Letters to the Editor

What You Say

Stay Gold

Speaking as one of the "outsiders" who helped organize the volunteer effort on that remarkable Saturday, it is easy to understand our "doubting" Sharon's point of view [Loose Canon, "An Urban Eden's Troubled Rebirth," Bruce Schimmel, Aug. 23, 2007]. Volunteer efforts often come and go with the promise of turning bad things to good. Moreover, it is true that "outsiders" can sustain something good for only so long, before enthusiasm wanes and efforts dry up.

But I think Sharon is wrong about this one. Consider that the lot was once an award-winning reclamation project in the '90s and has a history of strong support from the city and nearby residents. This support has not gone away, it's just been in hibernation.

Directly across the street is an active senior citizens home where the watchful eye of Tioga United, a strong community group, meets regularly. Tioga United has become vested in this project and, more importantly, knows the mechanics of maintaining vacant lots.

The "outside" leadership has a real purpose and a long-term vision, which includes grant programs and an extraordinary core group of volunteers to participate. Let us also remember the larger human psychological story: As we watch the murder rate rise, projects like this can forge a strong sense of beating back the bad guys. So, our beloved "doubting" Sharon, I'm willing to bet you're wrong on this one. Consider picking up a shovel with that hot dog next time!

Joe Walsh
Via E-mail

Over many years of advocacy for a just trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal, I have learned to shrug my shoulders at the innumerable falsehoods, misconceptions and stereotypical attitudes that have dominated public discourse. I realized long ago that rarely will area residents have the chance to glean any true understanding of such from the local media. It is so frustrating to see "liberal" publications such as yours display such cluelessness when it comes to Mumia that I find myself sinking into a state of resignation.

I was nonetheless appalled to read in [Slant, "Retribution," Michael Washburn, Aug. 16, 2007] that, "What the supporters of this vicious cop killer wont tell you is that his original attorney had to recuse himself ... because Abu-Jamal insisted on a crazed defense along the lines that he was right to shoot the cop for political reasons."

This is not an "opinion." This is known as a lie. I am utterly dismayed that City Paper, regardless of its editorial animosity toward Jamal, would [publish] such an egregious statement. Mumia's original attorney, Anthony Jackson, withdrew from the case after Mumia was granted the right to represent himself. This right was capriciously revoked by Judge Albert Sabo during jury selection, and Jackson's "representation" was summarily imposed on Mumia despite his and Jackson's strenuous objections.

Mumia has maintained his complete innocence from day one. He has never based his defense on technicalities, political justifications or anything other than his steadfast insistence that he did not shoot officer Faulkner.

Bob Harris
West Philadelphia

My commentary was not, nor did it pretend to be, a comprehensive case for the death penalty. City Paper told me I had a word limit, so I focused on a couple of issues that sometimes go ignored in death-penalty debates. So, last week's letters that chided me for not devoting more space to this or that issue are wide of the mark.

[Slant, "Stay of Execution," Andrew E. Mathis, Aug. 23, 2007] did not offer any facts or evidence at all, beyond citing a couple of Supreme Court decisions. There is something childlike in the way that Mathis expects us to accept his denunciation of capital punishment as "racist" without a single supporting statistic or fact. Nor did Mathis bother to address my point: Capital punishment is a way to strike at those who prey on minorities; it is in blacks' best interest.

In a situation like Rwanda or Darfur, where blacks are killing blacks, the failure to take preventive action is sometimes denounced as evidence of racism. But if you advocate getting tough with the small criminal element preying on the mostly law-abiding black or Hispanic community, then — in the twisted logic of liberalism — you are endorsing racism. Incredible.

Michael Washburn
Via E-mail