Likins needs 'to get some guts'

This letter is to comment on the article which ran on April 4 about the university canceling its contract with the New Era company, a firm which produced baseball caps for the UA.

The administration's reason for canceling the contract is that New Era produced a cap with an unauthorized design. But let's a take a look at why the administration was even bothering to check up on New Era.

Students Against Sweatshops has been pressuring the administration for about nine months to look into New Era's labor practices. The workers there have complained of poverty wages, inadequate health care and unsafe working conditions.

The administration agreed to look into New Era. In addition to the labor abuses, they found that New Era was using a factory in China to make some of its products. New Era did not disclose the fact that it used that factory to the university, despite the fact that it was under contractual obligation to the university to do so.

But what does the administration do? It cancels the contract with New Era because they made a cap with an unauthorized design, even though it had perfectly legal ways to sever the contract for human rights violations and failure to meet disclosure requirements. What good does that do? Does that put ANY pressure on the company to treat its workers better or disclose all of its factory locations?

This administration has long claimed to share SAS's concern for human rights, but its recent actions with New Era show otherwise. As with all of our dealings with the administration on human rights issues, the President and his lackeys have been consistently spineless. Tell President Likins to get some guts. He can be reached at plikins@u.arizona.edu.

Rachel Wilson
psychology graduate student

Students Against Sweatshops member

True that word meanings have been stretched

In reading Caitlin Hall's April 3 column, "Say Anything," I found it sad and disturbing that she finds "nothing inherently sinister" about the term "communist."

Nevertheless, I agree with her that many Americans have stretched various words far beyond their original meanings and that they make liberal (in the old-fashioned sense) use of such words as labels for their perceived enemies.

Consequently, I am confident that Ms. Hall will join me in calling for people to stop tagging as "racist," "sexist," "bigot," etc., all those who are against such things as slave reparations for blacks, affirmative action, increased taxes, banning SUVs and prematurely ending the war in Afghanistan.

Kevin A. Pollak
law student

There are evil people on both sides of Mideast conflict

I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Navabi's statements. The difference between the United States and Israel is that our leader is not a war criminal. Ariel Sharon was held responsible by the Israeli government itself for the massacre of hundreds or people in a refugee camp in his 1982 invasion of Lebanon. Also, the past couple of years of intensified fighting were greatly a result of Sharon's intentional provocation by entering the Al-Aqsa complex with armed guards. He did this as a political move against Barak, and it ended in the killing of protesters on the Temple Mount. The problems between Palestinians and Jewish settlers are also his doing. As Agriculture Minister in the '70s, he increased settlements in the illegally occupied areas such as the West Bank in order to make it impossible for the land to be returned to the Palestinians. The U.N. has declared the occupation of the West Bank illegal since 1967. While the recent terrorist attacks are disgraceful and appalling, I am sick and tired of hearing the Palestinian terrorists being singled out as the only terrorists; there are evil people on both sides. The 1994 killing of 29 praying Muslims in Hebron and the assassination of Rabin were both carried out by Israeli Jews. And for those who think that civilians are not targeted for just throwing rocks at the illegally occupying Israeli soldiers, tell that to my Palestinian friend who had to carry the dead body of his 8-year-old cousin home after he had been shot by a soldier. Tell that to the families of over 1,000 Palestinians killed in the Intifadah. Furthermore, in the 1930s, Zionist terrorists bombed Palestinians and British. The Zionists from Europe intentionally displaced over 3 million people in an effort to conquer what they deemed as rightfully theirs.

While it may seem I am biased on the side of the Palestinians, this is not the case. I feel that both sides have good and bad people, but most Americans tend to focus on the good people in Israel and the bad Palestinians. And when those brave enough as Mr. Navabi speak out about this, they are attacked by people like Rudy Adler who say that "it's pointless to argue with someone like (him) because he is blinded by religion."

The sooner we understand that the conflict has little to do with religion, the better.

Ali Scotten
anthropology and near eastern studies junior

America must 'stand up for rights of innocent people'

After reading Mr. Navabi's letter, which horrifically villainies Israel, I am appalled, not only as a supporter of Israel, but as a human being and a proud American. Terrorism, whether in the form of planes flying into buildings or a person detonating him/herself while surrounded by innocent bystanders, is unacceptable and should never be supported.

Considering this ideal, Israel's plight can and SHOULD be considered similar to the events of Sept. 11. Concerning Mr. Navabi's claims about the situation facing the Palestinian people, there are a few points which need to be clarified.

The Israeli army DOES NOT destroy the homes of innocent Palestinians, rather, only those of known terrorists. The Israeli Army DOES NOT kill innocent children everyday.

Unfortunately, some children have been killed but only because they have been unwillingly placed into a particular situation, most often by their own families. Furthermore, what is extremely haunting is Mr. Navabi's implicit claim that the Palestinian terrorists are not "brainwashed to do something extremely wicked," a concept which, according to him, applies only to the perpetrators of Sept. 11.

Mr. Navabi also refers to Palestinian terrorists as people who have been "left in a hopeless situation," thus attempting to justify their actions against Israel. Think about this for a moment.

Do the homeless people in New York take out their frustrations by blowing themselves up in Times Square at noon on Monday, or what about those minorities who have been denied education in California?

Most offensive (and ignorant) of all, however, is the claim that "Israel's actions are no different than those actions by the Hamas." Israel has reiterated time and again that their sole goal is to seek out terrorists.

In accordance, the F-16 strikes and tank invasions have been directed almost entirely at structures and locations that support terrorists and their activities. However, at no point in time has ANYONE from the Palestinian side claimed that they were seeking out those who have "wronged" them in their decisions to unleash suicide bombers on INNOCENT civilians, and they have targeted, aside from unaware soldiers, ONLY innocent people trying to live their everyday lives!

America should definitely stand up, Mr. Navabi, but we should stand up for the rights and lives of the innocent people who are threatened everyday by the terrorism perpetrated by the Palestinian Terrorists and their undoubtedly "extremely wicked" acts!

Andy Westle
political science senior

Palestinians are victims of an orgy of violence

Israeli officials would like everyone to believe that they are a people terrorized by the Palestinians, whom they politely refer to as lice and cancer. Conversely, the Palestinians are the ones who have had a real injustice put upon them. It was their homeland for over a thousand years that was taken without their consent and with extreme force during the establishment of the state of Israel.

Israel's intrusion into Palestinian land can be likened to Osama bin Laden's intrusion on America, and like Americans, Palestinians are fighting back to restore the peace they once knew.

The Palestinians, however, lack the weapons, money, intelligence agencies, and support of Israel. They must resort to using stones and homemade explosives to reclaim their raided land. In Palestine, it is common to see young boys armed with nothing but simple stones combating trained Israeli soldiers with machine guns and tanks. According to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, 9/11 Palestinians have been killed and 17,032 Palestinians have been injured between Sept. 29, 2000 and Jan. 9, 2002. The Israeli army has ruthlessly fired at children marching in demonstrations without provocation, callously opened fire on civilian neighborhoods and schools, taken possession of land, and demolished tens of thousands of olive trees.

The Palestinians lead a sad life that most people aren't aware of or choose to ignore with many living in tents after forced out of their own homes and property. Their cemeteries are being shelled, purposely aimed at and heartlessly reduced to rubble. The Palestinian people live in fear everyday of their lives.

It is contradictory for the United States to declare war on terrorism and then support Ariel Sharon, especially after his attacks on the Sabra and Shatila camps, which is one of the most evil-minded acts of violence in prevailing history. Thousands of defenseless and weaponless Palestinian refugees, women, children and elderly, were slaughtered in an orgy of malicious butchery in 1982. Bulldozers were employed to dig mass graves, and dwellings were also bulldozed to conceal the bodies of the victims. The United Nations General Assembly condemned the Sabra and Shatila massacre and acknowledged it to be an act of genocide.

Why is it that when Ariel Sharon commits atrocities like these, it is ignored? How can America support Sharon and declare a war on terrorism? Is Sharon not a terrorist or do Palestinian lives not count?

Fadia Sarsour
child psychology junior

More Middle East education necessary for understanding

The letter to the editor by Armand Navabi is a prime example of the need for education about the situation in the Middle East. The Palestinian media has told its people that the only way to effect any change is to blow themselves up to kill as many people as they feel is necessary. This is not an act of desperation over the occupation of the West Bank! The Palestinians had the choice to accept the proposal for land at Camp David and Yasser Arafat walked away. They have always had the option of nonviolent resistance, but that strategy has been rejected. This is because the Palestinians want to win their state with blood. The suicide bombings are not out of desperation; they are a strategic choice! A Hamas leader, Ismail Haniya said in The Washington Post that the Israelis are on the run now because Jews "love life more than any other people, and they prefer not to die?" This makes the suicide bombings ideal.

A very specific reason that the U.S. must react to these bombings is that if they work in Israel then other terrorists all over the world will copy them. This is why the whole world must put up a fight! As for the Israeli soldiers targeting civilians, this is incorrect. The Israeli army is under strict orders to minimize civilian casualties, just as the United States army is in Afghanistan.

While Navabi is correct in his statement that more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis, he forgot a very important distinction. The majority of the Palestinians killed have been military personnel, while the majority of the Israelis killed have been civilians.

How can you rationalize the bombing of a nightclub or a cafe? Comparing a democracy such as Israel to the United States is nothing short of a compliment. When attacked, Israel does whatever it can to fight back and protect its people in the same spirit of democracy that the United States holds true.

Dalia Spingarn
political science and Judaic studies freshman