To the editor,
After reading Bruce Wark's "Dogs of war" editorial in last week's issue, I was left shaking my head for two reasons. The first was because of all the trouble Jerry Reddick, AKA the Dawgfather, has experienced. The other was because of his choice to turn it into some sort of racial issue.
Reddick states, "I am a black Muslim man persecuted on the basis of my race and religion," and "All the guns of HRM are pointed at me." From what the article states, this is a completely inaccurate and unnecessary statement, which I think only serves to diminish him as a person in the public's eyes.
To begin with, the HRM was only responding to complaints lodged by the Dal Student Union. The DSU was more than likely responding to pressure from their own tenants to do something about a guy that was having an impact on their business. This is a business issue, not a racial one, and to claim otherwise is self-serving and detrimental to others trying to fight legitimate racial issues.
The HRM was forced to take action in this case because of multiple complaints filed by the DSU. They weren't acting on race or religion, but were doing what they had to do.
There is no doubt in my mind that if the Dawgfather were a white Christian, the same thing would have happened. Our bylaws are complicated and could use fine-tuning. Reddick got caught up in it because of where he was doing business and the impact it was having on big business located nearby.
I believe that Reddick is a credit to our society and we'd all benefit with more people like him. I just wish that he'd fight it honourably instead of diminishing himself by using the race card.
By G. Munt