Arizona Daily Wildcat
Thursday Feb. 21, 2002
Jews want to remember and remind
This is not an "organized letter-writing-campaign by a Jewish group" as Jeffrey R. Colson was anticipating in his Tuesday letter titled "Nazi Holocaust not the only holocaust in the 20th century," which is a response to a Feb. 12 article of a picture of a girl reading names of people who died in the Holocaust with a caption under it saying, "This girl is reading names of people who died in the Holocaust."
My simple response to why Jews remember our grandparents, brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers that died at the hands of Hitler is to not only to remind those who want us to forget only 57 years later, but more importantly to remind the world of how evil mankind has the potential of being. And as long as we acknowledge its existence, we can try to stop it before it happens to Jews or any other peoples of the world.
To Jeffrey R. Colson, I ask that you join the cause in prevention of injustice to all people by representing other peoples that Jews have been unable to represent. I would love to help you as long as you aren't worrying that an "unwilling audience" member might hear.
guitar performance senior
Levy has right 'to remember'
This is in response to Jeffrey R. Colson's Tuesday letter. Why are you blaming Mirie Levy for what you perceive to be a lack of mention of any other holocaust in our world? Its almost like you are singling out Levy for what you think is some sort of conspiracy to repress information concerning these other events! To answer your question, you don't see more support for remembering "other" holocausts, because people like you just criticize other people and don't actually go out and do something about it yourself. Here's an idea. Sit your ass outside for a few days straight and read the names of Chinese victims or whomever you want. Only then will I ever respect your ability to harass other people for the names they want to honor.
The poor girl just wanted to honor her fallen ancestors, and you know what? She has every right to remember her lost family.
Wildcat shows poor choice in letters
This letter is to the staff of the Daily Wildcat. I must say that I was outraged to see the letter on the Holocaust that made it through your screening. It was nothing more than an attempt to anger the Jewish population at the university.
Congratulations, you have helped that cause. I struggled to realize why you would print such an article for a long time, when at last it dawned on me. He said the magic phrase "censorship." Now you're in a pickle. You could be impeding someone's First Amendment rights. Once that was said on to the pages it goes without so much as a check at its content.
Since you didn't bother to check, let me tell you what content you missed. The article first stated that the Jews were the cause of the Holocaust. Since the "second (Nazi) holocaust was largely a response to the first one (Bolshevik), since the Bolshevik leadership was almost, to a man, Jewish." Next, the article interjects that Judaism was not a religion.
I suppose that you would have no problem if I wrote an article stating that the blacks caused slavery and that Islam is not a religion due to some similar features of some of its members. All I have to do is throw "censorship" in there?
Is that really all it takes to get your favorite "-ism" published? I truly hope you hold higher standards than that.
One last problem I had was this: There are "sources" listed but no quotes. Did you (The Daily Wildcat) check them? I would bet that you didn't. Wouldn't it be good journalism to do so before printing them, implying that they are valid?
To answer the question posed by the article: Reading the names of those who died is a way to show that humanity will not stand for this sort of blatant and overt ethnic cleansing. By reading the names we are not "ignoring all other victims of all other holocausts"; we are honoring their memory by standing against what they died for.
computer science and psychology junior
Colson letter 'utterly ridiculous'
Mr. Jeffrey Colson is sadly mistaken and has, in my opinion, embarrassed himself in front of both the UA and Tucson communities, not to mention the Jewish community that inhabits both.
First of all, my father is a Jewish educator, and I have spent my entire life studying and living Judaism. "Jewish" is a religion, just like Christianity is a religion. There are black Jews, Asian Jews, white Jews and many other "races" of Jews, making Judaism itself a defined religion. I hate to sound repetitive, but that might be the only way to convince Mr. Colson of his gross misinterpretation.
Secondly, I am appalled at the mere sight of Mr. Colson's attack on Hillel and Ms. Mirie Levy. He mentions that there have been three major holocausts in the 20th century but that Hillel and Ms. Levy only read the names, albeit "57 years later," of those who perished in "their" holocaust.
This is not only offensive but utterly ridiculous. Hillel is a Jewish organization, and they have every right to be concerned with commemorating and remembering the lives of those who suffered in the Holocaust which most directly affected "Jewish" history. Nothing makes the "Nazi" Holocaust more special, as Mr. Colson implies; rather, it is the one that the Jewish people have the greatest connection to. If the Soviet families wish to remember the victims of "their" holocaust, and the Chinese wish to remember the victims of "their" holocaust, then that is their right.
Mr. Colson, I would appreciate it if next time, you would take the time to actually think about your argument before you make it!
Judaic studies and political science senior
A lesson to learn from the Nazi Holocaust
One of the most important reasons for remembering our past is to ensure that we do not repeat our mistakes. This is doubtlessly a prominent ground for the Jewish community's insistence on our remembering the Nazi Holocaust. The Jewish people have been persecuted for thousands of years; naturally and understandably, they would like this pattern to stop.
In Jeffrey Colson's letter to the editor in the Tuesday Wildcat, he claims that other recent holocausts have not been remembered to an adequate degree. To this claim, I agree. As a product of this nation's educational system, I must concede to have learned far more about the Nazi Holocaust than the Soviet/Bolshevik or Chinese holocausts.
Who is to blame for this? Colson concludes that the Jewish community is at fault. He blames the Jews. The Jews always seem to promote remembrance of the Nazi Holocaust rather than the other major holocausts, argues Colson. What a coincidence; it just so happens that the Nazi Holocaust was the one where 6,000,000 of our ancestors were killed! That is why it is special to us. Similarly, the Chinese holocaust is probably more special to the Chinese than it is to the Russians. And the Jews have never inhibited education about other holocausts, nor claimed that they did not occur.
Colson is correct about the Jewish emphasis on the Nazi Holocaust - but is it the responsibility of the Jews to further our memory of these other holocausts? Naturally, groups of people will be inclined to promote their history, and their lessons learned. However, it is important to be taught about all important historical events so that people can learn and society can progress. It is the responsibility of the educational system to make sure this does in fact occur. It is not the responsibility of the Jewish people or any other race, religion, or ethnic group.
Almost 70 years ago, Adolf Hitler wrongfully blamed the Jews for Germany's plummeting economy and diminished national stature. Those feelings ultimately resulted in a Nazi Holocaust in which 6,000,000 Jews were killed. One lesson to learn from this is that we should take extreme caution and careful consideration before we blame an entire group of people for something, for anything. Sadly, despite the Jewish insistence on Holocaust remembrance, obviously not everyone has been able to learn this lesson.
political science and philosophy senior
Upset over 'slanderous commentary'
The Wildcat editorial is right, protesting a Sugar Ray concert is silly; but you have to admit, it's cool to see someone who doesn't automatically love anything mainstream. I work with Dave, and he is a great guy, and I give him respect for standing behind his opinions and beliefs, even though they are different from mine.
The Wildcat editorial argued against Dave's position on Sugar Ray, but Dan Howarth attacked Dave personally, which is a sign of a weak argument. Dan's argument (notice I say Dan's argument, not Dan) was full of so many personal attacks on Dave (example: last line - "You are sorry.") that I thought Mark McGrath's mom was writing it. The Wildcat never should have printed such a slanderous commentary or should have taught Dan how to write constructive arguments. It's hard to believe that (editor in chief) Maggie Burnett let Dan's commentary run, considering its length and lack of substance.
Are guest commentaries subject to a lower standard, or was Dan's low-brow attack on Dave too much for the Wildcat to pass up?
senior majoring in English
KAMP Student Radio
How dare you screw with the crossword!
Is it just me, or is the Wildcat trying to play some sick joke on the entire university? I picked up my copy of the Wildcat yesterday only to find that the crossword puzzle was the same as Tuesday's. Are you trying to say the student body needs more practice at brainteasers and cannot handle challenges, or simply that we do not deserve any enjoyment out of our newspaper?
I believe it is both. Please do not omit the crossword anymore, I wouldn't want to have to read the articles and listen in class.
business management junior