Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


What if a parent decided not to vaccinate a child based on this unacountable opinnion?

To The Daily Sun,

I was named in three letters in the last two weeks, quite an impressive feat, I think. Seeing that those letter writers were Russ Wiles, Tony Boutin and Don Ewing make that a bit less impressive. These letter writers have no shame and no accountability.

In the past, Russ has published letters where he has said that vaccines are not immunizations and that doctors are lying to their patients. What if someone read those lies, elected not to vaccinate based on that and ended up with a child with a vaccine preventable disease. Russ having no accountability would claim his First Amendment rights and go on his merry way, leaving this mother and child with potentially severe medical consequences.

A few years ago a caller to a local radio show named Richard made some claims about the HPV vaccine and the disease Guillain-Barre (GB). In it he stated that the HPV vaccine caused this severe paralyzing disease in one in one-million girls who received it. Cherry-picking facts, what Richard, who is not trained in either medicine or in statistics did not know was that in this age group the incidence of GB is 1.1-1.5 per 100,000 or 11-15 young people would expect to come down with this disease. Much higher than the 1 that Richard was so hot about. But he knew.

What if a parent hearing this elected not to vaccinate her child based on this, and not on the medical research, exposing her child to a potential deadly disease which could have been prevented by a safe and effective vaccine? No accountability to Richard though.

We see this now with the climate change deniers. For years we have promoted getting young students interested in STEM vocations. STEM stands for science, technology, engineering and mathematics. We have writers like the above trio who, I would gather have no background in science, who, without any documentation, attack climate change. Why would anyone go into science and be subject to attacks from such uniformed people? When a paper is published in science it goes through a peer review before it is published. It is reviewed for its research methods and data. Only then is it published. If it does not meet these standards then it does not get published. Like the famous Pero paper that one local chiropractor claimed proved that children could boost their immune system with chiropractic manipulation, it was never published because its claims did not stand up to the even low chiropractic standards.

If they have nothing, then like Don Ewing they claim this fantastic government hoax or conspiracy theory. Never mind that 175 countries, 197 international science organizations, 97 percent of climatologists, and that every national and international science academies have consensus papers out on the validity and facts on the changing climate. The Pentagon has a position paper out on the effects of climate change on future military endeavors. The military understood these implications as early as 2003 and adopted climate change into its planning in 2007. Hey Don, that was before Obama.

It is well known that CO2 traps the sun's rays increasing the temperature on the earth surface. Water makes up 70 percent the Earth's surfaces, so the majority of this rise in temps would be reflected in ocean temperatures. This is exactly what is happening, more and more data shows this.

The World Meteorological Organization declared 2015 the hottest year on record by a large margin. This year could be even warmer. The Arctic has warmed twice as fast as the rest of the world over the last few decades The consequences of an increasingly warming ocean temps can be seen in the bleaching of the great coral reef off the shores of Australia.

The melting of arctic ice and the rapid melting of the ice sheaths on Greenland add fresh water to the oceans, fresh water does not hold oxygen as well as salt water which puts sea life at risk. So says Matthew Long, an oceanographer at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

A recent paper out of Dartmouth College published in March of this year — yes, Dartmouth right here in New Hampshire — looked at the release of CO2 from thawing permafrost. Guess they must also be part of this great government conspiracy, right Don.

Don, in his fantasy of a government conspiracy, does not recognize that climatologist around the world are publishing papers on the effects of climate change. Like this one: the summer of 2015 was more than two degrees Celsius warmer than the long-term average, said survey team coordinator Andrea Fischer, a glaciologist with the Austrian Academy of Sciences.

How does the great conspiracist Don explain this? Are these researchers also part of this global conspiracy? Are then all the climatologist who are publishing, deliberately providing false data as part of this conspiracy? This is just total nonsense and as crazy as anything Russ has said in the past.

I would suggest all readers do your own research on climate change, or at least demand that these writers produce some documentation supporting their insane theories. I think you will find those studies severely lacking in number and peer acceptance.

Mirno Pasquali


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 671

We should be against any hate speech that endangers people

To The Daily Sun,

Charlie from Wolfeboro thinks I must have been the college debate coach's favorite, while I think he was probably the kid who wasn't quick enough to get on any debate team. He asked why I try to convince others. Firstly, I don't believe people like Charlie, Russ, Steve, Don, Tony, or John are reachable, ever. You folks are lost.

Charlie starts off with a complete fallacy that, "Instead of wishing to make the country great again. I need to be against making the country great again." Folks, they completely miss the point. Hello! America is great right right now and Donald Trump is playing the weakness card trying to convince his gullible sheep that we are in decline. Maybe they are in decline but we aren't.

Exit polls show 65 percent of Republicans believe the GOP has turned their back on them. Good for them for finally figuring that one out. Too bad they got suckered in the first place. Trump preys on their fears and failures like a good propagandist does.

His second point, "Instead of being for a strong military, I need to be against having a strong military, thereby putting the country at risk against dictators around the world who do not give a tinker's damn — what they are called by the "intelligentsia." This is another foolish statement. We have a very strong military right now. Trump is simply convincing the bleating sheep that it's not big enough and we should be sword-rattling pugilists in our foreign policies. This he does even though we fund it to the tune of more than the next six most powerful nations combined.

His third point, "I need to be against the man-and-woman model of family that has worked for over 5,000 years as the glue to keep societies together" is another example of a narrow mind. I am talking inclusiveness. There have always been gay and lesbian couples, just as there are in most of the bird and mammal species and it's time to recognize them as people equal under the law — marriage, Social Security benefits, testamentary rights, etc.

Only 5,000? Did you get that from the Bible? Try millions for our evolutionary clade and over 280,000 years for humans alone. We already won the LGBT rights fight, so try another dead horse. There have always been transgenders and intersexuals (those born with elements of both male and female genitalia). You just need to crawl out of your hole and get some sun.

His fourth one is another goofball point: "I need to be against English as a unifying force in the country, though India, with its 300 languages and over 1,000 dialects, has realized that such a level of diversity does not work and all matters of commerce and law are conducted in English." Who is against English as a unifying force? Another strawman argument because the movement I speak of that echoes the German fascists want English-only.

The key word is "only." Let people speak their tongue and don't throw your toys on the floor when they do. All over this country we are bilingual in roads, airports, media, and it's not hurting anyone. Most of our legal documents are in English and sometimes also in Spanish for new immigrants, etc., and nobody is asking for that central place for English to be changed.

Then Charlie wiggles this one in: "I need to be against asking our immigrants (legal and not) to assimilate into the American culture because diversity as practiced in the Balkans and the Middle East has worked so very well and we should follow it." So there it is, folks, it's the Middle East and the Balkans. All immigrants should assimilate because they will fail economically if they don't. Most do. But it's up to them, not some right-wing, glassy-eyed, flag-waving, Bible-thumping, white nationalist. No law but those pursuant to the Constitution is to be in effect. That means no laws based on any religious belief, Muslim, Christian, or Jewish, etc.

The Constitution is an enlightenment based, godless document that puts all religions on the same footing under the law. All of this does not mean newer immigrants celebrating their own home culture is wrong. It's also more difficult for the elderly to learn new languages, so ease off a bit. Just remember that most of the world outside the Orient is multicultural and full of diversity. You've lost this one, too. By 2060, whites will be in the minority and so will theistic belief.

Charlie's sixth point is like Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachmann word salad. He writes, "I need to be against hate speech, religious stereotyping, revoking civil rights in the name of patriotism and national."

Let me simplify this. We should be ethically against any hate speech that endangers people, seeks to strip civil rights from them, or to dehumanize them as so many wingnuts do. Taking a wide brush to any group is not intelligent. Most Muslims are not violent, most Christians are not twisted dominionists (Christian Sharia) like Ted Cruz (aka Teddy Taliban), and most Christians aren't narrow-minded fools like Huckabee or Santorum.

Now let me finish with the Marxist-socialist rants of right-wing nutjobs. There are not any Marxist-socialists anymore. Hardly anybody believes in that purist socialist rubbish but Charlie didn't get the memo a few decades ago. In fact, very few believe in purist unregulated capitalism, either. What most people believe in are mixed economies. Regulated capitalism with an emphasis on increasing purchasing power in the citizenry. Expanding the national commons when the market fails as it did on healthcare. Please read the memo, Charlie.

Like Stevie Earle, you're beating a dead horse about those ghastly commie-pinkos. If you don't know what Marxism is, it's when the state owns all the means of production and distribution of products for starters. Can you find one person who actually believes that Marxism is a good idea? I have not met even one.

James Veverka


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 339