Pro-terrorist lobby II

And the pro-terrorist lobby will not relent.

Citing the same article I cite in the letter immediately below, yesterday's (Saturday, September 30) Boston Globe had 4 more letters supporting the terrorists and attacking the President. Only one letter was published that was critical of the terrorists or supportive of the President, an almost veto-proof majority of the U.S. Senate, and the will of a majority of Americans. The letter immediately below could have been published to add some more balance to yesterday's letters. The second letter below would have been a great letter for the Globe to have published this morning; instead, the Globe published 7 letters supporting the terrorists and attacking the President and none supoporting the President, the bi-partsan majority of the United States Senate and the will of the majority of Americans. Thus, the third letter way down below that I sent this morning.

Editor,

In commenting on legislation passed by the U.S. Senate (65 - 34) which authorizes military tribunals and certain interrogation techniques for use against terrorists, Sen. John F. Kerry said, "This bill gives an Administration that lobbied for torture exactly what it wanted (Senate's passage of detainee bill gives Bush a win, September 29, A1)."

No surprise here, this is exactly what a member of the pro-terrorist lobby would say. (End of first letter.)

Wow, a sitting U.S. Senator suggesting the President is part of the "pro-torture lobby". And the Globe happily printed the quote without commenting on how ridiculous the insinuation is.

The second letter:

Edtor,

You cannot imagine how thrilled I was to see the Letters page of Saturday, September 30.

Recall, just seven days ago, on the emotional subject of interrogating terrorists, the Boston Globe chose to publish five letters supportive of the terrorists and attacking the President of the United States.

Then, subsequent to that, our Uniter Not Divider, that's President Bush, by the way, orchestrated passage of U.S. Senate legislation supporting military tribunals for terrorists and outlining acceptable interrogation methods for use against terrorists. The vote in the Senate was 65 - 34 with 12 Democrats crossing over to support the President and most definitely the will of a majority of Americans.

Additionally, this week, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to support our troops in Iraq with $70 billion. That's 100 - 0. Looks an awful like unity to me but then I'm not a liberal extremist.

This all translated into progress on the Letters page of the Boston Globe today; the letters on the above general topics were 4 letters supporting the terrorists and attacking the President and 1 letter supporting the President, the majority of U.S. Senators and the majority of Americans. Any progress in the war against terrorists should be celebrated. (End of second letter.)

Finally, letter number three:

Editor,

I appreciate that the pro-terrorist lobby has found a friendly forum in the Letters section of the Boston Globe; it and the editorial staff of the Boston Globe share a hatred of President Bush and I understand your mutual affection for each other.

To wit, in reviewing all of the letters the Boston Globe has published over the last week on the war against terrorists, the count ran 14 - 2, those supporting the terrorists and attacking the President of the United States versus those supporting the President. If you throw in the letters from last Saturday, the count goes to 19 - 2. It was 7 - 0 in today's Boston Sunday Globe!

However, it simply is not true that the only "villain" in the 19 letters is the global leader in the war against terrorists, President Bush. Just this week, twelve Senate Democrats supported President Bush's plan for military tribunals to try terrorists and to allow for certain harsh interrogation methods against terrorists. Also, this week, all Senate Democrats voted for an additional $70 billion in military spending to fight the war in Iraq. Last October 7, 44 out of 45 Senate Democrats (Sen. Patrick Leahy missed the vote) voted for an additional $50 billion in military spending to fight the war in Iraq; certainly Congress could cut off spending for the troops if it did not want to support and continue the war. In 2001, all Senate Democrats except Sen. Russ Feingold voted in support of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001. When the legislation was just recently re-authorized, 33 Senate Democrats voted for re-authorization. In October 2003, about half of all Senate Democrats voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq; the headliners voting "yes" included our very own Sen. John F. Kerry and New York's Sen. Hillary Clinton. There are many other votes I can list but I hope everybody sees that Senate Democrats are "complicit" (a word I choose for its negative connotation in an attempt to mock the liberal extremists) in fighting the war against terrorists.

In the spirit of intellectual and journalistic honesty, I think either a few more letters should be published that support the President, a fantastic majority of the U.S. Senate, and the will of most Americans. Or, if only the letters from the liberal extremists continue to get published that these letters at least recognize the many moderate Senate Democrats that routinely vote in support of the President, a demonstrated "uniter" as the votes listed above clearly indicate. (End of third letter.)

For those in cities other than Boston, please, feel free to use the phrase "pro-terrorist lobby" in any letter you choose to submit to you local, liberal newspaper.