|
|
||
|
|
Letters to the Editor
Downtown Office Closure Absurd and Wasteful Dear Mr. Martin, This letter concerns State decisions which will effect the City of Saginaw & their residents significantly. Also, an alternative could be tried that might actually accomplish what the State office closings are supposedly trying to accomplish. The Secretary of State office is scheduled to be closed on Jan. 31, 2002. This closing is supposed to occur in order to save State monies. This office is an office that pays rent to another State agency, the Department of Management & Budget. Therefore, not only is the office closing going to be an inconvenience for many people, but it is not going to accomplish what the politicians said they wanted to accomplish. The supposed money savings are an income loss for the Dept. of Mgt. & Budget. They do not have another tenant who is prospectively seeking that site where the current S.O.S office is located. Plus, many people who frequent the downtown office cannot drive, or they are acquiring a car for the first time and need the Saginaw downtown office to do business. These are not just easy registration transactions. With the closing of the downtown office there will not be an S.O.S office within the City limits of Saginaw. I think that is absurd. For a city the size, geographically and population wise to not have any office is anachronistic and political party favoritism at its worst. Finally, another alternative that I mentioned in order to reduce the State budget, really, is to amend the State employees' retirement plan. Currently the plan is out of date & out of synch' with most major corporations and other governmental agencies. Currently you have to be 55 and have at least 30 years of work experience in order to qualify for a "full" retirement. An amendment to the current law is in the House Appropriations committee and is not being scheduled for any hearings. This bill #4810 would permit State employees with 30 years of work experience and those who have reached the age of 50 to retire with a "full" retirement. They would have to have an 80-point qualifier rather than an 85-point plan. This would save the State somewhere between $80,000,000 and $50,000,000 in the first year, if no new employees would be hired to fill those vacancies. This is real money, not a filtering out system that actually costs the State money; such as, the closure of the Downtown S.O.S. office. Please research & investigate this information. These injustices need to be looked at. The "mainline" press is not interested. They just keep applauding the current administrations. Sincerely, Mike (Full name & address withheld by request) Ollie North Letter a Hoax Dear Bob, I was a bit surprised to see the letter signed, "Dave I. of Phoenix" in your edition of December 20-January 9. In this letter, the author claims to quote from 1987 testimony of Col. Oliver North, naming Osama bin Laden as a terrorist that scared him so much he spent $60,000 for home security to protect himself and his family. Actually, this claimed testimony is a hoax that is being spread around on the Internet. Even Rush Limbaugh, the right wing extremist (to whom I listen occasionally, to see what "the enemy" is up to), has acknowledged and verified that Ollie North never said this. North did say that he built the security system to protect himself and his family against ABU NIDAL, a Palestinian politician who joined the ranks of the Fatah movement, later joined the PLO and later split off from them. His organization specialized in anti-Jewish attacks on school children. He was expelled from Iraq in 1983 and went to Syria. From there he went to Libya. It was claimed he was arrested in Egypt in 1998, but the Egyptians denied this. The latest information on him was that he was hospitalized in Baghdad in 2000. Your readers should know that Ollie North did not give us any "warning" back in 1987 about Osama bin Laden. You may want to include this information in your next edition. I realize this was not your statement, but that of a letter-writer, but I thought you might run a "correction". Best wishes for the New Year. Eugene D. Mossner Saginaw Dear Bob, I'm glad you put a question mark at the end of the headline "A Warning from Ollie?" in the Dec. 20 issue of the Review. This is another hoax that's been widely dispersed via e-mail. Col. North's testimony referred to Abu Nidal. At the time, the U.S. still considered Osama bin Laden a good guy -- he was one of the "freedom fighters" we supplied to help boot the Soviets from Afghanistan. A good policy for you and all your readers: whenever you get an e-mail that talks about travelers losing kidneys, computer viruses or terrorist warnings, check out the Urban Legends Reference Pages at http://www.snopes.com. Sincerely, Greg Branch Saginaw Editor's Reply: Thanks to both of you along with several other readers that alerted us to this hoax. I sincerely apologize for the mis-information contained in last issue's Ollie North letter. We received that letter hours before our deadline and needed to fill some space and I was remiss in not checking out the veracity of the letter. And thanks to Greg and Al Limberg for turning me on to the 'Urban Legend Hoax Page'.
The Review welcomes your letters & comments. Please address all correspondence to: Letters to the Editor - Review Magazine 318 S. Hamilton St. Saginaw, MI 48602 |
|
|
|
Enable frames | |
|
home | out/about | events | personal | store | classified | real estate | forums | archives | contact |
||
