Your article "Tax records probed in Nation of Islam's city housing pacts" (April 18) left out one essential fact: The Nation of Islam is a hate group which promulgates a scurrilous message of racial and religious animosity.
Any of the so-called positive effects produced by NOI Security in the housing projects is outweighed by their association with this malevolent organization.
It is outrageous that Baltimore City helps fund the Nation of Islam by hiring this group to guard public housing. It is an affront to all fair-minded people who work against bigotry and intolerance.
I am sure the city would never think of hiring a company called KKK Security to guard the Convention Center or the Baltimore Museum of Art.
But Mayor Schmoke and Housing Commissioner Daniel P. Henson III feel that NOI Security (which was the high bidder on the security contract) is just fine.
Well, they're are wrong. The ends do not justify the means.
Congratulations to Sen. Bob Dole for having the courage to stand up to the entertainment industry, and Time-Warner in particular, for its excesses in filmmaking and gangsta rap recording.
After the death of Eric Johnson, who was the head of the Motion Picture Association of America, Jack Valenti succeeded him as the new head and moral arbiter.
Mr. Valenti became Hollywood's self-censorship czar. Upon assuming his new position, he began to shift the emphasis of the Production Code from narrow taboos to broad guidelines that permitted great artistic freedom.
That was back in 1966. From then on, there was no stopping Hollywood. As the years went by films portrayed more and more violence, sex, nudity, drug taking and disgusting language.
Every time the industry comes under fire it promises to clean up its act. But it never does and never will until Congress comes down on it like the wrath of God.
Strict guidelines should be enacted by Congress to protect our children from Hollywood's sick movie-making practiced in the name of artistic freedom.
Another thing Congress should look into is denying tax write-offs to anyone who sponsors entertainment that violates congressional guidelines. The industry can never be trusted to police itself. Let it scream censorship until it is blue in the face. Enough is enough.
Your recent article on the federal charity fund points out the high cost to taxpayers of the campaign ("For federal workers, charity begins on payday," June 8).
If it costs taxpayers $22.1 million to raise $196 million, we have paid 11.2 percent of the $196 million through taxes.
Of the $196 million raised, probably 30 percent, or about $58 million, goes to administrative expenses and salaries for those who are employed by the various charities.
This means that the cost of providing about $137 million to the needy people who actually benefit from the federal campaign is $80 million.
This is big business, not charity. It's long past time to clean up the list of charities in the federal campaign. No charity that uses more than 10 percent of its funds for administration should be allowed on the list.
Federal workers have the right to give to any charity they want. Susan Holliday must understand this. The question is, should taxpayers pay the price of soliciting these funds?
Charles D. Connelly
I am amazed, surprised, and confused that baseball fans are criticizing Cal Ripken for attempting to break Lou Gehrig's consecutive-games-played record.
Mr. Ripken has worked extremely hard to be in the enviable position of rewriting baseball history.
If I recall correctly, there were several games during Lou Gehrig's streak in which he played very few innings. Although I do not know the exact statistics, I believe that Mr. Ripken has played in almost every inning of every game during his streak.
It is interesting to note that the active player with the next highest consecutive-games-played recently had his string broken at approximately 300 games. This magnifies the accomplishment of Mr. Ripken.
I believe that baseball fans are wrong in not rejoicing over the success of Mr. Ripken.
Elizabeth A. Brown
Our confused, pathetic policy in Bosnia
Capt. Scott O'Grady brings into focus our confused, pathetic policy in Bosnia.
Ask anyone from the president down why we are in Bosnia and you get a jumble of rationalizations.
Our purpose there is as foggy as it was in Vietnam. Our people can't distinguish between the Bosnian Muslims and the Bosnian Serbs.
We have to ask ourselves what we are doing there. If they want to continue their tribal wars, which have been going on for centuries, let them.
But why should our young men die for them? Why do we have to wait for one of the "best and brightest" to write a book admitting how wrong we are in Bosnia, as we were in Vietnam?
Why don't we just get out now? We don't need to save face. We just need common sense.
And we need our Captain O'Gradys to show us the way. Now we learn that our pilots are not properly protected from anti-aircraft missiles and that our intelligence is also failing them.
Recently our nation has been shamefully exposed as a partner in the disgusting torture of the "disappeared" in Latin America (news articles, June 11, 13, 15).
We continually reproach China for its hideous human rights policies, but we do the same thing in Honduras and other Latin American countries.
As a girl I always took pride in the fact that we were a country dedicated to helping the oppressed, of saving human beings from the tortures imposed by ruthless dictators.
That was the real American dream, not the desire to "own your own home."
The dream was to be free and decent to ones' fellow man. We have lost that.
Rose B. Isaacs