Letters 10-24-2016

It’s Obama’s 1984 Several editions ago I concluded a short letter to the editor with an ominous rhetorical flourish: “Welcome to George Orwell’s 1984 and the grand opening of the Federal Department of Truth!” At the time I am sure most of the readers laughed off my comments as right-wing hyperbole. Shame on you for doubting me...

Gun Bans Don’t Work It is said that mass violence only happens in the USA. A lone gunman in a rubber boat, drifted ashore at a popular resort in Tunisia and randomly shot and killed 38 mostly British and Irish tourists. Tunisian gun laws, which are among the most restrictive in the world, didn’t stop this mass slaughter. And in January 2015, two armed men killed 11 and wounded 11 others in an attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. French gun laws didn’t stop these assassins...

Scripps’ Good Deed No good deed shall go unpunished! When Dan Scripps was the 101st District State Representative, he introduced legislation to prevent corporations from contaminating (e.g. fracking) or depleting (e.g. Nestle) Michigan’s water table for corporate profit. There are no property lines in the water table, and many of us depend on private wells for abundant, safe, clean water. In the subsequent election, Dan’s opponents ran a negative campaign almost solely on the misrepresentation that Dan’s good deed was a government takeover of your private water well...

Political Definitions As the time to vote draws near it’s a good time to check into what you stand for. According to Dictionary.com the meanings for liberal and conservative are as follows:

Liberal: Favorable to progress or reform as in political or religious affairs.

Conservative: Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditions and limit change...

Voting Takes A Month? Hurricane Matthew hit the Florida coast Oct. 6, over three weeks before Election Day. Bob Ross (Oct. 17th issue) posits that perhaps evacuation orders from Governor Scott may have had political motivations to diminish turnout and seems to praise Hillary Clinton’s call for Gov. Scott to extend Florida’s voter registration deadline due to evacuations...

Clinton Foundation Facts Does the Clinton Foundation really spend a mere 10 percent (per Mike Pence) or 20 percent (per Reince Priebus) of its money on charity? Not true. Charity Watch gives it an A rating (the same as it gives the NRA Foundation) and says it spends 88 percent on charitable causes, and 12 percent on overhead. Here is the source of the misunderstanding: The Foundation does give only a small percentage of its money to charitable organizations, but it spends far more money directly running a number of programs...

America Needs Change Trump supports our constitution, will appoint judges that will keep our freedoms safe. He supports the partial-birth ban; Hillary voted against it. Regardless of how you feel about Trump, critical issues are at stake. Trump will increase national security, monitor refugee admissions, endorse our vital military forces while fighting ISIS. Vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence will be an intelligent asset for the country. Hillary wants open borders, increased government regulation, and more demilitarization at a time when we need strong military defenses...

My Process For No I will be voting “no” on Prop 3 because I am supportive of the process that is in place to review and approve developments. I was on the Traverse City Planning Commission in the 1990s and gained an appreciation for all of the work that goes into a review. The staff reviews the project and makes a recommendation. The developer then makes a presentation, and fellow commissioners and the public can ask questions and make comments. By the end of the process, I knew how to vote for a project, up or down. This process then repeats itself at the City Commission...

Regarding Your Postcard If you received a “Vote No” postcard from StandUp TC, don’t believe their lies. Prop 3 is not illegal. It won’t cost city taxpayers thousands of dollars in legal bills or special elections. Prop 3 is about protecting our downtown -- not Munson, NMC or the Commons -- from a future of ugly skyscrapers that will diminish the very character of our downtown...

Vote Yes It has been suggested that a recall or re-election of current city staff and Traverse City Commission would work better than Prop 3. I disagree. A recall campaign is the most divisive, costly type of election possible. Prop 3, when passed, will allow all city residents an opportunity to vote on any proposed development over 60 feet tall at no cost to the taxpayer...

Yes Vote Explained A “yes” vote on Prop 3 will give Traverse City the right to vote on developments over 60 feet high. It doesn’t require votes on every future building, as incorrectly stated by a previous letter writer. If referendums are held during general elections, taxpayers pay nothing...

Beware Trump When the country you love have have served for 33 years is threatened, you have an obligation and a duty to speak out. Now is the time for all Americans to speak out against a possible Donald Trump presidency. During the past year Trump has been exposed as a pathological liar, a demagogue and a person who is totally unfit to assume the presidency of our already great country...

Picture Worth 1,000 Words Nobody disagrees with the need for affordable housing or that a certain level of density is dollar smart for TC. The issue is the proposed solution. If you haven’t already seen the architect’s rendition for the site, please Google “Pine Street Development Traverse City”...

Living Wage, Not Tall Buildings Our community deserves better than the StandUp TC “vote no” arguments. They are not truthful. Their yard signs say: “More Housing. Less Red Tape. Vote like you want your kids to live here.” The truth: More housing, but for whom? At what price..

Home · Articles · News · Books · Bush at War: An untested President...
. . . .

Bush at War: An untested President Responds to a World of Terror

Nancy Sundstrom - January 9th, 2003
It’s something of a given that any new book from journalist Bob Woodward will shoot to the top of the bestseller list. And history has repeated itself with his latest effort, even though some would argue that the history on which it is based is still being written.
“Bush at War“ is an investigative account of the first 18 months of the Bush White House, a tenure that changed dramatically with the tragic events of September 11, 2001. Based on hundreds of interviews with Bush staffers and hours of exclusive interviews with the subject himself, Woodward‘s mission was to provide “the first in-depth, behind-the-scenes story of the new, untested President as he responds to the worst acts of terror on American soil.“
The good news is that he delivers, thanks to his access to all the major players in the war on terrorism and to classified reports and cabinet meetings, along with a neatly-delivered narrative that gives a day-by-day account of Bush’s decision-making processes and power struggles for the first three months following 9-11.
During that time, the U.S. prepared for war in Afghanistan, took steps toward a preemptive strike against Iraq, intensified homeland defense, and began a well-funded CIA covert war against world terrorism. Everything is well-documented and detailed, and Woodward‘s signature analysis of Bush as a leader during a time of crisis is thoughtful and fair, especially when it comes to dissecting Bush’s often by-the-seat-of-the-pants management style.
The tome starts right where it should, on a clear September morning well over one year ago, when the world changed in an instant for everyone:

“Tuesday, September 11, 2001, began as one of those spectacular pre-fall days on the East Coast, sunny, temperatures in the 70s, light winds, the sky a vivid light blue. With President George W. Bush traveling in Florida that morning promoting his education agenda, his intelligence chief, CIA Director George J. Tenet, didn‘t have to observe the 8 A.M. ritual of personally briefing the president at the White House on the latest and most important top secret information flowing into America‘s vast spy empire.
Instead Tenet, 48, a hefty, outgoing son of Greek immigrants, was having a leisurely breakfast at the St. Regis Hotel, three blocks north of the White House, with the man who was most responsible for his rise in the world of secret intelligence -- former Oklahoma Democratic Senator David L. Boren....
“What are you worried about these days?“ Boren asked Tenet that morning.
“Bin Laden,“ Tenet replied, referring to terrorist leader Osama bin Laden, an exiled Saudi who was living in Afghanistan and had developed the worldwide network al Qaeda, Arabic for “the Base.“ He was convinced that bin Laden was going to do something big, he said.
“Oh, George!“ Boren said. For the last two years he had been listening to his friend‘s concerns about bin Laden. How could one private person without the resources of a foreign government be such a threat? he asked.
“You don‘t understand the capabilities and the reach of what they‘re putting together,“ Tenet said.
Boren was worried that his friend had developed an unhealthy obsession about bin Laden. Nearly two years earlier, just before the 2000 millennium celebration, Tenet had taken the highly unusual and risky step of personally warning Boren not to travel or appear at big public events over New Year‘s Eve or New Year‘s Day because he anticipated major attacks.
More recently, Tenet had worried that there would be attacks during the July 4, 2001, celebration. Though he didn‘t disclose it to Boren, there had been 34 specific communications intercepts among various bin Laden associates that summer making declarations such as “Zero hour is tomorrow“ or “Something spectacular is coming.“...Nothing had happened, but Tenet said it was the issue he was losing sleep over.
Suddenly, several of Tenet‘s security guards approached. They were not strolling. They were bolting toward the table.
Uh-oh, Boren thought.
“Mr. Director,“ one of them said, “there‘s a serious problem.“
“What is it?“ Tenet asked, indicating that it was okay to speak freely.
“The World Trade tower has been attacked.“
One of them handed Tenet a cell phone and he called headquarters.
“So they put the plane into the building itself?“ Tenet asked incredulously.
He ordered his key people to gather in his conference room at CIA headquarters. He would be there in about 15-20 minutes.
“This has bin Laden all over it,“ Tenet told Boren. “I‘ve got to go.“ He also had another reaction, one that raised the real possibility that the CIA and the FBI had not done all that could have been done to prevent the terrorist attack. “I wonder,“ Tenet said, “if it has anything to do with this guy taking pilot training.“ He was referring to Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan descent whom the FBI had detained in Minnesota the previous month after he had acted suspiciously at a local flight training school.“

What follows makes for very compelling reading, and there are times when Woodward strings sequences together for maximum tension, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. Bush has something of a cowboy quality to him, especially as he presses his team for concrete decisions and plans of action, and it’s revealing that he developed his “Bush Doctrine“ (which states that the U.S. would not only go after terrorists everywhere, but also the governments or groups which harbor them) without first consulting Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is particularly telling. Other usual suspects also find themselves under Woodward scrutiny, including National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Tenet , and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Battles for control, agendas, and initiatives abound at every level, and while Woodward does lean heavily on transcribed conversations, this is still impactful stuff, and sometimes even a bit chilling.
How the war on terrorism will finally be played out under the Bush presidency remains to seen, but when it is, there will perhaps be another volume to complement this one. As it is, it acquits itself as an insightful look into some of the earliest days of Bush in the White House, ones no one could have predicted and the likes of which, hopefully, will never be seen again.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5