Letters to the Editor


The A.S. debate on April 3 was a sad and pathetic display of stupidity. Brian Uiga and his group of idiots have proven that they have neither the maturity nor the self-discipline to be in any type of leadership position. He claims to want to serve one of the most prestigious universities in the nation, yet his answer to opposition is to say, “”F–k you,”” and flip off the other candidates. He claims to be the only one with brains, telling me after the debate, “”I’m a mechanical engineer. What are you? A political science major?”” He then began to dance around like a monkey, saying, “”I have the brains. I have the brains.”” Uiga has shown that he has no brains. Not once has he ever said anything of substance. He simply prefers to say “”F–k you”” to all of those that do not agree with him.

Is this how he would run the A.S. meetings? By screaming obscenities and not allowing anyone else to speak? Apparently he believes that only the superior mechanical engineer mind can be put into this coveted position and people, such as political science majors, do not have enough brainpower for even the simplest of tasks. Uiga’s disgusting and pathetic display proves he has none of the so-called “”brains”” that it takes to be A.S. president. The president of Associated Students in theory should represent the student body. Do we, as students, want a dancing idiot to represent us? This coming week I look forward to voting against Brian Uiga.

— Marissa Boren

Eleanor Roosevelt College senior

Campaign aims to provoke, Uiga explains


This is an open letter to all persons who have found offense with my actions at the UCSD presidential debates.

I sincerely feel that student apathy is the No. 1 problem on this campus.

The outcome of my spectacle at the Price Center can be summed up in the following way: At least 300 people will not vote for me because they find my actions disgusting. Perhaps 100 people will vote for me because they are tired of the pretension surrounding the A.S. elections.

As a candidate, I lose.

But I have forced the apathy surrounding the A.S. elections out of perhaps 400 people, and frankly, I don’t care if I win as long as the students are impassioned enough to do something about those in power. I congratulate anyone who insults me, for they have found their voice. Consider running for office next year if your passion decides to continue.

I will be on Library Walk during the next week asking people what is wrong with UCSD. I strongly urge you to come out and tell me that I am what is wrong with UCSD.

— Brian Uiga

Official Representative of the New Students First of the Unity Action Parking Wave Slate Slate

Campustruth.org ads are anything but truthful


I am extremely disturbed by the campustruth.org ads that appeared in your newspaper on March 31 and April 3. I find these ads extremely offensive because of their blatant propaganda that attempts to promote an anti-Palestinian sentiment on this campus. From a newspaper that claims to “”reserve the right to refuse advertising which has obscene, sexist, racist or other content deemed inappropriate”” (as stated in the ad policies on the Guardian Web site), I do not know how to react to the publication of the campustruth.org ads, except with disbelief and shock. I certainly expect that the editors of this newspaper would have better judgment than to accept money for an advertisement that to me seems so inflammatory. If an organization approached your newspaper with an ad degrading women, blacks, Latinos or gays, then would this newspaper accept money and print the ad? I could never imagine a campus newspaper allowing racist or sexist ads to be printed. The purpose of a newspaper seems so clear to me: give its readers the facts, not feed them propaganda based on venomous stereotypes.

I am very disappointed in this newspaper, but more importantly very frightened by the presence of these ads. By accepting to print these ads, your editors have obviously deemed them clear of racist or inappropriate content. I do not think that I am alone when I say that the degradation of Palestinians, let alone any ethnic group for this matter, is inappropriate and lacking in the most fundamental values of acceptance and respect. The root of the stereotypes presented in these ads is deeply based on hatred and a complete lack of consideration and compassion for others. Similar ads have already appeared in other campus newspapers around the country where they have stirred criticism and outrage. Students at Florida State University, University of Michigan and Rutgers University, to name a few, have all expressed vehement opposition to the presence of these ads in their respective school publications.

Is there any hope for a world free of hatred? Perhaps one might consider me a naive optimist, but I do very strongly believe that we can live in a world without the presence of malice and misguided intentions. However, the existence of such ads greatly discourages me. In the future, I hope this newspaper will properly enforce its stated advertising policy, and think twice before accepting money to print inflammatory and prejudiced ads.

— Irini Kolaitis

Revelle College sophomore

Editor’s note: All advertising decisions are made by the Guardian business office and are not subject to review by Guardian editorial staff.