Mumia plagued by rhetoric

Anyone walking around campus this past week has undoubtedly seen the most recent Mumia Abu-Jamal propaganda, of a slant decidedly opposite from the normal "Free Mumia" posters which proliferate exponentially on walls around campus. These new additions to the Mumia discourse propose that we utilize common sense and recognize Mumia for the "cop killer" that he is. While it is always refreshing to hear a new take on any divisive issue, these posters should be taken with a grain of salt. These posters bear no name or organizational backing, nor do they advance any specific evidence conclusively proving Mumia's guilt.

With this caution, it also must be stated that the free Mumia posters should be taken with an almost equal amount of skepticism. At least the pro-Jamal people attach names and organizations to their flyers. However, their defense, or anyone's defense for that matter, of Mumia Abu-Jamal is not conclusive enough to warrant the convicted journalist's release from prison. While it is apparent to anyone familiar with the case that there were serious problems concerning the prosecution and judge's handling of the trial, these problems in themselves do not automatically mean that Jamal did not kill officer Faulkner seventeen years ago. What these problems do mean is that Mumia should be granted a new trial.

Anyone concerned with the trial and the fate of equity and justice should be concerned with why Jamal has engendered so much support. Of the thousands of prisoners on death row, why do the Beastie Boys and Rage Against the Machine champion this alleged"cop-killer?" There are undoubtedly many death-row prisoners who have been convicted under similar questionable circumstances, but where are the full-page ads in the New York Times on their behalf? Is it because Mumia happens to be a lot more photogenic, and more importantly, a lot more eloquent and well-connected than your run-of-the-mill convict? Is it because the floundering radical-left is looking for anyone to align themselves with, and who better than a former Black Panther and respected journalist allegedly set up by The Man?

Sadly, there is the possibility that an innocent man is sitting on Death Row, and no matter how many concerts are held on his behalf, nothing can make up for the lost 17 years behind bars. Tragically, a policeman was shot and almost two decades later we are unable to definitively close the case, indefinitely prolonging the pain for his family and friends. Both sides of the Mumia debate continue to spout misinformation, half-truths, and antagonistic rhetoric in the effort to bolster their political agendas. This bantering only prolongs and intensifies the conflict making it much harder to come to the equitable conclusion.

How about a straight answer?

Why won't anyone make a direct statement about the status of the proposed LGBT-and-Ally theme hall? There are many who would like to know what has happened to this previously hot proposal. Has it been approved? Where is it?

More importantly, where is the proposal itself? It seems to be lost under the table, where a Student Life Committee put it last spring. Its original promoters have been slow to react. Caught up in the shuffle of remnants of committee notes, perhaps those with the clues have forgotten how to answer a direct question. Perhaps their roundabout answers are a cover-up for their disorganization.

Yet this apparent reluctance to re-initiate dialogue about this issue might actually be explainable. Gradually it becomes clear that it is the process of how program houses come to be that must be re-evaluated, rather than specific halls or themes. This LGBT Hall proposal is well-liked, well-written and spoken highly of by the Dean of Students. Tackling an entire process is the difficult part - it requires an understanding of its context, and observation requires time. Time that the new Dean of Students must use efficiently. But time ticks by, and people get sidetracked, other issues come up first on the agenda and processes remain the same.

A program like this should not disappear into bureaucratic pigeonholes, for its imagining of a new kind of living space fits naturally into the context of Oberlin. As strong as the support for LGBTU is on campus, one would think this issue would be gaining momentum.

If this is the issue that will force Student Life to reevaluate the program house system, let us get behind it. Reinforced criteria about how a program house is approved would speed any future proposal like this along.

Will the proposal come up again in the Student Life Committee? Will we start to hear about it again? Let us not avoid an isolated proposal because we fear changing the system. And let us not avoid being straightforward and responsive.