Letters To The Editor

U.S. AND THE WORLD

War wrong and uncalled for

We are still bombing Yugoslavia, even though we are making things worse and not meeting U.S.-NATO objectives. The Rambouillet agreement is dead. The humanitarian situation is worse in Kosovo and the rest of Yugoslavia. The credibility of the U.S. and NATO have been undermined. Now, the pressure for ground troops is rising.

This is a war that should never have been started and should be stopped immediately. The war was started because Yugoslavia would not accept U.S.-NATO occupying forces, a legitimate position for any sovereign nation. Yugoslavia did not threaten any of its neighboring nations, the U.S. or NATO. Yugoslavia was responding to a civil war started by the Kosovo Liberation Army supported by the Albanian people of Kosovo. The KLA has been called a terrorist group by a senior U.S. diplomat. A senator on the Intelligence Committee said the KLA had ties to the terrorist group that bombed U.S. embassies.

Now we continue to prosecute the war because the NATO has to build its credibility by defeating the great big nation of Yugoslavia. NATO credibility was destroyed with the attack on Yugoslavia after insisting for years that it was strictly a defensive organization that would only respond to threats to one of its members. Pride is not a good reason for war.

To stop a humanitarian disaster in Kosovo we take actions that make the disaster worse and create an humanitarian disaster in the rest of Yugoslavia. We should stop the war. Gregory Prekeges Spokane

We must deal with Milosevic

“Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” The statements made against our involvement in the latest Balkan purge are virtually identical (plug in the current names and places) to those made by apologists for Adolf Hitler when he was pursuing his brutal delusions of empire 60 years ago.

Slobodan Milosevic doesn’t use ovens, as did Adolf, but his methods are no less brutal, stripping exiles of their property, bank accounts and identities.

We have graphic documentation of Milosevic’s atrocities - videos and photographs of exhumed mass graves, piles of bodies of mutilated men, women and children. How can anyone call this just another exercise of Balkan-style politics?

Frankly, I doubt we have the human resources to fight this latest demonic incarnation hand-to-hand. And our supplies of JP-4 and missiles is no less finite, courtesy of the historic hostility of liberal politicians in this country to a sufficient military. All the ingredients for the Cold War are still in the frying pan; the heat was just turned off for awhile. And Russia is rumbling about lighting the burner again if we (NATO) put soldiers in Yugoslavia.

You can bet Iraq, Iran, Lybia and China are tallying the assets we are expending and gauging our national resolve to do away with one of their political soulmates. Distasteful as the thought may be, we have little choice about whether we and our allies commit ground troops.

Suppose the people persecuted by Milosevic had the right to keep and bear arms? I wonder. Brehon K. McFarland Colville, Wash.

This is an `Adolf Clinton’ war

On March 27, I mailed to a relative a news clipping reporting my cousin, George Fairbanks of Montana, being awarded the Silver Star for gallantry. He had charged through an open field under fire and killed seven enemy soldiers on Okinawa on May 9, 1945. Our country was in a declared war against an enemy who had conducted a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

I watched TV all that day as the current administration dumped billions of dollars worth of bombs in an undeclared war against a country which has not attacked us. A lot of words were being used by government spokesmen, such as “degrade” and “diminish,” which appear to translate to include our night bombing of Yugoslavian troops’ barracks 200 miles from the conflict in Kosovo. We are killing people. Degrade and diminish more aptly applies to what the radical, leftist presidency has done to our military through budget reductions, excessive deployments and the wanton expenditure of our assets.

President Clinton used the far-fetched attempt to compare Milosevic to Adolf Hitler. However, a demonstrator in Berlin held up a sign, “Adolf Clinton.” The demonstrator didn’t know who the real war criminal is. Do we? Sieg heil, Mr. President. Robert S. Korkus Spokane

PEOPLE IN SOCIETY

Ordinance arguments flawed

While I appreciate Peter Dolina’s support (in defense of the human rights ordinance, Perspective, April 4), I find it odd that he began with several accounts of being propositioned and flattening the person. This unfortunately reinforces the stereotype that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people constantly make unwanted advances. And at least Dolina was able, through words or actions, to easily deflect the advances without serious injury to anyone.

Compare this to the situation women are far more likely to find themselves in and usually less able to deflect receiving unwanted advances from a straight man.

In Jim Shamp’s argument against retaining the human rights ordinance as it stands (Perspective, April 4), he advocates abolishing all protected classes. Whether you agree with this or not, it’s not the question before us. The petition in circulation seeks to remove only one group from the ordinance, and thus to reinforce discrimination. Also, the ordinance as written encourages discussion, negotiation and mediation to resolve differences. It emphasizes education and understanding, not force. Marcia Smith Spokane

Don’t legitimize homosexual ways

Former principal Mervin Finstad’s comments about youth and homosexuality (Opinion, April 7) are the kind of misinformation our children can do without. There are more than a half million teenagers who try to kill themselves every year and they don’t all do so because of society’s rejection of their sexual orientation.

By legitimizing homosexual behavior we place teens at risk. Thirty percent of gay and bisexual males have attempted suicide at least once. A third of gay adolescent males will be HIV infected by the time they are 30. With a life expectancy 30 years less than heterosexuals, do we really want to encourage teens in this high risk behavior?

Why are we fixated on smoking, drugs and alcohol abuse but not the death risks inherent with homosexual behavior? The answer is simple: we are more interested in pushing acceptance than in offering real solutions. Children struggling with homosexuality can get help through dozens of agencies affiliated with Exodus International.

If we care about our children, we will tell them the truth - homosexuality is a dead end. While thousands of years of moral tradition between Bible-believing Christians and Jews may not now be politically correct, it is morally and physically sound. Don S. Otis Sandpoint

Feminism not what it once was

When I read articles like Andrea Vogt’s “Menopause, treatments dividing forces” (April 4), I wonder about the future of the “feminist” movement. While I am eternally grateful to the women who fought for my right to go to college, to vote and to receive equal pay for equal work, I would like to believe that the term “feminist” would leave room for ethics and compassion.

When we choose to use hormone replacement therapy, it is critical that we consider the origins of the hormones and refuse to use Premarin and other drugs made from horse urine. There are alternatives that don’t involve the suffering of horses. Ask your doctor, or call 1-800-KNOW-PMU. Choose compassion over cruelty. Kerry L. Masters Liberty Lake

What girls wear isn’t the issue

In the April 6 article, “Poll: Some teens say rape can be invited,” a state Office of Crime Victims Advocacy survey shows that 45 percent of teens believe a girl who wears revealing clothing puts herself in a position to be raped. Cindy Morrow, director of the agency’s teenage sexual assault prevention campaign, concludes from these findings that “The perception is still that the girl is leading the guy on, that he has the right to assault her.”

Morrow, if I were to walk around with $20 bills hanging out of my pockets, I would indeed be putting myself in a position to be robbed. I doubt that many of those young Americans polled would conclude from this that the criminal has a right to rob me. Steven J. St. George Spokane

Attitudes reflect immaturity

Re: “Obscene chest? Look down, men” (Golden Pen letter, April 5). Thank you, Frances Crabtree, for your superbly written and provocative article about our culture’s embarrassment and preoccupation with the female chest. Or dare I say breasts!

Lacking adequate space here, let me say simply that the booby prize goes to the church for our convoluted societal attitude on the subject. Way back when, women (because of the patriarchal nature of the church) were typically the supposed guilty party when men were “led” astray. Remember Eve? And what of commercialism? Make it obscene or taboo and commercialism responds as nature does to a vacuum. Times haven’t changed much. Women are still treated as property (who’s name is traditionally changed when married?). Attitudes about women “asking for it” in rape cases are just now beginning to change. And, if women don’t own stock in Revlon, they are not considered normal.

Does anyone else see the conflicting messages here? What of our children? What confusion are we raising them in?

Bottom line is that it’s not just about women’s breasts, although they are a convenient object for our affection or affliction. It’s really about our culture’s gross immaturity when it comes to sex and the human body. God forbid we should view a woman’s breasts as anything other than prurient. God forbid that we should see the human body, in whatever form, as a miraculous creation. God forbid that we should grow up. Wallace M. Keith Spokane

Deregulate clothing choices

It has been said that the flower children of the sixties are now running the world. It’s a little hard to tell that from where I sit. Lovers of au naturel in positions of power, where are you when we need you? Stand up and be counted!

There was in your editorial columns some weeks ago a vitriolic attack on bare-breasted girls in Moscow, Idaho.

On April 5, there was a passionate defense of bare female breasts in your Golden Pen column that passionately attacked the “… hairy, flabby, grossly out-of-shape male chest.”

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

On female good looks, even though there are a few anorexic darlings who look great in contemporary clothing styles, there are a lot more Rubenesque beauties who look great without clothing. Or so I’m told.

Fair’s fair. Women (and men) who think they look great wearing clothes should not be required to take them off. Women (and men) who think they look great without clothes should not be required to wear them.

People who don’t give a damn about looking great must have their choice, of course. F.R. Bresgal Spokane

NHS values seem muddled

The two girls who were denied entry into the National Honor Society should be commended for managing to meet the grade requirements. Pregnancy at a young age, whether in or out of wedlock, planned or unplanned, is a stressful thing to deal with. I am impressed with the strength which those girls showed in achieving such good grades. The NHS should recognize that accomplishment.

I have had friends who have become pregnant as young as 14. Some have stayed in school but many more dropped out. The stress of “morality” questions took their toll. Depending on one’s beliefs, morality is defined in different ways. If having a child out of wedlock is immoral, should two people be forced into a marriage that will likely be an unhappy and unhealthy one for the child to save face and uphold the appearance of morality? Would the NHS rather that happened? Chani Blizzard, age 16 Spokane

OTHER TOPICS

Hate crime law - simpler is better

The current version of the Hate Crimes Law applies only to victims of racial and religious minorities. Now, Clinton wants to change the law so it also applies to victims who are women, members of any religion and homosexuals. If he succeeds, the hate crimes law will apply to all Americans except white heterosexual males. So much for justice for all. Why not just make the law apply to all victims of hate crimes? Douglas D. Deabler Veradale

Let’s get beyond hypotheticals

Horsefeathers! PATH, the acronym for Plan for Analyzing and Testing Hypothesis, is exactly what it indicates - a plan to examine unproved theories and assumptions.

Webster’s New World Dictionary defines hypothesis as “an unproved theory, etc., tentatively accepted to explain certain facts.” To this date, not one single hypothesis of the PATH process has been validated as a scientific fact.

The same Webster’s Dictionary defines horsefeathers as “nonsense, bunk.” Despite the enormous expense and effort to prove the hypothesis of delayed mortality of juvenile fish, it remains unproved. The time has come to logically label this failure horsefeathers. Dick Sherwin Clarkston, Wash.

Dog owners luck it’s not worse

We have become a nation of victims - to the degree that the dividing line between victim and perpetrator is so muddled we’re losing the ability to discern the simple difference between right and wrong.

The extreme rationalization and desperate arguments of the attorney and owners of the Saint Bernards that attacked a little girl don’t fall on less than empathetic or compassionate ears. These dogs were fed, cared for and loved by them. They’re also valuable income providers as breeders.

But the bottom line is this: they attacked and most likely would have killed an innocent young child. If they should escape again, they may well attack another. Common sense tells you this. The dogs weren’t provoked. And even if they were, provocation does not equal justification.

I sympathize with the owners, but I would advise them to count their blessings for even being allowed to keep their dogs, because no child should have to suffer a dog attack even one time, let alone live with the fear that it could happen again. And maybe next time there won’t be anyone there to help. David Bray Spokane

Dogs’ owners attitude lamentable

Though I don’t know the Tesdals or their animals, I understand what it’s like to feel what they are feeling. However, their response to their animals mauling a child is incredibly irresponsible and selfish.

Recently, my Rottweiler bit a teenager and injured his calf. The boy needed surgery to repair the damage. Like the Tesdals’ animals, mine was loving and sweet to be around. However, he got the wrong message and attacked a child. Unlike the Tesdals, I immediately drove my beautiful dog to the veterinarian’s and had him destroyed. It was the hardest thing I have done in my 29 years. That is what a responsible animal owner/lover does.

I did not want to do this. However, what if he attacked someone again? Did I want to be responsible for that? It was hard enough to see that once and I am not prepared to endure that again or have another innocent person endure it either.

What are the Tesdals’ motives for keeping their animals alive? Seems to me it has to be selfishness. I loved my dog immensely and because I did, I did what was necessary, not what I wanted or what anyone else wanted. The Tesdals should be ashamed of themselves. To think their animals wouldn’t do this again is foolish. They should let go of their animals, grieve and begin to heal. Jean Booth Moyie Springs, Idaho

Grizzlies tough, adaptable

Re: “Road in grizzly country alive again, (April 7). The grizzly is a survivor; there is too much emphasis on them. As a logger and a farmer, I have seen both worlds. Animals adapt very well. While logging I have watched bull elk use roads like a map. From my viewpoint, he went from one herd of elk on the Rockford side of Mica Peak to the herd on the Liberty Lake side by using roads. The animals adapt to the environment. When it’s properly managed, everyone benefits. Donald W. Sheard Mica, Wash.