Dear Editor,
The Press Editorial of November 24, 2005 has both bad news and good news. It is initialed by BP which I take to be Brian Powers the Publisher and he relates the anxious experience of the heart attack. He then goes on to relate his treatment and recovery which seems to have been quite satisfactory. We are always grateful for recovering patients whether it be ourselves or a total stranger. We celebrate whomever or whatever it is we direct our thanks to and it matters not the person or object. An Atheist may be indebted to the doctors or technicians. Some may feel the first responder(s) are the heros. As for myself, "I know whom I have believed".
In 1990 at the age of 64 I stepped off into a life that would be "pill filled" and self controled, something quite alien to my lifestyle; I had my first cardiac infarction. I too was treated at Benedictine and it was first class. I got limousine service via the Olive First Aid Unit ambulance [don't forget them in your giving]. I then visited my HMO doctor armed with records and EKG's from Benedictine and began a regimen of pills, diet and weight reduction.
On January 2, 1997 I had another attack which landed me in St. Vincent's hospital in NYC. I had what has become known as "a 3 way" bypass. Kudos to the surgeon and staff; I walked out 5 days later.
In August of 1999 while camping in Michigan's upper peninsula I became short of breath and ran back to NY to my HMO doctor who enrolled me in St. Vincent's on Staten Island for a pacemaker.
Event number 4 occurred last December as I was sharpening up my horns for the muzzle loader hunt. I was again short of breath and felt chest congestion. Off to the doctor and muzzle loading could wait. This time it was a heart valve replacement for which some unwitting cow offered. I am still walking around and the cow was celebrated as steak and burghers; praise to the venerable cow.
My point in sharing these last 15 years on earth is this; each time I experienced something different with my system(s) I got some assistance and I got it post haste. As Brian Powers advises, "take an aspirin and call 911". You may not need an aspirin, but it sure won't do any harm. I do not need "nitro" but I carry it as first aid for someone who just might need it. I might add that we have advanced so far, so fast in medical techniques, procedures, medicines and equipment in the last 50 years but it still requires immediate notification to take advantage of these
gifts.
We all are pleased that you recovered as well and as quickly as you have, Brian. You are needed by all those that love and respect you and certainly as our parochial publisher. God Bless [may I?].
Glenn T. Anderson
Olivebridge, NY

Dear Editor,
The US and Britain are using depleted uranium (DU-99% U-238) weapons in Iraq lacing this ancient land with radioactive U-238 with a half life of 4.5 billion years, the age of the earth. When the high speed, extremely dense uranium metal projectile hits the armor of a tank for instance, the impact creates extreme heat, melting the armor which makes these weapons very useful to the military. DU is cheap and plentiful, a waste by-product of building atomic bombs and the nuclear power industry. It is very convenient for the nuclear industry to sell this radioactive waste to the military which then uses it in Iraq. It is an easy solution for the military-industrial complex but what about its effects on people? After burning, uranium oxide dust is infused into the air, is carried by the wind, breathed into the lungs or settles on the surface to be picked up on the skin, incorporated into plants, eaten by animals, becoming part of the food and water supply of the people of Iraq and our children who are soldiering there.
It is particularly harmful to fetuses producing miscarriages and birth defects and causes abnormally high death rates and cancer throughout the population of Iraq and in our troops and in their children conceived after serving in Iraq. One Iraq War veteran, tested positive for DU, has a daughter born with no fingers. The VA has refused to consider this a war related injury and denied a claim for her massive disability. DU weapons were used in the first Gulf War, Bosnia, Serbia and Afghanistan so the terrible long term effects of this contamination are becoming more evident yet we continue to use it.
The UN Human Rights Commission in 1996 banned DU and declared it a Weapon of Mass Destruction. The UN body declared that use of DU constitutes a crime against humanity. In 2002 the UN human Rights Commission stated its use violated the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva Protocol of 1925, the Nuremburg Principles of 1945, The Charter of the United Nations, the Anti-Genocide Conventions of 1948, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980. Yet we continue to use it - thousands of tons of U-238. What kind of people are we? Do you want your children to go to Iraq?
We rightly had great contempt for Germans who ‘knew nothing’ of the Holocaust – how many Americans will be ‘surprised’ and disbelieve charges against them of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Are we so disinterested? Is the truth too terrible? There is no excuse.
For additional information please see idust.net, miltoxproj.org, traprockpeace.org, projectcensored.org.
Elaine Hencke
Woodstock, NY

Dear Editor,
Both Crossroads Ventures and the Catskill Center recently filed appeals to the several rulings of the DEC’s Administrative Law Judge, Richard Wissler, in reference to the proposed Belleayre Resort. It has generated yet more newspaper lineage.
There are no surprises in our appeal. It’s a straight challenge to the judge’s failure to apply appropriately the standard of “substantive and significant” to the issues reviewed, particularly in the light of the DEC staff’s professional competence and expertise, and in comparison to the economic benefits of the project.
The surprise is in the Catskill Center’s appeal, which is a bombshell: they have directly attacked the Ski Center, holding that any expansion of the state facility will deplete the water supplies of Fleischmanns and Shandaken and produce traffic at such a volume as to have “dire consequences.” They are demanding joint adjudication of any future plans, real or imagined which the DEC might be contemplating in reference to the Ski Center coupling it with any further review of the Resort.
They are asserting that the standard of profound solitude which applies to the Wilderness designation of parts of the forest preserve has an umbrella of influence over any lands anywhere near the wilderness area. In other words, the thousands of acres of private Shandaken land abutting the 211 tax parcels owned by the state are subject to limitations of noise, visual pollution, and other subjective standards which the Catskill Center might raise against their private use and/or development.
They have asserted that midweek and year-round business is not to be desired in the Forest Preserve, thereby condemning every restaurant, inn and hotel-owner in Shandaken and Middletown to a life lived always on the economic edge.
Lastly, they have advanced a standard of review for any project proposed in the region, which in time, expense and uncertainty of outcome will effectively deter any developer from looking twice at the region.
In short, in their frenzy to kill the Resort, the Catskill Center has abandoned any pretense of concern for the community and has revealed their total disinterest in the amount of collateral damage they cause the citizens, taxpayers and business owners of Shandaken and Middletown. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Dean Gitter, Crossroads Ventures,
Mount Tremper, NY

Dear Editor,
When one is seeking a give and take reasonable compromise, it is counterproductive to take the approach of labeling folks who disagree with you as extremists or zealots. I don’t believe there is anybody in our community who is opposed to economic growth in the region: that would be as unrealistic as it is undesirable. But in order to approach a common goal and open a fair and reasoned dialogue, personal attacks are not what’s needed. Rather than blaming others, it would be much more helpful and productive to look at ourselves in the mirror and ask: what am I doing that is contributing to this divisiveness? Where am I unwilling to listen to points of view that differ from my own? What steps can I take to heal the rift?
We can’t control other people, what they think or how they act. The best we can do is lead by example, modeling a reasoned and moderate approach to exploring important issues with a sense of honesty and respect. This approach works whether you are raising kids, resolving conflicts in your marriage or healing rifts within the community. When we resist the temptation to blame others and call them names out of frustration and instead choose to place ourselves in the driver’s seat by taking self-responsibility for our part in the disharmony, you’ll be surprised by the results that can be achieved. Think about it.
Bill Colagrande
Phoenicia, NY

Dear Editor,
Your editorial of November 24 was, as ever, a wise perspective on our mountain town, a clear call for personal and community responsibility, a solemn reminder to those in power that government is there to represent — and unite -- all the people of its community.
You did, however, leave out one large segment of our local population, those who don’t vote but wish very much that they could. Those local folks care at least as passionately as any full-time resident about what happens to our town. Those folks own property here, and their taxes pay for local roads and local schools and libraries and fire and police departments. They hire local artisans to work on their homes when they can’t do the work themselves. They attend meetings and hearings on local issues, speaking out for our community. They support local businesses and local agriculture, they cherish local friends and neighbors. They love the local landscape and work hard to protect it. And when they’re not able to be local, they’re thinking about getting back as soon as they can.
The only local activity off-limits for these folks (who, for reasons ranging from rent to tax laws, must list city addresses as their primary addresses) is the chance to vote in local elections. And as a result, the only local right denied them is taxation WITH representation. For many of them, the last two years have been frustrating and disheartening; this second homer hopes against hope, as you and so many other local folks do, that the next two years will be very different.
Evelyn Polesny,
Woodland Valley and NYC