Letters to the editor

Genocide recognition controversial I would like
to praise the Daily Bruin for its editorial, “Students give
due support to Armenians” (April 21), challenging the United
States to recognize the Armenian Genocide and put historical fact
above political expediency in its dealings with Turkey. However,
the Daily Bruin was mistaken to include Israel among the
governments that recognize the Genocide. As astonishing as it might
seem, the Israeli government can be counted among the most
vociferous deniers of the Armenian Genocide. In a meeting with
Turkish leaders, Nobel Laureate Simon Peres trivialized the
Armenian Genocide and went so far as to state that Armenian
“allegations” of the Genocide were
“meaningless.”Â  This position has been echoed by
many members, past and present, of the Israeli Government,
including the very Israeli ambassador to Armenia, Rivka Kohen. More
chilling yet, there is evidence to suggest that American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, arguably the largest and most influential
Jewish- American political organization of its kind, has worked (in
likely coordination with the Israeli government) in denying the
Armenian Genocide. In April 2002, the New York Times and
Ha’aretz, a leading Israeli newspaper, both published
articles that exposed Jewish-American lobbies’ work behind
the scenes to quash a U.S. Congressional Resolution recognizing the
Armenian Genocide.

Aris Janigian, Ph.D. Professor of humanities, Southern
California Institute of Architecture

Troops, not war, deserve support I’d like
to address Ashley Schwellenbach’s letter, “USAC should
not support troops” (April 23). First of all, I am definitely
against the war on Iraq happening right now, probably more so than
Schwellenbach. I believe that war is rarely, if ever, justified.
This being said, I disagree with her simple logic that if you
support the troops, then you support the war. To me, that’s a
black and white view. I do not support what the troops are doing in
terms of causing death, destruction, and grief, but I support the
troops themselves. They are human beings, and I hope that they are
able to come back alive, safe and healthy (physically, emotionally
and mentally). Many people in the U.S. armed forces do not
necessarily have the desire to fight, conquer or destroy; they
often come from poor or disadvantaged families and have very few
options to get an education or improve their socioeconomic status
other than the military. U.S. forces consist of more than just
combat forces. What about the support crews, technicians, cooks and
other personnel not directly involved in the fighting? It’s a
sad situation, but most people in the military don’t really
have much power to make decisions about the actual war. I hope I
have made this distinction clear. I’m fine with a USAC
declaration supporting the troops, as long as it also mentions that
it opposes the war itself. I feel terrible when I read about the
polls showing that about 70 percent of Americans support this war.
Until a future day (hopefully in my lifetime) when humans come up
with a positive, cooperative and constructive method to solve
global conflicts, I think it’s important to realize the
difference between supporting the troops as people and supporting
war.

Clara Yoon First-year, undeclared

Drink that beer and enjoy life Adir Levy
recommends that students should use their time in college to grow
as individuals in his column, “Getting drunk for fun not
worth potential risks” (April 23). As part of this growth, he
advocates avoidance of excessive drinking. He asserts that
excessive drinking, while sometimes fun, can have dangerous
consequences. Well, I couldn’t disagree more strongly. There
are many enjoyable things in this life that have risks or potential
harmful consequences. In most sports, from football to
skateboarding to drinking contests, there is a potential harm.
Having sex (even protected) is potentially harmful. But I
don’t think students should live afraid to take action,
afraid to try new exciting experiences and afraid to have fun.
There will always be the “Negative Nancy’s” or
“Nervous Nellies” like Mr. Levy, who prefer to live the
quiet, fearful life, but that certainly isn’t the life for
everyone. I say enjoy life now while you are young and have minimal
responsibilities. Gabe Rothstein Graduate
student

Response to hate crime needed I am writing in
response to the hate crime committed on your campus over the
weekend. When I heard about the pig blood incident at the UCLA
Medical Center, I was in a state of shock. I am from Dallas, and I
have always admired UCLA from afar, believing it was a school both
tolerant and respectful. My impression of the university took a
dramatic turn for the worse after hearing that a hate monger had
desecrated Muslim religious prayer rugs by pouring pig’s
blood all over them. This should be a sad week for me, Muslims in
America, the UCLA religious community and the UCLA campus at large.
Yet the response in your student newspaper has been quiet and
unreactive. I was a former editor-in-chief of a collegiate daily
student newspaper, and I know that if this had occurred on my
campus, an editorial concerning the issue would have been written
immediately. It’s unfortunate to know this crime was
committed in the first place, especially near a school with a
reputation as good as UCLA. It is disheartening to know the
reactionary response of the newspaper has been dramatically less
than ideal. Feras Gadamsi Dallas, TX