Dear editor,
Recently one of my veteran brothers Peter Howard wrote a letter crying foul about Cassie Craven's opinion piece. I agree with very little of what he stated.
Cassie was not speaking for us, "Dead or Alive," she was taking from the experience of her grandmother and showing a bit of what can happen to a soldier and their family, what they have sacrificed for us.
Mr. Howard is correct that we don't get to speak out publicly while serving and that we do not get to challenge lawful orders. Good and vibrant discussions should be had by all "Respectfully," he forgot that word.
I am a veteran of the Cold War, Gulf War, and GWOT.
It is my belief that shooting at ICE agents in California, destroying college campuses, burning buildings and cars, supporting Hamas, and threatening Jewish people are not "good and vibrant" discussions.
It is anti-American hatred. Cassie pointed that out in so many words and I thank her for that.
While I will not speak for my living brothers and sisters, I do reserve the right to speak for those I failed to bring home.
When one has handed a folded flag to a widow or grieving mother whose last memory of their spouse or child is going to be the sound of Taps, yes I do reserve that right.
My last memory of one of my best friends is a white stone at Ft. Meade and I will speak for him.
You are correct Mr Howard, you don't speak for me, but remember there are those that should be spoken for, and shouting "From the River to the Sea", or "This is Mexico" and flipping cars is not speaking for any veteran I know or knew, "Dead or Alive ".
Sincerely,
Richard Nielsen, Gillette
