Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 11, 1985)
Page 2AThe Battalion/Wednesday, September 11,1985 OPINION Reagan dodges embarrassment President Reagan changed his mind over the weekend, sud denly deciding economic sanctions were necessary to encourage South Africa to abolish its apartheid government. Friday, Rea gan believed his policy of “constructive engagement” was work ing. But threats of a sanction bill passing Congress over Reagan’s l passing i veto, seems to have motivated the president’s change of mind. Reagan issued an executive order Monday which banned ex ports of nuclear technology and computer equipment and pro hibited the issuing of loans to the South African government, except for those which aid blacks. Reagan also proposed a ban on importing Krugerrand gold coins. The order is an attempt by Reagan to avoid an embarrassing veto override by Congress. Congress’s bill would have been harsher, but would have contained most of the sanctions which Reagan implemented. The Reagan sanctions, except for the Krugerrand ban, are nothing new. A ban on the sale of the computer equipment to South African police and restrictions on the sale of technology, which could be used to develop nuclear weapons, have been on the books since the Carter Administration. Reagan’s sanctions are long overdue, but lack sincerity. His concept of “constructive engagement” doesn’t support the eco nomic suffocation that the sanctions will create. It’s good to see action taken against South Africa. Reagan’s new stance on the issue isn’t heroic, but rather a maneuver to keep out of an embarrassing situation at the hands of Congress. The Battalion Editorial Board Mail Call Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length but will make every effort to maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must include the address and telephone number of the writer. Laurels for Pallmeyer EDITOR: Congratulations to Karl Pallmeyer for his column of September 4 in which he raises the question that has troubled me ever since the death of Bruce Goodrich last August — why has the Corps as an organization not been called to account for the actions of its members? I was amazed to learn from Mr. Pallmeyer’s column that Gabriel Cua- dra, who was convicted of tampering with evidence during the Goodrich investigation, was involved only three months earlier in an incident in which freshman cadets were beaten with ax handles. For his part in that incident, he was put on probation, yet he was in a position to tamper with evidence in the Goodrich case. This not only emphasizes Mr. Pallmeyer’s question, but also raises the question of how well the Corps is controlling the activities of its members —or whether it is even attempting to do so. If, as Mr. Pallmeyer suggests, the Corps is primarily interested in main taining an image as opposed to pro moting the welfare of its members, then what does it say for their image to have two cadets who participated in the Goodrich incident back in the Corps this fall? And what about the University that sponsors and shelters this orga nization? Mr. Pallmeyer notes that hazing as a traditional (there’s that word again) Corps activity has never come to trial. The reason for this is that Texas A&M cannot permit such a trial. That would point a finger at 109 years of physical and mental abuse that the University has implic itly condoned by looking the other way. If the Corps is image-conscious, they are no more so than the Board of Regents and the University as a whole. To those who would point out that the cadets involved have been pun ished, I would ask what a total of $650 in fines, $750 in scholarship contributions and 300 hours of com munity service really represents? Is this the value placed on Bruce Good rich’s life? Just as important, does it mean that any meaningful action will be taken to eliminate hazing once and for all? Gary W. Guthrie Lashings for Pallmeyer EDITOR: This letter is in regard to Karl Pal lmeyer’s editorial of Sept. 4. Mr. Pallmeyer, of course everyone remembers the death of Bruce Good rich and the strong words spent for many months concerning the inci dent. But, I don’t believe anyone, even you, can comprehend fully what took place that evening. Only Bruce and the men involved know. Until we can understand, should we in our short-sightedness condemn these men without searching out the whole truth? I’m tired of the shallow mindedness of The Batt — always condemning things they are too igno rant to understand. You never seem to search out the feelings of all con cerned, and this is a valuable journa listic quality called insight. Mr. Pallmeyer, you stated that “it is obvious the Corps wants to forget the whole story of Bruce Goodrich.” Where were you when the Corps ate its evening meal in complete silence that following day? Who had the backbone to tell about the cadets’ tears, frustrations, and angers? I am not in the Corps and I cannot judge the members, but at least I have the courage to look at two sides of a very sad story. You chose to use the word “force” when describing the actions of Bruce’s upperclassmen. He may have been urged to participate, but using “forced” is misleading and false. I know you realize the power of words. I just hope that the next time you do battle with any organization, that you have the courage to not just seek out one side of a story, but to look in all directions and seek out a whole truth. I remember, Mr. Pal lmeyer, that you once wrote an article about the National Guard and re hashed how you had so often as sumed it to be full of a certain type of people. Perhaps if you did the same for the Corps and other groups, you could be equally enlightened. This is not a letter set out to pro tect or try to rescue the Corps. They don’t need it. This is to point out that ignorant, biased opinions in the hands of journalists are the most vio lent and dangerous weapons. I just hope you don’t slaughter us all be fore you learn what respectable, good journalism really is. Judy Redding ‘87 si 'TEAef»ts bfUO'S M Cost-efficient space luxuries mean more research money A couple of weeks ago, as summer jobs came to an end and the U-Haul trailer business en tered its peak sea son, a very signifi- cant event sneaked by. An astronaunt had a Coke break Camille Brown between orbits. Soft drinks in space. Coke was quick to point out that its product was sippped first, followed by a Pepsi, tasted several minutes later. Of course if the Pepsi people didn’t have spies watching the Coke people, Pepsi would have been left out of the deal al together. Coke arranged to send a Classic up with the space shuttle, and when Pepsi found out, they demanded equal space in space. Eight cans went up. Four of each brand, in all fairness. But if anyone should get a prize for making history, it should be Pepsi. For its four cans, Coke spent millions on re search, compared to the couple hun dred thousand Pepsi spent on its half of the eight pack. But this isn’t the first time ineffi ciency has plagued the research on adapting earthly goodies to the world of weightlessness. It recently has hap pened on a more serious scale. A shocking news story hit the wire last spring. The Russians moved ahead in the space toilet race because their Space John worked and the United States’ Space John flopped. The U.S. spent millions on perfecting the high tech toilet, and the Soviet Union spent about as much as Ronald Reagan makes in a year to develop a toi let which is as basic as a remodeled out house. The outhouse worked. Our million dollar museum piece is still in the repair shop. Which household necessity will be the next most sought after space luxury? Some common household items will likely cost a fortune to redevelop, and others will still cost a fortune, if this re search trend continues. An item will be expensively tailored for space, while si multaneously someone will come up with the same thing in cost-efficient form. For example, this scenario: One spaceship totes space-adapted, de hydrated, microwave-safe boil-a-bag meals, and a passing space shuttle laughs and points because they saved millions by serving the old earthly favor ite, foil-wrapped pinto beans and corn- bread. As result, spacecraft number two has more money to spend on valuable research projects, while spacecraft number one can only chomp on the delicacies brought about by boil-a-bag research. But as of late the U.S. is headed in the right direction. The Soviet Union, Japan and the European Space Agency are spending millions on a plan to intercept Haley’s Comet. The U.S. backed out of the project because of budget problems, and has taken on a mission that could be just as useful to science, and at a fraction of the cost. The U.S. is sending an existing sa tellite to intercept the smaller Giaco- bini-Zinner comet, and if does it will be the first man-made object to intercept a comet. More importantly, particles on the comet could help scientists in vestigate the origin of the solar system. So there. We will win a race, and do it withina very reasonable budget. With space research in its neonatal stage, engineers will have more oppor tunity to choose between one of two routes: very expensive or expensive. When the choice exists, less money should be spent on a perhaps less ex travagant version of the same idea. In the near future, when the space suits are handed out, the companies who spend millions solving a hundred thousand dollar problem will be the ones sucking for air. Coke research team, take note. Camille Brown is a senior journalism major and a columnist for The Battal- © 1983 by NEA, Inc “Get back in your room and study. Do you want to be Lee lacocca, OR NOT?” The Battalion USPS 045 360 Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Rhonda Snider, Editor Michelle Powe, Managing Editor John Hallett, Kay Mallett, News Editors Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor Karen Bloch, City Editor Travis Tingle, Sports Editor The Battalion Staff Assistant City Editors Kirsten Dietz, Jerry Oslin Assistant News Editors Cathie Anderson, Jan Perry Assistant Sports Editor Charean Williams Entertainment Editors Cathy Riely, Walter Smith Staff Writers Tamara Bell, Meg Cadigan, Ed Cassavoy, Ann Cervenka, Cindy Gay, Doug Hall, Paul Herndon, Tammy Kirk, Jens Koepke, Trent Leopold, Mary McWhorter, June Pang, Tricia Parker, Lynn Rae Povec, Marybeth Rohsner, Gigi Shamsy, Kenneth Sury Copy Editors Rebecca Adair, Mike Davis, Sifrah Oates Make-up Editor Ed Cassavoy Columnists Marcy Basile, Camille Brown, John Hallett, Karl Pallmeyer Photo Editor Wayne Grabein Photographers Greg Bailey, Anthony Casper, Franlc Hada, Kyle Hawkins, Jaime Lopez Michael Sancnez Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper operated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarily rep resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. vs pa per students in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Department of Communications. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday dur ing Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per se mester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Ad- s turn' vertising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. Editorial staff phone number: (409) 845-3316. Ad vertising: (409) 845-2611. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battal ion, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 ByCHR The gove gether with tries to furtl nent spat administrat Texas A&M Ray Coll ministrator technology Space Rest Engineerinj Colladay terns that a group on a ready being But engit tails are stil said. “What wi what resoui and univer ment’s resoi While N mainly on platform, a search Cen neers have 1 station coul engineers ai The Lan encourage t Sch By KR The Erie begun fall year of tht child progr; The prc mothers ant lary Blake, tor, says. The pro year-olds b most trying says the two ing as an int “The pn credible sui Blake says. Both mo trust new s time friend! The schc for new mol they can lea