UA responsible for continued labor abuses at New Era

This letter is in response to Mike Low's letter that appeared in the Monday Wildcat. Mr. Low claims that the university did not have legal recourse to cancel its contract with New Era, claiming that the administration did not receive a final report on the New Era cap company. What Mr. Low fails to mention is the reason for the lack of a final report: The New Era company refuses to allow the Worker Rights Consortium monitors into its factory to conduct another report. Management of the New Era company did allow investigators from the Fair Labor Association in, but, as is the case with reports from the FLA, that report is confidential. The edited FLA report is expected to be released this week.

The fact that New Era refused to allow the WRC investigators does indeed constitute a violation of its contract with the University of Arizona. Ten other universities have severed their contracts with New Era because of its human rights and disclosure violations. Among them are Duke, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Georgetown, University of Michigan and Indiana University.

Again, this goes to show how our university administration is spineless. If 10 other major universities can legally cancel their contract with New Era, we can too. Peter Likins and Mike Low bear a personal responsibility for the continuing labor abuses at New Era. They should be ashamed.

Rachel Wilson
psychology graduate student

Petersen doesn't know feminism

Charles Petersen really needs to re-evaluate his definition of feminism.

For being a history major, he of all people should realize the inconsistencies and unethical treatment towards women and other minorities throughout U.S and world history.

As a feminist, I am sorry for wanting to better the current treatment of women/other minorities. I am also equally as sorry for not wanting to elect a president who is going to deliberately attempt to build a glass ceiling, strip women of their right to choose and create a homogeneous atmosphere.

In Laura Winsky's Monday commentary titled "The less cloudy side of the street," she is absolutely correct: "Feminism is the radical idea that women are human too," is a slogan that should function universally.

Furthermore, letters such as the one printed by Charles Petersen really worry me as to the incorrect notions of feminism that naive individuals are so adamant on believing.

In retrospect, instead of making broad generalizations about feminism, how about making an attempt at educating yourself?

I suggest taking one of the various women's studies courses offered here at the UA for anyone (particularly Petersen) who clearly needs an accurate definition of the word "feminism."

Noelle Gaffney
sophomore majoring in English, creative writing and women's studies

Mideast conflict needs a fair look

Why is it that most people in the United States tend to only criticize the Palestinians for their actions, but never hold Israel accountable for what they are doing wrong? No doubt the suicide attacks are terrible, evil and are carried out on innocent people, but the fact remains that Israel has been illegally occupying Palestinian territories since 1967, despite repeated condemnation from the United Nations, European Union and Arab League. All the while, the United States continues to support Israel, financially and otherwise, in their seemingly never-ending quest to expand and take charge of land that doesn't belong to them.

I am not saying that we should support the way Palestinians are handling this - it would be hypocritical and wrong to support terrorist actions against innocent people.

However, it is just as wrong to insist that Palestinians "play by the rules" as long as Israel repeatedly breaks them by not giving Palestinians the rights to their land and homes. Americans would not tolerate an invasion and illegal occupation in our country, so how should we expect Palestinians to just give up everything they have without fighting back in some way?

The United States should cut off all aid to, and cease supporting Israel until they withdraw from all Palestinian territories. It is not their land, and until they give it back, the horrific suicide attacks will continue to claim innocent lives.

Sarah Hartwell
ecology and evolutionary biology sophomore

Middle East situation should be examined with facts, not lies

This is in response to the letter from Mr. Sarsour in the April 5 Wildcat. His letter contained so much right out lies that I could not let it stand. He first states that the Palestinian land of thousands of years was taken from them in an extremely forceful act. When the British mandate ended and Israel was formed (as was laid out by the United Nations), all of Israel's neighbors declared war, Palestinians included. Their goal was to "drive the Israelis into the sea." They did not want a peaceful coexistence. They wanted the annihilation of Israel and its people. But Israel did not die; it survived and doubled its size with counter offensives. I fail to see how this is an act of aggression on the part of Israel.

The next "point" the article makes is that the Israeli army "fires on children without provocation." This simply isn't the case - unless you consider a horde of people throwing stones a lack of provocation. The Israeli army takes as many precautions as can be allowed to keep civilian casualties to a minimum. Also, the author is surprisingly harsh on the targeting of civilians considering his support of Palestinian terror tactics.

The only truthful thing this article brings with it was the Sabra and Shatila massacres. This was a terrible tragedy that no peoples should have to go through. However, this was not perpetrated by Israel as Mr. Sarsour tried to make you believe. It was carried out by Arab Christians and was condemned by the Israeli government.

One suggestion I have for Mr. Sarsour: If you fill your article with persuasive arguments, you will not have to rely on persuasive language.

Reuben Goodman
computer science and psychology junior