The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, February 02, 2000, Image 13
Wednesday, Feint, OPINION 'fK'day, February 2, 2(KK) THE BATTALION Page 13 ne fhere goes the neighborhood %ms for a new luxury residence hall not in the University’s best interest sefflfj Ult Is the RK (AP) >tpopular e" novelist k. t on the s in critical . asA^M i lire at his - ipu sutlerd -ytK. n is h.i\ night istjjtuJciu oke out ir '! his l ast ^^■tion ' iteir right ailer New Year ic ^ UI nof-Q^| arL . ma de. Max Iv it i d darkh API- restv st (J .unpus librarv' at 2 a.m. in mitidle of finals. Maybe it is le Field wtien the Longhorns ne ti > town. [Despite all this corn ition. nglit now tlie grassy comer the [lot next to All Faiths Chapel , joss from the Beutel Health Cen- lmu 1 * s |P'-‘finitely in the running, re at hir Ma n > people have different -.utTcrtt as for this location’s future, but night s .sidenee Life is working hard to out in tk i the spot for a new luxury resi- s 1 • ice riall. Although the idea of author - ythii ■ new is always exciting, been c; cSrent plans for this residence 1 ar». extremely elaborate and tn CTixa \ relevant to the students' needs. ' Thi. plans for the new residence il art. similar to the type of struc- i> reponevit g^urrently used in off-campus is b-ugat-.'ygfe. residence halls, such as The 1 Jlawav I louse, with four bed- . ims sharing a kitchen area. The first question in any tns nor something new on the xas \&M campus, and maybe the biggest problem with this specific project is, what will it cost the students? The University is still paying for previous residence hall con struction projects from 1989 and will continue to pay until approxi mately 2009. A&M does not need to spend more money on an expensive apartment-style residence hall. So, the people working on the plans for the new residence hall are sug gesting the expensive on-campus housing. Because the cost of this resi dence hall is so lofty, there is also an unmentioned part of the plan that is nearly inevitable. It is not likely that there will be enough students who agree to pay this out rageous rent and the price will have to be lowered to a more rea sonable cost. So, what about the dilferenee that still needs to be paid? Well, to be blunt, all on-campus students might have to uay hi it \e lupcrlf “toll road method." In other words, get the students who are liv ing in the residence hall to pay, higher fees prices to pick up the tab for its construction, and ideally the new hall would not be costly to those living elsewhere. Although this seems to be a simple plan, there is a definite catch. To break even w ith its building fees, the new residence hall would cost its residents a hefty' rent. The price to the prospective residents would certainly be more than that of living in one of the modular res- idence halls — currently the most Although the idea of anything new is always exciting, the current plans for this residence hall are extremely elaborate and not relevant to the students' needs. pay that bill. The money could be subsi dized by a planned in crease in the cost of all on- campus resi dence halls. Although the cost issue is important, it is not the only reason this plan should not be given the green light. The elaborate lay out of this residence hall (which is what would cause outrageously high prices) is not necessary’. Why does a residence hall need to have a kjtchen , when it w ill be located across from the improved Sbisa Dining Hall? Furthermore, having a kitchen for the luxury of cooking what one wants is nice, but for tenants living in a residence hall not lo cated extremely close to a park ing garage or fish lot, getting to the store for cooking supplies may not be an easy task. Finally, because of the apart ment-style layout of the pro posed residence hall, it is obvi ous that it would be exclusively for tenants who can afford more extravagant living. Northside is perceived as being a practical, no-frills community. Setting up a high-cost luxury residence hall would create a stig ma of have’s and have-not’s. Why would Texas A&M purpose ly plague Northside with this fi- naneial segregation? Each year many freshmen are put on waiting lists for on-campus housing. It is true that a new resi dence hall would be in the best in terest for the future of a growing student body, but there is really no reason the residence hall could not follow more simplistic ideals and run for a much low er price. The ideas for the private resi dence hall are not set in stone, but the project already has an ideal finish date of 2003. If the plan is approved, it will not be long be fore the cement is laid. Melissa Bedsole is a sophomore general studies major. EMILY HARRELL/I m BATTALION vith hv -,hotozr: i as hi! ipna. Truth about massacre obscured by both sides Texas lawyers forsake charity work “G Chris HLiriTNES days. O n Dec. 13, 1937, after tearing through half of China like the prover bial bull in a shop, the Imperial Japanese Army captured the city of Nanking and began three months of looting, rape, torture and mass murder. The massacre claimed between 32,000 and 369,000 lives, depending on the agenda of who one talks to. ®In a perfect world, someone would be wearing a white hat. However, every side in any discussion of the Nanking Ineident, more spectacularly known as the Rape of Nanking, has reached levels of self-delusion matched perhaps only by the pathologically insane. The Japanese government has systematically dov nplayed all Japanese wartime atrocities, while the Chinese government and people have supported the highest death toll. ■Perhaps most disturbing, though, is the insistence of many Japanese right-wingers, including figures as prominent as Shintaro Ishihara, governor of Tokyo, that there was no massacre at Nanking at all. Tlie lies on both sides must stop before history is doomed to bear the repetition of these crimes. ■The efforts of the Chinese to memorialize the dead of Nanking (and more impor tantly for the Chinese, to blame the Japanese for those deaths) are being undercut by the insistence of otherwise reputable scholars on ludicrous ly high death tolls as high as 369,366. Fig ures like this are achieved via methods that car be kindly labeled as “questionable.” A better description would be “exaggerated,” “biased" or perhaps “dishonest.” t':, The Chinese are relying on, and inflating, the official Allied death toll for Nanking. The Allies counted 300,000 deaths from highly suspect sources. |iFor example, a Dec. 18 mass killing on the banks of the Yangtze River was tallied by sun ivor Lu Su at exactly 54,718 people. Su, a local peasant, reported that the victims were bound in pairs, marched to the river, machine-gunned, bayoneted, doused in oil and then set on fire. Su was hit in the leg and hid in a cave, which allowed him to gain his count. The fact that Su could apparently count that well through a cave wall while in jured and on the run creates too much doubt to trust his numbers. Every mass killing is plagued by similar problems, yet the Allies anti the Chinese have taken the numbers at face value. S', A relief organization, the Tsun-shan-tang, said it buried 110,000 bodies over a two itibnth period. In a three-week spurt during this time, they claimed to have buried /I PERF-0100 105,000 victims. To perform this feat, they would have had to increase their daily rate ds and cap- :e and ts. These ie i? The lies on both sides must stop before history is doomed to bear the repetition of these crimes. is, 4, ;es. from 75 bodies to 5,000 bodies-per-day. Such improvement is simply not credible. Yet, the Allies and China just took their numbers at face value. But while Nanking was not nearly as bad as the Chinese claim, it did happen. An American missionary filmed the massacre of civilians and smuggled the movie reels out qf the country. Japanese soldiers routinely entered the “safe zone” set up by Europeans under the pretense of looking for Chinese soldiers and gang-raped and murdered Chi nese women. Historical records agree that these rape-murders occurred at least 20,000 times in three months, more than 220 rape- murders per day. And while accounts like Lu Su’s are un reliable as to number, they are utterly reli able as to existence. Lu Su did survive a massacre on the banks of the Yangtze. Bod ies were left in the street to be buried by so cieties like the Tsun-shan-tang. Women were raped and then murdered. And yet at a recent conference at Tokyo’s Asia University, historians and retired sol diers did claim there was no massacre at Nanking. Shudo I ligashinakano, professor of history at Asia Univer- — sity, said, “There was no massacre of civilians at Nanking.” To claim there was no Rape of Nanking is ludi crous. To claim that more died than really did is equally ludicrous. Many historical revi sionists seem to feel if they say it did not exist loud enough, it might just go away. Many Japanese feel it would be a loss efface to ad mit their ancestors committed such atroci ties. Fost-war historical revisionism has en sured that students grow up in the Japanese public schools ignorant of the existence of this atrocity. However, many Japanese feel it would be better to own up to the past and learn from their mistakes. More puzzling is the behavior of the Chi nese, who insist on inflating the casualty fig ures. It is commonly accepted that their mo tive for the inflation is so that Nanking will have a higher death toll than the nuclear at tacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Chi nese do not seem to understand that no one cares whose atrocity is bigger. There is no prestige in having been screwed over worse by a victorious invader. And while the Chinese are using exag geration to further a political end, the Japan ese revisionists are using outright lies to make themselves feel better about the dirty laundry from their country’s past. Each side must stop the agendas, stop the lies and stop the revisionist politics. Other wise, the continued atrocities that should have been prevented will bring tlie death toll higher and higher. your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” These words, etched into the base of the Stat ue of Liberty, have come to em body the American spirit of free dom and equality under the eyes of the law. Unfortunately, for many disadvantaged Americans the na tion’s second-most famous female statue, Lady Justice, might as well have words etched into its base as well. “The tired, the poor, the hud dled masses should seek justice elsewhere.” For millions of Americans, in cluding many Texans, the use of state and federal court systems is far too expensive a prospect to contemplate seriously. In today’s society, justice has too high a price for a large number of this nation’s citizens. Although Americans are entitled to court-appointed legal representa tion in criminal cases, they are on their own when it comes to finding legal advice or representation in civil matters. The necessary proce dures of transferring property, mak ing a will or getting social security benefits are impossible to carry out for the large number of economi cally-disadvantaged Americans who cannot afford the services of a legal firm. And even though nearly one out of every five Texans lives in pover ty, the Lone Star State ranks a piti ful 48th in providing legal assis tance to the poor. The vast majority of Texas lawyers come nowhere near meeting the American Bar Associa tion’s recom mended annual amount of pro bono work — 50 hours or one hour a week. In fact, ac cording to the Texas State Bar, four out of five Texas attorneys report absolutely no pro bono work at all. Many of those who did report pro bono work cited time served on community arts boards or FTA work, neither of which actually helped the indigent citizens of (his state receive the legal assistance they need. In 1994, a class action suit filed by South Texas farm workers ar gued that, in exchange for their ex clusive license to practice law, Texas lawyers should comply with By perpetuating a system where only those with money can seek justice, the principle of justice itself is being undermined. the moral, ethical and professional duty of providing pro bono ser vice. The workers asserted that it is part of the legal profession’s re sponsibility to ensure that all of America’s citizens are adequately represented in court. In response to the class action suit, the Texas Supreme Court held a brief hearing on the need for legal services for low-in- come Texans Thursday. Al though they failed to come up with a solu tion to the pressing short age of pro bono work, perhaps the hearing will remind the lawyers, judges and lawmakers of Texas that some thing needs to be done. Can Texas lawyers be made to do pro bono work? Can the state reasonably ask its lawyers to aban don their wealthy clients, lower their incomes and do legal work without getting paid for it? The answer, of course, is no. The state cannot ask lawyers to do that anymore than it can ask restau rant owners to donate dishes to lo cal food shelters. The initiative to help the poor must come from with in, it cannot be forced upon the in dividual by an outside force. That being said, the lawyers of Texas should be ashamed of their failure to do anything to help allevi ate the problem of legal underrepre sentation of'the poor. By perpetuat ing a system where only those with money can seek justice, the princi ple of justice itself is being under mined. As St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, law is “nothing else than an ordi nance of reason for the common good.” The common good cannot be served by a legal system which excludes the poverty-stricken por tion of its population. The true goal of the legal es tablishment should be to champi on the rights of the downtrodden, not merely to defend the rights of those who can best line their pocketbooks. To be sure, lawyers have the right to earn money, but they have an additional responsibility as citi zens to protect the founding princi ples of this nation. In the end, the bottom line should be justice and civil rights, not the almighty dollar. The mere concept of “Equality Under Law" does no good for those who cannot pay to get into the courtroom. Nicholas Roznovsky is a junior political science major. Chris Hufjlnes is a senior speech communication major. ‘White trash’ column draws criticism In response to Ann Hart’s Feb. 1 column. The Battalion’s Opinion page has sunk to a new low of ignorance and con tradiction. As an “offended citizen” and at the urging of Ann Flart, this writer will not take the Battalion’s racist “affronts lying down.” After reading Hart’s column, one draws the conclusion that she believes speech that is deemed offensive on the grounds of racism should be banned. However, if one follows Hart’s rationale, then The Battalion should be banned for its “inflammatory rhetoric.” Hart’s editors completely contradict her opinion with the headline, “White trash on the highway.” The definition of white trash according to Webster’s Dic tionary: “White Trash — slang, (dis paraging and offensive), a member of the class of poor whites, esp. in the southern U.S.” The use of the racial slur is not jus tified in print because it pertains to a group of ignorant activists who happen to be white. Hart then goes on to contradict her self saying, “The prospect of [the Klan] slipping into obscurity terrifies them, so they do whatever it takes to stay in the limelight.” Why not let them slip into ob scurity instead of dedicating six columns, 400 - 700 words and a graph- MAIL CALL ic to this topic? Finally, as if writing racial slurs across the top of the page in large let ters isn’t tacky enough, the column runs on the first day of Black History Month. Perhaps instead of making readers aware of the evils of the Klan in Mis souri, a better topic might have been the achievements made at Texas A&M University by Black students and what still needs to be accomplished. Joe Schumacher Class of ’99 In response to Heather CorbelTs Jan. 31 Bush’s religion alone not a reason for support column. It disturbs me to read an editorial that implies we should vote for some one solely because he appears to be a “model Christian.” Just because George W. Bush appeared at a church after the Bonfire tragedy (read — an other politician’s phony media tactic), I should vote for him? Let’s wake up and realize that politi cians know all the tricks to fool the vot ers, but more importantly that our fu ture president’s choice of religion is immaterial. One is not hired for an oc cupation because he is a moral Chris tian; he is hired because he can do the job properly, regardless of his person al life. The main issue that concerns me, and hopefully the rest of the campus, is that our economy continues to flour ish, leaving an ample amount of job openings in the near future. I never planned to spend six years earning two degrees at A&M so I could work at McDonald’s when ultimately complete my education. Think about this situation, and choose your votes wisely. Thomas Lee Stone Class of ‘00 The Battalion encourages letters to the ed itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and include the author’s name, class and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed Mc Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mall Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mail: 1111 Fax: (409) 84S2647 E-mail: battletters@hotmall.com