Dear Editor:
After reading the "In Our Midst" feature in the Daily's Jan. 30 issue, I was very disappointed with the context and direction of the story. Since that day, I have come to realize that the piece was very well received by nearly everyone that has spoken to me about it. Still, I feel it is necessary to iron out the misrepresented details so that there is no disparity between the interview I sat through with Carrie and the story she wrote. Before I begin, I thank you for posting this letter and the Daily's candor in dealing with my objections. I'd also like to thank Carrie Battan for taking the time to write a story about me. Everything that follows is the "other side" and the missing pieces of the article already written.
-I do not prohibit or discourage Navy ROTC Midshipmen from discussing politics. Even if I wanted to, as a Sergeant I have no right to do so. Like them, I am in the process of earning a commission as a Marine Officer. This was a misinterpretation of an incident in 2006, during which I counseled one of my Marines for making an inappropriate comment about a civilian leader. NROTC does not suppress free speech (and neither do I).
-I joined the Marines because my life experiences leading up to the spring of 2002 had made enlisted service the best option available to me. I did try to dissuade some friends from enlisting, but as fate would have it, we all spent the summer at boot camp. College was not an impossibility for me; I decided it didn't match the hand I was dealt at the time.
-The exploding SUV did not leave me haunted with creeping images of my death or feelings of futility. The only lasting effect it produced was to leave me determined to react with more urgency the next time I saw one of our vehicles in flames. "I'm not willing to die here this time" was a direct reference to my dissatisfaction with specific duties I was charged with performing in the wake of the 2006 elections. I did not believe that OIF was an exercise in futility, but I quickly developed a fear of one day watching the sacrifices and legacies of all our fallen servicemen desecrated by a second Fall of Saigon. If I were to have died in the weeks following the SUV incident, my last thought would have likely been, "You've got to be kidding me."
-The lull I felt in my optimism for securing a democratic peace in Iraq was a direct result of unfamiliar changes to the political arena in November 2006. While you are technically correct in saying my views on the war are "far from consistent," I hope you'll grant me a pass on this one, as my expectations normalized once I realized that Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid were not going to rip the carpet from under our boots.
-No one encouraged me to seek enrollment to more prestigious schools than Florida State; I was able to remember the email address of a charismatic teacher and mentor who had been a member of the Georgetown Alumni Association. After contacting him and soliciting a recommendation to Georgetown, my hamster wheel began to turn faster and I started pumping out applications to every school that caught my eye. There was just something about Jumbo that called to me. . .
-The military is not completely free of politics, but you will never see the Air Force endorse Dennis Kucinich and start swift-boating Sen. McCain and his endorsement from the Navy. Our laws state that the armed forces are non-partisan and so the military will never allow itself to be dragged into party affiliations or partisan conflicts.
-Lastly, I think my comment about classmates with views in conflict with my own was misunderstood. I have met several young men and women since September who are so opposed to my manner of thinking that I doubt we could even agree on the color of the sky. However, I've only met one student that was anything but reasonable and amicable. Even my most closed-minded classmates are generally respectful and graciously agree to disagree.
Again, thank you for being so cooperative.
Regards, Edgar Luna
Editor's note: After reviewing the reporter's notes and recordings, the Daily stands by her work as a factual and accurate account of the interview in question.
