Letters to the Editor

Clinton’s lies did not cost lives of soldiers
Re: Column “Actions lie louder than words,” July 8

I think it’s amusing how Michael Holt and his other right-wing friends are getting upset over how the Iraq war is becoming further exposed as a waste of money and human lives.

Furthermore, I think it is equally amusing how Holt and other right-wingers overlook, in their simplistic comparison to Clinton’s lies, that not one single person died as result of something that even a majority of the American public — and the world — thought was a private matter.

This should be contrasted with the Bush administration, whose top officials pushed the lies about the still non-existent weapons of mass destruction and approved the invasion of a sovereign nation without international approval. And what about the ever reappearing “link” between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden?

Holt asks us, “Who knows what else he (Clinton) lied about or to whom?” I would ask Holt, given the Bush Administration’s track record, what else are they willing to lie about or willing to do, and who will die as a result of it?

I hope as Holt completes his degree in history and political science, he will become more challenging of the corporate-owned media and better at analyzing facts and evaluating information.

James Coleman is a graduate student majoring in international studies.

No unanimous support, no ties with al-Qaeda
Re: Column “Actions lie louder than words,” July 8

You suggest (without saying so exactly) that the invasion and occupation of Iraq is justified because “al-Qaeda had operatives in countries all over the planet including the United States.” By this logic, the United States should invade and occupy itself. (Perhaps it would not be so bad to keep more U.S. citizens occupied.)

You claim that “it is unknown if President George W. Bush has lied about why we are in Iraq.” To the best of my knowledge, this claim is accurate. However, in this regard, I wonder whether you are aware of the following statement, made by Bush to a Polish television station on May 30, 2003:

“We’ve found the weapons of mass destruction.” This statement is necessarily either a lie or, far worse, indicative of a psychopathological delusion.

You assert that “everyone on the left … thought a tiny little lie was no big deal.” I, for one, have been on the left for decades, and since learning that former President Bill Clinton lied, I have always thought his lie is a very big deal. Thus your assertion is incorrect — meaning that either you lied in making it (if you knew that at least one person on the left thought Clinton’s lie was a big deal) or made a factual error.

It is also either a lie or a factual error that “Congress gave their unanimous approval for the war.” The tally in the Senate was 77-23; in the House of Representatives, it was 296-133.

Congress did not vote “for the war.” What Congress did was “authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.” Since all evidence now points to the fact that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, it is entirely unclear just what was authorized in the resolutions of Oct. 11, 2002.

Bill Rosenthal is an adjunct professor of secondary education.