To the editor:
Thanks for the staff editorial about the apparel task force, "Apparel Task Force a lonely place for student voices," (Wednesday, Opinion). A few corrections are in order. We’ve never shouted our way into administrators’ offices. We have videotaped our visits to Khator’s office and posted them on our blog. The videos show we’ve been quiet and respectful in the offices.
Also the quote in "Sweat-free students won’t rest," (April 2, News) about the task force is incorrect, I never said Quezada "doesn’t know anything about anything," nor did we go to the SGA because Quezada told us to. Nor did I say that the task force was to learn about the issue. I said that it’s another layer outside the shared governance system. I told the reporter that Dr. Foss said in a press release to bring our concerns to the SGA, which we did.
Finally, Quezada’s comment that the task force was for educational purposes is incorrect. As Dr. Khator’s letter to us (posted on our blog) says, "I have asked for its recommendations to be presented to me no later than June." Therefore, the task force exists to make a recommendation.
Quezada doesn’t seem to know the reason for the task force. He commented about students using "radical tactics." How is getting a bill passed in the SGA "radical?" Peaceful, non-violent protests can hardly be considered radical and in fact David Rosen, former president of the SGA, joined us at our Valentine’s day protest and invited the entire SGA to come. He also called for Khator to meet with us, which she ignored. How is bringing former and current sweatshops workers to speak on campus radical? It’s more educational than a task force closed to all but one student.
Timothy O’Brien
PhD candidate
History Department
