Letters to the editor

YNetwork neutrality

our Monday article "Politicians battle over network neutrality," highlights an important piece of the proposed legislation in the debate over "net neutrality" but fails to mention that the proposed legislation is really about

increasing video service options and saving consumers money.

The Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunity Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2686) is about more than "net neutrality."

This bill would fix today's outdated laws that go all the way back to the 1960s by breaking up one of the last monopolies left in this country - cable television - and bring benefits to consumers, businesses and local communities.

How it would work is really very simple. Consumers win when businesses compete. Increased competition means consumers will see almost immediate cost savings and improved customer service. And with the introduction of new competitors comes increased options and control over cable programming, high-speed Internet and costs.

The video choice bill comes down to increased cost savings, competition, choice and control. This legislation is a clear "win" for consumers; on that point I refuse to be neutral.

Kelley Gannon

TV4US representative

Thailand's coup

arly Tuesday, Thailand's army commander showed the meaning of democracy. The army commander in Thailand launched a coup against the prime minister, who had been embattled and surrounded in scandals, his Cabinet and ministers.

I should hope that our military would have the same morals to depose an unlawful and unpopular president as the Thai military has. The army commander says that they will hand back power to an elected government as soon as is possible.

While this is still developing, it appears that the military has taken the steps toward a true, uncorrupted democracy, even if by force.

This is truly an example of how an entrenched and immovable government can still be removed in a peaceful, if not forceful, fashion.

Let us always remember that our rights are greater than the institutions that supposedly uphold them and that we should bear no undue burden from these institutions without standing against them.

Ethan Root

University student

War prisoners

he United States always has and needs to continue to hold the standard high for treatment of war prisoners. This is not a small matter

and pushing change through will serve one purpose: to excuse the abuse that has currently been done in terms of torture by the current administration.

Linda Ruth

Realtor

Suicide taken lightly

unny, if a person died of a curable disease, authorities would investigate what their barriers to medical attention were.

The same approach should have been taken in John Hoff's Monday column on suicide. The trite headline, "Don't jump, don't jump, don't jump," strangely does not have any curative effects on the suicidal.

Rather, it trivializes and strips suicidal individuals of their dignity - which is probably the last thing they need someone else to take from them.

The message Hoff gives is that suicide is a selfish action that foolish, lemminglike people do and that it's offensive when they choose to do it on campus. He pleads, " ... must (suicide) happen in the middle of campus in front of everybody?"

What is his solution, that they do it at home?

His last line isn't about suicidal people, the surviving victims, the complex problem or anything at all. It's about the Washington Avenue Bridge, as if it's really hurting from its dark reputation and about to throw itself into the river below.

How do you make a bridge a "symbol of life?" Procreate on it? And why should that matter when people are dying?

Cry me a Mississippi River, or call Hoff a hypocrite for stigmatizing suicide further in spite of his brief plea to "get over social taboos which make it difficult to discuss suicide." But Hoff really needs to stop offending us with this shallow drivel. Lest he drive someone over the edge, spoiling

the "perfect record of no University students being killed, yet."

Quynh Nguyen

University student