Editor:
Ah, yes. I knew I could count on the university culture to produce responses to a terrorist attack against the United States such as that of Michael Homel?s.
In his enlightened, intellectual view, he proclaims that his words of reason are not meant to justify the murdering of innocent people, and yet he goes on to do just that by saying, “someone doesn’t kill themselves just to take out the lives of some of their enemies, unless they feel they have an enemy worthy of destruction” (Read: It’s not like they didn’t have a reason).
I know I am not the only person that found these words incredibly offensive.
To apply Mr. Homel’s logic to other situations, if my son ever gets jumped and beat up at school, I’ll remember to make sure he sits and thinks about what he might have done to provoke his attacker. Or if I ever have a daughter who is raped, according to Mr. Homel, I ought to make sure she learns not to wear revealing clothing, thereby bringing the attack upon herself.
Homel suggests that we ?reassess our roll[sic] in the world theatre and try to make fewer enemies.? The prudence and effectiveness of such action (while not invaluable), would unfortunately be mitigated by the fact that this enemy lacks the capacity to reason. NOTHING the United States could do would make these people stop and think, “Gee, maybe we should rethink this terrorism gig.?
I assume that the rest of us who want to see some action taken against the perpetrators are only mind-numbed robots programmed by the evil American capitalist machine.
From the comfort of an academic enclave, where the bashing of the country that affords people the freedom to do so is ever so popular, letters such as Homel?s are easy to write.
The exploitation of workers and high use of resources are issues that should and must be addressed. However, in a situation like this, such letters will do nothing but further alienate Americans whom people such as Homel seek to inform concerning such issues.
Mack Bartschi, Junior, Finance