Signs 'a rort'

In regards to the story about drivers ignoring speed signs (News, June 2), I've been waiting for an article on this as it's been a pet peeve for a while now. I've travelled SH29 about once a fortnight on average for the past 12 months dealing with my mother's property in Te Awamutu (as she's now in a resthome). Several trips have been spoiled by these signs flashing 80km/h as I exit Tauranga, driving on a dry road with light traffic up the Kaimais. A couple of times I've resorted to taking a photo, to prove that this is a rort, should I have the misfortune to be ticketed. However, I'm sure that if a cop tickets me, and even if I take my photo to court, the legal system won't give a toss that the sign is ridiculous and wrong – and Maxwell is equally wrong to say teething problems at the start of the trial could be partly responsible. Not partly responsible – in my opinion, the technology is crap. Until they get it right, I'll continue to ignore the signs. I drive to the conditions, not the technology.
Larry Bryan

Other museum options

Discussion should be ongoing and consideration given to the considerable cost of maintaining and storing Tauranga's artefacts, some of which no doubt are very worthy, some of which no doubt would be more appropriate on display at the Historic Village and some no doubt to a skip bin. One of New York's smaller museums is only 1.8sq m, can only hold three to four people at any one time and is very popular. I do not believe the city can afford a $55 million facility, we have far greater priorities. In my view, the city, as we seem hell-bent on getting a museum, should perhaps look at an existing building. My suggestion would be our old post office on Willow St. Over 100 years old, great location, plenty of space, even room for a cafe. For those readers who are interested go to Papers Past, August 8, 1919, yes 100 years ago, and you can read about how the ratepayers of the day were complaining about how the elected members were spending ratepayers' money. Sounds familiar.
John Bickers

Opposing ethnic cleansing

I find myself amazed at Joy Z Marks' letter Bullying tactics (Opinion, June 1). How's this - "virtually surrounded by enemies" - like Jordan, which Israel has had relatively cordial relations with since 1948? Egypt, where Israel has a peace treaty? Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Co-operation Council states, which have an undeclared de facto alliance with Israel? Iraq, Syria, and Libya have been virtually demolished by the Nato razor gang, and the US is trying to commit murder-suicide with Iran. Then you get the conflation of anti-Zionist, meaning opposition to specific Israeli policies, with anti-Semitism, meaning the fear and hatred of the Jewish people. Conflating those two implies that the Jewish people have the same value as those policies. I oppose a certain specific Israeli policy, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians from the West Bank and the strangulation of Gaza. It reminds me of why my distant relatives, the Levis of Krakow, are no longer there. They got ethnically cleansed in 1941-45. I fail to agree that Israel's ethnic cleansing policies have the same value as my ethnically cleansed Jewish relatives. I think the accusation of bullying might with greater justice be made of those who try to stifle justified criticism of Israel.
Wesley Parish