100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

June 17, 2002 - Image 5

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily Summer Weekly, 2002-06-17

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Monday, June 17, 2002 - The Michigan Daily - 5

* LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The scarlet bagel
11m2TmaT MO Ijfr4%J r '~'x.

Deitch's opinion is
irrelevant to the
issue of divestment
To THE DAILY
I am writing in response to
the article "Palestinians ask 'U' to
investigate financial support of
companies" (06/03/02). Univer-
sity Board of Regents Chair
Laurence Deitch (D-Bingham
Farms) was reported as saying
that he supports the Israeli mili-
tary and their actions. Although I
disagree with what he had to say,
his opinion on the Israeli mili-
tary's actions is irrelevant with
regards to the University's policy
regarding its investments. The
University's policy states that any
investments which are the cause
of "moral and ethical" concern to
many students of the University
should be investigated and if
these concerns are found to be
legitimate, the University should
take the appropriate action to
begin divesting from these corpo-
rations. Deitch should not factor
his opinion of Israel or the Israeli
military in his decision. All he
should consider is whether many
students find these investments
to be of concern. If you have
been keeping up on events
around the University over the
past two years, you will have
seen that there is a very large
number of people that share the
same concerns I do over the Uni-
versitv's investments and these
people are not only Palestinian
hut they are also Americans,
Africans, Arabs, Muslims, Asians
and many more people that I can
name. The University should
respond as it did when many stu-
dents found the investments in
South Africa and tobacco compa-
nies of moral and ethical con-
cern. It should create an advisory
committee to investigate these
concerns.

then resorts to lies sbout Israeli
treatment of Christians in order
to explain why Christians should
not support Israel. It seems that
in Zahr's mind if people support
Israel, it can only be explained as
being the result of some conspir-
atorial political alliance or hid-
den anti-Semitic motives. In
reality, Israel enjoys widespread
support as people understand the
precarious situation in which
Israel finds itself. People under-
stand that Israel is fighting a war
against a terrorist infrastructure
that literally spends its nights
devising plans to kill women and
children, and its days recruiting
14-year-old kids to implement
those plans. People support Israel
because they have looked at the
historical background and pre-
sent day reality of the situation
and based on that, have made the
conscious decision to support
Israel.
Zahr concludes by urging
American Christians to support
the Palestinians so as not to be
duped by the Christian right.
nevermind making a decision
based on an analysis of informa-
tion. I would urge everybody,
not just Christians, to look at the
reality of the situation and form
opinions based on the facts and
history of the situation, not the
rhetoric offered by Zahr. By
casually throwing around terms
like "ethnic cleansing" and "war
crimes" (which demonstrates a
complete lack of understanding
of what those terms actually
mean), Zahr offers much in the
way of colorful slogans, but lit-
tle substance.
YONATAN HEiSLE
University aluni
Daily staff is both a
disgrace and inferior
to the State News
To THE DAILY:

g i RIGT SIDE

when my
m o 0 h e r
applied to one of
the elite private
prep schools in the
state, the interview-
er asked her parents
if given her last
name (which was
not McNeil at the time), she was Jew-
ish. When they answered yes, the
interviewer promptly drew a life size
bagel in red ink on the application.
Although the interview continued on
briefly, with assurances that she was a
fine applicant ansd that a decision
would be reached after careful consid-
eration - it was clear that she would
not gain admission. That scarlet bagel,
as she would later call it, represented
her own personal experience with big-
oted admission policies that sought to
limit the number of Jews who gained
admission to the nation's best schools
- a disturbingly common practice at
the time.
Such policies are, one would
expect, remnants from another time. In
fact Jews, while only 2 percent of the
population, they account for 23 per-
cent of the students at Ivy League
schools. It would seem we have moved
well beyond the vestiges of discrimi-
nation in which bright young appli-
cants are branded with bagels or other
demeaning ethnic markers.
But as Judge Danny Boggs noted

in his dissent from the recent 6th
Circuit Court of Appeals decision, "a
significant portion" of the candidates
to the University's Law School who
are turned down because of the Law
School's racial quotas are Jewish
applicants. The reason? Because in
order to maintain the "critical mass"
of less qualified minority students,
many of the best applicants are
turned away. Apparently being a Jew-
ish student is less valuable to the
Law School's "diversity" than is an
underrepresented minority whose
experience is akin to, according to
the Law School, that of someone
who has attained a physics Ph.D or
gained 30 years of professional work
experience.
The Law School, in their quest to
construct entering classes according to
ethnic and racial "representation" in
the population are very dissatisfied
when Jews have stepped well beyond
their "allotment" and gained nearly a
quarter of all spots at Ivy League
schools - to the demise of the
"underrepresented." Apparently the
Law School will continue to deny
admission to students simply because
they are Jewish until they can achieve
a more accurate "representation" -
i.e. around a few percent. What ethnic
marker does the Law School admis-
sion office draw on Jewish applica-
tions? Have they returned to scarlet
bagels?
Apparently they do not have to.

According to the Wall Street Journal,
testing companies, including the Col-
lege Board, the maker of the Scholas-
tic Aptitude Test and many other
standardized tests, have begun asking
test takers to list their religious faith.
They then market this information
to colleges and universities who are
bent on controlling access by a few
specified groups beyond racial classi-
fications and some who even actively
recruit certain categories. For exam-
ple, Vanderbilt University recently
announced an "elite strategy" to target
Jewish students in order to boost its
rankings closer toward Ivy League sta-
tus. The "strategy" targets Jews
because of their staggering "overrepre-
sentation" in the ivy Leagues and the
fact that of all reported faiths for the
SAT, Jews scored the second highest
on average. Admissions officers no
longer have to draw red bagels on
applications when companies can sell
them sophisticated reports.
Institutions of higher education
have seemingly returned us to a time
when applicants are branded according
to racial and ethnic categories that
weigh far greater upon their chances
of admission than their accomplish-
ments or talent. It would seem that
affirmative action and anti-Semitism
have disturbingly similar objectives. It
is time to end this madness.
KevinMcNeilcan bereachedat
kicneil@uniich.edu

VIEWPOINT
Moral clarity in a time of crisis

Zahr's rhea
nothing to
realities of
To THE DAILY:
it seems that
of Amer Zahr's
"The dasgers of C
(06/03/02) is
should not sup
that Jews, in to
welcome Christi
convenient. Wh
about the artic
Zahr's blatant a
strong feelings
conteimpt betw
Christians and
Zahr refers to
quote made by B
urges Jews not t
Billy Graham is
sentative of all

ASHRAF ZAHR Once again, the Daily has dis-
Engineering senior appointed me. Daily Arts Editor
Luke Smith's review of the MTV
Movie Awards "The 2002 MTV
toric does Movie Awards" (06/10/02) is rep-
resentative of the Daily's unpro-
expose the fessional and casual attitude
N;iar t toward reporting. Regardless of
Mi A s the merit of the award show, the
comments made were inappro-
priate, especially the caption,
t the main point "Sarah Michelle gets shown her
recent viewpoint place. Rock on JB." While I have
lristian Zionism" become used to the Daily's casu-
that Christians al attitudes, biased reporting and
port Israel, and constant typos, I often wonder
urn, should not why the staff does not have more
an support. How' pride in its work. Maybe I should
at is disturbing just read the State News.
le, however, is KRssTAL VARDAMAN
ttempt to create LSA senior
of distrust and
.een pro-Israel
pro-Israel Jews. SEND LETTERS TO THE
an anti-Jewish EDOfoR TO.
lilly Graham and LEERS MICHIGAN
o forget it, as ifA
somehow repre-- DAILY.C M.
Christians. He_

BY ERC StNGER
Two weeks ago, a viewpoint wxes written
in the Daily, "The dangers of Christian
Zionism" (06/03/02) criticizing the strong
support Christian conservatives have given
to Israel and Israel's war on terrorism. How-
ever, this strong support should come as no
surprise to anyone who has followed the con-
servative revolution of the '90s, as many ide-
ological conservatives have supported Israel
for years due to theirclear vision of morality.
After all, Israel is a democratic nation that
stands for many of the same freedoms and
principals that the United States stands for
while the Palestinian Authority is a suppres-
sive regime headed by a terrorist.
House Majority Leader Dick Armey's
(R-Texas) strong support for Israel is totally
based on principal, as no person in their
right mind can accuse Armey of catering to
the Jewish American constituency that
gives him very little support. Armey cor-
rectly understands that Israel is a sovereign
democratic nation that has the right to
defend itself from terrorism. U.S. policy
should not infringe on Israel's right to
reclaim the West Bank and Gaza in order to
protect its citizens from the terror that is
harvested in these two areas.
Jewish American voters need to remind
themselves of the Republican leadership's
unequivocal support for Israel when they go
to the ballot boxes in 2002. The Democratic
Party cannot be a sufficient protector of
Israel as many of the constituencies of the
Democratic Party are ultra-liberals, who are

extremely sympathetic to the Palestinian
cause. Jewish Americans need to begin sup-
porting conservative Republicans like
Armey and House Majority Whip Tom
DeLay (R-Texas) in order for their pro-
Israeli positions to become U.S. policy. If
any substantial amount of Jewish Americans
supported President Bush in the 2000 elec-
tions, Bush would not waiver so much on
his Middle East policy as it is difficult for a
president to be extremely pro-Israel without
receiving the support of Jewish Americans.
One can only hope that in the near future
Bush changes his policy on the Middle East,
as many innocent Israelis continue to be vic-
tims of terror. The Palestinian claim to the
land of the West Bank and Gaza is unfounded
as Israel gained theses two territories through
war. The notion of giving land for peace is
ridiculous, as no people should be rewarded
for terrorism. Yasser Arafat is a terrorist and
Israel should never agree to any type of peace
settlement that requires dealing with Arafat.
Ariel Sharon's most important job as prime
minister of Israel is protecting his people and
if 1e thinks reclaiming the West Bank and
Gaza will eliminate terrorism in his nation,
U.S. policy should not stop hint. President
Bush can no longer waiver in his Mid-East
policy. Bush needs to label Arafat as a terror-
ist andlproceed from there.
President Bush needs to retreat to his
conservative roots and fully support Israel's
war on terrorism as other members of his
party have. Bush cannot continue to act
moderate in order to keep his poll numbers
up. Moderates like Secretary of State Colin
Powell and National Security Advisor Con-

dolezza Rice need to take a back seat in the
administrations foreign policy and hawks
like Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wol-
fowitz need to take charge. Mid-East turmoil
should not stop the United States from
invading Iraq and pursuing other military
operations in the war on terror. President
Bush should not be afraid to act like a true
conservative since he was elected as one.
Republicans put Bush on die ballot because
he was a conservative, not a moderate like
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Although President Bush has not been
staunchly pro-Israel in his foreign policy, it
needs to be noted that mainstream Ameri-
can conservatism is pro-Israel, Radio hosts
such as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity
are unabashed in their support for Israel
and Republican Congressional leaders con-
tinually voice their support for Israel's
cause. The fact that Israel is a Western
Democracy with elected leaders is enough
for conservatives to stand solidly with
Israel, even though most American Jews do
not vote for conservative politicians. It is
time for Jewish Americans to move across
the aisle and support the political party that
will protect Israel. Hopefully, Jewish
Americans will remember that it was Presi-
dent Clinton who brought Arafat to this
country and legitimized him as a leader.
Armey and DeLay will continue to be
Israel's two greatest allies in American pol-
itics and it is time that Jewish Americans
take this into consideration when they vote.
Singer is an LSA sophomore.

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan