Weighty Issue To the Editor, I just finished perusing Dave Devine's "A Great Idea" (Tucson Weekly, December 12). It raised one interesting question: Is the phrase "...fat-assed city lawyer" a generic insult or is it directed at any particular individual? As you can well imagine, this issue has acquired some significance within our office. --Thomas Berning City Attorney To the Editor, Regarding Dave Devine's "A Great Idea" (Tucson Weekly, December 12): You'd almost think the job description for being a Tucson City Council member includes the phrase "must have expertise in tunnel vision and hindsight; those with peripheral vision and forethought need not apply." This is a council that is supposed to act in the best interests of Tucson--for health, safety and welfare. Our welfare, which means the desert. Yet, they continually undermine any progress they make in developing a trust with the public by, nine times out of 10, swaying to the siren song of the overzealous developer. If the concern is for the economic rejuvenation of the TCC, does it make any sense to build a resort to service it out at Starr Pass? Or is someone just trying to make a deal with any substantiation they can? For a council whose seat is in the core of downtown Tucson and whose duties include the "due care" of downtown, they seem to be quite the neglectful parents. Perhaps the average citizen isn't aware that a fair amount of the central business district of downtown and its outlying parcels are owned by the state. If solicited by the right organizations for the right reasons, this land could possibly be purchased for pennies on the dollar. If anything, $9 million will buy a great deal more of downtown than it will at Starr Pass, and I guarantee the rewards would be much more appreciated by all of Tucson. The bottom line is that we must stop building out and finish building up what we've already started. Until we can figure out a way of electing councils and boards who will actually serve our best interests, the desert will continue disappearing. --Aaron Seth Katz Dubious Honors To the Editor, I just finished reading Leo Banks and Jim Nintzel's whining tirade ("Doobie, Doobie, Doo...," Tucson Weekly, January 2), which left me somewhat infuriated. It is true that a free society does need someone to stand up and point out how we are screwing up. But a responsible journalist would actually research the issues and compose definitive articles describing the symptoms of a problem, and a possible solution. What you have produced is a witch hunt on all people who do not happen to view the world in exactly the same way you do. Here's an idea, let's take both of your lives and put them under your little microscope. I'll bet that you two come out looking as stupid as the dupes in the piece of trash you call an article. Not only is the article you have produced underinformed and (obviously intentionally) misleading, but it is irresponsible for a professional journalist. Tell you what, let's take a piece of your best work, send it to the real newspaper of your choice, and watch how long it takes them to laugh you out of the building. In the future, try giving Tucsonans a little credit when you write a piece. Present us with the well-researched facts of an issue, then recommend your own conclusion based on that. After all, most of us are pretty smart and can handle it. Besides, that's what a real journalist would do. --Robert S. O'Brien Defending The Flagg To the Editor, Leo Banks and Jim Nintzel's reference to "homeless groupie" Brian Flagg as one of the "usual frauds" in our fair city, is a wonderful example of an attitude that needs no home on your pages ("Doobie, Doobie, Doo...," Tucson Weekly, January 2). Or were the authors the ones who are faking? --Ted Warmbrand To the Editor, Regarding "Doobie, Doobie, Doo..." (Tucson Weekly, January 2): Putting homeless advocate Brian Flagg in the same line of fire as Manuel Pacheco, Paul Sypherd and Fife Symington is an injustice to all the impoverished in our city. Brian Flagg not only speaks for the rights of the homeless, he also cooks and serves them food daily at the Casa Maria soup kitchen. If that isn't a job, what is? By the way, Leo and Jim, what do you get paid for your bird-brained twaddle in The Weekly? --Bernadette Jilka On Patrol To the Editor, I am offended by the subhead in your article "Police State Update" (Tucson Weekly, December 26), which read, "The U.S. Border Patrol's Units Are Out In Numbers Befitting A Nazi Jew-Bashing Extravaganza." After the subhead, not once in the article did you mention any of the atrocities which were perpetrated against Jewish people 55 years ago in Europe, perhaps because there is no comparison which could possibly be made between the situation you are concerned about and the total horror of the Holocaust. You must be a very young person not to realize the Nazis did much more than "Jew-bashing." They had a goal of total annihilation--and they almost succeeded. I hope you never forget that of the six million souls who died at the hands of the Nazis and their accomplices, 1.5 million were children 18 years old and younger. Can you possibly envision 1.5 million babies, toddlers, youngsters and teens--all dead? The Border Patrol may be all you describe, and their actions certainly may need revision, but please keep your headlines in the proper perspective. And as for your own education, study about the war (not the bashing) against the Jews. Think of all those doctors and teachers, lawyers and business people, musicians and workers, and the tailors and shoemakers--but most of all the children. The Holocaust was indeed an "extravaganza." --Barbara Goodfriend We Want Letters! Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks? Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com

		© 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth