Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Israel shouldn't be above criticism, 1/27

It seems to me that Deborah Lipstadt, the writer of this commentary, by ignoring Jimmy Carter's point about the treatment of Palestinians and by condemning him for failing to mention the Holocaust, has made his point.

Israel should not be above criticism.

Jeffrey Harper, St. Petersburg

Consider Carter's case

The author of this article, Deborah Lipstadt, claims that Jimmy Carter ignores the importance of the Holocaust in his new book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. She claims that the Holocaust "sealed in the minds of almost all the world's people then the need for the Jewish people to have a Jewish state in their ancestral homeland."

Ex-President Carter, who has an intimate knowledge of the history of the Middle East and personal experience with the principal actors, sponsored the meetings at Camp David in 1978 that led to Egypt-Israel peace treaty. In his new book, Carter says that there will be no peace for anyone in the Middle East as long as Israel is violating key U.N. resolutions, official American policy and the "road map" for peace by occupying Arab lands and oppressing Palestinians.

This statement by Carter has brought forth strong protests from Israel's supporters in the United States. Deborah Lipstadt says he is ignoring the Holocaust and giving too much importance to Palestinian complaints; others say he is giving in to anti-Semitic feelings; and still others say he is confused, doesn't understand or is simply wrong. They do not like the information and opinions Carter provides in Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

An interesting perspective on this debate is the position taken by Tony Judt, a prominent historian who is Jewish and director of New York University's Remarque Institute, which promotes the study of Europe. In a recent article in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, he is quoted: "The very idea of a 'Jewish state' - a state in which Jews and the Jewish religion have exclusive privileges from which non-Jewish citizens are forever excluded - is rooted in another time and another place. Israel, in short, is an anachronism."

If all these charges and countercharges seem confusing, I suggest you read Jimmy Carter's book and make up your own mind.

Joseph A. Mahon, St. Petersburg

Other views are needed

I'm hardly shocked that the Times editorial board would choose to print the Deborah Lipstadt opinion piece, since they tend to favor columnists who support Israel and Israeli policies.

Lipstadt's piece falls into the "criticize Israel, minimize the importance of the Holocaust, you are anti-Semetic, you shall be attacked" category. On the rare occasion that truthful dialogue surfaces through the media filter on the Israel/Palestine issue, the apologists for Israel rise up in indignant defense in spite of the documented humiliation and abuse endured by the Palestinians under Israeli military occupation that has existed now for four decades.

While much can be said to refute the opinions of Deborah Lipstadt, my question to the Times editorial board is a simple one: When might the readers of the editorial pages expect to see opinion pieces that oppose the viewpoints expressed by Lipstadt, Jeffrey Goldberg and Ethan Bronner and insinuated by the Times itself?

Gerald Heidel, St. Petersburg

Assess the apartheid thesis

According to Deborah Lipstadt, Jimmy Carter should have written a book about the Holocaust instead of the current mistreatment of Palestinians in their Israeli occupied territory.

Since this commentary didn't "enumerate the many factual errors in this book" by design, maybe you could find a less emotional review that actually discusses the merits and demerits of Carter's thesis, that the term "apartheid" is an apt description of what is currently transpiring in Palestine.

Ken Cooley, Tampa

Cher's swanky, televised "Sweet 16" Jan. 21, Floridian story

Portrait of a spoiled child

Could somebody please explain to me why a father working hard to achieve success makes it okay to spoil the bejesus out of a kid? A $96,000 car for a 16-year-old? Give me a break! Mason Hubsher may be successful at his job, but he needs to get a clue when it comes to parenting!

Kids who don't learn the value of money, like those who are given everything they want, end up as spoiled twits with an absurd sense of entitlement, just like the girl in the article, who arranged her MTV appearance behind her parents' back, assuming that they would spring for an absurdly lavish Sweet 16 party. That, Mr. Hubsher, is the definition of spoiled!

As Dr. Phil is so fond of saying, "Overindulgence is the cruelest form of child abuse."

Bob Lasher, Clearwater

Focus on worthy teens

I read this article with disbelief, waiting to get to the punch line. When I got to the end and realized there was no punch line, no joke, I was deeply saddened to think that these parents felt the need to go to such extravagance to show their "love" to their 16-year-old. It is, however, her parents' prerogative to do as they desire for their child.

I do strongly disagree with the St. Petersburg Times devoting such a large amount of space to an article like this when there are a large number of teenagers in the community doing many useful services, volunteering with nonprofit organizations and really trying to make a difference. What kind of message do you send to these teens, regarding their worth, when they read articles like this?

Barry Bowlen, Clearwater

Questionable values

On the same day that the Times reported the death of 20 U.S. military personnel in Iraq and the continued plight of the homeless in St. Petersburg, a most outrageous article appeared in the Floridian section. The article glorified the ridiculous birthday party given to a Palm Harbor teenager. The party which was featured on MTV was held in the teenager's home, a $2-million "castle," and was capped off by her gift of a $96,000 Jaguar convertible.

That this type of extravagance happens is bad enough, but I find it hardly newsworthy. One just has to wonder what type of values this young lady's parents are instilling.

Don Guckian, Clearwater

A provocative picture

Shame on Cher's parents for allowing their daughter to wear such a provocative dress on her sweet 16 birthday.

Shame on the Times, "Florida's Best Newspaper," for printing this provocative picture on the front page of their Floridian section.

Sylvia Walbridge, St. Petersburg

We need tax relief, fast Jan. 13, commentary by Marco Rubio

Fix the state's shift in the tax burden

I generally agree with our new speaker of the House, Marco Rubio, that Florida property taxes are now too high, that property taxes have been growing faster than personal income since 2000 and that these taxes need reduction. I strongly disagree with him when he writes that the causes of the property tax increases are immaterial. Rubio seems to believe that property taxes can be reduced fast without carefully addressing the causes of the increases.

One chief cause of the property tax increases is the state's $19-billion to $20-billion tax reductions (since 2000) that resulted in the reduction of the state's public school education contribution to the counties from 62 percent to around 40 percent. The costs to run the public schools have increased, not decreased, and the huge percentage decrease from the state has forced the counties to greatly increase property taxes to get the funds to run the schools.

Jeb Bush and the Republican Legislature robbed Peter to pay Paul - and are directly responsible for the recent dramatic increase in property taxes. It is no coincidence that property taxes have increased faster than personal income since 2000. The dates fit neatly into Jeb Bush's years as governor.

Fix the cause, Mr. Speaker. Return the state's public school education contribution to the counties to the same percentage as it was pre-Bush, and the tax problem will largely be resolved. You may have to rescind 10 percent to 20 percent tax cuts you all have talked about recently, but it will be worth it. To do otherwise will only degrade Florida's public education.

William K. Whitfield, Tallahassee

Crist calls for property tax cut Jan. 25, story

No relief for renters

Gov. Charlie Crist has put forth a property tax plan that does nothing for people who don't own the home where they reside. Yes, that would be renters.

Rental property has no tax cap or homestead exemption, and the property tax on the house I rent was raised more than 20 percent this year. My rent increase was 50 percent because of taxes and, I assume, insurance.

I have a hard time understanding why Gov. Crist is totally ignoring thousands of people who are being gouged by property taxes on homes they don't own.

Dale Romano, St. Petersburg

For Floridians only Jan. 24, letter

Nonresidents pay plenty

The letter writer apparently thinks that Florida residents are subsidizing insurance rates for people who own property in Florida but have a primary residence in another state. I suppose she means through the Citizens Property Insurance company.

My primary residence is in Michigan and I own a condo in Florida for the winter. I pay the same sales and property taxes that Florida residents pay except that I don't get a homestead exemption. This means that I pay more taxes. Both my property taxes and insurance premiums have more that doubled here.

Just for comparison: Michigan real estate taxes are assessed at 50 percent of the market value while Florida is at 100 percent. Increases are capped at 5 percent per year or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. I expect that millage rates are higher in Michigan because my property taxes are even higher there than they are here.

My point is that I pay property taxes and insurance premiums for the full year and only use the roads and other services for four months and the schools not at all. Where does the subsidy come in?

Alan Anderson, New Port Richey

Byrd tactics hurt research center Jan. 21, editorial

Institute must do better

Sadly, I agree with the Times Sunday editorial assessment that the Johnnie B. Byrd Sr. Alzheimer's Institute bureaucrats have not been "sufficiently frugal" in many of their expenditures of public dollars, especially lobbying and communications. It has been a growing disappointment to me, one to which I finally could not "look the other way."

For example, you repeated the discredited claim by the Byrd Institute CEO that he had reduced administrative expenses to 7 percent. I wish this were true. This claim was resoundingly repudiated as an accounting "sleight of hand" by the CEO at our last board meeting.

The truth is that of the $15-million in tax money generously given by the Legislature to the Byrd Institute for research last year, only about $8-million was actually spent on research programs. (The rest was diverted to cover cost overruns on the construction of the Byrd Institute lab.) Of the $8-million spent on research programs, more than $2-million was spent on administrative costs - that is, 25 percent of all program dollars spent last year went to "overhead."

That's too much bureaucracy for an upstart research institute. I am convinced that the board will begin to take a much closer look at these issues in the immediate future.

I also agree that potential private donors and the Florida Legislature must ask whether they are willing to invest in a research institute that spends one in four dollars on "overhead." They should demand better. I do.

I hope our Byrd Institute bureaucrats will quickly get their minds off of "feathering their nest" and focus more of our precious resources on the goal at hand: a world without Alzheimer's disease.

Johnnie B. Byrd Jr., Plant City

Bad female drivers? It's just a myth, new analysis finds Jan. 19, story

Driving realities

The article on motor vehicle crash data is a good example of how statistics can mislead the public by implying that our fates are somehow determined by unseen and uncontrollable forces. Statistics describe aggregate outcomes for a population. It has very little to do with the realities faced by a driver in a specific situation. Worse, articles like this encourage a denial of personal responsibility for our actions behind the wheel.

Your likelihood of surviving your next work commute or grocery store trip has more to do with your choices - and the choices of drivers on the road with you at that time - than with your gender or age.

A driver's deliberate decisions to drive too fast, drive too close to surrounding vehicles, or to talk on a cell phone instead of watching the road, are the real causes of motor vehicle crashes. The Times missed a prime opportunity to remind every driver that following the rules of the road will reduce motor vehicle crashes and save lives.

Scott Bravard, St. Petersburg

Key to road survival: Let her drive Jan. 19

Numbers can deceive

Figures never lie, but all liars figure. Statistics can be arranged in a way to say just about everything. One red flag that these numbers are full of baloney is the citing that 82 is the riskiest age for drivers. Some explanation is given toward the end, but the insinuation off the top is that "Those old people are dangerous."

The truth is that 82-year-olds are more likely to die doing just about any activity, as their bodies are not going to take a whole lot of trauma. On the other hand, the fact that they have survived as drivers to that age would tend to suggest that they are pretty good at it.

Frank Guy, St. Petersburg

Irony of honors evokes a protest Jan. 19, story

Gen. Lee deserved honor

The Hillsborough County Commission's decision to issue a proclamation honoring the bicentennial of Gen. Robert E. Lee's birthday was criticized in a Rumpelstilskin-like tantrum by lawyer Clinton Paris, who "likened the recognition to honoring Japanese military leaders for a crafty invasion of Pearl Harbor." County Attorney Renee Lee said there was some merit to Paris' condemnation.

How disappointing and, frankly, sad that supposedly "educated" lawyers such as Paris and Lee zealously attack a man who abhorred slavery, whose father was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, an honorable man of God who would relegate no ill will toward either of them.

I find it only right and just and good that James A. Hammond be honored for his background in education and his selfless service to his community.

Sharon A. Dragneff, Tampa

Gibbs is a great school

The Gibbs High School Parent Teacher Student Association wishes to express disappointment in the skewed picture of our school which was painted in your fine newspaper recently. We are proud of our high school, our students, our staff, and our administrator, and are offended at the manner in which our school was portrayed.

An unfortunate consequence of this negative publicity is that some parents are now afraid to send their children here.

We want all parents to know that Gibbs welcomes parents and students to visit our campus to see for themselves what a fine school we have. There are rules surrounding campus visits, so please call first. If you are filling out choice or magnet applications for your child and have been thinking about Gibbs, please do not be dismayed by the recent misrepresentations of our great school.

Sondra Smith, president, Gibbs High School PTSA, Pinellas Park

Gibbs High School

The bad apples

During my 30 years as a public school teacher, I observed many of the same kind of problems that have been plaguing Gibbs this past semester, though never close to the same magnitude. I would say that these kinds of problems, wherever they may occur, are caused by one, or more, of the following: a school and central administration lacking the skills, experience, toughness and determination to do what has to be done; a staff that lacks adequate support from their principal and central administration; a staff that lacks experience and consistency in their discipline expectations and practice; and a lack of widespread parental and community involvement and support.

It appears that all of these components, to some degree, were at play at Gibbs for far too long before serious action was taken. For example: If the "bad apples" referred to by Pinellas school superintendent Clayton Wilcox are the same 20 or so "frequent fliers," who appear in the principal's office once, twice, or three times a day, the source of the problems should have been obvious long ago, and decisive action would likely have eliminated many of those problems.

We can now only hope that much has been learned from the mistakes of the past few weeks and that the new program at Gibbs will succeed.

John Farnham, St. Petersburg

[Last modified January 26, 2007, 20:50:44]