LETTERS: Terrorism policy would hurt U.S.

To the Editor: It's unfortunate that we live in a world where many innocent people die due to terrorism. But I can't see how the Flatows case can be a hope for a more effective way to fight terrorism. For many Iranians the story goes like this: An American judge, in an American court (with no legal representative of Iran) orders their country to pay $247.5 million to the family of an American victim who sadly was killed by a suicide bomber in the Gaza Strip in 1995. A so-called expert testimony "proved" that Iran had provided funds for the Palestinian group who took the responsibility of the awful bombing. The judge then blamed Iran for its role in the bombing. Iran denies any support for terrorist groups and its president, elected by 70 percent of Iranian people, very explicitly condemns terrorism in any country for any cause. If one day the procedure and logic which were followed in this unfair ruling become the international norm, the country which will suffer most will be the U.S. itself. Already, through the past few decades, the U.S. has -- certainly against the will of many of her citizens -- supported numerous murderous puppet dictators, violent guerilla groups and bloody military coups all across the world, from Latin America to Asia. Never has promoting hatred helped resolve such problems, and the people of the world don't like to see the leader(s) of the world abusing their power. Powerful countries alone, just like powerful dictators, cannot peacefully rule the world and bring justice to all. An unbiased international organization will be a much more effective way to go. Farshad Mashayekhi Wharton Ph.D. '02 Word choice lacking To the Editor: The Penn Consumers Alliance objects to your characterization of our organization as "pesky" ("U., vendors reach agreement without pesky UCVA, PCA," DP gag issue, 3/31/98). We are not pesky. Rather, we are -- as Penn administrators themselves have pointed out repeatedly -- irresponsible, divisive, misguided and incendiary (rhetorically, not literally). We also disseminate misinformation, don't represent anybody, don't have all the facts and don't know what we're talking about. We feel these qualities, as noted by University Counsel Roman Petyk, Managing Director for Economic Development Jack Shannon and Vice President for Government, Community and Public Affairs Carol Scheman during the past 10 months, are not adequately captured by the word "pesky." We regret you did not find a better term to encapsulate all the names the administration has called us, names they obviously have spent a lot of time thinking up and figuring out how to insert into their public statements. I would also like to correct your statement that I "would not comment." In fact, I had three DP reporters trying to talk to me at the same time, and my call waiting must've gotten screwed up. Given a chance, I certainly would have said something sufficiently verbose and ill-considered, though I would not have been able to provide any inside information on College senior John La Bombard's anatomical situation. Matthew Ruben GAS '99 PCA spokesperson