Re: “Presidential endorsement: Sarah Woolf” (9.3.10) The Tribune sounds downright patronizing when they tell a female political candidate to control her emotions. It is as stupid and condescending to tell a woman so accomplished as Sarah to “control her emotions” as it is to assume that emotionality might hinder anyone as “forceful and rational” as she.
Letters to the Editor
Re: “Supressing debate: Ontario’s language politics” by Max Silverman (2.3.10) In his article, Max Silverman relies on two ad hominem arguments instead of critically analyzing the relevant issues. To me, and clearly the Ontario legislature, Peter Shurman’s judgment of the event “Israeli Apartheid Week” was accurate.
Re: “Why Gaza Remembrance Week misses the point” by Adam Winer (26.1.10) Although Adam Winer’s commentary concludes on a somewhat optimistic note – calling on us to have open dialogue and broaden our knowledge about the Arab-Israeli conflict – the manner in which he wrote his op-ed makes clear that he has yet to follow this important piece of advice.
Re: “Dr. Cornett’s favorite play? Monty Python’s Spamalot.” by Anait Keuchguerian (9.2.10) Under the banner of academic transparency, a recent student letter advocated the screening of Alanis Obomsawin’s documentary about the remarkable teaching style of Norman Cornett, a professor whom McGill let go three years ago.
Re: “Why Gaza Remembrance Week misses the point” by Adam Winer (09.02.10) Mr. Winer seems to have entirely missed the point in believing that SPHR should be neutral in its display and presentation of speakers for the Gaza Remembrance event. When an entire population becomes the target of Israeli amunition and unjustified sanctions, then logically people have to stand up in defence of human rights and to lobby governments and intellectuals to stop the suffering of the Palestinian people.
I think the Financial Ethics Review Committee cares a lot about human rights, social justice, and environmental protection. I also think that the Israeli army and the Israeli government sometimes do things that are morally questionable, if not repugnant. However, I think that Wednesday’s motion is not primarily a function of anybody’s commitment to human rights, social justice, and environmental protection, but of condemning the State of Israel.
Re: “Right Minded: An offensive motion” by Brendan Steven (09.02.10) Columnist Brendan Steven makes an argument that the upcoming (as of this letter) General Assembly motion on discriminatory groups constitutes a vote on freedom of speech. However, his analysis is significantly misguided.
Re: “Pop Rhetoric: Fist-pumping IQs away” by Bianca Van Bavel (02.02.10) Dear Bianca Van Bavel, I’m writing in response to your article on Jersey Shore, MTV’s newest reality show. You seem to be upset that, as “young impressionable intellectuals,” we (speaking on behalf of non-closet Shore fans) have decided to spend some of our free time being entertained.
The singular noun “transparency” can mean many things. The quality of being clear and transparent is the most important. But this quality depends on the material’s capacity for allowing electromagnetic radiation to be transmitted. Materials that allow transmission in the range of human visibility are called transparent.
Foucalt you, Ricky. Re: “Piñata Diplmacy: James McGill – Turning in my grave” by Ricky Kreitner (22.09.09) What up, James McGill, Michel Foucault here (also conveniently undead for the time being). I am writing to clear up certain misconceptions you seem to have regarding my personal area of expertise: cultural studies.