Letters to the Editor

The U.N. was created with the intention of stopping wars, or at least to stop wars as large and destructive as World War II. Iran is a clear threat, not just to the United States, but to Israel, Russia and Europe.

Iran has enriched uranium and it is a matter of time before it develops nuclear weapons, despite claims of using nuclear power for "peaceful" purposes only.

After being referred to the Atomic Energy Commission in the United Nations, Iran was sent to the U.N. Security Council. Now what? Now either the Security Council can put an embargo on Iran or pursue a military solution.

An embargo is unlikely because both China and Russia have extensive economic ties to Iran. Also, since the core of any U.N.-led invasion would have to be led by the United States, it is unlikely the U.N. will endorse that option, either.

Instead, Israel will probably conduct some special bombing raid on Iran's nuclear facilities. Problem solved. But is this really the way that the United Nations is supposed to be used? No. The problem with the U.N. is that it seeks everyone's approval before it will accomplish anything. This is almost impossible, even on the Security Council.

Also, although the U.N. did respond in Yugoslavia, it failed to act in Rwanda or Sudan. Instead of becoming a military alliance against aggressive countries, the U.N. has become an alliance on paper. It will need to make major changes if it wants to recover and mediate world affairs as originally intended.

Michael Johnson
Issaquah

Keep U.S. friends close and negotiate with Iran

In John Barnes' Thursday letter to the editor, he compares Iran to the Nazis while implying that Iran is close to developing nuclear weapons, and that it would use them to "exterminate" Jews in Israel. His inflammatory rhetoric is no better than Iran's.

Yes, Iran calls for wiping Israel off the map. This has been their position for decades. However, that is not the same as calling for the "extermination" of a people. The comparison between the Nazis and Iran is ludicrous, at best. They do not call for the killing of every Jew, as the Nazis did.

Israel has the best-equipped, best-trained military in the Middle East, with the strongest allies. Israel has nuclear weapons already, while Iran is five to 10 years away from developing them. Iran knows that, and while Iranian President MahmoudAhmadinejad may be a fool, the clerics who hold the real power are not such fools.

We've seen how well diplomacy at gunpoint and sanctions worked in Iraq. We should remember the saying: "Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" and negotiate with Iran.

Micah Rose
Seattle

SEATTLE'S SOUTH END

Starbucks doesn't want strip club as a neighbor

It's time to consider some reasonable alternatives to the proposed cabaret zone.

It is no accident that the state's largest housing project, the county juvenile detention center and the bulk of the city's halfway and sex offender housing are in South End communities. Now, the city wants to add an additional burden on these now-prospering communities by locating a "red-light district" there. This is both unreasonable and unwise.

It not only forces South End residents to (again) grapple with the social and criminal concerns associated with an unwelcome neighbor, but it creates economic disincentives for developers to invest in these communities. As downtown and North End developers are well aware, new Starbucks and mixed-use condominiums are difficult to finance and build within walking distance of halfway houses, jails and strip clubs -- and therein lies the injustice. Given the prosperity of North End communities, couldn't they share some of this burden?

The quasi-industrial areas around Leary Way, Interbay and South Lake Union offer similar characteristics as the proposed zone. Why not relocate the clubs there? Surely the ordinance's proposed set-backs and sign restrictions would mitigate the impact. Or would North End residents prefer not to have strip clubs in their back yards?

Matt Senechal
Seattle

IMMIGRATION

Law draws modern-day Mason-Dixon line

In regards to the U.S. Senate's pending/proposed immigration reform, according to a recent article in The New York Times: "(Illegal immigrants) would be put on a path toward guaranteed citizenship, provided that they remained employed, paid fines and back taxes, and learned English."

That poses some troubling questions.

Some companies have flagrantly used illegal immigrants for many years.

Those that have adhered to the intent of the law and have not hired workers suspected of being here illegally presently have a much higher per-employee payroll then those that have disregarded the law.

How would small companies wanting to expand their work force attract these workers? Working for a smaller firm is risky. There is a chance of failure or bankruptcy. The citizenship-seeking worker could lose his job with the small firm and then be subject to deportation.

This bill would provide present employers of illegal immigrants the equivalent of indentured servitude.

Small, growing firms seeking to expand their work force want the same opportunity for tapping the labor pool as that of existing firms.

This law would draw the equivalent of an anti-free-market Mason-Dixon line between those who now "own" illegal immigrants and those who may wish to free them from their "masters" in the next five years.

Cal Fuqua
Camano Island

ISRAEL'S LOBBY

Jews take diverse stands on Palestinians' rights

The brilliance of Rupert Cornwell's April 9 article on the so-called Israel lobby is that one cannot criticize his position without incurring the label "suppressor of the truth." According to him, the "truth" apparently is that the "Israel lobby" controls U.S. foreign policy on the Mideast and tilts it toward Israel, and woe to any individual who dares go up against this lobby. If one takes issue with him, and suggests that the Israel lobby is comprised of U.S. citizens, both Jewish and non-Jewish, who believe in a basic congruence of interests between Israel and America, this puts one on the side of deception and obfuscation.

What he really is saying is that his point of view isn't as popular as he would like. Notice how he introduces the idea of a worldwide Jewish cabal and links the "Israel lobby" to it, but then dismisses the existence of such a cabal. But the association has been made. And what should one make of his purposeful confusion of "Israel lobby" with "pro-Jewish groups" (whatever that means) and "Jewish lobby"? Jews belong to many political parties, hold differing ideas about faith, take diverse stands on Israel and on Palestinian rights. Dare I accuse Cornwell of ethnic/religious stereotyping? No, because by labeling his words thusly, it only proves his point: that anyone who presumes to criticize Israel will be labeled an anti-Semite.

Rabbi Anson Laytner
Executive Director
The American Jewish Committee
Greater Seattle Chapter

'Jewish conspiracy' rhetoric awakened by P-I

The P-I helped reawaken "Jewish conspiracy" rhetoric, used to persecute Jews over the millennium, by printing Rupert Cornwell's column. Cornwell claims Jews have a stranglehold on Congress because the U.S. supports Israel. Eighty percent of Americans support Israel, Cornwell claims, because of Jewish lobbyists. He cannot credit Americans with the intelligence to discern Israel as the only reliable U.S. friend in an unstable Mideast. Cornwell blames the tiny Jewish state for all the conflicts that plague the Arab world and says American Jews control U.S. Middle East policy. As Cornwall is well aware, this type of thinking has a term. It is called "anti-Semitism" and Cornwall cannot evade it because by saying it does not apply.

Israel is a trusted, stalwart ally in the volatile Mideast. Israel collaborates with the U.S., sharing painfully learned lessons on civilian attacks. Even the Seattle Police Department has worked with Israel to strengthen our terrorism response plan. Israel is committed to democracy where religions are respected, citizens have equal rights and the system of justice parallels our own.

In truth, there is probably more disagreement among Jews about U.S. foreign policy than among the general public.

Carolyn Hathaway
Bellevue

Americans support Israel against Arabs, Iranians

Not since the Nazi-Soviet pact of August 1939 have we seen a more startling example of how political extremes of left and right embrace one another than the current adoption of recycled Nazi propaganda by "progressive" forces in Europe and the United States.

Thus the progressive P-I sees fit to reprint (from the far left British paper The Independent) Rupert Cornwell's apologia for the squalid tract by Professors Walt and Mearsheimer alleging that Jews -- and their non-Jewish agents run the U.S. government on behalf of Israel. Their polemic blames "the lobby" for threatening U.S. security and indeed that of the entire world.

About the only global ill for which Walt, Mearsheimer and their acolyte Cornwell do not blame Israel and "the lobby" is avian flu. As David Duke, doyen of U.S. Nazis and former Ku Klux Klan leader, observed: "This article validates every major point I have been making since even before the war started."

What enrages Walt, Mearsheimer, Cornwell and Duke is that the American public supports, by wide margins, Israel as against the Arab and Iranian forces (none of which is even mentioned by the accusatory professors) that seek to destroy it; and so, with a contempt for average Americans that more than equals their paranoia about Jews, they attribute such support to a vast, sinister conspiracy.

Edward Alexander
Seattle

Anti-Semitism poisons the well of discussion

The Mearsheimer-Walt thesis proves their point that questioning U.S. policy regarding Israel can be lethal to your reputation or worse (April 9 P-I). They have been savaged because they questioned whether it is in America's best interest to follow the policy leads of the U.S.-Israel lobby and the state of Israel unconditionally and unquestioningly. These attacks rival anti-Semitism itself in virulence and bigotry. It is beyond reprehensible.

The truth is that there are Jews and Gentiles on both sides of this imbroglio. Anti-Semitism is a convenient and deadly slur to poison the well of discussion. The sad truth of the matter is that the Israel-Palestinian conflict might have been resolved years ago had the issue been deliberated upon in good faith especially by the US.

We've learned nothing as the conflict escalates in Iraq and Israel-Palestine. We are now sleepwalking into war with Iran again at the behest of Israel and its U.S. lobby.

We are inviting the use of weapons of mass destruction against us as we needlessly inflame the world of Islam.

Americans may have little reason to respect the machinations of Israel and its U.S. lobby, but we cannot blame them entirely. It is our own fault if we do not have the guts to resist those who would sacrifice our own national interests.

The United States is now a full partner in the growing catastrophe in the Middle East. We can help Israel, but if it has no respect for our interests, we need a new ally.

Malcolm D. McPhee
Sequim

Add P-I Opinion headlines to