Leave the politics to us lawyers
won't go," Mar. 6
To the Editor:
Jeff Armour wishes we weren't so lazy; I share his sentiments in part. He suggests that if we are ever subject to an attack, it will be the result of us not attacking Iraq. He then suggests that Iraq is something of a rebellious child that needs to be disciplined in order to set an example to the other children (presumably in the Arab and Muslim world).
His argument smacks of paternalism and racism and is not the type of sentiment society needs to act upon. I am saddened to think that Armour's own insane beliefs won't go away, and this is what prompted me to write. The war on Iraq is rejected by most as a policy tool to strengthen United States positioning and has little to do with the protection of anyone.
Most people in the free world understand this. It is startling that The Gazette would even print his simplistic views, especially given his racist undertones and remarks. I do support freedom of expression, but just because we are free to insult and offend does not mean we should do so freely. My priest would never bear arms, but, if he did, I can guarantee that he would be aiming at the individuals who spew hatred here in Canada, rather than at the millions in Iraq who require nothing more than our humanistic support.
I'm thankful Armour is in the sciences we need less people like him in power, not more. If we are ever to be subject to attack, it will be in response to the mentality exemplified in Armour's letter, and not because we didn't drop the bomb first.
Randa B. Mouammar
BA, MA Political Science