Merrimack Valley People for Peace Serving the communities of the Merrimack Valley

  Letters to the Editor:

COMING EVENTS    Weekly Vigils    Recent Events      20 Year History NEWS/INFORMATION Links to Resources Radio ACTION Do Now Contact Government Submit News or Events VOTE! Register to vote Defend the Environment

ABOUT MVPP Contact MVPP Join/Renew! Why we still vigil Letters to Editors Officers Newsletter (in pdf)

HOME

Greed is behind the destruction of Iraq
"Newburyport Daily News" June 11, 2008

To the editor:

Numerous documents, reports, books, articles and interviews from all sides of the spectrum, including. Republicans, Democrats, CIA operatives, members of the military and many more, have revealed the betrayal of Americans, Iraqis; and the world by the Bush/Cheney government and its neocon supporters .It has been shown over and over that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, no connection to al-Qaida, no nuclear programs - in fact, all the claims used to justify the invasion of Iraq were lies, misinformation and propaganda, developed in order to implement a plan worked out by neocons Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz years before 9/11.

As a consequence, millions of people have been slaughtered, maimed and made homeless, jobless and without hope in a destroyed land, through the horrors of the bloodbath that continues to this day. It seems the Bush/Cheney agenda has always been to cripple and enslave the entire Iraqi nation within their own land, with no recourse to justice or independence.

With the "agreement" that the Bush/Cheney people are currently trying to force on the Iraqi government, the true aims of this administration are apparent. In addition to control of Iraqi oil, the deal provides for over 50 permanent U.S. military bases and the right to conduct military operations from those bases (to almost anywhere in the world). It provides immunity from Iraqi law for American troops and contractors, but a free hand to carry out arrests of Iraqis, all without consultation with the Iraqi government. The Iraqis have been told that billions of dollars of Iraqi money held in a New York bank will never be released unless the "agreement" is signed.

Clearly wealth does not satisfy the people of the Bush/Cheney regime, for they have vast wealth. I do not understand their desire to turn the whole world into killing fields for the war industry, or their avid bludgeoning of weaker nations into absolute submission. Greed takes many forms; the greed that produced the Bush/Cheney government comes from the heart of evil. It brings only devastation and misery.

Diana Philip, Newburyport

A news blackout of Winter Soldier Hearings
"Newburyport Daily News" April 7, 2008

To the editor:

It surprised me to learn recently that The New York Times published information about the Winter Soldier Hearings, held in Washington, D.C., March 13-16, in its international paper, the International Herald Tribune in Paris, but not in The New York Times' editions published here in the United States. What am I to make of this news blackout in America, whereby all the rest of the world gets to know about the hearings, but not American citizens? There were reports in places as far-flung as Britain, Australia, Croatia and Iran. Are we to be the last to know?

The Winter Soldier Hearings bring talk of war to the very human level - which is what war is really about - to the level of people who have directly experienced war and its terrible consequences. Not the rants of politicians whose wealth and bloated egos keep them insulated from any concern about ordinary human beings, nor the conniving of sycophants who see advantage in kissing up to power, nor the rapacious greed of the oil industry and weapons manufacturers, nor the inhuman callousness of military planners who are devoid of conscience, all groups that personally profit from a state of war.

The Winter Soldier Hearings are the personal testimonies of Iraq war veterans; what they saw, what they did, what that has done to them, and how veterans have been treated. It is also individual stories of what has been done repeatedly, over and over, to hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi people - infants, children, men and women of all ages - whose only fault was to live in their own country. But the world's superpower wants to take what they have and has lied grotesquely to further its agenda. Sorry, but that's what it comes down to.

There are some places where information on the hearings is available. Go to IVAW.org or truthout.org for coverage. The testimonies are painful to hear, but at the same point Americans must face what is being done in our name and with taxpayers' money. Diana Philip, Newburyport

Let's come to our senses and leave Iraq

"Newburyport Daily News" April 1, 2008
To the editor:

Over five years ago the U.S. invaded Iraq under the pretext that it possessed weapons of mass destruction, stored by Saddam Hussein, formerly a U.S. ally. Our country conveniently has forgotten that President Bush and Vice President Cheney stated that our war would be a short one. Today, between 600,000 and one million Iraqi civilians and soldiers have died violently, as well as over 4,000 U.S. soldiers - plus, there is no official number of the soldiers who have died in hospitals in Germany or in the U.S. from traumatic wounds.

Do these deaths mean anything to the American public? Yes, our soldiers' senseless deaths hit us, but we are ignorant and casual about the eradication of countless Iraqis, destruction and death being so removed from our placid and safe American life. Moreover, we are told incessantly that in spite of losing so many of our young men and women, this "war on terrorism" is worth it. But what are we winning? The answer continues to be the need for Iraq's oil and the need to account for our hurt pride until we get the job done.

I think of those Iraqi civilians - children, mothers, fathers, grandparents - or those brave American soldiers who no longer are with us. Or of the 30,000 wounded U.S. soldiers, many horrifically. Their full-time care is a portion of the projected $3 trillion this war will cost. Moreover, the complicity between our government and the media assures that we receive a minimum coverage of war-torn Iraq, with its food, gas, electricity, health, educational and infrastructure shortages that are at lower standards now than at the beginning of the war.

On September 11, 2001, we lost nearly 3,000 people. Bent on retaliation, our country set out to punish first Afghanistan and then Iraq (though there never was evidence of al-Qaida influence in Iraq at that time). If our intent is an eye for an eye, we certainly are the bully. By any definition, going to war is an act of terrorism.

Let's come to our senses: Our soldiers should leave Iraq, except for a small contingent (printed, but Barbara would delete), and the United Nations should step in to help the Iraqis stabilize the country. The millions of dollars that we spend daily on the war could instead be pumped into energizing our own recessive economy as well as helping the Iraqis get back on their feet.

Barbara Haack, West Newbury

Letter given to Rep. Niki Tsongs, March 19, 2008 see Word Document

Support our troops by voting for change March 18

"Newburyport Daily News" March 18, 2008

To the editor

Vote for change. What problems have been solved by the war in Iraq? For what good reason have 655,000 people been killed -3,973 or our own troops killed, 29,080 wounded-and trillions of dollars spent for the war? How can we support our troops if we don't question the government's handling of foreign policy? If we don't adhere to international law and human rights? If we don't hold the government accountable to a balance of powers, to the equitable handling of our resources? How can we allow some corporations to profit from war while soldiers lose their lives, health and homes?

Imagine what could be if our troops dedicated their gifts in service to non-violent ways of building a world of justice, including a just and careful handling of the resources of the Earth itself. And, if we contributed our particular gifts to such purpose.

It has been said that the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men and women to do nothing.

Vote, act.

Trish Walker ,West Newbury

President Bush’s Veto of Bill Banning Torture

"The Eagle Tribune" March 11, 2008
Letter Editor

I am extremely disappointed that President Bush has vetoed H.R 2082, the Intelligence Authorization bill, which prevents the CIA and other US agents from using waterboarding, sexual humiliation, dogs and other techniques that amount to torture.

The Bush administration’s stubborn and reckless disregard for basic decency and international law has already brought us disrepute. The President’s veto further compounds the incalculable damage to the United States’ standing at home and abroad. The veto of the anti-torture legislation loudly contradicts his assertion that the United States “does not torture.”

I applaud the Congress for rejecting the bogus arguments and false claims that torture is an effective interrogation tactic. I urge the Congress to take the next step and pursue the available credible evidence of illegal and inhuman extraordinary renditions and torture in clandestine gulags around the world, and promptly hold all those responsible for the blatant violations of national and international laws.

Masood A. Sheikh, North Andover

Relicense Vermont Yankee?

“You would think a relicensing inspection for a nuclear plant would be at least as thorough as the house inspection you get when you purchase a home,” said Paula Gotch, a member of one of the nine groups involved in a petition to halt the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC, “Cut and Paste” relicensing tactics. “My inspector tested equipment and systems carefully himself. Here you have a federal agency, the NRC, content to just shuffle papers. It’s truly mind boggling,”

Despite a seriously flawed relicensing process, the NRC, gave its blessing in early March to Entergy to extend the license of the 36-year-old Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon, Vermont. It evidently makes no difference to the NRC that its own Office of the Inspector General, OIG, issued an alarming critique in September, 2007, of the NRC’s own renewal process. The entire OIG report (#OIG-07-A-15) is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/insp-gen/2007/

There is no indication that the NRC has addressed the points in the OIG critique.

Environmental and citizens’ groups from Vermont, New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts and responded to the OIG report with a petition demanding that the NRC halt the license renewal process for the “aging fleet of nuclear power plants until objective and independent analysis is conducted into the current licensing renewal process.” Vermont Yankee is among the oldest nuclear power plants still in operation. It was licensed in 1972 for 40 years with a life expectancy determined to end in 2012. This did not take into account a 20 per cent uprate, which creates much more wear and tear.

“So far, the relicensing process has been a conveyor belt to a rubber stamp, not a proper safety review,” stated Richard Webster of the Eastern Environmental Law Center, one of the attorneys representing the groups.

“The NRC is an agency in need of Congressional overhaul, and if this OIG report doesn’t prove that, nothing short of a meltdown will,” stated Peggi Sturmfels a member of the coalition of petitioners.

“The OIG report makes it clear that the current NRC license renewal process is a failure and must be completely re-evaluated before another plant is relicensed,” stated the attorney for Riverkeeper, an environmental group working on the Indian Point relicensing.

Vermont’s Governor Jim Douglas, joined anti-nuclear groups from Vermont, New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey in an effort to stop the NRC’s relicensing of four nuclear reactors until the NRC overhauls its review process. The Douglas administration joined Vermont’s state congressional delegation in asking for an independent safety assessment of Vermont Yankee before the NRC or state signs off on an additional 20 years of operation.

Some of the issues that were raised by the OIG audit are 1. In more than 70 per cent of audited plant renewals the NRC staff did not verify the authenticity of technical safety information submitted by nuclear power plant operators; 2. NRC staff reviewers routinely “cut and pasted” whole sections of the renewal application text into their own safety reviews, rather than write their own evaluations. 3. The NRC has no procedures in place to check whether the safety reviews were done properly.

Agreeing with the ”cut and paste” criticism is Sarah Hofmann, director of public advocacy for the Vermont Department of Public Service commented. “The other thing is they (NRC) don’t go in and check and independently verify.”

Top officials in Governor Deval Patrick’s administration in Massachusetts are also urging the NRC to revamp their oversight of the licensing process before moving ahead with pending renewals.

“The report states that relicensing decisions fail to document that NRC staff is providing the intensive, independent review of industry submittals that the public both expects and relies on for its protection,” states James Milkey chief of the environmental protection division of Martha Coakley, Massachusetts attorney general.

“Given the importance of the safety review associated with nuclear power plant relicensing, these conclusions (in the audit) are disturbing to say the least,” stated both Massachusetts secretaries of energy and environment and public safety.

Nuclear power can never be considered safe, cost effective, reliable or sustainable. NRC’s failure to evaluate a nuclear plant proves the point.

Also unnerving are uncertainties of true costs of decommissioning, unsolvable issues of protecting and storing waste, and risks associated with nuclear proliferation. Projected extreme weather conditions caused by global warming will impact nuclear plants and their waste in other as yet unknown ways.

More than 500 organizations from the United States and 38 countries on six continents have signed statements rejecting the use of nuclear power as a means of addressing climate change. It is clear that our energy future must be carbon-free AND nuclear-free. Certainly Vermont is up to the task.

by Hattie Nestel, 25 miles from Vermont Yankee in Athol, Massachusetts and a member of Citizens Awareness Network Hattieshalom@verizon.net

Let's resolve to make peace in '08

"The Marblehead Reporter" 1/07/08 To the editor:

It is in the spirit of the New Year that we reach out to anyone who thinks that they can make a difference in this crazy world, is willing to question what most accept as the inevitable, and is willing to stand up to the belief that violence is the best answer to troubling questions.

It is in that spirit that many of us vigil for peace in Iraq each week on Tuesdays from 6:30 to 7:15 p.m. in front of the high school and Community Center at the corner of Humphrey and Pleasant streets.

We usually receive a lot of support from drivers, but occasionally, as happened last Tuesday, an adult drove by and shouted, “Drop a bomb on them,” which his young passenger then repeated out the window. We have one sign that says, “No Place for Hate,” but here in this small, seemingly peaceful town, there is still much fear to be addressed in our community. When our president divides us all into two camps — those with us and against us — we turn our rage against the “other,” black or Hispanic, gay or lesbian, pro-or anti-war, Christian, Jew or Muslim, in acts of aggression, like destroying the Peace Pole beside the YMCA, or in disparaging remarks.

We ask you to join us in reaching out to our neighbors, in bringing up tough questions about war and peace, about the protection of human rights, about the American use of torture, about the fact that our country is viewed as the number-one threat to peace by other nations on this planet. It is so important that we be positive role models for our young people, isn’t it? Let’s channel our fear and anger into positive actions.

There will be a film series about non-violence starting Wednesday, Jan. 16 at 7 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church, 28 Mugford St. Everyone is invited to see the films and a discussion afterwards. We all have something to offer toward peaceable community.

Kathy Sands-Boehmer Green Street Tom Gale Manataug Trail

A combat veteran's antiwar effort

"Boston Globe" November 4, 2007

I WAS appalled at your coverage of the Oct. 27 antiwar demonstration on Boston Common ("10,000 in Boston rally against war," Page B6, Oct. 28). Not only was it buried deep within the paper, but it failed to mention perhaps the most significant aspect of the march to Copley Square: that it was led by a platoon of combat veterans. When the troops speak out against this horrific war, their voices are silenced by blatant omissions from the mainstream media. As a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, and as a combat veteran Marine who was among those leading the march, I feel deeply disrespected. Veterans have a unique perspective on what is happening on the ground in Iraq. More than 1 million of us have served in Iraq and Afghanistan since the start of the war, and the truth is starting to emerge. Soon our voices will be impossible to censor, and America will be forced to confront how much blood is on our hands. It's bad enough that I was betrayed by the country I swore to defend. It's almost more painful to be ignored by my hometown newspaper when I returned.

Corporal MATT HOWARD (not an MVPP member, but eloquent)

Rally to stop the war in Iraq

"Lawrence Eagle Tribune" October 23, 2007
To the editor:

My 20-year-old son is in the Army, and he recently returned from a 15-month deployment in Iraq. I am a member of Military Families Speak Out (MFSO). I support the troops, but I do NOT support this war. I definitely do not want my son, or any of the other soldiers in his brigade, to have to endure another tour in Iraq.

On Oct 27, there will be a National Mobilization to Stop the War. This is an important opportunity for the American people to show our politicians that we want an end to the Iraq war. On Oct. 27, there will be rallies held in Boston, as well as 10 other cities across America (see www.oct27.org for complete details). The Boston activities begin at noon at the Boston Common grandstand, a march follows at 2 p.m.

I fear that the American public naively assumes that the next president will take steps to end the war in Iraq. There is NO guarantee that this will happen. In fact, there are numerous signs that suggest the contrary.

I am not a professional promoter, nor am I trying to convert people into antiwar activists. I am just a single mom who teaches high school math, so I know how important numbers are. Vote with your feet, and come to the Boston Common on Oct. 27. Take public transportation if you can. After all, this country's ridiculous need for foreign oil is the real reason we invaded Iraq to being with.

ANNE CHAY Military Families Speak Out (MFSO) Andover

Here's a few political terms Armerding missed

"Lawrence Eagle Tribune" October 23, 2007
To the editor:

I couldn't help but notice that Taylor Armerding's column of political translations left a few terms out. He only included those espoused by liberals, most likely due to a lack of space. To provide balance, I give these additional definitions:

Family Values: Make any behavior my fundamentalist religious supporters disapprove of illegal. Also known as inciting intolerance against a marginalized minority.

Support the Troops: Continue pouring money and lives into the war in Iraq while cutting veterans benefits for the troops who return.

Free Market: Ordinary citizens are left to shift for themselves while big corporations get subsidies and bailouts for their bad decisions.

Free Trade: Write treaties that encourage companies to ship jobs to countries without labor or environmental protections and also to give corporations more rights than real people or governments.

Fiscal Responsibility: Cut programs that help ordinary citizens, but increase corporate subsidies and tax cuts and military spending.

Tax Relief: Give huge tax breaks to the super rich and crumbs to everyone else (see Fiscal Responsibility).

Right to Work: Pass laws that make it more difficult for workers to unionize and allow employers to freely punish anyone who tries to do so.

Clear Skies Initiative: Weaken anti-pollution laws.

No Child Left Behind: Force public schools to sacrifice real education in order to drill students to pass extremely difficult standardized tests. Also allow military recruiters to actively recruit on campus and to call students at home.

Homeland Security: Repeal the protections of the Bill of Rights to spy on citizens without warrants and sequester people away indefinitely without trial. Also send most of the National Guard, whose job it is to protect the homeland, to wars overseas (see Support the Troops).

MICHAEL BLEIWEISS, Methuen

____________________________________________________________________

Older letters can be found in newsletters. Letters about the Israel/Palestine wall.

___________________________________________________

Merrimack Valley People for Peace meets monthly, on the fourth Tuesday, at 7:30 pm, Meeting at the First United Methodist Church, N Andover Sept, 2006 - Feb, 2007 (NOT DECEMBER)

Contact Merrimack Valley People for Peace Call (978) 661-9009