Members Speak Out

Inhumane prescription drug benefit

Dec 8, 2005

Editor, The Chronicle,

Every day I see how inhumane the current Republican White House and Congress are. I have been trying to help my patients understand the supposed Medicare prescription drug benefit that will go into effect on January 1, 2006. All recipients of Medicare must sign up for a plan before the end of the year. If they do not sign up by January they will be charged a higher premium later in the year for each month they have not signed up. There are dozens of plans available and each plan charges a different amount for a number of different levels of coverage.

In the capitalist system if you buy a large amount of something generally you can reduce your per unit cost. The Veterans Administration negotiates with pharmaceutical companies to get lower cost medications for veterans. However with this new law, the Congress caved in to drug company lobbyists so this law specifically states that the government cannot bargain the price of the covered medications. This gave the drug companies a huge built in profit. A few million dollars for lobbyists can lead to a few billion dollars in profits taken out the pockets of average Americans. When you finally choose a plan you are committed to that plan for a year. Generally you will look at the lists of medications that each plan covers and try to choose a plan that covers most if not all of your medications.

What they don't tell you is that while you are stuck with a plan for a year the insurance companies can change the medications that they cover whenever they want. You can pick a plan to cover that medication that costs you several hundred dollars a month and the insurance company can stop covering it. So you are stuck with paying your premiums with no coverage for a year without any redress. Tell me again about compassionate conservative.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell WA

Too much violence, another approach to security, Dec 8, 2005

To the Editor,

The lead story in the Seattle Times (12-8-05) vividly reported on a man who threatened others with a bomb (that didn't exist) and was shot by air marshals. While I want my government to protect me against genuine threats, I regret that he wasn~Rt arrested and tried instead.

Several years ago, a small group of people repeatedly invented threats about bombs that didn't exist. Tens of thousands of people died as a result including several thousand US soldiers. Yet that small group of people is still at the helm of the world~Rs most powerful country, promoting a war that has made us less secure, a war that absorbs attention and money needed to confront real threats like climate change and desperate poverty.

A few months' cost of the Iraq war could feed the billion poorest people in the world. Another month's worth could dramatically reduce disease and improve infant and maternal mortality rates. What terrorist could find anti-American recruits in communities receiving such help? Let's make Peace on Earth something real this year by supporting efforts like the ONE Campaign to help the world's poorest people -- while improving our security (see http://www.onecampaign.org).

Sincerely, Glen Gersmehl, Shoreline

Detainees have rights, Senators have obligations

November 26, 2005

Dear Senator Cantwell

Thank you for your "Nay" vote on Graham Amendment No. 2516, Thursday Nov. 10, 2005, a gesture on your part in support of human rights and due process. This defense of the Constitution was just a small step to overcome the egregious violations of the Constitution under the current administration.

I understand that you took an oath of office and swore to uphold the Constitution. I am writing to urge you to do more in regard to the detainees at Guantanamo, in US controlled prisons around the world, and in prisons in the US.

Imagine if you were detained a single hour at the airport for security purposes and consequently missed your plane. If you couldn't reach your family and friends, imagine how upset you would be knowing they would be frantic with worry. Imagine how irritated you would be if the delay made you miss an important meeting with constituents. All this could happen with a mere hour of mistaken identity.

Now imagine detention without accusation or prosecution for 3 years! Imagine if this detention included being shackled and hooded and taken on airplanes around the world. Imagine if this included being put into an outdoor cage with no explanations, no rights, no contact with your loved ones. Imagine if this included invasive searches of your private parts, harsh and sometimes brutal treatment, and disrespect of your religion.

Imagine if this treatment came at the hands of a country claiming to respect freedom and democracy. Imagine if this treatment were supported, or not opposed, by Senators sworn to uphold these rights:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Please note that in no place does an Amendment to the Constitution place exclusions on these rights if the person has been declared to be an Enemy Combatant; if the person is outside the U.S.; no distinction is made for citizens or non citizens.

Please let me know what you are doing to protect the Constitutional rights of prisoners in US custody.

Sincerely yours,

Jean N. Buskin

Politics or science to determine scientific policy

Nov 11, 2005

Dear Senator Murray:

I am appalled that this is even an issue, but the current administration's abuses of "scientific" reports apparently requires consideration of Amendment #2228 to the Labor, Health & Human Services, and Education appropriations bill now in conference committee.

Both the House and Senate have approved a ban on a "political litmus test" for federal science advisory committee nominees. We must regain some honesty if this nation is to lead the rest of the world. Decisions MUST be made on the best available information, rather than unilateral political agendas. The senate version of the appropriations bill also includes a ban on the distribution of false information (of which the current administration has repeatedly been guilty).

Please include both 1) a ban on a political litmus test for federal science advisory committee nominees, and 2) a ban on the distribution of false information in the conference committee of the Labor, Health & Human Services, and Education appropriations bill.

Thank you sincerely,

R. Ed Myer, M. D., Seattle

Where's the morality of the Church?

Oct 31, 2005

To the Editor, The Chronicle,

As a Christian living in the United States, I have a concern about the silent position taken by so many churches concerning the war in Iraq, the increasing disparity betwen the rich and the poor in this world, and the continued blight of racism in our society so clearly highlighted by the tragedies in New Orleans. Many if not most Christians in our country believe they are following the path set by Jesus.

However, we find ourselves in a country engaged in a brutal and devastating war in Iraq and elsewhere which has left over 2,000 U.S. soldiers dead with tens of thousands of others wounded, and thousands upon thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis dead, wounded and imprisoned. Our leaders continually call for more tax cuts for the already wealthy with plans to take this money from funds set aside for the poorest among us.

There is no longer any understanding of the common good in our country. Despite the gains during the Civil Rights movement there is still clear racism in many areas including those of health, wealth and opportunity in our country. Although there have been some Christian leaders who have been outspoken and prophetic on these issues, there has been a disturbing silence from most of the clergy in our country.

The Church should be at the forefront pointing to the issues and raising questions about this unjust war, the obscenity of the accumulation of wealth at the expense of the poor and the continued injustice related to accidents of birth such as race. I invite all religious leaders to mindfully and prayerfully critique the presence of evil and sin in our imperial society.

The main moral problems of today are not the narrow questions related to areas of sexuality so often focused on. Jesus spoke very little if at all about these areas. He spoke very often about how we are to treat the weak and the poor. Christians need to be reminded that their first God is not the nation that they happen to live in. The leaders in the Church have the responsibility to take a loud and visible stance against all the injustice being perpetrated in the name of the war on terror, the free market and updated Bush manifest destiny.

The Church should be defying the fear and greed being promoted by the powers and principalities resident in Washington D.C. and other power centers in our country. Forty years ago Rev. Martin Luther King prophetically named the three main evils in the U.S. society as militarism, racism and poverty. What has changed? Where are the prophets today who will speak truth to power?

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell WA

Racist Hurricane Response, Sept. 8, 2005

Editor, The Chronicle

About four years ago I predicted that the current Presdent would go down as the worst President in our history. Every day there is more evidence to support this thesis. After September 11 one would think that emergency preparedness would be a high priority for our government. Why then did Bush place someone in charge of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) whose only previous work experience was to monitor the judges of contests for Arabian horses?

The inept response of FEMA to the catastrophe in Louisiana and Mississippi is criminal. Republicans should be happy with this situation though. Republicans have been saying for years that their goal is to down-size the government to the point where they can drown it in a bath tub. Well, they have their drownings now which are a direct result of their down-sized government.

I hate to point out the part racism has taken in this but if you compare the government response to Hurricane Frances in the largely white communities of Bush-governed Florida a year earlier to the current response to a largely poor African-American community in New Orleans it seems obvious. When it was clear that the hurricane was going to hit Florida hundreds of truckloads of food, water and ice were in place before the first winds hit. Arrangements were made specially to provide fuel and generators to area hospitals. The Army Corps of Engineers provided tens of thousands of tarps to homeowners. The National Guard had thousands of troops including hundreds of emergency medical personnel standing by to help. FEMA coordinated public information messages to direct evacuees. Disaster relief checks were under way within a week.

Where was this response to Hurricane Katrina? Did the fact that New Orleans is a Democratic stronghold with 70 percent Black with the highest perecnt of people in poverty of all American cities play a part in the government response? It seems likely that there are thousands of dead people lying in the streets of New Orleans. There needs to be a criminal investigation into their deaths.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell WA

Cowlitz County protesters support mother's peace vigil

News coverage from The Daily News sent to WWFOR

Local protesters support mother's vigil. By Barbara LaBoe. Aug 16, 2005

Their numbers were small, but a group of anti-war protesters said Monday afternoon their message isn't any less important.

"She's one of the few people who is actually calling Bush's bluff," Smith said. "The Democrats aren't doing it, but she is."

Smith said his fellow peace activists only had about 15 hours' notice, so he wasn't expecting a large turnout. Nationwide, a number of vigils are being held for Sheehan on Wednesday -- including one in Rainier -- but Smith said he didn't want to wait.

"I'll be happy if we get three or four people," he said, unloading protest signs from his van. "Whatever we can do to get the message out."

Three is exactly what he got, as Iva O'Shaunesy, Greg Lapic and Tedine Roos all joined the cause. All said they were motivated by their belief the war is wrong and soldiers are dying needlessly. And, they said, peaceful protest can spark change.

"Ghandi did it. Martin Luther King did it. Lech Walesa did it," Smith said. "It can be done."

The group drew mostly thumbs up by the motorists who acknowledged them, though one angry man screamed something that couldn't be made out.

The four weren't optimistic that Bush would meet with Sheehan, but they said it's still important to continue their protests.

"She's standing up for a lot of people who want reasons (for the war), and there aren't any," Roos said. "And I think the sentiment is shifting."

Rainier's vigil, according to the meetwithcindy.org website, is at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday in front of J&R grocery outlet.

Susan Donaldson, Tacoma, on Army recruiting, submitted to The News Tribune, July 29, 2005

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, July 18, 2005, Letter to The Chronicle, on how terrorists are created

Despite Prime Minister Tony Blair's claim otherwise, it is clear that the four tragic bombings in London last week are a result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the United States and Great Britain. The media coverage of the stiff-upper lip Brit being brave is interesting to compare to the media coverage of the suicide bombings in Iraq. We don't see stories on the bravery of the Iraqis who go on with daily life in the midst of similar bombings. The steady almost daily drum beat of bombings must be much more difficult to live through than a single, however horrendous, incident of violence.

Suicide bombings have become the most common form of terrorism in the world since September 11, 2001. The unprovoked attacks on innocent people in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington D.C. were largely condemned by clerics as a violation of Muslim law but now many Islamic religious leaders say that the fighting in Iraq is justified. The Koran supports fighting to defend innocent people who have been attacked by foreign invaders.

Two-thirds of the insurgent attacks in Iraq have been suicide missions. There have been 400 suicide bombings in Iraq since we invaded that country with 90 carried out during the month of May. This past weekend suicide bombs killed close to 200 people. There were eleven suicide bombings on July 15 alone in and around Baghdad.

Several recent studies by the Saudi Arabian government and by the Global Research in International Affairs Center in Israel have concluded that the vast majority of those going to fight the Americans in Iraq were not formerly terrorists but have been radicalized by the invasion of an Arab land. These studies refute the Bush claims that these people are fighting because they hate democracy and our way of life. They are fighting because we have invaded their neighbor's land in an illegal war.

As of today 1,961 allied troops including 1,767 Americans have died as a result of this invasion and occupation of a sovereign country that was no threat to the U.S. A recent estimate by the Iraqi Healrth Ministry is that some 130,000 innocent Iraqis have died since the invasion. There is less clean water, health care and electricity now than there was with Saddam Hussein under the sanctions. The invasion and occupation of Iraq is a total deadly mess that we are responsible for.

The American people are finally awakening to the fact that they were lied to in order to gain support for this illegal and immoral war. It is time to impeach the President and bring our soldiers home.

Jean Buskin, Seattle, letter to the Seattle Times, on Bush the criminal

Thanks to the Times for the report "Saddam faces first criminal case in Iraq," (July 18, 2005) subtitled "150 deaths: one of lesser alleged atrocities."

Too bad that the US supported Saddam until August 2, 1990, long after this massacre, and long after the 1988 chemical attack that killed 5000 Kurds in Halabja. Too bad that the US didn't and still doesn't support the International Criminal Court which could have long ago prosecuted Saddam, and perhaps prevented further atrocities.

Interesting that the crime chosen for prosecution is retaliation for an alleged assassination attempt against Saddam. It brings to mind the alleged assassination attempt against George W. Bush in 1993, which led to US bombing of Iraq, killing 8 civilians. When will former Pres. Clinton be prosecuted for this "lesser" atrocity?

When will Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II be prosecuted for the greater atrocities of 2 illegal wars that killed hundreds of thousands, plus the sanctions that killed over a million?

We rightly decry the recent terrorist attacks on London. But if we value life, we need to hold accountable all those who take it needlessly.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, letter to The Chronicle, May 16, 2005, caring for veterans

It is easy to see that the military programs in the United States are controlled by those willing to use our children for political purposes. It is also easy to see that they do not value the service of these veterans. This may be because most of those in power were rich enough or connected well enough to never have to actually serve.

I make no secret of the fact that I think that there should never be any veterans because there is never a need for war. However, I believe that as long as we allow our children to be sent into kill or be killed situations we should be honoring the promises made to them. I think that the attitude of the current administration can be summed up in the outrageous assertion made by Under Secretary of Defense David Chu that veterans benefits are responsible for the Pentagon's inability to provide weapons and equipment for our troops.

Clearly those in charge at the Bush administration believe that veteran's don't deserve benefits or that the government cannot afford to pay for them. This at the same time that Bush and the Republican controlled Congress is giving billions in tax rebates to the wealthiest people in our country. I wonder how many of those getting the tax money back have children in the military.

Whatever budget problems the Pentagon may be having, it is unconscionable to blame health care, disbility compensation and other promised benefits for veterans as the source of the problem. The Republican controlled Senate rejected 53-47 an amendment to the President's request for veterans health care offered by Senate Veterans Affairs Committee ranking member Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) that would have added $2.8 billion for veterans health care.

During floor debate in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives repeated attempts to increase funding for veterans were rejected. Among them was a Democratic alternative budget resolution offered by Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), the ranking member of the Budget Committee, that would have added $2.4 billion to veterans benefits and services. The Disabled American Veterans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, AMVETS, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars co-authored a study that shows that Congress needs to increase funding more than $3 billion to maintain current services.

Current services are clearly not going to be adequate for the veterans returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. The President's veterans budget would increase spending by 1.1% but this increase would be paid by charging veterans a $250 a year fee and by doubling pharmacy fees. So instead of adequately funding the needs of U.S. veterans the President proposes to shift the cost onto the veterans themselves.

Again I wonder how many of the very rich getting tax breaks have family members in the military. Until the time comes that we have abolished war as an instrument of national policy we are morally bound to care for those we put in harms way.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, April 22 2005 letter to The Chronicle, on a culture of war

I understand that my last letter to the editor engendered some negative responses. For the record I am a combat Infantry veteran. I am a member of Disabled American Veterans. I am President of Veterans for Peace Rachel Corrie Chapter #109. Thus I have some background when I speak about the military. I am also a Christian who believes that when Jesus called us to love our enemies He was not being naive. I believe that a true disciple of Christ has no choice but to oppose evil wherever it may be seen.

Our culture, instead of being marked by justice and compassion, is marked by retribution and revenge. Our government under the current warlord President does its best to keep the populace in a state of fear. Martin Luther King, Jr. rightly named the three main evils of our society as racism, poverty and militarism. Christians who wish to be true to Jesus' message must confront all three. Not confronting them publicly is the same as assenting to evil.

America has become a society in which a state of war is considered normal. There is little public discourse about our assertion of permanent global military superiority. It is taken that our constant war status is an obvious good. The U.S. spends more on the Pentagon budget than the combined defense budgets of all the other nations of the world. We have over 20,000 nuclear weapons and are planning to build more. In the four years between 1989 and 2003 the U.S. military were involved in nine major military adventures. That does not include the various cruise missile strikes around the world, weekly bombing attacks against the people of Iraq during the sanctions, or the missions of GIs sent to Rwanda, Colombia, East Timor and the Philippines.

I believe that the only possible stance for a Christian is as a pacifist. The churches are complicit in the evils of our day when they preach their justified war theories. Christ never justified violence in any form. The churches need to separate themselves from the ruling power structure and return to the simple message of Christ.

That being said if you look closely at the letters that I have written I have never suggested that our children should not join the military. All I have suggested is that anyone taking this step should not do so without having all the information before making a decision that places one in situations to kill or be killed. I applaud the deire of the young people to do something positive for their country. I believe that the current selfish American culture abuses this laudable desire.

I personally long for the American that honors the peacemakers at least equally with the warriors.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, March 7, 2005, letter to The Chronicle on spending priorities

The federal budget for FY 2006 contains $643 billion for current military spending. This includes the Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental spending that the President forgot to include in his budget request. The past military portion of the FY 2006 budget ($384 billion) includes veterans benefits and interest on the federal debt related to past wars and the previous enormous military budgets. This is more than a trillion dollars.

Consider what positive things could be accomplished with this money. It has been estimated that for the amount we spend in one year on the military, starvation and malnutrition in the world could be eliminated, shelter could be provided for all homeless, all landmines could be removed, all nuclear weapons could be removed, illiteracy could be eliminated, clean water could be provided for everyone, the world population could be stabilized and soil erosion around the world could be eliminated. Health insurance could be provided for over two million children with the $4.9 billion in taxes that Washington State citizens provided for the Iraq war last year.

The military spends about $3 billion a year to convince our children that enlisting will give them college money, job training and an alternative to flipping burgers. What do we get for the $16,000 per recruit that we pay in taxes? Mostly we get recruits who are ignorant of the reality of military life. The recruiters don't tell the students that fifty-seven percent of those who enroll in the GI Bill receive no education benefits from the military despite spending $1200.00 of their own money on the program. Additionally, 23% only receive half of their maximum benefits.

Recruiters don't mention that the estimated lifetime prevalence of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder among American Vietnam veterans is 30.9% for men and 26.9% for women. Recruiters don't mention that most people don't have time to attend college while in the military. Most recruiters don't point out that the enlistment agreement says that your status, pay, benefits, and responsibilities in the military can change without warning and without recourse. In the military you can be punished with no access to a lawyer or a trial.

Recruiters don't point out that military personnel no longer have the constitutional rights of civilians. Your right to free speech, assembly, and petition is eliminated under the Military Uniform Code of Justice. Recruiters don't point out the fact that few if any military jobs have a civilian equivalent. Most recruiters won't tell you that they were assigned to recruiting jobs against their will.

Anyone considering enlisting in the military should consider whether they are willing to kill someone else solely because they are ordered to do so. A recent survey found that 30% of women reported being victims of rape or attempted rape while in the military. I recommend talking with a veteran before signing enlistment papers. You can find a vet who will tell you the truth about the military at www.vfp109.org. Don't join the military without knowing all that you can be.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, letter to The Chronicle, Feb 3, 2005, on Social Security hoaxes

Once again President Bush is trying to hoodwink the American people with fear, lies and a manufactured fake crisis. The Propaganda Minister of Adolph Hitler was Joseph Goebels. He said that if you tell a lie big enough and repeat it often enough the people will come to believe it. Bush and company understand that the big lie can only be maintained as long as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and military implications of the lie. A changing lie can be used to confuse the people. A search for invisiible weapons of mass destruction seamlessly becomes a bold fight for truth, justice and the American way.

The newest lie being promoted by Bush is that there is a crisis in the Social Security system. He is trying to induce fear among the young by selling the idea that they will have no retirement funds unless the system is changed according to the gospel by Bush right now. This is also a way to politically divide the people with the young pitted against the old. The truth is that the report from his own Social Security Trustees states that the program is fiscally sound for at least the next 38 years even if nothing is changed. With minor tweaking it can maintain current levels of benefits indefinitely.

Remember that currently 48 million people get SS checks and 38% of those are disabled, widowed and children. Social Security checks, whose recipients have an annual median of $11,000, are the sole income of one-third of Americans over the age of sixty-five. Under the President's plan of privatizing a portion of the Social Security payments, conservative estimates expect a reduction of 40% in the payments to future retirees. The transition costs to set up the Bush plan involves the government borrowing $2-3 trillion. This increase in the deficit is money that future taxpayers will have to pay back with interest.

The rationale Bush gives for his plan is that by playing the stock market workers can make more money than the government currently earns by selling bonds. The stock market earnings are not guaranteed but the bonds are backed by the full faith and trust of the U.S. government. If his plan had been in place 6-8 years ago when the stock market crashed how would you like to have been relying on that income to pay your bills? Argentina tried a similar system a number of years ago. Their economy tanked with a huge increase in the destitute elderly.

A cynical person might suggest that the real reason for the Bush plan is the billions in commissions which will flow through the brokerage houses which were among his major financial supporters in the last election. A simple plan that would raise most if not all the extra funds that may be needed 40-50 years from now would be to extend the social security tax to the wealthy. Currently no social security tax is paid on all income above $90,000 a year.

Why should those who are wealthy not pay their fair share? No one in this country gets wealthy solely by their own efforts. They either inherit wealth or they earn it in the context of our whole social and economic culture. The name Social Security implies a social contract to provide security to those in our society who cannot provide their own.

I have confidence that the younger generation will see through the lies that Bush is promoting to induce fear of the future and division between generations. The younger voters were the only age group to not support Bush in the last election. They know bull when they hear it.

All of us have relatives and friends who are dependent on their Social Security benefits. Let Congress know that this attack on the poor and aged now and in the future will not be tolerated. Don't be taken in by the political language coming out of the Republican mouths that sounds truthful but are only wind. (452 words)

Larry Kerschner Pe Ell, Jan 9, 2005, letter to The Chronicle, on honoring the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr.

We celebrate the life of Martin Luther King on January 17. In a speech delivered one year before he was assassinated, he prophesied that a nation that continues year after year spending more money on the military than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death. This year we will spend over $600 billion on the military while cutting social programs.

When I look around I can't help but wonder about the spiritual health of our nation. Recently I read about a private Christian school in North Carolina that teaches its students that slavery wasn't that bad for the slaves. I hear that the hottest new show on television, Desperate Housewives, features story lines such as a married women having an affair with her seventeen year old gardener. I'm disgusted by the description of the new FOX show called "Who's Your Daddy?" in which a woman adopted at birth interviews eight men to try to determine which one abandoned her at birth. If she figures it out she gets money; if not he gets money.

There are news reports that the Pentagon wants $25 million to build a prison to keep people in for life without trial or access to courts or lawyers. The U.S. is one of the only nations in the world that has not adopted the 1989 Convention on the Rights of Children so that we can have children under eighteen in the military.

Abortions in our country have increased each year of the Bush administration compared to Clinton's eight years. Multichannel ews reports that adult entertainment revenue on cable television has grown from $263 million in 1998 to $609 million in 2002.

In 2003 15,000 children with mental illnesses in this country were improperly incarcerated because of a lack of access to mental health treatment. Eighty-one million people, 32 percent of the U.S. population under age 65, were uninsured at some point during 2002-2003. More than one hundred high-level officials of the current administration are now regulating industries they formerly worked for.

Until recently the U.S. never officially practiced torture. Torture was viewed as repugnant and un-American. Now the U.S., through officially santioned torture and the sanctions against the people of Iraq, which resulted in the death of 500,000 children, have sent the message to the world that America will kill your children and torture you unless you cooperate with us.

Eighty-one percent of Americans subscribe to some organized religion. Many Americans may go to church and consider themselves morally superior but the stench of the spiritual death Rev. King prophesied pervades our society.

I am reminded of the passage from Matthew where Christ says, "Woe to you hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful but inside you are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness." Rev. King also once spoke of a dream he had for all children. I don't think this is the America he had in mind.

Article by Glen Anderson on "Moral Values."

Glen explains: This article will appear on the religion page of the local newspaper, the Olympian, on Saturday January 1, 2005, and on the Olympian's online version, http://www.theolympian.com The Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation is an affiliate member of Interfaith Works, the local organization comprising a diverse range of religious congregations and a few other faith-based groups. One of that organization's many activities is scheduling people to write articles for the "Perspectives" column of the newspaper's weekly religion page. When the Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation was invited to submit an article our Steering Committee assigned me to write the article. I wrote the following, and the Steering Committee has approved it.

A Broader View of "Moral Values" by Glen Anderson on behalf of the Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation for the Olympian's "Perspectives" column on Saturday January 1, 2005

Some exit polls said that 22% of voters chose "moral values" as the biggest issue guiding their choice of presidential candidate.  The term "moral values" is politically charged but poorly defined.  Let's look at moral values more thoughtfully.

Mainstream media assume that "moral issues" are those involving sexuality.  But this is really far too limited.

Pax Christi, a Catholic-based organization, commissioned a poll about which issues motivated voters.  When asked to choose "the most urgent moral crisis facing the US," voters identified "greed and materialism" (33%) and "poverty and economic justice" (31%) twice as often as abortion (16%) and more than 2 ½ times as often as gay marriage (only 12%).

A nationwide poll asked voters to identify the "moral issue" that most influenced which candidate they voted for.  While 13% cited abortion and 9% citied same-sex marriage, a whopping 42% cited the war in Iraq.

The wars against Iraq and "terrorism" grossly violate international law and the Church's traditional "Just War" criteria.  The Bush administration has been authorizing torture and other brutal violations of the Geneva Conventions. What do our moral values say about this?

Should the Port of Olympia be complicit in this illegal and immoral war? When local citizens challenged the shipment of war supplies, officials rationalized it by saying the port was making money from it. Is "anything for a buck" our ethical standard?

After World War II the U.S. was figuring out its role in the post-war world.  In 1948 George Kennan, chief of the U.S. State Department's Policy Planning Staff, said: "We have about 60 per cent of the world's wealth but only 6.3 per cent of its population.  In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment.  Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity.  ...  The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts."  Indeed, this is how the U.S. has been acting for more than half a century.  What do our moral values say about greed and violence?

Aren't our moral values offended by the following?

* The widening gap between rich and poor

* Weakening environmental protections

* Using more than our fair share of oil and other natural resources

* Leaving 45 million Americans without health care

* Punishing people harshly for their legal offenses instead of healing and rehabilitating them

* Keeping the minimum wage so low that full-time workers can't afford rent and food

Jesus and the Hebrew prophets emphasized these kinds of moral issues, but they said very little about the sex-related topics that preoccupy media coverage of "moral issues."  They emphasized meeting the needs of the poor, welcoming the outsider, respecting everyone's full dignity, and valuing fairness instead of greed.

Through biblical prophets like Amos and Isaiah - and more recent spiritual leaders like the Quakers' George Fox, Mahatma Gandhi, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King, and the Dalai Lama - God keeps trying to rescue us from our hang-ups, distractions, and false gods of power and wealth - and to point us back toward God's call to practice social justice and love our neighbors - yes, ALL of our neighbors - as ourselves.

All religious traditions support similar moral values, including love, peace, compassion, forgiveness, social justice, and care for the earth.

The Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation invites you to explore this topic further on our TCTV program (channel 22 or 29) at 1:30 p.m. Mondays and 9:00 p.m. Thursdays throughout January.

Larry Kerschner of Pe Ell, active in Fire Mountain Chapter, letter to editor Dec 16, 2004, support the troops by bringing them home

Editor, The Chronicle

For a little over two years, each Saturday at noon a group of people have gathered at Washington Park near the War Memorial to witness for peace.

This group is composed of members of the Fire Mountain Chapter of the Fellowship of Reconciliation and the Rachel Corrie Chapter #109 of the Veterans for Peace. Both organizations are opposed to the use of war as a tool of international relations.

We believe, that by questioning this policy of our government, we are in fact serving our nation. We believe that it has been shown that the current administration lied and manipulated intelligence data to convince us to support their desire to subjugate a sovereign country that was no threat to America.

International law, developed during the Nazi trials in Nuremberg after the Second World War, holds that attacking and invading another country that poses no threat is the primary war crime. The genesis of this letter is that occasionally people will respond to the signs that we hold during our vigils. Several women have yelled that they have sons in the military in Iraq and castigate us for not being supportive of their relatives. Generally, they then speed off without stopping to talk.

We believe that it is our duty as human beings to increase awareness of the actual costs of war. The real costs of war are not limited to money although the billions wasted prevent our society from doing many worthwhile things. The best troop support is to be honest about the fact that the U.S. government has placed our children in a situation where they commit war crimes to protect themselves. Recent polls show that seventy percent of the American public have concluded that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was a mistake.

We support the troops with our prayers and our hope that they do not have to kill or be killled in order that international corporations can maintain access to petroleum reserves. We support the troops by seeking justice for veterans and other victims of war. We support the troops by joining with Military Families Speak Out and the recently formed Iraq Veterans Against the War in their call to bring our children home now. You cannot be all that you can be if you are dead or maimed in body or soul.

The recent election showed divisions in our country that have been fostered by the fear-mongering of the current administration. In order to counter this deep mistrust we need to look for and commit ourselves to healing acts of truth and reconciliation. I encourage the mothers of these troops and anyone else driving by to stop and talk. I think that you will find that we can agree on the necessity to seek peaceful alternatives to war. A yellow vinyl sticker on the back of a vehicle does nothing to support my nephew who is in Iraq right now. Promoting peace is the greatest support we can give him and the others we have placed in harm's way.

Larry Kerschner

Dennis Mills, co-chair of Olympia chapter letter to the editor in The Olympian Dec 14, 2004 "We should not benefit from the war economy"

Moving war materials from the Port of Olympia might give some people the impression that we are supporting the troops. In my opinion, we are only extending the likelihood that more people will die.

Sending more armor and troops to Vietnam didn't help end the war. Recently, I read the names of my friends on the Vietnam Memorial on the Capitol Campus. More weapons and troops shipped out of our Washington state ports didn't save their lives. Admitting that we had a failed foreign policy and pulling our forces out of Vietnam saved lives, both American and Vietnamese.

We need to build a peace economy in Washington state and not benefit from the war economy. We need to bring the troops home. We need to revisit the lessons learned from Vietnam, Afghanistan and Lebanon.

I have been told that the port receives a profit from military shipping approximately equal to $3 per resident. If that is so, I donated $9 from my family to start a fund so that our port no longer has to rely on war to make a profit.

Dennis W. Mills, Olympia

Larry Kerschner of Pe Ell, active in Fire Mountain Chapter, letter to editor Nov 30, 2004, the power to make change

Editor, The Chronicle

The twentieth century was the bloodiest century ever with more people killed in wars than in all of previous history. The first two-thirds of the twentieth century also saw a burgeoning of the ideals of hope and democracy.

Here in America we saw the women's movement in which the sufragettes began the road to the recognition of the equality of women. We saw the heroic struggles of the working people to organize themselves into cooperative unions. Workers demanded to be treated with dignity. We saw the people of color rise up and demand to be respected as human beings in the civil rights movement.

Besides the spirit of democracy and equality what these movements had in common was that they were essentially non-violent. These movements filled the streets of America with people who acted out of the best ideals of America and the gospel. These movements eventually led to the government developing programs like Social Security which were meant to lift people up. People began to act like they believed that 'all men are created equal'.

Unfortunately not long after the Second World War, corporations, assisted by the 'free' press, began using propaganda to counteract the risks that they saw in true democracy. Business interests were sold as being the same thing as national interests. Churches helped keep the masses asleep by promoting the idea that some segments of the population are not worthy of God's blessing. The military-industrial-security complex became the governing body of this country. The anti-war movement of the sixties was the last time that the people were able to change the direction of our rulers.

Over the last 30-40 years, the powers and principalities controlling the right-wing Christian and political movement have promoted selfishness, greed, fear, and mean-spiritedness. These are all anti-democratic and anti-Christian ideas. Violence has become our norm. One quarter of all the people in the world in prison are in U.S. prisons. On the average four unarmed people are killed by the police in this country each week. They are generally people of color.

Corporate profit is the sole governing principle of political decisions under our plantation capitalism. Laws continue to be written to stop democratic organizations like unions from developing. The health of our children isn't profitable enough so is ignored. America is the greatest armaments creator in the world from the .38 pistol to the nuclear bomb.

The earlier voices of the people were heard when committed people literally filled the streets and stood in the way of the evil that has control of our country. The people do not have $600 billion year to oppose those in power but we do have our voices and our bodies. Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi and many others have shown the power of the people to non-violently change chaos into community. Only the will is needed. True change only comes from the power of the people. The national security complex and it's world vision cannot be reformed. It must be replaced.

Larry Kerschner

Glen Anderson of Olympia Chapter letter to the editor submitted to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer November 18, 2004 on making the CIA a propaganda arm

Editor:

Bush is Politicizing the CIA & Promoting More "Faulty Intelligence"

In 1947 President Truman and Congress created the Central Intelligence Agency in order to compile and analyze the most accurate information possible about international problems. Truman and Congress wisely designed the CIA to be objective and free from political tampering, so they made it independent from the Pentagon and State Department, which are heavily influenced by political partisanship.

Now Bush is politicizing the CIA with hard-core loyalists and purging the CIA of people who are not his "yes men."

For several years the people who populate the Bush administration were itching for a war against oil-rich Iraq. When the CIA's honest intelligence did not justify a war, Cheney badgered the CIA to generate excuses to justify war, and the Bush administration lied repeatedly about evidence that it knew was not valid.

Rumsfeld bypassed the Pentagon's accurate intelligence and created a different intelligence unit specifically to produce intelligence to justify war.

Lie after lie has been exposed.

In a truly historical break, many dozens of longtime professionals from the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies protested these manipulations of intelligence. They formed an organization, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and blew the whistle on Bush's lies and distortions, but the news media gave them little coverage.

Bush and his cronies deliberately lied their way into the Iraq war, and most politicians and news media mumble their blame on "faulty intelligence."

Now Bush is further undermining the CIA's mission of objectivity by purging employees who disagree with him. When Bush makes the CIA another propaganda arm of his bull-headed, trigger-happy foreign policy, he will blunder into more wars.

The "faulty intelligence" that led us into Iraq was clearly Bush's fault. Now he is setting us up for even worse!

Sincerely, Glen Anderson

Glen Anderson letter to editor submitted to The Seattle Times Nov 17, 2004, on US training terrorists at the School of the Americas

Editor:

The American people, Congress, and Bush all say they oppose terrorism and terrorist training schools. We have an easy opportunity to shut down a school that has trained terrorists since 1946.

The U.S. Army School of the Americas (SOA) at Fort Benning, Georgia, has trained Latin American soldiers to commit human rights abuses in counter-insurgency wars against their own poor populations.

SOA's graduates have a long history of human rights violations. From the atrocities in El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1980s to recent human rights violations in Colombia, they consistently appear in reports on human rights abuses in Latin America, including civilian massacres, assassinations, disappearances, death threats, and countless other crimes against humanity.

All over the world, people who support human rights have urged the U.S. to stop training terrorists at SOA, but despite some cosmetic changes, including changing SOA's name to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHISC), this persists as one of the largest terrorism schools in the world.

The US government - in our name and with our tax dollars - continues to train soldiers from Latin American countries with the worst human rights records.

The US pays lip service to opposing terrorism, but actions speak louder than words. The rest of the world is watching what we do. If Congress really cared about stopping terrorism and human rights abuses, it would pass HR 1258 and close WHISC.

More information is at http://www.soaw.org

Sincerely, Glen Anderson

Larry Kerschner, of Pe Ell, Fire Mountain chapter, letter to editor Nov 9, 2004, No Mandate

Editor, The Chronicle

My first reaction to the election results were that America will now get what we deserve but almost half of those who voted chose to repudiate the narrow world vision of George Bush. Bush claims a mandate but in fact only won by three per cent. Almost half of us don't deserve what we are going to get.

If 70,000 voters in Ohio had voted otherwise John Kerry would be the next President. Considering that Bush received 4,000 votes in one Ohio precinct that has just over 600 registered voters maybe 70,000 did vote the other way. Be that as it may, we have to get ready for more tax cuts and regulations written by and for affluent corporations. A wave of conservative judges on the Supreme Court will diminish workers rights and environmental protection for the next generation. We can also expect to see a continuing cut in funding for housing and other social programs for the poor.

Vice President Cheney is now on record as supporting the idea of abolishing the income tax and replacing it with a highly regressive flat national sales tax which would increase the tax burden on the poor and middle class. In his last pre-election speech in Florida, the President pledged to liberate Cuba. Career diplomats at the State Department are concerned that this promise may lead to military intervention in Cuba.

Republican strategist Richard Viguerie is calling for abolishing the Medicare prescription drug benefit recently passed. He also calls for greatly increased oil and gas exploration in the continental U.S. with the increased environmental damage. Overseas, to go along with the mess in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Republicans, along with Israel, plant to overthrow the government of President Assad in Syria and to eliminate the nuclear facilities in Iran.

The new Republican Senator from Oklahoma is on the record stating that doctors who perform abortions should be executed. This is the same man who as a Congressman said he saw nothing wrong with having access to and using bazookas.

As bleak as this future seems, those who opposed the policies of Bush need to look at what was accomplished over the past two years. Millions of new voters were energized, many of them young people, and became involved. Florida passed a new law increasing their minimum wage. Democrat Barack Obama trounced his right-wing opponent in Illinois. Here in Washington a tax cut initiative was turned down. The right wing built their power base over the past thirty years. Much was accomplished by Progressives in two years. Activist driven activities must continue and expand.

Those of us who are Christians and Progressives also won't cede "moral issues" to the right wing. The 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians who have been killed by the U.S. might argue about how pro-life Bush is. We should remember Psalm 37:7-8 "Do not fret over those who prosper in their way, over those who carry out evil devices. Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath. Do not fret - it only leads to evil".

Larry Kerschner

Larry Kerschnerof Pe Ell, Fire Mountain chapter, letter to the editor Oct 19, 2004, Pre-election Considerations

Editor, the Chronicle

Just some facts to consider before voting. Health insurance premiums have risen by more than one-third since Bush took office leaving 44 million without health coverage. The health plan the President proposes gives affluent people one more tax break. Health Savings Accounts are useful for the healthy and wealthy only. Under the new Medicare drug prescription law, seniors and persons with disabilities must pay annual out-of-pocket expenses of between $5,100-$2,251.

Bush's plan to privatize Social Security would divert payroll tax revenue needed for Social Security payments into new private accounts with stockbrokers taking their percentages. Bush doesn't mention the fact that world oil production has peaked. This along with the Iraq war and the growing demand for oil in India and China point to continued increasing oil prices.

The wealthiest 20 percent of households in the U.S. account for 50% of the total U.S. income. The poorest 20% account for 3.5% of U.S. income. The Forbe's 400 richest Americans are doing better under Bush as their collective wealth has risen $45 billion since 2003. Median household income has fallen for the fourth year in a row.

Two million jobs have been lost since Bush took office. Some recent job growth has been concentrated in health care, food services, and temporary employment firms, all low paying sectors. Temp agencies account for 20% of all new jobs. One in six manufacturing job has disappeared since Bush took the oath. Workers wages have risen 0.3% while corporate profits are up 28.4 percent since Bush was made President.

For fiscal year 2005, which started this month, the U.S. gross federal debt is projected to be $8.1 trillion. Just recently, in order to not raise the current federal debt limit of $7.38 trillion just prior to the election, the administration decided to stop paying into the federal employees' retirement fund. The most commonly reported federal budget deficit doesn't include borrowings from federal trust funds --mostly Social Security and Medicare. When these takings are included the current annual federal budget deficit is $639 billion.

The U.S. borrows more than $600 billion each year from the rest of the world, especially from the central banks of China and Japan. With the trade deficit nearly 6% of the Gross National Product, the dollar has lost one third of its value against the euro. When the President says things are going well in Iraq he isn't talking about the military or the Iraqis, he is speaking of Halliburton and the other U.S. corporations receiving dollars meant to reconstruct Iraq. The Vice-President's old company alone has received about $18 billion in contracts.

Last week at the Capital lawn in Olympia we placed crosses for and read names of the eleven hundred plus U.S troops who have died useless deaths in the President's war. This doesn't count the thousands of troops who have been terribly maimed or the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis who have died. Consider your vote well.

Larry Kerschner

Dan L.Smith of Longview, Cowlitz County Chapter, letter to the editor of The Daily News, Oct 12, 2004, on the right to peaceably assemble

Check the facts before writing

In response to Carol Harrison's Oct. 2 letter titled, "What more do you want?", letter writers might be more effective if the facts were checked before writing.

When preparing for the candlelight vigil to show respect for more than 1,000 young Americans killed in the Halliburton-Cheney/Bush war, I went to the Kelso Police Department, requested a permit for 10 people to stand on the sidewalk and was refused. It is not as though the Kelso police did not know who we were. The Cowlitz County Fellowship of Reconciliation has been peacefully vigiling with a legal Kelso permit for the last three years.

On the day of the vigil, I did take the time to personally apply for a permit. I was told by the chief's secretary that the chief was out for the rest of the day. Therefore, she told me, we would not be allowed to gather that night.

We felt that night it was essential that we exercise our First Amendment right to "peacefully assemble." My constitution says nothing about a citizen's obligation to first request to his government for the right to assemble.

I am sure that the Kelso City Council meant well and thought it was protecting its citizens by passing this ordinance. Unfortunately, it did the opposite.

Dan Smith, Longview

Dennis Mills, co-chair of Olympia chapter letter to the editor in The Olympian Oct 9, 2004 "Understand how tax dollars are being spent" Money for Destruction?

It is time to let our elected officials know that there are other viewpoints to ponder. It's hard to believe, even to rationalize, that the U.S. government can proceed ahead and not consider the long-range consequences of its foreign policies.

Tropical Storm Jeanne left hundreds dead and many thousands of people homeless in Haiti. The European Union pledged $1.8 million. Venezuela offered $1 million worth of emergency supplies.

The United States? Well, the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince kicked in $60,000. This is embarrassing and disgusting!

Our administration is further exacerbating the problems in the Middle East. The failed foreign policies have not made the Palestinians or the Israelis any safer.

Under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act, countries receiving U.S. weapons are allowed to use them for internal security, for legitimate self-defense or for "preventing or hindering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."

The $319 million arms transfer, proposed by the Bush administration on June 1, went ahead after Congress took no action during its 30-day review period.

The United States is moving ahead with the transfer to Israel of 5,000 heavy, precision-guided bombs, including 500 "earth-penetrating" 2,000-pound bombs designed for use against underground facilities. In my office, I have a piece of rubble I gathered from a destroyed Palestinian police building that was next to the Friends School in Ramallah. It reminds me of how our tax money is used!

Dennis W. Mills, Olympia

Larry Kerschner of Pe Ell, Fire Mountain Chapter, letter to editor, Oct 1, 2004, Debates Not Getting to the Point

Editor, The Chronicle

During the first so-called Presidential debate Senator Kerry was clearly better prepared and in command. The President was defensive and had little to say outside of a few impotently repeated refrains. Limiting their debate to Iraq and North Korea they both ignored areas of importance to the U.S.

There was no mention of the 3,000 Haitians who have been murdered by the thugs we installed after abducting the elected President of Haiti. There was no mention of the daily killings of Palestinians by Israelis; nor of the killing of Israelis by Palestinians.

They both agreed that the greatest threat to the U.S. is proliferation of nuclear materials. While I agree this is a grave threat, they might have mentioned the fact that on September 20 a young mother in Thailand died from a virus (H5N1) which she contracted from her dying child. H5N1 is the so-called "avian flu". This was the first human-to-human transmission of this particular virus.

This may be a serious threat because the bird-to-human form has had a 70% lethality rate. H1N1, which was the avian flu of the infamous 1918-19 pandemic had a lethality rate of 5%. Between 50-100 million people died around the world from that virus. It would seem that H5N1 might be considered a grave threat along with stray nuclear materials. A prototype H5N1 vaccine is being developed but won't be available for public use for some time.

But back to Iraq where the President continues to claim steady progress. Progress for who? Halliburton? The recently released report from the Defense Science Board, a panel of advisors to the Defense Secretary, states that the "inadequate total numbers" of troops means that the United States can "not sustain our current and projected global stabilization commitments".

President Bush kept saying that Senator Kerry accuses him of being in "the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time." Senator Kerry denied saying this but I think that it describes things perfectly. We invaded a country 10% our size which was no threat to us but which has huge oil reserves. We have killed over 14,000 Iraqi civilians, imprisoned tens of thousands, most without cause, and permitted a pattern of torture and abuse. We took control of their oil, wrote their 'new' constitution, appointed their leaders, allowed no opposing views and are in the process of building several large permanent military occupation bases. No wonder there were no flowers and candy to greet our troops.

The President claims a coalition of supportive nations but Costa Rica, the Philippines, Spain, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Honduras, Norway, Thailand and New Zealand troops have left or plan to leave Iraq soon. Singapore has only 33 troops left and Moldavan troops have dwindled to twelve.

The 1197 U.S. and coalition troops who have died thus far in Iraq may disagree with Mr. Bush's assessment of progress. I look forward to the next 'debate' when Mr. Bush will try to defend his domestic programs.

Larry Kerschner

Cora Lawrence, Seattle, writing the mayor Sept 28, 2004, about not cutting the social services budget further

Dear Mayor Nickels, The social service budget must not be cut any more. Social services which promote individual growth and independence to productive citizenship are the only answer to homelessness.

Please, please! Sincerely, Cora Lawrence, R.N.,Ph.D.

Rosy Betz-Zall, Seattle, Sept 28, 2004, acting to keep social services funding

Dear Friends of Mine,

I am one of the many people taking time to fast and sit in outside the mayors office this summer. This is in solidarity with the people in our neighborhoods who are "doing without". The budget for helping these people is much too reduced already. I am asking you to please call or e-mail or pop a postcard in the mail to the mayor expressing your feelings of the subject.

Thanks, Rosy Betz-Zall

Jamie K. Donaldson, Bellingham, Letter to the editor, Sept. 21, 2004, Thoughts for Iraq on International Day of Peace

Bellingham Herald,

On the occasion of International Day of Peace (Sept. 21), I'm moved to ask my fellow citizens to consider the Iraqi people whose suffering you won't see pictured in The Herald.

First there was the double whammy of life under a brutal dictatorship and crippling economic sanctions, both supported by the United States. Next a war that left the infrastructure of their country in ruins. Then another war and life under military occupation. Contrary to what the current administration predicted, U.S. troops were not greeted as liberators when they entered Baghdad last year.

According to a June 2004 study by the Institute for Policy Studies and Foreign Policy in Focus, 80 percent of Iraqis express "no confidence" in U.S. civilian authorities or coalition forces.

Democracy cannot be won by shooting, bombing and torturing its intended beneficiaries. And no, we cannot cut and run on the Iraqis; we have a moral obligation to clean up the chaos and destruction that we've wrought. But the military occupation must end now, for their sake and ours.

Instead, send the civilian doctors and nurses to heal the suffering, the civil engineers to rebuild the country and the international peacekeepers to restore security and help begin reconciliation.

Jamie K. Donaldson, Bellingham

Larry Kerschner Sept 21, 2004, letter to the editor, thoughts on abortion

Editor, The Chronicle

Abortion is a problem for many in our society. It is a problem for those who oppose it. It is a problem for those who believe that only the woman who is pregnant should decide this issue. It is a problem for the fetus.

Why do women get abortions? Generally the reasons come down to the fact that the woman sees the baby as a threat to some part of her life either physically, emotionally, financially, or mentally. When we perceive that someone threatens a portion or all of our life we would commonly identify this person as our enemy. For whatever reason the fetus becomes the enemy of the pregnant woman.

Jesus tells us to love our enemies. He also shows us that we don't love unless we are willing to suffer. For this reason I don't believe that someone who identifies herself as a Christian can in good conscience have an abortion. In no way am I condemning those who have had abortions. Jesus did not condemn the woman found in adultery. Condemnation does not lead to reconciliation.

I would guess that more often than not the women having abortions are young and poor. As Christians we are called to help free the poor from the injustices of our society. We should be doing all that we can to reduce the need for abortions. We should be supporting early sex education, contraception, counseling and adoption. As parents we should be living lives that show our children what it means to love and be loved.

A society in which 20% of the children live below the poverty level does not value children. A society where an equal number have no health care does not value children. A society that is not willing to spend the money needed to educate them does not value children. A society that sexualizes almost all advertising does not value children. A society that sends it's young off to kill or be killed does not value children.

Many of my progressive friends will not agree with me about abortion. They see a huge amount of hypocrisy in a society that does not value children but wants to force women to have children against their own judgement. I have heard it said that 70% of those calling themselves Christian who oppose abortion support captal punishment; 90% of them are said to support war as a legitimate foreign policy tool.

Jesus said love your enemies. He didn't say love your enemies before they are born but it's OK to kill them after they are born. The women struggling with the realities of their lives are being told they must love their unborn enemies. But these same Christians are saying that they don't have to love their own enemies. A priest recently told me that since the people in Iraq are threatening us it's OK to kill them. I can see Jesus just sadly shaking His head.

A truly pro-life society would make the perceived need for abortion unnecessary.

Larry Kerschner

Susan Kay Donaldson, Tacoma, letter to the editor, September 9, 2004, Moral and Physical Cost of War Preparation

re: "Workers become anemic, so bomb production stops" (A3)

Dear Mr. Seago:

The sad irony of bomb-makers’ becoming sick from the very work they do, to ensure others’ deaths ("Workers become anemic, so bomb production stops", AP, TNT, 8 Sept., A3), mirrors a larger sickness in our society as a whole. Because of the United States’ addiction to war, our whole population suffers. We pour resources into our efforts to kill other people, but then lack the money properly to fund functions that enhance life—for example, education, health care, housing, job creation, transportation, and the arts. Additionally, the killing we do creates new martyrs—and consequently new enemies for us. Thus, military might does not bring security; rather, it erodes it. However, the greatest damage we suffer, it seems to me, is to our souls, as we are taught to be suspicious rather than to trust, to hoard rather than to share, and to hate rather than to love.

Let us instead choose life. Those bombs need never be made; all humanity will be far safer without them.

Yours truly, Susan Kay Donaldson

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, Fire Mountain Chapter, letter to the editor, Sept. 1, 2004, Who's Really Supporting the Troops?

Editor, The Chronicle

The Republicans at the current convention in New York City are showing their true opinion of veterans. They are passing around bandaids imprinted with a Purple Heart for all the delegates to wear clearly demeaning the sacrifice of millions of veterans who have been awarded this medal. The President's attitude has been to do the macho strut and smirk while on stage but out of the limelight he has promoted policies that undermine the morale of the current troops and their families.

In Agust 2003, while Congress was recessed, this administration cut payments for imminent danger and family separation. Congress had earlier increased imminent danger pay by $75.00 a month and monthly allowances of $150.00 to help fund rent and child care for troop's families at home. Public outrage forced the White House to rescind those cuts but it showed the troops that they are a low priority for this administration.

By late Summer 2003 it became apparent that U.S. troops were inadequately equipped. Although Congress had approved funds for ceramic-plated body armor, by October 2003 over 50,000 U.S. troops had not been given this life saving gear. By September 2003 this administration decided to deploy National Guard and Reservists overseas due to the poorly planned over extension of U.S. military forces. Those who signed up with the expectation of serving one weekend a month are now being sent into dangerous situations for extending durations. This administration, disregarding the agreements under which these people signed up, began a Stop Loss policy keeping thousands of troops in danger beyond their enlistment time. This effectively is forcing troops to remain in combat through an involuntary draft. Many of the same people who signed up for National Guard duty are the very same local police and firefighters that we need for true homeland security. Many of them are the sole bread winners for their families.

The recent show of the political power of Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani by settling the fighting in Najaf underscores the fact that the troops should be out of Iraq. Their continued presence in a country where they are clearly not wanted is the main reason that Iraq is so dangerous. The fact that there was a political solution to this situation and not a military one is being ignored by the Bush administration. The 1107 coalition troops who have died in Iraq have died because of the ideologically driven lack of planning by this administration. The above noted policies show what President Bush really thinks about those who serve at his whim in the U.S. military.

Larry Kerschner

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, Fire Mountain chapter, letter to the editor July 28, 2004, Needless Loss of Lives

Editor the Chronicle,

As of today, 1032 coalition troops have died in Iraq. 911 of them were young Americans. Bill O'Reilly and the Chronicle claim that President Bush about Iraq but it is clear that there was a concerted effort to mislead the American public to promote an ideological agenda. Those surrounding the President made up their minds to find an excuse to attack Iraq long before September 11, 2001. If you are not clear on this read Richard Clarke's book "Against All Enemies".

Seventeen of these young men who died for nothing were from Washington State. Their names are: Justin Hebert (Arlington); Christopher Bunda (Bremerton); Curt Jordan (Green Acres); Benjamin Colgan (Kent); Jacob Herring (Kirkland); James Shull (Kirkland); Cody Calavan (Lake Stevens); Jeffrey Shaver (Maple Valley); Kerry Scott (Mount Vernon); Marvin Best (Prosser); Jeremiah Schmunk (Richland/Kennewick); Michael Adams (Seattle); Nathan Nakis (Sedro-Wooley); Robert Benson (Spokane); Duane Longstreth (Tacoma); Cedric Bruns (Vancouver); and Dustin Sides (Yakima).

The national media owned and controlled by extreme conservatives also seldom mention the soldiers in iraq who have been injured many of whom have become amputees. The number of wounded are estimated between 5,000-10,000. Add to this number the 25,000 soldiers reportedly suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Every day disasters this administration perpetrated on the people of Afghanistan and Iraq are visibly unraveling. In 13 of Iraq's 18 provinces, there is less electricity available now than under Saddam under the sanctions. Every day insurgent attacks are killing common Iraqi people. The man we put in charge is known to the Iraqi people as a CIA agaent. It is estimated that over 5,000 new terrorists have joined Al Quaeda sice we invaded Iraq. There were no terrorists to speak of in Iraq before but now our soldiers act as sitting ducks.

Afghanistan is also a basket case. Over 100 American soldiers have died in Afghanistan. Elections that were to be held in September have been re-scheduled. Only 1.6 million of a possible 10.5 million voters have been registered. The Karzai government controls thr area around Kabul. The warlords, the Taliban and Gulbuddin Hikmatayar control most of the country.

The Nobel Prize winning orgnization Doctors without Borders have withdrawn due to the number of murders of humanitarian workers. Forced marriage, rape and other violence against women is widespread. The largest export commodity is opium which the Taliban had stopped. According to a White House report Afghanistan now accounts for 75% of the world output of opium.

We as Americans need to apologize to the families of those who have died in this so-called war on terror both here and in Afghanistan and Iraq. In our names, these people were put in harm's way. Their deaths belong to all of us.

As a veteran I would like to invite all who would like to see the end of this type of shameful government actions to join the Veterans for Peace. For information go to www.veteransforpeace.org nationally and www.criticalconcer.com/vfp/html for the local group.

Larry Kerschner

Why settle for a republic when we could have a democracy?

Can the electoral process interfere with our efforts to promote peace and social justice?

Show biz or substance?

Regardless of who ends up being elected, the electoral process itself can distract activists from making progress on the real issues. The electoral game easily grabs our attention and can become an end in itself rather than a means to our real ends – making public policy flow from our deepest values of peace and social justice.

Especially in 2003 and 2004 we’ve seen attention, effort and money diverted from substantive issues to the game of presidential politics. The "anybody but Bush" mantra ignores that both major political parties support a horribly violent foreign policy and refuse to address important social and economic justice issues.

After the Cold War ended, Democrat Clinton ignored the opportunity to overhaul our foreign policy. For eight years Democrat Clinton kept the US at war against Iraq and kept Star Wars alive. Democrat Clinton supported NAFTA and the WTO, expanded the federal death penalty, abolished the welfare safety net, and supported the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act. Most of the people opposing Bush now were silent for eight years while Clinton laid the foundation for Bush’s policies.

The US’s two biggest political parties (and major news media, corrupt campaign financing methods, restrictions on third parties, etc.) maintain the facade that we have free elections, but – like giant corporations that share a duopoly over a market – they share a comfortable symbiotic relationship that avoids meaningful political change. These parties don’t discuss issues honestly, but cynically exploit them for partisan ends.

In such a political climate, we don’t get real choices because candidates and parties don’t talk about real issues. We won’t make progress in a political system that is structured toward conservatism and middle-of-the-roadism. We won’t make progress by casting our lot with moderate candidates running as "the lesser of two evils."

This same pattern recurs every four years, and it persists because voters focus on candidates more than issues. If we want to make progress on the issues, we have to raise the issues proactively and organize on them explicitly. If the public demands a peaceful foreign policy and accepts nothing less, politicians will adopt those policies. When the people lead, the "leaders" will have to follow.

Build grassroots movements:

Our vision of political change is more profound than partisan. While millions of progressives seek salvation by defeating Bush on November 2, we must change the political culture in more radical ways.

We can’t just replace one politician with another. We must change the political climate. This requires not just an electoral campaign, but society-wide consciousness raising and an entire political change movement.

Gandhi and King did not run for office. They promoted nonviolent revolutions from the grassroots up.

The most important positive changes in the US (women’s right to vote, the labor movement, the Civil Rights movement, environmentalism, etc.) have arisen through grassroots organizing – NOT through electing this or that candidate.

Certainly we should vote and urge other people to vote. But please don’t let the electoral campaign season distract us from our real organizing at a more profound level. We practice democracy by what we do every day to build strong grassroots movements. Voting takes just a few minutes a few times a year. Let’s spend the other 99.999% of our time organizing on the issues and building a strong progressive movement!

Electoral campaign "buzz" distracts attention from the issues. News coverage that treats an election as a horse race with numbers and strategies displaces consideration of the issues that are really at stake. Unless we citizens make the issues the election year’s centerpiece, the politicians and news media will settle for trivial sideshows. Four years ago the media talked endlessly about Gore appearing "stiff" and changing to earth-tone clothing. During a recent campaign the media focused on which candidate for First Lady makes better cookies. The media can get away with this because we don’t force them to cover the issues.

Don’t we need to defeat bad politicians? Yes, but there are right ways and wrong ways to do that. Instead of focusing on personalities, let’s raise the issues so clearly that people will make informed choices. Then when bad politicians are defeated, we’ll also have a strong mandate for replacing bad policies with good ones.

For example, unless we challenge the premises underlying the so-called "War on Terror," we’ll just end up with a different president waging it. Unless we challenge dominance of global capitalism, we’ll just get a different CEO in the White House.

On the other hand, strong grassroots organizing for peace, economic justice, human rights, the environment, universal health care, and other issues would change our nation’s overall political climate and culture! This would let us make strong demands on politicians of all parties and at all levels. Issue-based organizing would make electoral changes in November AND establish grassroots movements that will hold the victors accountable throughout their terms. It would also lay a foundation for other political organizing over the long haul, including third parties.

Reach out to others:

Most people tend to discuss politics only with other people who already agree with them. Until we reach out and talk with people who are different from ourselves, we’re not really building our movements. We need to find people who can become allies on an issue-by-issue basis.

People who think they’re conservative actually agree with progressive positions on many issues. For example, couldn’t fiscal conservatives oppose massive military spending and unjustified tax breaks? Couldn’t the conservatives who oppose big government object to the Patriot Act’s intrusiveness? Couldn’t traditionalists who value honesty oppose a war rooted in lies?

How could we help ordinary people see that their deepest values are served better by progressive and peace-oriented candidates who are strong on real issues than by glib politicians with vague, pious platitudes – or by politicians who side with the elites against the public interest?

Re-frame the issues:

After the September 11 attacks Bush promoted the notion of a "War on Terrorism," which the news media and politicians of both parties accepted at face value. Framing the problem as a "war" has sent us down a road of endless military spending, governmental abuse of our freedom, and escalating global violence.

As long as we allow the concept of the "War on Terrorism" to persist, we lock ourselves into pretty much the same way of doing things – pretty much the same foreign policy – no matter who is in the White House or the Capitol Building.

We need to debunk the concept of the "War on Terrorism" in order to change the policies that flow from that misguided concept. We need to re-frame the issues of violence and security so we can help the public understand the real problems and work for real solutions. This is not a partisan matter. Politicians won’t lead the way toward peace. Only we can do that.

This is only one example. We need to organize from the grassroots up on and re-frame many other issues related to peace, social and economic justice, the environment, and so forth.

It’s not too late. Election campaign seasons are volatile. We can make that volatility work for us by lighting fires under certain issues now – and forcing politicians to deal with them now.

Let’s strategize boldly.

Let’s seize the initiative, proactively create news, and place hot issues squarely on the public agenda.

Let’s re-frame issues and change the terms of the debate.

Let’s create new demands and new expectations.

Let’s reach out to the public, not just to each other.

Let’s network with strategic allies and tactical allies.

Let’s win in more profound ways!

Shulamit Decktor, Seattle, June 23, 2004, a reply to Senator Kerry's letters...

Dear Senator Kerry,

You and your organizational supporters continue to send me letters and emails requesting that I support you in defeating President Bush in the 2004 election. Like most Americans I would like nothing better than to see the end of the policies of the Bush Administration . These policies have turned a surplus into a deficit, increased international and domestic dangers to Americans, and isolated our country diplomatically. At home, the Bush policies have been a disaster for the great majority of Americans, creating ever more joblessness and homelessness, loss of health care, security, privacy, and freedom. The 2004 presidential election is an opportunity to address these failures. I want a candidate who recognizes the crises that we face and proposes real solutions to change course. You are not that candidate. You do not act or speak as if there were any crisis to be resolved. What you have to say about issues of war and peace is either alarming or trivial.

Please understand that this election is not a popularity contest, as far as I am concerned. I do not care that you served in Vietnam and that George Bush did not. I don't care whether you had better grades at Yale than Bush. I am not impressed that you present yourself as a better champion of minorities and the poor. But I do care about your voting record and where you stand on the issues. Here is what this means:

1. On Iraq: you advocate sending more troops and bullying NATO and other allies to "share" in the illegal occupation of Iraq. That position is worse than the Bush position, not better. First, it not only disregards international law, which says we have no right to be in Iraq, but it also compounds the problem by pressuring other countries to participate in the illegality. I don't suppose you hold these views opportunistically, wanting to appear tough to "centrist" voters. I think you honestly believe that we have the right to force ourselves on the Iraqis. That makes you just as dangerous as George Bush.

2. On Civil Liberties: you have voted for the egregiously unpatriotic "Patriot Act." That is all that anyone who cares deeply for the United States' Bill of Rights needs to know, to recognize that you are not a civil libertarian.

3. On Civil Rights for Homosexuals, your difference from Bush's positions do not make your positions laudable. While your voting record on civil rights for homosexuals is better than his positions, your unashamed supposition that you or anyone else has the right to deny a basic civil right, such as marriage, to anyone else, a right from which you yourself fully benefit, is despicable.

4. On Fair Trade and jobs, you have supported all the major trade agreements that the Republicans have supported. Now you say that if elected president you would put all such agreements under a 120-day review and take unspecified "necessary steps" if they are found to be unfair to Americans. Again, I look at your voting record to make up my mind whether you can be trusted on this. I think you are not to be trusted.

5. Health Care: Forty-five million Americans have no health care insurance or inadequate coverage despite more money per capita being spent on health care in the US than anywhere else in the world. Our infant mortality statistics are worse than those of fifteen other countries. Still you remain opposed to universal health care.

6. You propose to cut the deficit in half within four years while continuing to increase defense spending. Your math does not add up, even if you were to propose increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans. The current defense budget is bigger in real terms than the average it was during the cold war despite persistent questions about waste and lack of sufficient over sight, questions that you yourself do not raise.

7. On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, your rhetoric matches your record, and they are both wrong. You have supported Israel's illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, which is nothing short of ethnic cleansing. The ongoing sickening destruction of Palestinian society, to establish and defend illegal Israeli settlements paid for by US tax payers, is thanks in part to your supine voting record in the Senate, along with that of other Democrats and Republicans.

8. On fighting terror you are as hypocritical and dishonest as Bush. You have chosen to alarm the public about the possible dangers of "nukes" in Iran and North Korea. Using fear to prepare the public for an illegal war is a wellworn Bush tactic, and will very likely lead to more anti-American terror.

Your record in the Senate and the positions you have taken leave much to be desired. As for your strategy, many people believe your chicken approach to campaigning to be a strategic decision that you have had to make. They tell informed Americans that you are actually opposed to the Iraq war, but for political reasons must hide this. The theory is that you are trying to capture the centrist voters. Whatever its lack of honesty, I might believe it to be your motivation if the polls were suggesting the opposite of what they do in fact indicate. But when so many people are opposing the Iraq war, as they now do, all that is needed is a leader who will be a leader and say what must be said in opposition to the war. It would have made you popular despite your dull rhetoric. Instead, you are continually losing the opportunity to attack George Bush on the war and on other vulnerable issues. Many people credit you for helping turn public opinion against the Vietnam War thirty years ago. But you yourself had supported and fought in the war, and only later changed your mind. How many more people must die in Iraq, be jobless and homeless and without hope in our own country, before you come to your senses on these current issues?

It is not clear what you and the Democrats ( with some notable exceptions) have to offer. On the one hand, you do not use the many opportunities available to you to discredit the Bush Administration. On the other hand, you complain when someone like Ralph Nader does speak to the issues. I understand that you might feel the progressive vote is owed to you. I am sure that Ralph Nader infuriates you, in providing informed voters with a real alternative. Let me put your mind at ease about that. If there were no independent or third party candidate running for the 2004 presidential race, I might decide not to vote. Because between a chicken hawk such as Bush and a chicken politician like yourself, there is very little choice.

I wish it were different. It is time that Americans had a decent choice.

Shulamit Decktor.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, Fire Mountain Chapter, letter to the editor, June 11, 2004 on Reagan's record

Editor, The Chronicle

When any person dies they deserve respect. The family of former President Reagan deserves condolences for their personal loss and for the tragedy of watching him deteriorate with Alzheimer's Disease. This condition effects the memory of those afflicted. It should not effect the memory of the rest of us but when I see the canonization efforts in the media for Ronald Reagan I begin to wonder. The media would have us believe that he was the most popular President ever but his 52% average approval ratings place him sixth of the last ten Presidents.

When we consider his life we should also consider the lives of all those who were victims of his policies. Before Reagan, people sleeping in the streets were rare. After Reagan, the term homeless became common with over 2 million without homes. Reagan cut the budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development by three-quarters. That Department was the main supporter of subsidized housing for the poor. At the same time the Reagan administration changed the tax codes to reduce incentives to provide low income housing. During this time of tax breaks for the wealthy, the average family income for the poorest 20% of Americans dropped 6.1% while the income of the top fifth rose by 11.1%.

Reagan opposed the Civil Rights movement. His administration blocked busing programs and cut Head Start which was to bring equality to education. He supported tax breaks for segregated schools. His first campaign stop was at Philadelphia, Mississippi. That is the town where three civil rights workers had been murdered in collaboration with the Sheriff's department. He publicly supported States Rights which was code for racism. He supported the apartheid regime in South Africa which was responsible for the deaths of thousands of black people.

He supported the Argentine junta which was applying state terror and disappearing thousands of dissidents. An estimated 300,000 people died in Central America because of Reagan's support of governments with death squads and the invasion of Nicaragua by the terrorist contras.

The media gives him credit for defeating communism but it's pretty clear that the Soviet Union was collapsing from within at that time. An argument can be made that his Evil Empire belligerence lengthened the Cold War. The current Russian ambassador to Sweden, who was a Gorbachev confidante, says that the idea of Star Wars was exploited by Kremlin hardliners to complicate Gorbachev's attempts to end the Cold war.

AIDS was recognized in 1981 but because of his anti-gay bigotry Reagan couldn't even say the name in public until forced to by the action of activists in 1987. He supported fighters in Afghanistan who became known as Al-Queda and the Taliban. He supported Saddam Hussein. Under his watch America became a debtor nation for the first time. However, his worst legacy was to encourge a meaness and selfishness of spirit which still envelopes America today.

Let us give the man the respect he deserves but let's not lie to ourselves about who he was.

Larry Kerschner

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, May 31, 2004, letter to the editor on Drug Discount Program

Editor, The Chronicle

A recent article in the Chronicle stated that only 400 AARP members, out of 35 million, have signed up for the new Medicare drug discount program. Medicare covers more than 40 million seniors and disabled Americans who are projected to consume $1.8 trillion of prescription drugs over the next decade. The Bush administration had projected that 7.3 million Medicare recipients would sign up for the cards. There is no specific requirement in the law that Medicare recipients sign up for the program However, beneficiaries who delay enrollment or temporarily leave the program could face steep financial penalties. Those who do not enroll when first eligible will pay a late enrollment penalty for the rest of their lives. If a beneficiary does not have prescription drug coverage for longer than two months they are subject to a one per cent increase in their premium for each month that they are not covered when they do sign up for the! program. Thus if you are not covered by a prescription drug program for whatever reason for ten months after you become eligible for the Medicare program your premium will be increased by ten percent each month for the rest of your life.

Another little examined aspect of this program is the claim that it will save the seniors money on their prescriptions. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds that several million of the nation's poorest elderly and disabled beneficiaries will be worse off because they will have to pay more for drugs than they currently pay under Medicaid and can be denied coverage for medications they currently receive. With the cards the seniors receive from the so-called discount drug companies there is no guarantee that a specific drug will be available. Thus you may sign up for a card because a particular drug is offered but if they decide to stop providing that madication you cannot change cards for a year.

Why was President Bush so adamant about this particular program plan? It might be the close financial, professional and political ties he has to AdvancePCS -- the company that helped write the bill Congress passed. The CEO of AdvancePCS is a close personal friend of the President. According to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, David Halbert, before starting AdvancePCS helped clean up an insider trading deal with Harken Energy that had prompted an SEC investigation of George W. Bush. Soon thereafter, Halbert invited Bush to become one of the initial investors in AdvancePCS - a transaction which netted the President a million dollars.

AdvancePCS and four other companies control eighty per cent of the pharmaceutical benefits management programs and ninety per cent of the mail-order pharmacy business. This new Medicare program is designed to steer millions of patients away from local pharmacies and into using these mail-order businesses. Senator Ted Kennedy recently stated that only in this administration would the words 'discount cards' mean that the seniors get the cards while the corporations get the discounts.

Larry Kerschner

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell, letter to the editor, May 19, 2004, Iraq - they don't want us

Editor, The Chronicle

Instead of refuting the same old tired lies about the war in Iraq played again in a recent Chronicle editorial, let's look at Iraq today. As of today, (5-18-04) the number of dead coalition troops in Iraq has reached nine hundred. To those dead remember to add the over one hundred and twenty troops who have died in Afghanistan.

Because of the lack of planning, the Bush government now has to move ten percent of the troops in South Korea to shore up the troops in Iraq. These 3600 troops are moving from the region of North Korea where, without lies, it has been shown that international terrorists and nuclear weapons intersect.

Part or all of nine of the Army's ten active-duty divisions are currently deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan. 167,000 members of the Reserve and the National Guard are on active duty at this time. Now the Rumsfeld Defense Department has asked Congress to have the Internal Revenue Service to use confidential tax returns to locate members of the Individual Ready Reserve for possible callup. These 280,000 people are those who have completed their active-duty tours but are still subject to involuntary recall for a certain number of years. The problem for the Pentagon is that more than a quarter of these veterans have neglected to keep Big Brother informed of their whereabouts.

The Marines have announced that they are considering doubling the length of time for tours of duty in Iraq because of the lack of replacement troops.

Now let's look at things from the Iraqi point of view. Out of a potential workforce of seven million Iraqis only 25,000 are working on projects in the U.S. Reconstruction efforts. That should really jumpstart their economy.

A recent Iraqi opinion poll conducted by Gallup in March has discredited many claims of the Bush administration. After there were no weapons of mass destruction and after there was no connection to Al Quaeda or 9-11, Bush and his minions argued that there is a silent majority of Iraqis who regard the U.S. troops as liberators, who want the U.S. troops to stay in Iraq for a prolonged time, who oppose insurgent attacks on coalition troops, and are enthusiatics about a Western-style democracy.

While ninety-seven percent of the Kurds in the north view U.S. forces as liberators only ten percent of the Sunnis and seven percent of the Shias view the troops in this way. At the beginning of the war, when support for the U.S. would be expected to be highest, only forty-three percent of Iraqis viewed us as liberators. The poll results showed that sixty-one percent of Shias and sixty-five percent of Sunnis want our troops to leave immediately. Is it racism to think that the Iraqis can't figure out how to govern themselves without our directions?

Support for armed attacks on coalition forces is also not confined to a small minority of extremists. Twenty-two percent of respondents stated that such attacks were sometimes justified and twenty-nine percent stated that such attacks were always justified when a country is occupied by foreign invaders. Remember that this poll was taken before the exposures from Abu Ghraib were released. Less than forty percent of Iraqis support a Western-style democracy according to this poll.

It is kind of ironic that the U.S. State Department just released it's annual human rights report with pictures of smiling Iraqi children on the cover. It is clearly time to stop building permanent military bases in Iraq and stop the occupation of another country that doesn't want us. Bring the troops home.

Larry Kerschner

Prisoner Abuse in Iraq. Letter by Ruth Yarrow, WWFOR organizer, published in The Seattle Times, May 7, 2004

War of terror

While I found it painful to look at the photos of Iraqi prisoners being tortured by the U.S. military, I deeply appreciate that you printed them in your May 4 issue. We need to know what our government is doing; not knowing spells the demise of democracy.

This administration says we are fighting a war against terror. I think we are fighting a war of terror, with well over 10,000 Iraqi civilians dead, many more thousands suffering, including these prisoners. I include our young troops among those who are suffering and terrorized, whether from physical and psychological damage or erosion of their consciences and humanity.

Let us speak up to bring our troops home, and to have our tax dollars go to peacekeeping forces and to rebuilding Iraq.

Ruth Yarrow, Seattle

"President" Bush Wreaks Havoc. Letter to the Editor, by Larry Kerschner, Fire Mountain Chapter FOR, submitted April 26, 2004

Editor, The Chronicle

After the Bay of Pigs fiasco, President Kennedy said that while victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan he was, in the final analysis, the responsible officer of the U.S. government. During his recent press conference, President Bush could not think of a single mistake for which he was responsible. How about bombing the Afghanistan people into oblivion and then abandoning them to the opium dealers and the warlords? How about his concerted push to geat rid of the U.N. weapons inspectors so that they couldn't say there were no WMDs before 20,000 people including over 800 Americans were killed in Iraq? How about his alienating over 90% of the people of the world by his arrogance and hubris? How about his cutting the budgets for veterans and education while giving billions to the already super-rich? How about his swaggering and smirking "bring it on"? Why after a year of occupation are the hospitals, waste and water treatment plants and electricity plants in Iraq not any better than they were while Saddam was in charge? The Iraqi children are still dying.

Several years ago, in a letter to the Chronicle, I predicted that this George Bush will go down in history as the worst President America has ever had. I have seen nothing in the interim to change my mind. This man lives in a fantasy world. The recent fuss at the 9-11 Commission about a President's Daily Briefing that was presented about six weeks before the terrorist attack raised questions about the preparedness of the President.

The PDB is a collation of information which has usually been reduced to 1-2 pages. Instead of reading these brief documents the President has the Director of the CIA read them and then tell him what they contained. This President may not be stupid but he is intellectually lazy. He allows those around him to do his thinking for him. His reluctance to release the PDBs from the Clinton administration is probably because Clinton read them and made notes on all of them of questions he had and actions he wanted done. In other words, doing the job of the President.

America and the world must not be afflicted by four more years with this man as President.

Larry Kerschner, Pe Ell WA

Massacre in Fallujah. Letter to the Editor by Ruth Yarrow, WWFOR Organizer, published April 16, 2004, in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer

IRAQ

There can be no democracy without truth Looking at what is happening in Fallujah, you might conclude that the U.S. policy is to increase terrorism. The NGO's Coordinating Committee in Iraq has witnessed real horrors including our coalition forces occupying Fallujah's hospitals and expelling the patients. The Bush administration does not seem to grasp that Iraqi terrorists are not born but feel driven to take extreme action when they see their loved ones traumatized, imprisoned and killed. The same could be said of our own soldiers who, under horrific conditions, fearing for their lives, become terrorists to Iraqi civilians.

Kudos to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer for including the following paragraph in the Tuesday article: "A hospital official said more than 600 Iraqis were killed in Fallujah alone -- mostly women, children and the elderly."

A democracy can survive only when its citizens know the truth. And the truth is that our violence in Fallujah will generate much more violence. We need to demand a speedy U.S. withdrawal, international oversight to return control of Iraq to the Iraqis and a sane foreign policy that increases negotiation and peace, not militarism and terror.

Ruth Yarrow, Seattle

Massacre in Fallujah. Letter to the Editor by Susan Donaldson, Tacoma FOR, submitted April 15, 2004

Dear Mr. Seago: (The News Tribune)

re: Lee Keath’s "Iraqi women, children flee beseeged city" (Sat., 10 April, A1,9)

I am horrified by U.S. actions in Fallujah and at their implications for the future. In response to the desecration of the corpses of the four U.S. mercenaries killed there, I read that while "women, children, and the elderly were allowed to leave the city," military-aged men "were