|
|
 |
Roar Of The ZionTo the Editor, I first read Jeff Smith's "Case Study" (November 12) about a week after it was published, because I was in a slip-and-fall trial, representing the little guy against the insurance company, and I didn't want to be distracted and incensed when I was in trial. When I finally did read it, I was upset and unnerved at Smith's callousness, ignorance, lack of investigation, and general muckraking and bigoted attitude.
Smith wasn't informing the public and illuminating minds to create an atmosphere of intellectual freedom--he was merely slinging mean-spirited mud, which fortunately came back and hit him in the face. What audacity he has! He certainly isn't the type to be sorry for what he has written--but only for the fact he was caught at it. Obviously, he is intelligent and can wield the pen as a sword. He can't plead ignorance when he uses pejorative statements which he knows will sting. Let's first talk about the religious issue. When Smith calls a New York Jew--which I obviously am--a "Hymie" and then makes allusions to Adolph Hitler, who is the curse of every Jew, relating his philosophy to his "German brother" and then ends with criticism of another Jew, Laura Schlesinger, he has opened the door to anti-Semitism.
Smith does owe me a personal apology as well as every other Jewish
person in Tucson. The fact that he isn't even making an apology
makes his "some-
Now for me as a lawyer. I have worked with all my heart here
in Tucson for 25 years; created a firm, fathered four beautiful
and wonderful children, and pushed the envelope for my principles
even though it has cost me a great deal in time, money and popularity
because I have fought for what I believe in. I am the lawyer of
the common man. I do help people. I have tried my hardest to be
a good lawyer and professional in this community and to educate
people on what is going on in a context in which our society operates.
I filed this suit, against the advice of some close to me, because
I believe that even an accident lawyer has the right to get paid
for what he has done--that there is no free lunch--and that if
you use someone's time and efforts you should pay for it. Though
Smith didn't take the time to find out, he should know that this
case first went to arbitration, where I was awarded my entire
fee. I am not going to sink to his level and expose his dear friend
Mr. Bolding or Mr. Maltz, but I believe if he does a little truth-seeking,
he will find they have been less than "kosher." I am
not afraid to go to trial--and often do on losing cases because
I feel the underdog has to be protected. But when three of my
own scientific experts tell me that my client's story is not feasible,
I have a right to be cautious.
Smith has criticized me for not doing my job as a lawyer by not
fighting for justice, but he is guilty of not doing his job as
a journalist and not fighting for the truth. It is ironic that
he has painted me as a shyster lawyer, which has put me in the
position of trying to explain my actions and Smith is now being
painted as a bigot who is trying to explain away his actions.
Maybe this letter will get Smith more readers or maybe it will
make those who do read him as a habit take his statements with
more than a grain of salt as to their believability.
--Harold Hyams
To the Editor,
A glaring omission in Margaret Regan's otherwise well-written
(and, I assume, well-researched) "Art In The Open" (December 17) was that I painted the long West Concourse divider at Tucson International Airport which features clouds and the Tucson Mountains. The names Paul Edwards, Chris Tanz and Vytas Sakalas are clearly
displayed on the wall opposite the collaborative artwork, and
if Regan would have asked either Paula Dunn or her associates
at Tucson Airport, or David Hoyt Johnson, Beth Hancock or their
associates at the Tucson Pima Arts Council, they would have informed
her as to the authorship of the piece in question. Were it not
for the fact that this is the largest painting (about 72 feet
long on each side) that I have ever done, or that I worked to
exhaustion, for months to complete it before the deadline--while
holding down a full-time job--I would have remained silent about
being ignored in this way.
--Vytas Sakalas
To the Editor,
Chris Limberis' article on South Tucson City Councilman Roman
Soltero ("The Perfect Pol," December 24) was a bullseye and a pleasant piece of journalism. As many of the "old guard" lament the lack of qualified candidates and the demise of the
political system, a quiet but solid juggernaut has been assembled
in Legislative District 10! The foundation was established by
the late Sam Lena and the plan was set in motion by patriarch
Dan Eckstrom.
This district is poised to make serious change in southern Arizona.
With the team of state Sen. Victor Soltero, state Reps Ramon Valadez
and Sally Ann Gonzales, South Tucson Mayor Shirley Villegas, and
South Tucson Councilmembers Ramon Soltero and Jennifer Eckstrom,
the district has assembled a team poised for the millennium.
--Byron L. Howard
We Want Letters!
Thrilled by our brilliant insights? Sick of our mean-spirited attacks?
Need to make something perfectly clear? Write: tucsonweekly@tucsonweekly.com
|
 |
Home | Currents | City Week | Music | Review | Books | Cinema | Back Page | Archives
|
 |
© 1995-99 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth |
|
I couldn't understand how a newspaperman who never met me, nor
spoke with me nor obviously investigated the issue, could write
such an awful, vengeful article to smear me. I was shocked and
surprised by Smith's venom and couldn't understand it. To quote
him, "Yes, I'm sorry people hate and mistrust other people
without even knowing them."
The frightening thing about Smith and people like him is that
he gulls the public into believing his version in the way he frames
the issues. It is like the teacher who promotes politics and uses
his podium unfairly to push his position. He has no right as a
newspaper reporter to push a position without first thoroughly
investigating it--and if he is not a legitimate reporter, then
what is he?