Letters to the editors

AMS hypocrisy

Dear Editors,

Re: “AMS Campaigns Gets Personal” (Journal, Jan. 23, 2009)

I have several questions and concerns in regards to what has occurred between the two executive teams running in this AMS election. The first is where is our President Talia Radcliffe and our Social Issues Commissioner Kavita Bissoondial on this issue, in the same manner that they were present in the campaign to have ASUS President Jake Mantle removed from office?

Both comments were similar in that they were not malicious. They were of a joking manner and made on Facebook. Perhaps both Talia and Kavita have realized the error of their ways in demanding President Mantle’s resignation. Nevertheless, some comment or statement is definitely warranted as they were the ones to set the precedent.

Many argued that Jake’s comment warranted his resignation; I was not one of them. Many argued that in light of Suhail’s comments he should bow out of the election; I am not one of them. What Suhail said should not have warranted any negative repercussions towards his team in the campaign, in the same way that Jake’s comments never should have caused such a fuss. My concern is the action of our establishment, in particular our social issues commissioner and our AMS President. If Suhail’s comment is not going to be drawing the same criticism as Jake’s did—which I do not think it should—then perhaps an apology towards Jake Mantle is in order.

Daniel Salvatore

ArtSci ’10

Dear Diatribe

Dear Editors,

This past fall, QUMSA and the Queen’s Muslim community were the victims of several discriminatory incidents perpetrated by a small number of individuals. Though such incidents seem to be a thing of the past, it is important that we do not forget about them and become complacent. Instead, we should urge debate and awareness of the issues that exist in order to better understand them. Unfortunately, it seems that Diatribe magazine has a slightly different take on the matter.

In the fall of 2008, Diatribe had an article submitted to them by Gareth Chantler during the height of the previously mentioned incidents. Diatribe opted not to publish the article, feeling that it presented a hazard to Queen’s students’ safety given the climate at the time. Not one to be discouraged, Chantler submitted the article to the Western Standard, an Alberta-based conservative media outlet. The article, entitled “I am Islamophobic” (westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2933), was eventually published online.

In the most recent issue of Diatribe, turning to the back cover will allow you to see a small, unassuming piece. It reads: “To the Western Standard: For giving islamophobia a home, you deserve 11 days of AMS sensitivity training.” This petty, childish attack reeks of bitterness and desperation. It is not up to a campus media outlet to judge what others can or should publish, and it is certainly considered below a professional publication to resort to name calling when another media outlet publishes a piece which might disagree with their views. I don’t profess to be an expert on the issue, but perhaps such petty, inconsiderate behaviour is part of the reason why Diatribe no longer receives AMS funding from student fees.”

Alistair Cooke

Sci ’11 

Sutherland worthy

Dear Editors,

To the Queen’s Board of Trustees and Senate:

It was with dismay that I recently learned that the Board of Trustees failed to accept the recommendation of three current student leaders that the Policy Studies Building be renamed to honour Robert Sutherland. While a plaque in Grant Hall is nice, the naming of the former Student Union billiard room is not sufficient for this major benefactor and figure of singular historical significance to Queen’s and Canada.

When I came to Queen’s in 1967 I was one of very few non-whites on campus. While I was generally treated well, there were, from time to time, hurtful remarks and incidents that said to me, “You are not one of us.” I congratulate Queen’s for its ongoing efforts to rid the campus of the racism that persists. Today, the face of Queen’s is much more varied. Queen’s is the better for the diversity.

Yet I venture to guess that the face of the Board of Trustees is more like the Queen’s of 1967 than of 2009. Even faint-hearted reference to loss of potential naming rights is old-school thinking. It fails to recognize that there are now donors who would be honoured to have their name associated with that of Robert Sutherland. In today’s Canada, the honouring of Robert Sutherland with a significant landmark would be a marketing asset for Queen’s. I would also consider it recognition of the contribution of non-white people to Queen’s.

Please do the right thing and rename the Policy Studies Building Robert Sutherland Hall.

Ken Ohtake

Arts ’71

All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to content