Our view mislabels protesters

As a Grandmother for Peace, I protest the ongoing military occupation of Iraq. I am writing in response to the Our view column in the Sept. 19 edition. I do not agree with your headline’s characterization of protesters “The petulance of protesters.” My dictionary tells me that I am being petulant if I am “impatient or irritable, esp. over petty things; peevish.”

I do not believe my reasons for demonstrating are petty. Below are a few of the reasons why I demonstrate against our occupation of Iraq.

1. President Bush’s lies led us into an illegal invasion of a country which was not a threat to our nation. There were no weapons of mass destruction.

2. He has also repeatedly implied that Iraq was connected to the events of 9/11. When pressed on the matter, he has admitted that there is no connection between Iraq and 9/11.

3. At this point, more than 3,800 of our fine, dedicated military have given their lives in support of an illegal invasion followed by an equally illegal occupation. I support our troops but their “commander in chief” has given them a mission that is ill conceived, immoral and illegal.

4. More than 1 million innocent civilians have been killed in Iraq. And over 4 million Iraqis have fled their homes to escape the ongoing brutal violence. A 1997 estimate of the total population of Iraq was 22,219,289. Can you imagine how we would feel if more than one fifth of the people in our country were either killed or had fled because of an illegal invasion?

My reasons for demonstrating are not petty. I am not motivated by petulance. Might I suggest you try a different word choice for your headline if you are, as it appears, into alliteration? Try “Principled.” Before our tragic illegal invasion, I thought of myself as a proud patriot. I remain patriotic but the pride is gone. I’m also, prompt, precise and picky and, regrettably somewhat plump.

You accurately stated that Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker’s assessment of the progress in Iraq is “bleak.” But you, along with numerous sources, failed to notice that the MoveOn ad was asking a question, “General Petraeus or Betray Us?” not calling the general a name. I believe the ad’s question will be answered by history.

Your article ends by saying that close to 70 percent of people polled “would like our troops out, if not immediately at least in the near future.” You then assert “antiwar activists are puzzled that those polled won’t stand up and be counted.” For myself, I am not puzzled. I am aware that, civil rights which I once counted on are no longer in effect. My telephone conversations may be monitored. If I become enough of a disruption, I might be “disappeared.” Torture of prisoners is now allowed, but renamed, in an attempt to get information. The Geneva Conventions are “quaint.” Sometimes when we demonstrate, persons drive by and film us. Are we being threatened? There are many reasons why people choose not to join us when we demonstrate. Some are just too busy working to feed their families in our “booming” economy.

Unlike your editorial in which you decry the actions of Code Pink, I applaud each person who demonstrates. Like many protesters, “Code Pink” members are motivated by knowing the following: Only when we have your attention can we possibly persuade you to consider change. We want you to stop and think. Don’t just repeat the phrases that are constantly repeated attempting to justify this never-ending occupation.

I demonstrate with 'Grandmothers for Peace’ at 99th Avenue and Bell Road on the first and third Saturdays of each month. We are there from 8 to 9:30 am. You don’t need to be a grandmother to join us. Everyone is welcome.

Joan Kroll

Sun City