Bomber propaganda
Dear Editor:
I am an alumnus of SMU (’97) and the Dedman School of Law (’00), and I enjoy reading The Daily Campus online and keeping up with events at my alma mater. I have never written a letter to the editor of any newspaper before, but your “Top Commentary Story” on April 11, 2002 entitled “Propaganda” was disturbing enough to motivate me to write this letter.
I am not so naive to think that propaganda does not exist in this country, or that news services are not very often biased. In that regard, your premise was accurate. However, your assertion that we should encourage the practice of rewarding the families of suicide bombers is preposterous; even when it is couched with the disclaimer that “[t]his is not a defense of suicide bombers.”
It is truly sad when a parent loses a child. However, when parents and/or the society in which they live encourage their children to become “martyrs,” and fill them with the belief that they will be granted salvation if they kill innocent people, it is not sad. That is “barbaric,” not “the practice of not taking care of those families.”
When Saddam Hussein offers $25,000 to each family of a suicide bomber, and Yasser Arafat offers another $25,000, this is more money than most of those families expect to see in several years. Make no mistake, this money is a reward. It fosters the belief that what they are doing is acceptable and even heroic. (Just for argument’s sake, do you think that if the parents of suicide bombers were fined $50,000 or made to work the equivalent hours for that money in a state-sponsored program, that there would be as many suicide bombings?)
These “suicide bombers” are murderers. Imagine if someone entered Hughes-Trigg and decided to kill themselves and everyone around them. Would you be comforted by the fact that the parents of that student were receiving $50,000 when the parents of the victims were receiving none?
An editorial reflects on the entire newspaper staff. This is especially true when it is given top billing as this one was on The Daily Campus online. If this editorial was cleared by the proper channels, I am saddened at the turn that this college newspaper has taken.
Sincerely,
James B. Parks, III
Dear Editor:
CNN reported that Saddam Hussein, not Yasser Arafat, was giving the families of Palestinian suicide bombers money.
When the $25,000 is given is of little consequence. The families get it either way. It’s a very large amount of money for a Palestinian, and the reward will spur more suicide bombings because people will want to provide for their families. It essentially becomes a business proposition: Kill yourself and make your family rich.
If I may quote: “…not taking care of [the suicide bomber’s] families could be viewed as barbaric.” Why? We should not punish the families of these suicide bombers, obviously. But to say that not giving the families aid is barbaric is just stupid. They’re probably very poor people. But there’s many other poor people whose brother or sister did not blow themselves up that we could help first.
Jeff Littlejohn
First-year
Uncaring administration
Dear Editor:
I read your article in the March 28th paper about the Greenville robbery. We live in San Diego and our son Matt is a freshman attending SMU. Our son and two other students were car jacked at the end of January just off the campus grounds. This man brandished the gun in my son’s face scaring him to death. The man stole the truck owned by one of the boys and fired two rounds as he sped away. Matt has been shaken from this incident. Not one time did anyone from the university follow up to see how he was or how we were handling the incident. I find the administration at SMU most uncaring.
David Kemp
SMU parent
