ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Slammed by the NY Times

Dear ETS!,

On November 3, after reading yet another call to bomb Iraq from the New York Times editorial staff, I quickly penned a "letter to the editor." A day later I arrived at work to find, in my inbox, a message from Mary Drohan at the NY Times urgently requesting a call. Aside from getting some personal information, the purpose of the call was to help verify the statistices I used. I pointed her to a 1996 article in her own paper, as well as a 1997 UNICEF report at www2.unicef.org/pub/iraqsa. She then told me she'd send her edit to me for my approval and I thanked her and went on my merry way. That is, until Thursday when I opened the Times to page A24. Below is my letter as I originally wrote it in all its naked glory, followed by the dressed up, sanitized version the NY Times ran. Here's the Original:

To the editor,

Sincerely, Jeff Gustafson

Here's the one they printed:

To the Editor:

Jeff Gustafson, Seattle, Nov. 3, 1998

After pointing Ms. Drohan to page 42 of the 1997 Unicef report which clearly reports that sanctions kill over 90,000/year (50,000 of which are children under 5), she completely changed the source of these statistics to "Iraqi officials!" Of all the changes that could be made to my letter, I can think of nothing more effective than this--if the goal is to allow the average American reader to more easily dismiss my words. Add to this the exclusion of my critical thoughts on Saddam and yet another peg is knocked out from under my argument. Furthermore, no one from the NY Times called or attempted to contact me regarding these changes.

I would like to ask Mary Drohan and the New York Times: "Why even bother to radically alter any letters from the public to advance your agenda or to completely undermine an opposing viewpoint? Why not simply manufacture them?"

But what ever you do, don't put my name on it!

Jeff Gustafson

Pie Paul Watson?

At a joint Sea Shepherd and Jack Metcalf news conference yesterday, far right-wing racist Jack Metcalf complained that the civil rights of Sea Shepherd had been violated by the Makahs. This is the same Jack Metcalf that has spent a lifetime seeking to deny civil and human rights to people of color. The same Metcalf who, while in the Washington State Assembly, stated that "Black people are genetically incapable of governing themselves." The same Metcalf that the ACLU gave a 0 rating on his voting record on civil rights in Congress. To Metcalf, and others like him, rights only belong to rich white men.

Paul Watson stated to the press that the actions of the Makahs were like the actions of the KKK in the south in the days of the civil rights movement. Paul Watson, I lived many years in the south and fought the KKK, and let me tell you something. If the Makahs acted like the KKK your ass would be hanging from a tree. All the Makahs tried to do was to defend themselves two times from these white racists who sought to disrupt sacred ceremonies. But I will agree with Watson on one thing: I do wish that the Makah Tribal Police had not stepped in. For that was the only thing that saved the racists from the wrath of the Makah people.

People need to start seeing Paul Watson and Sea Shepherd for what they really are. They are nothing more than racist eco-fascists who are out to spread their eurocentric supremacy upon the world. Watson basically stated this goal when he said in the "Town Meeting" TV show that he has to deal with different cultures throughout the world, and that what these people have to understand is that they must obey international laws.

Whose international laws? That of the international eurocentric corporate machine. Yes, dear friends, the same monster whose industrial greed nearly wiped out the gray whale in the first place, along with the buffalo, and so many other forms of life. The same monster that exterminated complete indigenous Nations from the face of the earth. The same monster industrial process that rapes Mother Earth and vomits its waste, fouling the air, land, and water.

"How can you say such things of Captain Watson?" the bleeding heart white liberals think. To that I say: "How could he be anything but what I have said, when he stands hand in hand with Metcalf, who is not only a racist, but also has one of the worst environmental voting records in Congress."

To Watson and his kind, the rich white man is morally superior to nature and the other peoples of the world. To them the world is just a playground with warm fuzzy things in it for their entertainment. The whale, they seek to domesticate as their pets. It is interesting that they promote the whale watchers. My father, while he was still living, was in the Coast Guard Auxiliary, and one of the things they had to do was to keep the whale watchers off the migrating gray whales so that they could safely migrate.

Real environmentalism is not morally superior to nature, but rather seeks to be in balance with nature. The wolf, eagle, and orca have their place in the balance, as do the plant eaters. They all depend upon each other, for without both, the balance would be upset and their survival would be in danger. Traditional indigenous people are also a part of that balance of nature.

What is upsetting the balance of nature is people like Watson, Metcalf, and their god of greed.

Arthur J. Miller, Tacoma, WA

Mumia Info

Dear Geov Parrish and ETS! staff,

Thank you for bringing the Mumia story to our attention. I must admit that due to mostly inadequate mainstream media coverage, I am completely in the dark about this story. Would you please distribute more information about his plight? The additional information about his background would really give your audience more reason to rally his cause. More importantly, I would like to know what e-mail addresses of government officials or influencers involved with the case can be provided so that a grassroots campaign can be waged via e-mail on Mumia's behalf.

All of your efforts in coverage of local and international issues is greatly appreciated as an alternate channel of information. Keep up the great work!

--Michael Martinez, Seattle, WA

M.T. replies: We've printed a lot of stuff about Mumia in the past. You can visit our web site at EatTheState.org to read more. To get in touch with the local group working to support Mumia, call 206-781-9781.

Stripmine or Else!

Dear ETS!,

Your article about the open pit gold mine in Okanogan County was interesting. Having lived in Okanogan County and helped log a large portion of Buck Horn Mountain, I disagree with everything you promote concerning this mine. There is not and would not be any great loss to the environment if this mine were to proceed. Buck Horn Mountain was practically denuded of vegetation during the early part of this century due to mining activity. I personally logged areas that only about 100 years ago were tailings from the hard rock mines. Okanogan county needs the employment the mine would create. Within 100 years of the mine closing there would be no sign of it on the environment.

--Mike McDaniel, via e-mail

M.T. replies: I really hate letters like this. Any article we ran on the open pit gold mine in Okanogan County was printed so long ago that I can't even remember which year of issues to scan in order to find it. Aw, forget it. Can't people send in their letters when the articles are still fresh in people's minds? What is this? Are we all stuck in a time warp?

Anyway, regarding the open pit mine: 100 years ago mining companies weren't using the same kind of destructive equipment, machinery, and chemicals that they use today. An open pit mine is literally a dead zone. Also, today's mines don't employ as many people as mines operated 100 years ago did. Aside from that, the real question is: why is your only choice limited to a few jobs that denude Buck Horn Mountain vs. no jobs at all? Or is that just mining company propaganda?

Red & Green

ETS!,

I am relieved to find that some countries still can rally political consciousness at the polling booth. That Germany pulled off a Red\Green victory is relieving and gives me hope that other countries may some day have a socially and environmentally responsible government that is popularly elected. Though the effectiveness of such a coalition is yet to be seen, already they have signed into existence a ban on nuclear energy that should take effect within 4 years. Already there are cries of protest from the right and from countries like France (which purchases a good portion of power and nuclear fuel from Germany), but this is to be expected.

The coalition, headed by the moderate (left compared to our centrist Pres. Bill) Schroeder is patching together a number of laws and regulations that will greatly improve immigration and naturalization laws, as well as complete the partially finished, high-speed, "mag-lev" train that will run from Rostock to Hamburg and eventually south to France. Hopefully this is just the beginning (the Greens are infamous for their insistence on Germany withdrawing from NATO and demanding a higher gas tax that would drive the price even higher than the apx $4 per gallon now).

I only hope this type of alliance (what I like to call the social three: environmentalism, socialism, and democracy) will spread home to America. Our own left needs to take a lesson from Europe and unify in order to improve electoral results. Good luck Germany!

--James Taylor, Seattle

M.T. replies: I'm glad you're so hopeful about the new "Red/Green" alliance in Germany. I wish I could say that I am, too. The business press, however, is full of articles about how the "moderate-left" party headed by Gerhard Schroeder is more pro-business than its campaign rhetoric would lead us to believe, and they give all kinds of examples of how Schroeder and his colleagues have benefited German business in the past few years. We'll just have to wait and see how it all turns out.

Missed The Point

Hey folks,

Nice quote from the Wash. State Medical Association on cannabis, valium, and percocet. There are two major differences between cannabis and valium/percocet. Valium is both physically addicting and you can kill yourself by ingesting too much of it. The valium kick is a two week ordeal that requires intensive medical intervention to deal with physiological complications. Cannabis is not physically addicting and you can't kill yourself OD-ing with it. Another good reason why it is that you'd better think for yourself on this one.

--Lyle Courtsal, Seattle

M.T. replies: Uh, Lyle. The quote wasn't from the WSMA, it was from Dr. Sandra Counts, a pain specialist speaking to the WSMA, asking them to support legalization of marijuana for pain treatment [Quote of the Week, 10/7/98]. Of course, the WSMA showed its conservative side and voted "no." Happily, voters showed some real compassion and knowledge of the issue, and approved the initiative anyway.