9 4 - The Michigan Daily - Friday, October 10, 2003 OP/ED ale ffitdlwpm &td 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 letters@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 LOUIE MEIZLISH Editor in Chief AUBREY HENRETTY ZAC PESKOWITZ Editorial Page Editors Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE I don't think telling people to press the 'Shift' key is a violation." - Princeton graduate student Alex Halderman on SunnComm Technologies Inc. 's intention to sue him due to a paper Halderman wrote on strategies for bypassing the company's CD protection software. The quote was reported by Reuters yesterday. 1 o " J A, © COLIN DALY THE MICHIGAN DALY }# j ' , p u Rt ~A5 4.f "! *A sof 3 RE~l1p, F-OR succpSS? My Sharona DANIEL ADAMS I WIN 4 h erever we stand, we stand with Israel," is the phrase stamped onto hundreds of T-shirts donned proudly each year by student activists on campus. I never get over how silly the people wearing them look, so convinced that they have a firm grip on the snafus that are the ongoing Arab-Israeli wars. Personally, I took a class on the conflict through the Political Science Department and left with more questions than I had answers for, but these students apparently have all the answers, and the T-shirts to prove it. I suppose it must be nice to be so enlightened and world- ly - to know exactly who is to blame for a half-century of violence. Where do I sign up? Really, these shirts serve two functions: first, to create the appearance of a united pro-Israel group on campus, and also to piss off local pro-Palestinian factions. Why else would you make a special effort to wear such a blatantly nationalistic statement, and one that is potentially confrontational, as a manner of casual dress? Such is the true nature of the Israeli-Palestinian debate in Ann Arbor, the intensity of which is nearly unmatched in its ability to spark fervent stu- dent reaction. Take for example the issue of University divestment from Israel. For starters, the likelihood of the Uni- versity following through with divestment is extremely remote at this point, as it doesn't appear that this is even an option being con- sidered seriously by University officials. Divestment has virtually no potential to alter in a significant way the plight of the Palestinian people. It has little deterrent effect on the Israeli government, and equal- ly remote financial repercussions. Nonethe- less, it remains one of the most hotly con- tested issues on campus, and dearly impor- tant to those who advocate it. I could probably spray the Diag in green and white sparkle paint and draw less outrage than if I were to weigh in one way or another on divestment from Israel. Unfortunately, the actors directly involved in the conflict suffer from similar misplaced priorities. I wasn't a bit surprised that Ariel Sharon rationalized his attack on terrorist elements inside Syria on Sunday as a response to terrorist attacks on Israelis, as if that alone justified the raid. A Sharon adviser, Dore Gold, said it best in The New York Times, "Israel had to send the message that it cannot be repeatedly struck with impunity." I would remind Gold that Israel has been attempting to send this message with brute force for decades, and yet the terrorists aren't getting the message. Israel is not get- ting any safer. Every time there is a suicide bombing of some emotional or violent sig- nificance, Sharon uses his military to pin prick the terrorist elements believed to be at fault, then calls it good in the name of national defense and kosher apple pie. Then after the bombs stop falling, and another half-dozen terrorists are sent back to hell, six new civilians take their places in the line. While it may have a been a "just" attack, it did nothing to advance the security of the Israeli population, or for that matter the populations of the region as a whole. Sharon and others don't seem to realize that more important considerations are for the collective good: how are policy decisions going to impact the terrorist threat? Is another "successful" Israeli attack going to thwart or deter terrorism? Eventually, Israeli leaders will have to learn that while bombs and bullets are effective against the human flesh of the terrorists, they are utterly use- less against the terrorism itself. Swept away yet again in this attack were all notions of a U.S.-led peace plan. Even if Presi- dent Bush wanted to stop the attack, his hands were tied. After two years of shaking a stick at the international community, using vague justi- fications for his own military endeavors, and launching two invasions, the United States has no ability to put the brakes on the retaliatory or preemptive strikes of its allies. We started this "war on terror," and I'm sure Sharon was happy to oblige in widening it. So regardless of potential reservations, Bush bit his tongue and said nothing, as his "roadmap to peace" was blown to ashes by American planes and American bombs. If it weren't so bloody awful, it'd be funny: Unilateralist U.S. policy designed to exercise American autonomy has instead left U.S. officials with a short- ened list of diplomatic options. Now, when someone else decides to follow our lead and shoot first, all we can do is watch and pray the situation doesn't worsen. I ask those who stand for Israel, what do you have underneath those T-shirts? Is it a love of Israel or a love of peace? Careful with your answer, for the two are not mutu- ally exclusive. On the contrary, I would argue that for Israel to have its security, it must first have its peace - not the other way around. If it is guarantees that you seek, there will be none forthcoming from the families of the men Israel has just killed. There will be no solution, no peace, and no security in the Middle East until those who choose the narcotic of national- ism opt instead to set it aside in favor of concession and negotiation. Standing with Israel is noble, yet it must be subservient to a dedication to peace. Adams can be reached at dnadams@umich.edu. 4 4 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Columbus Day a symbol of miseducation, racism and ignorance To THE DAILY: We are concerned about the widespread shock and internal anguish the Columbus Day chalkings seem to have provoked, as recorded by the Daily (Memory of Columbus challenged by chalkings written around campus, 10/09/03). In particular, Bobby Raham's apparent fears of critically think- ing about history are a point of concern. People should be reexamining American history because, as it is written in public educational institutions, it is Euro-centri- cally biased. People need to know the truth. "Columbus's contributions changed the course of history." Is that alone a reason to celebrate him? Currently, it is a big deal to bring up Hitler and his Holocaust; those who effect "great" change on the world do not always effect changes that are great. Columbus was, perhaps, a determined explorer, but he had no real qualities of greatness that led to him encounter, not "discover," the peoples of a continent unknown to his people, he was just lucky. "Everybody makes mistakes?" Sure, in the case of Jefferson, social context can be understood. That is, it is hard to expect people of that time and status not to own slaves and be racist; even so, societal expectations do not justify his actions. However, encountering people with a total lack of respect for their humanity is another matter. And had Columbus and his conquis- tadors done anything worth "looking past" the mistreatment of those people, there might be reason to allow a few "mistakes," but not the death and enslavement of thou- sands and thousands of indigenous people. On the discussion about whether or not Columbus himself committed genocide, we could all collect sources and debate. How- ever, comparable to Hitler, Columbus cre- ated an elaborate system of enslavement and eradication of native people. The "contributions that changed the course of history" that Columbus made also Columbus Day is not just a holiday about a man that "discovered" America, it is a symbol of the miseducation of our youth, it is a symbol of racism that still exists and it is a symbol of the ignorance and marginalization that Native Americans and people of color face everyday all across this country. NICKOLE FOx LSA senior NASA co-chair DANIELA GONZALES LSA junior La Voz Latina AIME KooPMAN LSA sophomore NASA co-chair PILAR PARISH LSA sophomore NASA treasurer NICOLE SMITH LSA senior NASA secretary RICARDO VALLE LSA senior La Voz Latina co-chair Reader clarifies comments regarding Columbus Day To THE DAILY: For the first time, I found myself offended while reading comments a jour- nalist reported to be mine. For this reason I feel the need to clarify my opinion, as it was misrepresented in the Daily's article on the anti-Columbus chalkings (Memory of Columbus challenged by chalkings written around campus, 10/09/03). I did not mean to imply that we should ignore the negative in historical figures. Nor did I mean to minimize or deny the terrible slaughter of Native Americans that was a result of the arrival of Columbus and other Europeans. My mention of Washington and Jeffer- son was intended to illustrate the tendency among liberals to concentrate solely on the negative aspects of our founding fathers, and now of Columbus. Despite the fact that they were less than perfect, the contribu- of those they interview. I also commend the Native American Students Association and La Voz Latina for their activism and their effort to ensure that students properly understand historical facts. BOBBY RAHAM LSA sophomore Article on abortion omits important facts, obviously biased in favor of Life Chain To THE DAILY: With the intent of deconstructing the misrepresentations of the pro-choice move- ment, as well as addressing a few other rel- evant points, we are writing in response to the Daily's article Abortion foes try to keep issue in spotlight (10/06/03). The authors of this article have a clear bias on behalf of the Life Chain group. While we cannot deny the possibility that pro-choicers might throw bottles at anti- choice protesters, nowhere do they men- tion the anti-choice protesters who habitually harass women seeking abor- tions, to the point where clinic escorts must physically intervene to protect the woman from the protesters. Just as anti-choicers would not want to be stereotyped as hostile fanatics who mur- der abortion providers, we also want to convey that the bottle throwing of one pro- choice person does not represent the entire movement. Also, we would like to clarify that it is not our intent to demean anti-choicers. Our quotes in Monday's article were not printed in their entirety, which may lead to the false impression that we do not respect anti-choicers' understanding and expres- sion of their beliefs. On the contrary, although we disagree with their beliefs, we affirm their right to exercise their First Amendment rights. What we do not affirm is their oversimplification of the complex issues surrounding reproductive health. Life's decisions are affected by a myri- ad of experiences that no one can catego- I -- I J