Darwinian Dead-Ends To the Editor, Regarding Gregory McNamee's "Howl" (December 3): Reintroduction of endangered species is a move up the evolutionary ladder for humans. We have realized that our ill-advised "unconditional harvesting" philosophy has dangerously unbalanced the mix of life forms in our country. There are, however, some knuckle-draggers out there who have not only fallen off the evolutionary ladder but who are bent on dragging us with them. They are the ones who are subverting the reintroduction effort because of irrational fear and/or greed. They don't realize they have an astronomically "better" chance of being maimed while traveling in today's "civilized" society than in the wilderness. Neither do they comprehend that wild predators take a minuscule number of domestic livestock compared to bad weather and ill health. Predators would take even less had we not wiped out the bison herds and other mammals in the food chain. Enlightened ranchers and farmers have significantly reduced their losses to negligible levels by use of imaginative techniques like working dogs. But our Neanderthal neighbors' version of wisdom comes out of the barrel of a Winchester or the mouth of a strychnine bottle. It's a philosophy comparable to wealthy medieval merchants who had starving people jailed for stealing a loaf of bread. Human social evolution has dragged far behind our technological evolution. At the dawn of our existence, mankind fought off competitors with rocks and clubs. Today he fights off his perceived competitors with machetes, missiles and microorganisms. We've also applied this mindless tactic to our wildlife populations in order to marginally increase profits. We've killed not only with direct confrontation but also through the law of unintended consequences. Air, water and ground contamination, and paving over habitat are slower, but just as sure killers as a steel trap and a shot through the head. As we kill off the diversity of life on this planet we impoverish those life forms that are left. We now have more opportunities than ever to slow down this genocide of our wildlife. Our current opening is to turn these wolf killer(s) into the authorities. We can also make it known that we think jail time is the appropriate punishment for this type of crime. We can further boycott those who shelter these killing cowards. Unfortunately, incarceration cannot be long enough for these Darwinian dead-ends to disappear, but keeping them out of action will prevent them, however briefly, from further despoiling our country. --James P. Needham The Absolute Last Waco Letter To the Editor, I've been following the ongoing debate surrounding the Waco issue and I would like to comment on Tom Danehy's response to Chuck Aubrey's views ("Mail Bonding," December 10). It seems Danehy doesn't remember seeing footage of government forces firing shots at "occupied" buildings. It was one of the many lengthy scenes involving infra-red technology that causes everything in view to show up (or not) according to its level of heat. Those extremely bright little flashes of heat racing out of the tanks and toward the compound could not have been anything but gunfire. Now as to whether the building was occupied, let me ask this of Danehy: Where else could they have been? There was only one building! And if the compound were void of life at that point, why in the world would the government need to be shooting at it? Danehy also stated that the only three options the Davidians had were to wait, fight back or surrender. Well, the Davidians did attempt to surrender, specifically by calling 911 during the initial raid, only to find that the ATF refused to respond to the dispatcher. A later attempt to surrender after allowing Koresh to finish writing a religious manuscript also went up in flames, but a bit more literally, as shown on the video. The one he claims he watched. Twice! Danehy says to suggest the government burned and shot the Davidians is absurd. Well, absurd things happen all the time, like somebody watching that videotape twice and not figuring out that the ATF could have followed the rules by peacefully serving their warrant instead of charging in with all guns blazing for publicity. And if religious demagogues raping children is a tax agency priority, then why haven't the ATF driven their tanks to the friendly neighborhood Catholic Church yet? David Koresh was certainly no angel; in fact, he was probably nothing more than a lunatic, heavily armed Jesus-wannabe. But he had the right to be one. --Shawn Patrick Dent Sexual Squealing To the Editor, Your "first-ever" sex survey tends to confirm the rumor I've heard that you're planning to relocate The Weekly editorial offices to the adult-shop strip on Speedway. Is it really true, though, that you'll have private cubicles where customers can watch the staff prostitute themselves to their sleaziest advertisers while simultaneously attempting to maintain postures of moral outrage for the benefit of the onlookers? I'm afraid that's going to be less sexy than just plain laughable. --David Sewell Editor's note: In case you missed our last two issues, you still have a chance to fill out our first-ever Sex Survey! Just print the form, and mail it to P.O. Box 2429, Tucson AZ 85719. Or fax it: 792-2096. Firing Range To the Editor, I have a solution to the wolf problem. It's a simple solution whose time has come. Shoot cattle. Yes, that's right, shoot cows and lots of them. Cattle are not on any endangered list that I'm aware of. Of course the price of cow would lead one to differ with that statement. As far as dangerous pests go, cattle rate much higher than any old flea-bitten wolf. Wolves have never killed a human. Cattle cannot boast that; just ask the families of those who have lost loved ones due to E-coli-laced beef. Cattle are a direct contributor of heart disease in America. Just try and find a person with heart disease (non-congenital) that doesn't have a long history of beef addiction and abuse. Cattle have also contributed to the near extinction of wolves, mountain lions, Indians, buffalo, and even threatened a certain talk show host's bank account. Cattle cost the American public in health care far more than not wearing helmets, seat belts, jaywalking or smoking dope. If anyone questions you about what you're doing, or even tries to cite you, just tell them that the cow (or bull) was attacking your dog. So the next time you are out on the open range drinking beer and enjoying your Second Amendment rights, think about eradicating a few of these pests; hell, they're easy to hit. --Gregory L. Travis Tom Foolery To the Editor, I've always enjoyed reading the letters section, but a couple weeks ago, I came across one that I absolutely couldn't believe. Danny Bailey accused your columnist Tom Danehy of being a liar, calling him a "lying baby-boomer" and a lying old man" ("Liar's Club," Mailbag, November 19). Danehy is a humor columnist, and a darned good one, at that. Many times he's every bit as good as the Pulitzer Prize-winning Dave Barry. Danehy could write about Martians or boogers or living in a tree. It wouldn't matter as long as it was funny and/or entertaining. No one expects him (or any humorist) to adhere to a standard of truth. Think about it this way. Remember when Steve Martin used to do the old arrow-through-the-head bit? There really wasn't an arrow through his head. It was just a gag. In a way, he was lying to us to make us laugh. And we didn't get mad at that. Danehy is sometimes exasperating, sometimes annoying, but usually laugh-out-loud funny. He's the No. 1 reason why I read The Weekly. He doesn't always write the truth, but that doesn't make him a liar. --Josh Robinson Tune Out To the Editor, Regarding the recent half-page ad in the Tucson Weekly for the PBS show Sessions at West 54th Street: This season includes Lucinda Williams, Cowboy Junkies and Elvis Costello, to name a few. I hope your readers enjoyed that ad, because we'll never SEE those shows here in Tucson, since KUAT-TV dropped Sessions... this year, replaced by Austin City Limits. Why can't they have both shows, like the Phoenix/Tempe PBS station? I called KUAT-TV and was told that they considered Sessions... too "esoteric" and that their viewers prefer a more "country and western" show such as Austin City Limits. This is the network that advertises "If PBS doesn't do it, who will?" I guess that doesn't apply to us hicks in Tucson. The Phoenix/Tempe PBS station always seems to have more adventurous programming than ours, one of the few advantages of living up there. --Hal Williams We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives

		© 1995-98 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth