Appalling advertisement

I am shocked and appalled by the blatant deception spoon-fed to me and my fellow GW students and by how intellectually handicapped organizations out there deem the students of this institution, supposedly of higher learning, to be. I am referring to the recent Campus Truth advertisement emblazoned across the back page of the Nov. 4 Hatchet.

The ad juxtaposes a frightening photo of a suicide bomber against the backdrop of an M-16 rifle and Arabic writing, next to a wide-eyed pleasant-looking athlete against the backdrop of the Israeli flag. The ad includes the name of each and the catchy slogan, “There are two sides to every story, but only one truth.”

It does not take a CNN pundit to discern the offensively skewed message here. The athlete represents Israelis as a great, innocent and loving people, while the other guy generically represents those evil enough to stand against Israel where he embraces his rifle and we are supposed to accept he seeks violence in the name of terror, mayhem, anarchy and destruction. Of course, the other guy is not expressly identified so as to allow him to represent Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, whichever (we’ve seen them use the groups interchangeably, now they’re trying to get us in the habit of it as well).

Truth? What exactly may I ask is the truth portrayed here? I first believed the two figures from the ad were involved in the terrorist attack at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, where the group Black September held hostage and eventually killed 11 Israeli athletes. As it turns out, the ad had nothing to do with Munich, just two randomly selected images from each nation portraying opposite images, love and hate, life and death, good and evil. No underlying connection, relevant link or coherent deduction with respect to any logic was made.

No “truth” about it, because there is no statement of any fact within the ad. A follow up on their Web site will show the same ad, except with the caption “Israeli school children’s hero,” and “Palestinian school children’s hero” respectively. Even better, now we’re supposed to accept that both nations collectively came to a consensus as to who their children’s heroes are, and Campus Truth is doing us a service by bringing us, the uninformed GW community, not one side of the story, not the other side, but the “truth.”

Propaganda has come a long way, lies and stereotypes have traveled everywhere but now they have both come to our doorstep. I just hope we are ready for visitors. May our intelligence disappoint them.

-Ahmad Maaty, President, The Islamic Alliance for Justice
junior

Hypocritical response

I find it odd how some Hatchet readers seem to have a lot to argue about the paper’s choice of advertisements. I am referring to two of the most controversial advertisements, the half page ad paid for by campustruth.org and the several page insert paid for by a right to life organization. I find some of the responses to both ads as being based on ignorance and filled with hypocrisy.

Some of our liberal friends on campus argued against the paper’s decision to run the pro-life ad. They argued it was against liberal rights. What ever happened to the right of freedom of speech and freedom of the press? It was correct and business-like for the Hatchet to respond that basically if they pay, it will run. I am glad it did not bend to the will of the mob. I am sure the ad did not run out of the editors own high moral pro-life values and that a pro-choice ad would just as likely have run.

I am also positive the Hatchet will receive responses to the supposed “truth” ad. Although I might not agree with what the ad states, I believe that the way to respond to such an ad is for those that disagree to raise funds to run an opposing ad. Only if The Hatchet should choose not to run that ad would I call it a biased paper. So, long live the free press and business transactions.

-Salim Makhlouf
sophomore

Work for students

I am disgusted with the behavior of our student association. An organization chartered to represent students and their concerns has no justification for political scare tactics and fabricated conspiracy theories. It is no wonder that the GW student body was declared one of the least happy in the nation – no one is taking the responsibility of improving the quality of student life.

Whatever their intentions are, SA leaders appear to spend more time fighting each other for power than they do fighting for GW students. Unfortunately, they are not alone in their actions. Over the past couple of weeks it has been exposed that senators have made common practice of putting themselves ahead of the students who they are obligated to represent.

I commend The Hatchet for exposing the political infighting that is polarizing the SA (“SA officials resign,” Nov.4 p.1) and inhibiting the efficiency of student government. Those responsible owe it to us, the students of GW, to admit their wrongdoing and resign from office. I hope, the members of the SA can quickly put this ugly mess behind them and move on to fulfilling their duty to improve of the quality of life for every GW student.

-Dan Teles
sophomore

Open discussion

Webster’s dictionary defines ignorant as “destitute of knowledge or education, lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified.” From this definition, it is incredibly hard for me to understand how the addition of such an informative packet by The Human Life Alliance on the ever-so-controversial topic of abortion can be viewed as ignorant.

I suggest that before we start using such big words in our vocabulary, we should familiarize ourselves with their meaning. It is amazing that on a college campus, which promotes the empowerment of today’s youth through knowledge, so many students can be content with being poorly educated and misinformed. Society throws at us neatly packaged lies and misrepresentations, and many of us quickly eat it up faster than the chicken nuggets at Chick-Fil-A. Are we so afraid to accept real truth that we hide behind fabricated and perpetuated deceptions? Many of today’s youth stunt their own growth by shutting their minds to accepting and understanding other points of views.

In response to the writer of the letter to the editor entitled “Poor Taste” (Oct. 31, p.4): Was the problem that the insert “wasn’t the usual commercial advertising section that students throw away as they pick up The Hatchet,” or that it made you think about real life issues challenging our society?

The point is, it should not be such a one-sided debate on either pro-choice or pro-life. Instead, it should be about being armed with all the necessary information to make the right choice. The categories are no longer limited to pro-choice or pro-life. It is up to us to be educated.

-Yvonne Anuli Orji
sophomore

Not so funny

As a Recess member, I was quite dismayed after reading Sara Nir’s Nov. 4 article entitled “Vexed in the City” (p. 6). Nir indirectly equated eating out of a garbage can with going to a Recess show. Why Nir chose to single out and malign Recess is beyond me.

Nir’s attack on Recess contributed little to her article and came off as nothing more than an amateurish attempt at humor writing and a pointless attack on a student organization. If Nir feels that “utter stupidity” is needed to explain going to a Recess show, maybe she should consult with the more than 800 GW students who have attended a Recess show this year. Maybe they could explain their “utter stupidity” to her.

While I do not feel The Hatchet should censor its writers, I would like to point out that these petty and childish attacks on student organizations, such as in Nir’s article, do nothing but drag the usually superb Hatchet to a lower level of journalism.

-Adam Riedel
junior, president of Recess