Features

RACIAL CRITERIA 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Last week the Daily Planet reported on the Berkeley School Board’s decision to adopt a new student assignment plan (“Despite Lawsuit, School Board Adopts Racial Criteria,” Feb. 6-9). I was simply floored at the inability of the board majority to think outside the box and their willingness to toss our children’s money away. Currently the district is being sued by the Pacific Legal Foundation for its alleged illegal insistence on using race for school assignment. It is a lawsuit similar to one the PLF pursued in Southern California. In that case the PLF won. Most legal experts expect they will win the one against Berkeley as well. A pro bono lawyer is defending the BUSD. All other expenses come out of the district’s general fund. When the PLF wins, Berkeley may be held responsible for the PLF’s legal expenses. Where will this money come from? Class size, field trips, teacher’s salaries, library books? 

A diverse committee of BUSD staff and parents examined alternative approaches to achiving integration. They came to the board with a plan which uses socio economic factors in lieu of race. They believed if adopted the schools would be at least as integrated as the current system. If the board embraces the committee’s plan, the schools will no longer continue to flout the law. The case for using socio- economic factors for achieving integration is based on progressive ideals and achieves the goals of both equity and racial integration. The plan the board did adopt is a multi-step process which includes race. 

The school board is about to approach the citizens of Berkeley to ask us to renew the parcel tax known as BSEP, which provides 10 percent of the BUSD budget. How can they do that when they are frivolously embracing a discretionary lawsuit which may well cost the district untold sums of money? Boggles the mind. 

Please call the school board and let them know what you think.  

Janet Huseby 

• 

LEADERSHIP 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

July 1, 2004, will mark the mid-point of term of Ms. Fox-Ruby’s tenure on the Alameda County Board of Education. Let’s look at the record of Ms. Fox -Ruby since her election in March 2002. Based on her record she has failed to address the significant challenges at the county office of education. 

She has supported budgets that provide for increased public relations activities over resources to support classrooms in the court school system and community schools operated by the county office. The majority of the students served by these county operated programs are males of African-American and Latino descent. 

Over the last two years the test scores at the Alameda County office have declined more than any other county office in the Bay Area. As a former educator and teacher she has done nothing to ensure the right’s to these students to a quality education is addressed. 

She along with the Jordan-led majority have refused to implement the recommendations of the Alameda County Grand Jury with called for among other things, open and public debate on issues. 

During these tough fiscal times facing school districts including especially Oakland USD, which is one of two districts in her trustee area under the control of the state, she voted to give County Superintendent Jordan a 66 percent salary increase, which was the largest salary increase of any publicly elected official statewide. 

This coming after only six months in office and after Ms. Fox Ruby received substantial campaign contributions and political support from the 

benefactor of her vote for the salary increase County Superintendent Jordan. 

Despite public outrage and a board resolution by Trustee Cobb to reconsider the salary increase, the Jordan-led majority, for which Ms. Fox-Ruby is a member, refused to change it. 

This is the type of leadership you have on the county board of education, a representative that is “bought and paid for” by County Superintendent Jordan and not a representative of the voters of Trustee area one.  

Jerome Wiggins,  

former member  

Alameda County Board of Education 

• 

INTOLERANCE 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

On Tuesday evening, those who went to hear Daniel Pipes speak on the UC Berkeley campus were treated to a specter which would have sent Mario Savio spinning in his grave and appalled all those who believe in the right of free speech. While I am at odds with some of what Dr. Pipes believes, like many others, I wanted to hear what he had to say. Unfortunately, that was difficult as Pipes was incessantly interrupted by catcalls from Students for Justice in Palestine, members of the Muslim Students Association, and swill spilling from various constituents of KPFA’s Berkeley-left “Amen Corner.” 

Ironically, by attempting to keep Pipes from speaking, the pro-Palestinian minion in the process virtually ratified Pipes’ contention that strident Islamicists signify a gross intolerance of those who differ with themselves. Unsurprisingly, the first person to be expelled was the leader of the SJP, Snehal Shingavi. Mr. Shingavi gained national notoriety by asking that only those who agreed with him ideologically attend his class on Palestinian literature. More recently, he was sanctioned by UCB for violating the student code of conduct. 

Mr. Shingavi and his ideological soul mates make a shambles out of everything Mario Savio, the FSM, and indeed the Constitution stand for. Hence, because they so overtly trample on the rights of others, may I suggest that Mr. Shingavi along with all those who attempted to disrupt last night’s talk, be expelled posthaste? Their actions are antithetical to everything an institution of higher learning should stand for.  

One last disturbing matter—thoughout the evening, there were innumerable cries that “Israelis are Nazis” (never mind that it is only major Palestinian groups who are calling for genocide). This subtext of anti-Semitism was punctuated by the final expulsion of the evening, that of Joseph Anderson. Because he is a minority man in hyper-sensitive Berkeley, Mr. Anderson’s frequent rants against Israel are often cut a great deal of slack. But he left virtually foaming at the mouth, screaming at the audience what a good percentage of the pro-Palestinian demonstrators clearly feel: “You’re all a bunch of filthy Jewish liars.”  

Alas, as shown at the Pipes’ lecture, bigotry certainly has neither ethnic nor color boundaries. 

Dan Spitzer 

• 

XXXXXXXXXX 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I was fortunate to hear Daniel Pipes speak at UC Berkeley Tuesday night. He was a brilliant speaker and a very tolerant and composed gentleman. He had to contend with a large audience of Moslem students and other Pro-Palestinian sympathizers.  

Their outrageous bad behavior, e.g. continuous interrupting his speech with raucous shouting and chanting “racist, racist” etc., was reminiscent of the German Facist Youth of the Hitler era. 

They had hopes of blocking him from speaking altogether like they did to Netanyahu a few years ago. But the campus police were wonderful in controlling them ultimately and removing most of them before the evening was over. 

Their bad behavior lent proof to Daniel Pipes warning of the radical Islamists’ design and threat to destroy Western culture and Judeo Christian philosophy. 

Aubrey Lee Broudy 

• 

XXXXXXXXXX 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

What’s this negativity about 21st century marriages? 

These are modern times and our marriage laws must be broadened. The Massachusetts courts have ruled that tow men or two women have the right to legally marry. 

Great! Now is the time to develop modern 21st century marriage laws. 

To hell with Bush and the right wing religious extremists. 

Our new laws must allow three people to marry. Three is company, what a wonderful family foundation this will make. Our modern houses are big enough, our king-sized beds are big enough, let’s move forward. The kids would always have one parent at home. Every family needs two wage earners. If one parent dies there would never be a single widow. 

Think of this! Every kid would have three mommies, three daddies, two mommies and one daddy, or two daddies and one mommy. Hopefully, our family, Judy, Megan and I will enjoy a legal marriage. 

How wonderful California will be! 

Our 21st century marriage laws will solve California housing problems because we will need 1,750,000 fewer homes. One minor problem, our building codes must require three car garages. 

Sidney Steinberg 

• 

XXXXXXXXXX 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

We now not only have “Hardballs” on TV but also “Creampuff!” 

In his interview of the president, Tim Russert was strangely silent when Bush just rambled on, repeating himself and finally declared that “being able to produce dangerous weapons is the same as possessing them.” 

At that point, Russert might have asked whether Bush was declaring his intention to wage preemptive war on the whole world, since nearly all countries are capable of producing poison gas, nerve gas and dangerous biological weapons.  

Max Alfert 

• 

XXXXXXXXXX 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

At the end of a recent ABC News with Peter Jennings a few days ago after the New Hampshire primary, Diane Sawyer had a segment in which she revealed that the microphone used by Howard Dean in his Iowa Scream Speech was an unusual, very rarely used type which hugely amplifies and somewhat distorts the human voice. This mike also cuts was back on the sound of an excited, noisy crowd. She recognized this mike as one used by her only a few times in her long career, when addressing noisy audiences. It was a different shape and size from a standard microphone. 

She thought that the over seven hundred replays of this incident, which shook the confidence of many voters, even those strongly committed to Dean, and caused people to see him as angry and out of control, was a result of the microphone’s effect. It may also explain why those who were actually at this event didn’t see what the fuss was about. Ms. Sawyer also noted that the amplified mike was held “way too close,” because Dean thought it was an ordinary mike, which may have added to the distortion and magnification. 

It would be sad if Dean loses ground because of a technical glitch not of his own doing. It surprises me that I have not seen any reports about this disturbing revelation. 

Nancy Langert