The "teach-in" on Iraq offered recently wasn't what I expected. I know I speak for other people as well, based on a few conversations. I do agree with most of what was stated about the United States, Iraq, etc. However, I disagree with the format in which it was presented. The organizers of this teach-in stated, "The aim of this [teach-in] is not to get you to think in a particular way. The goals are: 1) to provide more and/or different information to build on, and 2) to have you -- be you liberal, right wing, or in-the-middle -- take a closer look at how you form your opinions."

I laughed a little (to myself) thinking they didn't try to make me "think in a particular way," because they did try to make me have an anti-American attitude. Note that the diversity of speakers was zero -- no speaker spoke in favor of invading Iraq. I also laughed a little (also to myself) when they tried to give us "different information to build on." Although I can't recollect many specifics, I do remember one professor stating that we know less than 1 percent of what is really going on in Iraq. I have no information to prove or disprove this statement, but I can argue against them providing us "different information to build on" when they had less than 1 percent of the "information to build on." Yet, that 1 percent may be approaching absolute zero as we speak and that withholding of information by our government is scaring me.

In conclusion, I did like some arguments that some speakers presented. If their statements are true and complete, then I do worry about what our country is doing with our military power. Can we have a dialogue about this, rather than another "teach-in monologue"? Is our government withholding 99 percent of the information related to Iraq? Is it good or bad? I don't know. Do you?