The PG is simply wrong about Bush's remarks

Your editorial on President Bush's comment about "World War III" ("WW III: The President Uses Reckless Doomsday Talk on Iran," Oct. 20) is a prime example of the unethical, inaccurate journalism that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez pointed out in his Oct. 12 speech. The media reported his comments about the handling of the war ("Ex-Commander Faults U.S. Performance in Iraq," Oct. 13) but ignored his comments on the media.

The first inaccuracy, which is also unethical, is the president made no "threat" of and is not considering starting a world war, as the editorial claims. He was responding to a question as to how seriously he believed Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. He responded by referencing Iran's repeated threats to destroy Israel and said, "So I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." He was alluding to consequences of an Israeli response if attacked by Iran.

Other inaccuracies: Presidents Roosevelt and Wilson did not seek authorization or approval of declarations of war. As commander in chief, they possessed the authority to command forces but not to declare war. They asked Congress to declare war.

Prior to the start of the Iraq war nearly every foreign intelligence agency said Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, contrary to what your editorial states. As for "bypassing" the United Nations, ever hear of Resolution 1441?

Based on these inaccuracies, the PG calls for the impeachment of the president if he acts against Iran. Unbelievable.

MICHAEL McKENDRY
Sewickley

---

Complicit PG

As a daily reader of the Post-Gazette, I take notice of your editorials -- mostly critical of the Bush/Cheney Republican agenda. I certainly agree with you on all. But I cannot help thinking sadly of the big picture that you ignored. Your failure in refusing the possibility that our election system has been violated for the past six years is, in my mind, inexcusable.

Of course, you were just part of the entire major media cover-up. I can't help but wonder where our nation (and the world) would be without this corporate-controlled, greedy wrecking crew. With Al Gore or John Kerry as president, where would we have gone in protecting the environment (our world)? How many of our soldiers would be alive and well? How many of our soldiers would not be crippled for life? How many innocent Iraqis would be alive? Would we have continued to have the budget surpluses that the Clinton administration left? Would Social Security by now be protected? Would our previous stature in the world be even more pronounced?

Second, despite your constant criticism of Bush/Cheney, you cannot call for their impeachment? Whose sins are greater: Clinton's or Bush/Cheney's? How much more damage will they do in another year and a half? I am afraid to even think of that. Yes, your criticism is "too little, too late."

GEORGE MATUS
Munhall

---

Nuclear warnings

Due homage was paid to Rear Adm. Hyman G. Rickover's prediction 50 years ago of the current energy crisis ("The Admiral's Warning," Oct. 21 column by Executive Editor David M. Shribman). Rickover had been responsible for the establishment of the first nuclear power reactor, in nearby Shippingport, and for production of the nuclear engines for U.S. submarines, the main launch pads for nuclear-tipped missiles. So his prescient warning 25 years later of the threatening nuclear plague was perhaps even more trenchant than his earlier alert.

In 1982, with the hindsight of fallout from more than 1,000 nuclear test explosions, of an unending nuclear arms race, of threatened nuclear war and of the Three Mile Island disaster, Rickover declared to a congressional committee: "I think the human race is going to wreck itself, and it is important that we get control of this horrible force and try to eliminate it ... I think from a long-range standpoint -- I'm talking about humanity -- the most important thing we could do is start by having an international meeting where we first outlaw nuclear weapons to start with, then we outlaw nuclear reactors too. ..."

We live in a world with Pakistan, India and North Korea added to the nuclear weapons states; a nuclear-armed Israel and possible spread to Iran and other Middle East nations; the administration's "full-spectrum" nuclear policies, plans for new nuclear weapons and nuclear threats; worries about nuclear terrorism; and a "nuclear renaissance" being pushed by the likes of Bechtel Corp.

Today, more than ever, we need to act on the exhortations of Rickover, the latter-day nuclear Cassandra, to compel our government to lead the way to elimination of the nuclear dangers.

DANIEL FINE, M.D.
New Kensington

---

The profit motive

With regard to the article "Legislators Again Push for Local Police to Use Radar Guns" (Oct. 24), I hope that if this bill is passed, it does not lead to the installation of "red-light" camera systems or other photo radar traps in the commonwealth. These systems are typically installed by private companies whose sole purpose is revenue generation, since they profit from each ticket based upon a negotiated rate with the local jurisdiction.

News from Phoenix, Ariz., one city where these systems are installed, has brought accusations of shortening yellow light times in certain intersections to increase the number of motorists caught in these traps.

I do agree that something needs to be done about speeders on certain local roads. On Route 19 in Upper St. Clair, where the posted limit is 35 mph due to road work, it is common for some drivers to be traveling in excess of 60 mph. What's the hurry, folks? Do everyone a favor, leave 10 minutes earlier, and slow down!

GIL HANNA
Upper St. Clair

---

A proud profession

This letter is in response to the Oct. 15 George F. Will column ("Conservatives Need Not Apply: Social Work Schools Are Now Liberal Indoctrination Centers"). As Mr. Will points out, the social work profession values social and economic justice and diversity. It is interesting that he feels competent to attack these values, yet acknowledges his own ignorance as to their definitions.

The mission of the social work profession is to enhance human well-being, help meet the basic human needs of all people and advocate on behalf of oppressed populations. It is interesting that such values elicit such a vehement and derisive attack from Mr. Will.

The National Association of Social Workers' Code of Ethics articulates basic values, ethical principles and standards that social workers should abide by when serving their clients. It does not provide a set of rules that prescribe how social workers should act or think.

Social workers are encouraged to participate in the political process in order to effectuate positive change for the clients they serve. Our constitutional right to freedom of speech and democratic form of government ensures us this right as American citizens.

Social workers come from all points on the political spectrum and share the common factor of wanting to help others. We are proud of having the distinction of holding a code of ethics that extols us to pursue advocacy for social and economic justice toward making the world a better place.

JAMES H. ANDREWS
President, Board of Directors
National Association of Social Workers-Pennsylvania Chapter
Greensburg

---

The residency requirement for police makes the city stronger

I am a Boy Scout working my way to Eagle rank and a resident of Pittsburgh, living in the Lawrenceville neighborhood with my parents, who both have jobs in the city. My scout troop is in Lawrenceville; I attend a city high school, Perry Traditional Academy. I take two Port Authority buses to come home from school, catching my connecting bus in Downtown Pittsburgh.

My friends and I walk the city streets, and go down to the river trail at 43rd Street for something to do. I see a lot of things I don't like: graffiti on buildings, drug deals in broad daylight, kids my age and younger getting into trouble. This city is where I live, and I care about what happens.

Mark DeSantis isn't thinking about the people of this city -- the people who live and work here. The Fraternal Order of Police is endorsing him because he is promising to change the requirement that city police officers will not have to live in the city they protect ("City Police Endorse DeSantis for Mayor," Oct. 20).

If the police do not want to live in the city they are supposed to protect, how does that make the citizens feel? Where is the pride of living in the community that you are working to protect and improve? My view is that if you want to be paid by the city, then you should live in the city and spend your money within the community instead of getting paid and taking money away from the city. My Eagle Scout project will be something that will improve the community in which I live.

CHAD MILCZAREK
Lawrenceville

---

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.