Letters

Scientology should not be prejudged

In response to Soloman Matsas’ letter about the Wednesday
insert in the Daily Bruin titled “Dianetics: The Evolution of
a Science,” I would like to say to students: find out for
yourself (“Scientology misleading and manipulative,”
Viewpoint, May 23).

All people are entitled to their own opinions, but dare I say
there is much more to the story than the tired lines of
Matsas’ letter.

Dianetics and scientology, like other fields of knowledge, are
concerned only with results ““ improvement of mental ability
and intelligence. There are 8 million people worldwide who have
used L. Ron Hubbard’s works in these fields to produce such
positive results as improving their intelligence and reducing
stress in their lives. Tens of thousands of those people are right
here in Los Angeles, each with their own story.

So if you’re not one to believe everything you hear about
others’ religious beliefs or actions, then find out for
yourself about this revolutionary ““ and statistically
workable ““ technology of the human mind.

Austin Mattison President, Student Scientologists in
Action

No evidence given in conservative viewpoint

In his letter, Dan Williams speaks of Republicans and
conservatives in almost religious tones (“Rational thinking
found in conservative voice,” Viewpoint, May 24). He blasts
the left for crying racism, intolerance and insensitivity with a
disregard for facts. He then goes on to blame corroded schools, a
culture of victimhood, class warfare and bloated government on what
he calls “liberal policy.” He provides no facts, simply
declares the situation to be so.

How does a chemical engineering student get away with this kind
of logical process? It is the narrowness of conservative policy,
not the openness to creative problem solving fostered in a liberal
climate, that leads to corroded schools (chemists will use their
own metaphor). It is the conservatives, hiding away in their gated
communities, hoarding their treasure, who foment racism and class
warfare, not the willingness of liberals to question authority
until they come up with a solution.

How I would like Williams to explain how conservative solutions
actually solve our complex social problems? I dare him to come up
with even one that isn’t so simplistic that it causes a
greater problem.

Frances Goff Staff and alumna

Construction should focus on team, not
stadium

Jeff Eisenberg’s column about how a new stadium would
produce winning teams is comparable to telling a poor craftsman
that his tools are to blame (“New stadium could reignite
football team,” Sports, May 23).

The Bruins have been playing .500 ball the last three
years. Now, who has been the coach during this time? Right,
Toledo. 

Toledo was an outstanding coach his first couple of years, but
that was with Terry Donahue recruits (i.e., McNown, Farmer,
etc.)

I believe that, in his heart, Toledo wants to win and is trying
to do that, but it isn’t working. He has a tendency to
blame everyone but himself. He has shown that he has no
control over the team with the disabled parking fiasco in
’99, last year’s team going from potential national
champion to conference doormat, Foster’s suspension, and,
worst of all three, consecutive loses to USC with last year’s
game being shut out. 

When you finish your finals, get a copy of last year’s
UCLA-USC game. Look at the faces of the UCLA
players. They looked beaten before the game
started. Sometimes I wonder if that loss was a conspiracy by
the team to get rid of Toledo.

Just read the write-up on the new AD. His forte seems to be
in building and improving facilities and not building champion
teams. If Guerrero likes constructing, let him construct a winning
football team by finding a new coach and not worrying about a new
stadium. UCLA will be playing mediocre football in a new
stadium as long as Toledo is the coach.

A new stadium by the Staples Center might just have an adverse
effect on the football team. The new stadium will be a shared
location with a pro football team along with, guess
who? Right! USC! USC will go to the new stadium as
well. It is still closer to their campus than to the UCLA
campus. We’ll go right back to sharing a stadium with
our arch rivals. Moving to the Rose Bowl was suppose to give UCLA a
home field. I think it did, but it never improved the team.

I hate football season. Following the Bruins is asking too
much from this mere mortal. I’m hoping that this will be the
last year of Toledo and perhaps in a few years UCLA will be in the
race for a national championship.

Wayne M. Cutler Alumnus Class of ’67