Guest commentary substitutes opinions, blatant lies for facts

This letter is written in regard to Monday's guest column "U.S. aggression against Iraq criminal," by Professor Julian Kunnie. At first I was amazed at the information portrayed in this piece. Information about depleted uranium used by the United States against Iraq in the Gulf War and indirect Iraqi casualties caused by sanctions. But then as I read on, I began to doubt the whole thing.

The author stated that, "Israel has nuclear weapons mounted on F-16 fighter bombers." I would like to know the source of that information since Israel has never confirmed its possession of such weapons, let alone a deployment method. One could perhaps infer the possession, given some intelligence sources, but these are just inferences, not facts. So now I question the credibility of the entire article.

Next, he calls Israel a "colonization of Palestinians." Since this is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts, I am now convinced that Professor Kunnie is full of it. The colonization of Israel started due to the need for a homeland for Jews (an important concept in post-World War II times). The land of Israel was selected because of its significance to Jewish people. The reason the Plantains lost their land was from the multitude of offensives they engaged in Guest commentary substitutes opinions, blatant lies for facts against Israel, starting in 1947.

Kunnie then breaks his own back while stating that America is "condemning Iraq since it is a black nation and sparing Israel such criticism because it is white." This is the most insulting thing I have ever heard. Israel has been fighting for its survival since its creation. The stated goal of its adversary has been "to drive the Jews into the sea." Notice, not the liberation of Palestine, not the betterment of the Palestinian people, but genocide against the Jews. Israel has been fighting a war against racism. Furthermore, to condemn Israel and support Iraq simply because Iraq is a "black nation" constitutes the same racism that the author appears to disagree with.

Professor Kunnie, it is a dangerous thing when opinion and speculation are stated as fact. You were trying to persuade readers about questioning our government's methods and motivation, yet all you managed to do is perpetuate lies and anger Jewish people who might otherwise have agreed with your opinion.

Reuben Goodman
psychology senior

A look at facts reveals Salmon is best choice for Arizona Governor

Mr. Wilson, it is yet again my pleasure to respond to one of your articles. Please note that I am not attempting to change your views. However, I want to make sure the UA community knows the truth about Matt Salmon.

First, yes, Matt is pro-life. I like how you placed a spin in your column by calling it "anti-choice," so I will do the same by saying that you and Janet Napolitano are "anti-life." I urge you all to take a look at the Salmon for Governor Web site. You can see the Salmon Plan, which outlines his plans and visions for the State of Arizona.

In regards to the environment, Salmon has pledged to "collaborate with federal officials to provide increased federal funding for long-term wildfire prevention, forest management and habitat protection." Using the usual special interests line (which I'm sure Terry McAuliffe asks you to do in the DNC Manual) is trite. Do you realize that unions and environmental groups are also "special interests?"

Salmon has called for lowering the tax burden on business, because according to numerous studies, Arizona taxes businesses much more than neighboring states. So why would a business want to come to Arizona? Lowering their tax burden will make Arizona more competitive and allow more businesses to come to Arizona, which means more jobs. On that note, in Matt's Workforce 2010 Plan, he is promising to create 500,000 new high-quality jobs across Arizona in the next eight years.

On the subject of education, Salmon wants to increase teacher pay, establish a "report card" program to ensure schools are holding up high standards of educating our future and allowing educational choice.

Salmon will end our budget crisis with a plan called Zero Based Budgeting. This plan will make major state agencies prove each year why they need money, instead of just giving them more money to waste. Salmon has also already found numerous areas in which real cuts can be made instead of taking it out on the universities. One such area is placing a freeze on out-of-state travel expenses and vehicles for state employees that will have an estimated impact of $14 million. These are common sense cuts.

Please, Mr. Wilson, look at facts. It doesn't take that long to see how much good Matt Salmon will do. I am proud to say, "Go, Matt, Go!"

Pete Seat
theatre arts sophomore

D.C. police violated civil liberties by arresting innocent protesters

When reading through Friday's letter "D.C. protesters were not as peaceful as column claimed," by Manuel R. Espinoza, about the demonstrations in Washington, D.C., I couldn't help but notice the lack of knowledge on which he based his claims.

Ms. Hall points out the real facts of what it was like to be there, and the violations of our civil liberties that took place.

First of all, Mr. Espinoza doesn't seem to understand that the Anti-Capitalist Convergence he so despised was not where the most massive arrests took place.

Mr. Espinoza also doesn't seem to understand that the legality of direct actions and civil disobedience and the fairness of them are not one in the same.

Legally, the police cannot just stop demonstrators from leaving a park because they believe they may or may not do something illegal.

Traditionally, what has been done is the police back away so that the civil disobedience can be committed and then arrest them, and charge them accordingly. In D.C., many protesters were never given this opportunity.

My other point is that myself and the other people arrested, who filled fourteen city busses, were participating in a drum circle (mostly hippies playing music and dancing) at a park several blocks from the Anti-Capitalist Convergence meeting.

What happened next was the hippies, demonstrators, tourists, press and legal observers from the National Lawyers Guild in the park were detained for a few hours and then they arrested all of us.

The point I believe Ms. Hall was trying to make is that it is not OK that our First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendment rights as well as Writ of Habeus Corpus may have been violated during the course of the weekend (I am not a lawyer, so I can't say for sure).

It is also not OK that I was beaten by police who had their badge numbers removed.

If I am to choose to live under this so-called republic, the liberties promised to us in writing must be upheld in practice.

Chad Wellins
political science sophomore

Kunnie's case would be stronger with more correct information

In Monday's guest column "U.S. aggression against Iraq criminal," Professor Julian Kunnie made a factual error when he stated that the United States dropped 300 tons of "depleted uranium bombs" on Iraq during the Gulf War. While I would not be surprised if 300 tons of munitions containing depleted uranium were expended during the Gulf War, it would not have been in the form of bombs.

The primary use of depleted uranium by the military is for the core of certain armor piercing shells fired by planes and tanks. I feel fairly certain that the bulk of the depleted uranium ordinance fired in Iraq came form the 30mm Gatling canons on the noses of A-10 Warthog ground attack jets. These are the same planes that we see flying overhead everyday from nearby Davis-Monthan AFB. Depleted uranium is used as the core of these projectiles because it is extremely dense and therefore penetrates armor very effectively. This type of projectile has been in use for several decades and has proven very effective against tanks and armored personnel carriers.

I make this correction of Mr. Kunnie's statement not because I oppose his views, but because I feel it is essential that we on the left be accurate about the details when confronting those on the right. Nothing weakens the cause of educating people about alternative points of view more than spouting "facts" that are easily disputed by those on the right. I battle constantly with conservative colleagues over things like this. The strength of Mr. Kunnie's statement is greatly weakened when the reader is able to find such an obviously incorrect statement before getting to the meat of the editorial.

The conduct of the U.S.-backed sanctions against Iraq is truly immoral and has been conducted with the full knowledge that it is the people that have suffered, not Saddam. This and other crucial points made by Professor Kunnie are weakened by his factual error about "depleted uranium bombs."

Just because you oppose excessive military spending and misguided military interventions does not excuse you from knowing the facts. Those on the right do a good job of reading our literature and responding to it well. We on the left need to take a cue from them and be sure to have our facts straight when taking them to task.

George Marsden
computer science sophomore