Letters to the Editor

Your choice of political cartoons for Monday, the day we observed Memorial Day, ("Iraqi War Memorial" with U.S. Marines raising the U.S. Flag attached to an oil well) undermines your lead editorial for that day on the same page "Recall spirit of Memorial Day." Your editorial asks readers to "put aside how the war divides us over politics and ideology and focus instead on how war unites us both in pride and sorrow."

The cartoon also undermines similar messages written by your talented staff of columnists.

That cartoon is an insult to all the men and women who have served in our armed forces in war and in peace -- particularly to those of us who served in Iraq. As a professional soldier and Iraqi war veteran, I acknowledge the oath I took to preserve and defend the U.S. Constitution. I also embrace the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment that provide for a free press in our society.

I ask that you equally respect my right to no longer subscribe to your newspaper. Of all the days of the year to politicize and jeer the work of U.S. service members, Memorial Day was a truly poor choice. No matter how honorable your intentions, it was a cheap shot, and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

George Johnson
Kirkland

This time, the tears were in anger and shame

As a young man, almost 50 years ago, I cried openly while standing for the first time at the base of the U.S. Marine Memorial in Washington, D.C. I had seen the famous photograph that inspired the memorial as well as numerous pictures and depictions of the memorial itself many times, but it was not until standing alone in the evening light looking up at the faces on that statue that the full impact of what those men did came over me. There was no shame in those tears -- they were tears of pride and humility in remembrance of the sacrifices of all those lost in that horrible war.

I cried once more this Memorial Day morning upon opening the Opinion Page of the Seattle P-I to see your "editorial cartoon" demeaning -- no, insulting -- that beautiful symbol honoring all who have served and are serving in our armed forces. This time, however, the tears were not in pride or humility but, rather, in anger, then in frustration and finally in shame that anyone -- let alone a respected newspaper -- could dishonor such a symbol and in doing so, in my opinion, to dishonor and demean the memory of those killed and wounded as well as the survivors of the recent Iraq conflict.

Please do not interpret my comments as a protest against your stated opposition to this conflict. Those honored by the memorial you desecrate died so that all of us can believe and give expression to those beliefs in freedom. I only wish that you had chosen a more suitable manner in which to express your opinions -- one that would not desecrate the memory of so many who gave their all.

John Summers
Port Angeles

Don't lose sight of why people died in Iraq

As I was listening to some of the remarks being made at different Memorial Day services Monday, I couldn't help but worry that lies were replacing history. While I mourn for the loss of any life in service to our country, it is wrong to say that those who died in the invasion of Iraq gave their lives in defense of our freedoms and liberties.

Were these lives lost in vain? I think that what we are hearing from Iraq about the atrocities committed by the Saddam Hussien regime would sway anyone to accept that the "liberation of Iraq" was a just cause and worthy of the blood of our young. However, this was not that cause for which these gallant heroes were asked to sacrifice their lives. According to their commander in chief, Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and their direct links to al-Qaida posed a real and imminent threat to the United States.

One life is too many to sacrifice for a lie. There are no great stockpiles of weapons. There are no direct links to al-Qaida. There are a handful of "no-bid" contracts to some friends of the White House to rebuild something that didn't need it before we got there. There is an army of occupation to rule over the second-largest oil reserves in the world and a great photo op on an aircraft carrier.

Mourn for the lives lost in Iraq but never lose sight of why they had to die.

Charles Shue
Redmond

SAND POINT MAGNUSON PARK

Wildlife (and quiet life) will be scarce under lights

I'm amazed at the shortsighted vision of local politicians and bureaucrats in their proposal to place a major, night-lighted sports complex in Sand Point Magnuson Park.

The huge scale of this proposed complex, with 11-15 synthetic soccer fields over 22 acres, and lighting estimated to be roughly 60 percent of the lighting at Safeco Field, was never part of the original Magnuson Park redevelopment plan.

I don't think creating a complex for organized team sports was what voters had in mind when they approved recent parks levies. Instead of open green space and playfields that can be enjoyed by anyone, we would instead be paying extra tax money for synthetic turf fields for the exclusive use of those (primarily adults) willing to pay fees to various athletic leagues. The comment in Monday's P-I from Peter Lukevich, president of the Friends of Athletic Fields group, that "the location is ideal" illustrates the self-serving attitude of the organized sports leagues: "I can go play in a softball game, then go stroll through the wildlife area."

The comment should be continued, " ... then go home to my quiet, dark neighborhood where I can be free of snarled traffic, hear the sounds of birds, see some stars and sleep in peace."

What Lukevich's group would leave behind in terms of disturbance to wildlife, transitional housing residents and surrounding neighborhoods is not mentioned. We might as well scrap any plans to rehabilitate and restore the wetlands. What is the sense of restoring this haven for wildlife and humans when they would be driven away by excessive noise and light?

Francine Rennert
Seattle

WHAT'S FARE IS FAIR

Apply legislator's words to island he represents

After reading Mercer Island legislator Jim Horn's comments regarding the Vashon ferry fare increases (May 12), I began to marvel at his hypocrisy.

While all state residents will bear the burden of a budget deficit, I would at least expect a legislator from Mercer Island (home to the most expensive stretch of Interstate 90 for miles) to make ferry passengers pay more for public transit to Seattle.

Ferries are part of the state highway system, just like that lovely concrete- and ivy-covered stretch through Mercer Island. To extend Horn's logic to his own constituents, I suggest a proposal to collect fares from all residents of Mercer Island who use I-90 to get to Seattle. According to Horn's logic, Vashon residents should pay 40 percent of the cost of their highway. Why can't Mercer Island residents do the same?

If the Transportation Committee wants to increase costs for island residents, let's do it for all island residents.

Ryan Malane
Bremerton

OREGON

State's policy about self-serve not neighborly

In Washington and every other state where I travel, I can be in and out of a self-serve gas station in about three minutes, including payment by debit or credit card.

If I buy gas in Oregon during one of my frequent trips to my hometown near Portland, I find myself waiting in line while the attendant serves other cars ahead of me. I used to shrug off this annoyance as a trade-off for having the attendant collect my payment. Now, most of the stations require that I leave my car, walk into the facility, then wait in line all over again just for the pleasure of paying.

If I must get out in the rain anyway, I might as well pump my own gas.

Until Oregon's voters change their minds on the self-serve issue, I will continue to zip in and out of the state without having to refill. I urge others to do the same.

Cliff Sanderlin
Edmonds

Add P-I Opinion headlines to