Letters: Rock Island must preserve its unique natural areas
Rock Island is an epicenter of prized wilderness, with centuries of calculated and caring engineering along one of the world's longest rivers. Keep the marshes please and do something smart for once. Those eagles and herrings need you, Rock Island City Council.'Biodiversity vs. expansion: wetlands in the Quad Cities,' what a fantastic story for the Tribune to feature as its lead story on Sunday's front page. The wetlands area in question in Rock Island appears beautiful and is critical habitat for eagles and many other endangered species.
Unfortunately, this story is a perfect example of 'the American way,' at least these days. Over and over in our country we see development take precedence over protection of incredible ecological environments. How do you weigh the protection of a significant bald eagle habitat versus building a gas station? It doesn't seem to be a difficult choice. But the article leads one to believe that the gas station will be winning out!
Again, this nonsense brings to mind Joni Mitchell's wonderful lyrics when she sang 'they paved paradise, and put up a parking lot'.Former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold's op-ed highlighting the latest efforts by the current federal government to threaten the public lands of northeastern Minnesota is worthy of greater attention ('Messing with Boundary Waters is bad politics,' Aug. 9). I grew up there and both myself and my extended family continue to live there or visit it annually. It is everything Mr. Feingold says. Many of us in the upper Midwest have this as our touchstone to our local wilderness.
Having grown up there, I well remember when the Boundary Waters Canoe Area was created legislatively in 1978, when I was 15. By that time, I had fished, camped and traveled those waters more times than I can remember with my father, mother, siblings and friends— enough to not need a map to get around those waters.
Locals revered those lands, as they do still. They also need a way to make a living. In 1978, the ban on motors in the Boundary Waters was a very real concern for those who had fishing, lodging and other businesses dependent on boating access. Time and investment in promoting tourism, as well as creation of the Voyageurs National Park in 1975, have largely addressed those initial concerns on economic impact and the political push-back that came with those concerns.
The area's greatest economic driver after the end of the lumbering trade in the early 20th century has been and continues to be iron ore mining. Mining is a notoriously boom-bust industry, and the long-term costs have to be carefully weighed against the short-term gains. I know mining is in the blood of those who live there still, but there are big environmental differences in mining iron ore to mining copper. Plus, do we really want to sell our sacred land's mineral rights to foreigners? In our current national governmental climate, where oversight and protection are all but forgotten in favor of economic privilege for the few, we need to pay attention to this one.Regarding Elizabeth Shakelford's August 8 column ('Gaza's starvation is America's shame,' Aug. 8) concerning the terrible suffering of Gazan residents and U.S. action, or lack thereof, would the allies have accepted an offer from Germany's Nazi government for a ceasefire and peace talks that would have left that government in power? How is Israel supposed to accept the continued existence of the Hamas 'government', a government sworn to Israel's destruction, when a cease fire would be an opportunity to rearm and dig tunnels?
The conditions that the residents of Gaza are dealing with are beyond awful. It is clear that Shackelford has more empathy for the people of Gaza than does Hamas, which will stop at nothing, even the terrible suffering of its own people, to achieve its ends. To Hamas, if Hamas is not to be, then the residents of Gaza serve no purpose.
How about letting the residents of Gaza vote in a free and fair election as to who they want to be governed by?In her column on August 8, Shackelford deserves special praise for pointing out the connection between America's support for Israel and the ongoing starvation of Gaza's civilian population. While reporting a fact that may not be universally known would merit praise in itself, Shackelford is not just reporting a fact: She's doing it at the risk of tarnishing, perhaps even ruining, her reputation.
For American politicians and intellectuals alike, criticizing Israel's policies in Gaza and the West Bank or questioning America's support for Israel has become dangerous, all too often incurring charges of antisemitism. My hunch is that many who in private criticize Israel or America's support for Israel never say a word in public, cowed into silence by the sword of Damocles hanging over them — the omnipresent threat of charges of antisemitism.
But, as Shackelford implies, one evil (hatred of Jews) cannot justify another — depraved indifference to the starvation of an entire population. No matter how much America supports Israel, no matter how just Israel's operations in Gaza may be, they cannot justify mass starvation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's route to Kennedy Center cleared of homeless camps amid DC crackdown
The number of homeless in D.C. is down from pandemic levels. The White House said those who remain in encampments will be jailed if they refuse to move. WASHINGTON ‒ Blocks away from where President Donald Trump announced the latest slate of Kennedy Center honorees, workers began to sweep away homeless encampments along his route to the White House as part of his broader crackdown in the capital city. The Aug. 13 move comes days after Trump seized control of Washington, D.C.'s local law enforcement, deployed National Guard troops, and ordered people living outside to "immediately" move, suggesting, as the president put it, that they be relocated "FAR from the Capital." Amber Harding, executive director of the Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless, said officials cleared at least two tents on a patch of green space near the Kennedy Center as Trump spoke at the performing arts center. Members of the city's Department of Human Services pinned notices to at least nine other tents in the area, notifying residents that the camps would be broken down and closed if not removed by the following morning. George Morgan, a lifelong D.C. resident who has lived in the encampment for two months, said he's not sure where he will go. He won't go to a shelter because they wouldn't allow him to bring his American pit bull terrier. "I'm very concerned," said Morgan, a Trump supporter, about the president's takeover of the city's police force and his mobilization of the National Guard. "I try not to take offense." He said while he doesn't know where he will go, he's "hopeful God will make a way." Where are they being taken? Advocates for the city's homeless population say they're still unclear where the Trump administration expects people living outside to move. At an Aug. 12 news conference, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters homeless people would be "given the option to leave their encampment, to be taken to a homeless shelter, to be offered addiction or mental-health services, and if they refuse, they will be susceptible to fines or to jail time." She said U.S. Park Police have removed 70 homeless encampments from federal parks since March and are set to clear the remaining two encampments in the city later this week. Andrew Wassenich, director of policy at Miriam's Kitchen, a local nonprofit that assists the homeless, said Trump's rhetoric and the notices being put on tents appear targeted at scaring homeless people to leave. "The more people who do that on their own, the easier for them," he said. So far, Wassenich said the clearing of encampments mirrors past efforts by city officials to move people away from high-traffic areas of the city. In 2023, officials removed a large site of tents at a park near the White House despite pushback from some local officials and homeless advocacy groups. "They're not solving the homeless problem. It's not going away," Wassenich added. "They're just moving it." 'Minimize the disruption' Over the weekend, the city's human services department added about 70 beds to homeless shelters to make room for an expected influx of residents, said Rachel Pierre, the agency's acting director. She said that the city's shelters were at capacity when the order took effect, but that additional room could be made. Wayne Turnage, the deputy mayor of the DC Department of Health and Human Services, said the number of homeless encampments in the city is way down from their pandemic levels. Turnage said about 100 people are living in encampments today – down from around 300 in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. But advocates said those numbers likely do not include all of the people living outside in D.C. The city counted 900 people living on the streets during a one-night survey in January. When the city conducts a cleanup or shuts down an encampment, they typically provide residents with a week's notice, Turnage said. But with the new federal order in place, they're telling residents that they should pack up now. "Our objective is to see that the encampments are closed in an orderly fashion and to extend homeless services to those who are impacted," Turnage said. 'These people are human beings, they're not chess pieces. Their lives are being disrupted, so we have to make sure that we do as much as we can to minimize the disruption."
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Ignore the blowhard activists— keep horse carriages in Central Park
It's amazing how much manure is produced by the elite interests trying to bully horse carriages out of Central Park. The latest is Central Park Conservancy President Betsy Smith coming out in favor of a City Council bill to ban the carriages citywide. 'With visitation to the park growing to record levels,' she claims, the ban is 'a matter of public health and safety for park visitors.' Advertisement In other words: Add the Conservancy to the long list of local nonprofits playing politics. In fact, it's been making life harder for the horses and their trade for years now: The CPC's recent street-markings update failed 'to designate a mixed-use lane for carriages to use as there had been,' notes Pete Donohue, president of Transport Workers Union of America, the union that reps the carriage drivers. Animal-welfare extremists and other ideologues have been trying to put the horses and their 200 carriage drivers and stable hands out of work for years. Advertisement But those blue-collar, largely immigrant or first-generation American workers don't matter to the well-paid leaders of the park nonprofit, nor to the City Council members backing the ban. As for safety in the park: Puh-leaze. Smith cites two recent incidents where horses got free from their drivers and ran loose through the park, resulting in a handful of injuries. That's nothing compared to the 522 bike-involved collisions, with one fatality, reported in the park from 2018 to 2022. Advertisement Not to mention the menace of heavier, faster, more dangerous e-bikes and e-scooters — plus the scandal-plagued pedicabs: Why isn't Smith demanding they get barred from the park? Carriage-haters seem to imagine the horses would otherwise roam free in fields somewhere, but now suffer horribly doing work . . . they've been bred for generations to do. Nor is there any evidence of true, systemic mistreatment in the carriage industry — only one-off stories distorted to stir up fury. Advertisement Last week, for example a mare named Lady died while on the way back to her stable in Hell's Kitchen, kicking off another round of outrage — when she actually died of a small tumor in her adrenal gland, not any abuse. There's no cause to completely ban a favorite tourist activity, which is undoubtedly a draw for those record visitors Smith brags about. The City Council shouldn't heed the high-horse panic-mongers seeking to kill a tradition that dates back nearly two centuries. Let the horses keep clomping through Central Park.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
NIH director offers reason for cutting vaccine contracts
Bhattacharya said in a recent episode of the podcast 'War Room' and then again in an opinion piece in The Washington Post, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) chose to cancel millions of dollars in mRNA contracts because the American public does not trust the technology. His reasoning differs from the explanation HHS Secretary Kennedy gave for canceling $500 million worth of mRNA contracts last week. Kennedy justified the move by claiming the technology does not meet 'current scientific standards.' Bhattacharya called mRNA a promising technology that could lead to better treatments for diseases like cancer. But he expressed concern over just how much antigen mRNA vaccines produce and leave in the body, even though other types of vaccines share the same issue and are considered safe and effective. Bhattacharya blamed public distrust in mRNA on vaccine mandates and other public health safety measures issued under the Biden administration, arguing that his administration did not properly address concerns about the vaccine's safety and efficacy. 'As a vaccine intended for broad public use, especially during a public health emergency, the platform has failed a crucial test: earning public trust,' he wrote. 'No matter how elegant the science, a platform that lacks credibility among the people it seeks to protect cannot fulfill its public health mission.' outspoken critic of lockdown measures and vaccine mandates.
