Although I have no intention of engaging with Mr. Thomas Oatway on this or any other subject matter I will say three things about his letter (June 23):
It does not appear that he looked up (or read) the medical study and report I cited in my letter. I didn’t make this stuff up. I was not encouraging anyone to do anything. Everything I said (outside of my opinion) is either a historical or anthropological fact.
As for online supporters, I don’t need online supporters. I’m just sharing my views and opinions — that’s what the letters to the editor section is for. They just happen to conflict with Mr. Oatway’s views and opinions. What I’m curious about is why he feels so threatened by them. Hmmmm?
Perhaps The Signal should stop printing Mr. Oatway’s letters for the same reason he wants them to stop printing mine. I imagine there are people who don’t agree with everything he has to say, either, and find some of his statements just as disturbing as mine. Perhaps then we should both be cancelled in the interests of communal peace and harmony. Those double-edged swords are indeed razor-sharp.
Mr. Oatway’s writing reveals his true politics. I have read his “claim” to be a “middle-of-the road” voter, but that’s not where he’s coming from. His writing reveals he is actually deep in left field. Mr. Oatway strikes me as the liberal equivalent of a conservative who has been told there is no God.
Arthur Saginian
Santa Clarita
