Letters to the Editor

Editor:

There has been little news media coverage given to the fate of Golden Gate Park Stables and the coverage that has been given appears to be extremely one-sided in favor of the present operators. But what do the four remaining boarders (the villains) have to say? What is their story?

I am a frequent park user and walk through the stables almost daily with my dogs. When I walk through the stables and see these boarders, I don't see four selfish people that are holding up progress, I see four very loving, caring and loyal horse guardians.

These people are not young kids, they are in their 50s and 60s and some of them appear to have physical problems. They are there seven days a week, rain or shine, hot or cold, sick or healthy, taking care of their horses.

One woman walks with a cane, yet she is there daily cleaning her stall and caring for her horse. After she is finished she walks her dog.

Another women cleans her stall on her hands and knees because she has a bad back and it is too uncomfortable for her to clean her stall the conventional way. She is unable to ride but that doesn't stop her from caring for the horse on a daily basis. His nightly bucket is filled with bite-sized cut up carrots and apples. She has boarded there for 31 years.

There is another petite platinum-blonde-haired lady with a very big horse that has a leg injury. I believe this lady has back problems as well, yet she is there daily.

I don't know much about the fourth boarder.

As a frequent park user for many, many, many years I feel that the stables have grossly been allowed to deteriorate under the present operators. There has been virtually no maintenance done on the barn since the present operators have taken over. How and why could the SF Recreation and Park Department and the City allow this to happen to what was once such a beautiful facility that was so full of life?

These four boarders need to tell their side of the story.

N. Elliott

Editor:

It is ironic that Supervisor Jake McGoldrick took so much pride in introducing Proposition C last November in your article "Prop D is a Much Needed Reform Measure" (February 2002) as he has a habit of ignoring his constituents.

I e-mailed McGoldrick imploring him to look into the timing of traffic lights on Geary Boulevard last summer. The points I raised for a timed traffic system are as follows:

· Reduce traffic congestion - by avoiding start and stop traffic.

· Safety/reduce speeding - racing at timed yellow lights is pointless. You'll have to stop at the next one. With untimed lights, there's no guarantee you won't make the next one, and the one after that, thus encouraging aggressive driving and speeding.

· Stress reduction - what is the point in stopping at every other block - specifically Parker, Arguello, Fifth Avenue, Eighth Avenue, Park Presidio, 18th Avenue and 23rd Avenue. Compare driving on Geary with the ease of driving on Fell/Oak and Pine/Bush.

I got a generic auto-generated e-mail response thanking me for my effort and asking me to be patient, as it would take his office a month to reply. Four months later, I heard nothing from him. I sent him another letter, this time via regular post. That was two months ago. The response is predictable: none.

In contrast, I sent a similar e-mail to Supervisor Leland Yee regarding the timing of 19th Avenue lights. His response was a hand written note informing me that he has already looked into this matter with the DPT.

Supervisor McGoldrick should be less smug about sponsoring propositions that require more responsiveness from city officials since he obviously does not do what he preaches.

Jeff Kee

Editor:

I'd like to commend Paul Kozakiewicz, publisher of the Richmond Review and Sunset Beacon, for taking a courageous and principled stand on the Israeli/Palestinian issue (January 2002).

The America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is an extremely powerful lobby with a long history of making - and breaking - the careers of Americans. It's very difficult not only for elected officials, but also for those in the media, to go up against AIPAC by criticizing Israel.

This extraordinary influence has naturally had a dramatic impact on media coverage in this country concerning the Middle East conflict. We should keep in mind that the ratio of Palestinian-to-Israeli deaths in the present Intifada is running nearly 3-1. Yet it's the Palestinians who are always described as being perpetrators of violence and "terrorism." Another case in point: the recent Israeli seizure of a shipload of arms - hailed as proof of Yasser Arafat's intentions to do evil, while Israel's prerogative to stockpile vast tons of sophisticated weaponry, including nuclear warheads, goes unquestioned.

The fact that numbers of Americans are becoming at least dimly aware of these discrepancies - and that newspapers, albeit only small, locally-owned ones, have begun to speak up and question U.S. Middle East policy - suggests that AIPAC's power and political influence are starting to crack. Of course this has all come at the expense of an egregious amount of bloodshed.

Having stated all of the above, I would add this, however: I read recently that an aqueduct tunnel in Jerusalem, built by King Hezekiah in about 700 B.C., is still in use today. So even if you reject the notion that this land was given to the Israelis by God, it's clear that there is an historical claim there that is very real and very legitimate. Jews have a right to have their own state - theocratic, democratic or whatever they choose to make it. At least insofar as the pre-1967 borders are concerned. The Occupied Territories are another matter.

Israel's policies of building more and more settlements on Palestinian land would have to be labeled "expansionist" by just about anyone's definition other than the major media. Such settlement building can in no way be conducive to peace, and in fact scuttles any claim Israel may ever try to lay of taking the high road. The officials who have given orders to demolish Palestinian homes, uproot olive trees and fire missiles from F-16s seem to have forgotten the edict issued in Exodus 22:21: "Thou shalt neither vex a stranger nor oppress him: for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."

Such a lapse of memory seems also to have befallen Catherine Treadgold, who ironically urges Kozakiewicz to "read his own Bible." In her letter published in the February Richmond Review, Treadgold accuses Kozakiewicz of being influenced by "some obvious Arafat propaganda." Wherever this Arafat propaganda is being disseminated, it certainly is not in the major media.

Israel should dismantle its settlements and pull completely - not partially - out of the West Bank and Gaza. It should also offer to pay reparations to the descendents of Palestinians who lost their homes in 1948. (We, after all, did as much for Japanese-Americans). A peace-loving democracy would at least put such proposals on the negotiating table.

Richard Edmondson