Letters: Readers discuss outrageous torture, migrant caravan and the toll of tariffs
Terrible denial
Americans, where is our outrage? A permanent U.S. resident working for an American newspaper was horrendously tortured because he was a journalist who called out the truth.
A senior Turkish official reports that Jamal Khashoggi’s fingers were cut off — symbolic perhaps of silencing those fingers on a keyboard that challenges oppression. (Oct. 18, 2A, “Audio offers details of killing, official says”)
Do you want to know more about his torture, about what else his murderers did to him? The American president doesn’t. He doesn’t want to listen to the audio recording of the screams and the buzzsaw and the suggestions to use earplugs playing soothing music among these assassins so they didn’t have to be traumatized by their own handiwork. The president prefers the soothing camouflage of his own denial.
America, where is our shame? The world is outraged, even if we’re not.
Leann Karbaumer
Platte City
Congress’ loyalty
There is caravan of would-be migrants on the way to the United States through Mexico, traveling unimpeded. President Donald Trump has said he will cut off all foreign aid to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador if these people try to enter the United States. (Oct. 17, KansasCity.com, “Trump warns of aid cut over migrant caravan now in Guatemala”)
Congress has instructed the president not to cut off the aid. Whom does Congress represent: the citizenry of the United States or the invaders?
John Lovelace
Olathe
Dangerous ‘correct’
Max Boot writes that he has been left out of the current form of the Republican Party. (Oct. 18, 13A, “The new face of American conservatism leaves me out”) This is true, but he makes an interesting point in listing his conservative bona fides.
One that caught my eye was, “I criticized political correctness.” But this is exactly what he has fallen prey to.
In the movie “Doctor Zhivago,” a doctor has been pressed into service by the Red Army. He wants to go home, and one of the leaders of his group agrees that he has been a good comrade. Another corrects him: “In the hour of victory, the military will have served its purpose, and all men will be judged politically, regardless of their military record.”
This is what political correctness is: A party has a strict line, a set of positions. Anyone who deviates is in a state of political incorrectness.
People (often on the right) complain about political correctness, but they usually mean something like saying “Happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” or being civil to people different from themselves.
Real political correctness is much more dangerous. It is really political intolerance. It once seemed to be predominant on the left, but as is clear from Boot’s essay, and elsewhere, today’s right has perfected it.
Greg Simpson
Olathe
Senseless tariffs
CottonBelle has been manufacturing soft goods for the home for 30 years in the small, rural town of Belle, Mo. On Sept. 24, the Office of the United States Trade Representative imposed a 10 percent tariff on $200 billion of imports to the U.S. from China, including home furnishings fabrics but not finished products made in China.
On Jan. 1, the tariff is scheduled to rise to 25 percent. While fibers, yarns and fabrics are subject to this tariff, sewn products and apparel made in China are not. According to trade publication Furniture Today, apparel and other sewn home goods represent 93.5 percent of U.S. imports in this sector, while fibers, yarns and fabrics total only 6.5 percent.
It does not make sense to have tariffs on only 6.5 percent while most of China’s 10 million textile and apparel jobs are concentrated in the final steps of the supply chain — the labor-intensive cutting and sewing operations. Finished products from China most directly affect jobs in the U.S.
Our business is devoted to U.S. manufacturing. Our products are made in America by American sewers. We are proud of that. These tariffs threaten to put CottonBelle out of business.
Mary Lou Rath
Owner, CottonBelle
Belle, Mo.
The right choice
Wednesday’s print edition of The Star contained the full, unexpurgated wording of the many initiatives that will be on the ballot in November.
There are three marijuana initiatives. Two years ago, we couldn’t get an initiative on the ballot. Reading through them all (which I have done) takes a long time and is, overall, more confusing than illuminating.
The Star’s editorial board has not yet made a recommendation on the subject so far, but the Post-Dispatch and The St. Louis American have recommended a yes vote on Amendment 2. I think they are right.
Amendment 2 is the most reasonable. It provides for a reasonable tax rate, puts experts in charge of the regulation and is supported by patients, veterans and doctors. Amendment 3 is the vanity amendment of a Springfield doctor and lawyer. Proposition C would create legislation that could be gutted or otherwise amended by state representatives.
Nothing stops you from voting for all three. However, the winner of the two amendments would supersede the losing amendment and the Proposition C law. Vote for Amendment 2, the sensible choice.
Timothy Earl Osburn
Parkville