Minority coverage insensitive

Just when I was beginning to wonder why the Mirror, which tries so hard to project itself as being politically hip, has so little to say about the plights of ethnic minorities in Montreal and vicinity... along comes Kristian Gravenor's enlightening piece on Kahnawake ["Mohawks will have you for dinner", June 4].

The situation Gravenor describes has all the makings of a good, politically attuned story: an economically depressed native community that feels compelled to market its ethnic heritage in order to generate jobs and income; the refusal of all governments to lend a financial hand in this endeavour; the pandering to French tourists and their tastes for New World exotica; and to top it all off, the neo-colonialist attitude of the Le Figaro reporter who complains that the natives don't speak French!

But instead of any sensitive treatment of the issues, Gravenor delivers his superficial and smirking "perspective." He ridicules the Mohawks' portrayal of their own history and relationship with nature, expresses mock resentment at not being able to "raise a single Eurobuck by re-enacting my own British traditions," and smugly observes that the Kahnawake reserve "still looks more like Chateauguay without the streetlights than Eurodisney."

If this is what the Mirror's coverage of ethnic minorities looks like, then I should be thankful that it is such a rare treat.

--Chris Oliver

No proof of pet pilfering

Last week's cover story ["Lock up your pets!", June 11] charges that animal dealers in Quebec are stealing people's pets and selling them to research laboratories. This is a serious allegation. However, writer Jacquie Charlton offers little more than hearsay to support this sensationalist conspiracy theory.

Most important, Charlton provides no balance in her story. Where is the explanation of the vital role that animal research has played in lifesaving advances, such as the development of insulin, vaccines, pharmaceuticals, organ transplants, open heart surgery, etc.? Where is the explanation of the tremendous strides that scientists have made in reducing our reliance on research animals? Where is the explanation of the systems that are in place to ensure that research animals are humanely and responsibly used in Canada?

Yes, the issue of animal research should be open to discussion. However, constructive dialogue cannot occur if the public does not have access to all the relevant information.

--Patricia Guyda, President
Canadians for Health Research

Leave Bezonsky in Toronto

So, Josh Bezonsky leaves Montreal for TO, writes a happy little column about how Montreal is slowly going down like the Titanic and then the Mirror continues to print his column? I enjoyed Mr. Bezonsky's column while he was here, but is Montreal so amazingly devoid of scribes with skill that the Mirror must resort to printing imported whine? Can't anyone else in La Belle Province write such pizzazz-filled sentences as "Toronto is so not Montreal!"? Is there no one here witty enough to come up with things such as "Wank Me Off Before You Ca Ca"?

Come on already!

--J. Kelly Nestruck

Unitarian seeks retribution

Regarding the story "Spitting in God's eye" [June 4], allow me to make the following clarifications:

When a total solar eclipse occurs, the resulting "sign in the heavens" is a purely symbolic "All-Seeing Eye of God." And I did not "come across" the passage in Ecclesiasticus; it was the very first passage that my eyes saw when I randomly opened the Bible.

Rev. Drennan's sorry excuse for an apology validates the saying that "the repentance of a hypocrite is hypocrisy itself." He does not acknowledge any wrongdoing whatsoever, nor does he retract his allegations. On the contrary, he insinuates that his words were not offensive and implies that he maintains his reprehensible "position" that my revelation was a "psychotic experience," the claims arising from it "silliness and fantasy."

I am no longer seeking a "deeper apology." Instead, I expect my fellow Unitarians to condemn Rev. Drennan's behaviour and to subject him to disciplinary action. Justice and equity will not be upheld unless Rev. Drennan is disciplined at least as strictly for his far more serious offenses.

And I challenge Ellen Campbell to defend her deceptive assertions, which are as misleading as much of the Unitarian Universalist publicity. Her response totally evades the issue of Rev. Drennan's conduct and the fact that it makes a total mockery of most Unitarian Universalist covenants, principles and affirmations.

--Robin Edgar