Letters to Editor

Comments on Khalidi

Regarding 'Khalidi: Constraints on Palestine fueled conflict' (Monday, April 23, 2007):

Rashid Khalidi's comments are highly selective and omissive. He evades the question: Why didn't Jordan establish a separate Palestinian state when Jordan controlled the West Bank from 1948-67? The answer to that question is the reason the conflict exists to this day between the Arab nations and Israel: The Arabs want a Palestinian state in place of Israel, not one alongside of it. Michael Scharf '64

Column of no interest

Regarding 'On corn dogs and other things" (Tuesday, April 24, 2007):

I cannot help but feel, after reading Jason Gilbert '09's most recent column, that The Daily Princetonian is doing a disservice to its own reputation as well as to that of our school by publishing a column that says nothing of interest to anyone, not even the columnist. Gilbert himself admits he has nothing to add to topics of public interest: "Those words have already been written with more eloquence and with more insight than I can possibly offer." Instead of bringing to the attention of the campus one of the variety of issues facing us as a school, town, country, planet, etc., he (along with fellow 'Prince' writer Neel Gehani '07) opts for a flat humor that would fall short even if he used it only once in a while — and he uses it nearly every week. Why doesn't the 'Prince' cut these columnists who can't find anything to say and open up print space to interested readers and writers who do? Donny Dietz '09

Woolsey's hateful past

Regarding 'Ex-CIA head emphasizes clean energy' (Tuesday, April 24, 2007):

In April 2005, the threat of overwhelming student protest forced the CIA to cancel a campus recruitment event at NYU. Princeton students hosted former CIA Director James Woolsey last week. Entirely in keeping with the violent, imperial history of the agency he once directed, Woolsey agitated through the late-90s for the invasion of Iraq, and more recently advocated strikes on Syria, implying that the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, should be assassinated. Woolsey has argued against the creation of a Palestinian state and urged Israel not to withdraw from the West Bank. In March, Woolsey told students at Yale that President Jimmy Carter was an "enabler" of anti-Semitism because he had arranged to purchase oil from Saudi Arabia — whose government Woolsey has described, bizarrely, as "genocidal." When asked why he did not favor an immediate assault on Iran, Woolsey replied, "one has to take things, to some degree, by steps."

In short, Woolsey is an unrepentant warmonger with a considerable record of offensive pronouncements, some verging on racist, about attitudes supposedly typical of the varied peoples of the Near East. Even on a campus where many students seem to think they're at a country club rather than a college, it is surprising that Woolsey's visit was welcomed; no university ought to offer this man a platform from which to expound his hateful opinions. Dylan Byron '09

Public Safety shoud be armed

Regarding 'Would Public Safety be able to prevent a shooting?' (Tuesday, April 24, 2007):

The recent incident at Virginia Tech was sobering to all of us. It's only natural that students here at Princeton might feel a little unsafe and have questions about our security. It certainly seems like Public Safety has taken precautions for our safety. I respect and salute them for their foresight. I think that it is ridiculous, however, that Public Safety officers are unarmed.

In the event of a security threat on campus, Public Safety's reaction would be to call local police. Do I need to point out that a gunmen could kill dozens in the time between a 9/11 call and response when an armed and trained Public Safety officer could neutralize such a threat immediately before more damage was done?

I understand keeping Princeton a gun-free zone for students and faculty, but having the officers in charge of our safety kept unarmed is a very foolish idea indeed. P.J. Miller '10