Arizona Daily Wildcat advertising info
UA news
world news
cat calls
police beat
photo features
special reports

UA Basketball
restaurant, bar and party guide
Write a letter to the Editor

Contact the Daily Wildcat staff

Send feedback to the web designers

Arizona Student Media info...

Daily Wildcat staff alumni...

TV3 - student tv...

KAMP - student radio...

Wildcat Online Banner

Letters to the Editor

Arizona Daily Wildcat
Tuesday Feb. 19, 2002

Sugar Ray has come a long way

This is in response to "Psycho" Dave's letters on protesting the Sugar Ray concert. All I have to say is quit your bitching and get a life.

I'm sick and tired of people like you talking about how bands and record companies are only worried about making money and how they don't care about music. Who would blame them? I'm sure if you were in their positions, you would be worried about making as much money as possible. I'm sure I would.

Isn't that what life is all about? Making the most out of what life has to offer? Let people enjoy what they want. Sugar Ray has come a long way from what they started out to be. Yeah, they changed their music, but I think it's for the better. You're just bitter that Mark gets all the girls you can only dream about.

Tim Burnham
undeclared freshman and KAMP Radio DJ

Report recruiting harassments

I appreciate Catlin Murphy's article on religious recruitment in the Thursday issue. As the United Methodist minister on campus, I realize that recruiting is important, but it is also important to know when one is crossing the line.

A couple of important details were missed or wrongly reported by Murphy. First, Faith Christian Church continues to rent a large classroom from the university and holds worship every Sunday on campus. Second, there is a campus organization, the University Religious Council (URC), that is responsible for monitoring the behavior of our member organizations on campus.

The URC bylaws include prohibitions against harassment and aggressive recruiting practices. If one experiences these things, bring the issues to the URC through the Dean of Students office.

Rev. Dan Hurlbert
United Methodist Campus Minister
University Religious Council

I am writing in response to the Feb. 12 Wildcat article about Holocaust victims' names being read aloud on campus.

I realize that this letter is un-PC, and will likely be ignored due to the ongoing and intolerant campus censorship found here in America. Nonetheless, I have an honest question to ask of, and would like an honest answer from, the Jewish young woman (Mirie Levy) who read the Holocaust victim names aloud to both willing and possibly unwilling audiences at the UA: Why is only one holocaust ever referred to in America today?

There have been three large holocausts in the 20th century: Soviet/Bolshevik, 1917-forward, 20 plus million victims; Nazi, 1930s-1945, 2 to 15 million victims depending on your source; and the biggest, the Chinese holocaust, 1949-forward, 60-plus million victims. [1] In other words, the large holocaust with the least number of victims is being mentioned almost daily, while the others are completely ignored. This ignoring of wholesale mass-murder seems more than strange.

Note that the second (Nazi) holocaust was largely a response to the first one, since the Bolshevik leadership was, almost to a man, Jewish-by-race, and the Communist Parties in Europe just before Hitler came to power were all Jewish-led as well. [2] [3].

My question to the young lady and to all Jewish persons on campus is two-fold: 1) Why is their holocaust so special? 2) Why do they read those names aloud 57 years later, yet ignore all other victims of all other holocausts? The Soviet holocaust featured specific victims and specific execution methods, spanning approximately 30 years, so it was most certainly a "holocaust." Ditto the Chinese event. Further, the majority of all Nazi victims were actually not Jewish, with the Jews making up about one-third of all concentration-camp inmates, the rest being Communists, homosexuals, labor-union members, leftists, gypsies, clergy and others. Granted, the Nazis focused on Jews much more than any other group.

Let the young lady named Levy respond in the Wildcat; also, let her stick to the issue and not toss around predictable charges of "anti-Semitism," which have grown stale; I assume she is Jewish-by-race, since Levy is often a Jewish ethnic surname. (You did not know that "Jewish" was a race [hybrid race by exclusive interbreeding for many centuries] and a religion both, did you? Few do - Jewish persons have worked hard to get their ethnic group listed as a "religion" only, to limit always-present "anti-Semitism.")

In conclusion, isn't all mass murder wrong, folks? Or only some? Let the name-calling and organized letter-writing-campaign-by-Jewish-groups begin.

(Exact citations from sources can be provided to the Wildcat staff). Notes: [1] Book: "The Black Book of Communism," 1999, Harvard University Press. [2] Book: "Roots of Radicalism: ... ," 1982/1996 by Jewish authors Stanley Rothman and S. R. Lichter, Transaction Pub. [3] Book: "The Culture of Critique: ... ," 1998, by Dr. Kevin MacDonald, Praeger Publishing. Jeffrey R. Colson Tucson, AZ.

Jeffrey R. Colson

Crotchball 'too funny'

I just read your article on the wonderful new sport of "crotchball." I have no idea how the person sent it to me found that article since he is in no way connected to your university, but I am really glad he did because it was just way too funny. The pictures are great too! I teach English to high school kids in Eger, Hungary (about 90 minutes east of Budapest), and I might just have to give that article to them to read! So, thanks to James Maxwell, David Harden and, of course, the crotchball players.

Anne Lynch
Eger, Hungary

Harmful drugs should not be legalized

Caitlin Hall suggests in her Wednesday column that the United States should legalize drugs to improve the welfare of its citizens. The legalization of drugs is a horrible idea.

Currently the United States has laws preventing corporations from marketing overtly harmful drugs in the name of profit. For example: if Caitlin Drug Inc. develops a drug which has an addiction rate of 98 percent for first-time users and causes death in 83 percent of its users in an annual period, the United States has chosen to ban this drug from the public. This is called making a drug illegal. Caitlin Drug Inc. would love to be able to sell this harmful drug (let's call it heroin) to the public. Caitlin Drug Inc. would love to stock the shelves of Wal-Mart, launch a massive advertising campaign on MTV, and give free samples away at concerts. Caitlin Drug Inc. would no doubt follow in the footsteps of the noble tobacco companies in "serving the public."

We all love the tobacco companies, right?

By legalizing harmful drugs, such as cocaine, heroin, PCP, LSD and whatever other drugs Caitlin Hall wants to make legal, we are basically saying that the government doesn't have the right to stop corporations from selling harmful drugs. The consumer is left on the front line trying to decide what drugs will kill them, only maim them, or be harmless. Illegal drug users currently use and die from cocaine, heroin, LSD, etc. Perhaps these people are depressed, trying to fit in, or just looking for excitement. In all cases, they later realize that they have made a horrible decision to take such powerful drugs.

I don't know how a rational person can justify legalizing drugs. Sure we might make some additional money in taxes, but is that money worth the health of our citizens? We shouldn't stop the government from trying to protect us from corporations that want to sell us harmful drugs. We should instead have a scaled government response based on the drug's risk to the user, in other words, the system we have now. If you're under 18, you can't buy tobacco, if you're under 21, you can't buy alcohol, and no matter what your age is, you can't buy heroin.

Creighton Anderson
doctoral candidate in material science and engineering

Movie sound horrible in Social Sciences

Last week, I went to the free screening of "Hart's War" at the Social Sciences building.

From what I saw, the movie looked really good, but that did not last long. I could not hear anything the characters were saying. Nothing ruins a good movie more than not being able to hear it. This was the second free screening I have gone to this year, and the speaker system has failed both times. I really appreciate the University Activities Board putting on the free movies, but something really needs to be done to fix them. If they are going to play the movies in the Social Sciences building, then they should improve the speaker system to accommodate for movies. The static from the speakers is unbearable.

I think they should move the movies to one of the new auditoriums in the ILC with the new state-of-the-art sound systems. Also, I understand that volunteers play the movies, but I think they should be trained in playing the movies and preview them first to make sure that they are of playing capacity. These are just a few suggestions to fixing a problem that has been plaguing the movie-going experience for way too long.

Mike Rosenthal
undeclared sophomore

Phoenix softball fields kept in good condition

I am writing to voice my frustration with a Feb. 12 article titled "The On Deck Circle," written by Brandon Johnson.

I am the recreation coordinator who oversees the Rose Mofford Softball Complex in Phoenix, Arizona. The article addressed our facility and its quality. Our staff works extremely hard to maintain this complex, as well as the many other complexes/fields for the Park and Recreation Department.

Mr. Johnson states that, "The Rose Mofford Softball Complex proved to be unworthy for its level of players." The complex is not only home to the ASU Fiesta Bowl Classic each year, but it also hosts the Junior College National Championships, high school state championships, ASA metro championships, USSSA state championships, Triple Crown state championships, the Firecracker softball tournament, and each year since 1990, it has hosted in (the) ASA major national championship.

In 1999, 2000 and 2001, this site received the ASA Award of Excellence for conducting one of the highest-rated ASA national tournaments.

The reputation of the Rose Mofford Softball Complex speaks for itself.

Mr. Johnson also listed that the complex was not a regulation size field and that we had to use PVC fencing for the outfield wall. This is true, but this is the same fencing that is used in all of the above tournaments. The fence is designed for this particular use and has a break-away system that is designed to allow participants to go through the fence without injury. The City of Phoenix would not purchase this fence if we felt it was unsafe.

One of his other concerns was the delay for repairing one of the fields. I was the lead person on that particular field. I was in direct contact with both Coach Candrea and Jenny Finch to repair the field to their liking. It is important to keep in mind that the players use steel spikes, which constantly tear up the field, especially the pitchers mound. In between games, we have roughly 10 minutes to repair the fields for the next game. In a tournament of this magnitude, you have multiple games, which cause even more wear and tear of the fields.

As for the staff that was needed to repair the fields again but did not show up, it was inaccurate. Mr. Johnson's comment was false concerning our staff not showing up when needed. It was Coach Candrea who said that the mound was fine and our services were not needed.

The article was disturbing to me and the staff that works so hard on these fields. We take a great deal of pride in that job that we do in our facilities and the staff's professionalism. The awards and accolades we receive prove that Rose Mofford isn't just a premier facility in Phoenix but also nationally.

Robert Estfan
recreation coordinator II
City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department Team Sports Office

'Blueball' comic disturbing

I found Thursday's comic, "We love blueballs," most disturbing. What was even more offensive than its implied meaning was the fact that it premiered on a day typically reserved for lovers expressing their admiration, love and praise for one another. Yet, the comic's creators had the audacity to indiscreetly depict an otherwise "innocent" non-human primate species, or what appears to be a very specific type of primate, the common squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus), engaging insidiously in sexual behavior(s). This comic should be offensive enough to rally the protests of animal activists, nature lovers, students, even faculty - and especially our good taste and perceptions regarding morality.

I'll admit that I am extremely disappointed in the Wildcat's decision to publish a comic of this caliber, one that expresses such a complete lack of tact, discretion and taste. Perhaps next time someone, anyone, will notice the offensiveness of such comic, and elicit tougher peer review. ... I won't hold my breath however.

Kimmey Hardesty
anthropology, ecology and evolutionary biology, and chemistry senior


advertising info

Webmaster -
© Copyright 2001 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media