Equal Opportunity Disservice
to the People I was one of the attorneys
for United Air Lines in EEOC v. United, which we tried
through the government's case in mid 1974, I believe,
before Judge Hubert Will in the US District Court,
Chicago. We then settled with the government, which
had "proven up" damages of $26 million at
the close of its case, covering all employees (except
flight attendants who had their own suit going) which
numbered about 50,000 at that time. Everything was
under attack -- ratios of employees in various jobs
by sex and race, tests administered, admitted discriminatory
practices on the flight deck before the 1964 Act was
passed.
We settled for $1 million. The government needed that
number to make a headline in the NY Times. The money
was basically just handed around willy-nilly to everyone
in the so-called "protected classes". I
was against the settlement, feeling that the government's
case was weak to non-existent, but the company felt
that failing to settle would incur fees and costs
above that amount, in addition to litigation risk.
They were undoubtedly right, but 20 years later I
ran into my co-counsel on the street in Chicago and
he said he had to rush off because he was late for
a court hearing on compliance with the affirmative
action aspects ("goals") of the settlement,
which obviously hounded the company for decades.
The reason the EEOC settled for such a small percentage
of what they had proven (4%) was that they didn't
want our defense studies to come to the light of day.
Under the guidance of an unimpeachable expert, we
[had proved that there was] no discernable discrimination
(after 1964).
We ultimately did a paper on our work,
published as "Statistical Study of Equality of
Opportunity at United AirLines: Methods and Findings",
Report 7824, Center for Mathematical Studies in Business
and Economics, Dept of Economics and Graduate School
of Business, University of Chicago (May 1978), by
Field, Kimpton, McGee and Roberts.
Our work goes far to destroy the underpinnings
of the "target list" approach the government
used at the time, where as you described they assumed
guilt by all of corporate America, based upon "crude"
comparisons by race and sex in the workforce or population
and in specific jobs. The government always uses these
crude comparisons to cast business in a bad light,
and still does so today. The popular media and left-leaning
groups repeat this nonsense daily as though it were
gospel, and rarely if ever mention the inherent shortcomings
and fallacies of using crude comparisons.
This does everyone a great disservice,
because by focusing attention on something that is
not the problem, it fosters neglect of and inattention
to things that really are the problem. Of course,
the most hurt by this process are the black and Latino
Americans who these people purport to speak for but,
in their ignorance, end up mightily disserving. This
is a national disgrace, and a self-inflicted stain
on this great liberal nation, at the hands, mostly,
of those who falsely claim the moral high ground while
being themselves already protected by wealth and income
or who are the beneficiaries of government largesse
and seek to keep the pipelines flowing into their
foreseeable future.
Henry Field Framingham
An Exercise in Healing As a female college student, I
am familiar with the types of rallies mentioned in
Izzy Lyman's article--in fact, as a member of MIT's
"Stop Our Silence," I try to help run them.
These awareness-building events are
absolutely not about hating men; we realize men are
our best allies against sexual violence and a necessary
part of our movement. When we have a clothesline project,
where survivors of sexual abuse create shirts and
"air their dirty laundry," there is nothing
hateful about it, except the hate the perpetrators
showed their victims. Instead, these events are healing
exercises meant to join, not divide, our community.
Lillie Werner
Boston
Empowering Women In response to Izzy Lyman's May
5 article about the UMass "Take Back the Night"
rally, I would like to say that I am appalled that
any news source, no matter its political leanings,
would take a stance against the rally. The purpose
of "Take Back the Night" is to support survivors
of sexual assault and to help women feel empowered
instead of fearful in their daily lives.
Our society has created a culture of
male violence where we teach women to "protect"
themselves by dressing conservatively and walking
with an escort at night instead of teaching men that
it is unacceptable to force themselves on women. "Take
Back the Night" was organized by a group of concerned
women and men - not "radical campus feminists"
- whose goal was to spread awareness about sexual
assault and change this culture of violence.
Contrary to the Lyman's assumptions,
not once did the rally make generalizations about
men, never claiming that all men are rapists or violent
criminals or anything else. "Take Back the Night"
stuck to its purpose, informing people about the current
state of affairs for sexual assault survivors:
sexual assault is far more common than most people
think, society continues to hold victims more responsible
for their attacks than the perpetrators, and now with
the elimination of funding for rape crisis centers,
victims will havenowhere to turn. Printing an article
ridiculing such an important event for such an important
cause was irresponsible and unforgivable.
Amy E. Ferrer
Belchertown
Feminists Double Standard I have been protesting "take
back the night rallies" for two decades. Women
tell us that men rape so therefore, let's focus on
a crime that is 99% of the time perpetuated by men.
I was sexually abused as a three year old boy; violently
violated. Nowhere is this crime listed. Women's sexual
violence is rarely thought of as rape. (No dick, no
crime) In the Vagina monologues a 13 year old girls
is seduced by an adult female then used sexually.
Many women didn't see that as a crime but imagine
the "shift" when a man does the same thing.
Adult women have sex with boys and we don't call it
rape. We act as if the touch of a female enhances
a male while a male's touch defiles which teaches
some men to want to use sex to defile women.
Locally the feminists don't want to deal with child
abuse each April when they proclaim both sexual assault
awareness month and child abuse awareness month. Year
after year it's always male bashing with silence about
child abuse. Silence because its mothers who are more
likely than fathers, to beat, strangle, drown, injure,
and torture a child. These are easy facts to find
unless you are a feminist.
Rapists don't come from average guys looking at Victoria's
Secret advertising. Rapists come from violence experienced
as children or brain damage.
Steve DeLuca
Mendocino CA
Nothing Hateful About It I am writing in response to the
"Extreme Feminists at U Mass Have 'Hate Men'
Rally to Keep Money Flowing to Rape Crisis Centers"
article. After reading the article I am still unsure
as to why the rally is referred to as the "'Hate
Men'" rally. There was nothing hateful about
the rally. I believe that men should be holding rallies
like take back the night. It shouldn't be a female
responsibility to constantly address violence committed
by men against women. It would have been helpful to
readers if you interviewed some of the "radical"
women who organized the rally.
Personally, I don't see how addressing violence with
non-violence is radical. Your article suggests anyone
with a voice and who organizes a positive peaceful
event is radical.
Keyse Angelo
U Mass Student
Think of
Tomorrow
"People don't miss the water until the well runs
dry" is a very old adage that is appropriate
for today. The tenor of our times is "now."
As a nation we are conditioned to today and not tomorrow.
Many people, including our governments, from national
to local, want us to think only of today. They do
not want us thinking of tomorrow because we might
want different conditions to come about for our futures
and that of our children.
I believe that the deterioration in governments, beginning
here in the East, will move westward unless there
is a concerted activity to prevent it. Robert Hamilton
Winchester
Outraged by Haverhill High
School's Homosexual Assembly on April 9
As a parent
of a freshman teenager at Haverhill High School, I
am outraged that my son, along with his entire class,
was dismissed from school yesterday to attend an "assembly" that promoted homosexuality.
The school held an event sponsored by the Gay Straight
Alliance that promoted homosexuality and required
the entire school to attend. As a parent, I was never
informed of such an assembly, nor was my child given
the opportunity to decline. My son reported that both
adults and students promoted a gay/lesbian lifestyle
with speeches, pamphlets, posters and even candy!
Posters included pictures of boys holding other boys'
hands and girls holding other girls' hands. Students
wore t-shirts from the Gay Straight Alliance and teachers
wore pins. Students were told that being homosexual
was not against the law, that it did not hurt anyone,
and that it was acceptable and normal behavior. That
is far from the truth!
Furthermore, while my son was looking at a $10,000
check donated by Wal-Mart, his picture was taken by
another student member of the GSA. As well, another
student GSA member handed a pamphlet to my son's friend,
then stepped away and had another student member of
the GSA take a picture of the boy thumbing through
the pamphlet. This portrays an aura of interest of
kids who are not interested, but were just going along
with the crowd and attending the event only because
they were told to do so by their teachers. I am completely
and totally outraged!
Parents should be given advance written notification
and students given the opportunity to decline such
a controversial assembly. I think it is a disgrace
that students were required to attend the assembly
and lured with candy and chocolates. Had this event
promoted men having sexual relations with boys or
sodomy, I think other parents would be just as outraged.
Homosexuality goes strictly against the teachings
of the Bible and has no place in a public education
setting. I feel as though the GSA went behind all
of the parents' backs by holding such a controversial
event during the school day and requiring students
to attend. I intend to bring this matter to the attention
of the Superintendent and School Committee. Name Withheld
Haverhill
P.S. Is there any information you can provide me with
that would help in terms of support, morally and legally,
because my intention is to keep my son from attending
any one of these events.
Editor's Comment:
The teachers make it very difficult for you to do
so without making your child an object of ridicule.
Learn how to disagree without being disagreeable.
Otherwise you will be torpedoed very early in the
school year. These are professional activists who
run these programs. You have to band together with
parents of similar mind. Lastly, you must let your
children know: "I send you to school to be educated.
When you come home you will be re-educated back to
reality." You'd be surprised at how much they
will appreciate that you took a position of showing
them how to resist the propaganda rather than embarrass
them by causing a public scene at the school all by
yourself. Let your state legislators know you are
angry! Then vote accordingly.
Proud to
Be an American
I've never been more proud to be an American than
I am today!
President Bush has shown courage, wisdom and exceptional
leadership beyond that of any president in my lifetime.
Our military performed almost flawlessly to bring
a quick and relatively bloodless end to an evil regime
that has existed, due to their methods of unprecedented
torture and intimidation. In spite of continued anti-American
propaganda in pockets throughout the world, the Iraqi
people know they have been liberated from a tyrant,
not occupied, and are hugging our American soldiers
and praising the U.S.A. It feels so good to live in
a land of freedom and know we have just extended that
privilege to millions more. Bonnie O'Neil
Newport Beach, CA
No to UN
Restructuring Iraq
Dear President Bush,
With the revelation of the hand that France, Russia
& Belgium had in supplying Iraq with nuclear capability,
how in the world can it be logical to allow them to
help rebuild Iraq? This would be a slap in the faces
of our soldiers who died for the Iraqis. It would
be a total lack of wisdom to consult with those countries
that jeopardized this planet.
You said any country who helped the terrorists was
our enemy, as much as the terrorists who attacked
us on 9/11. These very members of the UN have not
admitted their role in strengthening Saddam's arsenals.
We are uncovering their "donations." They
obviously don't have the best interests of Iraq at
heart. Judy Tetu
Sterling
Response
to Jim Duffy
Having lived in Massachusetts in my younger days,
I enjoy reading MassNews to keep up with what's happening
in the land of "Chappaquiddick Ted" and
"Barney Fag." So I guess that makes me one
of your "narrow-minded, intolerant and prejudiced
21st century dinosaurs." I'll accept that description
of myself without any shame whatsoever. I am very
narrow-minded and intolerant whenever some limp-wristed,
lisping pansy tries to force me to accept their perverted
life style as normal.
As for the Catholic priests being a bigger threat
to our children than the gays or liberals, they are
the gays and liberals! Last but not least, I am thrilled
to know that the gays have a welcome mat out for them
in West Roxbury. Hopefully, it will keep them out
of my neighborhood! John Fedor
Yoncalla, OR
Bulger's
Path Hurts Students
Students should protest UMass President William Bulger
for the future of their own educations. The system,
itself, is the problem as it jeopardizes its core
mission to pursue unrealistic and hubristic expansion.
Bulger's path hurts students.
The Board of Trustees approved a system-wide fee increase
of $1,000 for in-state students and $2,000 for out-of-state
students, or nearly 18%, for the coming 2003-2004
academic year. Only the student representative from
UMass Amherst voted against the hike. Since 1989,
fees have skyrocketed 453%! Unfortunately, fees are
mandatory and permanent. Many fees are extraneous
and never directly benefit the students who are forced
to pay them.
Romney only sought an $838, or 15%, tuition increase.
His plan would increase financial aid to offset the
burden upon in-state students. The restructuring will
prohibit campuses from raising fees and ties funding
to student performance.
The establishment essentially hiked taxes upon working
students. It is unconscionable to raise the costs
of a college education without shattering the status
quo. Support the Governor's proposal to reorganize
the University of Massachusetts and save public higher
education. Brock N. Cordeiro
UMass Boston, Graduate Class of 2004
UMass Dartmouth, Undergraduate Class of 2001
Dartmouth
Teachers
Union Should Spend Wisely
The Massachusetts Teachers Association plans to spend
$2 million to attack Governor Mitt Romney's budget.
They will make false claims that it will cause larger
class sizes.
If the Teachers Union were really interested in educating
children, and not political power, they would invest
that money on training teachers to do their jobs better.
After all, because of early retirement, so many of
our most experienced teachers, who say they love what
they do, retired after less time in the field than
most real labor workers, not to mention police and
firefighters who are ready to risk their lives every
day. Vincent A.J. Errichetti
Woburn
Letter
from a Canadian Friend
To our American friends, south of the boarder: a short
history lesson. Most Canadians support the U.S. We
do not all agree with our P.M., but before you start
judging Canada about not being in this war, a little
history lesson. During the First World War, the Canadians
were involved from the beginning. The U.S. did not
come in until the very ending. In the Second World
War, your president did not want to involve the U.S.
until Pearl Harbor while Canada was in it from the
start. So please do not judge us as you do. We support
you. Bob Joyes
Chelmsford, ON Canada
Editor's Comment: It's
good to have our friend from the North support us,
but his history lesson appears a little skewed.
In World War I, Canada was involved because it was
a member of the British Commonwealth. We were not
and should never have become involved. President Wilson
promised us in the 1916 elections that we would not
be. Because we did become involved, that allowed the
English and the French to demand unconditional surrender
and set the stage for World War II. That war also
established the Communist government in Russia.
In World War II, the Canadians went in a little earlier
than we did, only because they were still part of
the British Empire. But Canada never forced its young
men to go to war. They were all volunteers in both
wars.
In addition, World War I first established us as the
policemen of the world, and it appears we will be
unable to extricate ourselves from that assignment
in the near future. So the men of Canada (and many
other countries) can sit back and throw rocks and
cans at the policemen as we attempt to protect their
country.
Northfield
School
Thanks so much for the eye-opening story on Northfield
Mt. Hermon. I am a 1965 graduate of Northfield (back
when it was still a girls' school) and I can tell
you that things were a lot different back then. We
had daily compulsory chapel, daily Quiet Time for
Bible reading and a dress code that required us to
wear knee-length skirts and lace-up shoes to classes,
no immodest clothes. The biggest campus scandal, which
could get a student kicked out when I was there, involved
girls sneaking off to the woods to smoke cigarettes.
No doubt, the school's founder, much beloved evangelist
Dwight Moody, would turn over in his grave if he saw
what is going on at our school now.
I wish the alumni, who still give lots of money to
the school, could be made aware of what's going on
so they'd stop their charitable giving. I myself haven't
given to the school in years.
Earlier, I was giving to a group that supported religious
life at the school, but it eventually disbanded because
the chaplain supported the participation of Wiccans
and Pagans under the auspices of her chaplaincy. Linda Ames Nicolosi
Encino, CA
The SJC & "God Bless America"
I received today my April 2003 copy of Massachusetts
News, and saw to my dismay that the Massachusetts
SJC is contemplating tampering with the sacred definition
of marriage.
We have always asked God to Bless America. But perhaps
this is something we might want to reconsider, because
there might be dire consequences if we ask God to
bless us.
I think most would agree that America generally is
a land that has received more than its share of blessing,
happiness and material wealth from God (or Nature,
depending on one's preference). So in this sense,
America can be said to be a chosen land, with a chosen
people.
But what does it mean to be a chosen people? Ask any
Jew how he or she thinks of his/her status as a member
of the chosen people. If asked how they feel, most
Jews will not give a particularly bubbly answer. By
Jewish teaching, being "chosen" does not
at all mean that they are more privileged, or have
more or are more fortunate than others. On the contrary,
being "chosen" means that they have greater
responsibilities. And moreover, it means that when
any of them commit sin, both God and the gentiles
will judge them by a different, stricter standard
than they will other gentiles.
Jews are judged by a harsher standard, but only because
(in their belief) God expects more of them and deals
more harshly with them when they commit error. It's
as if you have two children. One is 2; the other 15.
Both break windows. You punish the 15-year- old more
than you do the 2-year-old because you know that the
15-year-old is far more capable of doing good than
is the 2-year-old. By reason of America's blessings,
we are in the same position of being chosen.
In Hebrew, the "evil eye" is the ayin hara;
in Italian, it's mal'occhio. Either way, the Jews
and Italians alike understand to avoid the "evil
eye." Basically, what it means is that one should
not curse other people or things and should not even
ask for blessings which are dangerous to ask for,
because when one invokes higher powers (good or evil)
to do something, one has gone out of his way to attract
their attention. Like, if I ask God for health, but
in the meanwhile I abuse my own health with alcohol
and drugs, I might attract God's personal attention,
and if He sees that I'm not worthy of the blessing
that I'm asking for, He might turn around and punish
me instead; whereas if I'd just left Him alone, I
might have gotten away with more self-abuse.
So with all this in mind, I see that there are many
dangerous, evil trends in American society. There's
abortion, expanding gay rights and lack of a feeling
of shamefulness about gay behavior, and now, tampering
with marriage itself.
For years, I criticized the Catholic Church for offering
annulments of marriage. I thought this was so much
sophistry, a back door, dishonest way of giving divorce
without calling it by its proper name. Now I realize
that the Church had it right, because in order to
be a real marriage, a marriage has to be holy. If
holiness is not present, the marriage is not a marriage
it's a sham, legalized shacking-up. The Jewish commentator
Rashi says the same thing when he says that there
is no marriage without kiddushin, or holiness. So
when the Church gives annulments, it's the Church's
way of recognizing that a particular relationship
never had the requisite holiness which in fact qualifies
it to be marriage altogether.
In the end, this is why marriage can only be between
men and women. As much as gays won't want to hear
it, since their relationships aren't holy, they can't
commit to marriage.
Justice Marshall seems totally blind to this when
she reduces marriage to a level of economic convenience.
I see Justice Marshall toying with and destroying
something that she clearly doesn't even understand.
I see her trying to do things to marriage which even
the Arab culture, for all of its own depravities,
would never dream of doing.
And I ask myself: Do I really want to ask God to Bless
America? We are chosen; God expects more of us, and
yet, we're giving God less. Asking God for His blessings
sounds like a disaster in the making to me. James A. Nollett
Billerica
Editor's Comment: My
first detailed look at the NYTimes came in the 1980s
when I was writing my book on the Civil Rights Act.
The Times was very unsatisfactory in telling what
happened on a day-to-day basis as that law was being
passed. As a result, I had to go to the Congressional
Record and read the actual debates in order to understand
what had happened. I had to dig it out myself.
For example, in order to derail the Act, a Southern
Congressman proposed an Amendment on a Saturday afternoon
to add women to the list of protected people. He believed
that would surely kill the bill. But he was wrong.
This huge, historic change sailed right through Congress
with only a few paragraphs in the Times. Although
it was months before Congress voted, this was never
mentioned again in the Times.
Was it sloppy, careless reporting or was it done on
purpose to sneak this through? We will never know,
but this changed American history. The liberal leaders
were all against it. The only reason that women are
allowed to sue everyone in sight today is because
the Times did not let anyone know what was happening
until it was all over.
Return
to Federalist Law
Thank you for publishing the article on the legal
system as seen by the Harvard Law School's Federalist
Society. These students may be the beginning of returning
the legal system described by President Washington
in his farewell speech. Please continue to publish
items and articles that show that many of our citizens
do recognize the failure of our current legal system
and what must be done to correct the problems. Bill Moore
Edmond, OK
Teresa
Heinz Wants Balance in Politics
In a recent article in a Boston paper, it was reported
that Teresa Heinz was trying to empower the people
of Idaho by donating money to the Democrat Party in
Idaho in order to help preserve the two-party system
of politics, and to make Idaho more like Switzerland
by giving visitors to Idaho a sense of personal safety.
Gee, does that mean then that Teresa Heinz will donate
money to the Republican Party in Massachusetts to
empower people here, and to help preserve the two-party
system while denouncing the many gun control laws
she has embraced to help make Massachusetts like the
well-armed Switzerland she speaks of? I won't hold
my breath. Don Schwarz
Stoughton
Read Carefully
If you had more carefully read the Boston Globe article
you attacked in, "Globe Threatens Lives of U.S.
Troops, As in Vietnam," you'd have realized that
the report states that "thousands" of people
demonstrated in the entire country, not in Cambridge
alone. Your trying to refute this head count by suggesting
that only hundreds demonstrated in Cambridge is either
absurd or disingenuous.
I find it ironic that MassNews, which I often admire
for stating strong opinions extremely strongly, should
criticize a news article on the grounds that it is
stopping intelligent discussion. Your diatribe discourages
intelligent discussion far better than any news story,
especially when you state that certain opinions opposed
to yours will cause deaths.
Please explain how the Boston Globe reporting "will
cause unnecessary death to many troops if it continues." Stephen Sossaman
Westfield Editor's Comment: I
am sorry that our article was not clear to you. You
are correct that the lead story was a national story.
But right next to it was a large, three-column picture
about Boston which gave the appearance of being a
part of the headline about "thousands rally."
A reader had to fortuitously read a separate story
in City & Region to discover that only "hundreds"
marched in Boston - along miles of Mass. Ave. from
Dorchester to Lexington!
Such sensational writing will naturally discourage
our troops when they read those negative stories.
It will greatly encourage the enemy, who will believe
what the Globe is writing. We need a "loyal opposition,"
not one that will divide the country as the NYTimes/Globe
complex did to our teenage troops in Vietnam. We did
not belong in that war but we were not on the wrong
side as the Times/Globe kept saying (after they pushed
us into it and then changed their minds).
Pro-Abortion
Aftermath Will Come to Iraq
Saddam Hussein's defeat will open the door for the
pro-abortion, pro-condom United States Agency for
International Development (USAID). For months, the
State Department has been planning the reconstruction
of Iraq which includes an assault by this agency.
This organization has helped "liberate"
nations such as Pakistan, Afghanistan and Albania
by helping legalize abortion. They will provide stocks
of condoms and contraceptives. USAID programs will
subject Iraqi children, especially girls, to graphic
sex education. They will further insist that family
planning (population control) programs be in place,
warning that the penalty for noncompliance will be
a denial of additional aid.
I pray Iraqis will resist these assaults on life and
family. The million or so Christians in Iraq will
be just as unhappy about this turn of events as their
Muslim neighbors. Perhaps we Americans need to look
at ourselves and ask, "Are we the ones who need
'liberation' from our sinful lives?" We are imprisoned
by sex on demand, pornography, the slaughter in the
womb, epidemics of STD's and HIV. How can we honestly
call ourselves a progressive nation? Thomas Messe, M.D.
Groton, CT
Wife of a Soldier Speaks
Out
To all the anti war protesters:
I'm sure that all your protests are with good intentions,
but there is another side of the war that you are
not thinking of that you need to be. That side is
the side of the soldiers, the men and woman who are
already deployed. Pretend for one minute that you
are them.
All your husband/wife knows is that you're somewhere
in the Middle East. You can't tell them where you
are. When you ask your commanding officer how long
you'll be gone, you're told 6-12 months. A lot can
happen in that time. You sleep on a cot in a tent;
and if you do get the luxury of a shower, it is from
a garden hose with no temperature control. All around
you is brown, your tent and your clothes. You spend
day after day pulling guard duty for 12-hours at a
time, and the only thing that you can do to help move
your days along is watch the sand dunes move.
You watch your children grow up through pictures and
letters, some of you even have wives who are pregnant.
They will deliver with you gone and you will meet
your child months into their life. When you do get
a chance to watch TV, it is CNN. What do you see?
Protesters and demonstrators picketing the war and
speaking out against it. Suddenly your morale goes
down. You are overseas away from family, friends and
everything you know, and you don't even have the support
of the country whose freedom you are willing to die
for.
My husband has been serving proudly in the United
States Army since 1996. Currently he is overseas doing
a 15-month hardship tour in South Korea. I have not
seen him in 10 months. Hold your signs and protest,
but please remember the reason you have the right
to hold those signs is because people died for your
right to do so.
The best thing about our government is our right to
speak out against it. So speak out. When I talk to
my husband, I will thank him for you. When you hold
your rallies, I'll let him know that you appreciate
all his sacrifices. While he sacrifices, I want all
of you to remember September 11th and all the people
who died because of it. Remember all the people who
lived through it and the nightmare of their days since.
People who lost their children, wives, husband and
friends.
Did you forget that day, is that why you think that
it is unnecessary to take these measures? I haven't
forgotten. I have not forgotten the day my husband
came home from work mad because they got us on our
soil. He was mad because it is his job to fight and,
if need be, die so that you can all go to work and
not worry if you are going to be face-to- face with
an airplane by breakfast.
Remember these things the next time that you think
Iraq isn't a threat to us.
On September 10, did you think that Afghanistan was?
As you continue your anti war efforts there are a
few things that you should take with you. Take with
you the security of knowing that the United States
military is the best military in the world. Take with
you the hope that because of this war no more innocent
civilians will die.
To all of you that hang flags from your house, I want
to thank you. Seeing them has made my last 10-months
easier. To all the servicemen and women; what do you
say to heroes? Please be safe. Joni Bonilla,
Wife of CPL Carlos Bonilla
US Army
Winthrop
