O CanadaI had to laugh when I read Peter Jay's recent...


August 21, 1994

O Canada

I had to laugh when I read Peter Jay's recent characterization (Aug. 4) of well-educated, liberal, hard-core nationalist Canadians, simply because it was so accurate.

However, contrary to his belief in a free and open Canada, the government of our northern neighbors is actually quite repressive.

To minimize press coverage of a trial in a western province, a Canadian court essentially forced cable companies to drop some services of U.S. origin, and customs officers tried to confiscate Buffalo newspapers from Canadians returning from the U.S. That is control of what they read.

While some jurisdictions in the U.S. add penalties for violent crimes motivated by racial hatred, Canadian law prohibits calling someone by a racial epithet, in an apparent effort to ensure no one's feelings are injured. That is control of what they say.

Contrary to President Clinton's apologists, Ontarians with medical conditions and long waits for treatment, most notably those who required ultrasonic removal of kidney stones, traveled to Buffalo and Syracuse for treatment. They did, that is, until Ontario started to refuse to pay. That is control of access to health care providers.

Ontario currently charges a 15 percent sales tax. As a result, on any given fall weekend at least one-third of the shoppers at Syracuse's Carousel Centre mall are Canadian.

Ontario, of course, tries to discourage this behavior. In addition, there was a recent effort to ban the importation of (admittedly rather tasteless) bubble gum cards. That is control of what they buy.

In my experience, most Canadians are friendly, almost to a fault, to Americans. Unfortunately, it is from Mr. Jay's Canadian nationalist "intellectuals" that our liberal intellectuals steal their ideas.

Dave Baum

Central Square, N.Y.

Beating Sarbanes

As a supporter of Ruthann Aron, I am irate at The Sun's endorsement in the Republican primary.

Not once in the endorsement are Ruthann Aron's positions on the issues stated.

The piece makes vague reference to her opponent's history of living in the region, though not in Maryland, and of his knowledge of urban issues. It does not identify one part of Ms. Aron's opponent's platform which would benefit Baltimore or Maryland.

I support Ruthann Aron because she has taken specific stances on issues which will benefit not just Baltimore, but the entire state.

She supports lower taxes to free up private enterprise and create jobs in Maryland.

She supports the death penalty and strict sentencing to make cities like Baltimore more livable and safe.

Why doesn't The Sun mention these positions or explain why Ms. Aron's opponent's stances (if they exist) are better? Because The Sun is an embarrassing newspaper which would like nothing better than to have Paul Sarbanes in its back pocket for six more years -- and it knows that Ruthann Aron would beat him. That's why.

Luckily for Maryland, The Sun no longer has the clout to impact a statewide election.

Ruthann Aron will still be around after the Republican primary to beat Senator Sarbanes.

June K. Bush

Silver Spring

Hiroshima Was Not a Mistake

"A Monstrous Mistake" by Stewart Udall (Opinion * Commentary, Aug. 8) begs for rebuttal. Granted, the ex-interior secretary exposes several interesting theories but does not put himself in the positions of the hundreds of thousands of young American soldiers, sailors and Marines who would have been casualties had an invasion of Japan been necessary.

America's only mistake possibly when Japan refused to surrender was not warning occupants of Japan's major cities to leave days before we attacked. Which cities were going to be bombed had to remain a secret.

This writer, at age 17, already sworn into the Navy in June 1945, was in the process of receiving training when the bombs were dropped. In retrospect I admire President Harry S Truman for having the guts to order what had to be done.

The Navy in its infinite wisdom after V-J day assigned some freshly trained sailors to the Navy Department in Washington late in 1945.

As a yeoman trainee, replacing higher-rated yeomen who were being discharged, I had the opportunity to read correspondence; in fact, it was my job.

I recall reading and hearing that anywhere from 200,000 to 400,000 casualties could have been suffered by the U.S. military, if invasion were necessary. This information originated from admirals and Marine generals whose knowledge of the situation, because most of them were recently returned from the action zone, certainly outweighs any vague, futile and abstract theory of Mr. Udall's.

Where he comes up with his cockeyed assumption that a promising opportunity was lost to negotiate with Japan, which had never negotiated anything, a surrender after Hitler's generals capitulated is pure folly.

As a history buff I have never read anything to support that fantasy. . . .

Donald F. Fritz


I am sure that Mr. Udall's treatment of the attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been formed by today's view of yesterday's war.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.