Tuesday. October 31, 2000
The University Daily Kansan
Section A · Page 5
Letters to the Editor
Columnist takes irresponsible position advocating voter apathy
I am appalled at the decision to run Karen Boyd's guest column yesterday, "Vote 'none (of) the above' in race for the presidency." In this column, Ms. Boyd comes dangerously close to advocating that students abdicate their right and responsibility to vote!
Does she not realize that this is one of the most closely contested presidential races in United States history? This is the first opportunity many University of Kansas students have had to exercise their right to vote, and for a columnist to suggest, even facetiously, that readers waste their votes in the vague, misguided hope that "a second crop of politicians would come out of the woodwork and at least give us something to work with" is asinine.
The crop of politicians running for election — Gore, Bush, Nader and Buchanan are the ones who have made the decision to run, and they are the ones we have to work with. None of the four candidates is perfect, but because each stands for very different policies and ideologies, it is up to voters to decide which candidate embodies the beliefs with which they are willing to live for the next four years.
Ms. Boyd claims she sees "no purpose in voting" this year, which is her individual choice to make. But for her to encourage readers to squander their votes on a writen "candidate" suggested by a 15-year-old movie is irresponsible, not to mention insulting to those of us who intend to cast meaningful votes only after carefully weighing the pros and cons of each candidate.
Voter apathy is always a problem, but this year it could actually affect the outcome of this election. For the Kansan to permit a columnist to suggest that readers waste their votes is especially remiss.
Sexual assault case mocks ideals of justice in United States
Carrie Williams 1997 KU alumnus
The turn of events last week in the investigation of an attack on a KU soccer player highlights the fact that American justice isn't easy.
I was horrified Thursday morning when I read about what seems like the cover-up of a crime, committed by football players and covered up with the silence of teammates.
covered up with the essence of truth.
An open message to anybody who saw the attack and said nothing: You need to rethink your concept of loyalty.
You should be loyal to the concept of justice, not your teammates.
Ideals last longer than personal friendships. People come and go, but ideals are fixed marks that can guide us when we need guidance the most.
In this country, we have committed ourselves to the ideal of acheiving justice within a system of law.
The football players who witnessed the attack and said nothing are allowing criminals to walk. They are supporting a society in which mothers, sisters and daughters can be sexually assaulted by men who are beholden only to themselves, and not the law.
But most importantly, they are violating the ideal of justice they said they would live bv.
This is harsh logic, and it cuts both ways. According to an article in Friday's Kansan, "All evidence considered in
assault, DA says," charges will not be filed against the two football players because of insufficient evidence.
Most likely, this is a result of the victim not notifying the police until two months after the attack. Evidence and good eyewitnesses are hard enough to find two hours after the attack, let alone two months.
If we have a right to live under the protection of the police, then we have a responsibility to report crimes to them as soon as we can.
To be fair, she expected the department to mete out a harsher punishment. But in America, punishment for crimes is the business of the people, not the Athletics Department.
I paraphrase Kevin Costner, who played an attorney in JFK. We've all been raised in a time when life was good. We think justice happens because it is just, and right happens of its own accord. But life teaches us that this is not the case. Justice must be carved out by individuals.
To the soccer player: I think you made an error in judgement, but that does not excuse the crime done against you. Do not rest until justice is served.
To anybody who can help her: Do.
John Audelhelm
Des Moines, Iowa, senior
Columnist cheapens history through inflammatory rhetoric
Though I appreciate that by publishing John McCool's editorials you may be trying to balance the generally liberal views of most of your columnists, I think it's time to revoke his soapbox.
McCool's most recent column, on "appeasement" in the Middle East in Thursday's Kansan, is more than just misguided. It is the work not of a conservative with a different take on things but of an irresponsible provocateur.
When he writes, for instance, that lies "drip from the mouths" of "vicious" and "depraved" Arabs, he is clearly not seeking to further the debate in a meaningful way. He is only adding fuel to a fire that needs no encouragement.
In another piece of empty and inflammatory rhetoric, McCool compares the Palestinians to the Nazis and their struggle for justice and self-determination to the Final Solution. It would be hard to find a less apt historical parallel. An impoverished and dispossessed people is not like a ruthlessly aggressive world power; rocks in slings are not like tanks and gas chambers. We cheapen history when we use it in this way.
Surely there is someone else who could more responsibly fulfill your need for a conservative voice.
Lawrence graduate student
Columnist bases argument on extremists' viewpoints
that such virulent, anti-Jewish statements reflect the sentiments of the Palestinian population as a whole, or even of the political elites that represent them?
The problem with John McCool's piece entitled "Appeasement a poor tactic in Middle East" is not a pro-Israeli bias written from an enlightening, well-informed perspective, but a pro-Israeli bias whose central thesis, that Palestinian issues should not be taken seriously, is based entirely on quotations of radical and reactionary Arab leaders, Muslim clergymen and state-run publications. While I will not question the credibility of the sources, I will ask this: Does the author truly believe
In the Oct. 26 edition of the Kansan, I stumbled across the most unprofessional piece of political commentary I have yet to read in this publication.
I would like to ask John if he has ever learned of the equally heinous comments made by Israeli leaders. Or, for that matter, throughout history, of similar proclamations made by either Black or Native-American representatives within our own country. If he were to discover such quotations, would he feel that those communities also have no legitimate cause that is worth discussing? Are they also "Nazis," bent on completing what "what would have taken place at Auschwitz?"
The lesson to be learned here is that one cannot successfully evaluate the political desires of a particular group (such as Palestinian Arabs), or question their commitment to peaceful co-existence with others (such as Israel Jews) by basing such criteria solely on the outlandish speeches or writings of those within the community who articulate extremist attitudes.
Matthew Davis Lawrence senior
Columnist's argument blatantly one-sided
I have to reply to the column written by John McCool. First, this has to be the most unprofessional editorial I have ever read. Secondly, the opinion makes the presumption that all Palestinians want to kill all Israelites.
Did he happen to go look at the pictures and article on the BBC Web page roughly three weeks ago? The pictures showed an Israeli soldier holding a Palestinian father and son at gunpoint. The father took several bullets to protect his son. After the father was slumped over from death, the soldier killed the boy.
The column attempts to show that no Israelites think reciprocally to the quoted remarks of the sermon. His one-sided argument is a demonstration of sheer ignorance. If he believes in what he wrote, then he should find some different and balanced facts so it can possibly have a touch of credibility.
Mike Bidwell Manhattan junior
University should have "all or nothing" obscenity policy
I must respond to the chalking issue and some inconsistent applications of removing "filthy language." Two Fridays ago, my mom, sister and I were walking near Wesco when we saw a chalking that basically said, "E eat pussy and be on TV."
What makes me question the lack of "aerose the board" application was the quote in last Tuesday's UDK about Wayne Pearse's policy on what chalkings should be removed. Let me reiterate his quote. The quote stated, "I tried to look at things like my mom or my children are standing beside me. I would have removed any filthy language."
What I wonder is, did he see the chalking from two Fridays ago? It was in a place where visiting "children" would have seen it. Could it be that he did not have it erased because it pertains to the "assumed" people behind it? That is just food for thought. My point is either erase all "filthy" language or none of it. My final point is that there will always be speech that most of us do not like to see. That is reality. Deal with it.
Mike Bidwell Manhattan junior
Dr. Bernard N.Nathanson Friday, November 3,2000 7pm,Lied Center FREE Event
For more information contact Aletheia Forum Event Coordinator, Charlie Svoboda, (785) 331-3145
Sponsored by Aletheia Forum Inc. and KU Students for Life
Kansan Classifieds Say it for everyone to hear 20% discount for students
...and is now pro-life.
No matter which side of the issue a person is on, there is value in hearing from a doctor who helped give birth to the abortion age...
Hollywood Theaters
SOUTHWIND 12
4433 IDWA
802 0886
BARGAIN MATINEES INDICATED BY ()
STADIUM SEATING + ADDICTAL
| Sat-Sun | Daily |
| :--- | :--- |
| 1 Meet The Parents $^{10}$ | (1:45) 7:30, 10:00 |
| 2 The Legend Of Dunstan Meet $^{11}$ | (1:50) 4:55, 7:25, 9:45 |
| 3:D.T. And The Tailer $^{12}$ | (1:30) 4:30, 7:20, 9:45 |
| 4 Lucky Numbers $^{13}$ | (1:55) 5:00, 7:45, 9:50 |
| 5 Remember The Titans $^{14}$ | (1:50) 4:15, 7:55, 9:45 |
| 6 Pay Forward $^{15}$ | (1:50) 4:20, 7:15, 10:00 |
| 7 Blair Witch 2 $^{16}$ | (1:55) 5:00, 7:45, 9:50 |
| 8 Bedazzled $^{17}$ | (1:40) 4:35, 7:50, 9:30 |
| 9 Meet The Parents $^{18}$ | (1:15) 4:00, 7:00, 9:30 |
| 10 Digimon $^{19}$ | (1:25 | --- |
| also... Lost Soula $^{20}$ | --- | 4:35) 7:35, 10:10 |
| 11 The Exorcist $^{21}$ | (1:10) 4:10, 7:10, 10:05 |
| 12 The Little Vampire $^{22}$ | (2:00) 4:25, 7:00, 9:25 |
Sat & Sun Daily
1 Almost Famous* (1:50) 4:30) 7:00,9:30
2 What Lies Beneath* (1:45) 4:40) 8:00
3 The Contender* (1:50) 4:00, —
4 Get Carter* (1:55) 4:35) 7:05,9:35
5 Girlfriend* (1:45) 4:30) 7:00,9:30
6 The Ladies Man* (2:00) 7:10,9:40
★ NO VIPES • PASSSES • SUPERSAVERS
SHOWTIMES FOR TODAY ONLY
PLAZA 6
All Shows Dip $2 + Purchase Ticket
otuation of all shows at Union
Union
STUDENT TRAVEL
With our staff of experienced travelers, a global network of offices, great prices, ticket flexibility and a ton of travel services, we know first-hand what it takes to put together a mind-blowing trip...
STA TRAVEL
800. 777.0112
www.statravel.com