Two-part rights series gave history lesson on local struggle
I want to express my appreciation for the excellent two-part article on "Justice at Gwynn Oak" (Aug. 23-24). Not being a Baltimore native, it gave me insight into what citizens in this community went through in the 1960s.
Looking carefully at the list of those who were arrested, I was pleased to see my predecessor's name and also the name of a current member of our Quaker Meeting, Ann Miller. I called Ann to congratulate and thank her for her involvement.
As soon as a second copy of the articles arrives, I shall send it on to Norman Morrison's widow, now living in North Carolina, as Mr. Morrison was also one of those arrested. There was evidently a third member of the congregation involved, but her name was not listed as she was not arrested.
Thank you again for your well-crafted writing and your insights into this local struggle for justice.
Ronald E. Mattson
Baltimore
The writer is executive secretary of the Baltimore Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Stony Run.
Making Memorial Stadium attractive to new residents
Several of your recent letters have suggested turning the razed Memorial Stadium into a park-and-ride lot for Ravens games. That might be a desirable idea for those who attend the 10 games per year, but it does not sit well with those of us who live in the Memorial Stadium neighborhood.
Those 10 days of convenience for football fans would leave us with 355 days of asphalt desert. No, what we need is something that will inspire people to come to our neighborhood to live, not just to park.
A grass-covered, tree-lined park with play equipment for young children and recreational and athletic facilities for adults would be such a use.
Herman M. Heyn
Baltimore
Blount tarnished record with residency charade
Judge Michael E. Loney ruled correctly by ordering Sen. Clarence W. Blount off the September primary ballot.
Mr. Blount lost it when he listened to his advisors and decided to run. He led Del. Frank D. Boston Jr. to believe he would not run again. He should have retired in the same dignified and conscientious manner in which he previously represented his district.
Mr. Blount, in my opinion, had no intention on supporting or conceding his seat to Mr. Boston. Mr. Boston showed guts in bucking the old boy's network.
How sad for the senator to be dragged into court to defend himself. He was really a senator without a true constituency. He continued this charade for nearly 10 years. He should be penalized through his retirement benefits.
He will be collecting a full pension from the state while he served in a district where he did not live.
Why would Mr. Blount misrepresent himself as being one of us? Baltimore has too many other important issues.
The voters of the 41st District should demand an explanation and an apology from Senator Blount.
He was callous and exploitive of the black community. His armor of valor has been pierced.
Carolyn Brown
Baltimore
Missed opportunity to urge worldwide family planning
Why is it so difficult for many people to mention overpopulation and methods for slowing population growth? In a recent Parade magazine, former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon wrote about the coming water shortages as population growth overwhelms supplies. He accepted as inevitable that by the year 2050 the world's population will be nearly double the present 5.9 billion.
Mr. Simon wrote about the consequences of overwhelming the world's resources, but in his suggestions on what to do, he did not include efforts to slow down the growth of populations.
For many years, the United States was the leader in support for family planning initiatives in the world's poorest countries. A radical change in congressional leadership beginning in 1994 resulted in savage cuts in our vital international family program.
The consequences of congressional cuts to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities and to International Planned Parenthood are two: many more abortions and out-of-control population growth.
It is most regrettable that Mr. Simon missed an opportunity to speak out for support of efforts to reduce the rate of population growth while he had a huge audience that reads Parade.
Carleton W. Brown
Elkton
Double standard in policies toward Sudan, Myanmar
Clarence Lusane, assistant professor at American University in Washington, writes about terrible facts in Sudan ("Starving Sudanese need our help now," Aug. 13).
Mr. Lusane wrote in his column: "The Sudanese government has played a murderous role. In its desperate effort to stay in power, the regime of Gen. Omar Hassan al Bashir has overseen the starvation, rape, brutality, killing and enslavement of its citizens while the southern part of the country continues to suffer the worst of that policies."
"Where is the United States in all these horrors?" asks Mr. Lusane.
Well, despite plenty of rhetoric, we can not expect anything from the Islamic countries.
Why? Because the suffering southern Sudanese are Christians and animists. That's why no help might be expected from any Muslim country.
But why is almost nothing done by the United States? Is is only because of the anxiety of Islamic fundamentalism? Not exactly. Some other consideration leads our Department of State to be quite active in Myanmar.
It probably makes sense that American University in Washington sent some students to Myanmar.
Rhetorically, to demonstrate for the democracy what activity is otherwise understood by the authorities in Myanmar.
Is it possible that the American University in Washington considers the crimes in Sudan an easy question, while Aung San Suu Kyi's case is much more serious because her husband is a British officer. And the earlier British Empire had difficulties in the former Burma.
What is the case?
The double standard is obvious if someone compares the terrible situations in Sudan and Myanmar.
Alec Kecskes
Kensington
Secret Service protection will never be the same
Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr is desperately seeking to condemn President Clinton by using any means to disfigure our government and liberties as free-spirited Americans.
Attacks on President Clinton's moral judgment are one thing that will recover with time and a blessing from his wife. It is ethically wrong for Mr. Starr to use the Secret Service on a witch hunt to end Mr. Clinton's career.
The job of the Secret Service is to protect the president and his family from the evils of this world. Mr. Starr has made the Secret Service talk. This type of action will put the president's life, as well as future presidents' lives, in jeopardy.
The outcome is simple and dramatic. There will be no real trust between the president and the Secret Service.
Elsoudani El-Wahhabi
Jessup
Clintons must solve woes outside the White House
President Clinton's public confession comes only as a last resort by him in order to save face. He has now no choice but to resign. His credibility, respect, dignity and honesty are lost.
He has a big problem that needs to be addressed, and the White House is not the place to do it. His wife is now forced to be honest, too, with these issues. There is no way they can put all this aside and carry on.
Jean M. Hammond
Upperco
Makes no sense to spend money on Clinton sex life
How many past presidents and private citizens have committed adultery? Should wiretaps and the FBI be employed to hunt down and hound all philanderers as liars, cheaters and threats to a decent society?
What sense does it make for the government to spend $40 million of our hard-earned dollars to interrogate the president's sex life? Nonsense. Please ask our senators to stop paying your money to fund Kenneth Starr's investigation.
Susan Wolf Dudley
Baltimore
Pub Date: 8/31/98