Indifference or intolerance?
Re: Racist item at bazaar
While attending one of our many Christmas bazaars this weekend, I came upon a booth of antiques and collectibles and at eye level, center of the display was a framed “poem” probably dating to the ‘30s or ‘40s. It was a picture of a small black child with a caption that included a racial slur. I read no further and said to the booth attendant, “I am highly offended by this!” Her reply was since it was a collectible, it was thus acceptable plus “black people even collect these” and that we are all welcome to our opinions.
The price tag was $65 and had I been able, I’d purchased it and destroyed it. The bazaar had begun at 8 a.m. and it was about 10:30 when this occurred. I wonder how many others saw it and ignored it out of indifference or maybe fear of causing a commotion or what?
I contacted the bazaar organizer and she went with me to the booth and placed the piece down and said she would talk to the sellers. I presume she did this.
We are awash in a world that has decided racism is again acceptable. The ugly incident at the college, the white supremacy poster and now this odious display at a Christian church seem to confirm it is the new norm. If this is true, it deeply saddens me.
Landowners not opposed to coal
Re: Ramaco’s Brook Mine
A recent letter to the editor (Nov. 11) from Tom Laya wrongly accused the Powder River Basin Resource Council and landowners of attempting to stop all fossil development in our state. Unfortunately, that letter did not tell the whole story about Mr. Laya who has leased coal to Ramaco and stands to make money if a coal mine is developed. I understand his fear of losing whatever monetary gain he was promised for mining coal he owns. However, unlike those of us who live or own property near the proposed mine and have a lot to lose, Mr. Laya’s home and property near the proposed mine would still be intact.
First and foremost, we the landowners are not against a new coal mine. We are against a company who has trespassed on private land and will not work with its neighbors. Believe me when I say their approach is more belligerent than neighborly. To everyone else it was nothing but grand promises. The numbers Ramaco talked about bounced around from up to 600 jobs at the mine, then it was lowered to 200 employees and then the number dropped to six. Ramaco has changed its plans so many times but still no new jobs have been created.
This summer, they announced that they had received a $7 million grant, which was also not accurate. The grant was for $3.7 million to the Western Research Institute along with other research partners who were not located in Wyoming. Ramaco made a lot of noise about a grant that would bring absolutely no money to Sheridan.
Our concerns over the hazardous wastes and water pollution from the proposed iPark and iCAM are concerns for the whole county and the valley. We are looking at the future for the good of all not just for private financial gains.
Ramaco’s stated disappointment regarding the decision by the Wyoming Environmental Quality Council would not have had to go that far if the permit application had been completed with all of the necessary findings and information in the first place. Instead the landowners and PRBRC had to find the experts to demonstrate the failings with subsidence and blasting and water impacts from the proposed mine. The EQC decision followed the laws that require protection of property and the environment. It is wonderful to see a state agency that will stand up for the good of all the people in the county or state. We are bound by laws of the state, so why should Ramaco feel it can slide under the radar?
This is not the first time Ramaco has conducted business this way. Please go to the internet and look up Ramaco and Nottingham, Pennsylvania. The people in that area had very similar experiences. We hope our elected officials — city, county and state — investigate and learn the facts instead of thinking there is a windfall in all of the Ramaco proposals.