BLM’s cash chaos
Compliments to Lee Brown at The Post on his thorough and much-needed exposé on Black Lives Matter, the organization that has proven itself to be nothing more than a scam, offering little actual help to the black community and serving only to enrich its intricate network of “leaders” (“Black Lives Matter in the red for $8M+,” May 25).
Time and again, as one head honcho is caught in the act of misappropriating funds and forced to resign, another steps up and does the same. Think of BLM’s administration as a snake with multiple heads.
As evidenced by its tax filings, over the past year BLM Global Network Foundation raised $8.5 million — how, no one really knows.
But even more astounding: During that same year, BLM somehow managed to spend $17 million, leaving the org with a $8.5 million deficit.
So where did all that money go? Or should we ask: Who’s been raking in the bucks?
Bert Wedemeyer, Brooklyn
NYPD shape-up
Oh, the horror (“NYPD snooper troopers,” May 28)!
NYPD officers are being told to drop the illegal window tints, illegal license-plate covers and defaced plates so they can pay tolls and obey traffic laws like everyone else. Finally.
Maybe next the city and NYPD could eliminate the placards that let cops and everyone else, from MTA workers to Assembly members, park on sidewalks, in traffic and bike lanes and in delivery zones — while the rest of us pay upward of $1,000 a month for parking.
If NYPD cops want respect, they can earn it by showing they respect the law. Any cop who willfully evades tolls and traffic laws is a crook who doesn’t deserve a badge.
Adrian Jones, Manhattan
Sperminator’s run
Any man who is a sperm donor to a dozen children really must think his DNA is all that, and then some (“King of pop!” May 27).
The last thing the Republican Party needs is an over-hyped individual who is most likely also over-sexed.
We have seen the results of that already.
What happened to people who just want to help and do their best for their fellow citizens?
Alfred Bonnabel, Manhattan
No speech stifling
Why all the angst and furor over the plain talk of a CUNY law graduate at the school’s commencement (“Just How Dumb Can U. Be?!” June 1)?
So what that she criticized US policies toward Israel and lambasted the NYPD and “white racism” in the US.
Since when is a graduate student’s speech at a commencement to be censored or the school punished by a withdrawal of funds on the grounds that some pols or some others in the audience (trustees and city officials) object to the speaker’s opinions?
Isn’t that the uniqueness and beauty of American-style freedoms — that students, faculty and staff at a public law school have a right to speak their personal views and criticisms?
The answer to hateful speech is a prompt response, not censorship or threats to defund the institution that allows for free speech.
Law schools especially — including the CUNY Law School — ought to uphold the values of free speech. Imagine what the state of civil rights would have been had our law schools disallowed so-called “incendiary,” controversial speech by the radicals of the 1960s and 1970s, militants like Stokely Carmichael, H. Rapp Brown, Dick Gregory and Martin Luther King Jr.
“Let a thousand tongues wag” is the American way, not censorship or defunding the school that allows a graduate to speak her mind.
Michael Meyers, President, New York Civil Rights Coalition, Manhattan
Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy and style.
This story originally appeared on NYPost
