I need help with a letter to the editor

I'm posting this here cuz the general discussion forum is down, don't kill me. I need help on this. Here's a link to a local editorial in my hometown paper:

http://www.observer-reporter.com/287412334753368.bsp

I couldn't believe what I was reading, it made me furious. So I wrote this letter. Help me out though cuz I'm not a writer and I want to make sure it's not too long and that I have everything right. Anything you can help me with would help a lot. It's rough, but here's what I wrote:

Your ability to dismiss what appears to be a pattern of deception and manipulation of intelligence as the product of a slow news cycle is outrageous. This is not about whether or not a politician lied regarding his personal life, but about the most important decision a president and his administration can make - sending the country to war. According to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, the total number of all coalition casualties, combat and otherwise, in Iraq as of today is 290. More are dying each and every day. If you're interested you can see the names and pictures along with a brief description of each of the U.S. troops killed at the Army Times website http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-warkilled.php. But, I have to warn you if you have a dial-up connection it takes a while to load. It's estimated that there have been in excess of 5000 Iraqi civilians killed so far as well. This occupation is costing American taxpayers in the neighborhood of 4 billion dollars a month.

The CIA has said there was no connection between Hussein and Al Quaeda and we have found no weapons of mass destruction. This war was sold to the American people as the last resort to an imminent threat. Apologists can scream as loud as they want that he gassed his own people, but the fact remains, that at the time he was committing this crime many of the people involved in planning this current Iraqi adventure considered Saddam Hussein an ally and there was not a peep to be heard. Right around that same time Donald Rumsfeld paid a visit to Mr. Hussein but unfortunately there was no discussion of his gassing of Kurds. Mr. Rumsfeld was more interested at that time in lobbying on behalf of the Bechtel Corporation. A company that, interestingly enough, was the recent recipient of a large government contract in the newly liberated Iraq. Curiously, a lot of other companies with close ties to this administration are also making out quite well over there now. Haliburton and Kellog, Brown and Root spring to mind. Please, there are plenty of questions that need to be asked of this administration. I hardly think this is something that the editors of a newspaper should be so cavalier about.

But, since you think there is a lack of hard news out there these days, I have a suggestion for you to follow up on that I'm sure your readers would be interested in. Perhaps you could get to the bottom of what's being done regarding the outing of an undercover CIA agent involved in WMD proliferation. Since you're in the news business I'm sure you're aware that in a recent Robert Novak column he mentioned that he was told by two senior White House officials that the wife of Joseph Wilson recommended that he be the one to go to Africa to investigate the uranium issue at the request of Vice President Cheney. The article also mentions that the same senior White House sources told Mr. Novak that Mr. Wilson's wife is a current undercover CIA agent in the area of WMD proliferation. It also mentioned the name that she goes by. Do you think outing an undercover agent, (a felony by the way) and jeopardizing everything she's been working on, as well as, quite possibly, the lives of the people she's been involved with, not to mention national security, is something that should be covered in the media? Given Bush's anger over White House leaks, you'd think he'd be upset, wouldn't you? He doesn't appear to be. Do you think it might be a way of intimidating whistleblowers who want to expose the truth, national security be damned? Joseph Wilson thinks it is.

As most people know, this is about more than 16 words. Spout all the GOP talking points that you like, but the citizens of this country deserve to know the truth about issues of national importance. I wonder what your position was on former President Clinton's inconsequential lie was? The difference is that when our current President lies people die.

Here's my creepy experience:

Yesterday the local paper printed my anti-Ann Coulter letter. Later in the day I got a call at the office from a guy who said he’d read it and wanted to thank me for writing it. Then he said he wrote a letter to them calling Coulter a b*tch and a c*nt, and they wouldn’t print it. He wanted to know why she can get away with calling people traitors but he can’t call people f*gs and n*ggers? It was an interesting academic point, I guess, but this guy was no academic. He said he always spiced his letters up with profanity and dared the editors to publish them. He said he wanted to fax me a few of his old letters, but warned me not to let my wife see them. He repeated himself 3 or 4 times and seemed to take greater pleasure in repeating the profanities each time. I’d say it was about as close to an obscene phone call as I’ve ever been. And the worst part about it was that he called to tell me he was on my side. Some wing-nuts screw to the right; some to the left.

I would just delete the line about it taking too long to download.
I think it is great, but may be too long for a newspaper to print, but who knows :)

Yeah, I'm gonna have to find a few things to trim I think. I put the "long time to download" part in there because I thought it might be a good way of getting the idea out there that there are just a lot of dead people listed on there.

maybe you should be more difinitive with it. it will take a long time to download because it is a long list.

by the way, i had my own idea on a letter writing campaign that can be seen here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=106&topic_id=915&mesg_id=915

second by the way, gd forum is back up, apparently

Okay...yeah, you need to trim. A good way to do that is to start fresh with a blank screen and start from the top. All the pertinent points you have made in that letter will come out in the most streamlined way.

Lots of the finest writers seem to say......write, write, write. Trash that draft. And start out clean.

what you want to say is all right inside.........and now that you have thrown in all out onto the page, the 2nd try will result in it coming out in a much more succinct and effective way.

Give it a whirl......

2. Cut the Army Times link. Numbers are enough.
3. Maybe mention that the recently released 9/11 report has NOTHING about a Saddam/Al Qaida link.
4. Cut words to about 300 or so
Otherwise fine!

Bruce

Newspapers are absolutly fanatical about space. Try this:

1. Keep it under 500 words
2. Summarize your points into single sentences
3. Use "bullets" to highlite your points.

Remember that:

You cannot educate/change the world in one letter, but you can generate discussion

Newspapers are a BUSINESS first, last and always which means they will neither give up precious space nor publiish anything that offfends their major advertisers.

Great thoughts in the letter.

Good luck.

I've made it much clearer and have it down to 450 words. Thanks again.

It's not just Novak's word, but the exact same thing was done in a second instance when "senior administration officials" told two Time reporters about Wilson's wife.

That being said, newspapers ARE fanatics about space. They usually list length guidelines, and are downright fascist about them. You may have to completely remove large sections of what you wanted to say in order for it to get published at all. I have had to edit letters to the BONE in the past. Think about what your absolute core point is, and limit it to that. (unless the paper says they accept letters of this length). Sometimes, they accept "Viewpoints", which are longer submissions. but this route is less likely to get accepted.

This paper often prints letters that are relatively long. I had one published a few years ago regarding a gun control editorial they ran.

I got it down to just under 400 words and I think it's much clearer.

Here it is in all its glory :) Wish me luck!

Your dismissal of what appears to be a pattern of deception and manipulation of intelligence as the product of a slow news cycle is outrageous. This concerns the most important decision a president can make - sending the country to war. According to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, the total number of all coalition casualties, combat and otherwise, in Iraq as of today is 290. More are dying daily. It's estimated that there have been in excess of 5000 Iraqi civilians killed so far as well. This occupation is costing American taxpayers in the neighborhood of 4 billion dollars a month.

The recent 9/11 report found no connection between Hussein and Al Quaeda and we have found no weapons of mass destruction. This war was sold to the American people as the last resort to an imminent threat. Apologists can scream as loudly as they want that he gassed his own people, but the fact remains, that at the time he was committing this crime many of those involved in planning the current adventure considered Saddam an ally and there was not a peep to be heard. Around that same time Donald Rumsfeld paid a visit to Mr. Hussein but unfortunately there was no discussion of his gassing of Kurds. Mr. Rumsfeld was more interested at that time in lobbying on behalf of the Bechtel Corporation. A company that, interestingly enough, was the recent recipient of a large government contract in the newly liberated Iraq.

But, since you think there's a dearth of real news, I have a suggestion. Perhaps you could investigate what's being done regarding the felonious outing of an undercover CIA agent involved in WMD proliferation. In recent columns by Robert Novak and Time magazine it was mentioned by two senior White House officials that Joseph Wilson's wife recommended him for the job of investigating the Africa uranium issue. The articles also mention that the same senior White House sources said that Mr. Wilson's wife is a current undercover CIA agent. They also gave the name that she goes by. Do you think this outing might be a way of intimidating whistleblowers wanting to expose the truth, national security be damned? Joseph Wilson thinks it is.

There are plenty of questions that need to be asked of this administration. I hardly think this is something that the editors of a newspaper should be so cavalier about.