Letters To The Editor

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Media must question the case against Iran

February 15, 2007

Four years ago, the Bush administration used cherry-picked and false intelligence to build a case for a war in Iraq, which has now cost us hundreds of billions of dollars and seen thousands of Americans killed and tens of thousands of Americans wounded.

If the weapons of mass destruction we were assured were in Iraq had been found, or the ties between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein's regime we were told about had been documented, maybe we would not now have reason to look with great skepticism at what appears to be the beginning of a march to war with Iran ("U.S. presses Iran weapons case," Feb. 12).

Unbelievably, the drumbeat for war in Iran is starting the same way the march to Baghdad began - with speculative and anonymously sourced news reports that contain little substance but blare large headlines and will no doubt sell newspapers and ratchet up TV ratings.

But while the bottom line of newspapers and networks may be well served by this kind of irresponsible reporting, the interests of the people are not.

We have an administration that has failed the people and has been supported and enabled by media that have lost their way and forgotten or abandoned their mission.

The American people, and especially the young men and women who serve this country so honorably, do not deserve to be once again taken down a garden path that turns out to lead straight to hell.

The media need to do their job this time. Ask questions. Reject anonymous sources. Demand proof.

It's the least they can do.

Really, the least.

Anne G. Schoonmaker

Sparks

Congress is obliged to back our troops

The politicians in Washington have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ("House measure opposes troop increase," Feb. 13).

If the politicians vote to cut off funding for our troops in Iraq and the same slaughter of our troops and allies happens that happened at the end of the Vietnam War, I hope the politicians understand that this would qualify them as domestic enemies of our country, and that many veterans would feel obliged to use our votes to remove them from office.

Neglecting the security of our children and grandchildren is despicable and would, in my opinion, be a seditious act.

The majority of our veterans prefer that we fight these terrorists in their country rather than in ours.

The events of the past six years have proved them right.

Stu Cleaver

Severn

Siting slots on boats is still no solution

What a mindless proposal it is to put slots on boats in the bay ("Riverboats offered as slots venue," Feb. 9).

Is this idea supposed to appease those who don't want slots in their backyard?

If the boats dock at the water's edge to load passengers, there will have to be huge parking lots for their vehicles. Does the legislator backing this idea think these facilities will be community-friendly?

Bringing in thousands of vehicles, with thousands of passengers, will not improve neighborhoods.

And putting gambling on boats will not save our communities from the fallout from this activity.

William Smouse

Millersville

Let others apologize for role in slavery

Regarding state Sen. Nathaniel Exum's resolution that would require Maryland to apologize for the role it played in the institution of slavery, I respectfully suggest that Mr. Exum start at the beginning of the chain of slavery and demand an apology from the African tribal chieftains who sold not only their enemies but also some of their own people into slavery ("Apology for state role in slavery introduced," Feb. 10).

And while he's at it, perhaps he should also demand an apology from the entire United States for the way the Irish, Italian, German, Polish, Norwegian and Chinese immigrants and indentured servants were treated when they arrived on the shores of America.

William M. Coughlin

Fallston

Electoral College key for small states

I was born and raised in a "large state" (Illinois) and now reside in a "small state" (Maryland). I hold degrees in political science and public administration. I am a registered Democrat.

I read with surprise and no little shock that state Sen. Jamie Raskin wants to give away Maryland's 10 electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote in a presidential election ("Electoral College reform in Md. sought," Feb. 7).

Mr. Raskin needs to reread the debates during the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia between representatives of the large and small states and note the compromises forged to give small states such as Maryland a voice in running our country.

One of these was the structure of the Electoral College, which was designed so that large states had to pay some mind to the will of small states, not only in the election itself but also in innumerable other ways, such as government appointments and the distribution of federal money.

If Mr. Raskin's proposal becomes law, there will be no reason for any presidential candidate to pay heed to Maryland.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.