Through your letters to the editor, I want to express my appreciation for the kindness and skills of reception staff, nurses and the doctor I saw at A&E on Friday.
The A&E reception area was very busy, I understand they were a doctor short. But they still all gave excellent service, even calling a taxi to get us home
GRAHAM and LYN PEARSON
That Suleimani presided over terrorist attacks on western citizens is undisputed. That Iran's frequently, openly-declared intent is to wipe the only democracy in the Middle East (Israel) off the map, is also easily verified.
Many videos of crowds chanting "death to America", "death to Israel", and recently "death to England", under the approving eye of their leader, can be found online. Even the name of the "Al Quds" force is "Jerusalem" in English.
It is a great dilemma for those who wish to preserve human life and freedom to be faced with the opportunity to remove (by killing) a person whose life and career are dedicated to killing others and removing their freedom.
I am thankful that this decision is not in my hands.
I do not think any nation can claim to be "good" any more than any human being can. We are all flawed in many ways. However, the actions and declarations of a nation filled with hate for other nations because they think and operate differently, are clearly worse than those whose aim is to live peacefully, allowing room for disagreement.
We have seen a lot lately about the killing of Iranian General Qasem Suleimani and whether or not it was legally or morally justifiable to kill him.
We have not seen much about all the killings General Suleimani was directly or indirectly responsible for, from soldiers to innocent civilians, and whether or not those killings were legally or morally justifiable.
We have seen the video footage and heard about the crowds of Iranians apparently mourning the death of the general, yet we have seen very little about all the Iranian protesters standing against the regime that the general was so highly placed in. We have seen very little about their struggles, their views, or the deaths of hundreds of them at the hands of the government they are protesting against, many specifically at the orders of General Suleimani.
I am not sure you can morally justify the killing of General Suleimani. I am certain the Western media cannot justify likening the General to Princess Diana and Martin Luther King while ignoring the plight of the Iranian people.
Whims and fancies
I can't help but endorse Mike O'Donnell's letter of January 16 ("Enough is enough").
Many years ago, when discussing with the late Manu Metekingi (a respected local Maori elder) the aspect of adding "h" to Wanganui, he commented that he couldn't care how it was spelled as long as it was pronounced "Wanganui".
When I mentioned that was not the way Ken Mair saw things, he replied, "Who does Ken Mair think he is? He doesn't even come from here".
When asked why he didn't refute Ken Mair's opinions, the reply was: "It's not our Maori way of doing things".
Of course, I had to respect Manu's "way of doing things" but it has subsequently left the town to the whims and fancies of radicals who consider that they can speak and hold sway on behalf of the local majority.
Having rowed myself in the 1970s, I enjoyed reading about Oliver Fahey winning the Billy Webb trophy.
One thing mystified me, however. What are the "prognostics" that Fahey knew "were the deciding factor"? Presumably they are some form of adjustment, but what?
The internet explains how they can be used to compare records, but that would not differentiate between scullers in the same race.
Please, could your correspondent explain how it worked? I am sure that other readers would like to know, too.
•Send your letters to: Letters, Whanganui Chronicle, 100 Guyton St, PO Box 433, Whanganui 4500 or email email@example.com