How are political plates different?
TO THE EDITOR:
I read your June 3 editorial, "Bredesen should veto 'Choose Life' license tags," and wondered that if you all object to this plate, do you also object to the "Animal Friendly," Radnor Lake and "Children First" plates?
What is different about the Choose Life plates? Is it OK to preserve Radnor Lake but not protect unborn children? Is it OK to support groups that protect animals but not humans? What is more political about this than the debate over how the Radnor Lake area should be used? Any discussion that pits differing opinions against one another is by definition political, and in the case of Radnor Lake, the license plate supports one group that has a view that is opposed by many. Why is the Choose Life plate any different? The Animal Friendly plate is no different. The plate supports a group that has, in my opinion, a very narrow view of the animal rights issue, and the funding from the plate helps it promote that view.
Again, why is the Choose Life plate any different than that? I welcome your feedback on this. I'm really curious how you justify this position.
By the way, your association of anti-abortion groups to the KKK was despicable.
Takes guts to apologize
TO THE EDITOR:
I do not live in the Harding Academy area and know absolutely nothing of their situation, but the letter from William R. Deloache Jr. (May 30, "Mistake doesn't change end result") was a welcomed, refreshing breeze in this time of backbiting and ill-will.
For someone in today's climate to admit to making an error and then to apologize for doing so is almost unheard of. That took guts. Thanks, Mr. Deloache.
Thanks to upset Trousdale citizens
TO THE EDITOR:
In regard to Colleen Creamer's fine June 4 article, "LES releases plan details," the issue of the waste stream to be produced by LES is of concern to the people of Trousdale County. As well it should be.
I would like to thank the people of that county for being concerned as well as your paper for keeping us in the know regarding this important issue. However, the waste stream that will be produced by LES doesn't have to sit on site or be transported to another facility when new technology has been developed and demonstrated that will treat the radioactivity of the waste to benign levels at their site cheaper than long-term storage - with the distinct advantage that the waste is no longer lethal or dangerous, which no other treatment regime can offer.
The good people of the county don't have to settle for second best or all the dangers that transporting and storing nuclear waste brings with it now that a cost-effective and permanent process can be implemented. They can make the waste benign and still have the plant and all the jobs it will bring to the area. That is the win-win that the people deserve. That is the solution that LES should be proposing.
It is important for the people of the county to have LES address this solution not only for the benefit of the local environment but more importantly for the safety of the people living there for future generations.
SALT LAKE CITY
We would've found Iraq WMD by now
TO THE EDITOR:
Kathleen Parker needs to wake up and smell the coffee - or perhaps the lack of coffee (June 2, "Unanswered question: Where are Iraq's WMD," p. 2)). If Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were so apparent to people like Secretary of State Colin Powell from satellite photographs and there were such "substantial" intelligence reports that convinced our government that there was an immediate threat from Iraq, there wouldn't be any significant difficulty finding the stuff once we were there.
Bush and his cronies have a pattern of lying to further their agendas, which shamelessly include increasing profits for his big business buddies. The American people have been played for fools. There is no evidence that the two trucks were mobile chemical weapons labs. There is no evidence that they are not. I can say that I do not know what the use is for the two trucks. Maybe they're like the dried milk factory we bombed in Somalia after saying it was a chemical weapons factory. We were wrong.
There is no evidence of any significant WMD right now in Iraq. Our government has admitted creating "intelligence" in the first Gulf war to bolster public opinion, as though the invasion of Kuwait was not significant enough. History has recorded time and time again that the most common motivation for going to war is economic.
Call me a cynic, but I think this war against Iraq was primarily about oil. OK, it could be a coincidence that Halliburton gets a juicy oil contract out of this. We collectively have a short memory in this country, and our government's previous associations with Saddam have been forgotten - apparently those with Halliburton, too.
To comment on a City Paper story or local issue, send us a typed letter 100 words or less (with zip code and a daytime phone number for verification) to: email@example.com, or Editor, The City Paper, P.O. Box 158434, Nashville, TN 37215. Letters may be edited to fit. There is no guarantee letters received will be printed.