Lack of RespectI was appalled at the coverage given former...


May 01, 1994

Lack of Respect

I was appalled at the coverage given former President Richard Nixon by the television networks on the night he died, and by The Sun on Sunday, April 24.

The hatred of many in the media came burning through before he was even buried.

I remember as a teen-ager when President Franklin Roosevelt died during World War II. The reaction of some of my elders was decidedly negative because of Roosevelt's policies during the depression.

Nevertheless he was our president and deserved respect. The reaction of some media to Nixon's death has been worse.

The struggles between fascism, communism and the democracies during the first half of the 20th century have continued between the communists and the democracies since World War II.

Many say the Cold War is over since the demise of the Soviet Union, but it isn't.

The old Marxists are still alive and kicking in the United States as well as in Cuba, North Korea, Russia and around the world. Richard Nixon fought many successful battles against the Marxists, so they grew to hate him.

Even some of Nixon's detractors are saying that he was the best president for foreign affairs in the last 50 years.

Actually there was none truly outstanding during the first half of the 20th century and none in the 18th or 19th centuries. This leaves Nixon as the best in foreign affairs.

Human beings and the office of the presidency deserve respect even if one disagrees politically with the incumbent.

The media would do their job much better if they reported the news factually and provided intelligent commentary instead of biased propaganda, especially on the death of one of our great leaders. The timing was in poorest possible taste.

William W. Griffiths


Lame Excuses

No one should fall for the false claims and lame excuses offered in The Sun April 9 by two of the 13 House Economic Matters Committee members who voted to kill a perfectly good Senate-passed anti-discrimination bill.

I refer to Delegates John Hurson of Montgomery County and Connie Galiazzo of Baltimore County and Senate Bill 560, which would have denied liquor licenses to clubs whose bylaws limit their membership on the basis of race, sex, religion, physical handicap or national origin.

Fortunately, this is an election year, and the constituents of the 13 defenders of what I call bigotry can decide whether they want to continue to be represented by such people.

In killing the bill, they and their friends have won a temporary victory.

But, for certain, those of us who believe that the state should not be confering special privileges on bigots are not going to give up and go away.

Kenneth A. Stevens


Claims on Kashmir

In his April 8 Opinion * Commentary piece, "Nuclear Gander," Jonathan Power has drawn a telling parallel by using another renegade nuclear state, North Korea, to buttress his argument against the sale of F-16 warplanes to Pakistan.

However, his remarks about the ownership of Kashmir require further elucidation.

In 1947 the British Indian Empire consisted of "British India" and a patchwork of 562 "princely states." The former was directly administered by the British Government of India, and the latter were the domains of the semi-autonomous Maharajas, Nawabs, etc.

At independence in 1947, these princes were expected to accede to either India or the newly created country of Pakistan.

The Maharaja of Kashmir acceded to India on Oct. 26, 1947. This act was, and remains, legally impeccable and is the basis of the Indian claim to that territory.

The Indian claim is not based on "superiority in numbers and weaponry," as stated by Mr. Power.

On the other hand, Islamabad's claim is not based on a legal foundation but a political one. As a "homeland" for the Muslims of the subcontinent, Islamabad claims that Kashmir with its Muslim majority should have joined Pakistan.

R. S. Kadian

Great Falls, Va.

Alexander Williams Is Fit to Sit

The Maryland State Conference of Branches, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, believes the April 16 article, "Marylander's chance for judgeship dimming," would have been more informative if some of the following issues and concerns were delineated in detail.

The American Bar Association has a historical track record of being unfair and basically hostile to black judiciary candidates.

For over six decades, ABA's official policy was to exclude black attorneys from its official membership rolls. It has operated under the assumption that black attorneys are incapable of dispensing justice in a fair and equitable manner.

The bottom-line reality was blacks were rated as being unfit for service and appointment as federal jurists.

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.