OCR Text |
Show THE ZEPHYR/JUNE-JULY 2003 FEEDBACK The Readers Respond THE ZEPHYR? BIASED? Jim, I was disappointed with the one sided take on the war in the April-May 2003 issue of the CCZ. Except for "A Day in the Life of a Peace Protester" by Dan Rosen, which was very open-minded and compelling, I thought the articles in the Zephyr were one sided, at the least, and demagogic and conspiratorial, at worst. Although it’s fair for the CCZ to have an opinion about such matters, I wish you would take into account that many of your compatriots of Southern Utah lovers are in favor this conflict for legitimate reasons that should not be parodied as ignorant. I would expect a less one-sided debate from the CCZ in the future. know is horrifying enough. Indeed it is, but given the secrecy of the current White House, it begs the question: what is the administration of Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney hiding from us? Of what more horrible deeds are they capable of? Simply because we would personally find a course of action repugnant and unthinkable does not necessarily mean that this administration isn't capable of going through with it. After all we are now in a war for control of oil disguised as "liberation," which is about as horrible a course of action that I care to imagine. In the weeks, months and even years to come we will be hearing bits of information concerning this administration’s secret activities, and much of it may be quite disturbing. Given that the “watchdog media” has consolidated itself into a mere shadow of Watergate era investigative journalism, it is extremely unlikely that any revelations of Bush administration deeds with be revealed anywhere in the mainstream media. News of this administration’s secret actions is going to come from sources out of the mainstream, whose credibility may very well be questionable. I am not suggesting that such information be believed outright, it would take a mountain of verifiable facts to convince me of the smallest detail, but I will keep on open mind. I would discourage my friend Dan, and anyone else, from casually disregarding anything we hear of the secret operations of this administration no matter how horrifying. Sincerely, John Hodge Grand Junction, Colorado Best, Dave Hausser Gambier, Ohio Since about 95% of the media analysis of the current world situation seems biased in a diametrically-opposed way, I felt that being “biased” in this fashion DID offer the other side of an otherwise “one-sided debate.”...JS PARANOIA? OR PROPHESY? To Mr. Jim Stiles, editor of The Canyon Country Zephyr: I read with interest the account of anti war activities in the Grand Junction area presented by Fruita, Colorado, resident Dan Rosen in the last issue of the Canyon Country Zephyr (April-May, 2003). I know Dan Rosen, I find him to be among the kindest, gentlest and most intelligent people it has been my pleasure to know. I am pleased beyond words to count Danny and his wife Karen as friends of mine. I fear, however, that Dan’s kindness and compassion might be blinding him, and other kind people like him, to some horrific possibilities. In his article, Dan finds what actions of this government that we’re aware of horrifying enough as it is without “unwarranted paranoia" concerning other more secretive actions this administration may have committed. But I ask, is such paranoia unwarranted? Now I don’t mean to suggest for a moment that our government was involved, either actively or passively, in the 9/11 attacks, but perhaps a look at past “paranoia” should give us pause. Before | came of age, during the anti-war protests of the 1960s, many activists asserted that the FBI or some such government agency was spying on them. Such ridiculous and outrageous complaints were originally dismissed as “paranoid delusion,’ for our government could not possibly be spying on it’s own people behaving in a perfectly legal and peaceful manner. As the dust ef Watergate settled, we all learned otherwise. FBI director J. Edger Hoover had indeed kept exhaustive records on numerous Americans including anti-war activists and President Nixon had even maintained an "enemies list." During the mid 1980s word first leaked out that the Reagan administration, in order to gain the release of hostages, might be dealing with those very same terrorists it had vowed never to negotiate with. "We do not negotiate with terrorists," the Gipper had asserted, in one of his very few statements I enthusiastically agreed with. Further ridiculous rumors spread concerning Reagan administration dealings with those terrorists and the selling of arms to, of all countries, Iran for cash that was then supposedly used to finance a CIA backed revolution in Nicaragua. "Paranoid delusion" was an understatement, for the supposed conspiracy had all the melodrama of a "B" movie. As matters turned out it was all revealed to be true and only Presidential pardons kept many of the characters in the drama from spending time in jail. Even more recently, attacks on President Clinton focused on his supposed sexual affairs with a member of the White House staff. "Absurd" thought many, including myself, for how would a president find the time, let alone the stupidity, to shame himself and the country in such a manner. It was all true, and we were all ashamed of our President. Vietnam. The Red Menace and McCarthyism. World War I and the Spanish-American War (in which media giants fanned the flames of war in order to boost readership, sound familiar?). In all of these examples, and many, many more, the "paranoid" suspicions of a few proved to be correct if not overly optimistic. We now have before us a presidential administration so obsessed with secrecy that it makes any previous administration look porous. Yet, as Dan Rosen observes, what we do IDENTIFYING THE PLANE IN HERB’S PHOTO Hello, Jim. You asked for some help in identifying the plane in Herb Ringer’s photo (Apr/May 2003). It is the B-17. Shown may be the Y1B-17, one of thirteen built for evaluation. The first flight was 02 December 1936. The first one from Boeing crashed at Wright Field, killing the occupants. The cause was due to locked controls. (My guess is that they had external control locks similar to those on the DC-2 anid 3 airplanes used to prevent wind gusts from moving rudders, elevators, etc., and damaging them.) The one shown could be the single Y1B-17A. There were also 39 B-17B types built, nearly identical to the earlier types. Following were B-17C types. The plane pictured was quite obsolete before WWII began. The serious production models came with completely different vertical stabilizers and rudders, providing for a tail gun’s installatiion. Later there were many modifications and the production models went to B-17G types. My Air Force group had a single B-17G used for transition training from 2 to 4 engine and general use to get pilots’ minimum hours per month time. I was a Nordern bombsight and C-1 autopilot mechanic after the war and had a number of rides in the group’s B-17, one of which took us over the Grand Canyon at 10,000 feet altitude. As the forward observer I rode in the bombardier’s position in the nose, which was a clear plexiglass window with a panoramic view forward. One of the pilots was flying by dead reckoning with the left side of the cockpit’s windows blocked out. The view of the canyon at that altitude and the low air speed of the B-17, about 180mph, was quite spectacular. Chuck Miller Illinois I'm always amazed at the wealth of historical knowledge out there in the Zephyr readership, and that they take the time to write and share it with us. I received several other letters on this subject. Thanks to Chuck and the other B-17 aficionados...Jim DEFENDS BACK-IN PARKING IN DOWNTOWN SALT LAKE CITY Editor: This is written in response to an article recently printed in your publication titled: "BACK-IN PARKING: A REALLY DUMB IIDEA IN SALT LAKE CITY" Last fall, back-in angle parking was implemented on 200 South in Salt Lake City in combination with the installation of bike lanes between 650 and 150 West. This parking style was installed because it provides a safer environment for bicyclists using the bike lanes since drivers are able to see them easier (and much sooner) when exiting their parking stalls. Is backing into a stall difficult? The backing maneuver may be unfamiliar, but is certainly much easier than backing into a parallel parking stall, a common task on city streets. Unlike with parallel parking back-in angle parking does not require the front of the vehicle to be maneuvered against the curb. In contrast to standard angle parking, visibility of oncoming traffic while exiting reverse angle stalls is much improved. No longer does one need to blindly back the entire rear half of their vehicle out into an active travel lane with the hope that approaching vehicles will stop. Now, with only a quick look to the left oncoming vehicles (including bicycles) are easily seen as you exit forward. DAVE WAGSTAFF CONSTRUCTION LITTLE WEASEL ADS, INC. PRESENTS: THE DESERT RAT COMMANDO New Construction Re-models "High Quality at a Fair Price " CALL (435) 259-5077 after 5 PM #1 in a series of profound observations about the state of our world. And now...Mr C: You say yer husband is a loafa... Who just sits there on the sofa? The more bullshit you eat, the less the flies will bother you. Won't build the shed or cut the grass? Won't fix the leak or get off his Ass-ertion that physical exertion Is a slow and futile form of suicide? Next time, The Desert Rat Commando will ponder the meaning of fake adobe. Want to get his attention? Call a building contractor! PAGE 34 | 8g |