Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (May 2, 1989)
The Battalion OPINION Tuesday, May 2,1989 Decision may make Bush look like klutz If Oliver North is found guilty and has to go to prison, President Bush is going to find himself stuck between the proverbial rock and hard place. Bush has indicated that he would not use his presidential powers to pardon *■ North, even though he still insists that North was a “hero.” But if he lets North go to prison, will that be any way to treat a hero? We used to pin medals on their chests, not con vict numbers. And by letting North go to prison, Bush will be saying, in effect, that North was guilty as charged, and that North wasn’t merely following orders from above. If that’s true, it means that North really was a loose cannon in the White House, part of a secret government of which Ronald Reagan and Bush were unaware. So what does that say about Reagan and Bush? I think it says they were a couple of klutzes. I don’t know how else you could de scribe a president and a vice president who didn’s know about the kind of ille gal, free-wheeling foreign policy opera tions that North supposedly was run ning right under their noses. Therefore, if Bush denies North a pardon, he’ll be saying, in effect: “Hero that he is, North broke the law and must face the consequencess. And the reason he was able to break the law is that the great president, under whom I served for eight years, didn’t know what was going on in his own White House. And I, as his loyal vice president, didn’t know what was going on, either. We were a couple of klutzes, all right.” How embarrassing. Especially for the many Americans who admire Reagan and Bush, most of whom also think highly of North. If they believe that North is telling the truth when he says he was a mere, obedient link in a chain of command, then they must wonder why he is being allowed to twist slowly in the wind all by himself. That has to be perplexing. If they be lieve North, then it is impossible alsoto believe that Bush and Reagan didn’t know what was going on. But if they believe Bush and Reagan, then it follows/ that North is a lying scoundrel, who brazenly exceeded his limited authority Therefore, he can’t be a hero, as Bush and Reagan have described him, can he? Would a true hero try to shift the blame for his misdeeds to others? Mike Royko I Columnist Yet, Bush still says North is a hero. Would an American president fib to us? So I have to ask one more time, if North is found guilty, how will Bush jus tify not pardoning a hero? And, once again, the only justification can be that he will not deserve a pardon because what he did was wrong. Which, if true, leads us back to the sad reality that Reagan and Bush were a couple of klutzes. Of course, Bush can always change his mind. He has shown in the past that he can be flexible and fair if he receives a convincing argument. Remember the Reagan voodoo economics he ridiculed in 1980. Later, when Reagan made him his running mate, he became a voodoo fan himself. So if the jury nails North, Bush might reverse hiself and say: “I cannot permit a hero to go to prison.” And most of Ollie’s admirers would be pleased and relieved. But that would raise some pesky ques tions. A pardon for North might be taken to mean that North was telling the truth: He was just a loyal Marine follow ing orders, even if the orders were ille gal. And if that’s the case, it would mean that Reagan and/or Bush knew what North was up to all the time, when he was breaking laws, running arms deals, lying to Congress, shredding govern ment documents and committing other mischief. Which would mean that Reagan an d/or Bush haven’t been telling the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, or even a thin slice of the truth. It would mean that they have let poor Ollie, a lowly former light colonel, be a fall guy. Tsk, tsk, how will that look in the his tory books? So, if North is found guilty, the op tions are not pleasant for Bush. Let a hero go to prison, which means Bush and Reagan were klutzes. Or pardon him, which means they lied to us. President Bush, meet Mr. Rock and Mr. Hardplace. Copyright 1989, Tribune Media Services, Inc. MA&3UUK HCVSTOfJ fWT “Pm sorry, Od.North,but you can’t solicit the jury for Contra aid funds!” Mail Call Abortion is no solution EDITOR: I am writing to address Stephanie Stribling’s “Supreme Court decision must allow abortion to remain legal.” I agree that “unwanted pregnancy is a mistake,” a mistake that can be prevented by sex education and turning away from premarital sex. Abortion, however, is not the “inevitable” solution to the problem. Just as a woman chooses to have an abortion, she can also choose not to have one. Not having an abortion would not only end the physical and emotional costs associated with the procedure, but would also remove the sense of loss or grief over the death of her child. Not having an abortion would at least “inflict” some quality of life upon child, rather than no life at all. Not having an abortion and utilizing an adoption agency would provide the gift of happiness to those couples who are unable to have a child of their own. Not having an abortion is the only alternative for a true Christian. Miss Stribling, the “heinous crime” lies in our society’s acceptance of abortion, not those attempts to stop it. Samantha Summers ’91 How about a steak, babe? EDITOR: Something very interesting occurred in the April 24 edition of your paper. On page six, there was a staff article on the “sexism” incident at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Specifically, the students there were concerned about the questionable language employed by the advertisers; the word “babe” was of special interest to those students as being offensive to females. Then I turned to page 12 and noted the presence of an advertisement by the A&M Steak House. A scantily clad young woman was holding up a list of things that might persuade potential diners to grace that particular establishment. Said young woman was referred to as a “fabulous babe.” I will grant that your organization has no control over what the advertisements say or depict, so long as they are the powers-that-be deem it to be in “good taste.” I must, however, let it be known that I find this particular state of affairs to be seemingly incongruous. The person who wrote the University of Wisconsin article wrote it not only to provide us with news from north of Villa Maria but also to expand our awareness of sexism around us. At least that is what I am led to believe. To place this article in the same edition as an advertisement that would be considered “sexist”, under those same conditions implied in the article, is ironic, if I did not know any better, I would say that the ad and the article being placed in the same edition was a very subtle, sarcastic comment on the work done by the reporter. In total seriousness, I realize that this was merely coincidence. But, the irony of it all is not lost on me. L W tu & 1 d d h I> Keep up the good work, Batt guys and gals; you may yet keep me from losing my sense of humor. David B. White ’90 Thanks for the compliment EDITOR: In regards to Nan Nagle’s letter of April 26,1 think I speak for all the DJ’s at KANM when I thank Nan for the compliments she so lavishly doled out. It’s nice to know that people do notice and like what we do. However, just for everyone’s edification, I’d like to point out that KANM is planning to begin broadcasting (that’s right — on the air!) around the first of next year, and that credit for this achievement should go to the officers of KANM. I hope everyone will keep this in mind and support alternative radio on our campus. Meredith Denton ’89 Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial reserves the right to edit letters for style and length, hut will make every effort to maintain the author's intent. Each letter must be signed and must include th classification, address and telephone number of the writer. : War on drugs no excuse to ignore civil rights Noted novelist William Burroughs declared in one of 1987’s commemora tive issues of Rolling Stone that “the big gest danger now is a fascist takeover un der the pretense of a war on drugs.” I may disagree with the wording and the implied belief in a conspiracy, but I feel the statement contains a great deal of validity. Under the excuse of a war on drugs, the government, perhaps with out intending to, has circumvented and even eliminated some fundamental civil rights. Big Brother has penetrated the world of private conversations. Certain firms specialize in planting people in factories to record conversations, supposedly on a quest for drugs. However, the spies do not turn off the recorders when the con- versations occasionally stray from - Adam Matieu v. fr Columnist drugs. As a result, all of the conversa tions are recorded. Marital discontent, job frustration and even hated union ac tivism all appear on tape in the posses sion of a firm hired by the managers of the company. Of course, the firm claims that management and law enforcement only have access to the parts of the tape that contain references to drugs. One would have to be extremely naive to be- The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Scot Walker, Editor Wade See, Managing Editor Juliette Rizzo, Opinion Page Editor Fiona Soltes, City Editor Ellen Hobbs, Chuck Squatriglia, News Editors Tom Kehoe, Sports Editor Jay Janner, Art Director Dean Sueltenfuss, Life Editor Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspa per 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, fac ulty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Department 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 request. Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-1 111. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battal ion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col lege Station TX 77843-4111. lieve that management would not be able to secure the tapes or acquire infor mation from them. The potential for abuse of this tactic is simply too great to justify its use. Far more distressing, however, is a re cent decision by the Supreme Court. The case involved the conviction of a man carrying drugs. The problem arose when airport authorities apprehended and searched him simply because he looked suspicious. In the now familiar 7-2 vote, the Court upheld the convic tion. The implications of the decision are far reaching. Airline authorities presumed the man guilty and the Court supported this. The overused but true adage, “innocent until proven guilty,” was totally ignored. Chief Justice William Rehnquist BLOOM COUNTY stated in the majority opinion that air port authorities may search someone if “reasonable suspicion” about his nature exists. This amounts to a tacit sanction of questioning and searching anyone based solely on his appearance. How many people, especially at this univer sity, would look suspicious to uni formed, presumably jumpy, airport se curity guards? These guards will not search everyone, only those whom they deem “suspicious.” I would rather not leave a decision on the acceptabilty of my behavior and appearance to these people. It is unfortunate that this case rep resented the whole issue of searching people in airports. The paranoid Rea gan justices probably could not rule in any other way. However, I hope that the airports never fully explore the t: scope of this decision. These are just two samples of an eve 1 ! growing number of governmental sions that curtail personal freedoi and there is no evidence that these forts are declining in number. The average person may no Ion complain about his boss or dress as likes without fear of serious cons quences. People must have the right express themselves, especially in set innocuous ways as frustrated grumble and mode of dress. The government is raping Ameritf in an effort to win an unwinnablewar : simply must stop this madness. Adam Mathieu is a senior chemist major and a columnist for The 1