Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 78 Editor's Choice: 28
-
Elephantman is wrong
[Read the article: Blowback from the GOP's holy war]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Elephantman said:
Can there be any doubt that one of the most repressive regimes on the face of the earth in the last half of the 20th century was the Taliban's reign in Afghanistan?
Are you trying to make the point that the Taliban are Muslims, therefore Muslim nations / movements are repressive? Do you see flaws in this logic?
If none of those terms is acceptable to Prof. Cole, is there any term he would accept? Or does he simply deny that there exists any generalized terrorist movement that threatens the United States in the post 9/11 era?
So you question the language issue, suggesting that the name we use to define the enemy does not matter...then you go on to say that because some people (Mr. Cole) think the language issue does matter, those people must not care about the threat posed by Muslim terrorist organizations... You are just brilliant.
But let us get back to the language issue. "Christian" and "Jewish" can be used to describe the religion, and a follower of the religion. Allow me to create a new word: "Christianic". Definition: having something to do with the Christian religion (but not used to describe a practitioner of that religion). Now, if I say that Timothy McVeigh was a Christianic Terrorist, I am saying that his religion – Christianity – was related to his terrorist act.. Elephantman, do you believe Christianity led him to commit acts of terror?
Even Bush has acknowledged that we are fighting a battle for Hearts and Minds… and it seems to me that we are losing that battle. Do you not see that the language we use has a great effect on how people perceive our intentions?
Professor Cole's article is largely a collection of inconsequential throwaway comments by candidates or their staffs.
Those quotes seem pretty revealing to me.
-
this article is mostly wrong
[Read the article: An Olympic disgrace]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First of all, did you ever see a cat being served at a restaurant in China? I have lived here in China for 6 years and never saw that. I hear in some places in Canton Province people eat cats. But I never saw this.
Dog meat in China is considered a niche delicacy. It is normally only eaten in the Winter time. Most people I have talked with do not eat it at all, or have eaten dog meat once every few years. It is, at most, a once a year meal for most people here, if that.
FYI, the majority of chicken Chinese people eat is free-range. The majority of beef Chinese people eat comes from working-animals...not herded cows. Since Chinese people eat organ-meats, as well as bone and cartilage, they value more of the animal that they kill. Unfortunatly, a lot of the lamb and pork is "free-range" too, which means that the animals eat a lot of crap (literally) and garbage.
Personally, the China animal cruelty story should be about city-people who keep big dogs as pets, locked up in their small appartments.
The majority of city-dwellers in China have enough common sense to differentiate a food animal and a pet animal. They are also very aware that Westerners do not eat dogs. The majority of Chinese people themselves do not eat dogs at all. Therefore, I think the the coach of the ski team was being cruel...to you. If I was you, I would have punched him out..right then and there.
-
This story is fake, (and I have a problem with Edziu's post)
[Read the article: An Olympic disgrace]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First of all, I don't believe this whole thing really happened. It is too theatrical. Chinese people to not make a show of killing their food. They do not bring out gutted dogs to the dinning table. （They sometimes do show live animals before the meal though）. Chinese people working at a ski resort would probably also be relatively international-ized and realize that foreigners don't eat dog. And for that matter, dog is usually only served in restaurants that specialize in it. And like another reader pointed out, "food" dogs are bred for their food value...they would not just take a dog off the street. Certainly not a big, expensive dog like a Collier. Oh...and it takes a while to skin and clean a dog. Then the meat is usually prepared in a slow-cooked stew. Its just not the type of animal that is butchered right before the meal as the author describes in this article.
If this whole thing actually did happen, then the problem is not with Chinese people, but with the company that the author kept. Or it was a different dog. And furthermore, “pity” would not be the feeling or expression on the Chinese host’s face. Mortal shock due to extreme loss-of-face for insulting a guest at the dinner table is what would have happened.
Edziu's Muze wrote:
It makes a difference in thus discussion that domestic animals are killed in these ways. Forever, they have been bred to befriend and develop comfortable relationships with humans. They do suffer horrific pain in many cases before actually dying and anyone who could do that, for a "special meal" or any other cultural habit is missing a compassion gene or two.
The author did not write that the animal was alive while gutted, and in any case, that is not how anyone prepares any food animal (except maybe some types of sushi).
I don't see how a dog can have more pain than a cow before dying. Their pain is from being slaughtered is not greater. In fact, (and I'm speculating here) since dogs are not slaughtered in a slaughterhouse factory, the dogs are much less likely to sense "the end is near" compared to chicken and cows, which are forced to morbidly walk into their “death box” by the thousands. And BTW, dogs have not been bred for their companionship...they were bred to work for humans...just as cows and horses have been bred.
I find that this article is insulting and fake. But I think suggestions that Chinese people are missing a "compassion gene or two" to be even more insulting and lacks intelligent analysis.