Armond Can Too Count; Nice Jann Wiener?ro;”er, Wenner Takeout, MUGGER; SF Hearts Signorile; Knipfel Hearts Fowlicide; Bless You, Jessica Willis, and Van Halen Too; Strausbaugh's a Geriatric Chump; You're the Scrambled One, Szamuely; More

The following is an open letter to Robert De Niro and Martin Scorsese re the Tribeca Film Festival: I read somewhere that you guys and the rest of your partners hope to re-ground Tribeca through a new film festival. You want to signal and jump-start a rebirth, emphasize the breadth of creativity and diversity in the film community, bring people together and especially back to Tribeca. Scorsese placed special emphasis on young people and "...people whose films were unable to be accepted in other venues."

Wow, I thought, is this for real? These guys usually don't bullshit. Do they really mean to be inclusive? Have a category, say, for Hairy Films (my name for "offensive" works, sexual, political or formal)? Or will this new festival be just one more wasted noble intention, a great mission cloaked in soaring aspirations and ending up being politics as usual.

Most festivals preen feathers of daring and then offer us innocuous routine pap. Don't compromise yourselves (and us). Don't squander this great opportunity. Many people like to say the world changed on Sept. 11, 2001. But for who? And for how long? You expect to see gay and lesbian people in the next St. Patrick's Day parade? Real courage is needed at this moment. Show it.

Alfred Leslie, Manhattan

Do the Math

Did Armond White even see Ocean's Eleven ("Film," 12/5)? I highly doubt it considering he gets such large facts incorrect, like how much money they stole from the casinos (it was $160 million, not $50 million). And if he did in fact see the movie, then I would have to question any kind of report from him given that his attention was obviously not on the film. This is a very poor article written by a clueless writer.

Michael Barreiro, Sacramento

The editors reply: According to the official Ocean's Eleven website, the plan was to heist $150 million, not $160. According to Armond White, the "crooks...band together to rob $50 million from three casinos..." According to our math book, $50 million x 3 = $150 million. QED.

Jann Wiener

MUGGER: When Jann Wenner gets up off the floor, slap him down again. A very fine piece of work on your part, a rarity, a fine piece of journalism ("MUGGER," 12/12). Thanks for your well-crafted effort. You put the pro in professional.

Name Withheld, via e-mail

Irrelevant Jann

MUGGER: I recently wrote Rolling Stone a poison pen letter pointing out that the editorial staff needs a shakeup. How many times have trite bimbettes been covered in the magazine when true artists have been ignored? How many times has a photo been shown of a would-be musician trying to make an original statement with a middle finger? Or even more annoying, when a group of folks who have no background on a subject get to give an opinion (e.g., asking Bono about Clinton's impeachment).

We received the issue summarizing the past year. Among other things is an article announcing that John Lennon's "Imagine" was the anthem to the 9/11/01 terrorist attack. I'm glad there was the article because it was the first I had heard about it.

Ironic that Jann Wenner is no longer relevant.

Barbara Pearson, Burns, OR

Actually, That'd Be Cool

MUGGER: To demonstrate Rolling Stone's influence (or lack of it), I heard Mick Jagger's new record sold something like 400 copies the first day. Gregorian chants remixed by the Beastie Boys would sell that many.

David Fletcher, Denver, NC

I Like Mike

MICHELANGELO Signorile: I am a sergeant/inspector with the San Francisco Police Dept. I am the inspector who put together the case involving David Pasquarelli and Michael Petrelis ("The Gist," 12/12). I am also a lesbian. I thought your article was well-written and to the point. I have read your stuff over the years, and respect your viewpoint. Keep on writing.

Lea Militello, San Francisco

Fraudulent Activists

MICHELANGELO Signorile: Thank you! Those of us who have been targeted by ACT UP San Francisco and Michael Petrelis for years know all too well the power this small group of harassers has to silence education and community dialogue. People outside San Francisco keep asking me, "Why are they doing this?" There is no good answer. The impact they have had on silencing HIV-prevention dialogues in San Francisco can't be overestimated. Yes, community forums have been canceled, costs for security at community events have cut into prevention programs and researchers have been less accessible for fear of harassment. I applaud you for speaking the truth about these liars. It was great to read your article and to feel that the reality of the situation was accurately represented. It is so refreshing to read an article where Petrelis and Pasquarelli aren't called "activists" and where their violence, misinformation and tactics are named and exposed for what they really are: anti-gay-community and damaging to HIV prevention efforts. I have more than 150 e-mails sent from Petrelis over the years, many of them reprints of letters he's sent to Tom Coburn and other homophobic members of Congress, appealing to them for help in silencing HIV prevention. (Petrelis actually reports local HIV prevention efforts to these homophobes, calling it "obscene," yet still finds a way to call HIV prevention homophobic!) Thank you for your clear expose of the hypocrisy and insanity of those who claim to be AIDS activists.

Ellen Goldstein, co-director, TIE Core Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, UC San Francisco

Re the Geriatric Chimp

John Strausbaugh: After wasting my time reading your sourpuss cheap shot attacks on Mick Jagger ("Daily Billboard," 12/10), I wonder how many, and how big, the mirrors are in your own unlovely house. And are they frosty rose-colored so that you don't have to see the lines forming on your own face? When exactly does your journalist (and I use the that term loosely) age limit make it impossible for you to write in your own chosen profession anymore? I would like to celebrate in a fine manner.

Mick Jagger has every right to rock his own way up until his grave is ready. Why? Because he is a self-made icon and earned it! Do I detect jealousy in your spite? You have personally attacked him before. Writing a review of the actual music must be beyond you. Yes, Mick's output may be past the burning prime of his youth, and not as socially relevant as it once was, but it is nevertheless the work of a man who has the tenacity to stay in show business for 40 years (even if it's not to your liking).

What is Jagger supposed to do? Start a new career as a critic? That would be too easy for him. He has a right to put out new albums because that's his life's work and what he enjoys. And you have the right to not like them. But to massage your ego at his expense is cheap and childish. The only thing you have proved in your spiteful meanderings is that you lack any type of vision. Many of Mick's boyhood blues idols performed and recorded well into fine maturity. He has every right to follow in their footsteps if he chooses. Yes, he alone is not the Rolling Stones. He is just one man plying his craft. Take or leave it, but don't polish your false crown on his efforts.

Tom Krebs, Los Angeles

Then You Missed Van Halen

JESSICA WILLIS: Don't take this the wrong way, but for a woman that's a cool point of view ("Music," 12/12). Bravo! Van Halen rocks and I feel the exact same way about them. Great article. I sat through every year of Sammy, and the Gary year. It was okay, but I could never imagine Dave. I'm 27, I was in fourth grade in 1984, so I missed him with VH. It's nice to see people out there who feel the same way. Good job!!!

Patrick Leopardi, Pittsburgh

Good on Ya, Jess

JESSICA WILLIS' "Van Halen" article is possibly the most enjoyable little piece of music journalism I have had the pleasure of reading in years. Congratulations, Jessica, on an article lacking the normal pretensions and self-importance most writers suffer from these days.

James Manson, Melbourne, Australia

She's Evil, Too, But Oh So Sweet

Jim Knipfel's blatant role as blind corporate shill has gone beyond the insignificant and into the reprehensible. Although he presents himself as a journalistic Tiresias, halfway between a misanthropic recluse and an affable but disabled uncle, Knipfel is closer to the Kurus, blinded by greed, who were slain by their kinsman Arjuna as told in the Bhagavad Ghita.

I refer, of course, to Knipfel's piece on Colonel Sanders ("Slackjaw," 12/12) and his iconic status in Japan. This comes less than four years after the great chicken slaughter in Hong Kong, a holocaust of livestock equaled in devastation only by the British government's war against its own cattle. It is the height of irresponsibility to provide justification, as Knipfel does, for an institution that systematically degrades and persecutes chickens. I am sure that Knipfel is content to act as a pawn for Colonel Sanders and his antifowlic consortium, but I am dismayed that New York Press would allow itself to be used as a forum for such hateful purposes. I am sure that this article would not have been run had it concerned Aunt Jemima, but Colonel Sanders' brand of devilry is considered acceptable. According the principles of law, I suppose Knipfel and New York Press have done nothing wrong. But the immorality cannot be denied.

Jabairu Tork, Boston

Karr Wreck

People don't read Mary Karr ("Books," 12/12) because of the quality?they read her work because it's Jerry Springer for the MFA crowd. It's like watching a really beautiful car wreck. Her writing is almost as impressive as her survival, but she needs to either wise up or come clean about her memoir's/novel's appeal. Hint: it's not the lapidary prose. Her theme song could be "Crawling from the Wreckage."

Kate Coe, Los Angeles

No Reason For Treason

RE Taki's "Who's a Traitor?" (Top Drawer," 12/12). Taki omits one important fact in the John Walker situation: the federal Constitution delegates the power to declare war to Congress (and to no one else), which was never done on either Vietnam or Afghanistan. So, call Walker's actions what you want, but any lawyer worth his fee could present an affirmative defense to treason in this case. FYI, Jane Fonda was not the only American to travel to North Vietnam during those conflict years. I cannot recall one who was ever tried and convicted of treason.

Len Karpinski, Anchorage

Let's Just Cane Him

TAKI: Your article fails to give proper weight to the fact that service in the army of a foreign country not at war with the United States does not satisfy the requirements of the treason statute.

To be convicted of treason, John Walker must have fought for Al Qaeda/Taliban after learning that the U.S. had declared war on them. His prior service in a foreign army might violate other statutes, but treason requires that he serve in a foreign army he knew to be at war with the U.S. Therefore, his initial activities as a Taliban soldier, performed prior to the U.S. declaration of war, are not treasonous. And if he continued to serve afterward while ignorant of the fact that the U.S. had declared war on his cronies (not an inconceivable notion, considering that he was in primitive Afghanistan, with little access to tv or radio), his actions are not treasonous.

It will be the government's burden to prove Walker continued to serve as a Taliban soldier with knowledge that the U.S. was at war with the Taliban. If this is proven, he should be convicted and executed. Alternately, if it can be proven that he participated in the murder of the CIA agent in the prison uprising, he should be convicted of murder and imprisoned for life.

If he neither soldiered knowingly against the United States nor participated in the prison murder, it would probably be best to forgo criminal prosecution altogether, bring him home and try to unbrainwash him. The man is only 20 years old, after all. Where possible, the mistakes of a child should be treated somewhat more leniently.

Marvin Kwartler, Manhattan

Hysterical

GEORGE SZAMUELY asks ("Taki's Top Drawer," 12/12), "So why were no fighters dispatched to intercept planes on an extraordinary day like Sept. 11?" Gee, I dunno, maybe because nothing like it had ever happened before? Maybe the military didn't keep handy a rule book on how to intercept and shoot down domestic passenger planes?

I don't know about you, George, but after the first plane had hit, I wasn't thinking, "Boy, I hope they're scrambling fighters out of Andrews to shoot down every passenger plane in the sky in case it holds terrorists." I was too busy trying to figure out what was going on, but I guess you were so sharp you knew the whole plan by 8:47. Maybe you should work for the CIA. Wouldn't that be funny.

Tom Patterson, Brooklyn

Of the Harlem vanden Heuvels

What are you paying Alexander Cockburn for his column? You should send the check for the last one to Katrina vanden Heuvel ("Wild Justice," 12/5), since half the column was quotes from her dopey L.A. Times op-ed piece. Or is it okay for neo-Stalinists to steal each other's material since they don't believe in private property?

Gene Salorio, Storrs, CT

Yeah, But Boxcutters Sold by Widows

MUGGER: I should spare you the pun, but Don MacLeod's article misses the mark ("Daily Billboard," 12/11). I shudder to think that my NRA dues are being subverted to improve the shooting skills of Al Qaeda soldiers. I guess we need new legislation to protect us from such a heinous threat as tattered paper targets in Afghanistan.

MacLeod suggests that terrorists purchase their guns at gun shows, thus taking advantage of the gun show loophole. The idea of a gun show loophole has been advanced so often by the likes of Sens. John McCain and Chuck Schumer that it has almost become a reality. However, a small amount of research would have shown the position to be inaccurate.

All vendors at gun shows must be federally licensed dealers and are not exempt from conducting individual background checks. The only exception is for one-time sellers of privately owned firearms?typically the widow selling her dead husband's gun collection, or a private citizen selling items from his/her collection. According to the FBI, these account for less than 5 percent of sales at all gun shows.

Furthermore, this exception does not absolve the private seller from responsibility. In Illinois, for example, if I sell my shotgun or pistol to my father-in-law?whether at a gun show or in my own living room?I must make a record of the sale, including the buyer's name, address and firearm owner's identification number issued by the state. I will have to maintain this record for no less than 10 years?hardly a no-questions-asked transaction. The NRA is not responsible for the United States being "awash in guns." If gun ownership is the problem, MacLeod should state his views more clearly. Perhaps he could offer an alternative to the Second Amendment, and be so generous as to explain how his insight should take precedent over our nation's founders. The weapons of choice for the terrorists on Sept. 11 were homemade knives, boxcutters and fully fueled passenger planes. Perhaps it's time MacLeod and Sen. McCain go after the real threat to our nation's safety?hand tools and commercial aircraft.

M. Van Voorhis, Alton, IL

Give Him a Tribunal

ONE HARDLY knows where to begin with Don MacLeod's ignorant and bigoted attack on the NRA. A few of the more glaring factual errors in his little knife job:

The NRA doesn't make sure America is "awash in guns." The American people do. Aside from a few collector's pieces it gives away at its annual banquet every year, the NRA doesn't put any guns into circulation. It may be difficult for MacLeod to believe, but most people do not think that guns are inherently evil; most gun owners are law-abiding, upstanding citizens, and people who buy guns do so for lots of reasons, none of them having anything to do with the NRA.

The reason Ashcroft "shan't bother to look up your gun purchase on the FBI database" is that the database itself is illegal, a blatant violation of federal statutes (which are quite clear on this point), and its use for law enforcement purposes is equally illegal. The statute establishing background checks for gun purchases makes very, very clear that the feds are not to use the background check system to create a registration database, which is what MacLeod wants them to do.

Gun shows are not exempt from gun-control regulations. The same laws on selling guns apply at gun shows exactly as they do outside of gun shows. Namely, dealers have to run background checks regardless of whether they sell at gun shows, and everyday Joes trying to unload a gun or two, regardless of whether they are selling at a gun show or to their buddy in the garage, are not required to run background checks. If the same laws apply in the same way, where's the loophole, MacLeod?

To be fair, MacLeod got a few things right: good marksmanship is, indeed, everyone's right, the Second Amendment is, indeed, a beautiful and elegant part of the Bill of Rights, and the NRA, by defending the Bill of Rights, does indeed do patriotic work. Too bad his only acquaintance with truth is through the lens of snide irony.

Tim Hartin, Mt. Horeb, Wisconsin

Well-Received and Entertaining

MUGGER: Nice work on the review of Bias in last Thursday's Wall Street Journal. Gee, have you possibly outgrown your own liberal biases, or did I just assume you had them? Between your prominence in The Wall Street Journal and John Strausbaugh's well-received polemic on the rock 'n' roll industry, City Paper alums are cleaning up. Whatever happened to Richard Rabicoff? I hope you were not overwhelmingly affected by Sept. 11, and that you and your family are well.

Richard Rabicoff, Baltimore

The Song Remains the Blame

Armond White: Your unconcealed irritation?no, disgust?with us (as a species) for refusing to embrace Steven Spielberg films with the same passion as you do is evidenced by your continued (and still unconvincing) references, comparisons and testaments to the greatness of A.I. It's almost as if you're trying to needle us, antagonize and shame us.

Personal taste aside, however, I'd like to bring to your attention the respectable (and ever-growing) number of people I've spoken to who dislike Spielberg movies for one reason and one reason only: composer/creep John Williams, whose outdatedly bombastic soundtracks are as ostentatious as they are condescending and manipulative.

Take, for instance, that nauseating dirge of faux-spiritual caterwauling that accompanied the most horrifying scenes of Amistad as well as the cheesy jubilance of the Faux-African Children's Chorus that totally ruined its otherwise wonderful finale. Remember?

Worse, still, is that he doesn't know when to shut up. And he's loud too (although, granted, that's not necessarily his fault...or is it?), making for a decidedly draining viewing experience; always.

And while you may initially find this contention to be a bit petty, again, it's apparently a pettiness that's shared by a great many others, as was demonstrated this past summer at a screening of A.I. at the Ziegfeld, where I had the pleasure of witnessing the entire theater erupt with gales of knowing laughter after one viewer (not myself, I swear) booed aloud when John Williams' name appeared on the screen.

I dunno. Perhaps you're simply impervious to his unrelenting assaults and/or you refuse to let it distract your focus from the more important facts of good filmmaking. Okay, I can understand that. Still, given your many in-depth essays examining music's awesome power (both positive and negative), I would think that you, of all people, might be reasonable enough to, at least, take my disagreement into consideration and, possibly, reevaluate your own unabashedly pro-Spielberg stance.

In the meantime, I intend to boycott all future releases that employ (or should I say enable) John Williams and I urge others to do likewise. This scourge on our culture has to be addressed once and for all. Our ears, sir, are not garbage pails.

C. Zwyer, Manhattan

He's a Workhorse

ARMOND White just doesn't stop. He is relentless, unforgiving and ridiculously specific. I really enjoy reading his critiques.

Candice Astor, Brooklyn

Faux Homo Subtext

Armond White thinks the reference to a woman in Vanilla Sky ("Film," 12/12) as the Tom Cruise character's "fuck buddy" and having Cameron Diaz say, "I swallowed your cum! That means something!" somehow "suggest inadvertent homoerotic tension." Oh really? Gosh, Armond, a lot of very straight men enjoy having female "fuck buddies" when they are not in so-called serious "relationships," and they also like it when women swallow their cum and do often believe that it "means something." I am very cognizant of gay subtext in films, but this time methinks you are really stretching to make a point that isn't there.

There are also many of us who thought both Cameron Crowe's Jerry Maguire and Wes Anderson's Rushmore were exceptionally rewarding if quite different films. That White feels the need to praise one to shortchange the other seems to obviate the fact that moviegoing can indeed be a many-splendored thing.

Barry O'Brien, New Rochelle, NY

But Ozzy's a Freak of Nature

Re Gabe Johnson's letter ("The Mail," 12/12). I can think of a few bands who weren't imitating what came before them. How about Black Sabbath? Or Zappa/Mothers (they weren't imitating Varese, no matter what you've heard)? Or what about the Mahavishnu Orchestra? But I guess we're talking "rock" here.

Larry Eldridge, Brooklyn

Dope Find

So, did you guys permanently drop "The Straight Dope," or what? Tell us. What's with all the sidestepping, like your nonresponse to Ron Finkelstein last week in "The Mail"?

It's odd?since the majority of New York Press deals with things happening in the media (especially things happening at New York Press, and how whatever you're doing is a million times better than every other publication), I'm always surprised at how you never just come out and say when you're changing something: when a columnist is leaving you, when you ax Kaz, when you lose Real Astrology, etc. If you think it's a change for the better, make an announcement. Don't be so ashamed that you skulk around until we're forced to pry the truth out of you.

Matthew Holm, Queens

The editors reply: Holm is right, we haven't been running "Dope" lately. When and if it returns we suspect he'll be the first to know.

Except This Week, Eh?

I always felt terrible. There was always something wrong. Then work would end. And it got worse. Usually I'd end up reading this newspaper. Some miserable shit like Slackjaw and his visit to the friggin' doctor or his gosh-darn parents in Green Bay or Morgan's feigning sycophantic bullshit that apparently triggered a thought that inevitably ended up in his miserable apartment. That said, I honestly enjoy his writing and agree with his belief that Henry Miller kicks ass. Blindness still sucks though. In my opinion.

Then one day it occurred to me that perhaps this newspaper perpetuated my unhappiness, or misery, as it were. I started to think I was just reading more miserable stuff about how miserable stuff can be by a bunch of miserable bastards like myself. So I thought anyway.

Then I stopped reading your paper in late October. The goal was no New York Press in November. Despite a self-destructive curiosity, it did happen. No New York Press in November. And it has continued.

Now I am less anxious, unhappy, pissed-off, disgruntled, misanthropic, psychotic, etc. Or at least I think I am. But I do know I drink less and I wake up slightly less apathetic and violently hungover than before. Or so I think. I lost some weight. Objectively, I believe. But most importantly, I no longer give a flying fuck about MUGGER's strange weekly amalgamation of verbal megalomania juxtaposed with random pictures distorted to no end. I still peek at Tony Millionaire's uberperceptive superfantastic interpretations of the world illustrated by the most mind-fuckingly amazing artwork I have ever seen anywhere on the face of the Earth. And, instead of wasting time reading your rag I get a couple of liters of Bacardi dark and get on that bloody train to Bay Ridge and then I end up somewhere. After that I generally don't remember.

Akshay Desai, Brooklyn

Wenner Always Sucked

MUGGER: You make some good points about Jann Wenner (12/12). Your themes?Wenner's shameless self-promotion, sucking up to rock stars, profiteering from the gritty rock scene?aren't really revelations, though.

By most accounts, from books and articles about Wenner and RS, even from the beginning in San Francisco, he was always considered an asshole. He drove a Porsche while everyone else was schlepping around in another German vehicle, the VW. He always wanted to make money. He ingratiated himself to the rock stars he idolized, Jagger included. I mean, he also publishes US magazine, after all. And, as for changing, he was always the first to rush to any trend, however frivolous?he had that Sebastian Junger unshaven look going for a while, albeit a chubbier version.

But, in the end, the thing I give him credit for is hiring a lot of innovative, thought-provoking writers over the years: P.J. O'Rourke, Tim Cahill, Ben Fong-Torres, Greil Marcus, Cameron Crowe, Hunter S. Thompson and a few others whose names slip my mind. Thanks for the piece, though. It was a good read.

Peter Van Allen, Ardmore, PA

Russ Smith replies: I've read the various books about Rolling Stone as well. My point?aside from providing background for those who don't know Wenner's history?was to focus on his inane and tossed-off editorial that appears in RS' current issue.

Jesus, Have a Drink, Skip

GOOD TAKE on Wenner, MUGGER, but let's face the truth?the baby boom generation (I'm one of them) were largely idiots. John Lennon was ultimately a moron and "Imagine" is a communist paean written by a millionaire. George Harrison was a goofball, though he did have a decent sense of humor. They're dead. So what?

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are scumbags, and always have been. Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison and the rest offed themselves, they were so stupid. Good riddance, baby. Rolling Stone and the Rolling Stones were about sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll. Period. Quit waxing nostalgic about any of it. Two of those subjects can be fun, but an entire generation who tried to extend normal youthful teenage rebellion into a lifetime is, clinically speaking, mentally deranged.

That's why we get angry, confused idiots like Barbra Streisand, Jesse Jackson and Richard Dreyfuss as mouthpieces of this generation and utter reprobates like Bill and Hillary Clinton and the two supposedly female senators from California can get elected. It's why we have kids like John "named after Lennon" Taliban Walker doing ridiculous things.

Lennon said the dream is over. It never was a dream, dude, it was a fucking hallucination.

Skip Press, Burbank, CA

Up the Anti

Don't you people think it's sort of...ironic that you refer to PETA as "Nazis" ("Billboard," 12/12)? You couldn't get further from fact if you tried, considering that any analogy you come up with would have to point to the behavior of furriers and others who slaughter innocent animals as "Nazis" because their behavior is identical. (In fact, their behavior is even more evil, because the Nazis were slaughtering Jews and others not only to seize their valuables but because they really did see themselves as making the world a better place. Furriers, etc., are sleazier, because they only slaughter those weaker than them to make a buck.)

I have no problem with you defending fur lovers and other selfish barbarians/assholes. Just don't confuse your metaphors with some lazy kneejerk insults. Attacking fascists doesn't make you a Nazi. It makes you the complete opposite of a Nazi.

Tammy Jeffrin, Manhattan

You Traitor

MUGGER: Sen. Leahy bemoans, or closer to the point, pisses and moans, about the potential of military tribunals (12/5). He berates Ashcroft, a fairly unsympathetic individual, over the fact that U.S. courts are open for business and that should be good enough for the Bush administration. With his unctuous smile he spots and blathers about our great judicial system being able to handle this and that, yet he holds up judges that our greatly overburdened judicial system desperately needs. Shouldn't someone be slapping him upside his head with this fact?

John R. McCormick, Woonsocket, RI

Exposing AIDS Revisionists

I wanted to thank New York Press for running Michelangelo Signorile's article ("The Gist," 12/12) regarding my city's current state of affairs in addressing the acts and fallout from two of San Francisco's HIV extremists, now both in custody. While there is a movement afoot to obfuscate the truth in the case of these two men and replace fact with mythology and revisionism, Signorile writes an honest and non-mythologized account of the antics of these two men. The phrase from the original ACT UP credo that I have imprinted in my mind is that we (are) were "united in anger...through direct, non-violent action."

That basic philosophical agreement has been violated time and time again here by the HIV extremists. It has been broken so many times, for so many years, that to simplify the recent spate of activities to solely "a phone zap" is unbelievable, unjustified, cruel and inaccurate. San Francisco has become a city where "nonviolent tactics" have been replaced by throwing empty pill bottles into someone's face, screaming, "Die, faggot, die." It has devolved into a place where a group of men can corner a young researcher in an elevator lobby, berate her and be so verbally abusive that she needs to obtain a TRO for her safety. Because of these HIV extremists, San Francisco became a city where "nonviolence" has been replaced by phone calls warning men to shut their mouths or else they'll be shut "for good" or "for you."

Given that the transcripts from just a handful of these men's calls have been released by way of the media, anyone who now operates in such a fashion to obfuscate the truth just to make martyrs of these two men does so with the knowledge that they are revising the facts. That some may choose to be blind and oblivious to the reality of these men's deeds is their own prerogative. However, none of us can remain blind and oblivious to the impact of these HIV extremists?they have coopted a movement's name and violated that movement's coda in the pursuit of an agenda that is wildly divergent from the goals established by the original ACT UP chapters.

Sometimes it is more courageous to speak the truth than it is to follow the will of a group of peers. Signorile displayed great courage when he told the truth; New York Press has done a great service to all involved in the legitimate struggle to end HIV/AIDS.

Mike Shriver, adviser to the Mayor on AIDS & HIV policy, San Francisco

Down with the Doctrinaires!

RE Michelangelo Signorile's disdain toward those who question current AIDS orthodoxy. Please consider the following: In a world that holds science in such high esteem, one would like to think that when a noted scientist like Robert Gallo goes on television to announce that AIDS is caused by a virus rather than a lifestyle?like a gay lifestyle that sometimes overdoses on drugs like poppers, ecstasy, steroids and cocaine?that he would be certain of several things. He should be certain that the virus he "discovered" is not in fact one he stole from a French scientist (who later sued him for stealing it). He had better make sure that he publishes his findings in a scientific journal, so that they may be challenged by members of his field, published before holding a press conference with other government officials. He should not hastily obtain patent rights in the hope of becoming a millionaire and then be forced to split those profits with the French scientist who discovered the virus originally.

The most urgent reason why scientists should be more responsible is that I almost ended up dead after about two and a half months on AIDS medication. After my HIV-positive diagnosis, my despair convinced me to take medications that almost killed me. Fourteen pills a day of medications that literally destroy the body?as I was participating in a clinical trials. I'm not exaggerating. I came very close to dying while my "doctor" told me that I was getting better. I can tell you my whole story up and down because it's the truth. I don't have to recall it. It shocks me awake every morning.

I invite anyone's opinion and hope that they would respect what I am saying because there is not one bit of untruth in this letter. At the very least, I wish that the gay community that I am a part of?I came out eight years ago?would reduce the intake of recreational drugs that over a prolonged period of time do a great deal of damage to the mind, body and soul.

Ronen Murad, Manhattan

Die, Yu