What makes our County the best place on Earth? What makes it a special sancuary we call home, where most know each other and our problems are not special?
It's the PEOPLE! It's our HERITAGE! It's our HONOR!
Consider the words below, of a man who was not a native to this area, but none the less a man who in trying days lead his nation through difficult times.
"This is the lesson: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense."
Winston Churchill
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Before coming to Swain County, we were warned repeatedly just how mean spirited some of the 'locals' could be. While most our Swain friends and neighbors have been wonderful, a small percentage persist in demonizing anyone they happen to disagree with.
This blog is a perfect example of that mean spiritedness.
Solutions to problems aren't offered, just complaints. Rumors and innuendo are tossed around without providing any supporting facts. Slurs are common. Words like traitor and coward are used by commenters for those who they disagree with. Public officials are compared to individuals accused of murdering their wife (O.J.)
Take a long hard look in the mirror - the rest of the world doesn't look upon your 'honorable' behavior with the same approval that you do.
This blog really could serve a useful purpose other than just a vent if you wanted it to. Policy matters could be debated, potential solutions offered, real problems could be brought to light (instead of a steady stream of innuendo).
The post a few weeks ago about county officals not attending a Fontana planning meeting was spot on. There is real value in pointing out that type of failure of leadership, if done without too much snark. But most of the rest......other than making you feel a little better, it accomplishes nothing.
Why do we find special about Swain County? The scenic beauty. It's not the people.
In the investigations that have been broght to the front and well published, things have come out that indeed are not "honorable". You have a chairman of the county commissioners that not once, but at least 3 times with no less than 60 absentee voters mail in ballots that "he mailed". It is fact or the state BOE and the DOJ chief crimminal investigator in Charlotte would not be following up with the investigation, something that you say is "without ...any supporting facts". It really appears that doing wrong and following illegal activity has been done for so long now it is accecpted as being right and okay. AND, if anyone identifies an obvious miscarriage of ethics, its "mean sprited" and then it is apparent that the "truth hurts" as you want to acknowledge "failure of leadership, without too much stark." That is exactly the problem sugar coat it, plead ignorannce, and without offense to as much to a fly ask them to "do better". So folks are very tired of the "machine" and they have attempted thes matters being debated at the board of aldermen and the county commissioners meetings. "Real problems have been brought to light" as you say in a real arena, but, with the "failure of leadership" that we currently have, they have chose "not to turn the switch on". And another thing, "The scenic beauty" you enjoy, well, enjoy it and hope you die enjoying it, when the contract of 1943 is settled with a cash settlement, "wilderness" is NOW YOUR HOME, for others to hike in an enjoy solitude, touching their souls with nature, like they have done to all the communities of the Little Tenn. River, and the Fontana Basin.
Finally, a substantive response. Thank you Mr. Drake.
However, you are making the mistaken assumption that I'm defending the status quo. I'm not. I was appalled at the handling of the Sheriff's food contract - not at the termination of the previous practice, but in the timing. If Glenn Jones is indeed found guilty of the deeds under investigation by the state, then he absolutely should face whatever he has coming to him, and new elections held for chairman. I think the Park Service stumbled badly and rather inexcusably on the lack of transportation to recent Decoration Days. Et cetera, et cetera....
But, I'm also tired of reading letters week after week, year after year, in the Smoky Mtn Times, and on this blog, slinging around accusations without backing them up, or badmouthing anyone who holds a different opinion. I'm tired of seeing banners hung downtown accusing our congressional representative of being a 'Traitor'. No one is defending G. Jones here. I am defending those who have legitimate differences of opinion from you who are honorable men and women.
I understand the frustration you have with the current adminstration, as I share many of the same frustrations. But....there is civil discourse and disagreement on one hand, and mud-slinging and innuendo on the other. I'm simply urging those on this blog who are claiming a moral authority to back it up with a clear understanding of where that line is.
Finally, there seems to be a regrettable tendency to link a cash settlement on the road issue with the Park Service's desire to manage the North Shore as wilderness. These issues, while related, are separate. There are legitimate concerns by Swain residents over a wilderness designation, and by all means these should be aired and hopefully driven to an acceptable political conclusion. However, to insinuate that the county receiving a cash settlement automatically means a Wilderness Designation is just simply not true.
Ah, the opportunity for some real discussion of "policy matters could be debated"...involving " a small percentage persist in demonizing anyone they happen to disagree with." Several questions here for you: "Are you an "American"? Do you believe in the "Principals of America"? Are you familiar with the "Bill of Rights"? Do you believe that the "Bill of Rights should apply to all "Americans"? Would you agree with the following statement if it was presented for passage to the U.S. Congress: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; of abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." My friend, the answer to all of these questions, should be, believe it or not is "yes", and the proposal item I mentioned if presented to U.S. Congress, well, it was not part of the "Bill of Rights" and it was not until the twelve amendments were sent to the states on 25 Sept. 1789. This particular one my friend is: OUR first Amendment. Another topic: "However, to insinuate that the county receiving a cash settlement automatically means a Wilderness Designation is just simply not true." Again, my friend, you have spoken of "without any supporting facts" about certain topics, can you support that a "Wilderness Designation is not true". Have you read the read the FINAL EIS STUDY??? Guess not, here's document, section and page, FACT : 3.2.5 Parkland, National Forest, and Recreational Facilities, (Affected Enviorment-3-23, page 20), "NPS has determined that in the light of the difficulties encountered in the previous wilderness proposals, any future consideration of wilderness designation should not take place until the North Shore Road issue is resolved. However, the Park is currently manages all of the proposed area in accordance with NPS wilderness policies to preserve the characteristics that make it eligible as a designated wilderness." To say, "the Park Service stumbled badly and rather inexcusably on the lack of transportation to recent Decoration Days..." is truly a first step of this quote from the "Wilderness Act of 1964", "the imprint of man's work substantially un-noticeable". Which is exactly the steps and the lengths that the NPS is doing to side step the Federal Government's obligation to the honor, memory, respect to it's own citizens and veterans of several conflicts, of which over 1,100 are still interred in the area for potential "Wilderness". All of this, at the desires of the "environmentalists".
To" no honor without compassion"..
YOU need to learn some "facts".!!The land on the northshore was considered for "wilderness" in 1966,1974,1979,& 1999.Having the unfulfilled '43 agreement kept it from happening.This is DEFINATELY the plan of the government !If there is a "cash settlement" the '43agreement is gone and WILDERNESS WILL COME !!!WE must bind together and Demand the remainder of the road be built to save the last 15% of the county!.Read the FEIS...LEARN about this.!Refer to the page in paul drake's comment.I think you will find it very interesting. Check it out !
I have in fact read the EIS. Let me see if I can decipher what you are saying here.
1) If B cannot occur without A first happening, then B must automatically occur if A does happen.
B in this case being Wilderness Designation, A being a Cash Settlement.
That statement does not appear in any book of logic I've ever read. Despite the Park's stated intentions, Wilderness is not a done deal, and I believe there is a middle ground. I urge you to read the book 'Wolf Wars', largely about the political aspects of the reintroduction of the Grey Wolf to Yellowstone, in order to gain perspective on the types of political compromises that can be made in situations like this. You might also study the compromises made by Grand Teton National Park to surrounding communities.
I am probably someone you would consider an 'environmentalist', but I also strongly believe that family members should have reasonable access to the cemeteries. I've never yet met or talked with anyone else who you probably would consider an 'environmentalist' who believes otherwise. I'm not saying there perhaps aren't some very radical 'environmentalists' out there, but they are in the vast minority. Most sympathies lie with your position on access, but on the other hand people like myself want to see the park protected. There has to be a solution that satisfies both. Find it, and you'll have people on both sides pushing to make it happen.
2)Demand the remainder of the road be built to save the last 15% of the county!
The logic of this truly escapes me. As far as I'm aware of, there is no movement anywhere to 'take' the rest of the county, other than voluntary sales by county landowners to preservation groups, or by voluntary conservation easements, again by county landowners (and the city in a few cases).
To state otherwise I believe is a fear mongering tactic with absolutely no basis in fact. If you have factual knowledge that this is otherwise, I'd consider it a great personal favor to us all for you to share your source of the information, so that it can be properly publicized.
3) I've re-read Mr. Drake's opening lines about the Constitution multiple times, and for the life of me I'm unable to figure out exactly what point he is trying to make, other than perhaps to suggest that everyone has a right to say whatever they want, which of course is true. Just as I'm entitled to say what I said above.
4) In the spirit of trying to find that middle ground, from your perspective, what are the specific concerns about a Wilderness Designation, particularly as according to the text you highlighted from the EIS it is largely managed that way today? Is it mainly concern with cemetery access and maintenance, or are there other pressing concerns?
you came here thinking the people were mean spirited so you already had an opinion.It's people like you that make us that way ! You don't know or care about us.You haven't read the 1943 agreement,The FEIS ,or know about "wilderness" Do you know what is AN INTERNATIONAL BIOSPHERE RESERVE ?Probably Not !I really don't think you will be happy living here among us mean people so you might want to consider a home elsewhere.I'd be happy to help you pack !!
To "no honor without compassion" According to the FEIS study if the 1943 Agreement is ever broken we are promised a wilderness, and with wilderness comes buffer zones.You talked about compromise, the park service has never given an inch with Swain County, their ultimate goal is to control all of Swain County land. It is a slap in our peoples faces to even offer money, how about the people that was forced off their land and had to leave Swain County to find jobs, money will not benefit these people.
To: "no honor without compassion". "Despite the Park's stated intentions. Wilderness is not a done deal...". You spoke of posing of facts with your first article, seems you never answered Mr. Drake on your "facts" that the wilderness will not come, and you advise you have read the EIS, if you have, then the part that Mr. Drake has quoted from is factual from the EIS study, and you cannot comprehend this?? You talk retoric about facts, and when presented you skirt those points. Your comment about reading "reading about the Constitution multiple times", and not understanding, I believe what he is saying here is rather simple, you spoke of "just complaints, and no supporting facts", his, emphasis here is "freedom of speech" does apply to everyone. As far as any comment from you on the "Widerness Act of 1964" on the quote, I guess you probably do not believe that as fact either. If you believe that thought about " voluntary preservation groups" you need to check out the "Dogwood Alliance", they are constantly bragging about how "they" are taking back family lands for "preservation", and remember here, there is no property taxes on public lands. How lonely and sad you must be, living here, away from other family members and only here to enjoy It's the scenic beauty" and "Not the people".
I bet that, if that enviormentalist prson had their way, they would want 441 cheokee to gatlinburg, and the blue Ridge parkway clsoed to see the parks protected. Wahts the problem a road going to be??
This PLACE is special to me because it is HOME, where my great great grandparents, great grandparents, grandparents,and parents lived and raised their families. My HERITAGE is on the NORTH SHORE OF Fontana Lake. I feel a real connection to this land.
Post a Comment