I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
!
!
I
i
i
Opinion
CIA needs power to work
While not condoning the alleged abuses of the Central
Intelligence Agency, we have long felt the administration
and Congress have fettered the vital agency with restraints
unrealistic in today’s world.
Support for this position, while slow in coming, is being
more frequently heard in Washington — partly in view of
the crises in Iran and Afghanistan and partly because of
information on Soviet Union tactics now coming to light.
Details of a secret campaign conducted by the Russians —
a bag full of “dirty tricks” to discredit the U.S. among its
allies and other nations — were made public last week by
the House Intelligence Committee.
The study portrays a clandestine anti-U.S. propaganda
drive that reached a peak in intensity and sophistication in
1978 and 1979, the period in which the U.S. and the Soviet
Union were wrapping up a new strategic arms limitation.
Heavily bankrolled by the Soviets in regard to money,
manpower and equipment, the effort to create tensions
between the U.S. and other countries apparently was consi
dered top priority in covert operations of the KGB.
What was happening to the CIA during most of this time?
It was being severely chastised for not playing by the rules,
held up for public ridicule and chided for not being “open”
in its operations.
To suggest we do not need a top-notch spy agency is
absurd. To suggest that such an agency play only by the rules
of the good guys is ludicrous. No intelligence agency in the
world can operate publicly and be effective.
It is unfortunate we had to learn the need for a strong,
effective intelligence system the hard way. It is regrettable
we had to reduce the CIA to shambles and learn what the
KGB is doing before we could see how vital the need for our
own system.
Amarillo Daily News
the small society
by Briclcman
I'/AA
A UV11A& £>NLY
£>N
WHAT
AAAKIri& —
The Battalion
usps
LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the editor should not exceed 3(H) words and are
subject to heinfi cut to that length or less if Ionizer The
editorial staff reserves the rifiht to edit such letters and does
not guarantee to publish any letter. Each letter must be
signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone
numbir for verification.
Address correspondence to l^cttirs to the Editor. The
Battalion. Room 216. Reed McDonald Building. College
Station. Texas 77643.
Represented nationally hy National Educational Adver
tising Services. Inc.. New York City. Chicago and Los
Angeles.
The Battalion is published Monday through Fridas from
September through May except during exam and holidax
x-riods and the summer, when it is published on Tuesday
hrough Thursday.
Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester; $33.25 per
school year; $35.(X) per hill year. Advertising rates furnished
on request Address; The Battalion. Room 216. Reed
McDonald Building. C Jo I lege Station. Texas 77843.
United Press International is entitled exclusively to the
use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it.
Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved.
Second-Class postage paid at College Station. TX 77843.
045 360
MEMBER
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Congress
Editor Roy Bragg
Associate Editor Keith Taylor
News Editor Rusty Cawley
Asst. News Editor Karen Cornelison
Copy Editor Dillard Stone
Sports Editor Mike Burrichter
Focus Editor Rhonda Watters
City Editor Louie Arthur
Campus Editor Diane Blake
Staff Writers Nancy Andersen,
Tricia Brunhart,Angelique Copeland,
Laura Cortez, Meril Edwards,
Carol Hancock, Kathleen McElroy,
Debbie Nelson, Richard Oliver,
Tim Sager, Steve Sisney,
Becky Swanson, Andy Williams
Chief Photographer . Lynn Blanco
Photographers . Lee Roy Leschper,
Steve Clark, Ed Cunnius,
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are
those of the editor or of the writer of the
article and are not necessarily those of the
University administration or the Board of
Regents. The Battalion is a non-profit, self-
supporting enterprise operated by students
as a university and community newspaper.
Editorial policy is determined by the editor.
Viewpoint
The Battalion Friday
Texas A&M University March 7, 1980
Trudeau will have to fight off
growing Canadian regionalism
By JACK REDDEN
United Press International
Pierre Trudeau, elected prime minister
12 years ago on a promise of a strong central
government, is likely to spend the final
years of his tenure fighting a defensive ac
tion against growing regionalism.
The danger of Quebec separation is grea
ter, not less, than it was in 1968 and that
area’s demand for more autonomy from de
cisions made in Ottawa has now been
joined by provinces from the Atlantic to the
Pacific.
The tide has turned since Trudeau, a
dedicated centralist, came to power on a
pledge that Quebec would not get special
privileges.
Newfoundland’s government is deman
ding Ottawa transfer control over fishing as
well as off-shore natural resources. Both
Newfoundland and Nova Scotia are trying
to restrict jobs in oil and gas exploration to
natives of the province.
In the west, which elected only two Li
berals to the federal government — and
none west of Winnipeg — the feelings of
antagonism to Ottawa are old but never
stronger than at the moment.
It is just a matter of time until Trudeau
gets into a confrontation with Premier Pe
ter Lougheed of oil-rich Alberta.
Trudeau is committed to lower oil prices
than those promised by the previous Con
servative administration — Lougheed is
adamant that Alberta will get as much re
venue as the Tories promised. His threats
have gone as far as cutting energy supplies
to other provinces.
On the west coast, British Columbia Pre
mier William Bennett unveiled his govern
ment’s new budget with an endorsement of
national unity but a warning for Ottawa and
central Canada.
“British Columbians today,’’ he said,
“have little more representation in many of
the central institutions that govern the acti
vities of Canada than our forebears did in
1871 when the united colony of British Col
umbia entered Confederation.”
It is ironic that Trudeau, the man who
went to Ottawa to stop Quebec turning
inward, should be prime minister when the
regions of Canada are increasingly deman
ding changes in the traditional power
sharing that appear to be erecting barriers
between provinces.
The predominant strength of central
Canada has been unchallenged for a cen
tury. There was grumbling in the past ab
out the economic structure, which pro
vided high tariffs to force the purchase of
Ontario and Quebec’s manufactured
goods.
Now the demand for a change is being
backed by the one irresistible force — the
growing economic power of Canada’s for
merly backward and dependent regions.
Oil has turned Alberta into the weal
thiest of the country’s 10 provinces. New
foundland is still Canada s poorest province
but is confident the exploratory wells off
the main island will prove there is enough
oil and gas to go the same direction.
Nova Scotia looks to the treacherous
wind-swept sands of Sable Island to give
the energy-poor province the natural gas it
needs — and of course fights for sole juris
diction over the seabed mineral resources
that Trudeau wants to share.
Trudeau spoke repeatedly against this
rising regionalism and the Conservative
endorsement of it during his 1979 election
campaign but almost ignored the subject
until very near the Feb. 18 vote that re
turned him to power.
“Canada is not a 'community of com
munities' where a lot of little feudal states
try to get together to give some power to
the national government, " Trudeau said of
the previous Conservative government’s
view of Canada.
“The people of Canada want to vote in
this election to say clearly that they want a
government which will govern for the
whole country, not for one province against
the other, not for onepartajjt
other.
They did — and they didn’t
( )ntario, which most agree hast
most during the last century(rtr/m
nomic framework of the sparsely J
nation and now needs westemoijjJ,
back to Trudeau.
But clearly the western reWlv
Trudeau at least partly reflects^
ion of the Quebec native’s viewtf^H
unity — a mood also apparent
\ incial governments that fightwiaE
receive strong support.
Trudeau in the past has beenuav
give the provinces what theyaskdr ;’
although many think he is now:--
ciliatory, in his speech on thenigkH
returned to power he talkedofil
central government.
I'nder the constitutionOttawaa..,
rule provinces for the nationalgyrlfe
has been hinted in the past on mattyi
as Alberta's threat tocutoffener|)r®
in order to get world prices. ButusJ
powers without popular support
extremely dangerous.
Like it or not, Trudeau willprokk;
on the defensive in his final term,®/
fend off the growing regionalvoifl
minimi/e the flow of powertopiJll
go\ ei mnents until the pendulum ml
1
Jt
ne
an
to
dr
st;
th
th
dr
th
se
2
4
€
me
the
A&
Cl
oh
Letters
Government by people, not computer
Editor:
I am writing in response to the “Compu
ter may aid marriages” article in March
5th’s Battalion. This article deals with plans
for computers that would aid people in
making decisions in areas such as voting
and marriage, a “... kind of mass produc
tion of intelligence, ...,” as the sociologist
developing the program calls it.
The very idea of such functions being
carried out by a computer abhors me, as it
should any individual concerned with pre
serving freedom and morality in society.
Can decisions made through a computer’s
“analytical thinking” involve morals and
basic human rights? And, if so, who is to
program these ideas into a computer?
I’m not in any way saying I’m against
computers. They are invaluable in almost
every facet of our culture. But there exist
certain decisions, (about things like politics
and marriage), which should be made by
human brain, however “muddled” it is with
feelings and emotions. According to the
article, cheap versions of computer prog
rams to “relieve” our minds of such deci
sions could be on the market within five
years. The idea certainly is tempting, as it
appeals to the laziness and self-doubt in
almost everyone. But we must always keep
in mind that ours is a government “of the
people, for the people, by the people” —
not computer.
Kathy Johnston
Women’s team happy
Editor:
The views exuressed in Wednesday’s let
ter column (“Soccer Ignored”) concerning
the men’s soccer team do not reflect the
views of the Texas A&M women’s soccer
team. We do appreciate the support we
have received from the Intramural Depart
ment, the Battalion staff, and the student
body. As an extramural club, we are the
reigning state champs representing Texas
A&M University. With the backing we
have received, and with thecontal
port, our level of competition cane
crease.
President Donna Elk 1 F
Coach Alan Hi* ■
Correction
Three students were misidentifel
picture appearing on page lofH®l
Battalion. The cadet doingpushuOT
Giebel, and seniors Stuart Sasseras : |
man Linkenhoger are members!?
pany B-l.
Thotz
By Doug Graham
I HCPE UR. CLDIVilGS' MANOSOUPT IS
SHORT. I ME GOT To CHAIMGE
3 UORTS (M OGK PHM SlGS H. BOOK
SO UdE CAM PRIMT A SE.G0MD EDITION
that will. HAUL To our
AT AM E\JEN
HIGHER PR\
TRAM
\TUE CASA
DMC.
WHfcM The MANMJ5CB1PT
REACHES ITS XiesrfA/ATIOwJTP
SUEA2ELV
0 IMC
f HOWEVER, I'll snul
this \s poorly writtem
IWODM^RfcHfcKJSlGLE CARCAOL