y, Ij§hruary 27, 2001
Opi NION
Page 5B
THE BATTALION
iar in ad). This r
y°u get an additmi
heduledtoendtooii
Fhe Learning Channel
/ebnoM
/ould televising McVeigh’s execution be a teaching tool or unneeded violence?
n April
OST&FOU*! 19 . I995 -
r " ' ' the Al-
^OTORCyCLE r ‘l l ® uil ^, n S
Aded m Ok-
uns great, $,250,060. :. . na City.
is.ooteThundred
774-2935. $4,500. • . ■ , ,
iixty eight
le w e re
MUSIC
/ANTED, local Tx. mm
ers already In. Call Mill,
PETS
>s. Kittens, Cats, Doj
ional birds, snakes n
belter- 775-5755,
home, adult cal, neuti
Call Becky 7664-158'
- black & yellow,
mted. close to ca»
-291-2947.
i and more than 500 were injured
3 deadliest act of terrorism on
soil. Timothy McVeigh was con-
d of the crime and given the death
Ity, to be administered by lethal
tion. His execution is set for May
. a federal prison in Terre Haute,
Only eight seats are available for
■e ms to witness the execution, but
tOOMMATES ; A fa J P ote " tiai witnesses.
o lew forbids broadcasting an ex-
5 peTs a 'wlk m asl6,MF ton on c l° sec P c > rcu d television,
the government is considering that
leaded, summer m because of the large number of
y dupl Cy ao y k h®> ms' relatives.
he Execution should be broadcast
pa\ -per-view, with all proceeds
reded for renewables»r g the memorial in Oklahoma
tem, great location » would sent a strong message
ould-be terrorists and give ob-
caii 694-7837. ;rs an opportunity to learn about
available 02/26,01. dal [punishment.
5 S mm^edu 89Apa,tmM would be the first inmate
TTiabil Lm/tsw,! death by the federal government
t-8206. ; 1963. The Oklahoma City bomb-
2-roommates, male ot S 3 unique case, and should be
ii 847-5392or22o-75<7 j as suc i 1 xhi s event attracted
attention from all over the
^ d, exposing the truth that the
tobHVlUbb :ed States is not as safe as it would
dveDriving Lots-oi-ta;tp believe. This horror has forever
forever the lives of thousands.
t-2:30pm). inside Bar bombing was an attack on the se-
)r. $2 stee2i , 7. L0 846 l 6i'ii 1 y °f the entire U.S. population.
-0017). jrica is not immune from large-
TRAVEL £ devastation at the hands of a few.
iblic execution would leave no
any on Padre! spraj^in anyone’s mind: Mass murder
,/-,i 582 )t tolerated and will result in the
penalty.
for victims, support for families of the
deceased and contributions to the
memorial in Oklahoma City. More im
portant to those whose lives were not
directly touched by the tragedy, a pay-
per-view execution offers the chance
for a more informed opinion on the
death penalty.
The death penalty is one the most
controversial issues in the United
States, yet very few ever have wit
nessed an execution. Given the violent
and barbaric nature of entertainment,
people should be able to handle this
reality. Veteran newsman Mike Wal-
into a death-penalty opponent. Before
any opinion is finalized, the opportu
nity to see what takes place should be
available to the public. A truly in
formed and well-thought-out opinion
on capital punishment cannot be com
plete without firsthand experience of
this process.
If anyone deserves to die for
crimes, it is Timothy McVeigh. His
case presents a unique opportunity to
send the message that terrorism on
American soil will be severely pun
ished. A pay*-per-view execution may
appear barbaric, but there is an up
T imothy McVeigh killed
168 people and injured
500 more when he
obliterated the Alfred P.
Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City with a 2,000-
pound fertilizer bomb on
April 19, 1995. He is sched
uled to become the first fed
eral inmate executed since 1963 but the most
unusual thing about McVeigh’s scheduled exe
cution on May 16 is that he wants his execution
to be nationally broadcast. This is a horrific
idea that should not be allowed.
• McVeigh’s crime was the largest act of ter-
on P . a hoTeisandcoS k PCY-per-view execution seems a
<.net Boo-575-2026. wisted, but that is only because it
never happened. The idea of tele-
TUTORS ig executions is not new. Several
win help with school an-: .'“Sj including Oklahoma, have al
ia. id relatives of murder victims to
^executions via closed-circuit
IGHT LOSS ^sion Everyone should be al-
n 30 days for $38. ihe opportunity to watch Ameri-
>61-4006. worst terrorist receive his penalty.
-sST»Si5®ong as there is no objection
vaiat 1-888-536-9/15 1 the victims’ families, whose
isafeiy. up toloTpS'iion matters more than anyone
96-9711/229-3582. J s | t fa s can b ene fi c i a | i n a nUITI-
weight? ioo%naw- ;0 f wa y S _ First, every penny must
anteed, doctor recc y \t • i
or Herb. o a worthy cause. In the McVeigh
>efore Spring iSfsftat could be medical expenses
Tune in Tune in rune in tune
ffiuite 1
n« n t
Tune
Tune
fflmte 1
mi
Tune
in Veen
I N Tune In lull
Tune In
Ton In i
In Tune
Tun
In
111
l
me In
fune
Tune
lace of 60 Minutes said, “We are told
it’s too grisly. The fact of the matter is,
we’ve been brought up on a diet of
televised gore, in which we routinely
see people being killed. If the death
penalty is supposed to be a deterrent,
the impact of seeing what happens
when an individual is electrocuted, or
gassed, or injected or even hanged
would be even more considerable that
just plain talking about it.”
Perhaps witnessing someone die
would turn a death-penalty advocate
side. Besides generating revenue, this
proposed public execution is an educa
tional opportunity. Also, restricting
what news can be broadcast over the
airwaves is contrary to the First
Amendment.
Should a broadcaster who wants to
televise an execution be censored?
Broadcasting an execution, even to
those who choose to receive it, is a dif
ficult issue, but it should be given a try.
Jonathan Jones is a junior-
political science major.
rorism ever committed on U.S. soil. He killed
168 people, including 19 children, in a matter
of seconds.
It is impossible for McVeigh’s execution to
be witnessed by all 250 of the survivors and
family members of the deceased who wish to
be present. Officials are considering broadcast
ing the execution on a closed-circuit telecast
that will be available only to survivors and rel
atives of the deceased.
A similar technique was used to allow vic
tims to watch McVeigh’s Denver trial in an au
ditorium in Oklahoma CitU
McVeigh, in a letter published by The Sun
day Oklahoma, asked that his execution be na
tionally televised.
“It has ... been said that all of Oklahoma
was a victim of the bombing. Can all of Okla
homa watch?” he asked in the letter.
The idea of televising an execution is not
new. In 1994, former talk-show host Phil Don
ahue tried to get permission to televise the exe
cution of murderer David Lawson but was de
nied by the North Carolina Supreme Court and
the U.S. Supreme Court.
McVeigh’s attorney Rob Nigh Jr. said
McVeigh will not make a legal push for a pub
lic execution, but Nigh said he supports the
idea.
“If it is our collective judg
ment that capital punishment is
a reasonable response to crime,
we need to come to grips with
what it actually is,” he said.
That is true. Perhaps it
would be more difficult for
Americans to support the death
penalty if they had to see a man
murdered by the federal gov
ernment. This course of action,
however, is a bit extreme.
The violence portrayed on
television, which has already
angered parents groups and
other activists concerned about
the effects of violence on chil
dren, is nothing compared to
watching an actual human be
ing die.
After McVeigh has been giv
en his lethal injection and the
drugs take their course, there
will be no director to yell “Cut!”
The potential effects of a na
tionally broadcast execution on
children far outweigh the wish
es of a mass murderer.
The idea itself is similar to
the days of the Old West, when
T | families used to bring picnic
I li f! 6 b as k ets so they would have
something to eat as they
watched public hangings. That
spectacle was done away with
long ago and should not return.
For anyone besides the families
of the victims and the survivors to watch
McVeigh’s execution is nothing more than
blood lust.
Executions do not belong on television
where they can be seen by children. While it
could affect the public’s view on capital pun
ishment, the risks are too great for McVeigh’s
execution to be broadcast to a wide audience.
McVeigh’s execution does not meet the decen
cy standards expected from television.
Richard Bray is a sophomore
journalism major.
JOE PEDEN/The Battalion
~ I
Mail Call
jnfederate flag is
mbol of history
h reference to Dr. John’Robertson’s
Itient “The Confederate battle flag is
Wrong symbol for the university.”
have a question for Dr. Robertson:
gpexactly is the right symbol for our
fees ity?
fhe Confederate flag is a symbol of
^ that took place in the very region
;re our University stands today. I un
stand that some may misinterpret the
J Is a symbol of racism. However
IXw Bare many of us who have ancestors
) fought and died for this flag of which
icked it up, stop buff speak. Why must we bring down a
ig. Please bringyojAbol of history because people are too
yearbook (the 13 s fi nttC) ^ g researc h an q fj nc |
UR
out more about what the flag might sym
bolize and what other issues the Confed
eracy fought for?
Nevertheless, people don’t, and time
and time again the issue is racism and
slavery. By bringing down the picture of
one of the former president’s of A&M be
cause he had one of his “heroes” in the
background is a prime example of the ig
norance so many Americans share. There
are many symbols around A&M that may
be linked to the Civil War and the Confed
erate South. In fact, some of the
founders and first presidents of this’Uni-
versity were involved in the Civil War,;so I
guess we should just shut down the en-
tire University, because we are a “wrong”
symbol for the rest of the United States.
Tyler Dunman
Class of ‘03
University diversification will not be
achieved with use of affirmative action
U niversity adminis
trators across the
country are feeling
pressured to take action as
the U.S. population con
tinues to diversify, yet
many campus demo
graphics remain predomi
nantly white.
Administrators are
defending the idea that affirmative action
may add diversity in color but offer little
substance.
At the center of the diversity issue are af
firmative-action cases in Texas, Michigan,
California, Georgia and Washington.
The Center for Individual Rights, a con
servative legal organization, filed an appeal
Feb. 20 challenging Michigan’s affirmative
action policy. A district court upheld Michi
gan’s current policy. This is the latest battle in
the fight to end the unjust practice of race-
based admissions.
If the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
overturns the decision, it will add weight
to the precedent that affirmative action is
unconstitutional.
Affirmative action seeks to increase di
versity by singling out minority students
and admitting them over students with sim
ilar qualifications. While the concept has
good intentions, it screams “racism.” Mi
norities should not be singled out because
of their race for any reason. Race-based ad
missions go against the idea of equality for
all Americans.
Instead of fighting a losing battle, univer
sities should expend efforts to create fair pro
grams to diversify their campuses. Diversity
can be achieved without affirmative action.
First, University officials should define di
versity and set their goals accordingly. A real
istic expectation would be for campus diver
sity to reflect that state’s demographics.
The value of a diverse campus is uncon
tested. However, there is a difference be
tween admitting students based on their race
and admitting those same students because of
the diversity they would share through their
experience as a minority. Arguing the differ
ence between one’s race and one’s experi-
Minorities should not he
singled out because of
their race for any reason.
ences related to race may seem philosophi
cal, but they are indeed separate. Diversity is
more than skin deep.
Universities need to show more commit
ment to diversity on campuses. They are con
cerned with bringing in more minorities, but
have relatively few programs that allow stu
dents to interact. At Texas A&M, countless
programs advertise diversity on campus.
Unfortunately, those programs do not
reach out to others. A good example of expo
sure to diversity are the International Week
booths in the main hallway of the Memorial
Student Center. Diverse programs that do not
reach out to others accomplish nothing.
There is no point in diversification if there
will be no interaction.
In Texas, A&M and the University of
Texas are slowly reaching pre-Hopwood mi
nority numbers. The steady increases are a
direct result of creative programs to enroll
minority students.
UT president Larry Faulkner has begun
taking trips to predominantly Hispanic and
black high schools to show his interest in
having the students apply to his school.
A&M has significantly increased the number
of scholarships available to minority stu
dents. This is evidence that diversity is
achievable without discrimination.
Finally, it is time to realize that the prob
lems facing minorities entering higher edu
cation have deeper roots than entrance re
quirements. Unfortunately, affirmative
action covers up other problems. If the ad
missions bar is even for all applicants re
gardless of race, and a significant number of
minorities are not admitted, two conclusions
can be drawn.
Either minorities are naturally not as in
telligent as whites, or the problem lies else
where. One would be ignorant to believe the
first conclusion, so it is likely that the diver
sity issue can be tackled from other angles. It
may be a pre-college education problem if
minorities are not competing as well at col
lege admissions. If the focus turns to an
swering the question of why minority stu
dents are not as likely to get admitted to
universities, the true problem can be discov
ered and addressed.
Universities should be commended for
their commitment to diversifying their stu
dent bodies. However, the commitment does
not justify the artificial diversity that affirma
tive action creates.
Mariano Castillo is a junior journalism
and international communications major
A