Letters To The Editor

Terrorist accusation soft-pedaled

To The Editor:
I just finished reading the Mary Reinholz article on Lynne Stewart in your current issue, and can’t figure out whether it’s poor journalism or an overzealous liberal bias that led the writer to grossly misrepresent a critical fact in the story (news article, April 15 – 21, “Grandma lawyer, accused terrorist, parties Downtown”).  I’m referring to the opening paragraph, in which Ms. Reinholz stated the “63-year old grandmother who was accused of ‘aiding terrorism’ as a result of her representation of Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman.”  Great lede ... but it’s hardly the truth.  

Ms. Stewart was indicted on charges that on several occasions she knowingly facilitated and concealed communications between her client and members of the Islamic Group, an Egyptian terrorist group with ties to Al Qaeda, which is believed to have enabled her client to direct terrorist activities from his cell.  

Though later in the article, Ms. Reinholz does mention “she was accused of, among other offenses, helping the blind sheik, an Islamic cleric, communicate with his followers.”  However, this “other offense,” which Ms. Reinholz made sound more like a Koran study group than what facts have led prosecutors to believe was an issuing of terrorism directives, is the basis for the accusation of aiding terrorism.  It is not because she represented a terrorist, as Ms. Reinholz appears to want readers to believe about the “grandma lawyer,” as the headline describes her.  (As though the source of her notoriety as a lawyer is having grandchildren, as opposed to representing terrorists.)

The fact that Ms. Stewart’s client is “serving a life sentence for conspiring to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993,” as the article points out, makes this all the more disappointing to read in a publication which claims to be “The Newspaper of Lower Manhattan” — a neighborhood which is still desperately trying to recover from a tragedy that was set in motion by the acts of her client on Feb. 26, 1993.

I would have expected better from you.
Bruce Colwin

Memorial is being rushed

To The Editor:
Re “Libeskind signals flexibility in memorial process” (news article, April 15 – 21, 2003):

You’ve got to be kidding. After all this time, an applicant for the World Trade Center memorial competition will have less than two months to produce a solution? And then the jury will go to work until November. The Lower Manhattan Development Corp. should get real.
Timothy Clay

Difficult times for Chatham

To The Editor:
I’m glad the Downtown Express printed Richard Scorce’s letter to The Editor (April 15 –21, 2003). It has been a difficult period for the residents surrounding police headquarters: the constant changes in protocols, the abusive use of the streets (especially Park Row) for parking; the non-response from both the mayor and the police commissioner regarding our concerns about the closure and the reasons behind its closure; the assignment of liaisons who attempt to negotiate with residents about topics such as the placement of the pop-up barriers while at the same time tearing up the sidewalks to place the barriers north of Chatham Green’s driveway; the constant fear that police H.Q., instead of being decentralized or relocated, is being enhanced and fortified from within to make it more of a target; he constant concern that the shroud of secrecy surrounding the reason for the street closure is to prevent disclosure of significant vulnerabilities such as the gas station and diesel fuel tanks that Richard Scorce mentioned..

I’d like to add to Richard Scorce’s comments that we are working hard to get Park Row open and are focusing on (but not limited to) the following:

SHORT TERM: Taking legal actions to force an immediate block of the installation of the pop-up barriers and an immediate review of the street closure and the reasons for closure.

MEDIUM TERM: Pushing for immediate traffic (Lower Manhattan Development Corp. has approved this study) and economic studies to support the re-opening of Park Row.

LONG TERM: The passing of legislation to require all street closures be subject to periodic review, by committees that represent the public (Checks-and-balances legislation that does not currently exist).

These are only a few of the options that we must consider to ensure the non-totalitarian control of our area, all in the name of “security.” Lastly, one must ask, with the planned significant cuts in the police force, wouldn’t a smaller perimeter be more manageable? The workers of police H.Q. will just have to park their cars in a parking lot or take mass transit like the rest of us.
Edward Lam
President of Chatham Green board

Lead dangers

To The Editor:
Thanks to Elizabeth O’Brien for her article of April 15 about dangerous levels of lead in apartments Downtown (news article, April 15 –21, 2003, “Dangerous lead was found in some apartments”).  The reassurances by the Environmental Protection Agency’s toxicologist Mark Maddaloni highlight the extent to which the E.P.A. has downplayed the risks to tenants of contaminants that remain from Sept. 11.

Dr. Maddaloni maintains that dangerous levels of lead begin at 10 micrograms per deciliter.  But an article recently released by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences contradicts this assertion: “‘...we find that most of the damage to intellectual functioning occurs at blood lead concentrations that are below 10 micrograms per deciliter,” said Richard Canfield, Division of Nutritional Sciences at Cornell University and primary author on the study. The amount of impairment attributed to lead exposure was much greater than the researchers had expected.”

Jenna Orkin and Maureen Silverman
The writers are from 9/11 Environmental Action and the New York City Coalition to End Lead Poisoning, respectively.