Guilty until
Tactics used by Charlottesville police are nothing more than racial pr
COLLINS
EZEANYIM
I ntheCierman Fxprcssionist film rash
of child murders throws an entire communi
ty into panic and soon has its citizensIprc-
suming innocent men guilty. Fortunately, such a
tiling would never happen in America, right?
at’sthe way it is supposed to work indjieory.
Someone should send a memo to the police
department in Charlottesville, Vu. It is common
that Americans are innocent until proven
ty. Indeed, this happens to apply to black
males who nonetheless are racially profiled in ^
tvery way imaginable.
For months, police in the town, home to the University of
itginia, were trying to catch a serial rapist using a controversial
and,in hindsight, not-so-brilliant idea. They asked hundreds of
c men in the area to have their cheeks swabbed to collect
DN'A samples to see if one of the samples matched that of the
upist-who also happened to he black. Nevermind that the tests
ere voluntary, the simple act of being asked to undergo such an
inspection is a humiliating and degrading experience. The tactics
Bed by the Charlottesville police may have been legal, but they
»ere far from ethical.
Charlottesville police said that in most cases, black men were
diosen to be tested based on tips given to them hy the public,
wording jo The Associated Press. This aspecj of their investiga
tion only made an already borrendou^yUuation worse. It is not a
itcret that much of the public regards black men - especially
)oung black men - with suspicion. For many members of the
Charlottesville community, it probably wouldn’t have taken much
to arouse m pii it in
At a forum held at UV. Charlottesville Police Chief Timothy J.
Longo was asked if the suspect had been white, would he still have
authorized the DNA testing. “Absolutely," he said. “1 will do them
all.” He added that he would perform the same type of test if the
suspect were Asian or a woman. These state
ments made by Longo are dubious and an obvi
ous attempt at damage control by the
Charlottesville Police Department.
The Charlottesville police would never per
form such widespread testing on groups such as
White men because their population is so large
that such tactics would be prohibitive. Black
men. on the other hand, are only a minority of
the population and thus make easy targets for
this type of harassment.
Black men have grown up in this country
with the notion that they are always suspects for
something. Department store employees will tail
them, fearful they might steal something. People,
afraid they might be robbed, will cross the street
when they see them approaching. In fact, this«reality of perpetual
suspicion has become so ingrained that when young black men
come of age they are taught by older generations how to deal with
the police when — not if— police stop their vehicle.
Some might call the policy adopted by the Charlottesville
police necessary. After all, the suspect has been responsible for six
attacks since February 1997 and may be responsible for up to 12
more assaults. Everyone agrees it is of utmost importance that this
cretin be caught.
<<
Black man, on the
other hand, are only a
minority of the
population and thus
make easy targets for this
type of harassment.
Putting aside the race issue, manpower has bee.ri pasted elimi
nating the reported 197 black men who submitted tp DNA-testing
to exclude themselves from being consideredp6tejrttia 1 suspects.
Also, the ACLU planned to distribute a flier that would alert black
men to the fact that they have the legal right to refuse the :est.
Charlottesville authorities will be put in a bind if
therapist they’re looking for refuses to pe test-
ed.f
Ultimately, this is racial profiling at its worse.
This is further evidence that Charlottesv ille
police required proof of a black man’s i mocence
as opposed to evidence of his guilt. UV graduate
student Steven Turner put it best: “Because the
suspect is black, every black man is a si ispect.”
Turner had the misfortune of having to wice
refuse to take the DNA swab test. This s the
exact opposite of how American due pn icess is
supposed to work.
After this story made national headliies and
the Charlottesville method of tracking d own
criminals was correctly criticized. Long)
reversed course and told The Washington Post that he had issued a
temporary halt to the “DNA Dragnet"'He said it will continue
once more “stringent, well-defined criterik” are developed. It
shame this type of compromise wasn’t the)guMiRg4Qtcetfehi
the investigation from the very beginning.
major.
Deyoe
Aggie tradition should not be exploited
in hopes of gaining the audience’s favor
ever again. Thai is the
way 1 felt the evening
of April 21, leaving
U Arena. Never again
Md Texas A&M’s tradi-
iions be exploited for political
jmpo.ses. I could barely
Mieve that I had just come
from a memorial service, and matt
tfiatthe eulog\ had been a MADDOX
campaign speech. The 2004
Muster speaker was wrong to stump for Vision
2020 during his address prior to the Roll Call for
le Absent. This should never happen again.
This year’s campus Muster speaker was Jon
Hagler, Class of 1958 and a leader in the
Association of Former Students and the Texas
A&M Foundation. Hagler has contributed years
ofhis life and thousands of dollars to A&M.
However, Hagler’s deep involvement in the
drafting of and fund-raising for Vision 2020 has
blinded him to what is an appropriate topic for
Muster, and to the appropriateness of Vision
2020 itself.
To Hagler, Muster probably presented the
perfect opportunity to try and salvage the reputa
tion of Vision 2020. The Class of 1954 was in
attendance along with thousands of devoted for
mer students — the target audience for fund
raising for Vision 2020. And since those former
students are further removed from current cam
pus politics, a simplified and one-sided presenta
tion of Vision 2020 was all that Hagler needed
to persuade his audience.
Hagler started off his talk in the right tone,
relating a humorous but tasteful story about
American soldiers serving overseas. He hailed
Muster as “A day of remembrance, of reverence
for life and of re-experiencing
the Aggie Spirit.” Soon
though, Hagler’s words lost
their reverence and digressed
to defining the Aggie spirit as
something that endorses
Vision 2020. '
Vision 2020 was a plan
drafted starting in 1997 on how
to “make A&M a top 10 uni
versity by the year 2020.”
Sadly, this “top 10” rating is
based on the highly-discredited
U.S. News & World Report
magazine ranking system.
Critics of this system include the deans at 178 of
America’s law schools, the National Opinion
Research Council and even former employees of
the magazine. Their criticisms range from the
ranking’s fluctuating system for rating schools,
the way it resembles a popularity contest by the
university officials who vote in the survey and
how it fails to address “the other education” that
A&M is renowned for. How this embodies the
Aggie spirit is a mystery.
Hagler equated the need to embrace Vision
2020 today as tjie same “crossroad” as
embracing Earl Rudder’s changes to A&M.
The difference in the crossroad presented by
Vision 2020 is that it will slam doors on
future Aggies, rather than opening them. A
recent example of this is the
faculty hiring initiative
recently begun under Vision
2020. While Hagler stated
that new faculty will benefit
the campus, he failed to men
tion that the subsequent 33
percent tuition hike imposed
on students over a one-year
period needed to afford the
hires is preventing current
and future Aggies from
attending A&M.
Hagler tried to quiet critics
of Vision 2020 by claiming
that “We (are not) trying to mimic Berkeley.”
However, since Berkeley is one of the six target
schools cited in the report as being well-regard
ed by U.S. News & World Report, we are try
ing to emulate it.
Hagler also attempted to dismiss critics of the
program who say that Vision 2020 cuts out tradi
tion from A&M. While providing no evidence
that these critics are wrong, Hagler instead con
vinced the audience that the critics’ assertions
are correct. By interrupting Muster on behalf of
Vision 2020, Hagler showed that no tradition is
too sacred to be changed for the sake of Vision
2020’s political expediency.
Hagler stated in his speech, “The Aggie
Spirit asks us to take time to discern right from
wrong, to think independently and to then do
something about it — follow our conscience.”
Some will say that there is no room to criticize
the prestigious Mr. Hagler. However, respecting
the positions of Muster speaker. Foundation
Trustee Emeritus and Association board mem
ber does not require respecting his message.
My simple hope is that when the time has come
for my fellow Aggies to say “here” after my
name is called, my eulogy will not be a plat
form for political initiatives, that it instead
praised A&M for being the best, not criticizing
us for what some people want changed. Muster,
and not Vision 2020, is the embodiment of the
Aggie Spirit and should not be corrupted.
Never again.
Matt Maddox is a senior
management major.
Soon though,
Hagler's words lost their
reverence and digressed
to defining the Aggie
spirit as something that
endorses Vision 2020.
MAIL CALL
The line between hero
and murderer is blurry
In response to Mile Walters ’ April 28
column:
Iraqis do not know how to react to the
American invasion of their country. If
Iraqis love the values that make their life
good, then anyone who seeks to supplant
Ihem with foreign values through mur
ders and bombings must be recognized
as evil. Anyone who kills a Muslim, harms
an Iraqi citizen or sends someone to kill
Muslims should be a marked man. The
distinction between the killing of Iraqis
and the resistance to imperialist foreign
invaders must be made.
We are at war, and since the United
Nations allows for the targeting of hostile
commanders as a legitimate act of war,
with international approval we can assas
sinate the American commander in chief.
The above argument for assassination
is ridiculous, but it is the exact same
argument you made for justifying these
crimes. If you truly support assassina
tions of enemy military commanders,
then you must support a terrorist's right
to assassinate President Bush.
Thankfully your views are not entertained
hy most of the international community.
Our world would be a very ugly place if
they were.
Tim Holm
Class of 2007
Israelis are as guilty
as Palestinians
To assume that Ariel Sharon and the
Israeli government are the good who are
seeking to protect themselves and the
people they are sworn to protect is a
naive understanding at best. Mr. Walters
tries to make a difference between the
good Israeli government which is only
committing surgical strikes on terrorist
leaders and the evil Palestinian terror
ists who are targeting civilians.
The problem with this is that Sharon
and his government are also killing inno
cent people unjustly. To simply think that
only terrorists are being targeted would
mean that Rachel Corrie was a terrorist
when she was run over by an Israeli bull
dozer multiple times because she simply
stood in front of a Palestinian home refus
ing to let it be demolished. It’s a shame
that most of us do not know her story.
And using a helicopter and three missiles
to go after a quadriplegic in a wheelchair,
which consequently took the lives of nine
other bystanders, is hardly surgical.
If we hold occupying the land of inno
cent people and destroying their lives in
so many different ways as some of our
values, then, as Mr. Walters says,
“Americans should stand by Israel as a
country that shares their own values.”
However, if we are people who hold to the
concept of struggling for truth and justice
as our values, then we need to realize
that the Israeli-Palestinian issue is far
from too complex to think of it simply as
good versus evil.
All Hakeem
Class of 2004
Geneva Convention
states detainees 9 rights
In response to Nick Davis' April 26 col
umn:
It’s ironic that Mr. Davis mentioned the
Geneva Conventions in his article only to
write: “These detainees are not U.S. citi
zens, so they have no rights."
Mr. Davis, the detainees are human,
and under the Geneva Conventions they
have basic human rights. The fact that
they aren’t U.S. citizens or they are
“enemy combatants” doesn't change
anything.
Article Five of the Third Geneva
Convention states that anyone detained
in the course of an armed conflict — sol
dier or otherwise - is presumed to be a
prisoner of war until a competent court or
tribunal determines otherwise. In the
case of the Guantanamo Bay captives,
this has not occurred. Thus, the “enemy
combatant" designation is invalid.
Mr. Davis also labels all the men held in
Guantanamo as terrorists even though
they have not formally been charged with
a crime. What acts of terrorism did they
commit? What evidence is there against
them? Mr. Davis didn’t answer any of
these questions in his column. His
charge: “They desired to kill American
soldiers, and they would love to see many
Americans suffer.”
He accuses them of having a desire to
kill! Not committing the crime, but
wanting to do it! No wonder Mr. Davis
doesn't want them to be tried in federal
courts — his case against them doesn’t
even hold water.
Midhat Farooqi
Class of 2004
In response to Chris Mahaffey’s April
22 column:
As a graduate student here at Texas
A&M 1 have not had the great experi
ence that most have made this universi
ty out to be.
1 would like to ask the question about
the role of graduate students here on
this campus. We are more than just
research gophers, fill-ins for absent
profs or test proctors. Some of us didn't
have the opportunity to attend A&M for
their undergraduate, like myself, and
when we get here we feel kind of mis
placed. I have never felt like I am a part
of this family.
When I first arrived here, a friend of
mine and I asked a fellow grad student
about participation in yells. Her
response was, “You’re dead, you can’t
yell." How am I supposed to react to
that? I had to learn The War Hymn from
the local phone book. Most campus
organizations don't readily accept or
include graduate students. When I
arrived,
I asked several of the student leaders
on campus about getting more of the
grad students and international students
to participate, especially if Bonfire
returns, and some were very proactive
about this. Now they’re not. Some grad
students have families and jobs, but we
want to belong. What do we have to do
to be included around here?
Randy Jackson
graduate student
The Battalion encourages letters to the edi
tor. Letters must be 200 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 014 Reed
McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters also
may be mailed to: 014 Reed McDonald, MS
1111, Texas A&M University, College Station,
TX 77843-1 111. Fax: (979) 845-2647 Email:
mailcall@thebattalion.net
Some grad students
do not feel included