PUBLIC FORUM : TOBACCO FOES COVER UP FOR `STUPID' AMERICANS.

Giant tobacco companies are ``merchants of death'' just after evil profits for shareholders. But why aren't Ralph Nader, the Food and Drug Administration, state governments and the media equally critical of the roll of tobacco farmers, the supermarkets and the mom-and-pop corner stores that either grow the base product or actually distribute the death sticks to the public?

For 25 years, the federal and state governments and health organizations have been attempting to educate the public through all forms of the media and the educational system about the health consequences of smoking.

But they all say a cartoon camel, in ads limited to billboards and adult magazines, has been more effective in ``luring'' youth into smoking than their communications have been in discouraging it.

Should government and the medical profession hire a better adman?

Isn't this rush to find a scapegoat, other than the individual who made a choice, an admission that Americans are stupid and not responsible for their actions?

Will we have the guts to say: ``We've warned you. Smoke and get sick. Don't expect help from us.''

- Mel Wolf

Burbank

Clinton and Nixon

Compared to the Clinton scandal, the Nixon-Watergate scandal should be simply considered a tempest in a teapot, or, at worst, an almost imperceptible zephyr.

So wouldn't it be ironic if it turned out to be that an unsuccessful sexual adventure with a nonentity, Paula Jones, brought about the president's undoing?

- Jack Schlict

North Hills

`Pentagon hypocrites'

It is disgusting to watch Secretary of Defense William Cohen and other Pentagon hypocrites try to justify the difference in treatment accorded to Air Force 1st Lt. Kelly Flinn, who was forced out of the military - under threat of court-martial - with a general discharge, and Air Force Gen. Joseph Ralston, a candidate for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Should Ralston be disqualified or discharged for having had an affair 13 years ago while separated from his wife? Of course not: The very idea of doing so is ludicrous. But neither should Flinn and others have been forced out of the service for similar offenses.

The double standard employed by the military in these instances is so obvious and brazen that it is a wonder that the military is able to find spokesmen who can defend it publicly with a straight face.

The chutzpah of the Department of Defense is staggering: A young woman officer who commits adultery is hounded from the service in disgrace, while the male general with 32 years of service is publicly defended by the secretary of defense.

Want to speak openly of your sexuality? Fine, as long as you're straight, but if you are serving your country as a gay service member then not only can you not speak of your sexuality, you're not even allowed to have sex.

The answer to this dilemma is crystal clear: The military should immediately end its interference in the sex lives of its members - including the bigoted and homophobic ``don't ask, don't tell'' policy - and reinstate 1st Lt. Flinn to her former position, along with back pay and an apology. Continued invasions of privacy on the part of the military can only lead to more chaos, more hypocrisy and more embarrassment for the military and those who serve in it.

- Ronald O. Richards

West Los Angeles 

Don't change `3 strikes'

The Oakland Tribune (``Use `3 strikes' for violent crimes only,'' Other Views, June 2), apparently is telling us that some crime is OK as long as the second and third crime is not violent.

Who is to say that there were no other crimes committed before the supposed second and third violent crimes?

The Tribune claims studies indicate that current laws have little effect on the drop in violent crime - what studies?

Does the Tribune expect to be a judge in determining what is or is not a violent crime?

The Tribune claims our prisons are being dangerously overcrowded and the courts clogged due to the ``three strikes, you're out'' law.

Every criminal taken off of the street means a little more freedom for the average law-abiding citizen.

The Tribune should get its priorities in order - more jails or more crime and victimization.

No amount of expense is too much in order to incarcerate these punks. We can save our life, liberty and money while helping to eliminate the stench from our streets.

- Mort Alan

Canyon Country

Cohen rebutted

Richard Cohen, writing in defense of Jesse Timmendequas (Opinions, June 4), the man who killed 7-year-old Megan Kanka, asked an interesting question. ``What was he doing out of jail''?

I would like to answer this. He was not in jail because the justice system is in the hands of people who are sympathetic to criminals. They think in terms of cure rather than punishment: Criminals are not evil; they are insane.

What Cohen says about Timmendequas' background is indeed tragic. It doesn't appear that he had much of a chance in life after the childhood Cohen described. His innocence was taken away at an early age. But the issue is, did Timmendequas know right from wrong? Clearly he did.

Timmendequas was deprived of his innocence and now gets pleasure in taking away the innocence of others. He should be executed for the good of society. Then maybe others with similar backgrounds will be able to override their pleasure because of the fear of punishment.

- Steve Lockhart

Canyon Country

Columnist Richard Cohen's argument that life in prison will ensure that Jesse Timmendequas will never again molest another person totally disregards the other inmates.

I believe we have a responsibility to all other persons, even those in prison. We cannot turn back the clock on the circumstances of Timmendequas' life that led to his raping and murdering a little girl, but we can and must ensure that he can never harm another person. Putting him to death is the only guarantee of this.

- Laurie King

Van Nuys