|
|
|
|
 |
Send
us a letter |
| |
|
The New Bishop
Apart from trumpeting the obvious novelty of a female
presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, Diane Rogers’s
article “Grace Under Pressure” (January/February)
accurately highlights Bishop Jefferts Schori’s
priorities. As the bishop stated in her investiture
sermon, she intends to focus the energy of the Episcopal
Church on the Millennium Development Goals, a United
Nations-sponsored global strategy for achieving eight
specific goals that emphasize poverty reduction and
public health improvements.
The intrinsic merit of most—if not all—of
these goals is self-evident, but what is less evident
and more debatable is whether the leader of a major
Christian denomination should enshroud that church in
the cloak of a manifesto of a political institution.
I believe this to be a grave mistake, one that will
hasten the ongoing spiritual and numerical declension
of this mainline denomination.
I have several Episcopalian friends who are saying
“enough” with the politicization of the
Episcopal Church, which appears to have jettisoned the
propagation of the true gospel as found in the Great
Commission (Matthew 28) in favor of the social gospel
as promoted by the United Nations. Looking for a reason
for the negative growth rate of this denomination? It
is all too obvious. God help the Episcopal Church recover
its true identity and purpose!
Mark Murphy, ’81
Fircrest, Washington
After reading the article, it is not hard to understand
why the Episcopal Church is decreasing in numbers. While
our society is self-destructing morally, Bishop Schori’s
priorities are to focus on the Millennium Development
Goals of the United Nations.
Her example of “Can we include Gentiles” is not quite the same as “Can we bless same-sex
unions.” The first question was settled in the
affirmative in Acts 11:18. The second question was answered
in the negative in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. There does
not appear to be much wiggle room here.
I take issue with her statement that “a belief
in creationism or intelligent design is too limited
an understanding of the divine because it assumes that
we can comprehend what the designer is all about, that
there is a fixity to the divine and that creation isn’t
ongoing.” To believe in creationism or intelligent
design only requires that one believes the Biblical
account in Genesis, which I would have thought would
be part of the job description of the head of any large
Christian denomination.
Finally, her definition of the divine as “that
which is drawing life into existence” and “the
energy behind creation” sounds like Eastern Religions
101. Does the name “Christ” ring a bell?
Robert Griffin, ’63, MS ’64
Loomis, California
Bishop Katharine—a fantastic cover article that
should be read by everyone for many reasons, but especially
for her insights on the fundamental connections between
science and religion. Bravo to Katharine and to Stanford
for spreading her amazing story.
Richard T. Hart, ’50, MS ’51
Watsonville, California
Tears came to my eyes at the mailbox when I saw the
cover of Stanford: the Most Reverend Dr. Katharine Jefferts
Schori adorned in ancient Catholic miter, holding the
primatial cross, and assuming her role as spiritual
leader of American Episcopalians. She takes on also
the difficult task of witnessing to the larger Anglican
Communion and other Christians the role of women in
the church, as Diane Rogers points out in her fine article.
“She’s Mary Magdalene!” I thought
to myself, “Beloved of and Chief of the Apostles,
shut out all these years—even defamed, by a misogynous
church—until now.”
I’m a former priest and lapsed Episcopalian.
The new primate tempts me to return to a community I
once loved and served. Her ordination to the episcopate
and elevation to this high office is a statement, I
believe, that God is indeed alive and well and doing
amazing new things among us.
Gilbert Joel Keithly, ’57
Spokane Valley, Washington
While “Grace Under Pressure” showed Katharine
Schori is a well-educated person in various subjects,
she appears to be somewhat of a captive to particular
political perspectives. Although the pattern in nature
is not complete eternal Deity, it is evidence of the
divine and intelligent design in a universe with a finite
time/space dimension. However, biological determinism
is an insufficient explanation for homosexuality in
a complex modern society of humans with qualified but
life-determining free will. It too easily relieves not
only the individual but society from responsibility
for their own actions, interactions and attitudes. Where
hyper-sexism, extreme sexual competitiveness, loose
moral standards, high family tensions, unequal male/female
demographics and any number of other experiential and
cultural factors exist, homosexuality is clearly a product
of more than some genetic dispositions which themselves
have an extensive range and uniqueness when coupled
with personality variables.
Robert Walker, ’69
Soquel, California
 |
|
In The Swim
I wanted to thank you for “Master Stroke” (January/February), documenting Skip Kenney and the Stanford men’s swim program. The article was well written, and it hit at the heart of what an athletic program should be. Hopefully everyone who reads the article can get a glimpse into the classroom of the Avery Aquatic Center that Skip Kenney and Ted Knapp teach in each day.
As a team member between the years of 1994 and 1998, I was brought back to some incredible memories and lessons that I rely on each day in my life. The dedication, discipline and intricacies of what it means to be a team unit are things I draw on in both my professional life and my personal life.
In short, what Skip and Ted have created is more than a team. It truly is a family that has dramatically impacted my life and keeps me going every day.
Scott Claypool, ’98
San Francisco, California
Those of us who are swimming alums love to read about our storied history. We’ve all heard it before, but it’s really nice to know that a new generation of Stanford students is learning our traditions. Thank you for all your hard work.
Thomas Zochowski, ’03
Victoria, British Columbia
The article brought back a floodtide of memories at the pool. Even though I played only a small part in those teams from 1983 to 1986 (I was a diver), I drew strength from being part of a bigger unit, especially as it came to the end of each year and we competed at the Pac-10 and NCAA championships. “The Streak” is cool, and its significance grows over time; but what makes Stanford great is that we always had our sights set much higher.
The NCAA championships were the real target, and it was truly magical to be a part of the team in 1985 and 1986 when it all came together. Skip Kenney and diving coach Rick Schavone have built phenomenal legacies down at the pool.
Thank you for the coverage of the teams.
Thor Johnson, ’86
San Juan Capistrano, California
Oil Pioneers
“The Arabian Adventure of Wallace Stegner”
article in your January/February issue is confusing
in both content and rationale. The point of the article
appears to be that Wallace Stegner was either a fool
or a patsy when, in his book Discovery! (funded by Aramco
in 1954), Stegner expressed admiration for the pioneering
American geologists who first found oil on the Arabian
peninsula. Apparently the article’s author, and
her primary source, Robert Vitalis, would have preferred
Stegner to have told a tale of unmitigated greed and
“cowboy” dedication to profit. But Stegner’s
admiration for those early pioneers was well placed.
None of the men who explored for oil in Arabia in the
1930s—despite the occasional dashing pose—can
fairly be compared to “kid[s] at a frat party.”
When the search for oil began in Arabia, the Saudis
only recently had consolidated power. The country had
no known resources, no agriculture, no industry and
no money. Nomadic Bedouin life prevailed. The Saudis
had to provide armed guards when local emirs attempted
to assert authority over early exploration operations.
Our stepfather, Robert P. Miller, was one of two Standard
Oil geologists who arrived in Saudi Arabia in 1930.
He was a salaried field geologist, motivated by the
desire to do his job well and to discover. Balding,
stoop-shouldered and irascible, he—unlike Max
Steineke—bore no physical resemblance to Indiana
Jones. But he did speak Arabic and habitually dress
as an Arab.
Our stepfather and his colleagues were 12,000 miles
from home, operating in a strange and largely unknown
environment. They had no electricity and no air-conditioning.
The water was bad. The flies were terrible. Roads were
nonexistent; often they traveled where no non-Arab had
gone before. These early explorers for oil improvised
transportation, hired and trained Saudis, pioneered
aerial surveys, and solved myriad problems of supply
and personnel with little or no outside help. The telegraph
from Jubail to San Francisco was their fastest means
of communication. Mail took weeks. Correspondence and
telegrams from the field detail personnel, political
and operational issues that had to be resolved between
the exploration camps, company headquarters, the Saudis
and the locals, all of whom had cultural biases and
perspectives and were communicating over vast distances,
often in different languages.
The author of “Arabian Adventure” apparently
views Stegner’s expressed admiration for the early
oil explorers in Arabia as a foray into cheap boosterism—something
he was paid to say. She intimates that because, in 1954,
there was supposedly “a lot of knowledge in leftist
circles” that Aramco was not as benign as its
image, Stegner’s praise for the men who explored
for oil in the 1930s was either bought and paid for
or mindless parroting of company publicists.
Judging the pioneering geologists of the ’30s
by today’s standards (or the standards of ’50s
liberals) is to confuse the past, present and future.
The men who constructed the Panama Canal were admirable
despite any unfairness in the U.S./Panama operating
agreements; the accomplishments of the men who found
Arabia’s oil are not made less because of Aramco’s
labor policies in later decades.
Both of us were privileged to study under Stegner while
at Stanford. The implication that he was either bought
off by Aramco or too stupid to recognize corporate puffery
is profoundly insulting to Stegner as a man and professor.
We also believe our stepfather, his associates and all
the people who took monumental risks in exploring for
oil on the Arabian Peninsula have been maligned. All
are owed an apology.
Kenneth T. Sproul, ’61
Woodside, California
Judith Sproul Davis, ’58
Placerville, California
I found it troubling that Cynthia Haven trivialized
the achievements of the geologists who worked in Saudi
Arabia in the 1930s and 1940s. One of those geologists
was my father, Max Steineke, ’21. He went to Saudi
Arabia in 1934 and was joined there, in Dhahran, by
my mother, my sister and myself from 1937 to 1939.
When the geologists arrived in the early 1930s it was
unknown whether their search for oil would be successful.
They were a small group who lived and worked under rugged
conditions in a harsh landscape. It is far off the mark
to refer to them as being on a “junket.”
In 1937, when the oil camp had become built up enough
for families to join the exploration crew, conditions
were still austere and spartan. When we few families
arrived we lived in small two-bedroom houses surrounded
by desert. The men were often gone, working long hours
out in the field for many weeks at a time. They
were not on a “lark,” although they did like
working on geology. Most, including my father, learned
Arabic. They regarded their Arab guides as partners
in their exploration.
Ms. Haven quotes Wallace Stegner’s book Discovery!
The Search for Arabian Oil,
but she seems so keen to discredit it that she follows
Stegner quotes with belittling remarks of her own. After
quoting a Stegner passage praising my father, she flippantly
says, “In short, Indy Jones.” She makes
fun of several photographs of my father. She says “in
one photo, he grins from beneath the traditional checkered
Arab headdress, like a kid at a frat costume party”—he
actually was not a member of a frat; he worked his way
through Stanford and was a hasher. She doesn’t
seem to realize that the Arab garb was worn as a sign
of courtesy on certain occasions. Of another photo she
says “he sits on a stone . . . banging on a rock
with a hammer. It looks posed, a visual cliché.”
Apparently she doesn’t know that this is what
geologists do. I saw him in this position hundreds
of times. Her remark would be like calling a picture
of a skier skiing or a writer at a desk a cliché.
Max Steineke has been widely recognized for exceptional
achievements in the discovery of vast reserves of oil
and gas in Saudi Arabia. He and his early colleagues
were serious professionals trying to figure out the
geology of the Arabian Peninsula, a difficult task.
To trivialize their efforts by using words such as “junket,”
“playacting” and “lark” is a
distortion of the immense challenges they faced and
what really happened.
Maxine Steineke Goad, ’51, MS ’53
Santa Fe, New Mexico
 |
|
Football Solutions
I believe that Stanford cannot field a strong enough
football team to be competitive in Division I competition
(“What We Tackled,” January/February). It
is not that we cannot attract talented quarterbacks.
It is that we cannot admit large and strong linemen.
We do not have a strong enough line, both offensive
and defensive, to protect the quarterback long enough
for him to read the defense, find an open receiver and
properly pass the ball. Likewise, without a strong line
a running game is not possible. Defensively, we are
not able to put pressure on the opposing quarterback
due to our weak linemen.
There are three solutions. One, lower our admission
standards to allow admission of beefy linemen. Two,
get the NCAA to do their jobs and ban student-athletes
who are not graduating (only 25 percent graduate from
D-I programs in football). Three, drop out of D-I in
football and play Pomona instead.
In my frequent discussions with fellow alumni the feeling
is to lower our admission standards for football recruits.
This will allow us to compete on the same footing with
the rest of the Pac-10.
Kingsley Roberts, ’75, MS ’76
Menlo Park, California
A
Welcome Ban
I am delighted to read that bicycles have been banned
from the Quad arcades (“The New Rules for Cars and Bikes,” Farm Report, January/February). I only wish they were banned
from the Quad entirely and that strict bike lanes were
enforced. I write as a former faculty member who was
hit, from behind, by
a bike in the main Quad. It knocked me down, breaking
my right elbow. I had to have horrible surgery and still
have pins and wires holding the elbow together. For
over a year I could not comfortably use the computer,
open cans of food (for my cat), wash my hair, turn keys
in locks, etc., and now, five years later, I still cannot
rest my elbow on the table. I guess that will ensure
I have good table manners!
Carol Delaney
Providence, Rhode Island
Habitat’s
Founder
Your November/December article on Habitat for Humanity
executive Jonathan Reckford (“He’d Like
to Build the World a Home”) includes some incorrect
and damaging information about Habitat founder Millard
Fuller. The article falsely states that a “female
staffer accused Habitat’s founder and longtime
president Millard Fuller of groping her.” Most
certainly, the allegations, which surfaced
in 2004, never included anything that could be reasonably
construed as “groping.” Furthermore, her
allegations were adamantly denied by Fuller and ultimately
proven to be unsubstantiated. The author goes on to
state that Millard’s being “forced out”
was a result of these accusations.
Again, this is damaging and erroneous. To support this,
I have included the following paragraph from a letter
that was written on September 7, 2006, by
a Habitat official:
“It has come to our attention that we may have
unintentionally and erroneously conveyed that Millard
Fuller’s termination was directly caused by an
allegation of inappropriate behavior toward a now former
employee. The Habitat for Humanity International Board
of Directors took the allegation very seriously, and
after a thorough investigation stated that there was
insufficient proof of inappropriate conduct.”
An accurate synopsis of what transpired should simply
read: “After [his] successful record of more than
28 years as founder and president, the Board of Directors
decided in 2005 that it was time to part ways due to
major differences, primarily about Habitat’s vision
and operating philosophy. Millard continues his mission
to eliminate poverty housing around the world through
a new organization, The Fuller Center for Housing.”
Lynda Spofford
Vice President of Communication
The Fuller Center for Housing
Americus, Georgia
 |
| The
following letters did not appear in the print edition
of STANFORD.
Oil Pioneers
Cynthia Haven does both Wallace Stegner and Aramco
a disservice in her article about Discovery!
(“The Arabian Adventure of Wallace Stegner,”
January/February). Aramco gave me a copy of the
1971 paperback as part of my orientation when
I joined the company in 1979. The book was a good
summary of the early Saudi and American pioneers.
I know several of their children and grandchildren,
who consider the book accurate. Haven totally
ignores the desire of sovereign nations to control
their own natural resources when she accuses Aramco
of “unbridled exploitation.” During
the time I worked in Saudi Arabia, Aramco handed
back control of its oil concessions to the country
in a peaceful transition for which the American
owners received compensation, a rare achievement
in the Middle East. Haven apparently has no knowledge
of Aramco’s community involvement (hospitals,
schools, roads and employee education) or its
service in cleaning up the oil spills associated
with the Gulf War. Based on my personal experience,
Wally Stegner’s portrayal of Aramco is not
in contradiction to his conservation values (or
mine) and Discovery! is an early example
of his uncanny ability to capture pioneering spirit
truthfully, with all its rough edges. In fact,
as general counsel of Aramco’s first downstream
joint venture (1989 to 1999), I consider myself
a pioneer, too.
Clydia J. Cuykendall, '71
Olympia, Washington
I have to wonder why STANFORD would select such
an obvious hit piece, long on innuendo and very
short on established facts. Surely you can do
better than a third party’s biased interpretation
of what a second party thought about the initial
writings of another.
Bob Elliott, ’52
Alamo, California
Your writer Cynthia Haven and Robert Vitalis
(of the University of Pennsylvania) displayed
journalistic writing styles worthy of the National
Enquirer. For decades I have admired the
serious writer-historian-novelist-conservationist
Wallace Stegner as well as the accomplished and
much honored geologist Max Steineke. Both of these
former Stanfordites, still much revered by members
of their respective professions, are cruelly ridiculed
by Haven and Vitalis. Why these two have gone
out of their way to castigate two honored and
patriotic citizens totally mystifies me. What
is their agenda?
Any sensible person who has read Stegner’s
descriptions of failed farming efforts in overgrazed
and deeply plowed fragile soils of Saskatchewan
and Montana in Wolf Willow cannot fail
to appreciate how sensitive Stegner was to the
tragic economic and human costs resulting from
inappropriate overexploitation of water, soil,
plant and animal resources. And in Beyond the
Hundredth Meridian (a magnificent biography
of John Wesley Powell, the one-armed survivor
of the Civil War who led the first party of explorers
down the length of the Colorado River), Stegner
describes how Maj. Powell investigated Indian
ethnology, plants, animals, minerals, soils and
limited water resources of the semi-desert and
desert regions of the Western states. It is abundantly
clear that Powell struggled against powerful and
greedy land developers, speculators and certain
members of the political leadership in Washington
who tried to downplay Powell’s pleas for
the protection of ecologically fragile biotopes
and physiotopes against rapacious capitalism unconcerned
with rational scientific land use on a sustainable
basis.
Stegner obviously was in agreement with Powell’s
assessment of the need for conservationist practices
outlined in his Report on the Lands of the
Arid Regions. Powell and Stegner were both
visionary conservationists. That Stegner accepted
$6,500 for 13 weeks’ work to compile and
write on commission a book about the early days
of oil exploration in Saudi Arabia in no way can
discredit a lifetime of literary and historical
excellence. Should he have refused the commission
and remained “pure”? How many writers,
poets and artists in the earlier hard times of
the 1930s, when given the choice, would have chosen
“purity” against what was a very generous
fee? Just take a look at the murals in post office
buildings, library buildings, bridges and national
park lodges and cabins in the great land for the
answer to that question.
As for Max Steineke, he was indeed an employee
of Standard Oil Company of California (now Chevron).
That company, unlike Gulf and some others, did
not indiscriminately fire or lay off
geologists and engineers during the Great Depression.
Steineke and others were kept on four days a week
but not discharged into the bread lines. I met
Max Steineke, his wife and their daughters Maxine
and Marian when I was a geology student at Stanford
(1948-52), joined them on Stanford Alpine Club
climbs, ski-mountaineering trips, and Sierra Club
pack trips in Yosemite Park, Sequoia and Kings
Canyon Parks, and on a 17- member, four-car ski
trip to Sun Valley, where we crowded into a two-room
motel unit and sidestepped down Baldy
Mountain three hours every morning (the “grooming”
technique of the day) in exchange for three hours
of free lift passes after lunch! Truly a low-cost
Christmas week vacation for impecunious students.
The entire Steineke family were campers and hikers
prior to a series of strokes that left Max incapacitated.
Steineke, Bramkamp and other early SOCAL geologists
of the 1930s were not Indiana Joneses playacting
on geologists’ junkets to Arabia, but hardworking
men who each spent several years in field geological
studies in Saudi Arabia before drilling locations
could be recommended with any scientifically reasonable
hope of finding oil. Steineke loved the desert,
developed good rapport with his Arab field workers,
and explored the hinterland for months at a time
by truck, on camel and on foot without air-conditioning
or a fancy office.
Steineke’s Arabic became reasonably fluent,
and Dr. Moujahed Al-Husseini, former exploration
vice-president of Aramco, told me at a conference
in Bahrain in 2000 that Steineke was dearly beloved
by his Saudi associates, although his occasional
misuse of singular/plural and masculine/feminine
forms in Arabic brought on many smiles and gentle
giggling. Max had a favorite Saudi field assistant
named Rimthan to whom he was devoted, and in fact
Max named one of the northern Saudi oil fields
Rimthan in his honor. In no way should
Max Steineke be mischaracterized as a kid
at a frat costume party. (I suppose “colonialist
British and others” would have called Rimthan
a bearer, or servant—hardly unique to oil
companies or to Saudi Arabia.)
Louis Christian, ’51, MS ’52
Dallas, Texas

Tough Row
I thoroughly enjoyed your article “The Erg
to Compete” (Being There, January/February).
My son has had a love-hate relationship with the
erg for more than eight years and you captured
the essence of erging perfectly—pain, intensity,
vomit buckets and all. He rowed for an NCAA Division
I university and appreciated the irony of the
erg having been invented by Stanford grads.
Katherine West
Davis, California

Sustainable Sustenance
Wow! I am really impressed with Stanford Dining
for their support for a sustainable table in the
dorms (“On Dining Hall Tables, Farm Fresh Food,” Farm Report, January/February). Not only are they providing students with
superior food, but they also are contributing
substantially to a solution for global warming
by cutting down on the fossil fuels used in transportation.
As one who believes in buying from farmers’
markets and eating organic or at least locally
grown, I thank Rafi Taherian, the director, for
his foresight. I hope programs like this transfer
to colleges and universities everywhere. What
a wonderful teaching tool growing and eating good
food can be.
Meredith Whitaker, ’49
San Luis Obispo, California
Rethinking Energy
Regarding the article “A Crude Awakening”
(November/December), the authors correctly framed
the problem as ”U.S. dependency on foreign
oil from unreliable sources.” Many of these
sources are already controlled by hostile governments
that use their oil revenues to harm other countries.
These days, most wars are fought over oil (not
natural gas, coal, renewables, etc.). We should
make all reasonable efforts to reduce oil consumption
now in order to reduce armed conflicts and save
lives, including American lives. In addition,
windfall revenues from oil cause and aggravate
corruption in governments, including our own.
The U.S. government uses our oil and other tax
revenues for “strategic purposes”
every day.
Even if it is difficult, we need to transition
away from gasoline and diesel. These are fossil
fuels; we know that they will not last forever,
so let’s get the transition going now. Most
of the technology is already available, so we
need to increase production of biofuels. A carbon
tax could be applied to every barrel of oil to
encourage people to immediately drive less and
to drive more efficient vehicles eventually; the
additional tax revenue can be applied to beefing
up Social Security, Medicare and general revenues.
Fuel economy standards can be increased to mandate
smaller engines, lighter vehicles, better trucks
and ethanol and biodiesel fueling capabilities;
this could result in a biodiesel-powered, fuel-efficient
Hummer that uses no oil at all. We can organize
OPIC (Organization of Petroleum Importing Countries)
to regulate storage and reduce consumption of
oil and production of greenhouse gases on a worldwide
basis and be a counterweight to OPEC, the cartel
that sets production quotas in oil exporting countries.
We can take all of these steps without any breakthrough
inventions. The new Congress will have a lot of
work to do.
Mike Timlin, MS ’81
Redwood City, California
They Said It First
The November/December issue has a short feature
(“Just Plane Fun,” Red All Over) on
a SkyMall parody (“SkyMaul”)
written by several former Stanford Sierra Camp
counselors and released in October.
Over a year earlier, however, Stanford’s
very own humor magazine, the Chaparral,
parodied SkyMall. The 48-page, free,
full-color parody was written under the editorship
of Matthew Henick, ’05, MA ’05, and
Charlie Stockman, ’04, MS ’05.
Douglas Kenter, ’07
Stanford, California
More on Medicine
At the end of his “need for kind doctors”
letter to you (“Doctoring Medicine,”
January/February), Myron Gananian, M.D., claims
that “smart doctors are common.” I
think an independent audit is needed to verify
that.
I’ve read that loss of sleep over a long
time causes permanent “cognitive impairment.”
If so, is the change from the natural eunoia
(an ancient Greek word, meaning “goodwill,
kindness”) of beginning medical students
to an iatronoia, developed and cultivated
by medical training, an ascent to a higher level
of awareness and understanding? Or, does it affirm
Hell’s caring part, a health care system
that kills 10,000 people a year? A kindly, professional
authority, based on impaired use of medical knowledge,
is something other than kind.
I think someone immune to organized medicine’s
political pressures should compare the IQs and
“kindness levels” of the healthy people
beginning medical studies with their IQs and “kindness
levels” after completion of residency. Publishing
the results would help the public decide if “iatronoia”
should be defined as healthy or pathological.
We may find that kindness comes with intelligence,
and the limited medical savant, who associates
“smartness” with memorizing parts
of the body, biochemical pathways, clinical and
surgical procedures, and playing the piano, would
find better work as an encarnalized computer hard
drive.
By the way, Dr. Gananian, the American medical
trades were prodded to reform themselves in the
early 1900s by newspaper editorials demanding
that incoming medical students have at least a
high school diploma.
Peter Pansing, ’67
Culver City, California
|
|
 |
| Address letters to:
Letters to the Editor
STANFORD magazine
Arrillaga Alumni Center
326 Galvez Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6105
Or fax to (650) 725-8676; or send us an e-mail. You
may also submit your letter online.
Letters may be edited for length, clarity and civility. Please note that your letter may appear in print, online or both. |
RETURN
TO TOP |
|
 |
|
|
|
|