Page 2/The Battalion/Friday, October 9, 1987
Opinion
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Sondra Pickard, Editor
John Jarvis, Managing Editor
Sue Krenek, Opinion Page Editor
Rodney Rather, City Editor
Robbyn Lister, News Editor
Loyd Brumfield, Sports Editor
Tracy Staton, Photo Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta
tion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial
board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions
of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students
in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Depart
ment of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during
Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination
periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school
year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M
Universitv, College Station, TX 77843-4 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216
Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX
77843-4111.
Moral guidance?
It’s been a year of embarassing revelations for presidential
candidates, and now the Republicans are in on the act.
In Thursday’s Washington Post, Pat Robertson admitted his
oldest son was conceived months before his marriage and that
he had concealed his wedding date. The information, though it
has no relevance in Robertson’s campaign, can only be consid
ered ironic coming from a self-appointed guardian of public
morality.
In a July interview, Robertson told the Post he and his wife
were married March 22, 1954. The actual marriage took place
Aug. 27, 1954. This discrepancy is not nearly as disturbing as
Robertson’s assertion that he had been honest with the newspa
per, that he and his wife considered the date of their son’s con
ception to be the start of their marriage.
Such a liberal concept of marriage seems foreign consid
ering Robertson’s vehement opposition to premarital sex. Rob
ertson, like Jim Bakker before him, is looking more and more
like a man who didn’t practice what he preached.
Who’s on the phone?
The joy of knowing
before you answer
Ma Bell has
done it again.
Through a new
service called Call
Identification, she
has reached out
and touched a
curiosity we all
share. Telephone
users now have
the chance to SondrO
know who is Pickard
calling them ■■■&■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
before they ever answer the phone.
What a wonderful and clever idea —
and so simple. When the phone rings, a
small screen hooked to your telephone
quickly displays the number of the
incoming call. The thought of it
intrigues and excites me.
But of course anytime a company gets
inventive and discovers something new
and different, complainers come out of
hiding. Those opposed to Ma Bell’s new
baby are ready and waiting — ready and
waiting to knock down Call
Identification at any chance they get.
Although still in its infancy, the
service has been available on a trial basis
in Orlando, Fla., for about a year now
and may be offered to Bell customers in
New Jersey and New York as well.
Opponents in New Jersey, including the
ACLU, are whining that Call
Identification represents an invasion of
privacy that could effect emergency hot
lines relying on anonymous tips. Others
say the service violates agreements
between the phone company and
customers who pay extra for
unpublished numbers.
The director of the public advocate’s
Division of Rate Counsel in New Jersey
has even gone so far as to say that
approval of Call Ideptification would
mean “we are being looked out for by
our Big Brother — Big Brother Bell.”
And according to a Houston Post
article, the New Jersey ACLU executive
director says, “Call Identification must
be seen as a new toy for the overzealous
bureaucrat, the overambitious
salesperson and overinquisitive
neighbor.”
A typical case of overparanoia.
If it ever catches on in the rest of the
country, Call Identification certainly
will not be ordered upon us, and neither
is it ordered upon the Bell customers in
Orlando. It is a service being offered,
not forced. Organizations that rely on
anonymous tips surely wouldn’t
implement a service such as Call
Identification, and neither Ma Bell nor
the government is going to make them.
They should be interested in the tips,
not the bearers of those tips. Unless the
organization decides to hook up Call
Identification for some odd reason,
nothing will disturb the caller’s
anonymity. It’s easy. If you don’t want
the service, don’t use it. Call
Identification shouldn’t discourage
anonymous callers with worthwhile
information for the same reasons, but if
it does, there are just as many ways to
make anonymous phone calls as there
are public telephones.
The over-worried-about-privacy
types with unpublished phone numbers
may also run into trouble, but such
secretive persons shouldn’t invade
someone else’s phone number unless
they are willing to divulge their own.
Again, for that type of paranoia, a pay
phone is a simple solution.
Ma and I are not the only Call
Identification supporters. New Jersey
state police said it was “a welcome relief’
and see it as a way to beat obscene
callers, reduce sales solicitation calls,
and help trace numbers during
emergencies. These reasons alone make
Call Identification worthwhile, but its
possibilities for personal use are
limitless.
Once you have numbers memorized
and matched with their respective
persons — bingo! Just watch your Call
Identification screen and you know
exactly who’s calling. I won’t deny it,
there are days when I don’t feel like
answering the phone, but I do it
anyway, because the call just mightbe
important. With Call Identification,
unwanted phone calls are out and
selective anwering is in. If the number
flashing on the screen doesn’t interest
you — don’t answer!
And then there’s always the prank
caller who whispers nauseating nothings
in your ear at 3 a.m. Call Identification
is the perfect revenge. Just softly recite
the number found on your screen into
the caller’s ear, being sure to include
that you’ve traced the call, you know
where where to find the caller, and that
the police are on their way. It should
work like a charm.
The ACLU can call me overzealous
or overinquisitive, but why shouldn’t I
be? It’s my phone and it’s in my house.
If a caller wishes to remain anonymous,
I’d prefer they not call at all.
An invasion of privacy by Big Brother
Bell? No, just another helpful invention
by Ma Bell. I’ll be the first in line if the
service is offered in College Station, and
I’ll bask in its originality every time my
phone rings.
Sondra Pickard is a senior journalism
major and editor o/The Battalion.
<£) convey t&vss s&svrCE
■wav sack iki the sack...between the hula hoops and The PEf rocks’
Breaking the cookie crew traditia
It’s that time of
year again. Those
familiar blue
notices asking for
volunteers for the
bonfire cookie
Bill
Sparks
Guest Columnist
crew are cropping
up all over
campus, and once again there are sure
to be dozens of beaming young ladies
lining up to pass refreshments to our
hungry boys. Something different may
happen this year, though. Some new
tradition, however ridiculous it may
seem, is trying to establish itself at our
University.
As you may know, the two female
cadet companies have been trying for
quite some time to be allowed to help
stack the bonfire. 1986 was the year that
the women expected to be working
inside the sacred perimeter.
You might remember that about this
time last year, a female cadet named
Simone Weaver was attacked by three
students on the bonfire field,
apparently because of a tradition
restricting women from this particular
field. You can imagine the surprise
Simone must have felt when she was
yanked off the oil barrel from which
she was directing the crew stacking logs.
She must have been even more
surprised as she was dragged off and
thrown to the ground outside the
perimeter.
Incidentally, it turned out that the
three cadets who participated in the
attack were subordinate to Ms. Weaver
in rank. For this reason, she believed
they had either been prompted by or
were under the orders of their direct
superiors when they carried this out.
Simone Weaver offered to drop the
assault charges against them if they
would reveal who had ordered them to
do this, but being “good Ags,” they of
course said nothing.
It was not at all surprising that there
were no orders issued from the Corps
Commandant or from our Board of
Regents demanding that women
immediately be allowed to work inside
the perimeter. By neglecting to do this,
our leaders not only showed the female
cadets that they were not concerned
with their problems, but also short
changed the male cadets who, upon
graduation, will be shocked to discover
that all branches of the armed services
now have women officers.
It was not surprising that male cadets
did not come to Simone Weaver’s
defense. In fact, they did just the
opposite, arguing that the womenki
no business on the field andthatium
student affair anyway, organized ami
run by the students with theuseof
volunteered land. All of which aremo
points, since the bonfire takes placeoi
campus — on state-supportedproptit
— and is a nationally known symbol
unique to this University. Noneohi
should be surprised by the behavioid
the cadets, who broke their promiit
allow female cadets to participate ini
stacking of the bonfire.
It seems like the easiest and safest
out of this predicament is forallofw
simply to insist that the femalecadetti
back into the cookie crew where the;
belong and keep their noses outoflb
men’s work. But with the passageof
time and the putting out to pastured
few old mules currently in influentii
positions, women eventually willbe
allowed into all areas of the Corpse!
Cadets on this campus. Thebigtjues®
seems to be whether certain male
members of the Corps will clingtotte
immature behavior and disgraceust!
again this year.
Bill Sparks is a senior English wifi
and editor of the newsletter for At
campus chapter of the National
Organization for Women.
Iform
Stone, C
a liver i
Aggies J
over $3£
And £
Tor him
at a table
Scott
fund-dr
sponse 1
beeen in
“Ever
far as d'
faculty g
afternoc
MSC) a
money. -
by at th
counting
can still«
Most
have cor
“We’r
checks ir
Bonfi
at Tex
started <
one of .
feverish!
is in its 7
The fi
the 78th
day fron
miles fi
County .
ten, a be
wise kno
Cuttin
civilians
Mitten sz
pated ov<
“Peopj
enthusia:
Mail Call
Where there's smoke ...
EDITOR:
It’s too late to change things this year. Uh-oh, there’s
that word —change. And probably too late for a few years
to come. But it’s not too late to think about what we do
each year about this time. We spend enormous amounts of
money, time and effort to satisfy a tradition, the Aggie
bonfire.
It’s like getting really drunk: You spend a lot of time
and money, and when it’s over you have only losses — no
gains.
We lose a field that could be nice but spends most of
the year recuperating from tradition. We lose a little clean
air. We lose wildlife habitat. Most important, we lose a little
self-pride, because everyone who supports it knows in
their heart it’s not necessary.
Do you support needlessly wasting natural resources?
Keith Coffman ’85, ’88
one tradition here that I have experienced once. As!
understand it, it’s a yearly event. I’m referring, of courst
to The Battalion s yearly opinion column on bonfire.lt’s>
typical Battalion column. It doesn’t say anythingpositivt
about bonfire, perhaps our oldest and greatest tradition
We get to read how dangerous and how terribly wrongit®
to destroy woodlands. Does The Battalion think thatwe
aren’t aware of this? Could it be that maybe the student'
believe that the benefits of bonfire (school spirit and
student bonding) exceed the negative aspects? They
obviously do or A&M wouldn’t have bonfire year after
year.
I see no reason this paper should bore us with things
we are already well aware of. I guess the writer does itf®
attention. Karl Pallmeyer sure got attention last year,
didn’t he? I wouldn’t have wanted to be him for allthettf
in the world. Anyway, why don’t you surprise everyone
this year and print a positive column? If you can’t doth;
do the next best thing and leave the page blank.
Chris Tiesman ’90
... there's bonfire
EDITOR:
As all know, A&M is a school rich in tradition. There is
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editomhlif
serves the right to edit letters for style and length, hut will make every effmUid
tain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must include the dust 1
lion, address and telephone number of the writer.
D
BLOOM COUNTY
by Berke BreatV
FIRST OFFICBR SPOCK
BACK FROM SH0R6 L£f\V£
ANP REPORTING FOR
PUTT/
\
wve been
REPifiCEP. we
HAVE A NEW
MISTER SPOOK
WITH A NEW PER-
speenve on the
CHARACTER.
AT THE MOMENT
A HE'S HAVING A
NEW TYPTCAL PISA -
SPOCK f/ GREEMENT
\ WITH PR. McCOY...
B0NC5,1 HPiTem
human mi
IMl