Rhetoric about Iraqi elections doesn't justify the slaughter

After Tuesday's rocket attack that left 22 dead while at lunch in a mess hall, Bush responded with rhetoric about the upcoming elections in Iraq and democracy. He said, "It's such a hopeful moment" ("Bush Sees Hope in Iraqi Election: He Says Mosul Carnage Doesn't Outweigh Prospect," Dec. 22).

My wife was so angry and upset to read his comments that she was in tears thinking of the families of those soldiers. How can the president be so arrogant and callous to think that this ideology justifies the continued slaughter? I wonder if he would say that if one of his daughters were among those who were killed.

In the same article, Secretary of State Colin Powell is quoted telling reporters that the administration never expected the violent level of insurgency against U.S. troops.

The administration thought they would greet us as liberators and throw flowers.

If administration officials underestimated the violence, how is it that they are so hopeful of successful elections? The majority of Americans now disagree.

A majority of Americans now say the war with Iraq was not worth fighting and more than half want to fire embattled Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the chief architect of that conflict, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll released last Monday.

With events in Iraq likely to get worse, the grand neo-con project to reshape the world is in near terminal crisis.

SCOTT MANLEY
Carnegie

---

Dwindling support

It is a curious dichotomy. As more "Support the Troops" decals are being attached to motor vehicles, the less military personnel are re-enlisting and the harder it is for recruiters to meet their goals.

SANFORD KELSON
Lake Conneaut

---

No surprise

Unbelievable! A soldier mentions a lack of armor in Iraq, and what a response. The media pick up on it as if there's been no previous hint of ill-equipped soldiers.

The Bush administration suddenly promises to remedy the situation, as if this fact was a real surprise. People in general are outraged, even though such information has been out there since before the war began.

The supposed "liberal" media are obviously just as gullible as the millions of "red" people this administration hopes will continue to believe its lies and deceptions.

JOHN DOYLE
South Park

---

Wrong cutbacks

I barely thought it possible, but our great "Christian" leaders have surpassed themselves in hypocrisy. An item in the Dec. 22 Post-Gazette, "U.S. Trims World Food Aid Donations," has left me reeling. It stated that because of budget shortfalls, the U.S. government will not honor $600 million in previously pledged donations to aid groups working at great peril in the misery spots of the world to bring some hope to the hopeless.

I'm just an average citizen, neither leader nor policy-maker, but my conscience tells me that when times are tight, there are a dozen places I'll cut back before I even think about cutting back on charitable donations!

I'm deeply grateful that there are people willing to devote themselves to helping others, and I would consider myself a poor excuse for a human being if I didn't make the minimal effort required to support them in this work.

I know there are millions of other Americans who feel the same way, but even if we all empty our pockets, we can't possibly make up a $600 million shortfall!

And as for what this will do to international relations ... hello, Washington! Is anyone even awake there?

LUCY HORTON
Oakland

---

Our similar values

In response to a series of "Blame Israel" letters, it is necessary to speak out. Blaming the situation in Israel for terrorism in the United States and for t he war in Iraq is simply absurd.

Since its founding, Israel has been the biggest supporter and strongest ally of the United States in the Middle East. The United States has always lent its support to Israel because the two countries were founded on similar beliefs and values. The United States has also supported the Palestinian people even though we have often questioned their tactics and leadership.

The Palestinian government has been riddled with corruption and confusing messages. Funds that were sent to help build the infrastructure for a future state for the Palestinian people were directed into the hands of government officials and terrorists.

To achieve peace, there will need to be negotiations between the parties. Hopefully, through these negotiations a plan will emerge. This will happen only if the new Palestinian leadership makes a commitment both to peace and to stopping the terror.

The Israelis have drawn up plan after plan from 1968 through 2000. The only constant throughout this "struggle/occupation" of the Palestinian people has been Yasser Arafat and his idea of forceful resistance and terrorist attacks. It is time for the Palestinians to stop hiding behind the fake mantle of victimhood and step forward in a spirit of peace and responsibility.

With new Palestinian leadership the prospect of two states living peacefully side by side now appears promising. The United States understands that a long-standing peace between Israel and its neighbors is not just good for the region, but good for the world. The United States will continue to be an important mediator in the ongoing peace process and will always support any democratic nation that believes in freedom, and human rights.

ORI AKRISH
Assistant Regional Director
Anti-Defamation League

JOSEPH FRIEDMAN
Pittsburgh Council Chair
Anti-Defamation League
Cleveland, Ohio

---

Intelligent design theory has no scientific or biblical basis

As a conservative Christian who worships God as Creator and believes that the Bible is the word of God, I found it odd to be cheering the American Civil Liberties Union recently. Its efforts to fight the Dover school board's insertion of intelligent design into biology class are well justified ("Evolutionary Challenge," Dec. 15; "Teaching of 'Intelligent Design' Delayed," Dec. 23).

Dover school board member William Buckingham uses the classic creationist strategy of claiming that evolution is just a theory, just as intelligent design is a theory. Nonsense! What Buckingham doesn't know or won't tell you is that evolution by natural selection is a scientific theory that provides a comprehensive explanation of how life has changed as evidenced by the findings of anthropologists, archaeologists, biochemists, biologists, geneticists, zoologists, chemists and geologists. Like the atomic theory, plate tectonic theory and the theory of relativity, the theory of evolution is a powerful scientific model that makes sense of real data.

It has been scrutinized for more than a century and has emerged as the premier scientific explanation of how life has changed for the past 3¹/₂ billion years. Intelligent design is a theory all right, but not a scientific theory. Intelligent design is a theory in the loosest sense of the word; it is a gut feeling, a guess, a hunch, a feeling, a conviction or a belief. Intelligent design simply states that if something is really complicated, there's a good chance that God did it supernaturally. It lacks the basic requirements of any scientific theory; it cannot be demonstrated, it cannot be falsified and it is not supported by evidence. Intelligent design may be fodder for a theology class, but it has no place in a biology class.

Nonetheless, I know why school boards may be tempted to adopt intelligent design. There are many famous evolutionists, such as Richard Dawkins, who have made no secret that they think that Christians are nitwits and the Bible is baloney. So what! Scientific advances are assessed by how well they correlate the data, regardless of political or religious leanings of the scientists involved in the discovery. That is why scientists of all faiths and scientists with no faith have recognized that evolution is indeed a great scientific theory. I find it very easy to sift the atheistic barbs from the sound science of scientists like Dawkins. If the Dover school board wants to protect the district's kids from such biases, however, that's perfectly understandable. They would be better off selecting sound evolution textbooks that contain no derogatory remarks about God, faith or the Bible rather than polluting the classroom with pseudo-science.

Finally, the Dover school board and Dover alumni, such as Steve Farrell, may be surprised to find that intelligent design has no biblical basis. Read the 38th and 39th chapters of Job; you'll discover that God declares that He has given us absolutely no spiritual insight into how He created anything. Who are we to dictate to God that He could not have let life evolve naturally on this planet if that was His will? That's why I'm perfectly content to let scientists -- even the left-wing, liberal, atheistic ones -- tell me how God's universe unfolded for the past 14 billion years. Their scientific findings are a testament to His glory, even if some of them deny His very existence.

BOB ENICK
MacLeod Professor of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering
University of Pittsburgh
Oakland