The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, October 24, 1997, Image 7

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

mg Intern WITH ay • October 24, 1997 The Battalion PINION Idmired" 0% Sighting for the wrong cause Stm, women of United States'armed forces should play no part in United Nations Donny Ferguson columnist pril 1775. American min- utemen stand firm on he battlefields of Lexing- nd Concord, prepared to ice their lives in defense of om against a tyrannical monarchy. August, 1995 - Conroe, Texas COIlsin Specialist Michael New , fuses to wear United Nations ionigtllsignia, stating he has taken i oath to defend the United ates, not the United Nations. 'less Sent Ever since brave American ilunteers stood up to the world’s most powerful mil- force on a quiet spring morning over two cen- ies ago, the United States armed forces have up- ;ld a tradition of excellence and bravery. TSowever, the rights of American soldiers and the flivereignty of our military is in jeopardy at the med- ting hands of the United Nations. ; 0( tober 24 will mark “United Nations Day,” the anniversary of the international organization’s at ion. Originally conceived as a global peacekeep- rce to counter the worldwide nuclear threat of old War, the UN has taken on the role of “plane- aolice,” shipping American soldiers thousands of away into domestic squabbles in far away war nes such as Bosnia. The UN should recognize that American soldiers ive taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the nited States from enemies foreign and domestic, ley have no obligation to serve the United Nations. Tlie UN’s control of American soldiers had gone rgely unchallenged until a brave Army Specialist, [ichael New of Conroe, deployed to Macedonia to nake the UN presence known,” refused to wear a NIrm band or helmet. “I ‘m enlisted in the US rmy; I am not a UN soldier,” New said, “I have taken vow to the UN; I have taken an oath to defend the institution of the United States...” New is right. Just as it was immoral to force Ameri- jColonists to pay taxes and serve a king who violat- their sovereignty and refused them representation, is immoral to force a soldier to fight and die for a ireign nation for which they pledge no allegiance. Colonel Ronald D. Ray (USMC, Ret.), former eputy Assistant Secretary of Defense and legal unsel to New told The New American, “He has been e victim of a bait-and-switch. He was recruited to rve the Red, White and Blue, not the United Nations flag.” Colonel Ray also pointed out, “As a US soldier, New would be entitled to a protected status as a POW; as a UN soldier, if he were captured he would be a ‘UN hostage.’” Not only are American soldiers’ lives in danger while on UN “missions,” if they are captured, they are not afforded the same protections they would have under US command. Probably the best known case of inhumane treat ment of UN hostages is Lieutenant Colonel Rich Hig gins, abducted and hanged by Hezbollah terrorists while on another one of the UN’s “peacekeeping mis sions” in Lebanon. Colonel Ray recalls “the position of our State Department was that they would seek the release of‘all of the hostages’ without making a spe cial effort to secure the release of this American offi cer. He wasn’t an American POW; he was simply an other UN hostage, and this redefinition of his status proved fatal.” Efforts to reform the UN and relieve the United States of its massive financial support have been met by stiff opposition from Democrats and liberal Re publicans. Congressman Ron Paul’s (Rep., 14-Texas) amendment to House resolution 1757, the FY 1997- 1998 State Department budget, included provisions for the United States’ withdrawal from the UN and in sured no more American soldiers would lose their lives for a foreign body to which they do not pledge allegiance. »> Local congressman Kevin Brady voted against the UN reform amendment and it was defeated. In poli- tics-as-usual style, Democrats and liberal Republi cans together to fight reform of the United Nations and succeeded in preserving UN command over American soldiers. The brave men and women of America’s armed forces have no obligation to serve the United Nations. Their duty is to protect and defend the United States of America, not to cater to the political whims of a multinational body. Unfortunately, they must serve a Congress who will not relieve them of their immoral obligation to a foreign body and a Commander-In-Chief who once said he is “in great sympathy with those who are not willing to fight, kill and maybe die for their country,” and finds himself, “loathing the military. Hopefully, Democrats and liberal Republicans in Congress, Kevin Brady included, will follow Michael New’s lead and recognize the rights of America’s armed forces. Donny Ferguson is a junior political science major. LClinton, Giuliani face disagreement over line-item veto is gone be] join us ;ood tin* ) a hese days President Clinton is be- , ing attacked on all sides. Besides the )ctober2i campaign finance issue, the Paula Jones ordeal, and losing a daughter to the world of higher ken education, Clinton aderehip ; has also been hack- ihip that ing away at bills i dt'ser. • With his newest toy, would I fhe line item veto. you P' eaie J| Touted by Republicans as part of some kind ofWWF tag team for the con stitution, the line item veto amendment America was right up there next to its partner, the danced budget amendment, which failed in the Senate earlier this year. Stephen Llano columnist Today, the line item veto is not an amendment, therefore, a challenge to the legality of the President playing cut and paste with Congressional bills was obvi ously forthcoming the first it was used. It wasn’t the immediacy of the chal lenge, but where it came from that should spark some surprise. Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of New York City filed a suit challenging the constitutionality of this provision of the President’s pow ers just last week. Apparently, Giuliani is protesting the veto of a provision that would have kept New York from having to return $2.6 billion dollars in Medic aid funding. “The president’s use of the line item veto in this instance is detrimental to the efforts of the city and its health care partners — the city’s public and volun tary hospitals and their employees — to provide maximum health care benefits to needy individuals,” Giuliani said. Obviously, Giuliani is a little upset about losing all that money. But the re action should upset Americans as to what we have lost as a nation. The line item veto in and of itself is an important consideration — giving this sort of power to one man over the content of bills is a scary proposition. Pressure from the people, who are, of course, so well informed on exactly what goes on in the Capitol, pushed this power right out of Congress, where the people's true representatives are, into the lap of the Imperial Presidency. Rejoicing that the President will save them from the evils of pork barrel poli tics, many voters are going to be shocked when their district represented by a “good” politician feels the effects of this power. Pork barrel is bad, unless it’s in my district. Just ask Giuliani or any of the others who helped him file the suit. On a deeper level, the distress call is clear. Americans have lost the concept of local government almost completely. The climate on television, the radio or in the newspaper reflects this — Problem X is a severe problem, and those lazy good for nothings in Wash ington better do something to solve problem X or we’ll vote them out. Unfortunately, this view circumvents the legitimate aim of government in the first place ’— to serve and protect the people. Cities, counties, and states are maybe not the best funded solutions, granted. But the effort and energy of co- operation on a local level can solve such pervasive issues such as crime. Neighborhood watch programs are a great example of city cooperation on a very local level. It may not be quick or easy, but at least it’s not contributing to a bankrupt imperial concept of government. Washington D.C. is the worst place Americans can look to solve problems that face them. Continually giving new and exciting broad powers to one person isn’t a solu tion — it is destroying the best solution we could possibly have. As for Giuliani, even if he wins or loses, until Americans rediscover city, county and state gov ernment, we may as well give the Presi dent a blank check. Stephen Llano is a senior history major. ilenensreiKfl^ assoonasi!i ,;: 'x r ,—« Mail Call i. tam0m —jVlisidentification stirs radio static n response to John Burtons Oct. 23 ! Broadcast news’’column: 3 News Wis former vice-president and sroom torrent volunteer for KEOS , I vould like to respond to your arti- ielconcerning KEOS’ relationship IKaNM Cable Radio. First of all, U operates at consistently er- oneous in citing KAMU as the sta- ;h Friday ion opposing KEOS . pKANM is a student organization ' vhic h operates at 99.9 fm cable, f md should be the station cited in ” r our article. Also, there is no such ocal program called ‘ Blues on the dove,” produced by KEOS - that irogram is produced by KPFT Icifica Radio out of Houston. ■KEOS is not the arch rival to [MM. As a participant with both bons at the time that KEOS was Ihdergoing the FCC licensing/ap- >lication process during 1992- 1 994,1 can assure you that it was |fact KANM that pilled its sup- from the creation of an on-air ilternative, non-commercial sta- ionforB/CS. 3-025) At the time, the DJs of KANM refused to participate because they wanted exclusive student control of the new station, a posi tion contrary to the mission of KEOS as a community-driven, all inclusive radio station. KANM expressly wanted to ex clude anyone who was not an A&M student, and when they saw that KEOS was open to all volunteers in the community, KANM as an orga nization refused to have any formal participation with the creation and development of KEOS. Informally, however, many DJs have participated concurrently with both situations since KEOS went on the air in 1995. KEOS has long been open to a more formal arrangement with KANM to in clude student DJs on the airwaves. But the management of KANM has consistently been adverse to any such arrangement. In the meantime, KEOS has grown substantially with student volunteerism, programs which target a student audience, and outreach towards the local student population, in addition to its out reach to the general public. KEOS has invited multiple student groups to advertise their events on the station. Currently, KEOS has more high school and college students on the air than any other broadcasting station in the vicinity. It is a complete misunder standing of the FCC licensing process to assert that KEOS could have taken :the license and ran.” KANM is not named anywhere on the application to the FCC, and could therefore have no authority over the actual license to Brazos Educational Radio as a non-profit organization which created KEOS Community Radio. Additionally, KANM has shown repeated ambivalence towards any efforts at communications with KEOS. Thank you for your consideration. Heidi Halstead KEOS volunteer Class of’92 Senate addresses co-enrollment Wed., Oct.22, the Student Sen ate passed Senate Resolution 97 (F) 7 concerning Blinn Co-Enroll ment. This resolution states that the Student Senate is not in favor of any change to the Co-Enroll ment policy, the policy as stated in Ruled 2.3.2 of the Student Rules (1997-98) manual reads: Undergraduate students en rolled at Texas A&M who wish to take a course or courses concur- renyly at another institution for degree credit at Texas A&M must receive the prior approval of their dean. The Student Senate unani mously passed this resolution Wednesday night in response to Faculty Senate discussion of a new Co-Enrollment policy. Faculty Senate has not taken any action regarding Co-Enrollment at this point, but in the best interest of the students, Student Senate vot ed to take an early stance. We appreciate the work of The Battalion, and understand that mistakes are made. We want all of the students to know that our posi tion stands in their favor, not to change the current Co-Enrollment policy. Any student interested can obtain a copy of S.R. 97 (F) 7 Blinn Co-Enrollment Resolution avail able on the Senate Web page locat ed at http: \\\stu- dent_senate. In addition, if you have an opinion on this or any is sue, committee membership is open to any student. Information concerning meet ing times and dates are also avail able aon the Web. Any further con cerns can be addressed by calling the Student Government Office at 845-3051, ask for Alice. Alice Gonzalez Speaker, Student Senate Class of'99 All Aggies should respect The Battalion Leave Mandy Cater alone. As a journalist, she was just doing her job. Almost every' response to the Bonfire pots articles last Friday have been a personal attack on her. Frankly, her article served its pur pose, and it obviously evoked a lot of emotion. It is true that many of the people complaining about the “bad” pots do not participate in the tremendous work that Bon fire requires. It is also probably true that no one would have even known about the pots if it weren’t for the Batt. Re member that tire Batt is a newspa per. Cater helped to uncover an in triguing story. No one can deny that. Not if they’re reading the article. The Bonfire workers seem to tlrink that the pots are their own business; that the profanities should have never been uncovered in the first place. Well they were, and now everyone knows about them. The “bad” pots were vulgar, disrespect ful, and undeniably crude. It created a bad image, and everyone knows. Everyone should remember to respect the Bonfire workers at A&M. They are hard-working and dedicat ed to what they do. All Aggies get to reap the bene fits of their work; all Aggies should be proud of the Bonfire and its workers. Now the flip side...Everyone should remember to respect the Batt workers at A&M. They are hard-working and dedicated to what they do. All Aggies get to reap the benefits of their work; All Aggies should be proud of the Batt and its workers. Mandy Cater deserves at least that much. Daniel Hayman Professor speaks concerning Bonfire As a professor who has been at Texas A&M for 30 years, I can as sure the “vocal minority” at the bonfire cutting site that the lan guage portrayed on some of the hard hats and T-shirts is not accept able in the “real world” of educated, professional people, nor is it a tradi tion, and hopefully, never will be. While a student at this univer sity, I worked summers and holi days in the oil field, and never was exposed to that degree of moral turpitude. I have heard this sort of filth on a C.B. spoken by some, certainly not all, of the long distance truck ers on the interstate highways. This could partly be attributed to their lack of education and the environ ment in which they were reared. What I am seeing in the stu dents who are advocating and participating in this display of pornographic language is a de sensitization from being exposed to language and activities of this nature in various ways. They seem to have literally lost all semblance of a conscience and the ability to discern what is right and acceptable from that which is pathetically immature and degen erate. I am saddened that these same students will soon be wearing an Aggie ring and receiving a degree that will set them apart as a grad uate of Texas A&M University. One might expect this sort of behavior from a young teenager who is seeking peer approval and experimenting with various things for “shock” value. This should not be found in a university student who should be serious about being a contribut ing and valued member of the community where they will someday live. I agree with the sentiments of one of the students: “Get a life”! “A people that values its privi leges above its principles soon loses both” (Wisdom Literature). Larry D. Claborn Texas A&M professor