Letters to the Editor | PostIndependent.com

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Though it has been largely ignored by the media, concrete evidence regarding the Iraq war recently emerged in a document called the Downing Street Memo. Published in the May 1 edition of London Times, it confirms that the President has not told the truth about his military action in Iraq.

The memo contains the details of a meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his inner circle that took place July 23, 2002, eight months before the invasion. It explicitly states that at the time, “military action was now seen as inevitable in Washington,” contradicting Bush’s statements at the time.

The memo’s key passage reads: “Bush wanted to remove Saddam, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” It goes on to say that Washington was too impatient to go the United Nations route, and that the war’s aftermath was discussed little.

The very serious implications are that Bush made a decision early on, unauthorized by Congress, to remove Saddam, and had the justification for his move contrived to win the support of the people (and of Congress).

If that is the case, what exactly have 1,700 of our soldiers died for?

Visit http://www.afterdowningstreet.org to learn more.

Mackenzie Gibson

Parachute

Dear Editor,

Gay Moore wrote last week accusing those who support fixing Social Security as being Republican partisans. As a Democrat, I took offense to this baseless accusation!

I disagree with Republicans on the war and on most foreign policy decisions. However, as a Democrat, I agree with the bipartisan assessment that pride and productivity are achieved through ownership. Does agreeing with reforming Social Security make me a partisan Republican?

Moore also claimed having a 401(k) though your employer is good enough. She is wrong! A small-business owner paying into a personal 401(k) also has to pay into Social Security.

Meanwhile, state and federal employees continue only paying into their personal state-subsidized accounts, which are exempt from payroll taxes. These taxes give no return on investment because Social Security is an annual expenditure out of the federal budget.

Whether someone has a 401(k) account is irrelevant to the debate over fixing Social Security. I am offended by Gay’s claim that I am a Republican mouthpiece.

I am also amused by her erroneous claim that simply because you can open an IRA means we shouldn’t give Americans some ownership in their retirement.

Erin Gilliam

Grand Junction

Dear Editor,

Thanks for the article on RS 2477, the 1866 statute that threatens many of our prized national lands. Under this ancient law, Moffat County is claiming over 2,000 miles of “highways” across public lands, including more than 50 miles inside the 26 square mile Browns Park National Wildlife Refuge. The article puts Moffat’s claims at 240 miles, the amount inside Dinosaur National Monument alone.

In 1976, Congress rescinded this Civil War-era statute, and for many Colorado lands it has not been in affect since the late 19th or early 20th century, when lands were “reserved” into national forests, monuments, parks, etc. Federal courts have ruled that routes not only have to have existed prior to this date, but also to have been constructed since that time for recognized public use.

Moffat County’s claims include footpaths, cow trails, rivers, and “routes no longer visible” (aka non-existent), and many do not satisfy the court’s requirements. Photos of Moffat’s claims can be viewed at http://66.84.44.20/2477/00index.htm.

Udall’s legislation offers a solution to separate bogus claims from legitimate public access needs, and the congressman should be commended for seeking compromise. Garfield County should support these sensible efforts.

Pete Kolbenschlag

Grand Junction

Dear Editor,

Thanks for the article on RS 2477, the 1866 statute that threatens many of our prized national lands. Under this ancient law, Moffat County is claiming over 2,000 miles of “highways” across public lands, including more than 50 miles inside the 26 square mile Browns Park National Wildlife Refuge. The article puts Moffat’s claims at 240 miles, the amount inside Dinosaur National Monument alone.

In 1976, Congress rescinded this Civil War-era statute, and for many Colorado lands it has not been in affect since the late 19th or early 20th century, when lands were “reserved” into national forests, monuments, parks, etc. Federal courts have ruled that routes not only have to have existed prior to this date, but also to have been constructed since that time for recognized public use.

Moffat County’s claims include footpaths, cow trails, rivers, and “routes no longer visible” (aka nonexistent), and many do not satisfy the court’s requirements. Photos of Moffat’s claims can be viewed at http://66.84.44.20/2477/00index.htm.

Udall’s legislation offers a solution to separate bogus claims from legitimate public access needs, and the congressman should be commended for seeking compromise. Garfield County should support these sensible efforts.

Pete Kolbenschlag

Grand Junction

Dear Editor,

I know that many people oppose the new high school, because of True Value, the Gymnastics Academy, etc. But I believe that students should be the main concern.

As a 2004 Glenwood Springs High School graduate, I am in full favor of the new high school. The old high school is run-down, dirty and disgusting. The halls were overpacked, and many of the the classrooms were, as well.

So instead of being concerned for businesses that can move, maybe everyone should consider the students and their strive for higher education.

Jennifer Odom

Glenwood Springs

Dear Editor,

This is in response to the editorial cartoon, “Bush unveils his plan for defeating the deadly insurgency in Iraq,” printed Tuesday in the Post Independent Voices section.

This cartoon is way over the top. Here are some quotes from the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics:

1. Make certain that headlines, news teasers and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites, and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.

2. Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events.

3. Avoid stereotyping.

4. Commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.

This cartoon borders on being evil and at best is a cheap shot and hate-filled. Whose side are you on, anyway?

Ross L. Talbott

New Castle

Editor’s note: The cartoon appeared on the paper’s opinion pages.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.