By Jared Chausow
By Katie Toth
By Elizabeth Flock
By Albert Samaha
By Anna Merlan
By Jon Campbell
By Jon Campbell
By Albert Samaha
Letter Of The Week
Re Anya Kamenetz's "Rich Little 'Poor' Kids" [July 27-August 2]: Aren't there enough truly troubled and needy young people in this city to profile without resorting to providing a forum for the overindulged, whining offspring of the super-rich? It takes truly self-involved and deluded individuals to worry over "finding themselves" while never having to worry about finding a way to pay billsever. Even the so-called philanthropists profiled in the sidebar aren't really changing their circumstances by donating a few million to a pet cause. They're just assuaging the minimal guilt they may have over being in that position in the first place.
I have two words for any of the unhappy young people in your profile: Trade ya!
Dix Hills, New York
Editor's note: Chisun Lee's article about Tony Lu, an immigrant rights activist who designed T-shirts declaring his objection to the new random bag search policy in New York's transit systems ["NYers to NYPD: 'I Do Not Consent to Being Searched,' " July 21, villagevoice.com], received an extraordinary response from readers. Nearly all disagreed with Lu's protest, many were angry, and some voiced their opinions in the most extreme terms. At deadline, the Voice had not received a letter from a New Yorker.
This is such a reasonable action, I cannot believe that any U.S. citizen would object to random searches. If I had my way, I would immediately institute "racial profiling." Search me, let's make America safer!
In Lu of privacy
Is it fair to say those who are guilty have something to hide? During a time when one person's perverted mission can destroy the lives of many, we still have the audacity to scream our privacy is being invaded through acts of protection put forth by our government? Reactions like those of Tony Lu just inflame people at a time when unity should be our only objective.
Mount Juliet, Tennessee
Though I can see Lee's view regarding the right to privacy, we must come to real terms. There is no Batman protecting Gotham from evildoers. The government has the responsibility to protect its citizens, and if backpacks are randomly checked, a potential terrorist just might think twice before picking a target. On Long Island, it already proved to be successful. The police arrested a man with weapons at the Brentwood train station who had a prior arrest for explosives. I feel, hey, if I'm not doing anything wrong, I have nothing to fear. But God forbid, if something did happen, you will be the first to report what our government did not do.
Centereach, New York
Some rights are bigger than others
I believe my right to not be blown up by a terrorist bomb takes precedence over someone's right not to be searched.
Georgetown, South Carolina
This is to those that choose not to be searched by the police in New York: Stay home or find another way to get around. How dare you think that your petty little self-centered selves should be more important than the safety of all those who use the transit systems.
Doofus and his cant
Tony Lu sounds like the kind of doofus who likes to hear the sound of his own voice but has zero common sense. When you ride public transportation you are at the whim of people who are trying to keep you and me safe from radicals and terrorists. It is their call when you decide to ride the subway, not that of idiots like Tony Lu.
College Station, Texas
Thoughts on a T-shirt
What is this Tony Lu bastard thinking? People are being literally blown apart by homemade bombs, and this fuck, this fuck is wearing a self-designed T-shirt saying he doesn't consent to being searched?
Sloatsburg, New York
I guess Lu consents to being blown up then.
Soda Springs, Idaho
The words on the T-shirt should probably be printed in German, Russian, and Chinese as wellmore in line with today's police state mentality than the once free United States of America.
Maybe the next bombs will target some of the people wearing these T-shirts. What is a little inconvenience compared to saving lives?
Anyone unwilling to be searched is suspect of doing something illegal. I have no sympathy for search protesters. By the way, you do not have a lock on what or who is a civil libertarian, and I don't accept this description of search protesters.
I don't understand Lee's concern with the search of baggage in the subways, or the profiling issue. I am a libertarian by party and would like to have the ability to self-govern, but these are extraordinary times. As such, I welcome the search of my personal belongings. Regarding the racial profiling, my father and grandfather were not able to find work during WW II because they had a German last name. So they joined the armed forces to fight for their country. Part of the price we pay for a free society is relative insecurity during the best of times. If you do not like the searches and profiling, don't ride the subway or buses.
Re Ed Halter's article about the dispute at IFC Center and how management will not talk to the union [July 27-August 2]: I am a projectionist at IFC Center. Although my political views are far to the left, I feel that in this case people are getting upset about something that's just not worth it. It's not like IFC went and hired random people off the street and paid them pennies on the dollar. I am an experienced projectionist. I learned to project at the film archives at North Carolina School of the Arts. At the archives we handled anywhere from five to 25 rare and fragile prints every week. Projection and handling standards there are higher than almost anywhere else in the world. I also project regularly at a private New York City screening room, which has high standards, and I am a licensed projectionist in New York State, contrary to the flyers the union people are handing out. I've had as much or more experience than the average union projectionist.
As far as the story of the botched showing of Dont Look Back goes, I hadn't heard of it prior to reading this article. Assuming it is true, it is not indicative of lax standards. Every single union projectionist has had a terrible show at some pointlikely more than one. Shit sometimes goes wrong. Overall, IFC Center standards are much higher than most places in New York City, or any place, for that matter. We actually can do reel-to-reel shows for archival prints, which is something that lots of union art house theaters can't say.
Also, we always send prints back out in the same or better shape than we got them in. The only thing we do to prints is, with the permission of the distributor, cut off the heads and tails for automation. I can't tell you how many prints we get that are in shitty shape or show up without reels or cores or are sticky or something absurd like that. We send them back out clean and correct.
I am paid well and treated with respect by IFC management. If IFC did talk to the union, there would be maybe one union guy actually hired to platter the prints and "run things." I would still get paid the same amount, and the projection standards would still be high. So, basically, I understand the anti-corporate sentiment people are expressing here, but I think that there are other corporate doings in the world that are far more deserving of their ire.
Cover him angry
I hate your cover art for "Tossing Out Tenants" [July 20-26]. It shows people falling from a building in poses reminiscent of the 9-11 victims who were forced to jump to their deaths. I simply expect better from the Voice than this poor choice of visual metaphor. As awful as it is, eviction does not equal death, not even in New York City.
In Catherine Rampell's review of The Skin Game [July 20-26], the play's author was misidentified. He is John Galsworthy.