Readers Write (Nov. 14): U.S. Postal Service, school suspensions, oil pipelines, Enlist Duo, Bin Laden killing

The U.S. Postal Service is disingenuous with its proposed closure of mail sorting facilities across the nation — including in Bemidji, Duluth, Mankato and St. Cloud. Concerning closures, USPS spokesman Peter Nowacki has been quoted as saying: "The time for first-class mail is expected to be about the same. Timely delivery is still important" and "[t]he delivery standard for first-class mail will change from one to three days to two to three days. Customers will see little change in when their mail is delivered."

Thankfully, the American Postal Workers Union has made the situation very clear: "On January 5 the USPS is slated to lower 'service standards' to virtually eliminate overnight delivery — including first-class mail from one address to another within the same city or town."

Today, four postal unions will participate in "National Day of Action" activities at about 125 locations across the nation. These unions will be protesting the closing of mail sorting facilities and the lowering of service standards.

If postal executives on the national level make the wrong decision and close these facilities, I challenge postal management on the state and local levels to mitigate the resulting consequences by working with local unions and rank-and-file members. Even though service standards probably will be lowered, we as postal employees have a duty to keep overnight delivery in rural Minnesota and western Wisconsin.

Incorrect, pervasive perceptions such as those harbored by society toward young black men take on the effect of a disease process. Assumptions and attitudes spiral through the community unchecked, especially when seemingly legitimate outlets such as public servants and the media reinforce what many do not know to be true through firsthand experience.

There is a ground zero in the community, and it is our schools. Minneapolis public schools Superintendent Bernadeia Johnson recently announced a ban on elementary-age school suspensions and a case-by-case review of suspensions of black students. From working and volunteering in classrooms, I can give witness to the effect that suspensions of black students has. Without conscious effort, suspended students' peers and the adults who work with them begin to see those students as "bad" and begin from that point to interpret their behavior. Studies have shown that this is true whether we accept it or not.

We may not want to be racist, but we are — through the conditioning that happens passively as we observe the treatment of others, especially within settings like our schools and neighborhoods. These are the settings where we forge our values and identities, and few people actively challenge these roots of institutional racism, so it continues.

The Nov. 12 article "Activist groups sue feds over border pipeline" describes an appropriate legal challenge to a secretive arrangement between the State Department and Enbridge Energy that would bypass environmental scrutiny of the latter's Line 67 expansion plans.

The devious pipeline shift contrived by Enbridge reflects the company's desperation to earn windfall profits by moving huge volumes of dirty tar-sands crude now, instead of waiting for the State Department to complete the required environmental-impact statement. It realizes that tar sands will cease to be an energy source of choice in the near future. Consumers will continue to reduce gasoline consumption by driving more-fuel-efficient cars, and they will place increased reliance on bicycling, transit, carpooling and electronic conferencing in lieu of go-to meetings. The enactment of the carbon fee-and-dividend plan at the state and/or federal level will force the consumption of fossil-based fuels to underwrite the rising costs of climate change to society. Finally, personal vehicles will become increasingly electric-battery-powered, fueled by renewable energy sources. It's time for tar sands to stay in the ground.

As a technical professional, I was extremely disappointed to see such an inaccurate and confusing commentary as "Beware this dangerous new pesticide" ("Nov. 12). At a time when we need the public to have informed and considered opinions on technical issues such as genetically modified foods, climate change and the use of products in the production of food, articles like this are a step in the wrong direction. Even the headline was misleading. The products discussed (glyphosate, and 2,4-D) are not pesticides. These products are herbicides used to kill plants. Pesticides kill insects.

The article's author clearly does not understand this distinction, since she discusses how the concern over "neonicotinoids," which are in fact pesticides, should raise concern about glyphosate and 2,4-D, which are not pesticides. She then confuses the use of glyphosate (once again an herbicide) with a risk to monarch butterfly larvae.

I support a science-based dialogue on the risks associated with the use of any herbicide or pesticide; however, the kind of scientifically inaccurate scaremongering the Star Tribune published on the 12th does not advance that dialogue.

Was the SEAL team supposed to Taser him when he reached for a weapon during the capture? Or: "Hands up, pretty please — we're taking you into custody?"

As a veteran, I think my taxpayer money was better spent with a quick burial at sea, and even that was far better than what Bin Laden deserved.