Japanese bombings, McVeigh unrelated
I would like to respond to the ignorant letter submitted by Tatiana Covington regarding Timothy McVeigh on June 20.
Tatiana, Where exactly is your point with your letter? Apparently in your eyes, Tim McVeigh and his terrorist act in Oklahoma is no big deal. You compare it to World War II and the atomic bombs dropped on Japan? How are the two similar? Did the government bomb McVeigh's harbor and start a war with him that he had to end with the murder of 168 people?
I am also confused by your comparison of Paul Tibbets, the pilot, and McVeigh. You seem to think that because he dropped the bomb he should be in the same category as McVeigh.
Did he decide he hated the Japanese and fly there and drop a bomb on his own volition? No. He followed an order from superiors. My final question to you is, why do you have to include your statement, "When we die there is no hell and no devil." How does that play into you theory?
I am not a religious person but your letter just makes no sense and makes you sound dumb, ignorant and childish. Maybe if your relatives had died in the bombing, you would be more sympathetic instead of ranting like an idiot. Go have another latte and shut up.
Ken Gafner
Alumnus
When I read the letter on June 20 from Science senior Tatiana Covington, I was shocked.
Comparing the deaths that Timothy McVeigh caused in Oklahoma with the deaths at Nagasaki and Hiroshima is like comparing apples to oranges.
We were at war with Japan. I don't remember a war at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing. Americans have not been at war with one another since the war between the states.
I agree that we should stop giving McVeigh the press coverage that he wanted, but calling his actions a "tiny toll" is invalidating the lives of the people he killed.
She also stated that "when we die we are dead. There is no hell and there is no devil." Is this a first hand account or just a belief? Because my belief is in my faith. You don't have to share those beliefs, but don't dismiss them without proof.
I truly can't understand what I was supposed to get out of her letter. Is she against the death penalty and using our past in war as justification for this or is she just trying to anger the reader?
Cynthia Mullaly
Facilities management employee
Education, peace only solution to bombings
I read a very interesting letter from Tatiana Convington on June 20 about the atomic bombs dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki versus Timothy McVeigh. Both points of view have many important aspects.
It was extremely sad that there were victims in both Japan and here in the U.S. Whether it be 168 dead or 50,000 dead, it is still wrong. What McVeigh did was horrible and it does not in any way justify the revenge of people killed in Oklahoma City. Basically it all boils down to revenge.
Mahatma Gandhi once said, "an eye for eye will leave the whole world." People were killed in Waco, Texas and then people were killed in Oklahoma City, and McVeigh was executed and has probably become a martyr for his cause. Only history will tell where his name will stand. Yet, unlike countless inmates on death row who have a chance of being innocent, McVeigh admitted his guilt and to me, it is up to God what his true punishment will be in hell. Coming back to the atomic bombs dropped in Japan are a whole different story.
The A-bombs dropped in Japan should never be celebrated or thought of as great decisions, but a warning to people in all nations that war is an ugly thing which causes great loss of life, and cause for future revenge. Only a peaceful solution is the best way to end conflicts.
War - whether World War II or the Gulf War - and acts of terrorism - whether in Oklahoma City or in Waco - are wrong regardless of the quantity of the loss of life. Only through education and a peace process can we learn to prevent any loss of life. It is very difficult, but not impossible.
Ahmad Saad Nasim
Business and public administration senior
Sexual orientation different than gender identity
Regarding the story "Gay community gains sexual freedom" on June 20, I would like to clarify the following statement made in the piece - "One in 10 of the population is not straight, meaning they're bisexual, transgender, gay or lesbian." The reality is that being transgender is not the same as being gay, lesbian or bisexual. As reflected in the above quote, there remains a great deal of unnecessary confusion about the difference between sexual orientation (i.e. hetero-, bi- or homo-sexuality) and gender identity.
To put it simply, gender identity is who you are and sexual orientation refers to who you love or have sex with. They are two completely separate concepts and a certain gender identity does not necessarily mean a certain sexual orientation. A person who is transgender may be gay, lesbian, bisexual or even straight.
If anyone would like to learn more about transgender, transsexual and gender-variant people and the issues they face, I invite them to visit the Web site of TGNet Arizona, an educational, advocacy and outreach organization for, by and about the transgender, transsexual and gender-variant communities of Arizona at www.tgnetarizona.org.
Alexander John Goodrum
Director TGNet Arizona
