Many readers have written in response to the ongoing work of the commission investigating the 9-11 attacks, as well as the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism.

Bush right to suspect Saddam

President Bush may or may not remember asking about Saddam after the Sept. 11 attacks, but he was surely not alone. Now everyone is questioning the president about if he was fixated on Saddam.

But for the president to wonder if one of the most cruel and extremist powers on today's face of the earth was involved is news and investigation-worthy, come on. I still think Saddam had a hand in or at least was privy to information about what happened on 9-11. But I might be just another right-wing conspiracy junkie.

David Champness, Amelia

---

Politics have hijacked investigative panel

It is becoming clearer every day that the 9-11 commission has become a politicized body. The issue of having Condoleezza Rice testify in public and under oath has grown out of reasonable proportion. The commission knows from previous testimony all the information she has to offer on the matter of pre 9-11 activities within the administration. Now we are in for grandstanding by commission members on the same material in front of TV cameras.

The commission has turned from one of high principles to nothing more than a partisan witch-hunt. Certain members, and one political party, want nothing more than to pin the blame upon the Bush administration. They are no longer trying to improve the system in order to preclude subsequent occurrences. One question for Richard Clarke: Would he have written the book if the office of the No. 2 man in Homeland Security had been given to him?

Robert Patterson, Mason

---

Joint Bush-Cheney testimony is farcical

It is absurd that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney insist on giving their testimony to the 9-11 commission together. This would be a hilarious joke if it weren't so very serious. How can we, or anyone else in the world, have any respect for our leaders who are afraid to answer questions independently about one of the most shocking and tragic events in the history of this country? What kind of leadership do we have here, anyway?

Tom Doetschman, Springfield Township

---

Clarke has stood up to earn credibility

Richard Clarke on his March 28 appearance on NBC's Meet The Press called the White House's bluff. Fox News should change its name to the "Smear Richard Clarke and Lynch Kobe Bryant Channel." After a week of smear and attack by the White House and its minions, Clarke said they should release it all, the e-mails, the congressional testimony, all of it. This followed Sen. Bill Frist's speech in the well of the Senate, where Frist called for release of prior testimony and accused Clarke of lying to Congress.

Within 48 hours, Frist recanted his accusation. I believe the White House doesn't have the courage to release all that information. And let's not forget that, after days of denying Clarke and Bush had a meeting and conversation just after 9-11, the White House was forced to admit that, indeed, such a meeting did take place.

Clarke's credibility cannot be questioned now, but the Bush's administration has no credibility.

Bill Adkins, Williamstown

---

Iraq clearly is part of war on terror

Iraq used to be a brutal regime that terrorized its own people and had the intent and the finances to terrorize others. Why do people refuse to see that Iraq is a part of the war on terror? After 9-11, President Bush did the right thing in targeting Afghanistan first. We went in and dismantled the Taliban. Our efforts there continued as we began the next of several phases of the war on terror. We never abandoned Afghanistan or the search for Osama bin Laden. The U.S. military is capable of multi-tasking. We can be in more than one place at any given time.

The war on terror is not against one dictator or one country. It includes a broad range of countries and an even broader number of terror soldiers who believe God is instructing them to kill us. It will not end in Iraq. It will most certainly take us to other countries. Saddam Hussein is the man who chose to play this deadly game of cat and mouse. Weapons of mass destruction may never be discovered, but not to go after Iraq bluff would have been the more dangerous move.

Teresa Stemann, Pleasant Ridge

---

Iraq, war on terror definitely separate

Many letters recently have addressed the war in Iraq, President Bush and John Kerry. Many have mistakenly incorporated the war in Iraq as part of the war on terror. My question to you is this: How? If there are no weapons of mass destruction, no links to al-Qaida and Iraq has not attacked the United States, then how is the war in Iraq a part of our war on terror?

The war on terror should be fought against al-Qaida where it operates. We have forgotten about Afghanistan, because of our massive involvement in Iraq, for the better part of two years. Only now can we refocus on it, surprisingly with elections around the corner.

Erik Vanags, Mount Washington

---

Doubts about Iraq looking better now

I find it incomprehensible that after a year of hunting phantom weapons of mass destruction, and the positively laughable lie that was "links to al-Qaida," people still have the gall to question other countries' support of the invasion of Iraq.

We mocked the French and Germans for insisting that the United Nations' inspectors should been given more time to do their job, and now the Spanish are cowards for supposedly giving the terrorists what they want. Sounds like Spain has woken up to the real results of this war.

While we were busy focusing on one of the few countries we probably never had anything to worry about, al-Qaida got more technologically advanced, organized and spread out. We should be thankful we ever had Spain's support at all, considering the mind-boggling stupidity and brashness behind this whole travesty.

Nathan Wojcik, East Walnut Hills

---

Money for Iraq could be better spent

When 90 percent of the people in Spain didn't want to participate in President Bush's war with Iraq, and their government sent them anyway, that to me is the real enemy of the people. It's time for a regime change in this country, so we can get down to fighting the real terrorist threats. Think about how much $87 billion could have been spent to make our borders, shipping ports, cargo planes, reservoirs, etc., more secure, not to mention the jobs it would have created.

George Case, Bethel