To The Daily Sun,
In response to Russ Wiles letter in the Saturday issue of The Daily Sun, I truly understand his concerns and the civil way he expressed them. I am aware of the questions you asked I have heard them on every network including Fox News, which I watch most every night at 6 p.m. I went for the second time to the Internet to read about the Marines and their first responsibility while guarding a U.S embassies. Russ, please take the time to go to Google and type in search box "military guards at U.S.embassies". You will find different paragraphs. I suggest "3-Marine security guard-Benghazi attack puts spotlight on Marine embassy guards, don't blame Marines here is who is supposed to protect U.S. diplomats.
I am aware of the military names you mentioned. I will just mention it. Col. Allen West is a disaster which happened.The Army got rid of him, Florida got rid of him, so he and others got on Fox News to continue the hate and discontent of this president. I can go back and tell you that Vietnam and Iraq where two of the biggest mistakes made by past presidents. I can also say that the Reagan administrations supplying Iraq with WMDs during Iran-Iraq war was a disaster also. It is also a fact that no president can please all the people all the time.
I can assure you Russ that I get a sick feeling every time an American gets killed in harms way. What I can't understand is why you and your friends don't value the death of a American military person as you do an American diplomat. Don't you think the family of the military deserve the same as a diplomats family? I am sure that when Congress investigators go in secret session that they have answers to many questions that they don't share with the public.
Finally Russ,I hope you will check the references I mention and though we disagree on everything, you will at least understand my point of view. Henry Osmer
Last Updated on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 09:57
To The Daily Sun,
What is happening at the Lakes Regional Planning Commission in Meredith? A community of towns are invited to attend a forum on Workforce Housing in the middle of the day on Sept. 27, between the hours of 11 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. This is suppose to be a public outreach program!
I have e-mailed Mr. Jerry Coogan. AICP, program manager for Granite State Futures, the program of the LPPC, and CEDS on two separate occasions — Sept. 1 and Sept. 4. In the first e-mail, I asked for the format of this workshop, and if the public is allowed questions. As of Sept. 15, I have not received acknowledgement from Mr. Coogan.
In my e-mail of Sept. 4, I wrote: "Please explain to me why this meeting is from 11 a.m.to 2:30 p.m. The hours discriminate against the 'Working Class' in the towns, therefore there will be less input from 'WE the PEOPLE'. I think the time should be changed to accommodate the 'Working Class'". As of Sept. 15, I have not received acknowledgement from Mr. Coogan!
This appears to be an illegal "public meeting" because most people who pay taxes and work are unable to attend. Can people walk away from their jobs at 11 a.m.? Why would you have a public meeting without a majority of the people?
Under your enabling statute (RSA 36:47, General Powers & Duties), the Regional Planning Commissions are required "to make a good faith effort and respond to our communities". Having meetings during the lunch hour is not a good faith effort, particularly when you've had other meetings in the evening when more taxpayers can attend. Those who show up are not a representative of the majority of taxpayers in any community.
It is offensive that you would hold this important hearing at a time which is only marginally consistent with due process of law and suggests that you want to do an end-run around important public input. The meeting should be rescheduled for an evening time.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 09:51
To The Daily Sun,
Can you help? Baby Threads has done a lot for the needy of New Hampshire, but now Baby Threads is broke. We need yarn or donations for the purchase of yarn.
You all know Jokie. She's the wonderful lady who crochets everywhere as she pushes her husband's wheelchair all around town. She crochets 250 twin size blankets each year. Those blankets are given to the elderly, kids in needy families, and kids in foster care. Baby Threads has been providing the yarn and now we need your help.
Jokie uses ordinary Red Heart yarn. It takes three plain color skeins and four skeins of multi-color to make one blanket. Yarn can be dropped off at Baby Threads Workshop at 668 Main Street in Laconia on Tuesday or Wednesday between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.
Last Updated on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 09:48
To The Daily Sun,
Once again the Carye family has donated another extremely important parcel of land in Gilford for conservation. Last year they donated over 387 acres to the New England Forestry Foundation adjacent to the Meadows property. That land was specifically noted in the Town's Natural Resource Inventory as a top priority for protection. They recently donated an additional 8.4 acres of land that lies between the east side of Walmart and the state owned land that abuts Lily Pond at the end of the bypass. The property also abuts the 16 acres of land donated by Steve Grant on the western shore of Lily Pond in 2011. The land contains prime wetlands which are a rare natural resource in Gilford and are high priorities for protection. The land not only acts as a buffer for Lily Pond but also contains a short stretch of Black Brook that exits Lily Pond.
The Gilford Land Conservation Task Force on behalf of the Gilford Conservation Commission and the Town of Gilford would like to publicly thank the Carye family once again for their generosity and caring to assure that such important natural resources remain protected in perpetuity. We are so fortunate to have you!
Everett McLaughlin, Chair
Land Conservation Task Force
Last Updated on Monday, 16 September 2013 10:58
To The Daily Sun,
This letter is in response to Moultonborough Board of Selectman member Tolman's recent letter that defended the actions of his board in attempting to remove two Planning Board members at a hearing held on September 9th.
While one can argue the issue of whether the votes of the two Planning Board members were correct or even rational, the proper arbiter to determine the validity of those votes was the Superior Court. The problem with Mr. Tolman's arguments is that he failed to see that the option he and the Selectboard members used to remedy what they perceived to be errors by the Planning Board, "impeachment" of the two Planning Board
members, was flawed as the statute they relied upon required a showing of malfeasance.
When the Town Administrator presented his "indictment" of the Planning Board members, based upon his perception of what should have been done, he provided the Selectboard with two options, which probably were not intended to be mutually exclusive. The first was appeal the decision to Superior Court; the second was to subject the offending Planning Board members to a removal hearing. For whatever reasons, in
the infamous unrecorded "non-meeting," the selectmen elected the second option to attempt to remove the allegedly offending Planning Board members, even though that option would not remedy the alleged problem described by the town administrator.
Last Updated on Monday, 16 September 2013 10:54