Hold the line...

A recently leaked National Intelligence Estimate declares that the war in Iraq is fueling global terrorism. The "jihadist" movement, according to the report, is becoming more decentralized and apt to grow as anti-American sentiment increases over U.S. presence in Iraq and the broader Middle East.

Meanwhile, George W. Bush continues to defend his strategy and blast those who would suggest that the Iraq war is actually making the world more dangerous.

Is anyone else shocked by all of this?

Clinton's justifiable anger

Former President Bill Clinton today blasted Chris Wallace of Fox News during an interview, accusing him of changing the subject of discussion and suggesting that Clinton didn't do enough during his presidency to capture Osama bin Laden. (The interview was apparently supposed to cover Clinton's recent global warming initiative.)

"I got closer to killing [bin Laden] than anybody has gotten since," Clinton said. "...I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you have asked this of."

Now, I'll be the first to criticize the policies (and sexual escapades) of Bill Clinton's eight-year administration. Nevertheless, he's absolutely right. The Bush administration did nothing to address the growing threat of terrorism during the eight months leading up to 9/11 (read: the August 2001 intelligence memo declaring bin Laden's determination to attack inside the United States), and then used its own propaganda machine to blame the tragedy on a president who had been out of office for more than half a year.

It's troubling enough to see images of George W. Bush golfing at his Texas ranch just weeks before planes slammed into the World Trade Center. Bill Clinton, who expected an interview on his efforts to mitigate global climate change, had every right to be upset about the implications of Wallace's question. Finger-pointing and antagonistic insinuations won't save this great nation; cooperation and unity will.

September 2006 destination: Seattle, Washington

If your goal was to invent a city completely surrounded by nature, you couldn't do much better than to conjure up a place like Seattle. Literally encapsulated by water, forests, and snowcapped mountains, this metropolitan area boasts perhaps the most majestic geographical setting in the lower 48 states.

Stereotypes aside, it does rain frequently here, but the rain is usually light and tempered by mid-afternoon bursts of sunshine, especially in the spring and summer. The temperature is moderated by the city's proximity to the Pacific Ocean: In the summer, it can be warm, but rarely hot or humid; in the winter, it's chilly, but almost never frigid or snowy. The air is so fresh from nearby evergreen forests and bodies of water that it feels like the area has a natural air-purification system.

Seattle is built on a narrow strip of land between Lake Washington to the east and Puget Sound (an inlet of the Pacific) to the west. Its steep hills afford unmatched views of the skyline and neighboring mountain ranges. On a clear day, a look to the west will reveal the glaciated peaks of the Olympic Mountains on the other side of Puget Sound; to the southeast is the massive 14,410-foot summit of Mount Rainier, a dormant volcano in the Cascade Range that, despite a distance of at least 60 miles, appears to hover directly over the city. This sleeping giant could inflict devastation on the region when it decides to wake up, like Mount St. Helens did farther south in the 1980s.

The town elicits images of Tom Hanks having lunch at the world-famous Pike Place Market in Sleepless in Seattle; of caffeine jolts at the world's first Starbucks Coffee or the corner espresso stand; of a lively alternative music scene that once included Kurt Cobain; and of the high-tech corporate world of Bill Gates and Microsoft. But there's much more. From the 360-degree rotating restaurant atop the Space Needle to the passenger/auto ferries docked at Pier 54 to the diverse restaurants, shops, and nightspots of the downtown and University district, Seattle combines the best of several worlds. An evening spent at a concert or theatrical performance could precede a morning spent hiking through an alpine meadow or whale-watching on a boat.

Seattle, a relatively unknown city in decades past, has since found its place in American culture. It's the type of place you'll remember after you leave, and the kind of atmosphere that will have you longing to return.

9/11: Understanding "why"

Last night I watched United 93, the first major motion picture documenting the heroic actions of passengers on that ill-faded flight. Presented in real time using accounts of what happened both on the ground and aboard the plane, this tasteful film is nonetheless heart-wrenching to watch.

It took me back to the horror that most Americans experienced on that day. It also brought back the anger -- not just because of what happened, but because of the misguided direction our nation has seemingly taken in years since. There were countless missed opportunities to prevent the terrorist attacks, but there have also been missed opportunities in their aftermath to make the world a more peaceful place.

On Monday evening, George W. Bush addressed the nation, again calling the terrorists "evil" and "haters of freedom." As usual, no speculation was offered as to "why": why these people have so much blind hatred for America, or why that hatred has spread like wildfire. Of course, this is the insinuation that Bush has made all along: that the 9/11 attacks happened for no other reason than the existence of evil, freedom-hating fanatics. It's part of his hopelessly oversimplified worldview. And it plays well with people. It's far easier to dismiss the perpetrators of the attacks as the "face of evil" rather than human beings who, evil though they were, had some reason for harboring so much fiery hatred.

But the "why" part, unfortunately, has never mattered much to George W. Bush. His ideology dictates that the barrel of a gun alone will keep us safe; that sending in 100,000 more troops and dropping bombs to "smoke out" terrorists will result in their unconditional surrender. Sadly, this just isn't the case. People hell-bent on blowing themselves up won't be stopped by an army of 500,000 strong, as long as there's no interest in determining why they want to do that. I can't claim to have an answer, but I'd strongly suspect there's more to it than, "they're evil and hate freedom." Until we at least attempt to figure that out, America will continue to live in fear.

Surrender to those who have harmed us? No way. Understand what drives their actions and beliefs? Absolutely.

Thinking about - and taking a break from - labor

Driving home one day this week, I saw this bumper sticker, which, as the Labor Day weekend approached, got me to thinking about the importance of workers' unions in America.

At a young age, I've already had the unfortunate but informative experience of working for an incompetent, self-serving, and frankly repugnant boss at an equally repugnant and corrupt place of employment. My suspicion was (and is) that I was terminated not as a consequence of sub-par performance, but because of personal motives on the part of my supervisor. I never had evidence to support my assertion, but I speculated on what type of legal action I could take if I did.

About a month ago, I saw a news program that gave me the answer, and it wasn't one I liked. It told the story of a manager in Ohio who fired employees caught smoking cigarettes -- not just at work, but at home, in the car, at a bar, or anywhere else. He was perfectly within his authority to do so. Irrespective of my opinion on smoking, the behaviors, habits, beliefs, and lifestyles of workers outside the workplace are of no business to their employers, unless the aforementioned have some bearing on the employee's ability to do his or her job. (In the Ohio case, it did not.)

I was disturbed to discover that, in most states, most employees simply do not have very many rights at all. Bosses can fire workers for almost any reason. In most states, termination of employment because your supervisor disagrees, for instance, with your politics or personal lifestyle choices, is not grounds for litigation. Nor is a supervisor who terminates without any reason or advance notice at all. Even sexual orientation isn't a protected category in most states. Technically, many bosses could fire a worker who is found to be gay (they do so in the military, don't they?)

It's no coincidence that the exception to this rule are heavily unionized industries (teachers, for example). I once listened to union-bashers and sympathized with them; now I consider them an indispensable resource for employees who would otherwise have no recourse for their grievances. I'm certainly not saying that unions are perfect, or that they don't have negative characteristics. I am saying that, as we celebrate Labor Day this weekend, we must remember the vital role that unionization has played in improving the quality of America's work environment.