Ram Sidi Article on 12/11 Ironic in More Ways Than One

Dear Editor,

I am writing about a Letter to the Editor (12/11 edition of the Star) to point out its irony and narrow-mindedness. The article is concerning the recent visit of Ram Sidi, former agent of Shin Bet. I call the article ironic because it claims that Sidi's presence alone was a clear bias (against Palestinian students), yet that entire letter was biased. The article completely omitted the fact that Shin Bet is a counter-terrorist organization, much like an Israeli version of the CIA, only on the front of the battlefield in the Middle East, so they have a better idea of what's going on and are more competent.

Personally, I take a neutral stance on the conflict between Israel and Palestine for numerous reasons. Both sides are constantly enacting vengeance upon the other in what seems to be a never-ending cycle of bloodshed, and it is tragic. I feel that taking a side in this issue will only further promote division and violence. Just for some background, I am not of Israeli or Palestinian descent; I am majoring in History, and consider myself a retired Roman Catholic.

Back to the article at hand: The author goes on to say that Sidi's presence alone violates the non-discrimination policy. Oddly enough the letter also neglected the fact that in most, if not all of his lectures (I did not attend Sidi's when he was here nor could I find a transcript) he always makes sure to point out that there is a vast divide amongst the radical and violent sects of Islam and the non-violent sects, and that he has nothing but respect for the passive sects. So if this man discriminates against terrorists, honestly, I do not have a problem with that.

Also, the issue of torture swings both ways. If one is na've enough to think that it is only the Shin Bet or the Israelis that torture, one should take a step back, take a deep breath and try again using a logical thought process. I could name people on both sides that have committed greater atrocities than a former counter-terrorist operative.

In the final paragraph, the author says that by inviting Sidi, a hate crime has been committed, discrimination has been placed on a high pedestal, and that any student of Palestinian or Muslim descent must feel unsafe on campus. So now people are walking hate crimes? Inviting a man such as Sidi to a very liberal school like ours is for educational purposes, not political agendas and is not even remotely comparable to the noose situation at CSU Fullerton.

Eric Anguiano