Opinion: Spraying poisons in Colombia is a sickening policy

Thank you for your continued coverage of how our government is funding the chemical poisoning of Colombia. I am sickened by the policy and most especially by the comments of the assistant secretary of state, Rand Beers.

He is quoted as saying that he and his family would be willing to stand in an open field under a spray plane to demonstrate that the mass deployment of Roundup chemical weed killer is "not harmful to humans."

This is utter nonsense. Anyone with gardening knowledge is aware that Roundup does not produce damage through skin contact, but it clearly destroys any and all vegetation that it contacts. In addition, as noted in your news report, the various surfactants added to the military's spray increase the chance for this deadly chemical to harm humans. Beers would provide us with a more dramatic demonstration were he to show us his family eating vegetable products that had been doused with Roundup.

My husband is a gardener. If he applies Roundup with a tank sprayer and directs it to specific plants and grasses, he is deemed to be using it in a legal and safe manner. However, were he to get into a helicopter and dump it in gallon quantities over Pinellas County, he would be rightfully arrested and criminally charged with endangering every resident in the county.

Our federal government defends this policy by stating its intention is to fight the production of dangerous drugs. It is reasonable to say that a number of other countries have legitimate complaints about the U.S. production and distribution of tobacco, but I doubt we would tolerate them invading U.S. airspace to drop Roundup on the tobacco fields of Kentucky and the Carolinas.

This policy is clearly a gravy train for our military forces, which lack a defined "enemy" from which to defend our citizenry. Regardless of how many hectares of Colombia we destroy and no matter how many citizens of Colombia we kill through guns and poisons, not a single cocaine addict in the United States will be any closer to true recovery.
-- Doreen Cohen, Clearwater

People are being harmed

I am very glad to see that the government is reconsidering the Colombia spraying plan. Officials are now investigating if and how much this aerial spraying is affecting human beings. But of course, even if people do not get sick or develop rashes, the spraying is harming people. One cannot control the winds when planes fumigate, and so the herbicide chemical solution also damages fruit trees and other food crops. It affects the soil and the rivers and the animals.

Since we would not permit such spraying in the United States, we should not do it in Colombia -- or don't we think that their lives are as valuable as ours?

I concur with those who say that the spraying in Colombia is not about drugs, but rather a way to dislocate the people who live in certain territories.

A few years ago, I went to Colombia with a delegation of the Latin America Working Group from Washington to investigate human rights abuses. Now I fear that I should have stayed in the United States and investigated our own human rights abuses.
-- Lucy Fuchs, Brandon

Abuse accusations can be abused

Re: Playing the bully, and playing for keeps, Mary Jo Melone, Aug. 21.

Melone has decided that she is judge, jury and executioner and uses the power of print to convict Christopher Vietri. Maybe Melone should look in the mirror to see who is playing the bully. Her reason for convicting Vietri: an accusation in a domestic violence injunction complaint filed by a wife. Maybe Melone should read the article Vulnerable System in the Times last December which stated, "A state law that allows victims to easily obtain a domestic violence injunction also allows an abuser to manipulate the law and get the upper hand in a divorce or custody case." In this article, a lawyer who helped write the legislation allowing injunctions says, "As you get to know the system, you're going to be able to manipulate it." And a judge says, "We give the petitioner the benefit of the doubt. We have to. But they could be lying. We don't know."

Perhaps Melone should use her time to investigate how the domestic violence abuse injunction law can be amended to only help true victims rather than help lawyers in divorce cases. While domestic violence obviously exists, it is naive to believe that a piece of paper will protect someone from a violent person, but for someone who knows it is a good legal chess move and has no fear of violence it's easy to take advantage of.

The bottom line here is that Mr. Vietri may be slime, or Mrs. Vietri may be a liar. I don't know, and neither does Melone.
-- Dan Favero, St. Petersburg

We don't know the truth

Re: Playing the bully and playing for keeps, by Mary Jo Melone, Aug. 21.

I see more and more bizarre behavior in this newspaper's efforts to make your opinions out to be the absolute truth or the law or both if it fits your purpose. Now this guy has been deemed guilty by the great Melone. Fancy that.

I do not know the people involved personally, have never met them, and do not know what is actually happening in their personal lives -- regarding Christopher Vietri, his children and their mothers -- but neither does Melone.

Unfortunately, she seems to believe that because these two women said it -- made the accusations -- that this automatically makes this man guilty of what he is being accused of. Apparently it never once occurred to her that there is a possibility that these two women may have their own agendas, their own personal desires about whatever they want to do, and this just may be an easy way out for them.

Melone even goes so far as to say that the Florida Legislature and Gov. Jeb Bush are "under his thumb." There can be only one reply to something that utterly ridiculous: Who do you think you're kidding?
-- A.J. Burch, Homosassa Springs

Our endangered liberties

Re: Once nailed to the door, now shuffled out of sight, Aug. 22.

Thank you, Howard Troxler and the St. Petersburg Times for strongly pointing out the latest attacks on citizens' rights by overzealous politicians and law enforcement officials whose motives appear blatantly partisan and/or designed to make their lives easier. The freedoms in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution were designed to protect our liberty and freedom by allowing dissent and the opportunity to do so. With the Boston Massacre fresh in their minds, there is no doubt that our Founding Fathers did not intend for government to be able to determine where and how people assembled to protest, as long as such protest did not break reasonable laws.

All citizens must realize, regardless of political opinion or position, that our liberties are severely endangered when our rights to assemble, protest, and speak are limited arbitrarily. If one's views are so emotionally based that one cannot tolerate a differing opinion, get a grip. This point of view is un-American.

I can only hope that legal action groups from all sides of the political spectrum are taking note and act to fight such arbitrary restrictions in court.
-- Martin L. Altner, Safety Harbor

Facts about the contract

In response to your Aug. 18 editorial entitled Crist's curious contract, I thought I would try to relieve your curiosity by giving you and your readers the facts.

1. The company that received the contract has been doing business with the Department of Education for more than 10 years, with good performance. This is long before my staff or I were on board. Any change toward a competitor would have to show exceptional savings and performance.

2. The company that was the successful bidder also was the lowest bidder by $15,000. (The $100,000 difference entailed only the maintenance fees.)

3. The final recommendation from staff was brought to my attention, and I concurred with the winning bidder, which was in that recommendation.

4. My chief of staff chose to recuse herself from this selection process because her husband is a lobbyist for one of the bidding companies, although he does not lobby for them with our department.

5. No one on my staff nor I knew if anyone from either company had contributed to my campaign and, if my staff or I had known, it would not have made any difference.

6. Finally, and most important, the losing bidder, after thorough investigation and review of the entire process, withdrew its protest, agreeing that it had been treated fairly and honestly.

I hope these facts have satisfied your curiosity about this matter. All of these facts have been readily available for any citizen of the state of Florida to examine.
-- Charlie Crist, commissioner, Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee

Keep racing its proper place

With the success of the recent movie The Fast and the Furious, modern "hot rods" have surged in popularity. Some of these machines are extremely fast, with stock horsepower boosted by highly modifying the engine with turbocharging, supercharging and even nitrous oxide.

Although I have long been a racing and hot rod fan, I realize that these machines should never be raced on public roads. With the capability of 145-plus miles per hour, racing like this puts in danger not only the drivers, but also the public.

The good news is that Tampa Bay has two venues where drivers can see just how fast their cars can go. For about 15 bucks you can race another car in a controlled, safe environment on a real drag strip. Sunshine Speedway in Clearwater and Bradenton Motorsports Park off Route 64 both offer a safe alternative to the streets, and you won't get a ticket for going 145.
-- Lawrence J. Gelb, Clearwater

Dividends before diversity

Re: Office Depot settles dispute, Aug. 24.

The left's drive for "diversity," (with the help of predatory trial lawyers), has created a situation where corporate assets are being wasted on such things as "diversity offices," "diversity training," "mentoring programs," etc.

As a shareholder in several such companies, I am interested in the bottom line. My concern is that hiring and advancement decisions be made only on the basis of ability and/or performance. This mania to have so many of each race, gender and sexual preference does not contribute to profits. Being results-oriented does.
-- Hans Walter Seelig, Palm Harbor

Too many guns and lawyers

According to the Associated Press, the United States has more attorneys and guns per population than any other nation. It is a national disgrace that as an American, you have a better chance of being shot or sued than an citizen of any other country on Earth.
-- Albert J. Maduri, New Port Richey

Share your opinions

We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They also can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.

For e-mail users: Letters can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com.E-mail messages must be text only and cannot include attachments. If you're using a word processing program to write the message, you must use its ''Save as'' function to save it as a text file, then import it into your e-mail program. Please include your return e-mail address, as well as your name, mailing address and phone number, in the text of the message.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page