By Amy Silverman
By Olivia LaVecchia
By Monica Alonzo and Stephen Lemons
By Chris Parker
By Michael Lacey
By Weston Phippen
It seems to me that a few bad apples spoil the bunch when it comes to, as one obviously racially ignorant person says, the "dark element" at clubs ("The War on HipHop," Michael Kiefer, December 21). Come on! Whites are fighting as much as blacks. My guess would be there's just as much or more posturing and machismo in white clubs, especially at the bars that surround ASU.
We always talk about equal rights, but there are "black" clubs. That's reverse discrimination. I think until whites, blacks and Hispanics can just hang out, bar owners are going to have to turn to the cops to give the nonviolent customers a sense of security.
As biased as New Times is, I think there may be some stones unturned. Which is not to say that shootings or sexual assaults at "white" clubs don't warrant a fine or the yanking of liquor licenses. But there is a definite, unsettling racial funk in Phoenix's air. Someone had better figure out how to fix it soon, or we're all going to have to wear flak jackets.
After reading Marc Ramirez's article "No Fowl, Some Harm" (December 21), I am left with two questions: Is Nick Ligidakis responsible for repairing the tenuous community relations apparently created by the Garfield School District? Should he be held accountable for a failure to feed more than 32,000 people (needy or not-so-needy) when he stated a limit of 16,000?
Fear of liability discourages many businesses from generous acts; to that New Times is adding fear of a public flogging--proof that no good deed goes unpunished.
What on Earth prompted New Times to lambaste Nick Ligidakis for serving "only" 32,000 free Thanksgiving meals? Didn't the hit piece on Mother Teresa work out?
Marc Ramirez's article about Nick Ligidakis' Thanksgiving efforts was offensive to me and insulting to a Samaritan. Had a New Times reporter been on hand for Jesus Christ's miracle of the loaves, we might have read first about those who got nary a bite.
As one who knows firsthand the challenge of organizing volunteers during the holidays, I'm awed by the dedication of Ligidakis and his volunteers. Personally, I'd like to see New Times and reporter Marc Ramirez demonstrate their ability to do a better job of feeding the poor and hungry at holiday time before reading more petty cavil about a local "saint" Nick.
Soap on the Ropes
Kudos to New Times and Paul Rubin for the delightful insight into big-business shenanigans at Dial Corp ("Dial's Dirty Laundry," December 14). Thank goodness New Times is around to play vacuum cleaner. Bravo!
Why is Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimsza sending letters to Valley business officials regarding the huge coalition of citizens opposed to the construction of the Sumitomo-Sitix plant ("Sumitomo Wrestling," Dave Plank, December 7)? In his letter, Rimsza states that the coalition has its facts wrong about the plant. As a member of this burgeoning coalition, I can tell the mayor that our facts about water and environmental issues relative to this plant are right on target.
Maybe our mayor is anxious because he and his staff didn't ask enough of the right questions before they hurriedly passed the Sumitomo agreement. They were so nervous that they passed the agreement in a secret emergency meeting--though it is highly illegal. The Phoenix City Council passed the agreement in secret because it did not want to give constituents the opportunity to question this matter publicly. There's only one word to describe these actions: sneaky.
This is yet another example of who Mayor Rimsza really serves. Shame on Skip and his cohorts for trying to bypass public opinion. Many Valley citizens are working to correct this type of bad behavior and to save families from exposure to the toxic emissions that will be generated by this plant.
Fran A. Booth
Believe It or Naught
Tony Ortega's story on Rick Ross was beyond one-sided ("Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlatans," November 30). The decision to portray Ross as some kind of saintly "good guy" is remarkable. The one thing I will give him credit for is his fantastic ability to get media types and a few others to take him seriously. Because of his terrific publicity-garnering skills, he is now considered an expert. What Ross is an expert on is his own brand of hate.
Perhaps those who attack him can be called "Nut Busters"--as that is what he is, a nut. He decides certain religions aren't "good," and, therefore, it is okay to attack those religions and attempt to get others to hate and attack them, as well.
That little detail that this country was founded upon--freedom of religion--is still quite important to some people. No one--not even "one of the nation's foremost deprogrammers"--has the right to decide what is an "acceptable" religion for another.
W. Russell Shaw
I am appalled at the reportership in the article about Rick Ross. I cannot believe that New Times can allow a reporter to slam a religion and present a criminal as a saint. The misrepresentation and lies were unbelievable.