I read with interest our paper's "Signs of patriotism" editorial, especially the poll that found over 80 percent of Americans said supporting U.S. policies was indicative of patriotism. So woe is apparently unpatriotic me, because I'm hoping Iran gets a nuclear weapon in full display before we (or Israel) invade them. An Iranian bomb in full view would be the best deterrent to stop an unnecessary nuclear attack, which our guys say is "on the table."

My reasoning: If the world can't rid itself of all nuclear weapons, the best safeguard against the worldwide nuclear devastation would be for everybody to have one handy. And, of course, with everybody using the same national security argument that we've been exploiting for over 60 years.

Furthermore, don't let some country like ours that has a policy of invading and occupying an innocent country tell you that those resisting civilians are terrorists that hate our so-called freedom. Because if they try that scam again, just ask if oil or strategic position is somehow part of their terrorist equation. So I guess that's another unpatriotic strike against me for not supporting U.S. policy.

Here's the latest shameful U.S. policy just signed into law that gives the president and the telecommunication companies immunity for sneaking behind our backs to illegally snoop in our private affairs. Of course, it's all in the cause of the "war on terrorism" or something. This new law was entirely unnecessary because the previous law provided for court approval of any necessary surveillance. So I'm proud to say this is my third unpatriotic strike against U.S. policy.

Finally, I must respond to Washington, D.C., critic Francis Williams who wrote "... one cannot help but agree with the response of Peter Graves ..." with no exceptions.

Peter Graves, another anti-Guffin Bay critic, disagreed with my assessment of badly injured John McCain's medical treatment after being shot down and taken prisoner. I said his treatment was exceptional. Mr. Graves wrote, "Exceptional medical treatment? For his first six weeks as a POW in 1967 the North Vietnamese refused to treat him at all."

Mr. Williams agreed with Mr. Graves's statement. So Mr. Williams is saying that he too believes that extremely injured John McCain went six weeks without medical treatment, which necessarily includes food and water. My opinion: Anyone believing that absurdity is displaying an unprecedented lack of common sense. Your call?

Stewart MacMillan

Guffin Bay