Bush singlehandedly created terrorism in Iraq: Who's More Dangerous? bush or bin Laden? (BUSH!)While I am no defender of Bush, this question borders on the offensive. Your column should foster thought and dialogue that enriches our lives. This question only promotes hyperbole. Let us remember the lives of the thousands of people both men have caused to be ended.
Elias Chaghouri, San Bruno
I would never compare Bush to bin Laden. Bush is doing his best to protect the United States. Bin Laden is doing the contrary -- he wants to destroy it, which will never happen as long as Bush is president.
Karen Gerbosi, Corte Madera
Undoubtedly bin Laden is more dangerous. It is sad and disappointing that some people are willing to forget the carnage of Sept. 11 that bin Laden sponsored for the sake of their obsession with bashing President Bush.
Nida Khalil, San Mateo
Well, who has killed more people? You have it: George W. Bush.
John Wills, Oakland
Bin Laden. He has a following that may continue for decades, whereas Bushism will die within a couple of years. Also, Bush, despite doing much deliberate wrong, has some good intentions.
Doug Latimer, Oakland
I wouldn't let either one play with matches. In a better world, their perverted philosophies would come with clearly posted warning labels. And extremely short expiration dates.
www.sfgate.com |
