Heimlich Sucks?ro;”Literally; Ssshhh About the Sox; Signorile, Why Do You Hate the Conservatives So?; Taki Gets the Unkindest Cut; More

At the end of Adam Heimlich's interview with El-P, did he suck his dick ("Straight Outta Brooklyn," 5/8)? Or maybe before? I mean, I haven't seen so much ass-kissing and dick-sucking since my last visit to the Castro.

Mark Miller, Brooklyn

True 'Dat

Russ Smith and John Strausbaugh frequently skewer cliche-spouting journalists, yet apparently didn't notice this eyeroller: "Straight Outta Brooklyn" (5/8). As a cover headline yet! Who hasn't seen the "straight outta..." phrase rolled out ad infinitum beginning around, say, the mid-90s when NWA's Straight Outta Compton LP ascended to the level of mini-cultural touchstone? You might as well have called the article "Keepin' It Real?Bigtime!"

Paul Sommerstein, Manhattan

Slackhound

Late kudos to Jim Knipfel for nailing the Midwest pipe bomber's profile ("Daily Billboard," 5/6). The fact that our Federal Bureau of Investigation?of investi-fucking-gation?whiffed makes me feel oh so confident about our safety. Also, regarding the "Daily Billboard"?more Repsher, less Tabb.

Mark Duffy, Manhattan

No Comment

MUGGER: Now that the Red Sox are respectable, some would even say good, why aren't you trumpeting their cause? Are you afraid of jinxing them? Enjoy your columns.

R.E. Bement, Longview, TX

Just Can't Get a Pure Compliment

I am surprised and rather delighted to see "Henry" included among your comics. It takes me back to the Sunday comics of my childhood in the late 1960s and early 1970s. However, what really surprises me is that it is the best comic strip that you are currently featuring.

David Colp, Brooklyn

Right After We Read Cyn Cotts

I expect to disagree with Armond White, and I don't mind. In fact, I often enjoy his seemingly deliberate perversity in championing films that other critics dismiss, or panning films that other critics like. And I've long since stopped trusting him when he recommends a film that turns out to be unwatchable?Mission to Mars did the trick. But there's a difference between perverse and obtuse. It's a line White rarely crosses, but he certainly did in his review of Henry Bean's The Believer ("Film," 5/15). White seems to think that Bean is endorsing the views of his Jewish-skinhead protagonist, and that the entire film is a product of Bean's "paranoia." You'd think White, of all critics, would recognize a metaphor when he sees one. Bean is no more paranoid about the rise of chic American fascists than Steven Spielberg is about the cruelty shown to humanoid robots. The Believer is the most interesting and resonant movie I've seen in a long time, and I'd hate to think that anyone who might love the movie will miss it because they make the mistake of trusting Armond White. (If you want to read a fair and nuanced review of the film, check out J. Hoberman in the Village Voice.)

Jack Lechner, Manhattan

They're Already Here

MIKE Signorile: I agree with you that the so-called lauding of Pim Fortuyn on the part of conservatives may be based in part in their common desire to close our borders to Islamic radicals ("The Gist," 5/15). That being said, I think your inability to distinguish between Islamic fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism is silly. The Christian right is not blowing things up and they are not migrating here in droves.

Evan Tucker, Chicago

Holland Opus

MIKE Signorile: Nice article on Pim Fortuyn. First of all, I'm not a voter for his party but I agree on a lot of points he made before and during his campaign. The best part is on election day almost 40 percent of immigrants voted for his party. We don't know if it is because they are already in our country and having the benefits of it. Mr. Fortuyn said the things a majority thought but couldn't say because of being labeled extreme left- or right-wing. If he was still alive, his party would have won the elections bigtime. But since his untimely death he still made it from zero seats to 26 seats in parliament. I know we are an odd country in the big world, and a small one as well, but freedom of speech, religion, sexual partner or whatever is #1 in our constitution. Freedom is big word in America but meanwhile there are so many do's and don'ts nobody knows what in one state is allowed and as soon as you cross a state-border or city is forbidden. An American friend wrote me: "We Americans are still living in the 18th century with today's technology." Puritans of the Future? They should keep in mind their own constitution and the changes some of their own right-wing politicians are planning to make. In short: no freedom for people with a same-sex partner.

Since this is not my native tongue I apologize for misspelling words. Greetings from across the big pond in that small country under sea level.

Name Withheld, via e-mail

The Mouth of the Severn

RE last week's "MUGGER." That prospect bothers Peter Beinart, who writes: "Today culture-war issues like school prayer and abortion are dwarfed by the threat to Israel. In such an environment, even many liberal Jews are willing to join forces with ardently Zionist evangelicals." Apparently, the overwhelming number of Christian conservatives who support Israel so vehemently that they berate George W. Bush for not giving Ariel Sharon a no-questions-asked green light in his justified battle against mass-murderer Yasir Arafat are ignorant crackers who are for now a necessary evil.

It is positively amazing to read stuff like this. Read some history, say even 80s history, let alone 70s, 60s or 50s history. For sheer numbers, if you had to pick between two butchers for the number of lives they have the responsibility for eliminating, your Mr. Sharon wins hands down, but hey?that doesn't count, they are just Palestinians! Forget the world court's move to prosecute him?they are all anti-Israeli bigots!

A little balance in your writing would be an amazing event. Someday, when the sun runs west to east.

Gwyllm Llwydd, Cardiff, Wales

Among the Thugs

Taki makes a lot of sense in describing the Euro "center-right" ("Top Drawer," 5/15). However, when he says, "The fact that every anti-Semitic act has been perpetrated by young Arab thugs does not seem to bother various Jewish groups over here. They're screaming bloody murder over European anti-Semitism, where there's nothing of the kind," he is missing a very big elephant. In the 20th-century, Europe, which was home to most of the world's Jews, massacred as many as they could and expelled the rest. This happened! America would never tolerate the Muslim thuggery being perpetrated against Europe's Jews. Why does Europe? I think it has something to do with history. Once again, Europe capitulates to thuggery in its midst, and sacrifices the rights (and maybe the lives) of a significant portion of its population. Any Jew living in Europe is nuts.

John Fulton, Philadelphia

Get Your Dead White Men Straight

Alexander Cockburn: It wasn't Sherman who made the "Dead Indian" statement ("Wild Justice," 5/8), it was Phil Sheridan.

Jamie Hailer, Ponte Vedra Beach, FL

Yeeeooowwww!!

Oh Taki, really dear, what a crock of b.s. ("Top Drawer," 5/8). If Grace let you kiss her, it would be only natural for her to have groped you. Her rejection had nothing to do with your approximate ages. She had expected and wanted something more sizeable than a wee burping worm. I know, dear?I'm another "Grace," only 50 years later.

Love and kisses...

Lola Sanford, Manhattan

May We Quote You?

I have to compliment you on Michelangelo Signorile's article "Canonizing Pim Fortuyn" ("The Gist," 5/15). Talk about being ahead of the curve. You and he deserve bravos.

But where are all the conservative "Friends of Fortuyn"?at this writing, not one of them can be seen anywhere near the subject. Sort of like shining a light on a nest of roaches. They all scattered. Even Andrew Sullivan has disappeared.

They might heed my famous saying: "You dance with hypocrisy enough, and people are going to think you're more than friends."

Andre Jacques, Beverly, MA

There's that Stuff About Knowing About the Hijackings Beforehand

MUGGER: Methinks the Democraps are getting very nervous. Al Gore and Terry McAuliffe both have attacked President Bush for the RNC's use of the picture of President Bush talking on the phone on Sept. 11. Al Gore, the world's worst political opportunist, had the gall to call the use of the picture "disgraceful," while that erstwhile political "statesman," Mr. "Global Crossing" Terry McAuliffe, referred to it as disgusting.

Let me get this straight: Al Gore, who called Bill Clinton the Greatest American President, referred to the use of Bush's picture as disgraceful, and McAuliffe, aka PT Barnum of the Beltway, said it was disgusting? The truth is stranger than fiction. The Dems are running scared if this is the only issue they can find to mount any kind of campaign on.

Tracy Meadows, Brenham, TX

Oh, They Knew?

It is not true that the Bush administration had no knowledge that hijacked American aircraft would be used as suicide attack planes. I'm writing to urge you to speak out about the Bush administration's knowledge of terrorist plane attacks on the WTC prior to 9/11. As a journalist, you must be most concerned with getting the truth out to the general public about these attacks, and not conceal it like the Bush administration is doing. I urge you to report this information to your readers.

Pat Lewis, Manhattan

It's All Coming Together

Mike Signorile: There's an angle to this that I think you didn't mention in last week's "Gist" (5/15). The conservative websites and warbloggers have been hinting that Fortuyn's murder was motivated by animal-rights/environmental extremism. It gives them a new club with which to bash greens and environmentalists. They've been hoping for something like this ever since Tom Clancy's ridiculous enviro-terrorist fantasy Rainbow Six was published.

Kerry Tatlow, Rockford, IL

Have You Got Anything Without Spam?

MUGGER: While you make some valid points in your criticism of Adam Cohen's anti-spam article (5/15), you missed some important points. Of course, being a Times hack, Cohen missed them as well, which just goes to show how seriously they really take free speech at the Times. If the Times op-ed page is to be believed, the First Amendment has no problem with restrictions on the dissemination of political speech in paid advertising, but other forms of expression, such as topless dancing, panhandling, graffiti and virtual child pornography are protected. This is patently absurd, but then, so is much of what the Times espouses.

Regardless of whether or not the Constitution protects unsolicited mass e-mails (and there are compelling arguments both ways), most spams are illegal on their face for reasons that have nothing to do with free speech. The solicitation of an illegal act is, by itself, illegal. Spams for Internet Viagra distributors, underage porn sites and online gambling are illegal under the statutes that bar the sale of controlled drugs without a prescription, possession or dissemination of child pornography and gambling, respectively. Online solicitations for investments are subject to the same SEC rules as any IPO and if the solicitor hasn't done his filings, then his solicitation is a felony. Also, since most spammers forge their e-mail addresses, they're committing fraud (not against the recipient, but against the ISP whose domain they forge). These are all prosecutable offenses. Thus, any spam that involves a forged address, solicits prescription drugs or child pornography is automatically illegal.

Next, there is the advertisement of regular porn. Adult materials sent through the regular mail have to be solicited by the recipient or the sender can be prosecuted under existing obscenity statutes and postal regulations. Such materials have to be clearly labeled in such a way that anyone receiving them has the option of not opening the envelope. The same ought to apply to e-mail. If we accept the basic premise that anything that would be illegal if done by regular mail is illegal if done by e-mail (and this is a reasonable premise in the face of trying to establish precedent), then the mass unsolicited dissemination of adult materials is clearly illegal, as is the use of deceptive subject headings to entice people to open e-mails that they would otherwise find offensive. A spammer who has to deceive the recipient into opening his e-mail is clearly acting in bad faith.

Simply going after spammers who violate existing laws would go a long way toward cleaning up the problem without infringing on free speech. That's something that Congress ought to get behind, especially since most of these illegal activities also involve attempts to hack accounts at ISPs or steal credit card information, and vigorous prosecution of fraud would actually expand legitimate e-commerce by making it safer.

Mike Harris, Los Angeles

You Make It Sound So Reasonable

MIKE Signorile: The nature of "conservatism" is malleable ("The Gist," 5/15). It is not a rigid ideology like contemporary liberalism. The heart of this question is: What do you want to conserve? Mr. Fortuyn wanted to conserve a Dutch culture that was tolerant. Muslim immigrants who would not integrate themselves into Dutch society threatened that, especially if immigration levels continued to exceed the level of integration of said immigrants.

Now, people like those at National Review Online and The Wall Street Journal often feel put-upon by a media and academy that are as intolerant as an unreformed fundamentalist Muslim from Sudan. College administrations that wink at student groups when conservative student newspapers are stolen, but nearly expel an Israeli student for calling a person a water buffalo infuriate people like me. When on network tv Rick Santorum is labeled far-right and Ted Kennedy is progressive or moderate, I get pissed off.

There is a distinct strain of conservatism in this country that is classically liberal, and Pim resonated with us. And part of classical liberalism is a toleration of all expressions of religion and as many different points of view as possible. I don't give a damn if Pat Robertson thinks you're going to hell because you're gay, and I don't think you do either. I also don't care if he can talk about it on tv. It's the Catholic Church's business whether they want the "lavender mafia" around or not. I don't care. That's all different from one of those Pakistani blockheads beating his wife because he had to take orders from a woman at work.

I love immigrants. My old man is one. My old man also saw no need to teach me the "native tongue" because we were Americans now. That's a reasonable place from which to approach immigration. And appreciating freedom, privatization and the rule of law are all also things that Pim and many American conservatives agree with. It isn't a conspiracy to throw out the sand niggers. It's simply a desire to keep this place resembling one that we want to continue living in, and one to which people throughout the world would like to move. That's why many conservatives are saddened that Pim was assassinated by an ideologue who?probably?is a fellow who is fairly uninterested in real diversity of thought and opinion.

Karl U. Bucus, Phoenixville, PA

MO: Better Party

MUGGER: The liberal media has always welcomed Jews, but condescendingly (5/15). Many liberal writers look at the right and think us schizophrenic, because we espouse views that are not totally in line. In other words, we are evenhanded. The present situation is that the new chic of poor Palestinians?a nail bomb in a pizza parlor is a political statement?has alienated a good deal of the U.S. middle. Because of 9/11, President Bush is walking a difficult path, but without trying to take away the military option for Israel has allowed many in the Jewish liberal community to look at who is delivering for their constituents. The Jewish community is a better fit in the GOP.

Pat Joyce, Hollister, MO

Vitale's No Dick

MUGGER: Excellent column in the Jewish World Review website. Really enjoyed it. Please keep it up.

Vince Vitale, Phoenix

Outrageous Fortuyn

MIKE Signorile: I'm a Republican who has been very puzzled over the issues you brought up in your column ("The Gist," 5/15). Even the readers on a couple of conservative websites I read every day have been making Mr. Fortuyn out to be a saint. You are the first person to point out the weirdness and hypocrisy of all this. I personally didn't hold his homosexuality against him. He did have some rather strange views about other matters. I hate hypocrisy no matter where it originates, even from fellow conservatives. Good article!

Patricia Charlene Cronier, Hoschton, GA

Where's Janet Reno When You Need Her?

MUGGER: Ain't heard from you in a while, but I reckon you're still kickin'. I just wondered if you knew of any reason why the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is not being pursued by the U.S. Dept. of Justice under the RICO laws. It would seem to be an open-and-shut case. Homosexual priests have been moved around the country to keep them from being lynched for sodomizing young kids, and that is a federal crime. Have you heard anything about this?

Your friend out in God's country?

Michael Boone, Williams, IN

No. Period.

Michelangelo Signorile: Do you ever have anything nice to say about conservatives (forget me asking about Christians)? No matter what they do you seem to find fault. I think you have serious problems that blind you to reality, Mr. Signorile ("The Gist," 5/15). You are mean and hateful and it's what you always accuse Christians and conservatives (whom I think you believe to be one and the same) of being. It's one thing to criticize, but you aim to demean and degrade. You must think you are the only one in the world who knows anything. I mean come on... You think folks at The Wall Street Journal or National Review Online are stupid enough to give commentary based on pure conjecture. I'm sorry, but I've tried being fair to you and seeing things from your point of view, but you are totally screwed up and it's either your way or no way.

Pim Fortuyn happened to be somebody and not just any somebody. The man had principles and was bold enough to give his life for said principles. He would not allow himself to be trumped by elites like yourself. That conservatives would find these qualities attractive or champion them should be no surprise. Nevertheless you find fault and nothing but fault with them for saying that Mr. Fortuyn was a brave soul. Not everyone feels as you do regarding immigration. Mr. Fortuyn had to live with these immigrants, and safety as well as many other matters were at issue. This does not make the man a racist. And how you can always link the most extreme elements of any society, the world over, with Christians is just beyond me. It's the hate in your heart, Mr. Signorile, that allows you to always find a way to degrade Christians. May God bless and help you. I'll be praying for you, but I doubt I can ever read a sentence you write again without questioning your sanity.

Adrienne Warden, Manhattan

Condi & Tom, Sittin' in a Tree

MUGGER: I was struck by your comment that the only celebrity you might be inclined to want to meet is Condi Rice. Same here. And as a single white guy in DC, I'm gonna give her a call. If Bush is smart he'll reassign Cheney in '04 and tab Rice as his runningmate. Quite incredible how lightweight current Democrats are. I like your work and yes, spot on: Peter Angelos is truly corrupt. Selig needs to explain why Florida has two sorry-ass baseball teams and DC doesn't have one.

Tom Spongberg, Alexandria, VA

Great Letter!

TAKI: Great piece ("Top Drawer," 5/15)!

Paul Gottfried, Elizabethtown, PA

His Mind?

MUGGER: You may be as acquainted with the notion of life after near-death as any of us who were alive to feel the heat of the '87 stockmarket fallout, but it doesn't show in your recent take on Bill Clinton's future in talk tv ("MUGGER," 5/8). Presupposing, in your phrasing, the tanking of the ex-scandalmeister's ratings soon after lift-off, what's to stop him from making hay of the present administration's inevitable false starts and wrong turns, particularly in the area of economic recovery and the Israeli conflict? And wouldn't such predictably myopic and self-serving ramblings only focus people's minds on what it is that sets W apart from the recent past?namely, his way of talking straight down to earth in a language everyone can basically recognize and accept, without feeling queasy? Bring it on! we should say. With his reserves of self-respect depleted, what does the Man from Hope have left to lose except perhaps the November elections?

Greg Lea, San Antonio

 

Try Huntington

MUGGER: Did your antecedents come from Annisquam?

Arthur C. Jameson, York, ME

Sound Advice

MUGGER: I always enjoy reading your stuff. You're almost always a breath of fresh air. But regarding the new Elvis Costello album, When I Was Cruel, it really is a very good album upon repeated listenings ("MUGGER," 5/1). Just this morning, after about five listens, I was rating the album as just good to very good. But this evening, after a few more listens, I'm finding more and more to like about it. It's very complex and takes more listens than his earlier stuff, but the talent on display here is really quite impressive. So I hope you don't give up on it and go back and give it more of a chance. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Steven Burn, Lawrenceville, GA

Seattle WA-Ha-Ha

Bravo, Carol Iannone. "A Better Gospel" was a great piece ("Taki's Top Drawer," 3/27). "In fact, now I'm wondering why a gospel hasn't been written about me and my life." I still laugh when I think about that.

Dave Folkerts, Seattle

Hurley Peyton

MUGGER: Well, first, it's worth mentioning that for a good number of those "ardent" evangelicals, Israel's security is a necessary part of the Second Coming, not to mention Apocalypse (5/15). And you, among others, will not be invited to the party. (Hey, look me up in the nether region and we can talk baseball.) Then there's William Kristol, who's flat-out wrong: Lieberman, among others, is certainly running to Bush's right on Israel. Moving on, we've got the notion that women will never vote based on one issue?but a couple paragraphs up, it's suggested that Jews will. (So Jewish women will vote on...two issues?) The Republican strategy is every bit as loopy as the once great Hispanic recruitment. But rest easy, you've got Falwell for the foreseeable future. And hey, thanks for unearthing the Times' horrid elitism regarding Mother's Day. Damn that Raines. Sorry about Manny.

Harley Peyton, Hollywood, CA

Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam

MUGGER: I must disagree with your take on spam e-mail (5/15). For many reasons spam and junk faxes are not the same as television or newspaper advertising or other forms of speech. But the big reason they are different is the burden it places on the receiver. I am not talking about the burden of deleting junk e-mail or disposing of junk faxes, although in some cases that can be significant. I am talking about the monetary cost to the recipient or anyone else in the chain of communication of receiving or transmitting this unsolicited garbage.

I will address faxes first. It costs more to receive a fax than to send one. It costs the sender a minuscule amount in terms of electricity and phone cost. It costs the receiver paper, ink, busy time on the fax machine and disposal costs.

With e-mail it is even more insidious. The spammer pumps out a message that took maybe five minutes to create to thousands of recipients, sometimes tens of thousands. Because of the nature of the Internet, the spammer only pays his monthly charge for the ISP that does his mail hosting. But when he sends out these huge bulk e-mails he is not just using resources that he has rented from his ISP. Because of the nature of the Internet and e-mail delivery, his bulk e-mails are consuming resources (bandwidth, server disk space, etc.) at every point along the delivery chain including the ISP for the recipient. Each one of those companies paid good money for their bandwidth, servers, etc. They did not grant the spammer permission to use their resources for ZERO compensation and yet he does. This does not even take into account the cost to the recipient in time and possibly the cost of filtering software. I run an e-mail server on a corporate network and the corporate office has a massive system that does nothing but try to filter spam from our 30,000+ end users. It is very costly to us. It consumes our bandwidth coming in, requires a costly setup to attempt to filter out, and when the filters aren't perfect it continues on to the end user, consuming more of our bandwidth and then server disk space. Spam may only be irritating to you but it costs money to your ISP, your IT support team and eventually to you. The only person in the chain who does not pay a significant portion of the costs is the spammer.

Spam is like a telemarketer calling you collect and not giving you the opportunity to refuse the charges. Spam is like someone putting up an advertising poster on the wall of your living room without your permission: sure you can take it down, but he shouldn't have been able to put it up in the first place!

Alan Collier, Cleveland, MS

It's a Shitty World

MUGGER: The Church of the Holy Nativity desecration? Let's all go shit in a mosque. How stupidly silent we are, having heard how our exploding Palestinian brethren used the Church of the Nativity as a toilet. Why has nothing been said about this latest calculated desecration of a sacred Christian site? Is the Pope too occupied with pedophile priests to focus on the stench? Are other Christian leaders blind to this sin against one of Christianity's most holy shrines?

Had Christians emptied their bowels in Medina, the hue and cry would have been damning and deafening. The Arab world, and non-Arab Muslims, would have demanded apologies and money to assuage the assault upon the Prophet of Allah. We are playing by different rules, and if ever there was foul play, this was it.

It is time we stopped avoiding truths and dressing half-truths in our own guilt and eagerness to appease slime like Arafat and a hoard of ayatollahs whose greatest ambition is to encourage women and children to kill themselves for the glory of Allah. A big truth here is that without Western civilization, the Arab nations would be one big impoverished and stinking outhouse. "Woe be to he who lives near an oil pool," is a bit of Arabian wisdom.

Another truth is that Arafat and his minions are lying scum and should be treated with disdain. To hell with diplomacy, and screw world opinion. Those assholes attacked us and are still at it, and it is high time for an ultimatum: stop the jihad, Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, and instantly get with the program or it is annihilation time. Let's stop pussyfooting and worrying about killing "innocents." Which Arab terrorist regretted the killing of innocents on Sept. 11? Which Arab leader came forth generously offering aid and expressing profuse grief to the families of those they killed in New York's World Trade Center?

How about we seize the Arabian oil fields for as long as it takes to compensate all parties for the damages of Sept. 11. Considering that some of those damages are emotional and cannot be fixed with money, treble damages should be assessed. And considering the perpetrators were mainly Saudis, Saudi oil fields should be the first seized and the last returned.

As far as Arab cooperation in the so-called War on Terror, the hard truth is that if the U.S. and Britain had not taken action, not one Arab leader would have lifted a finger against Osama bin Lousy. Complicating things is that we have become intensely fearful of socially or politically offending anyone?especially, right now, Arab-Americans.

Do we dare be suspicious that some Taliban and enemies of the American people are living amongst us? Hell, yes. I haven't heard a whole lot of Arab-American religious and sociopolitical leadership calls for pressure on or action against the regimes in their ancestral lands. I am in no way advocating discrimination, but think about it: why hasn't the Muslim leadership demanded Hamas become a functional partner of sane and productive society?

The desecration of one of the holiest places in Christendom is despicable and an act of the lowest form of human refuse. How would Arafat and his followers feel about pork-bombing Mecca? Long ago, the Israelites and the Philistines (Palestinians) waged war and the Israelites cut off the foreskins of Philistines to celebrate their victory. I am not especially pro- or anti-Israel, but all bull aside, the Palestinians are wallowing in their own mess, and Sharon should not stop at cutting off foreskins, but should now go after the dick of Palestine?and that dick's name is Yasir Arafat.

Ned Stuart, Manhattan