Name: Andrew Lent
Year: Freshman
Major: Political Science
Comments:
We are not hypocrites to have WMD and want Saddam to disarm. There is a difference between a stable American regime and an unstable dicatator in Iraq. Also, there is no coincidence to the current Iraq issue being raised again. Bush campaigned talking hard about Iraq, and if 9/11 didn't happen, this situation would have been resolved. Check out how many UN resolutions have called for Saddam to disarm since 1991. He also kicked inspectors out in 1998 and refused to cooperate. So now we have to believe he has no weapons?

Name: b.faust
Comments:
Greg, I don't mean to bash you or discriminate against political parties, but I believe Clinton was too much of a wuss to even deal with the situation.

The Clinton Admin. knew of the threat of Taliban and so forth. Bush just knows how to prioritize, in my opinion.

Name: Rachel Thomason Pastirik
Year: Senior
Major: Media Studies
Comments:
Dear Anonymous,
I would have taken the time to email you in person but because you weren”t able to leave your name with your comments, I will just post my response here. We thank you for your comments and if in the future you would like to post again, we encourage you to post your comments in the Bruise Board. (www.radford.edu/~archive/season13/interactive/bruise.html) It is designed for general gripes that aren”t related to the above articles.

I would also like to apologize to Whim staffers Andrew Lent, Mike Flick, Andrew Kinback, and Greg Woodruff who got your unrelated comments posted into their articles.

It appears that not all your facts are straight on what went on in the Student Media department last year and I think I know why. You sated ÐBefore leaving [RU], I had a very interesting conversation with Mr. Kallahan, who used to be the advisor for student media.¼ The problem with Mr. Callaghan was that he frequently told different variations of the truth to different parties. It looks like you have fallen pray to this as well.

In addition to student media students and faculty, Mr. Callaghan managed to upset many others at RU. Rather than list their names (and incorrectly spell them), I prefer to let the issue go. I would ask though that you show some professionalism and refrain from using Whim”s feedback forms for personal attacks.

When you act irresponsibly, eventually people are going to notice. Unfortunately, Mr. Callaghan acted irresponsibly in multiple situations though out his term here. Mr. Callaghan did a lot of damage to the foundation of student media. It is only because of the help and encouragement of responsible administrators and faculty that we have gotten back on our feet this year.

Anonymous, I wish you well in your endeavors and if you happen to speak with Mr. Callaghan again, would ask him to stop contacting current students and move on with his life. We have surly moved on without him.

Name: Pico De Gallo
Comments:
First off I agree with Daine. We've got weapons of mass distruction and here we are pissed that Iraq has them too. We are hypocrits. I don't side with Saddam I just say Bush needs to get his thumb out his behind! Secondly to anonymous, I'd just like to say that Stevedogg did his part in pissing off that guy too. How come he doesn't get a shout out in your article? I talked to him like a few minutes ago and he seemed really really hurt. I mean you didn't even mention his show! Third, why do you have an article in the FEEDBACK? Kinda selfish don't you think?

Name: anonymous
Comments:
I graduated from RU last spring, from the media studies department. Before leaving, I had a very interesting conversation with Mr. Kallahan, who used to be the advisor for student media. He told me lots of details as to why he was fired by Dr. Pomerantz, and also admitted he made some mistakes in the way he dealt with students and faculty. But Mr. K did nothing to justify his removal from office. The truth is that he was fired because of cowards: Sandra Kelley and her sister Debbie Brown, Chelsea Adams, Rachel Thomason and Shaggy Kinback. These five people all felt threatened by Mr. K, who is a very experienced professional and who has an assertive management style. And all five made unproven accusations behind Mr. K”s back. While Kelley and Adams, both faculty advisors, never bothered to approach Mr. K about misunderstandings, Thomason and Kinback simply stabbed him in the back. As for Debbie Brown, she is an assistant vice president who worked behind the scenes. She tried to get George Mendiola to change his mind about taking money away from ROC-TV. Brown also never approached Mr. K to discuss a single issue. She just took her sister Sandra”s word about matters and proceeded accordingly. Apparently, Brown and Pomerantz are good friends. Another way of putting this is that Pomerantz is controlled by Brown, who has been involved in other irregularities concerning people leaving this campus. For example, she fired Tammi Gardiner, the former director of alumni affairs, for no good reason. Both Pomerantz and Dean Michael Martis were hypcrites in the matter of Kallahan”s removal. One of the reasons he was hired was to Ðdeal¼ with the ROC-TV issue, which has hindered the media programs on this campus for some time. As a matter of fact, Martis suggested to Kallahan that ROC be eliminated as an organization on campus, as well as the steering committee for student media. But Mr. K said he wasn”t prepared to pursue such action. However, when Kelley and her band of whining egotists pushed for Kallahan”s removal, Norleen simply rolled over. So did Martis. And RU missed a golden opportunity to have an experienced and talented person improve the student media programs on campus. Kelley made much of a memo that Mr. K wrote about changing the steering committee. First, he wrote that memo as his own opinion and not the committee”s. Second, he did use the word Ðwe¼ one single time, when referring to the suggestion that faculty advisors should not sit on the committee because they represented a conflict of interest. Mr. K honestly believed that was how the committee felt. But Kelley used that single reference to Ðwe¼ to convince the student leaders that the whole memo was supposed to be their collective opinion. Kelley maliciously obscured the truth; rather than speaking to Mr. K for clarification, she decided to vilify him instead. Mr. K told me that not one single student media leader said goodbye to him at the end of the semester ˜ after everything he did for them and their programs. He did not deserve such treatment. Kelley was an instructor who is no longer on campus. Her journalistic abilities are nothing outstanding and her professional experience doesn”t go beyond Roanoke. As for Chelsea Adams, she is another instructor who is best known for apologizing about eating her lunch at committee meetings. One would think she would get tired of apologizing or start eating her lunch at some other time. How about some of the student media faculty? Mr. K helped Joe Flickinger out with the Radio Free Radford mess, cleaning it up for him. But did Joe ever visit Mr. K to let him know what Sandra Kelley was up to? No. And Dr. Kovarick, bless his heart, is a good man. But he moans and groans too much about freedom of expression for the students, when he should have supported Mr. K”s efforts to raise the level of professionalism at ROC-TV and keep the student media budget in order. As a whole, the media studies faculty is also partly responsible for Mr. K”s removal. They should have done more teaching and less politicking. They are also hypocritical because they really didn”t support an independent channel for ROC-TV. Yet they raised hell when Kallahan changed his mind on the matter. Yes, Mr. K is the one who first championed a new channel for ROC, despite the objections from Kelley, Adams and others. But he changed his mind when the budget crunch came, and saw how screwed up the ROC leadership was. Kallahan”s point of view was simple: cut through the petty politics and focus on what”s important ˜ a healthy budget, efficient operations, and improved professional values. For this attitude, he got canned by people whose egos were more important than anything else. For example, Rachel Thomason screamed about how Mr. K didn”t Ðconsult¼ her about taking $10,000 for a ROC channel and spending it on the production lab instead. Even after Mr. K reversed his decision and apologized for the action, she went ahead and sent a very nasty memo to half the campus. And she kept moaning about how she wasn”t Ðconsulted¼ to anyone who would listen. Get a clue, Thomason ˜ Mr. K didn”t have to consult you on budgetary matters! Rachel did a good job with Whim magazine, but she is also a very malicious and vindictive person who helped destroy Mr. K”s career here because of her own conceit. What lesson should this campus learn from Mr. K”s firing? It should learn that petty politics, mostly centered around ROC, continues to hinder the professional growth of student media programs at RU. We also should learn that Debbie Brown has a lot of authority on campus concerning personnel, and that Norleen Pomerantz is under her thumb. If I were writing for The Tartan, I would try to find out more about how Brown operates and why she has so much power as an assistant vice president. Rumor has it that she has so much Ðdirt¼ on other administrators that they are afraid to cross her path. You will have a hard time finding someone on campus who actually likes Debbie Brown! Even Dr. Covington and his assistant, Carrie McTeer, were hypocrite in this matter. Mr. K tried to arrange a taped interview with Covington for ROC”s doocumentary project. McTeer cancelled Covington”s scheduled interview four separate times before finally telling Mr. K that Covington Ðdoesn”t trust ROC-TV.¼ But where was the president when Brown and Kelley were calling for Kallahan”s removal? It is obvious that Brown doesn”t have to consult with the university president on matters of personnel. I wonder if he feels embarrassed by that situation. I work in the field of media and I can more than appreciate what Mr. K was trying to do for the student media programs. Yes, budgets do matter. Yes, productivity does matter. And, yes, professional attitudes do matter. ROC-TV is a joke and will continue to embarrass the campus. All you have to do is go down the road to Virginia Tech to see how a real student-operated television station works. Shaggy has his good points, but he is simply too immature and self-centered to lead ROC into a new era of responsibility and production work that is journalism and not misguided efforts by a group of ÐSaturday Night Live wannabes.¼ I hear that ROC is doing a movie these days. OMGá.I can hardly wait to miss it! I”m sure it will be a substandard effort, and I”m also sure it will embarrass RU. To everyone who played a role in getting Mr. K firedádo you feel like more decent people? You cowards waited for Kallahan to go on vacation to make your big push with lots of email and accusations. Mr. K never saw any of the email, the accusations were never specified to him, and he wasn”t even given a chance to defend himself. Kelley and her band of cowards put pressure on Pomerantz, Debbie Brown put pressure on Pomerantz, and Pomerantz caved in with Dean Martis there to help Ðjustify¼ her action. Mr, K deserved better. He had done a lot for student media during his short stay, and he would have done a lot more. But he needed support from the administration and he needed the faculty advisors to stop playing politics. This didn”t happen, and RU blew a real opportunity. Mr. K genuinely cared about the student media programs and did what he could to remove petty politics from the equation. Yes, he made some mistakes but nothing to justify his firing. In the end, he was dismissed because a small group of hateful cowards felt threatened by him. They need to ask themselves what motivated their actions. As for me, I will remain anonymous for obvious reasons. Working in the field of media, I can tell you that I behaved the way Kinback and Thomason behaved toward Mr. K, I would be fired immediately. Too bad Mr. K couldn”t have fired several student media leaders and faculty advisors for their conceit and ineptitude. Believe me, the university would have been much better off. Sincerely, The Anonymous Critic

Name: Greg
Comments:
Has anyone else noticed that these Iraq problems didn't resume until another George Bush came into office? Now, my question: coincidence? I think not.

Name: Nick
Comments:
Katie, I totally agree that innocent people should not die, but what other ways are there other than war? I am sure that Saddam is not really that interested in anti-war methods. I mean, call me crazy, but a man like Saddam is probably not going to want to negotiate, considering we have been trying to get Iraq to turn over its unauthorized illegal weapons for quite some time now. And I am also kind of sure that Osama Bin Laden is not going to sit down with us and try to find peaceful, anti-war ways to show his hatred for America either, unless you call blowing up the Pentagon and WTC a peaceful resolve to a problem. The bottom line I have been trying to get at here is that it would be absolutely wonderful if we could all work our problems out without having to worry about war, but in all honesty, I don't see that happening. Nuclear weapons are not made for peace, love, and happiness, and our military is not trained to help people "find the love". Like Brandon said, the military is there for that very reason. My cousin just signed up for the reserves knowing that he was going to be shipped off to fight. He didn't have to sign up, and when I asked him why, he said it was because he is in the military and that is what he is trained to do. you don't join the military if you don't love your country enough to die defending it. it is a very sad truth, but it is a truth.

Name: b.faust
Comments:
Good points, everyone. Great article Andrew...it's about time a college kid steers the other way! Ha.

I just wanted to rant in response (gotta join in on the fun!): First, there is not going to be any draft, seriously. No worries. Also the U.S. is definitely not alone in this supposed "disarming" of Iraq, as Nick supports. The situation in Kosovo definitely turned out better because of us (the U.S.)...I could cite many more examples my friends. Finally, anyone in the military is (or at least should be) willing to put their life on the line to support their commander-in-chief and country, whether they agree or not. We don't put those uniforms on for desk jobs (for the majority)!

Name: Katie
Comments:
I think you missed that we also have more weapons of mass destruction than most countries. I participated in a peace rally and we used it as an oppurtunity to discuss other options of taking care of this matter, other than war. We shouldn't have to risk the lifes of our military when there can be other options

Name: Nick
Comments:
daine, I see your points, excpet for one small detail. The U.S. does not delegate who 'can' and 'cannot' have weapons of mass destruction. It is actually the United Nations who sets all these limits. Certianly, no one country could be responsible for delegating anything. The U.S. is simply taking the initiative to ask the U.N. to respond to this obvious defiance of UN policy. Its not like the US is alone, either. We may not have the support of superpower Germany, but we do have other countries that are standing behind us, including the kurds, who want to see Saddam fall for their own reasons. Even if they don't care about the weapon situation, they are seperatists who would like to help. We have other aides too. THe point is though, that the US is not bullying anyone. The US is putting its foot down to the policies set forth by all the UN countries. Believeing that The US is the only country fighting against Saddam is a completely ethnocentric view of your nation.

Name: daine
Comments:
i think you miss the point of the protesters. its not that they side with iraq or that they are oblivious that iraq has weapons of "mass destruction", it's that when the US gets involved usually more innocent people die than ones responsible for the wrongdoing. also, who are we (the US) to say who can't and who can have mass weapons? who is the only nation to ever detonate not just one nuclear weapon, but two on a populated city? we act as if everyone should give up their weapons but us, and what sense does that make? we are the schoolyard bullies taking people's lunchmonies, and one day the rest of the world will rally to destroy us. i'm not for that, but i'm definitely forseeing it.

Name: Nick
Comments:
Great Article Andrew. I hope you submit more in the coming weeks!

Name: Greg Woodruff
Comments:
You have some good points. Maybe those of us who are opposed to war are idealists. War may not be inevitable, but in a perfect world it wouldn't need to be thought of. Sadly, this isn't a perfect world. Also, many of us refuse to fight in a war and go angry just thinking of the possibility of being forced to.