Letters to the Editor
In his Nov. 18 column, Michael Huerta castigates U.S. leaders for failing to show adequate "heartbreak and sympathy" toward the Palestinian people on the passing of Yasser Arafat. He claims that U.S. statements "welcoming" the Palestinian leader's death as an opportunity for peace "make the United States...appear insensitive and opportunistic."
Yet Yasser Arafat was no ordinary leader. Much like Osama bin Laden and the Taliban's Mullah Omar, Arafat funded, instigated, and directed vicious acts of terror against innocent civilians.
Arafat directly caused more Jewish deaths than any single leader since Adolf Hitler. Countless Arabs and foreign nationals also died as a result of actions carried out under his command, which ranged from school massacres to airplane hijackings. A recent Chicago Sun-Times editorial stated that "the attacks of Sept. 11 were no doubt inspired by [Arafat's] efforts."
Huerta fails to mention that Arafat betrayed his own people. He threw away numerous chances for a settlement with Israel that would have allowed the Palestinian people to live in peace.
As thousands of Palestinians languished in refugee camps, he embezzled billions of dollars in international aid money, using these funds both to enrich himself and to support terrorist organizations such as the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (the military wing of his Fatah movement).
No, the United States should not regret Arafat's death. American sympathy should not be wasted on a man who, like Stalin and Hitler, has now taken his rightful place in the dustbin of history.
David Weinstein, KSAS, '08
Intersession column needs clarification
I'd like to respond to Francesca Hansen's strongly worded, well written Op-Ed on Intersession, "New intersession a cheap compromise for students." Allow me to offer a few thoughts to help students better understand the choices we made:
1) While fall tuition covers Intersession theoretically, there is no money sitting around to pay instructors for Intersession courses. This explains why Intersession offerings in the past have been spotty at best.
These additional resources represent a major investment in Intersession, not programming on the cheap. In fact, you are getting more for your money, not less.
2) Our faculty do not believe that a student can legitimately absorb a semester's worth of material in three weeks or less. Even summer programs have five weeks of instruction, and that is pushing it.
3) It will take time, and many other related initiatives, to change the notion that we should be doing all we can to lessen the "burden" of a Hopkins education. I see your education as an opportunity for intellectual growth and genuine exploration, not a burden to be lessened.
4) The move toward S/U credit is consistent with the desire to offer exploration without competition. Competition can be healthy, but I do not see why competition must be omnipresent for an experience to be worthwhile.
It's healthy and necessary to have debates like these, especially as we try new ways to improve undergraduate education. I am intensely curious about how students will react to the changes we have made, and I'd like to hear from anyone who'd like to write after Intersession (jbader@jhu.edu). While I respect Francesca's concerns, I hope that student experiences with the new Intersession prove her wrong.
John Bader,
Associate Dean for Academic Programs and Advising