The September 14 editorial titled “The UN and Sheriff Bolton” claims that the United Nations has been corrupt for years and that finally the United States is standing up to this world body and demanding reform. “Americans can be proud of their government's long overdue assault on UN timidity, negligence and corruption” wrote the editorial board. Unfortunately there is absolutely no blame placed on the United States for the current obsoleteness of the United Nations.

There is a wealth of irony in the appointment of Tariq Ramadan to the British task force to aid the British panel in examining the roots of extremism in the country. Ramadan has been accused by the country on numerous occasions of being “more dangerous than several well-known radical preachers”.

While our country struggles to ensure democracy grows all over the world, it seems that our politicians forget that we already have an established democracy here at home, one that holds them accountable to the American people. This responsibility is ignored when it comes to the Patriot Act, which both the House and Senate voted to renew despite its baffling objectives and provisions (“Poll: Patriot Act mystery to most,” Aug. 31).

The article “Bush Hails Freedoms, but Experts See Confusion and Trouble” in the August 30, 2005 issue of the Chicago Sun-Times by Anne Gearan illustrates confusion with Iraq’s new constitution on the subject on Islam and democracy coexisting. The article, with a sub-heading entitled Islam or democracy? insinuates that the two cannot exist together.

There is a myth circulating around the world that women’s rights in the West are perfect. Thus any other body of rights is automatically labeled as discriminatory. In his column Derrick Z. Jackson propagates this myth by claiming, “It would be a travesty of American women, who have fought for equality to the level of dying in the military, did all this dying only to watch the burials of women’s rights in Iraq” (“What are our women fighting for?” Aug. 15).

Instead of letting emotional photographs and one-sided stories get the best of us, the facts on the Palestinian-Israeli issue should be reexamined. Everyone has seen the footage and heard the stories about the sadness and disparity of the Jewish settlers who were evicted from the Gaza Strip, but one must not forget the reasons for the removal of the settlers in the first place.

University of Chicago’s decision to renovate the basement of Rockefeller Chapel so that all of its faith groups have a place to worship should be applauded nationwide (“U. of C. seeks to give home to all of its faiths,” Aug. 26).

In regard to evangelical Rev. Pat Robertson's suggestion of the assassination of Venezuela president, your editorial "Reverend Terminator," (Editorial, Aug. 24) said, "His words aren't representative of people of faith."

In the August 24, 2005 article, Pulling up Stakes Doesn’t Mean Israelis are Settling for Less, Gerald D. Skoning gave a rather weak and disturbing metaphor for the Israeli government’s eviction of Jewish settlers in the Gaza Strip.

In the Chicago Sun-Times article entitled “Bad PR for U.S.” published on August 24, 2005, I found a strange correlation to the commentary made in regard to Pat Robertson’s suggestion to assassinate President Hugo Chavez making Americans look bad and how unconstructive violence and hate used by people claiming to be Muslims give all Muslims a bad rep.

The article about the Arab-Israeli orchestra is a welcome change to the usual coverage of the Middle East in the media (“Barenboim seeks peace with his baton,” Aug. 23)

By warning against British policies towards Israel, London Mayor Ken Livingstone is not trying to appease the terrorists as Sheryl Jedlinski claims, but rather is considering how British citizens feel towards their government’s positions (“There’s no future in appeasing terrorists,” Fencepost, Aug. 22). There is obviously disconnect between the country’s 1.5 million Muslim citizens and the greater population, and Livingstone is trying to figure out why it exists.

While the suggestion of Wayne Oras that Muslims help fight terrorism by not allowing “radical extremists to hide among them” (“Muslims’ interest in exposing terrorists,” Fence Post, Aug. 18) seems to be better than using profiling, it still wrongly makes all Muslims responsible for terrorist actions.

A grim picture of a Gaza settler’s life emerges from the editorial “Clinging to Gaza,” (Aug. 17) a picture that is not entirely accurate. The article offers a wrongful depiction of settlers living among animals just waiting to attack.

In his letter (“Breaking ties to Israel,” Aug. 17), Isaac Cohen cannot understand how the Presbyterian Church dares to divest from companies such as Caterpillar, which sells to Israel the equipment used to bulldoze the homes and farms of innocent Palestinians.

I would like to remind Tony Scaminaci that it is the protection of civil rights in the United States that allows his letter criticizing Washington lawmakers to be published (“No place now for political correctness,” Aug. 14).

In his letter “Hanania’s way would spell end of freedom,” (Aug. 13) Al Andreoni claims that Ray Hanania calls for the “appeasement and pacification” of the American people when dealing with terrorists. But what Hanania actually wants is an end to the senseless and inhuman characterization of Muslims, the same characterization that Andreoni displays in his letter.

I would like to thank the Tribune for a great article on the ability of Muslim-Americans to bridge two worlds (“U.S. Muslims span 2 worlds,” Metro, Aug. 12). The article does a good job of working towards assuring the American people that their Muslim neighbors are not here to destroy them, but rather here to lead an average American life just like them.

In his August 12th column, Charles Krauthammer plays down threats to our civil liberties by writing, “We have fluctuated between more or less openness depending on need and threat” (“Situational libertarianism”). It is astonishing that he can refer to the internment of Japanese Americans as a minor infraction of civil liberties and since it only lasted for the duration of the war, it is excusable and even justified.

Stanley Crouch seems to think every Muslim in the world fits this description: uneducated, elitist, sexist, anti-modern, immature and angry (“Backward thinking, democracy can’t coexist,” Aug. 12).