No Sweat! against Coke contract, not all big business contracts
Tyler Perry, Kirk Nathanson and Edward Delp's editorial column in the "Totally Coked out" Opinion front (Oct. 10) posits that No Sweat!'s opposition to IU's contract with Coca-Cola is based on a hatred of big businesses rather than an actual record of abuses. In fact, violent union busting in Colombian Coca-Cola bottling plants is quite well-documented. Take a look, for example, at the accounts by witness workers of the execution of union leader Isidro Segundo Gil on the floor of the factory, as printed by the "NYC Fact-Finding Delegation on Coca-Cola in Colombia," an investigation led by New York City Councilman Hiram Monserrate (available online at www.killercoke.org/report.htm). Or take a look at some of the dispatches sent directly from SINALTRAINAL, the union representing Coca-Cola bottling plant workers in Colombia, reporting violence, intimidation and murder (also available on www.killercoke.org). The evidence cited by Mr. Perry, Mr. Nathanson, and Mr. Delp against Coke's crimes is, in fact, quite flimsy: Cal Safety, the company hired by Coca-Cola to run an internal investigation of its labor practices in Colombia, is a for-profit organization with a notorious record of overlooking egregious human rights abuses; the American lawsuit is still being settled in courts; and, there has never actually been an investigation by the Colombian government.\nNo Sweat! does not oppose IU's contract with Coke because it is a big business; neither do we seek to end all of IU's relationships with large corporations. We oppose Coca-Cola in particular because SINALTRAINAL has appealed to the international community for aid and a boycott of Coca-Cola products until the company addresses its crimes.\nWe, as students of a university with a multi-million dollar contract with Coke, are in a unique position to negotiate with Coca-Cola because of the company's interest in maintaining our business relationship. Our actions will speak for us as a University; do we really want to support these crimes?
Jacob Mazer\nNo Sweat!
Challenge student political apathy
Probably one of the most disturbing political editorials I've read (and that's including the particularly partisan ones) was Kirk Nathanson's recent piece on political ignorance. ("I'm with stupid," Oct. 3). In the column, Mr. Nathanson discussed a survey of college students on their knowledge of domestic politics, history, economics and foreign affairs. Ultimately, most college students failed, which might not surprise some but alarmed many. What was surprising to me was that Mr. Nathanson, instead of being alarmed, thought it was fine, arguing that "the very reason human beings have done so well historically is by dividing society's tasks among themselves," and that "with the advent of quick and easy mass communication, all knowledge is digital, searchable and accessible." He sums it up by saying we must "leave biology to the doctors and government to the political scientists." In effect, politics should be the realm of a select few, and those who are ignorant can learn all they need to in the span of a Google search.\nI know I am right in saying Mr. Nathanson is wrong on both counts. To have a select few make political decisions is oligarchy. We're a democracy. We are the rulers. We might not hold office, give speeches or make the actual decisions our leaders make, but our leaders are ruled by us. Therefore it is our civic duty to know politics, which affects us whether we know about it or not.\nIn a sense, Mr. Nathanson is right: To be a scientist you must know science, and to be a farmer you must know agriculture. However, to be free you must likewise know politics. If people don't have political knowledge, sooner or later a lesson will be given to them, usually by someone they don't like doing something they don't like. Doctors and nurses should know biology, but in our hospital we are the doctors. We make political decisions that ruin and reward, help and hinder millions of people whom we never know. That is the essence of democracy, and ignorance, no matter its justification, is something we cannot afford.
Jeff Weimer\nSenior
In voting, consider more than just Iraq
In Brian Stewart's recent column, "Redeployment indeed" (Oct. 9), he seems to point out that when you vote this year, the war in Iraq should be your main concern. I disagree. When you go to vote, you should ask yourself these questions: What has the party in power done for me? Has it made this country safer? Has it done anything to help lower the costs of higher education? Has it acted in a fiscally responsible manner, without running up the debt, and does it at least have a plan to begin to payoff that debt? Do I want to live in a country where civil rights are falling behind such countries as South Africa? Or are they just playing me for a fool, using politically divisive issues, like the war in Iraq, gay marriage and abortion to convince me not vote for them but simply to vote against the opposition? All I ask is that you ask yourself these questions before you cast that ballot in November and not focus just on party propaganda.
Doug McDaniel\nSophomore
Torture is counterproductive
Regarding "Gitmo and Company" by Edward Delp (Oct. 10):\n"So what?" says Edward Delp, regarding aggressive interrogation techniques currently being used by the United States.\nShowing callousness to due process as well as a lack of logical reasoning, Delp insists that the war on terror demands discarding the legal principles on which our republic was founded.\nHowever, intelligence experts have repeatedly stated that torture is not a reliable method of gathering information. Prisoners subjected to torture often tell their captors what they want to hear - or make things up out of thin air.\nDelp also implies that giving the executive branch the power to label anyone an enemy combatant is actually a good thing, checks and balances be damned. He mocks the BBC and Amnesty International for reporting on cases of mistaken identity at Guantanamo, despite much genuine concern for the culpability of many in the prison's population. It is known that the bounty prizes which were given in exchange for alleged al-Qaida and Taliban members created a black market for abduction in Pakistan. (The majority of Guantanamo's inhabitants were captured in Pakistan.) Common sense dictates that every innocent who is tortured builds up the base of anti-Americanism, as did the use of sexual humiliation at Abu Ghraib and the perceived occupation in Iraq. Virtually every policy decision the Bush administration has made post-9/11 makes the journey of reconciliation with the Arab world that much harder. If that weren't the case, why isn't terror decreasing?\nWe are at the whim of statements from the current administration on the facts, and you must forgive some of us for being skeptical; Bush's track record hasn't proven exactly pristine. It boggles the mind that, in light of all this, some people sincerely believe these guys need more power.\nThose of us who caution against the use of torture are not denying the reality of this war, as Delp states. We simply wish that our government did not resort to terror tactics in order to fight terror.
Adam Haws\nGraduate student
Torture violates U.S. principles
Regarding "Gitmo and Company" by Edward Delp (Oct. 10):\nLet me preface this response by quoting one thing: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." That's the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights, not a restriction set by so-called international standards or "peacenik human rights whiners" of Amnesty International.\nYou have contested "So what?" about the United States foregoing human rights principles in order to inflict unnecessary pain and harm on suspects for the possibility of life-saving information. How can you permit such a doing? This country, the United States of America, was built on the premise of civil liberties and basic human rights. If we resort to cruel methods like our enemies do, then what are we fighting for, if not for the integrity of the foundation upon which our country was built?\nShould authorities have the right to torture anyone and everyone on the off chance that they might know something that could save others' lives without any legal obstacles? If this is the system you wish, then I hope that you or your family have never unknowingly been acquainted with a terrorist here within our borders. What would stop these authorities from exercising "aggressive interrogation" on you and your family? You might know something, after all. It can't be chanced not to torture you.\nThe war against terrorism is a different war, to be sure. Guidelines and standards should be re-evaluated, but this should be done in a way that preserves the integrity of our beliefs. What sort of strategy is it, to torture back our enemies because they do so to American personnel? There are other ways to triumph in this war while at the same time preserving our ideals. If we have to disregard these ideals put forth by our Founding Fathers, then we begin to lose the war against terrorism, no matter how many lives are lost on either side. To support torture is to deny the reality of our American creed.
Erik Nordlof\nJunior
Innocents held in Gitmo?
Edward Delp's Tuesday (Oct. 10) column "Gitmo and company" is so far off the mark that he supports something the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional and illegal. Mr. Delp is so eager to terrorize terrorists at Guantanamo Bay that he misses one very important point: America has positioned itself so that it can arrest anyone at any time without giving any reason.\nThis is evidenced by a recent report from Corine Hegland of the National Journal. The report finds that only 20 percent of Gitmo detainees are suspected terrorists and that less than half are suspected of actions against the United States. Who, then, is being held in Gitmo? The frightening answer is that we simply don't know because the government doesn't want us to know.\nNothing, not a law nor a constitutional right nor his wit and charm, would prevent the government from picking Mr. Delp up off the street tomorrow, whisking him away to Gitmo, detaining him for the rest of his life and "aggressively interrogating" him every day. They wouldn't need to press charges. His family wouldn't be able to find out why he was held. If he ever did face a tribunal, he wouldn't even be allowed to see the evidence he would need to defend himself against.\nNevermind that torture leads to fabricated confessions and that in violating the Geneva Convention, America invites its enemies to do the same. What does the rest of the debate matter when Americans fighting a war for freedom are no longer free?
Zane Davis\nSenior
I-69 won't aid state development
This is in response to Kirk Nathanson's article defending the I-69 article ("I-69 drives Indiana," Oct. 10).\nA classic political line Kirk used is what started my thoughts of responding to his column:\n"... but if you look at the numbers, we aren't sacrificing that much."\nI am wondering if that is the same attitude that is going to allow our (Indiana residents') fish, game and wildlife lands to be exploited.\nPeople, not numbers, Kirk, should make the difference. And as soon as politicians and aspiring politicians become aware of that, changes for the better will begin.\nSure, we can look at numbers and say, "We aren't losing that much". But it's our children and grandchildren who will see that all of those not so big loses add up to many irreversible changes.\nNow, I agree we do need better paying jobs. I agree we need the infrastructure to support the businesses that bring those jobs. What we don't need is lack of foresight. Every loss adds up. Let's look at revitalizing instead of building new. Sometimes, special interest groups and people who want to force their opinions upon others should realize it's freedom of speech not freedom to force that speech upon others that made this country what it is or was.\nMy only concern is I don't have majors in political science and English. If I did, I would be working to bring together a plan that benefits everything and everyone together in an agreement, not force my opinion.\nDo the now-suffering car makers in the world - GM, Ford and others - agree that they need to be paying nonskilled workers $24 an hour? College graduates who bring to the table a fair objective and can earn their employers nice returns on their investment, that's what all businesses need, not overpaid nonskilled workers who perform a minimum required daily redundant task and then complain about "the man."\nNumbers, Kirk, are not what pay taxes and buy the vehicles that are produced in this country.\nThis country was brought together as a nation fighting those who would force taxes and opinions upon their public.
Ed Tarr\nBloomington resident
Hitchens against totalitarianism
On Oct. 4, David Keppel wrote a confused paragraph in which he called Christopher Hitchens a "warmonger" for his support of the United States' military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan (in the Jordan River Forum). He bemoaned what he saw as Hitchens' "domestication of the iconoclasm of George Orwell." If Keppel had actually read Orwell ("Homage to Catalonia" would be a good starting point), he would have found that, using his own definition, Orwell was even more of a "warmonger" than Hitchens is. Orwell was so supportive of the communist forces in Spain that he went there to fight in the Spanish Civil War. Hitchens has yet to take his support of just war that far. If Orwell were alive today, he would surely be aghast at the American left's inability to face the dark realties of our world -- a tendency that is illustrated perfectly in Keppel's hackneyed rant. A constant advocate of overcoming cliched speech, Orwell would also be disturbed by Keppel's use of the word "warmonger" when, in fact, reality and Hitchens' approach to it are far more complex than such trite labels imply.\nHitchens is one of a new breed of leftists who started out opposing military interventions by Western colonial powers in the 1960s and ended up, after realizing that force is sometimes necessary, firmly supporting the cause of humanitarian military intervention. What motivates Hitchens to support U.S. military policy is not his love of war but rather his understanding that reality is not as simple as Keppel likes to imagine. Hitchens weighed the alleged evils of Halliburton against the atrocities of Saddam Hussein and chose to live with the former in order to do away with the latter. Pacifists like Keppel cannot seem to make such tough and realistic assessments. They also forget that the fulfillment of their cause -- a moratorium on all wars -- would condemn millions to a life worse than death. If advocating military intervention in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo and supporting the war of liberation in Iraq makes Hitchens a "warmonger," then maybe all humanitarians should aspire to be worthy of Keppel's label.
Triston McMillan\nIU Student\nEditor's Note: In Dave Keppel's Oct. 4 letter, he never used the term 'warmonger' to describe Christopher Hitchens. The term was used in the headline the IDS provided.
Support Valeri Haughton
In response to the article "Students face voter registration deadline" on Friday, Oct. 6, written by Sarah Core:\nVoting is something often not thought of, not cared about, or even not educated about. Many people think it is OK to be apathetic. I, however, feel very differently. Lately I have noticed that voting is finally getting noticed through the IDS. It's about time. I am very thankful that there has been a countdown within the last few issues of the IDS. As one of those people who has sat behind the table in Ballantine Hall with pamphlets upon pamphlets on the Democratic candidates this year, I see how people just walk by without looking or asking questions. But there are those select few who actually care and want to hear about who is running. I praise them for that.\nThere are many issues in Bloomington and that is why it is important to be educated on who you are voting for. One person I feel everyone should consider voting for, whether Democratic or Republican, is Valeri Haughton, who is running for judge in Monroe County. She is a political candidate who is genuine and honest. Not only those things, but she also has experience in the field. Having spoken to her personally at a College Democrats meeting, I know these things and I also know she is dedicated to helping out at the well-known community kitchen. I feel that those well-rounded characteristics are imperative to a candidate. There are many more candidates running who will work to solve the issues in this county, and even our very own IU. Everyone should check these candidates out at www.monroedems.org and continue to be an informed citizen because that is our duty.\nSo thank you to those of you who have put articles in the feature section informing people that there are only a few days left to vote and voting at the last second is not the keenest thing to do. Keep it up!
Alexa Lopez\nFreshman
Affirmative action: Discrimination or fairness?
Way back in 1964, before all of our time, the Civil Rights Act banned discrimination in schools, education and anything based on your race and/or gender. What is supposed to be a better and more well-rounded country, has now fallen back to its roots of 40-some years ago.\nAffirmative action is not any more helpful to this country than the ridiculous No Child Left Behind Act, yet many institutions, including Michigan, uphold it to its fullest extent. Personally, I just can't get it through my mind, and maybe it's just because I'm very uneducated and unaware of other people's situations, but this seems to be discrimination to me. Isn't singling out one group, based on the color of their skin, considered racism? If not, by all means, someone please stop me and my ignorant ways.\nIn the 1978 case of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the courts ruled that a "quota" system in higher education is unconstitutional. However, also in that case, it was ruled that admissions based on racial preferences are fine. Yet again, this is a wonderful representation of our justice system and its many mistakes that seem to be overlooked. This 1978 case, along with modern forms of affirmative action, now have paved the way for certain degrees of racism to be legally acceptable in this country again. I'm embarrassed for the United States, as a citizen, for us to have come so far in many other things, yet discrimination is now somewhat endorsed by the government. Congratulations, America. We have taken one step forward and many, many steps backward.
Kyle Blessinger\nSophomore
Afghan 'democracy' flawed
I recently attended a lecture that addressed Afghanistan and the lack of success the United States has had in installing democracy.\nAt the very core, the speaker stated, was the definition of the word democracy.\nHere in the United States, elections allow for the voting in of federal, state and local officials.\nIn Afghanistan, the elections elected the president, who then had the power to install all other officials.\nImagine if President Bush had the right to install our local officials here in Bloomington! \nTherefore, when we talk about the success, or failure, of democracy, it is important that we realize just what kind of democracy we are talking about.
Dave Stewart\nIU staff, Bookstore and Service Center
Ruckus leaves out Mac users
I am disappointed in the IUSA's decision to bring the music-downloading service Ruckus to the IU campus. The IUSA is portraying Ruckus as a program that can be easily used by both PC and Mac users. This is false.\nA little research of Ruckus' Web site shows that Mac users can not use the program unless they install Windows XP onto their Mac machine. This is in no way a "simple" request. Installing an operating system is not your run-of-the-mill software download. Worse, only the new Mac machines like MacBooks and MacBook Pros can have Windows XP installed on them. Older generations of Mac machines will not be able to run Ruckus. And who will support the service? Ruckus provides no telephone support to students, and there is absolutely no support for Mac users running the program.\nSo please, in the future, say PC users and some Mac users can use Ruckus. And even then, do not expect any type of support for the program And remember you can not burn CD's from the music you download, and you can not upload this music to your iPod. In the end, Ruckus is a waste of time and money for the University.
Jaclyn Schuenzel\nGraduate student
Bring back the band!
Dear Sir or Madam:\nWhat the heck is the band doing in the end zone at the football games this year? Because the stadium is not enclosed, when it plays, many people can't even hear it. The band is a huge support for the team and needs to be in the middle of the student section! A college band is an exciting part of a college football game! The fans like to hear the band, cheer with them, sing with them, etc. I bet if you ask the football players, they like to have them there, too. So, I say, move the band back to the student section!
Karen W. Hudson\nMarching Hundred alumna
