PGHIMC - Pittsburgh Independent Media Center

Letters to the POG
by Sam Monday, Mar. 24, 2003 at 11:55 AM

Further proof that we're living in the new Red Scare.

Letters to the editor, 03/24/03

Monday, March 24, 2003

As marches by anti-war protesters turn violent, ironies abound

Like all Americans, I am closely watching the developments of Operation Iraqi Freedom. And like all real Americans, I give 100 percent support to our coalition forces who are fighting it. But what compelled me to write this letter is what's happening closer to home.

On March 20, anti-war protestors took to the streets in several cities, including Pittsburgh. Some protesters may do this because they have a sincere belief in the cause, along with a rational argument that they feel substantiates that belief. Others speak out because they are uninformed or, worse, because they are promoting other agendas. Regardless of their motives, I recognize that, because they live in this country, these individuals have the right to express that opinion.

More than 100 participants were arrested in Pittsburgh because the gathering began to take on a mob atmosphere. The marchers were involved in altercations with police, who, ironically, work to keep the peace that these protesters claim to covet.

During these anti-war demonstrations, you say the United States is a bully, and you call our commander in chief a dictator. Question: What would have happened if you'd tried this in Iraq?

Get the answer from those who know. Once Iraq is liberated by this administration and its allies, ask the Iraqi people. Grateful to exercise their new-found liberties, including freedom of speech, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to tell you.


KRISTIN PAXTON
Economy



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nowhere crowd


I was both shocked and appalled at the recent "peace" demonstrations held in Downtown Pittsburgh. Why, I ask, must you peace protesters break the law to be heard? Since you are supporting "peace," why do your counterparts act out violently? Are you all that hypocritical?

Where were you when Saddam killed thousands in Northern Iraq? Where were you during the Kosovo conflict? Where were you when airplanes were flown into the World Trade Center and Pentagon?

The answer is simple: nowhere.

For those of you who said, "Let the United Nations decide," hear this: Over the past 12 years Iraq has been in violation of well over a dozen U.N. resolutions, all of which have gone unpunished.

This war is not for oil (as you hypocritical demonstrators think) but rather for prevention. Don't we all buy insurance, get vaccinated and have smoke detectors all to prevent something bad from happening?


JOSH GIEGEL
North Fayette



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Terrorists, too


The First Amendment: "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.."

My dictionary's definition of terrorism: "The systematic use of terror, esp. as a means of coercion."

I watched the peace march in Pittsburgh on Thursday. I had an unusual thought as I watched the proceedings. It was: "These people, too, are terrorists." That is, by the act of disrupting traffic, and, as I understand from the news reports, vandalizing automobiles, the act of assembly moved out of the domain of "peaceable" assembly and moved into the same world of motives that suicide bombers and other terrorists use.

This bothers me a lot. I am not in favor of the war, and furthermore I believe that opposition to the war is not at all inconsistent with patriotism. But I am distinctly opposed to people who have an important message to get across resorting to the same philosophical tactics that the followers of Osama bin Laden use. Certainly with less violence, and no loss of life. But, as George Bernard Shaw said in another context: "We've already established what you are. Now we're only haggling over the price."

If they believe these means are legitimate, where do we draw the line between what they did and what happened on 9/11? We should be opposed to the use of terrorism. To employ it demeans the democratic principles this country stands for.

I believe the First Amendment is plain: it says "peaceably assemble." It does not grant the right to disrupt the society in what are certainly non-peaceful ways, and I think such terrorist techniques only obscure and detract from the message they are trying to send.


JOSEPH M. NEWCOMER
Point Breeze

add your comments