WACO NOT FOR WACKOS Shame on you Willamette Week for suggesting in your review of the documentary Waco: The Rules of Engagement that the film is "required viewing for the conspiracy nut and complete skeptic" [Screen, WW, July 29, 1998]. It's unnerving that a seemingly liberal paper such as the Willamette Week would fall into the mainstream media trap of marginalizing filmmakers who create counter-propaganda and individuals who dare believe that the U.S. government might be complicit in terrorist acts against its own citizens, as we have seen prior to Waco in the MOVE bombing by Philadelphia police in 1985 and on other occasions. Avalon Kalin Joel Bartell Northwest Trinity Place STICKING TO PRINCIPLES While we appreciate the fair and balanced reporting about our U.S. Senate candidate, Karyn Moskowitz ["Backing Greens," WW, Aug. 19, 1998], I am obliged to point out one error. It is untrue that "The Pacific Party platform calls for companies to pay a pollution tax that would reflect the true environmental impacts of their operations." While Ms. Moskowitz and our gubernatorial candidate, Blair Bobier, both support such taxes, the Pacific Party itself does not have a platform. The Democrats and Republicans have platforms, and they change their platforms every two years to suit the current political climate. In contrast, The Pacific Party has a Statement of Principles, which has remained virtually unchanged in the party's eight-year history. While advocating "peace, justice and a sustainable environment," the Pacific Party Statement of Principles does not mention pollution taxes. Andy Davis, Media Coordinator The Pacific Party SECOND LOOK AT THIRD PARTIES Your article on the Pacific Party's Karyn Moskowitz ["Backing Greens," WW, Aug. 19, 1998] captured the reason why many of us in the voting public are giving the "third parties" a second look. She is bringing the mixture of ecology and economics to electoral politics that has been severely lacking. I have had the pleasure of hearing Moskowitz deliver her well-researched analysis of the abuse of our public lands. As someone who thought his education was relatively complete, I was surprised to discover that I wasn't close to understanding how our natural wealth was being ripped out from under us with the complicity of "regulatory" agencies. But what was most amazing is that I was learning this from a political candidate. Inevitably, the strength of our social fabric depends on the interplay between ecological and economic principles and forces. This is why I will support candidates here in California who think like Moskowitz and encourage Oregonians to do the same. Our forefathers fought hard for our voting privilege; we should use it responsibly. Fraser Shilling, Ph.D. University of California, Davis POLICING THE POLICE The Portland Police riot against protesters condemning police harassment ["Black & Blue," WW, Aug. 26, 1998] is an outrageous example of the blatant disregard that the police have for citizens' constitutional right to assemble and a sample of the virulent racism of the police department. The more I learned about the incident, the more I shook my head in disbelief--firing on peaceful protesters, revoking a mother's custody rights, reinforcing racist stereotypes on gang-affiliation issues, shutting down a private event. Sounds like a reenactment of the civil-rights struggles in the South. It will take much more than hugs from the mayor to defend the rights of people against police brutality. The subsequent meeting following the police action last weekend did not deal with the real abuses that occurred and offered no solutions. I am impressed with and totally support the position held by Adrienne Weller, District 18 State Representative candidate, that we need a civilian police review board, independent of City Hall, to have some community control over the police. Weller believes that the police should be accountable to the community when their behavior is out of control and they wildly over-react to people exercising their constitutional rights. A civilian review board would provide the community with a means to penalize officers who abridge people's civil and human rights. I agree, especially when the right to assemble to protest unfair treatment is met with brutal force. Jordana Sardo Northeast 88th Avenue WILL OREGON BLAZE TRAIL WITH 58? I would like to express my appreciation for the article on Measure 58 by Patty Wentz ["Birth of a Notion," WW, Aug. 26., 1998]. I am one of the many adult adoptees across the nation who are waiting to see if Oregon will lead the way in the restoration of our right to the records of our births. In fact, I am the person who presented this issue to the adoption support group in Philadelphia which Mr. Crumlish refers to in the first paragraph. As this article so clearly pointed out, this measure is not about searching for one's birth relatives; adoptees do this now, even with sealed records. The paper trail of an adoption is long, and persistent searchers can nearly always find their biological relatives, with or without their original birth certificates. What Measure 58 would do is restore adopted persons to a footing of equality with non-adopted persons. All adult citizens have a right to the official government records of their births, regardless of the circumstances of those births, and it is time that the state stop preventing adoptees from accessing theirs. I was also extremely glad to see the statement from the director of Oregon Right to Life stating its neutrality on this issue. The specter of abortion rates rising if records were opened is a scare tactic used by those who favor maintaining sealed records and the aura of shame which goes with them; in fact, states and countries with open records have lower abortion rates than those with sealed records. C.K. Bertrand Holub Philadelphia, Pa.   originally published September 2, 1998