Let's visit, once again, the letters page of the Inquirer:

No path to security

Re: "Bush offers the only real path for security," letter, Nov. 24:

Paul Mellon excoriates critics of President Bush's unilateral war on Iraq but conveniently ignores that 9/11 happened under Bush's presidency and that thoughtful and informed U.S. citizens feel far less secure today than when Bush declared his unilateral "war on terror."

The fact that the war is not overtly fought in our country should not distort the truth that the United States faces a rising tide of resentment around the world that poses a growing threat to our national security far more serious than a gaggle of mad bombers.

Osama bin Laden is apparently still at large and the escalation of al-Qaeda-type attacks around the globe suggests that Bush has stirred rather than destroyed the hornets' nest.

Elmer S. Miller

Philadelphia

Well Elmer, any "thoughtful and informed" citizen should've felt insecure after 19 terrorists attacked and killed 2,000 Americans. Are we safer than we were prior to attacking Iraq? Probably not. This is a war that will be fought for years or decades. Feeling secure, as we did for the years prior to 9/11 is a feeling that is gone. get used to it loser. As for the idiotic idea that we are resented, well dude, I've one thing to say, when France and Germany are hit by terrorist incidents, that goodwill will return as they beg us to help them. The goodwill or approval of the world is not a high priority. The security of this nation is. As for Osama being on the loose, Elmer (note to self, call Mom and thank her for not naming me Elmer), you and I don't really know if He's alive or not.

Every once in a while there appears the letters that restore hope in this bastion of donkey banality:

The dream of peace

Re: " A Palestinian Eid," Commentary Page, Nov. 25:

I really sympathized with writer Mike Odetalla until I remembered the Israelis whose celebration of Passover was interrupted when they were slaughtered by a Palestinian suicide bomber, or the bride-to-be who was blown up in a cafe the night before her wedding, or the mother who tried to shelter her baby - to no avail - from the Palestinian infiltrator who murdered them both, or the busload of worshipers returning from the Western Wall who were exploded in the streets of Jerusalem.

As distressing as Israel's defensive curfews, house demolitions and "disruption of culture and tradition" may be, they pale by comparison to the slaughter of innocent women, children and babies perpetrated by Palestinian terrorists.

God willing, Odetalla's relatives will celebrate the next Eid in freedom and peace - as he does in Michigan. But that will be up to the Palestinian leadership, in its willingness to support Odetalla's dream for peace and not the nightmares of those bent on the destruction of Israel and its people.

Beryl Dean
Haverford

Amen Brother. However, our cavalcade of morons continues with this:

Fight the real enemy

Re: "Bush offers the only real path for security," letter, Nov. 24:

Paul Mellon is right when he says that it's better "to have a leader committed to taking the fight to our enemies." Too bad George Bush can't make that commitment. When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, Franklin D. Roosevelt didn't declare war on Korea.

The candidate I vote for in 2004 will be out to fight terrorists, not Iraqis.

Jonathan Miller

Narberth

But Truman did. Read something other than the Inquirer, and you'll see that the al-Qaeda/Iraq connection is becoming more evident on a daily basis. By the way, what candidate will prosecute this war more thoroughly than Bush?