Dear editor,

As I was enjoying the tailgating on Saturday, an underage friend of mine was getting written up for having alcohol. I was looking over at the officers talking to him, and one of the officers approached me.

‘Can I help you?’ he said sarcastically.

As I began to explain that I was just looking because I’ve known the kid for a long time and he’s a good kid, I extended my hand to shake his.

A hand shake is the ultimate sign of respect and a sign that you really don’t want any problems with the person you are extending your hand to.

Not shaking an extended hand is the ultimate sign of disrespect in our culture.

The officer refused my hand shake, and then proceeded to lecture me and talk down to me, judging me like he knew me.

‘I kind of feel like you’re talking down to me,’ I said.

He then proceeded to talk down to me some more, before I just let it go. At the end I extended my hand again (being the bigger man) and he shook it this time.

Now, I didn’t get this officer’s name or his badge number, but I’d like to say a quick something to him:

You kept telling me that I ‘look like someone who wants to be a leader’ and ‘I need to be a leader’.

Nevermind what I look like, you look like an immature power-tripping cop. Being a police officer doesn’t give you the right to judge people, talk down to people or be disrespectful in general. And for the record, I know plenty of police officers and all of them are cool, average guys, who I’ve never seen abuse their powers.

It was probably the most disrespectful thing anyone has ever done to me. If you want to act like a person and talk about the situation, then you can contact The Collegian and I give them permission to give you my phone number.

Scott Bloomberg

Dear Editor,

RE: ‘Speaker addresses diversity using Family Guy and South Park,’ by Nick O’Malley; April 16 and ‘Enabling siblings of the disabled,’ by Matt Kushi; April 21

As a person with a disability, there are a couple of things that have been written in the past few days that have been upsetting. One is a mistake that may seem small to many, but to me, someone was a wheelchair athlete for six years and whose goal was the Paralympics, is a big deal.

In the article from the weekend edition, Nick O’Malley wrote an article about Matt Glowacki, a speaker who came to campus last week to talk about diversity. Glowacki is a person with a disability, and while I disagree with many of the things Glowacki was quoted as saying, that is not where the mistake is. The mistake was when O’Malley said that Glowacki had competed in the Special Olympics. The difference between the Special Olympics and the Paralympics is huge.

The Special Olympics are traditionally for those people with cognitive disabilities, and it is a competition where no matter what everyone wins something. The Paralympics is a competition for people with physical disabilities, where athletes spend years preparing and competition is tough. The mistake is an easy one, but the distinction is important.

The other article that I wanted to respond to is actually a series of articles. Matt Kushi wrote an article entitled ‘Enabling support for siblings of the disabled.’ He has written several different articles about disability, but this one got to me. The article from yesterday was an article about what it means to have a sibling with a disability.

As someone who has a disability, and who has a sibling, this article seemed more like a series of complaints about how horrible his life has been, than anything else. This is not only insulting, it seems downright childish. I know that life for my family hasn’t been the easiest because I have a disability, especially for my sister, but that does not mean I have to feel bad about anything.

I am proud of who I am and don’t want people feeling sorry for me, or my family. What Mr. Kushi seems to be doing in his column here is trying to make himself feel better about his situation. In the process he seems to be talking for a whole community, one which he himself is not even a part of fully.

I do appreciate that having a sibling with a disability, or even a close friend, might change how people view the world, and that is a very powerful thing. But ‘- as clich’eacute; and silly as this sounds ‘- those who have learned to accept people despite their differences also have to learn when and how it is ok to talk about those differences.

Every person, whether they are disabled, or able-bodied, gay or straight, black or white, male or female, has a different life experience.‘ I can only speak from my experience, and what my life has been like, and I have been very privileged to have great friends and a great family that supports me and appreciates me, and learn from me. I am not out to change the world, I can only hope that people will better understand where each person is coming from.

Dear Editor,

In the April 17th article ‘Obama Says U.S. Will Pursue Thaw With Cuba,’ The New York Times reports that President Obama is open to discussing ‘everything [Cuba] wants to talk about,’ including, presumably, the long-standing U.S. trade embargo against that country. President Obama proclaimed his forward-looking intentions. ‘I didn’t come here to debate the past. I came here to deal with the future.’ Obama called on Latin America to pursue a ‘new way’ in which the United States is not blamed ‘for every problem that arises in the hemisphere.’

However, the task of developing a new foreign policy toward Cuba must be undertaken with open-eyed historical understanding, including an understanding of whatever problems may generated by current and former U.S. policies toward Cuba. The economic and human consequences of the trade embargo are severe, as Amnesty International notes that the Cuban government is greatly hampered in its efforts to purchase essential medicines, medical equipment and supplies, food and agricultural products, construction materials and access to new technologies. Additionally, the embargo prevents Cuban-Americans from returning to their country of origin, in violation of Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

During the 1898 Spanish-American War, the U.S. intervened in Cuba chiefly to prevent Cuba from achieving independence from Spain on its own terms.‘ Rebels had promised agrarian reform to the Cuban people, threatening US agribusiness interests in Cuba.‘ Under the Platt Amendment, Cuba became a U.S. protectorate with limited autonomy.‘ The U.S. had extensive legal powers over Cuba, including the right to maintain military bases, veto treaties, and supervise the Cuban treasury. The rebel general Maximo Gomez lamented the military occupation of the country by our allies, who treat us as a people incapable of acting for ourselves, and who have reduced us to obedience, to submission, and to a tutelage imposed by the force of circumstances??

During the years that followed, the U.S. supported a string of repressive, military dictators, such as Gerardo Batista. What this history shows is that the economic strangulation of Cuba is not aimed at promoting democracy in Cuba, but is instead aimed at punishing Cubans for attempting to pursue independence from de facto American rule.

Timothy Prisk