Fighting for Freedom?Letter to the LA Times:
I noticed two delusional people in the paper today. One, understandably so, who's husband was just killed in Iraq, was angry at protesters. She claimed her husband had been fighting for their freedom. The other watched the video of Nick Berg's beheading, and claimed that was enough to show us why we're at war.
To the wife I suggest she talk to the group of anti-war military families whose husbands and sons died in the war, and they will be the first to tell her that all these people are not dying while fighting for our freedom, because it turns out Iraq was no threat to our freedom. There were no weapons. There is no evidence of Al Qaeda connections. And every time Dick Cheney and George W Bush say there were, they are lying.
To the man who wants to use Nick Berg's beheading as justification, I suggest he talk to Nick Berg's father, who is furious at Bush and Cheney, and who would be the first to point out that Nick was beheaded because the lies of this administration put these thousands of soldiers and contractors in a hornets nest we didn't need to be in. Perhaps this guy needs to hear Bush administration officials saying how Saddam did not have weapons, and how containment had worked, when they first got into office.
In short, they should both go see Fahrenheit 9/11. Maybe a few moments with Lila Lipscomb, the mother who's son died in Iraq, will make them realize that they, like she once was, are wrong about this administration's reasons for war in Iraq, protesters, and fighting for freedom (like we should have done a lot more of in Afghanistan, where Bin Laden is). The freedom we are fighting for in Iraq is for Bush and his friends to make more money on the backs of soldiers and innocent Iraqis.
If those people died protecting our freedom, then how come we lost so much of it to the Patriot Act?