Fee advocates should state affiliation

In a letter in yesterday’s Arizona Daily Wildcat, Carrie Bawolek offered arguments in favor of the proposed student union fee.

Regardless of any problems with her arguments, I think that Bawolek should have mentioned that she is a student employee of the Center for Student Involvement and Leadership, one of the departments of the student union that stands to receive a big budget increase if the fee is implemented.

Several sources inside CSIL have told me that the student employees from the department plan to flood the Wildcat with pro-fee letters to the editor. If that’s what they are going to do, I think that the Wildcat should force these students to state their affiliation.

For whatever reason, many of the students who work in CSIL have come to identify their interests with the interests of CSIL and, in my mind, lost touch with the interests of the student body as a whole.

I have also heard that these students hope to minimize attendance at the student forums regarding the fee, and minimize coverage of the issue.

If that’s their plan, I hope that they do not succeed.

Columnists ignore ChÇ­vez’s violent legacy

In Friday’s Wildcat, columns by Yusra Tekbali and Michael Huston on the proposed CǸsar ChÇ­vez holiday indicate that people don’t know enough about ChÇ­vez and his legacy.

I certainly agree – in particular, many casual ChÇ­vez supporters don’t realize he used violent tactics that violated the individual rights of farm workers, management and company owners. Both Wildcat columns present very little information about ChÇ­vez’s tactics, although Tekbali simply characterizes them as “”peaceful.”” Not true.

The facts are available and should be checked before one attempts to paint a villain as a hero. A number of articles regarding ChÇ­vez’s bully tactics have been assembled and are available at www.sabkha.com/Chavez.

If you come out in support of this man, his tactics and his ideas, be sure you first have at least a cursory understanding of what he represents.

Then be honest about what you support: the use of violence and intimidation to force individuals to act against their will, the destruction of property rights, the formation of government-backed monopolies (the ChÇ­vez unions) and the rule of the mob.

Halliburton shouldn’t be able to recruit on campus

This letter is in response to illegitimate companies such as Halliburton, preceding their arrival on campus this week to recruit among us for their programs of illegal war and criminal aggression.

In evidence of how Halliburton operates in the world, notably in Iraq at this moment, a company that proliferates crimes against humanity and peace must not get any support from any person, especially any student in research or systems fields, which the company’s operation is largely composed of.

The most elemental matter that must be made clear is the status of “”right.”” Regarding rules of universality in international law, there is not the right whatsoever in illegal wars of imperial aggression, wars that wage torture and occupation of seized territories through the use of unjustified force, the construction of illegal prisons and propagation of slave labor. Therefore, the fact that terrorist organizations as Halliburton, Raytheon, Boeing – and the mercenary armed forces of the U.S., for that matter – are invited to enter our campus or are harbored here for systematic mercenary training in the above is unacceptable.

And what is more, this is not a matter of “”personal decision,”” if one would be so ruthless as to call it such, in choosing who is to be your employer, who you choose to work for.

No, you do not have the right to work for criminal organizations like Halliburton, ones that willfully and knowingly carry out systematic murder and subjugation upon other nations throughout the world.Our civil liberties and those of such companies are not the same. The 1st, 8th and 14th amendments protect life, expression and views -ÿnot action. It is the actions of companies like Halliburton that are criminal, and they have no rights whatsoever that would spurn their continuation of war production. Even under constitutional law corporations are not considered “”persons,”” therefore restrictions on industry do not constrain civil liberties.

To expel such organizations from coming on campus is what we must determine, not readily forage at the administration’s officious “”Career Fairs”” if such are used to invite and harbor noxious and deadly organizations for our professional entrapment.