• Paths exist elsewhere • Quote my etiquette • More choice words • Common sense can save life • Kaua‘i has taken a stand Paths exist elsewhere Mr. Mickens’ recent opinion (“Path to nowhere,” Letters, Jan. 26) condemns unsubstantiated remarks,
• Paths exist elsewhere
• Quote my etiquette
• More choice words
• Common sense can save life
• Kaua‘i has taken a stand
Paths exist elsewhere
Mr. Mickens’ recent opinion (“Path to nowhere,” Letters, Jan. 26) condemns unsubstantiated remarks, yet for years Mr. Mickens’ gloomy predictions have been unencumbered by adherence to facts.
In this recent attack, he concludes, “If these paths were the solution then don’t you think that other municipalities would have had them long ago?”
Hundreds of other municipalities do have them. Consider Boulder, Colo.’s example. According to Mr. Jim Charlier (the nationally recognized transportation consultant who recently presented the Koloa-Po‘ipu Circulation Plan to the County Council), Boulder invested in extensive pathway networks and a well-developed bus system. During Boulder’s pathways build-out, critics voiced dire warnings. Their complaints were unsubstantiated.
Additional municipalities relying on multi-use paths as a mobility component include Anchorage, Alaska; Atlanta, Ga.; Austin, Texas; Davis, Calif.; Denver, Colo.; Madison, Wis.; Monterey, Calif.; Portland, Ore.; and Seattle, Wash.
Consider the East Coast Greenway. Some 2,600 miles of inter-urban trails connecting major cities along the United States’ East Coast; 29 miles of path in Long Beach, Calif.; the 32-mile American River Trail in Sacramento, Calif.; or the 30-mile Santa Ana River Trail linking Corona to Huntington Beach, Calif.
Let’s hear from more advocates for transportation alternatives who believe Kaua‘i too will greatly benefit from safe walkable and bikeable communities.
Thomas A. Noyes
Chair, Kauai Path Committee
Quote my etiquette
Please, allow me to summarize the contestable premise of a letter (“Quote etiquette,” Letters, Jan. 29) published in the Forum section.
Despite what intelligence reports indicate and despite what the biggest anti-Iraq War detractors are quoted as saying in support of military action, I’m just going to engage in an ad hominem attack on the presented facts and the writer of the opinion I disagree with. I’ll use the much-maligned term “Right Wing Blog” to infer discredit upon the valid quotes used even though they can be found in the Congressional Record and on the CNN Web site, which are far from being a “Right Wing Blog.” Next, I’ll take one of the quotes and summarize it into a statement worthy of my position on this issue claiming the quoted source only intended to support “internal opposition.” Finally, I’ll question the integrity of the opinion writer while not presenting any facts to support my claim. All of this should confuse and mislead the readers of this forum away from the verifiable facts of the opinion writer.
Did I miss anything? I have to say, I had a good laugh when I read “Quote etiquette” — especially the “internal Iraqi opposition” statement. But I have to ask, “What internal opposition? The Kurds?” We all know about the poisonous gas attacks used to eliminate that opposition. So let’s not get hung up on that. Get it … hung up?
Joseph Vrataric
Lihu‘e
More choice words
What I wonder is exactly when did the “right wingers” start coming out here to Hawai‘i?
They must know they are misplaced in a society that cares about each other.
Anyway, I would like to respond to another new improved Republican.
The first statement below is from Mr. Vrataric, and just below that is what he “forgot” to put first, as it was said before Mr. Vrataric’s quote.
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”
• President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 (according to Joseph Vrataric)
What was actually said first: “The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons.”
My first thought when I read Mr. Vrataric’s “More choice words,” was that someone had let George W. access a computer again. You are just incorrigible, Georgie, now off to bed with you, because tomorrow is another busy day. You are going to learn lots of new words, and pleaseeeeee work on your pronounciation.
Dennis Chaquette
Kapa‘a
Common sense can save life
In regards to a letter (“Signs needed,” Letters, Jan. 27) by Mr. Mills, I have noticed we do have U-turn signs posted at stoplights throughout our island. Now, doing a U-turn on a busy, double-lane highway should be all but common sense. The two U-turn accidents on Kaua‘i (the one on the Westside) was because the tourist was not cautious before doing the U-turn. I’m sure everyone has heard of “Look both ways before crossing the street.”
Mary Ellis Jones
Po‘ipu
Kaua‘i has taken a stand
Along with a group of peace-loving people on Saturday, I participated in an island-wide anti-war rally here on Kaua‘i.
We went from Waimea all the way to Kilauea, making eight stops and holding up signs. The group wasn’t large but each and every participant was there to make this country great again. And the reaction of the people of Kaua‘i was outstanding. Spending the whole day on the roads and being passed by at least 4,000 cars, we witnessed that at least one-third of the cars honked and their drivers and/or passengers gave us the peace sign and/or yelled in our support, while only four drivers gave us the thumb-down sign, which we interpreted as supporting the war instead of peace.
Let’s simplify the statistics. On a nice day like Saturday, most families get out on the road at least once a day, so we can extrapolate the numbers to the entire island. Considering that one third of them showed their support, and another third may have meant to do it, but was shy, afraid or timid to do so, the remaining third, less the supporters of the war, did not care. So, peace got 60 percent support. Let’s do the same thing with those who did not support us, because we presume that they acted with the same motives showing their rejection or showing nothing. That means only two-thousandths of the island’s population supports the war. Some 60 percent versus two-thousandths.
Then may I ask what the heck George Bush is doing? Whom is he serving? Not the people, for sure. Let him hear your voice.
Mahalo Kauaians.
János Samu
Kalaheo
