Letter to the Editor: Resents implications
I am replying to a letter by Ned Scarlet (Sun Advocate , March 4) to tell him I resent being called a hippie and a traitor.
I will be 73 years old on May 7. I have worked since I was 11 years old, except for an eight month vacation that President Eisenhower gave me during his 1958 recession. At the time I was married and had two sons and would have lost everything I own if my mother hadn't helped me out. I retired on President's Day 1992 after working 36 years for the Rio Grande Railroad as a switchman, brakeman and conductor in Helper.
If we want to get rid of terrorists and traitors I suggest we start with our present administration. If it is not traitorous to wrap our flag around a 55 gallon oil drum and it is not terrorist to instigate a war that will kill thousands of innocent men, women and children (at the behest of the oil companies) then I would like to know what is.
I also consider it traitorous to give ownership of the United States of America and its armed forces to the American oil companies and British Petroleum. If that is not traitorous, I would like them to tell me what is. I subscribe to the Sun Advocate and the Salt Lake Tribune and a great preponderance of the items I have read opposing the oil company's war with Iraq were written by veterans of World War II. Is Mr. Scarlet also accusing them of being traitors?
I agree with him that 9-11 was a heinous act. President Bush, as hard as he has tried, has not uncovered any evidence that Saddam was involved in 9-11. He states that terrorists reside in Iraq but weren't the group that actually occupied and piloted the planes that caused 9-11 residing in the United States.
Bush has accused Saddam of lying because he is destroying missiles he denied owning. But isn't Bush also being dishonest not telling Saddam that he is committed to destroy him whether he disarms or not?