From: | CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org> |
Date: | 21 Feb 2002 16:55:40 -0000 |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | Re: [CPEO-MEF] Digest for cpeo-military@igc.topica.com, issue 474 |
[SENT BY TED HENRY (KC2TH@aol.com)] I applaude Jim Werner for speaking up and trying to focus the discussion on examples of exemptions and how perpsective truly influences interpretation and expression of the current facts on an issue. While I am sometimes (maybe often) accused of being too wordy in some of my work, I firmly believe that in this environment the repercussions of being too wordy are far less then generalizing or trying to be brief. Clearly, there are exemptions for the military in certain areas and certainly there are current efforts to obtain more, as in the senate hearings coming up in March. And, at the same time, there are areas where other entities hold up genuine efforts to move a project forward, some justified, some not, some avoidable, some not. There will always be some antagonism - realities will not change. However, the more different individuals and groups can try to avoid statements about others and move toward asking clarifying questions and generating exploratory discussions the better - a point I tried to convey in the DU discussion. In the end, nothing can replace the working relationship, even though there will be various situations where different perspectives will have to respectfully take separate stances and actions on an issue. Peace Ted | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Military Exemptions Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Re: Digest for cpeo-military@igc.topica.com, issue 475 | |
Prev by Thread: Re: [CPEO-MEF] Digest for cpeo-military@igc.topica.com, issue 474 Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] Fort Devens taken off Superfund list |