Letters
CBC's radio and TV programs are vital for rural Canadians
Regarding the Oct. 11 Opinion piece, "Just pull the plug on the CBC already": I note that the writer lives in Toronto, where the choice of both radio and television channels providing information about Toronto is myriad. I live in Inuvik in the Northwest Territories, and I don't have much choice in getting information on the air about where I live. It's not all about hockey. It's about whether the Dempster Highway is open; it's about the territorial government's legislative assembly opening; it's about all kinds of things that I don't see and hear about anywhere else. If the CBC were to be privatized, who would carry the cost of providing the rural Canadian with vital information which allows that person to make informed decisions and take part in the running of our country - the whole country?
Anne M. Crossman
Retired area manager, CBC Western Arctic
Inuvik, Northwest Territories
Rondi Adamson does not speak for me when suggesting that the CBC should be scrapped! There is no one who would produce radio programming in the Inuktitut language to broadcast to the remote Inuit communities of the Arctic, in Cree for remote communities in northern Saskatchewan, or even in English for many other remote communities in northern Alberta or northwest Ontario. This fact alone justifies the continuance of "Mothercorp."
I am a small-"c" conservative in Alberta, and I enjoy listening to the commentaries on the CBC, even if they are tinged quite strongly pink (liberal/socialist), for it stimulates me to examine my own position on many subjects. The news gathering is exceptional, compared to "private" radio stations. However, I must agree in part with Ms. Adamson that perhaps the demise of CBC television might not be so bad. That role may be equally well filled by the private sector, although the radio operation (which is blessedly commercial free) would suffer from the loss of the TV advertising revenues!
Stuart Hellis
Spruce Grove, Alberta
Regarding John Hughes's Oct. 5 column, "Allied troops should stand firm in Iraq as democracy takes root": As an Arab- American Muslim and World War II veteran who has lived and studied in the Middle East, I endorse the position that we must stay the course in trying to build an Iraqi democracy and continue to confront world terrorism.
I think that the invasion of Iraq was ill-timed and ill-planned. However, I have encountered Islamic fundamental attitudes and they scare me. I can say the same about all groups who seek to impose their wills under the mask of religious duty. We cannot allow ourselves to cut and run in Iraq, or we will pay a much heavier price in the future.
Alec Berry
Dearborn Heights, Mich.
In response to the Sept. 30 article, "Where to find $200 billion to pay for Katrina?": I think individual Americans ought to hold the mortgage if the Gulf Coast is rebuilt. But the only funding people are talking about are budget cuts and increased taxes.
Maybe we can't avoid a huge bill. But why not use a funding method the financiers of World War II gave us? I think the government should sell World-War-II-type "war bonds" with a guaranteed rate of return to help finance the recovery. Taxes are involuntary. Recovery bond purchases are voluntary. We'll have to pay for reconstruction one way or another. Why not let John and Mary Public earn the interest on the debt instead of China or Japan?
Mark McBride
Baton Rouge, La.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number. Any letter accepted will appear in print and on our website, www.csmonitor.com.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to (617) 450-2317, or e-mail to Letters.
