Crimes against humanity
To the Editor:
When the leader of a country, an organization or a business denies the factual evidence of climate change and global warming, they should be tried in the World Court at The Hague for crimes against humanity.
When ethnic cleansing puts people in the court for killing a few thousand people, shouldn’t leaders who actively work to keep their country from reducing the level of carbon gases or continuing to produce those gases be guilty of crimes against humanity?
Never have so few people had the ability to kill all humans without the use of nuclear weapons. The presidents of the U.S., Brazil, the Philippines, Poland and a few other countries have said it isn’t happening. They are actively eliminating any activity or program that would reduce CO2 and methane in the air.
Trump actually has fired hundreds of people in 17 agencies for trying to educate and research climate change. If someone is found guilty of crimes against humanity, getting 10 to 20 years for ethnic cleansing, what should be the penalty for killing billions?
Every minute we waste denying the obvious facts and causing the remediation and reduction to be postponed is contributing to the destruction of humanity and life as we know it. What should their punishment be?
Quit whining, get back to work
To the Editor:
It seems we have a misconception. Some folks think you can only do one job at a time and nothing else gets done. Those are mostly Republican commentators. They say Democrats are so busy with impeachment talks (long overdue) that nothing is coming out of the House.
Wrong as usual. The House has been very busy this year getting things going for the people. The Senate’s Mitch McConnell is sitting on this very important and beneficial legislation. If he dare passes any of it, the people will see that the Republicans have been sitting on their hands (and campaign promises) for years. Thirty-eight bills are sitting with graveyard Mitch. All things people have been asking for, and Republicans are denying voters. Things like prescription drug price relief, gun control, environment, violence against women, consumer first legislation, internet voter security, and the list goes on.
But McConnell sits on all of these just like he filibustered to stop government when he was minority leader. He is very effective at stopping legislation that works for voters and pushing legislation for the wealthy.
So, in conclusion, don’t look at this from the starting position of bills, look to where and by whom and why they are being stopped.
They now want help upstream?
To the Editor:
Your May 20 “Then & Now” column contained some interesting information that many readers may have failed to fully comprehend. In 1855, Ellis S. Chesbrough came up with the idea of reversing the Chicago River and flushing the city’s sewage downstream. This was done to solve their problem of allowing the filth to drift into Lake Michigan and pollute their water supply.
So, for 154 years, Chicago has been (defecating) on Joliet and much of the rest of Illinois. They have shown for years that they don’t care about us, so why should we be expected to help solve their problems now?