In response to “A party and a protest,” by Michael Truong, April 30:

The Palestinian claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing at the hands of Israel are fabrications. In 1948, the Arab population in the British Mandate of Palestine was around 1.2 million people. Today, there are roughly 5.2 million Arabs in the same geographic region, comprising of Israel and the Palestinian territories. When a population increases from 1.2 million to 5.2 million people, it is impossible to claim that genocide has been taking place during any or all of the period of growth. In fact, the Arab population in the Palestinian territories is one of the fastest growing populations in the world.

Those who deny Israel’s right to exist, such as the student group Democracy Insurgent, compare the Nazi Holocaust to how the Palestinians are treated. This comparison is shameful and baseless. Six million people, one-third of the entire world Jewish population, were murdered in six years during the Holocaust. To use the deaths of 6 million people for fabricated propaganda purposes is inexcusable.

There has been an ethnic cleansing in the Gaza strip, however. Every Jew living in Gaza was forced to leave in 2005, turning Gaza into the only area of the world that has been made completely Jew-free since the Holocaust. Israel evacuated all citizens and military personnel from Gaza, and the Palestinians responded by making Gaza a launch pad for thousands of rockets aimed at Israeli population centers. Those rockets were made from the greenhouse irrigation pipes the Israelis left in Gaza in an attempt to provide a source of agriculture for the Palestinian people.

Maybe when Hamas values producing food for its own people over killing Jews, there will be peace.

Jeremy Sandler

Alumnus, class of 2007

A letter to President Emmert:

The process of cutting costs at the university is upside-down and regressive. Why is it tacitly accepted that the first to be fired or have positions eliminated are TAs and low-paid administrators, while disproportionately less is done to curb spending at the higher end of the salary spectrum? A $20,000 cut in funding for a TA means they have no job at all, may have to leave school if they can’t secure other funding, and the quality of undergraduate education suffers. A $20,000 cut to the annual salary of a professor means they have to cut back on their discretionary spending but continue to live a comparatively lavish lifestyle. Why do we accept the notion that the higher one’s salary, the more secure it must be? Why do we ignore that the same size cut disproportionately affects those at the bottom more than those perched at the top?

I think all options should be on the table, including a range of standard furloughs applied to all salaried positions, the longest being for the highest paid. Consider this a kind of progressive income tax on university faculty and staff where it will hurt the least, not the most. In a past life, I have been a well-paid permanent but furloughed employee, and found my furlough time invaluable for travel and study.

David Hays

Graduate, forest resources

UW ROTC

It has been nearly 14 years since I graduated from the UW, and it is amazing how our world and lives have changed during that period. Four years in Seattle was a wonderful college experience, and I have many fond memories of my time in the U-District and Green Lake Park. However, as an ROTC cadet, I did not realize how challenging, rewarding and amazing my next 14 years would be as an officer in the U.S. Army and how much I would experience and learn. I am currently attending school in Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and have unexpectedly run into five classmates from the UW ROTC program. Catching up with them on their experiences has made me reflect on my time as a Husky and how my choice to join the Army has led to who I am now.

The nation and the Army entrusts soldiers and officers with great responsibility. My first assignment to Korea opened my eyes to the experience of leading young Americans and to interacting with another culture. Since that first assignment, the Army has sent me to numerous locations in the United States and around the world, and I have had the opportunity to work with militaries from many different countries. Throughout the past 14 years, these experiences have taught me much about myself and about human nature. After a deployment to Iraq, I realize how adaptive and strong the American soldier can be and how strong an organization can be that is made up of a cross-section of the United States.

One of the best parts about being in the Army is that I am motivated and proud to serve the people of this great country every day. Although there are many challenges ahead, both domestically and globally, I consider myself lucky to live in the United States. Serving in the Army has been a tremendous experience, and reconnecting with my UW classmates over the past year has reminded me where I first began to think about a career in the Army.

Among many other benefits, the Army has provided me with much opportunity and allowed me to understand what diversity really is all about. This is not intended to be a sales pitch for the Army, but to recognize how graduating from the UW led me into the Army and how my experiences in the Army have made me a more complete person. I felt compelled to share how much being a UW alumnus and an Army officer has changed my life for the better.

Marne L. Sutten

Alumnus, class of 1995

In response to “Safe success in the future of thoroughbred racing,” by Jeff Dickson, May 4:

Jeff makes it sound as if Barbaro had already broken his leg when he was reloaded into the gate for the Preakness following his premature burst through the starting gate. Oh my, that is so wrong! No one in any state of mind would reload a horse with a broken leg into the gate! He was judged to be fine by the attending vet and a visual inspection by his jockey, Edgar Prado. Jockeys know intimately how a horse feels; they are riding them!

Eight Belles did not break her front legs during the race; she broke them while galloping out well after the finish of the race.

While the result is the same, Jeff should be more accurate about this. There isn’t anyone, from horse owner to veterinarian, who said they had ever seen anything like that happen. It was a fluke, pure and simple — as odd as a 22-year-old soccer player collapsing with a heart attack. It just doesn’t happen — but it did.

While racing merits the knocks it’s gotten for being too lax about medications, I would contend that most horses are not routinely injected with steroids. Neither Barbaro nor Eight Belles had steroids in their system. Many times, trainers administer the types of medications that people use for a cough or a cold, but it is debatable whether that is “performance-enhancing.” Put another way, would you rather slog through a day of classes with or without a Tylenol to make you feel better if you had a headache? Maybe it does enhance your performance, but I doubt it would make you run a race faster.

Jeff Mullins did exactly the right thing by withdrawing I Want Revenge from the Derby Saturday, but he was aware that the next day, he was to begin serving a suspension for just such an offense — administering a cough medicine to a horse at Aqueduct within the time period it was not allowed.

Had his horse broken down or had he won the race, commentators would be all over the medication offense issue, and rightfully so. I do agree that horses should just run on hay, oats and water.

Too many people unfamiliar with racing have opportunities to comment about things they don’t know. That’s our Internet age. But, if nothing else is corrected in this article, the assertion that Barbaro knowingly ran a race with a broken leg must be corrected.

Jane Fieberts

Monroe, Conn.

In response to “Demanding discussion: Anti-Budget Cut Coalition demands forum from UW president,” by Eric Staples, May 6:

It is time that the UW community has a thorough discussion of alternatives to mass layoffs, tuition increases, and cuts of classes and enrollments. The UW is a rich institution with many sources of funds and an endowment of nearly $2 billion. There is no reason that the core of the university has to be destroyed and the burden put on students, staff and faculty.

If there are any cuts, they should come from the top. In this crisis, it is time that top administrative positions are eliminated so that people who actually do the basic work at the UW can have their positions maintained. What is more important, TAs who actually teach undergraduates or top administrators who enforce budget cuts? There are way too many top managers and not enough workers at the UW. Those top administrators who remain, including the president, should take a massive pay cut. Half of President Mark Emmert’s salary could fund 10 regular staff positions.

The UW is consciously moving toward privatization. Talk by Emmert of a “new model” of funding is wrong. We cannot rely on student tuition to pay for the majority of education costs. Education should remain public, and we should all demand that the state provide the bulk of the money for public education.

We should all support the Anti-Budget Cut Coalition and demand that there be a real open town meeting on the UW budget, where those affected can present real alternatives to the administration’s attacks on students, staff and faculty.

Please keep covering this issue! It is probably the most important that the UW faces today.

Steve Leigh

Program coordinator, Department of Health Services

In response to “Torture is wrong: Recent scandals have undermined US image abroad,” by Chris Jordan, May 6:

The continued reports, opinion pieces and Obama administration comments on torture and waterboarding specifically are harmful to the United States. Instead of moving forward, they dwell on the past. The last time waterboarding was documented as a technique used on a detainee was in 2003, with the CIA removing it from its list of “enhanced techniques” in 2005. The fact that people continue to bring it up only perpetuates the idea that the United States is running around waterboarding everyone it captures. Unless someone decides to really look into the subject, you would never know how scarcely it was used and that it hasn’t been allowed for four years.

The best idea is to move forward, just like Obama promised during his campaign. Sadly, he has been wishy-washy on whether or not he will follow through on his promise. The problem with this is, whom do you prosecute? Is it the interrogators that followed procedure, the lawyers who wrote the ruling that allowed it, or the politicians who reviewed the interrogation recommendations and approved them? If it is the latter, which seems most appropriate, then Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be in serious trouble, since she was briefed on the techniques back in 2002 and was not only supportive, but encouraged it, which is interesting because she has recently been calling for a truth commission to investigate the subject and the idea that immunity would not be given to all people involved.

By continually dwelling on torture and not looking at what is actually happening, those that claim torture is destroying our image abroad are assisting in the process. Instead of letting people know that certain techniques ended under the Bush administration and dwelling on Obama’s goal to move forward, those who attack U.S. officials should instead condemn their own actions.

Holland Avery

Senior, political science/European studies

Mr. Jordan’s unequivocal “no” to utilizing enhanced interrogation techniques elucidates how absolutely misled some students of the University of Washington are concerning reasons why the United States adopted and utilized these techniques.

In particular, I want to highlight two critical errors in Mr. Jordan’s article. First, I want to impugn the conjecture Mr. Jordan puts forth that the termination of enhanced interrogation techniques will, in some way, give the United States the upper hand when dealing with the world at large — especially nations that sponsor terrorism. Does anyone really believe that, because we have repudiated enhanced interrogation and released the Justice Department memos, now-rogue nations like North Korea and Iran will suddenly drop all anti-American sentiment and play nice? To be so naive will prove to be a tough lesson, indeed.

Second, Mr. Jordan mentions international law — ostensibly to imply that the enemy combatants at Guantanamo should be protected under this law. Mr. Jordan is simply wrong. The United States has a right under the Geneva Convention to hold these combatants off the battlefield until they no longer pose a threat. I besiege Mr. Jordan, and others who agree with him, to remember that these terrorists at Guantanamo have disregarded all the laws of the Geneva Convention. They do not wear uniforms, they shield themselves using civilians and most certainly do not extend any of the rights of law to the individuals they capture.

It saddens me to think that there are groups of Americans who have seemingly forgotten the horror of Sept. 11, 2001 and the environment from which these techniques were engendered. I write today lest we have forgotten Daniel Pearl and Kim Sun-Li and the innumerable others in the Middle East who are the true victims of torture and hypocrisy. For those of you who do not know Daniel Pearl or Kim Sun-li, please research the names. In juxtaposition to what those two men faced, waterboarding and sleep deprivation seem of small consequence.

The United States should not be labeled a hypocrite for taking the requisite steps to ensure liberty and justice for the world. I hope Mr. Jordan reconsiders and researches the contended topic more thoroughly the next time.

Wally Hasslinger

Seattle, Wash.

Mr. Jordan’s opinion article relies on quite a few rose-colored assumptions about the world and those who live in it. He assumes that the widespread anti-Americanism that he has presumably seen on MSNBC has been caused by recent American actions when rather, it predates the Bush and Clinton administrations.

How would you explain Sept. 11, 2001, Kenya, the U.S.S. Cole or any of the other pre-“torture” terrorist attacks? How would you explain the celebrations in the streets in places like Palestine, Riyadh and others following the deaths of American civilians? He states that when “the United States is viewed as a benevolent global leader … the country is made safer.” How Mr. Jordan?

More importantly, what evidence do you have that this has ever happened? Were we “benevolent global leaders” under President Clinton? How about Carter, Ford or Kennedy? Terrorist attacks and anti-American demonstrations happened then as well; how do you explain those?

You make the assertion that our techniques have increased terrorist recruitment, but according to the Rand Corporation and other intelligence assets, terrorist recruitment has gone down in recent years. This is not to imply causation, but it certainly calls into question your assertions.

I would also call on you to support your claims that waterboarding “simply doesn’t work.” Admiral Dennis Blair, a republican and President Obama’s intelligence director, stated that these interrogations yielded “high value” information according to CNN (April 22, 2009).

The U.S. Army’s SERE School, which trains U.S. soldiers, sailors and airmen to survive capture and interrogation and uses waterboarding as a technique, maintains that the technique is highly effective and has never resulted in harm to a U.S. serviceman in the more than 20 years of use. The technique is no more dangerous or scarring than sleep deprivation (something all college students should be well-acquainted with) and is hardly in the same vein as the images that a word like torture brings up.

Lastly, you cite Jack Cloonan’s claim that the ticking-time-bomb scenario never happens. With all due respect to Cloonan, he has never been on the ground in Iraq. These situations do happen all the time; maybe it’s not nuclear, maybe it’s not U.S. citizens (though I don’t see how that changes the morality), but when you are faced with the lives of 20 Iraqi children and you have to decide whether or not to interrogate a known rapist and murderer, I know those kids will sleep easier knowing that there are strong men and women out there prepared to act on their behalf.

Your article also falls short of answering the actual question, red herring or not. What would you, Mr. Jordan, do if you were faced with a nuclear weapon in Seattle? Would you hold your morality intact faced with the deaths of your friends, family and half a million others?  Would you feel better knowing you protected the man who murdered them from the slightest inconvenience? It’s a tough question, one that is being answered by too many Monday morning quarterbacks.

David Coyle

Graduate, business administration

In response to “IMA stricken with racquetball woes,” by Andrew Mitrak, May 7:

I started playing racquetball last year as well and enjoyed playing the game very much. It was easy to pick up and didn’t require a lot of skill. I then decided to try squash. Squash was more difficult to pick up and requires much more skill in order to get better at it.

It is not surprising then that the UW has a squash team, but not a racquetball one. If racquetball was that much more popular at the UW, there would certainly be a team set up or even a box league where players compete against fellow students and faculty during the month like squash does. Just because squash isn’t as well-known at the UW as it is elsewhere in the United States, it doesn’t mean that the rest of the United States doesn’t play squash. The game is very popular over on the East Coast and is played at many high schools in the East and in Canada.

I have played with many students and staff here that are new to the game, but enjoy it very much. Because I have put in the time to actually learn the game, I have realized the greatness in the wonderful game of squash.

Andy Marsolek

Sophomore, business

Mr. Jordan’s opinion article relies on quite a few rose-colored assumptions about the world and those who live in it. He assumes that the widespread anti-Americanism that he has presumably seen on MSNBC has been caused by recent American actions when rather, it predates the Bush and Clinton administrations.

How would you explain Sept. 11, 2001, Kenya, the U.S.S. Cole or any of the other pre-“torture” terrorist attacks? How would you explain the celebrations in the streets in places like Palestine, Riyadh and others following the deaths of American civilians? He states that when “the United States is viewed as a benevolent global leader … the country is made safer.” How Mr. Jordan?

More importantly, what evidence do you have that this has ever happened? Were we “benevolent global leaders” under President Clinton? How about Carter, Ford or Kennedy? Terrorist attacks and anti-American demonstrations happened then as well; how do you explain those?

You make the assertion that our techniques have increased terrorist recruitment, but according to the Rand Corporation and other intelligence assets, terrorist recruitment has gone down in recent years. This is not to imply causation, but it certainly calls into question your assertions.

I would also call on you to support your claims that waterboarding “simply doesn’t work.” Admiral Dennis Blair, a republican and President Obama’s intelligence director, stated that these interrogations yielded “high value” information according to CNN (April 22, 2009).

The U.S. Army’s SERE School, which trains U.S. soldiers, sailors and airmen to survive capture and interrogation and uses waterboarding as a technique, maintains that the technique is highly effective and has never resulted in harm to a U.S. serviceman in the more than 20 years of use. The technique is no more dangerous or scarring than sleep deprivation (something all college students should be well-acquainted with) and is hardly in the same vein as the images that a word like torture brings up.

Lastly, you cite Jack Cloonan’s claim that the ticking-time-bomb scenario never happens. With all due respect to Cloonan, he has never been on the ground in Iraq. These situations do happen all the time; maybe it’s not nuclear, maybe it’s not U.S. citizens (though I don’t see how that changes the morality), but when you are faced with the lives of 20 Iraqi children and you have to decide whether or not to interrogate a known rapist and murderer, I know those kids will sleep easier knowing that there are strong men and women out there prepared to act on their behalf.

Your article also falls short of answering the actual question, red herring or not. What would you, Mr. Jordan, do if you were faced with a nuclear weapon in Seattle? Would you hold your morality intact faced with the deaths of your friends, family and half a million others?  Would you feel better knowing you protected the man who murdered them from the slightest inconvenience? It’s a tough question, one that is being answered by too many Monday morning quarterbacks.

David Coyle

Graduate, business administration

In response to “IMA stricken with racquetball woes,” by Andrew Mitrak, May 7:

I started playing racquetball last year as well and enjoyed playing the game very much. It was easy to pick up and didn’t require a lot of skill. I then decided to try squash. Squash was more difficult to pick up and requires much more skill in order to get better at it.

It is not surprising then that the UW has a squash team, but not a racquetball one. If racquetball was that much more popular at the UW, there would certainly be a team set up or even a box league where players compete against fellow students and faculty during the month like squash does. Just because squash isn’t as well-known at the UW as it is elsewhere in the United States, it doesn’t mean that the rest of the United States doesn’t play squash. The game is very popular over on the East Coast and is played at many high schools in the East and in Canada.

I have played with many students and staff here that are new to the game, but enjoy it very much. Because I have put in the time to actually learn the game, I have realized the greatness in the wonderful game of squash.

Andy Marsolek

Sophomore, business

While I agree with Andrew’s point about ensuring IMA space, resources are being used well; I completely disagree with him regarding squash. I grew up in good, old, American Cleveland, Ohio. My dad played racquetball regularly, and I’ve played occasionally over the years. Racquetball is a great sport. But squash is an equally great, if not better sport. I just started playing about a year and a half ago, thanks to easy access at the IMA. A couple of friends of mine, who happen to be from India, taught me how to play. It’s a fast-paced game that requires good hand-eye coordination, strategic thinking and an in-shape body to play well. And I have been surprised how popular it is.

I find the squash courts are most often full. I’ve actually gone to the IMA, and all of the squash rackets and balls were checked out and being used, and I either had to wait 15-20 minutes or play some racquetball for a while the racquetball courts were open and empty. I see all kinds of people playing squash, from newbie freshman to middle-aged scholars/faculty and female international students to jock-looking American graduate students.

It might be worth doing a traffic study in the courts to see if indeed some of the squash courts are not being used enough. But I totally disagree that it’s a lesser game, and it seems to be very popular from my perspective. If Andrew hasn’t played, he should try it some time. I’d be happy to meet him for a game.

Andy Davey

Manager, education outreach

Foundation for International Understanding Through Students

I definitely concur with Andy’s opinion. After reading the article, the writer seems to be very biased and ignorant of the actual ground realities. A slide show of the top-10 healthiest sports published by Forbes magazine a couple of years back rates squash as the No. 1 sport.

Further, at the IMA, there is a squash league with a monthly enrollment of nearly 30 to 40 players on a recreational basis, with each playing 5 to 6 matches a month, at least. The box includes players from UW faculty, staff, graduate students and a few undergraduates. Besides this, there is a ladder that has been started that is more competitive and has lots of undergraduates playing in it. And then there are recreational players who use the courts on a nearly daily basis.

Also, it needs to be mentioned that the squash courts are divided into two separate sections: On one side you have only four courts adapted to international rules where intermediates, advanced beginners and pros practice quite regularly; and besides that, there are a few more courts for practice and beginner level.

Subhanshu Gupta,

Doctoral student, Department of Electrical Engineering

Andrew Mitrak refers to squash as “laughable” and “inferior,” without offering any justification for why he believes this to be the case.

Squash is an athletically demanding sport; Forbes magazine has rated it as the number-one healthiest sport to play, estimating that it burns more than 1,000 calories per hour. It is also growing in popularity in the United States, particularly at the college level: More than 50 collegiate teams, including UW’s own Husky squash, compete in tournaments across the country. The UW Squash Club also fields multiple teams that play in weekly Seattle city league matches.

Mr. Mitrak points out, rightly, that some of the squash courts are severely underutilized. What he may not realize is that there are two types of squash court at the IMA: the older “North American” courts and the newer “international” courts. The former have fallen out of use as Americans have adopted the more tactical European/Asian version of the sport, but the latter, of which there are only four, are very busy.

There might be an argument for converting some older squash courts to racquetball courts, but Mr. Mitrak does the UW sports community, as a whole, a disservice with an inexplicable hatchet job on a sport about which he clearly knows very little. Both racquetball and squash are fun, exciting sports; instead of trying to tear one of them down, we should be encouraging greater participation in both.

Julian Wolfson

Acting president, UW Squash Club

Doctoral candidate, Department of Biostatistics

Wow, what a truly stupid article about racquetball and squash in today’s staff editorial. Maybe a little research would go a long way toward writing more worthwhile articles. We have an undergraduate squash team at the UW, a box league, plus about 175 people on our e-mail list. Currently, however, we only have four usable courts, and they get pretty packed, especially during the evening.

Hopefully future staff editorials will have more real content to them and less stupidity in a misguided attempt to be funny.

Claus C. Pörtner

Assistant professor, Department of Economics

I was disappointed to see the article concerning racquetball and squash. To quote Daniel Moynihan: “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”

On a world scale, squash is played much more widely. In fact, it was the last sport not to make it into the Olympics in the last vote, the highest-ranked sport not to be in. In the United States, racquetball courts are rapidly closing, and squash’s popularity is rapidly increasing. The Seattle Athletic Club in downtown Seattle used to have 14 racquetball courts and two squash courts. It now has eight squash courts and two racquetball courts, having converted most of the racquetball courts to squash because of the greater popularity.

I wonder if the author understands that we have some obsolete squash courts at the UW that are, in fact, little used, as they are “North American squash,” which is no longer played. The “international courts” are well-used and often oversubscribed. Unfortunately, the old “North American” courts have bearing walls and cannot be changed in size, so they have been used for other functions or as practice courts when the “international” courts are busy. Thus, the author is correct that the “North American” courts are little-used.

The UW has an active squash club that sends an undergraduate team to compete against varsity teams in the East. That club includes several former racquetball players who found squash to be the more challenging sport, and better for conditioning. Indeed, Forbes magazine rated squash as the “healthiest sport” because of the intense conditioning required. No doubt, racquetball is easier for beginners and hence, is often popular among those who are not serious about a sport, but ultimately, many racquetball players take up squash.

The UW also has a proud squash history. UW alumnus Mark Alger was U.S. National Champion in the early 1980s. Two other UW alumni, Shabana and Latasha Khan, have each won the U.S. Women’s National Champion. Ayub Khan, their brother, is currently the head professional at the Seattle Athletic Club as well as being a UW alumnus.

Let’s not throw stones. Enjoy the sports we want to play, but recognize that different folks enjoy different sports, fashions come and go, and let’s make sure we have the facts before writing in the newspaper.

Michael J. Bishop, M.D.

Professor, anesthesiology

Is this how the editorial section of The Daily is run? Someone on the staff doesn’t like something, squash in this case, and he has the license to launch a vicious and scathing attack on it. Obviously, he is clueless about the beauty and subtlety of squash. That’s alright, not everyone understands everything.

What’s not alright is that he is clueless about how a journalist is supposed to write. This is supposed to be a newspaper, not some un-moderated online blog. By publishing such articles, you will seriously undermine the credibility of your publication. And maybe you want to take that article down before more offended squash lovers send you e-mails about this.

Bhushan Mandhani

Graduate, computer science & engineering

As someone who enjoys playing both squash and racquetball at the UW, I must say that I find this article incredibly offensive on three levels. First is that it lacks any content whatsoever. He seems to merely be trying to be edgy without actually saying anything of merit.

He is flat-out wrong. There is a much more vibrant community of squash players than racquetball players. Squash has a mailing list of more than 150 people, along with two separate ladders of players. The courts are, if anything, hard to get time on during peak hours. Many racquetball players end up signing up for the squash ladder entirely because they can’t find people to play racquetball.

The article is frankly borderline xenophobic and reminds me of something one might read in 1984. What exactly does “it is the more American sport” mean? Does this imply that I am less of an American for playing squash, and if so, why do I care?

I find it reprehensible that The Daily would publish such drivel. What was the point? This is something that belongs on Mr. Mitrak’s blog next to how his opinion of whether Megan Fox is hot or not, not in a university-sponsored publication. Did you expect everyone to lightly chuckle to each other as someone needlessly degraded a section of the community? I could write more, but I have already wasted enough time on this collection of pointless hot air. Please try a little harder next time you think of publishing nonsense like this.

Max Boeck

Graduate student, genome sciences

I was dismayed by the one-sidedness of the opinion piece that appeared recently in The Daily about racquetball versus squash. Although written in a light-hearted manner, the intention of Andrew Mitrak’s piece was quite open and serious: the take over of first one, and then several of the squash courts, and their assimilation to a uniform set of racquetball areas!

The author speaks of empty squash courts at IMA and racquetball players “killing time” on them. I am only visiting briefly from the United Kingdom, but on two occasions I recently wandered over to IMA “on the off-chance,” and I saw the exact opposite situation: no racquetball players in sight and all the squash courts taken with a few desperately keen players queuing up.

Less anecdotal evidence also shows that squash is popular at the UW. There is a healthy box league here that welcomes players of all standards and allows you to quickly get to know fellow squash-heads. There is also a university club and team, and, as I write, a squash ladder is being launched.

But whether or not squash is more popular than racquetball at the UW, the plain truth is it should be. In fact, it is so easy to dismiss racquetball when compared to squash that it seems almost cruel to do it. But in case anyone was persuaded by Mr. Mitrak’s witty tirade, here are a few facts to set the record straight.

Popularity: Squash is growing all the time in numbers. It is played widely around the world. So much so, that it is being considered to be an Olympic sport for 2016. A steady, not growing, population of just 5.6 million plays racquetball.

Speed: “In the 2004 Canary Wharf Squash Classic, John White was recorded driving [squash] balls at speeds over 270 km/h (170 mph).” Racquetballs are big and heavy and most important, slow.

Grace and athleticism: Hundreds of videos on YouTube pay tribute to the excitement generated by the long attritional rallies associated with professional and even amateur squash. The grace, athleticism and sheer exertion of players is easily seen in these excellent videos.

Somebody please point me to the equivalent for racquetball; I’m sure it must be out there somewhere.

Ease of play: Yes, racquetball is easier than squash. But then, needlepoint is easier than architecture.

Joshua Knowles

School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester

I believe it was in very bad taste to publish the incendiary article lambasting squash as inferior, lifeless and un-American. The author could not be more wrong. Squash has a long history in the United States and is a collegiate sport nationwide. Squash is both more athletically rigorous and fast-paced than racquetball, leading me to believe that your author just couldn’t cut it on the squash court and moved on to racquetball. Instead of wasting his time attacking squash, maybe he should concentrate on his skills so that he can come join the big kids some day.

Furthermore, a visit to the squash courts on any given evening finds them actively used, with many spectators watching exciting matches. When was the last time a racquetball match drew a crowd to watch with baited breath as opponents out-maneuvered each other with nail-biting skill?

While it is true that the old-school squash courts are in bad repair and seldom-used, the answer is to divide the unused space between racquetball and squash so that both sports can benefit. And, we should kick out the boxers and the stationary bike people because, lets face it, they just don’t belong.

Jane E. Atkins

Graduate, forest resources

Andrew Mitrak’s article on racquetball vs. squash needs a modest reality check.

The two sports have oscillated wildly in popularity at the UW over the past several decades. Racquetball is currently more popular for reasons that have little to do with the game itself, as should be evident to even the casual onlooker.

The current perceived “misallotment” of courts between the two sports reflects the current popularity of racquetball, as well as a little bit of history. Squash players no longer use four of the eight IMA squash courts. The reason for this is that the four original courts are old “hardball” courts that are no longer useable for regulation play.

The old squash courts could be made more versatile, as Mr. Mitrak notes, by making the “tin” or “telltale” in the front removable. These old courts do get regular use by a wide range of people for soccer, racquetball and a range of other indoor play, and thus could be made a bit more versatile for a modest investment.

Let’s keep our eye on the right ball here: keeping our generally excellent IMA facilities available to all enthusiasts, regardless of their game of choice.

Ray Monnat

UW School of Medicine

During my four years at the UW, I had never come across such a stupid and ignorant article as the one I read today on racquetball and squash. Your “reporter” should do some research before tearing sports to pieces. Squash has been rated as the healthiest sport by Forbes magazine.

As a member of the undergraduate squash team, I feel very offended after all the struggle we have to raise money and travel to represent the UW and compete with other varsity teams nationwide. The UW has even had U.S. National Champions for squash. Squash is a sport I owe a lot too, and to have some ignorant person come and say so many degrading things about it is ridiculous.

Mauricio Cerna

Senior, industrial engineering

I, too, am a squash lover and have been actively playing the game for many years. I encourage others to try the sport out whenever possible and say nothing but great things about the sport. I have been more than content with the facilities that the UW offers and the ladder that its members have graciously provided and maintained.

However, I would hesitate against responding too harshly against the student who wrote the mentioned article or the publishing medium. In my opinion, the article can be summarized into two parts: a “humorous” poke at the game of squash and a request for conversion of some squash courts.

I consider the author’s statements to be humorous and, in general, a good-natured jest since it is based on a factual name comparison to the squash vegetable and an opinionated comparison to a similar sport: racquetball. I am not sure if the factual statements regarding the “invention” of racquetball are correct, so these could be potentially disputed. Concerning the author’s comments on racquetball being the “American” sport, of course we all know this opinion is unfounded, since football (and not that misguided “sport” of soccer) is the American sport.

But this is just my opinion, which may be more appropriate for an opinion section of a newspaper ­­— or is it?

The author has stated that there are often a handful of empty squash courts. In my weekly visits to the squash courts, I would have to agree, at least with respect to the U.S.-style courts. Of course, a thorough review of court usage (both squash and racquetball alike) should be performed before the IMA considers any court conversions.

Condemnation of letters of opinion is an attempt to suppress free speech, rights which are heightened in academic communities. Unfortunately, we all often forget that others have (and are like to share) opinions that are contrary to our own. We may also often forget that not everyone’s sense of humor is the same, especially in vastly multicultural communities. The extent to which one disagrees with the opinions of the author should be based on the correction of any factual errors. To the extent one is “deeply offended” by such expressed opinions, I would kindly comment that the opinions are not personal, sexist, religious or attack any other value that Americans deem to garner heightened attention; rather, the opinions are poking fun at a sport. Having a sense of humor is a good thing, especially when laughs are harder to come by this year.

Brad Riel

Graduate, law concurrent degree program

I’m trying to understand the point of the article about squash in The Daily today. I thought it was supposed to be about wanting more squash courts, but the author quickly lost focus and turned the article into a hate speech against squash.

Writing like this has no place in a “news” publication. It is perhaps worthy of a Facebook note if the author really needs to vent his personal dislike for a certain group of people and sport. Why you would allow them to vent against us squash players in a publication read by thousands, other than in one of those opposing opinions articles, is beyond me.

Squash is a completely different sport, with more of an emphasis on cunning and finesse than on speed and power. It is no greater and no less of a sport than racquetball. The author shows his ignorance when he failed to recognize that different sports appeal to different people. I tried racquetball once and never played it again. Next time, if the author could just focus on the subject instead of ranting about their personal dislike of a certain group of people, we, the readers, would appreciate it very much. Thanks.

Evan Kuester

Junior, mechanical engineering

This article, which states as its intention to point out the need for more racquetball courts, unnecessarily slanders the sport of squash and makes several extremely biased, unsubstantiated and downright inappropriate claims about the two sports. I was highly offended by the article and lost a tremendous amount of respect for The Daily when I read such an ignorant, poorly researched and slanderous article.

Brian Wood, M.D.

UW Department of Internal Medicine

I cannot believe you guys would publish such a stupid article. I always thought The Daily was about supporting our own Huskies, and yet, with a few ignorant words, you have bashed all the students, faculty and Huskies that play squash. I hope you take the e-mails we send as a squash community as a sign and fix the mistake you have made in letting a writer post garbage on our university’s paper.

Najib Morcos

Undergraduate, squash captain

I was surprised to read today’s staff editorial about racquetball, which was mostly an unfounded and very thoughtless critique of squash. I have played both games over the years and can attest that they are similarly fast, fun and easy to learn at a basic level. I prefer squash for its emphasis of finesse, careful shot placement and foot-speed on the court. I’m sure others could argue similarly for racquetball. Whatever the merits of these games, though, Mr. Mitrak’s article was offensive to the many squash players at the UW and, I would think, to anyone here who is at all serious about the game of racquetball. His misguided call to convert IMA squash courts to racquetball courts was absurd. There is plenty of room for both games at the IMA.

Alex T. Anderson, Ph.D.

Associate chair and graduate program coordinator, Department of Architecture

I’m a little confused at the purpose of this article. Is it to compare squash and racquetball? Or, is it to insult the squash community? I grew up playing racquetball, and before I came to the UW, I had only heard of squash. When I got here, I quickly found out there was a very small group of racquetball players.

I ended up having to play the skillful and tactful, what I like to call “old guys.” These players are usually retired or faculty who will show you what a .1-inch, off-the-ground shot looks like. I started playing squash here at the UW for the single fact that there are more people here who play squash competitively then racquetball here on campus. I believe the person who wrote this article is a person who is very closed-minded and has an ignorant view of squash.

The author writes, “It should go without saying that any sport sharing a name with a vegetable-like fruit is not to be trusted.” I cannot believe that someone would judge a sport purely on the name. Have you never heard the saying, “Don’t judge a book by its cover?” This statement simply reeks of ignorance.

The author writes, “However, racquetball and squash courts are interwoven at the IMA. It’s bad enough that the courts are in close proximity (this taints the entire athletic experience of racquetball for me), but the worst part is that the IMA actually allocates more courts to squash than it does to racquetball.”

There are equal amounts of American squash courts and racquetball courts at the IMA, with the addition of four international squash courts. Research is a valuable thing, try it out some time.

The author writes, “Take a look around the IMA next time you visit. I doubt you’ll see a single vacant racquetball court, but you’ll probably see a handful of empty squash courts — in use either by the select few squash enthusiasts at the UW, or racquetball players killing time as they wait for a court to be vacated.”

Maybe you should examine the squash courts at 5:30 to 6:30 p.m., when we have people standing around waiting to get on a court. On top of that, we have a box league that currently has more than 35 people registered. We have an undergraduate team with 12 members, and also, we have more than 150 members in the squash community here on campus.

Next time someone wants to bash the squash community, maybe they should try the game out first. How can you say you don’t like something before you’ve tried it? I have played both racquetball and squash for a significant portion of my life, and I feel that squash is a better, more well-rounded game. I have learned a lot from playing squash my three years here on campus, and I don’t feel I would have had the same experience with racquetball. Lastly, it’s one thing to personally dislike a sport, but it’s an entirely different thing to actively attack one. All this article really shows is the ignorance of the writer.

Brett McGinnis,

Co-captain, UW Squash Club

Webmaster, squash ladder Web site

I would like to let you know that I am extremely angry about today’s staff editorial on racquetball and squash. The tone of the article is very insulting to squash players and states that more “American sports” should be preferred over other types of sports.

While it’s OK for people to have their personal thoughts about certain sports, I don’t think The Daily should provide a platform for such articles via the staff editorial.

Dieter Fox

Associate professor, computer science & engineering