Letters to the Editor

Pentagon should prove detainees' guilt

The Pentagon recently stated that six of the 595 detainees at the United States Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba would face trial by a military tribunal. Only two of the six suspects have been officially charged. According to Pentagon officials, the suspects being held at Guantanamo Bay are hard-core terrorists and the “worst of the worst.” If that is the case, then where is the proof? Why won’t the Pentagon charge all the suspects and produce some evidence that will stand up in a court of law? Could it be that some of those men might be innocent victims caught up in the turbulence of war?

American officials claim that round-the-clock interrogations of the suspected “terrorists” have yielded significant details about terrorist plots. That may be the case, but one really has to wonder how much of that information is true. Military analysts say that indefinite detention and endless questioning can lead to false confessions by prisoners seeking privileges.

President Bush is taking unprecedented liberties with his “war powers” by going into other countries and arresting their citizens on the basis that they are alleged terrorists. But that’s okay because we are the United States and we can get away with that sort of thing. However, I do have to wonder what will happen the day a United States citizen gets captured abroad and held as a terrorist suspect. What comes to mind is the old saying that declares, “What goes around comes around.”

— Maria Macias

Students not being brainwashed

In response to the idea that liberals are trying to brainwash students in college, I simply have to laugh. The article “All hail the ills of our liberal education system (May 3)” makes the argument that our liberal professors and programs are attempting to turn all us young people into mindless, feminist, anti-government, touchy feely hippies.

However, anyone who knows about political socialization and personal politics knows that this is just silly. Trust me, everyone was brainwashed into their own specific political niche long before college. Other people’s political opinions have little sway on our own. We’re just stubborn that way. I mean just look at our governor and his wife. They’ve been married a long time but has either had huge effect on the others politics? No.

This stuff is engrained in you by the time you hit kindergarten if you can believe that. Amazing isn’t it? I was a liberal before I could say my ABC’s. Anyway the only people who would change their politics are the ones who had shaky convictions to begin with.

In class, especially the really political and philosophical ones, there are usually only a few people paying attention anyway. I’m one of them, Wes Tibbs is another, then there’s the Wicca in the back row, the bigot in the corner, army guy in front, and the militant liberal girl sitting next to him.

You know what the other 50 people are doing in the class they are sleeping. I have been in enough classes to know that most people are barely paying attention, let alone changing their own political views.

The only people who would get brainwashed by a class, are the people who didn’t have a brain to begin with—and contrary to popular belief most college students really do have brains.

— Brandon Hamilton

What would retreat mean?

I think it is time to talk about the global war on terror. The climate in Iraq has turned fierce with many Americans being disheartened over the loss of many great American men and women. However, I believe we need to look at what those who fight for our nation have accomplished. In both theaters not just Iraq, but in Afghanistan men and women have fought and died to protect us from attacks at home. To turn back now from their sacrifice would be a tragic mistake.

If you believe we should pull out of Iraq, where else should we retreat? Why not Afghanistan? Are not great American men and women dieing there too? Pat Tillman, for example, did not die in Iraq. He died in Afghanistan. If we do pull out of Iraq before the job is done we will have to pull out from every overseas mission in the war on terror.

Those who advocate pulling out from Iraq from either side of the political spectrum better realize that to justify pulling out of Iraq you are at the same time laying the foundation for American retreat around the world.

— Alexander Bumbac

Spare the amphitheater

Somehow I doubt Dean Luis Costa is the type of person who would come out to the amphitheater on a Saturday to see any concert that has been held there. He said, “I’ve been here 14 years, and I don’t think we’ve had 5 concerts.” Well I’ve been here 7 years and have seen more than 5. Parker-McClain writes in her May 5 article that the amphitheater “has sat in relative vacancy for many years.” This is an amphitheater—not a sports arena which by its very nature has a built in weekly events schedule. Of course it will be vacant when no concert is scheduled.

The only question addressed in the article was, “what is the best location for the University High School?” I believe there is a more important question, such as, what would be in the best interest of Fresno State students? With spokespeople like Dean Costa spinning the issue into one of a useless facility that will not be missed I don’t see that question being addressed.

I’d like to see The Collegian publish a good old-fashioned list of pros and cons with respect to the proposal and its effect on Fresno State students. Sure, the new UHS facility would be great for the high school students, but what about those of us who actually pay tuition to attend this campus?

What’s next, a University Junior High building in the Free Speech area? I don’t see crowds gathering there on a regular basis. Oh and don’t forget about all that “vacant” grassy area near the satellite student union, a possible location for the future University Kindergarten?

— Paul Scott

Sierra Club article shortsighted

The Sierra Club has come under fire from some for not stepping into the political brawl that is the immigration issue. Ryan Smith of the collegian calls the Sierra Club cowardly for not stepping into the fray (April 26). The truth is, the Sierra Club deals with a vast array of issues that impact our environment. These issues, like nuclear waste, global warming, etc. are complex and controversial. Funded by members, donors and benefactors, the Sierra Club has limited resources to protect our planet from the eco terrorists we all are. The Sierra Club will not discuss anit-immigration legislation, and for good reason—there are other more important issues.

Instead of wasting time and resources on the false cause that many, including Ryan Smith, have made immigration out to be, they focus their resources on the root of the symptom. What are the real causes of environmental problems? Also, the mission statement of the Sierra Club is simple, “Explore, enjoy, and protect the planet.” Nowhere does it say, “just America.”

The Sierra Club is concerned with the whole world, and as Ryan said, “We are moving into an age of globalization. I offer to you that the Sierra Club is more in tune with that statement than it’s author. Finally, we need to all look at our own environmental behavior before we put blame on the backs of others.

— Patrick Moyle