Posted on: Thursday, May 20, 2004

Letters to the Editor

IRAQI PRISONER ABUSE

Iraq abuse stories are being overplayed

As atrocious as the ever-unfolding details of the Iraq prison-abuse case are, I still don't find it quite "harrowing" — as your May 14 article "Soldier tells of prison beatings," puts it — enough to warrant all this blaring, incessant front-page attention.

What I do find harrowing is the recent abduction and videotaped decapitation of Nicholas Berg in Iraq, as well as the similar 2002 murder of reporter Daniel Pearle in Afghanistan, both acts committed solely for the victims' "crimes" of being American.

I also find harrowing the murders of those defenseless American contractors whose mangled corpses were paraded around Iraq by the cheering mob of mindless idiots.

Where is the constant, front-page news coverage on the hunting-down of the cowardly, despicable lowlives responsible for those outrages?

As shameful as this prison-abuse thing is, it's over now, passé, finito, done. The abusers are already being dealt with by the law, the crimes are already being investigated to the fullest by authorities and will not likely occur ever again — and even if they do, my heart is a little slow to sympathize with mistreated terrorists and members of Saddam Hussein's former regime.

I think it's shamefully unpatriotic for a newspaper to overpublicize something that tends to — wrongfully — make its country in general look bad.

Abusers were trying to find out about WMDs

To believe that a few privates and NCOs in the U.S. Army could have perpetrated and photographed such a series of incidents is absurd. Some higher authority would certainly have been involved. The military would not permit people of lower ranks to act for it.

No doubt the Bush administration was constantly applying pressure on the force in Iraq to come up with information of WMDs. In fact, without such evidence, there was little reason to go to war in the first place. These torture tactics on Iraqi prisoners were in answer to the pressure from above trying to get the prisoners to admit to something that did not exist.

Since our government was deeply involved in this procedure, the only thing to do is admit it, vote in a new president and go from there.

Ends don't justify means with abuse

The May 18 letter entitled "What if it hit home?" implies that interrogation that is humiliating is justified as long as the interrogation yields information that could save American lives.

Up until today, I was concerned that the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison would jeopardize American lives by causing retributive acts, such as the beheading of Nick Berg. I held this na•ve thought before I read John Corboy's letter that claims the prison "abuses" are perfectly "harmless" and "humane."

I attribute my naïveté to thinking that these "abuses" were harmful and inhumane to (1) Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham who, according to the May 8 Advertiser, said, "We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience; we're talking about rape and murder and some very serious charges," (2) the Red Cross' reports that prisoners were whipped with cables, kicked in the testicles, hung from iron bars by their handcuffs, given electrical shocks, and (3) ABC's report that Army Cpl. Charles Graner swung a police baton like a baseball bat to beat an inmate who was chained to a bed.

Apparently, by duplicitously implying that these acts are harmful and inhumane, Sen. Graham, the Red Cross, Amnesty International and ABC News are attempting to create unwarranted sympathy for the Iraqi detainees.

For Mr. Corboy concludes his letter by writing that instead of weeping for the so-called "abused" Iraqis, we should weep for Daniel Pearle and Daniel Berg. And all this time I thought that I was justified in weeping for Pearle, Berg and the abused Iraqis.

War is hell, so get over it or get the troops out

Has the United States become a country too civilized and open to win a war? Even when the enemy acts savagely and is unwilling to observe any rule whatsoever or standard that values human life?

Is this the scenario that preceded the fall of so many great past societies over the millennia? They grew too "civil" for their own good and became easy prey?

War is war. It is an ugly, horrible nightmare. Wanting to be genteel on the battlefield is about as na•ve as it gets.

Aside from the fact that George Bush led us into this conflict to avenge his daddy's failures, and to create an economic development zone for the richest of American oil companies, our sons and daughters are over there getting picked off one by one while, unbelievably, Americans focus on the bad guys' rights.

What's done is done. But since we are so "evolved" that we cannot shut up and let the military do whatever it takes to wipe out the scourge, let's get it over with and just skulk out of Iraq with our tails between our legs — the sooner the better — and meekly take our place among "has-been" nations.

Thanks for putting us in this sickening situation, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney.

---

Religious beliefs no excuse to discriminate

Again, with Jim Henshaw's letter (May 15) we read again that bias against a group of people (in this case, homosexuals) is not only acceptable but deserving of special protection. The reason? This isn't discrimination, but "deeply held religious beliefs."

He might take note of a small article published in the same section of The Advertiser that day, just a few pages away: "KANO, Nigeria — About 30,000 people, mostly ... Christians, huddled in security force installations in this heavily Muslim northern city — site of deadly attacks on Christians this week — officials said. In Abo, a southern city dominated by Christian(s) ... it was Muslim(s) ... who took refuge in police stations, fearing reprisals for the Kano attacks."

Back in the 19th century, it was Mormons who were undergoing similar treatment right here in the U.S.A. at the hands of mobs who were exercising "deeply held religious beliefs" as well, to fight what they saw as a threat to their mainstream faith.

No matter how thoughtfully Mr. Henshaw and others defend their discrimination against any group, large or small, by cloaking it in religion, it still comes down to the same basic and unacceptable thing.

For whatever reason, Hawai'i loves Jasmine

A controversy has emerged as to whether "American Idol" viewers should vote for talent or popularity. It helps to remember that the show is not called "American Talent." Nor is it called "America's Best Singer." The name of the show is "American Idol."

When you idolize someone, that means you can worship and admire them for any number of reasons, including talent, likeability, vulnerability, good looks and great outfits, or being from the same place.

For whatever reason, Hawai'i loves you, Jasmine.

Fantasia screeches while Jasmine sings

As former music majors at the University of Hawai'i and Columbia, let us throw in our two cents regarding "American Idol."

Fantasia Barrino may be a good performer, working the crowd, but she definitely has a nasal, strident voice, which has an edge to it.

We love Jasmine Trias' voice, which has a wonderful, mellow tone. Even Diana DeGarmo is better than Fantasia.

There's a difference between screeching a song and singing it.

World-class show went unreported by newspaper

My daughter and I attended the Hawaii World Invitational Lion Dance Championships at the Blaisdell Arena on Friday night. We were totally blown away by the spectacular performances of all the teams.

I was so disappointed to see absolutely nothing about the event in Saturday's and Sunday's Advertiser.

Hawai'i's own Gee Yung team did a fantastic job competing against teams from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia and San Francisco. It was a shame that with so much coverage of Jasmine, a little bit of ink could not be spared to cover our local participation in a world-class event.

Just buy lowest octane that prevents pinging

After reading the May 19 letter on how Mr. Ted Gibson proclaims that premium gasoline is superior to regular via his mpg "numbers," this is my conclusion. I have a 2000 Chevrolet Metro with a one-liter engine and a five-speed manual transmission. I'll skip the numbers and just say that with the regular gas, I can maintain a speed of 35 mph on a level grade of road such as near the H-3 to the H-1 interchange near Aloha Stadium in fifth gear.

If I try doing this with premium, my car lugs and I have to downshift to fourth gear.

The octane only slows the rate of combustion to prevent pinging or detonation. If the gas burns too slowly, what results is less horsepower and unburned hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere.

So in conclusion, just buy the lowest octane gas that prevents pinging. Any more is just wasting money.

Transitway plan won't work

In his May 4 Second Opinion column, Cliff Slater argues for an elevated reversible vehicular transitway instead of a rail system. There are several common-sense reasons why this scheme would not work as well as a rail/subway system (aboveground out of town, underground in town).

Mr. Slater's proposed transitway would only run to Iwilei. While a significant number of people do work in Iwilei, many more work in the downtown area or farther diamondhead. How are these transitway users to get to downtown or beyond?

A chemical reaction can only move as fast as its slowest step (the rate-determining step). Even if you race along the transitway, a tremendous traffic jam would meet you at the end as thousands of vehicles poured into Iwilei with only the street-level traffic grid there to handle the influx.

If you get to the end of the transitway in 20 minutes and then it takes half an hour to get from Iwilei into your parking garage five blocks away on Bishop Street, have you really gained anything? The rate-determining step is the street-level traffic, not the transitway.

The governor's proposed light-rail system also terminates in Iwilei, and because of that it shares many problems with Mr. Slater's proposed transitway. We need a downtown subway with stops within walking distance of people's destinations, and we need intra-island ferry service that docks at Aloha Tower. Both of these solutions would allow commuters to avoid downtown street-level traffic completely.

Because traffic is such a mess downtown during rush hour, there is every reason to believe that the buses, vans and cars Mr. Slater envisions using the transitway would not be able to drive 50 mph. In the morning, it is likely that traffic would back up from the Iwilei terminus miles down the transitway, which apparently would have only the one exit on the town end. If it gets backed up, there would be no side street to turn off on, no alternative to sitting and waiting.

Mr. Slater states, correctly, that a train system would require transfers between modes of transportation or a walk on either end. What he does not say is that his transitway system would require exactly the same thing. A commuter would have to get to the buses or vans that Mr. Slater envisions as primary users of the transitway. This would require a transfer or a walk. For many commuters, driving to the transitway entrance would actually waste time. If you live between Waikele and Iwilei, you would have to drive away from your destination to reach the only 'Ewa entrance to the transitway.

If Mr. Slater's financial estimates are correct, the transitway would cost $1.2 billion, nearly as much as the H-3 cost ($1.5 billion in inflation-adjusted 2004 dollars). If it works at all, it would only help those who live beyond Waikele who are commuting to Iwilei.

Thus, it would be a partial solution at best.

While the integrated system we need will be a combination of partial solutions, i.e. car, ferry, bus and rail, a rail/subway system will still be necessary even if we build the transitway and will serve many, many more people than Mr. Slater's proposal. Our traffic problems are too severe to hope to solve them with half-a-loaf solutions.