I should thank Mr. Joe Mickey for his letter on Feb. 28 suggesting China not to be awarded the Olympic games, because he helped me to explain to my students the differences between celebrating free speech and dishing out sloppy argument.

As a Speech Communications 100A teaching assistant, I always ask my students to prove their credibility to their audience. I wonder where Mickey's credibility stemmed from, though, when he wrote such a strongly-worded letter. I am not so naïve as to claim that only people who have lived in China or people who have seriously studied China have the right to voice their opinions.

However, since I found nothing in Mickey's letter but the all-too-familiar stock arguments that American media have consistently used to construct the identity (note: not identities) of China, I have to settle for a dismissal of his opinion as ideologically biased and culturally ignorant.

Before Mickey further indulges himself in his faulty analogy (awarding the games to China is like awarding the games to Salt Lake city), ad hominem fallacy (equating China with Hitler), and either-or fallacy (stop the games from going to China or boycott the games), I would suggest that he engage China in dialogue by first, say, making a few Chinese friends, reading a few Chinese books, or even visiting China if he can. Demonizing a cultural and ideological other 10,000 miles away might seem to be a brave thing to do, but it takes real courage to move beyond the comfortable and convenient Cold War rhetoric and embark on a different journey — one of truly understanding China.