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