Not our war
Our senior senator, Lindsey Graham, has received intelligence provided by the American, French and British Intelligence Services. These are the same organizations that showed proof that there were WMDs in Iraq.
We are now told that Russia has a 100-page report stating that Syrian insurgents or rebels instigated the attack on their own people.
Sen. Graham likely would say that report and President Vladimir Putin lied. I would most likely agree with that assessment, but I know our CIA is also known to lie.
Then he asks why Muslim rebels would kill their own people just to blame it on Assad.
This reason would be obvious: to get the United States, followed by others, to help their dying cause.
Muslims did this same thing in a Bosnian village in August of 1992.
I think we, if not the senior senator, can agree that no atrocity is beneath these radicals when their objectives are at stake.
I don’t see how we have a dog in this fight. Congress has been trying to deal with the Muslim Middle Eastern and Afghanistan people using our moral values and cultural attitudes for the past 12 years. How well has that been working for us?
I fought in one war as an infantry platoon leader. I was wounded twice in combat, and I assure you those two combatants and their mutually shared culture are not worth one American life.
If Muslim countries don’t find it necessary to respond to this atrocity, why on Earth should we?
They have all the right equipment (we have given it to them), so let their dog hunt.
Encourage our Arab allies, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan to do what their culture dictates for the brutality, and support the U.N. in condemning that vile act.
Rev. Fred Roark
Much fanfare has been lavished upon the Mount Pleasant Town Council lately regarding their “brave” decision to outlaw texting by motorists.
I consider the whole affair an exercise in gutless cowardice by officials who are either ignorant of safety issues or who have sold out to cell phone interests.
Years ago the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety determined that using a phone while driving, even hands free, was as dangerous as driving while drunk.
Are public officials really serious about driving safety? If so they would bravely ban phone use, even hands free, while driving.
Banning only texting is the equivalent of allowing drunk driving but banning cocktail shaker use behind the wheel.
There have been instances where drivers using cell phones have been involved in fatal accidents, and found at fault, but only charged with comparatively minor offenses, such as driving too fast for conditions.
Meanwhile, motorists who are found to be drinking in similar situations are likely to face the major charge of felony DUI.
In South Carolina we publicly abhor drunk driving. We abhor it to the extent that our “brave” state legislators have voted to lower the blood alcohol standard from 0.1 percent to .08 percent.
We commit much of our police patrol time to well-publicized “sober or slammer” campaigns, and encourage drivers to report suspected drunk driving.
This insanity will not end until we elect some truly brave leaders. Phone use while driving should be penalized as drunk driving.
A driver in possession of a cell phone that has not been deactivated should be penalized as an open container violation and investigated for phone use while driving.
Until such laws are enacted and enforced, traffic laws will shamefully continue to be more about public revenue than public safety.
Harbor Pointe Drive
Anybody who thinks the moonwalk died with Michael Jackson hasn’t seen Charleston County Council’s Teddie Pryor and Anna Johnson’s awkward backpedal on their promise to compensate property owners negatively impacted by their votes to extend I-526.
Long Bend Drive
In the recent article on South Carolina refusing to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, i.e. Obama-care, a Haley supporter said that Haley “gets it.”
We totally disagree with this action by the S.C. Legislature and our governor to refuse to participate in a program that would expand Medicaid entitlement to tens of thousands of poor S.C. residents.
Limiting access to health care is callous and uncaring because it is based on ideology and not concern for residents.
This action reminds me of when our previous governor, Mark Sanford, refused to take federal stimulus money to help S.C. public employees, including teachers, police and firefighters keep their jobs.
Fortunately, the Legislature took him to court, and South Carolina got the stimulus money.
This Medicaid expansion money is totally funded by the federal government for the first three years and 90 percent funded after that. Rejecting it borders on stupidity.
Why, if the governor and Legislature are so much against federal aid, does this state rank No. 9 among states that get back more federal money than they pay in taxes?
South Carolina gets back $1.92 in federal funds for every dollar it pays. Why is that all right?
Gov. Haley does not “get it.” She and the Legislature should face the fact that people will die due to their refusing this program.
Their decision will only give the states that accept the program more money.
Shame on our governor and Legislature. Rigid ideology does not justify such action.
We will wait until January to see if the Legislature refuses to accept that extra 92 cents.
While visiting the Yorktown and Clamagore at Patriots Point recently I observed several hundred sailors cleaning up the carrier and submarine.
I discovered that they were among 2,000 sailors from the Naval Nuclear Power School in Goose Creek volunteering at schools, parks and Patriots Point for a “Day of Caring.”
The officer in charge of the event, Craig Opie, informed me that 2,173 sailors from the command were involved in the one-day volunteer effort. They worked at 11 schools and several parks in North Charleston in addition to Patriots Point — over 10,000 hours of volunteer work.
These sailors deserve a huge “thank you” from our community. They definitely have my thanks.
Don’t be cruel
Earlier this year a condominium complex on the Charleston Harbor in Mount Pleasant advertised that if you moved from your home to their units you’d have “more time to live fully and savor every moment” including learning “to cook a buttery foie gras.”
The “butter” flavor is actually the fat in the diseased liver of ducks and geese.
The birds are force fed until they develop a condition called hepatic lipidosis or “fatty liver.”
The overfeeding is accomplished by shoving feeding tubes down their throats multiple times daily causing even more injury and suffering.
The process is considered to be so cruel that many countries (and one U.S. state) have outlawed the production or sale of fois gras.
Please Charleston, be kind. Say “no” to fois gras and find another way to live your life of luxury.
Jane Norrgard, DVM
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.