Connecting with
the world

Readers’ Views on War and Peace

To the editor:

To all the fine young men and women from the Town of Cochecton who are serving in the Armed Forces of this great country of ours:

Wherever you go, whatever you do, I’ll always be saying a prayer for you.

Lavina Powell
Cochecton, NY

To the editor:

Your editorial for February 20-26, 2003 expresses your commitment to making The River Reporter “...a forum for all points of view.” It also claims that accurate information on the issue of forcing Iraq to disarm is blocked by something you call the “corporate media.”

I beg leave to point out that Stuart Communications is itself a corporation; it is no more pure in this respect than the remainder of the American press. 

It can at least be said of your rival newspapers that for all their shortcomings they exceed the efforts of The River Reporter. They do more than merely follow anti-war protesters from place to place and record whatever assertions and fulminations they vent.

Such biased reporting does not provide your readers complete or accurate information. I am persuaded a large fraction of this community does not share your prejudices.

The use you make of the press at your command is certainly yours to decide. I doubt such activities fall under the definition of journalism, “pamphleteering” seems closer to the mark.

Edward M. Boyer
Narrowsburg, NY

To the editor:

On a recent visit to Wayne and Pike Counties to celebrate the 80th birthday of my father-in-law, I had the good fortune to read Richard Ross’ story and the many letters from local participants at the anti-war demonstration in New York City on February 15.

My wife, son, daughter and I traveled from Connecticut to join that massive call for peace. Our take on the events and our experience there was represented exactly in the pages of The River Reporter. I was particularly moved by the letter from the Willetts who told of being barricaded, pushed and kept from exercising their constitutional right to peacefully assemble. We had the exact experience.

I followed the coverage of the demonstration in the local and national media. I found it all lacking from under-estimating the size of the crown to focusing on isolated acts of violence.

Thanks for the best coverage anywhere.

Bill Meyerson
New Haven, CT

To the editor:

It seems an apt description that our military’s policy could be “shoot first and ask questions later.” Our government has a history of putting its military personnel in harm’s way while ignoring the inherent dangers they face. A case in point is the use of munitions made from depleted uranium or DU.

Since 1973 American weapons manufacturers have been aware of the superior destructive capabilities of DU, the waste product of uranium enrichment. The radioactive particles unleashed into the air upon impact of an armor-piercing DU projectile is the cause of “Gulf Syndrome,” a debilitating disease affecting thousands of U.S. servicemen and servicewomen since 1991. Over 800 tons of DU was unleashed in the Persian Gulf campaign creating a wasteland where all types of cancer, multiple sclerosis and birth defects are endemic in the civilian population.

Were our servicemen and servicewomen, those we ask to protect us, adequately warned? Our chilling official government policy states, “In a combat situation it is acceptable for unprotected personnel to be exposed to the combustion products of fired DU munitions and assume any health risks involved.” Will those unprotected join their brethren from WW2, Vietnam, Bosnia and Afghanistan in the long line for care at decaying VA hospitals?

Zeke Boyle
Callicoon, NY