Gov. Jennifer Granholm is losing her ambition. It wasn't more than three years ago when the newly elected governor made the commencement speech for the graduating class at the University of Michigan.
Indrek Wichman's explanation and response for his Feb. 28 letter to the Muslim Students' Association, or MSA, ("Prof explains reasons for offensive e-mail," SN 4/28), is a poor excuse for an apology. He seems to have abandoned his explanation that it was a private e-mail, instead justifying his actions with the First Amendment and using the Red Herring fallacy that the MSA attempted to impede upon the free speech of others. The association's actions regarding the cartoons were nothing close to an action against free speech, nor were they a protest in any sense.
What came first, the noise or the ticket? Lately, it seems hard to tell. Between unnecessarily loud neighbors and overzealous police officers, there are undefined boundaries when it comes to East Lansing's noise ordinance. And with a specific definition of noise given by the city — with sounds ranging from whistling to musical instruments — it seems far too easy to be ticketed for everyday noises. For those of us who aren't police officers, we're quick to empathize with our friends — the down-on-their-luck, struggling students looking forward to the weekend to unwind, only to get a ticket for violating the noise ordinance. For those of us who can relate to the police officers handing out these tickets, it seems viable to want to suppress a certain level of sound at specific times. What it all comes down to is a give-and-take relationship.
Like Shane Krouse's letter implies (Get over it, professor's e-mail overrated issue," SN 5/16), it is true that many issues should be left alone after a considerable amount of time.
The East Lansing City Council strikes again. Not less than a week after most MSU students have left, they decide to again infringe on student rights. The council has strengthened the discriminatory noise ordinance and removed only the borderline unconstitutional jail time clause.
In response to Shane Krouse's letter ("Get over it, professor's e-mail overrated issue," SN 5/16), the reason that Professor Wichman's e-mail is such a huge issue is because it currently reflects bigger issues not only within MSU, but also across the nation.
We eat organic food. We do yoga. We drive hybrid cars. We blow up massive bombs stirring up radioactive material into the atmosphere. Which one doesn't belong? If all goes as planned, this June, a 700-ton explosive will be detonated 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nev.
I am writing this letter in regard to the never-ending public ferment associated with the infamous Professor Wichman e-mail. The only reason this issue is still causing an enormous public outcry is because nobody has the sense to drop it.
Professor Indrek Wichman obviously does not get it. In his letter "Prof explains reasons for offensive e-mail," (SN 4/28), he seeks to portray his infamous e-mail as a free speech matter.
There's been a lot of talk lately about whether or not the United States should be speaking directly to Iran. The issue heated up after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sent a highly unusual 18-page letter to President Bush last week.
We've all heard the occasional (or not so occasional) complaint about the service at Olin Health Center.
Courtney Couvreur's column "SN coverage overly sympathetic to Nazi cause; harms community" (SN 4/28) is flawed in two respects.
Reader, that's you, I want to introduce you to something. Right here before your very eyes is The State News Opinion Page. Are you excited yet? As the new opinion editor, I feel it is my duty to make sure you, the reader, and this page have a good relationship. In the hope of creating a better reading experience for you, the Opinion Page has a new face this summer.
It all began with the Patriot Act. The Bush administration started prying into our personal information in an effort to detect early signs of domestic terrorist activity by looking at our private lives.
I thank you for your editorial chastising of Professor Indrek Wichman ("Poor choice, professor," SN 4/27). One hardly expects sweeping stereotypes and unbridled bias from a university professor, whose education should have provided a more nuanced grasp of human history and civilization. All large groups have criminal elements.
Thanks to the miracle of the Internet, I have seen that one of your professors, Indrek Wichman, is a subject of controversy because of an e-mail he sent to a local Muslim student group.
As an unwritten rule, I would typically agree with the simple principle of not calling the cops on your neighbor.
Sometimes silence can say a lot. The national Day of Silence was celebrated on Wednesday across the country.
I just read John Bice's "Islam doctrine should be modernized with 'Enlightenment' ideas" (SN 4/24). To be honest, I am sick and tired of defending Islam because people just don't understand the point of view I am presenting. Bice says that according to a book he read, "Muslims have been embroiled in violent conflicts all over the globe, fighting various Christian sects ?" Thanks for the insight, but there's another country at war all the time, all over the globe.
I am writing to clarify and explain the e-mail letter I wrote on Feb. 28 to the MSU Muslim Students' Association, or MSA. To my regret and chagrin, I wrote my e-mail using tactless and hyperbolic language that is common to quickly composed e-mails, not to slowly and carefully crafted compositions.