Spewing Hate

Dear Editor:

(In response to Ted Rall's "Dithering while America Sneezes" in the Nov. 12-18 issue of Urban Tulsa Weekly)

This guy is the biggest douchebag around. His columns are full of "truth-stretching" and trumped up accusations, whether they are against Bush or Obama, this guy just seethes hatred toward everything.

He has even referred to the Taliban terrorists in Pakistan as legitimate "Political adversaries" (Urban Tulsa issue Nov. 4)

This guy needs to be dropped from Urban Tulsa altogether.

-Jay 3333

Plain Racist

Dear Editor:

(In response to the "Ask a Mexican" column that runs in Urban Tulsa Weekly)

It's interesting that you publish racist hate filled content from the "Ask A Mexican" person. He routinely labels white Americans in some kind of derogatory way and he is filled with a particular venom towards a white American - Lou Dobss. His obsession with Dobbs is disturbing and it is disturbing that you publish such tripe.

Justifiably, you would never tolerate such bigotry from a white American.

On top of all that, he is not interesting or funny.

-Mike Wallens

Good Eats

Dear Editor:

(In response to Katharine Kelly's "Rest Stop" in the Nov. 5-11 issue of Urban Tulsa Weekly)

Our family of five ate here last Sunday with relatives, and we all enjoyed it. Thanks for calling our attention to Escargot's.

-Michael Bates

Crossing the Line

Dear Editor:

(In response to Arnold Hamilton's "End Around" in the Oct. 29- Nov. 4 issue of Urban Tulsa Weekly)

Mr. Hamilton's "Capitolist" column, End Around, was most disappointing before he even concluded his second sentence. Within that sentence, Mr. Hamilton abandoned solid journalistic inquiry into a serious subject and instead chose to use a vulgar pejorative to separate his views from another political perspective on the appropriate limits of government.

The serious subject, legislative leadership compared to using the state Constitutional amendment vote process, deserves writing and thinking that are several cuts above Democratic underground bloggers, Janeane Garofalo, and other flingers of political excrement. When Mr. Hamilton started writing in UTW, I believe his resume showed him to have that ability. I now seriously question whether that is true. The editor's journalistic judgment is equally questionable.

-Bart Pickens, Sand Springs

Falling Flat

(In response to Ted Rall's "Drop the Drones" in the Oct. 29-Nov. 4 issue of Urban Tulsa Weekly)

Dear Sirs:

Rant 'n' Rall Commentary is another dud.

Ted Rall condemned the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan as hopeless, stating "every single American soldier who died in Afghanistan has died for nothing." This week he sidesteps that deceitful argument and gives advice on how to conduct air operations!

Amazingly he zeroes in on one of the most accurate advanced weapons systems in the world instead of more deadly and indiscriminate types like cluster munitions. Drones and other coalition aircraft provide intelligence and precision targeting unmatched in history. Their presence is a deterrent to insurgents and helps protect innocent lives.

The author prefers we forego technical advantages in favor of placing more troops in harm's way; Mr. Rall sees more "honor" if we choose to increase US human casualties. We can prefer al-Qaeda and the Taliban stop using Afghan civilians and neighborhoods as shields, or at least, stop targeting them for terrorist attacks -- but that ain't gonna happen by 'dropping the drones.'

The truth is, no military in the history of war has done more to protect the innocent than we have in Afghanistan. On many occasions, legitimate targets were bypassed because of potential collateral damage/civilian injury.

Consider an article by Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff writer; when early in the war, "As many as 10 times over the last six weeks, the Air Force believed it had top Taliban and al Qaeda members in its cross hairs in Afghanistan but was unable to receive clearance to fire in time to hit them" because of military commanders' concerns for civilian casualties. Of course, the article went on to criticize the military for being too careful in its targeting.

P.S. Why give so much space to disparaging inane comparisons with the Holocaust or abusive cheap-shots at those in uniform? Mr. Rall conveys little understanding about civil/military operations in a counter-insurgency. Yet, he frequently reveals contempt for military efforts. If Mr. Rall is incapable of acknowledging the vast amount of U.S. military training and doctrine devoted to the ETHICAL, LEGAL and PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF WARFARE before dismissing its leaders as merely stupid, then his rants belong in a letter to the editor, not a weekly column.

Thank you.

-W. Merritt