TO THE EDITORS: If that is what you people think, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE LEAVE NOW! ["Land of the Free," edited by Kyle Shaw, July 3.] While you're waiting in lines for medical assistance and want to say something that is "PC" by Canada's standards against their so-called freedom of speech, don't come whining to America. To HELL with you suckers!

Dan, via e-mail

MR. STEINBACHER: I just read your review of T3 ["The Schwarzenegger," July 3]. While I agree with your comments that the film is sorely lacking, your feminist bootlicking was quite pathetic. Sir, look at your calendar. It is 2003. Feminism is no longer necessary and your reference to a particular archaic injustice is laughable at best. As a Philippine American woman, I've seen my share of injustices and most of them were based on race or ethnicity, not gender. American women currently enjoy a level of ease, standard of living, and personal safety that is unprecedented in the world and in world history. We have NOTHING to complain about. The fact that T3 was "sorely lacking" feminism is utterly irrelevant. The film has one purpose: to showcase our American fascination with blowing shit up. That's all it promised and it delivered.

Jeny Cartuiff

DEAR STRANGER: I respect The Stranger for its journalistic courage, but I'm afraid that you guys blew it this time. This week's annual Gay Pride issue [July 3] was marred with a completely nonsensical premise concerning appropriation of gay culture by heterosexuals. Granted, there is a dimension of validity in that argument. However, has the gay American community ever considered their appropriation of African American culture? Let's get real. Where would modern hip gay culture be without black people? It would most likely be limited to American show tunes, French [style], and Italian wines. In the U.S., black urban street culture is the predominant thread woven through the entire gay identity. "Hey girlfriend" between two males was never a part of Anglo verbiage until whites began to venture into the black underground clubs of New York's Harlem community in the 1930s.

Rev. Sequoyah Rodriguez

TO THE EDITOR: While Amy Jenniges' short piece [More In Other News, July 3] is bereft of substance--diverting attention from the real issues--it nonetheless manages to cram in many false statements in a short space.

Jenniges writes, "Confusion within SNOW about who would represent protestors... led to an angry e-mail exchange between SNOW's Howard Gale and fellow SNOW members." First, there was no confusion within SNOW. KUOW requested my participation in the show two weeks prior to airing and then contacted Ruth Yarrow (from SNOW) a few days before the show to request her participation. As soon as Ruth found out that I had been contacted earlier and had prepared for the show, she immediately contacted producer John Moe and requested that I participate rather than her. The KUOW producer said that only she could participate, thereby not allowing a major activist group to choose who could speak. Second, there was not a single angry e-mail exchange between myself and anyone from SNOW, either on or off the SNOW list, regarding this incident.

Jenniges also writes, "Scher says Gale told him he wasn't interested in the program the station outlined." I never even communicated with Steve Scher regarding this show until after the producer decided to ban me. In fact, the last communication I had with Scher was an e-mail from him the night before the show in which he said, "I look forward to your call," referring to my calling in to the show the next day. Yet when I called in to the show the next day, I was placed on hold for 50 minutes and then told "there's no time left." This makes it clear that someone at KUOW really didn't want me to participate. Further, I never said to anyone at KUOW that I wasn't interested in the "program the station outlined." When I first spoke with the KUOW producer, I noted that Seattle just had a police riot at the June 2 demonstration, which left many protestors seriously injured. In the context of June 2, and police misconduct at the March 22 antiwar demonstration, I said that it wouldn't make any sense to talk only about "the right and wrong way to protest" without talking about "the right and wrong way to police." In my conversation with KUOW producer John Moe two weeks prior to the show, we agreed I would be on the show after discussing this issue. It was not until I called the day before the show--after preparing for two weeks--that Moe informed me I would not be on.

There was no confusion at SNOW, though there apparently was much confusion at KUOW. And also at The Stranger.

Howard J. Gale

AMY JENNIGES RESPONDS: There was plenty of confusion as to who would be on the air at KUOW--whether that was the fault of KUOW, SNOW, or Gale is debatable. According to the e-mails I read, many on the e-mail list didn't know the whole story (which my short item made clear), and some questioned the validity of Gale and Yarrow as spokespersons for protesters. And while SNOWers weren't lobbing angry insults at each other, there were plenty of angry e-mails directed at KUOW--even a fledgling campaign to quit supporting the station.