Letters
To the Editor,
Last week Tony Martin spoke unopposed at the Oxford Union, providing the student press with a rare opportunity to discuss something important and controversial.
Rather than take this chance to open up debate, your paper followed the Union by once more giving Martin an unopposed voice, in an interview. You must be careful not to forget the hundreds of students who do not support Martin and who would have welcomed a challenge to the Union on this matter. If the paper insists on printing only one side of the story, might I suggest it rename itself 'A few Oxford Students and Some of their Friends'?
Clara Pope, Wadham
Dear Sir and Madam,
In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficient, the Most Merciful
It seems that since September 11th, Islam has been the focus of much negative press, as well as continuous stereotypes, which degrade and distort Muslims and Islam respectively. Oxford is a microcosm of the wider world, and even in Oxford, there appears to be a strong propagation of anti-Islamic sentiment.
Accusations have been made that the ISOC is anti-university, anti-freshers week and anti-student union. Such claims are INACCURATE. However, the ISOC has every right to discuss the most pertinent issues, which are applicable to Muslims and non-Muslims. OUSU's VP (Welfare) Rosie Buckland stated: "the fair is an inclusive event for everyone, and material of this nature should not have been there". In response to this, if the fair is INCLUSIVE FOR EVERYONE, then by definition the ISOC has the right to have its own viewpoint on the issues. Surely this is "inclusive for everyone?"
The ISOC does not aim to impose its viewpoints on others. However Islam is a creed from which emanates the systems to organise personal and societal life. It is a complete ideology (Deen) and as such it has its own viewpoint built upon its own philosophy which may or may not concur with the mainstream consensus. The ISOC feels it to be its duty to widen the perspective of all who wish to engage, to encourage debate in the university about the correct and productive way of life for all human beings - a necessity and an obligation for the future generation of leaders.
Yours faithfully,
Emran Islam President, OU ISOC
Dear Sir and Madam,
We would firstly like to commend Anjool Malde and Mary Morgan for their article "Is it 'cos one is black, Sir?". We found this to be a comprehensive and well-researched article, which highlighted the various factors that may explain the worrying lack of applications from under-represented groups such as Black and Bangladeshi students. It was with the high standard of this article in mind that we were disappointed to find such a woefully inaccurate and poorly researched article (whose author curiously declined to be named) "Dreaming Spires, ivory towers".
We particularly take issue with the paragraph that attempted to caricature the work of the Oxford Access Scheme. Firstly, the Access Scheme's volunteers are not taken solely from state schools. Indeed, members right up to the level of Co-ordinator have hailed from independent schools and it is foolish to suggest that independently educated students are incapable of grasping the issues which affect those in the state sector.
Leaving aside the difficulty any university student would have in visiting "their former classmates" (who surely would have left school along with him/her), we in no way suggest that the presence of our volunteers alone will encourage pupils to consider Oxford. It is of course easy to blame the admissions policies of Oxford University for the lack of diversity here.
As momentus a revelation as that is, it seems as if Charles Clarke is safe in his job for the moment. As are education writers across the country.
Yours faithfully,
David Johnston & Maxine Lyseight Oxford Access Scheme Co-ordinators
23rd Oct 2003