Reasons For Salim's Return Still Unknown

Shane Dale's attacks on Salim Stoudamire and Coach Olson are unfounded and malicious. Dale starts his column by stating that he does not know much of the details surrounding the suspension of Stoudamire. Dale then proceeds to question the attitudes and choices of those people involved in the situation, the only people who actually have facts upon which to base their opinions. To question Coach Olson's decision to lift Stoudamire's suspension after one game by attacking him and saying that in his old age he has become indifferent is ludicrous. Anyone who watched Coach Olson at Mac Court in Oregon, when he had to be restrained and received a technical foul, would agree that Olson has not become indifferent. In my more than 10 years of watching Olson coach, I have rarely seen him that intense and emotional. Moreover, I would like to know what facts Dale bases his "self-serving" label for Stoudamire on. Unless Dale knows Salim personally or can read his mind, I don't think it wise that Dale should state Stoudamire's motives. Is it not possible that Stoudamire is a fierce competitor and the agony of watching his team struggle and lose while unable to help changed his disposition? Is it not possible that Stoudamire pleaded with Olson and sincerely apologized for his infraction? Could Olson have suspended Stoudamire "indefinitely" so that he would have the option to evaluate Stoudamire's attitude during and after the Washington game to then make a decision? Like everything else in the column, the allusion that Arizona's poor play this year can be linked to Stoudamire's attitude and the suggestion that Olson reinstated Stoudamire to avoid more losses are shallow assumptions, one of which calls into question the ethics of a well-respected, Hall of Fame coaching legend. [Read article]

Last week, when the State Department dropped its 23-year-old ban on Americans traveling to Libya in response to the Libyan government's actions over the past 60 days, the American people and the world got a clear indication of how well American foreign policy is working. While it has come under fire ÷ literally and figuratively ÷ from many directions, Bush's foreign policy finally has a significant success that can be used to undercut the criticism. [Read article]

Three weeks ago, Northern Arizona University sex columnist Claire Fuller came out with a veritable how-to guide to performing oral sex. Since its publication, critics nationwide have condemned the column for crossing the lines of decency and good taste. It goes without saying that Fuller had the right to write the column, and that The Lumberjack, NAU's student paper, had the right to publish it. But the question remains: Should they have? We asked our columnists: "What should be out of bounds, instead of in print?" [Read article]