University Daily Kansan, April 3, 1985
OPINION
Page 4
The University Daily KANSAN
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University Daily Kansas UNPS 690-6400 is published at the University of Kansas. 118 Stauffer Fitt Hall Faint, Lawrence, KAN 6045, daily during the regular school year and Wednesday and Friday during the summer session, excluding Saturday, Sunday holidays and final periods. Second postage胶袋礼证 Lawrence KAN 6044. Subscriptions by mail are $1 for six months or $2 a year in Douglas County and $1 for six months or $3 a year in Jefferson County. Subscriptions to POSTMASTER Send address changes to the University Daily Kansas 118 Stauffer Fitt Hall Faint, Lawrence, KAN 6044.
MATT DEGALAN Editor
DIANE LUBER SUSAN WORTMAN
Managing Editor Editorial Editor
LYNNE STARK Business Manager
ROB KARWATH Campus Editor
DUNCAN CALHOUN MARY BERNICA
Retail Sales National Sales
Manager Manager
SUSANNE SHAW General Manager and News Adviser
DAVID NIXON Campus Sales Manager
JOHN OBERZAN Sales and Marketing Adviser
Chemical horror
West German doctors and U.S. intelligence sources confirmed last week that Iranian soldiers were not just being mutilated by Iraqi bombs and bullets. The soldiers' skin was blistered and charred from chemicals akin to mustard gas.
Mustard gas was used by Allies and the Axis alike in World War I. The horror of its use lingered so strongly that there no chemical warfare in WWII.
Just over a year ago, the United States condemned Iraq for violating the Geneva Protocol of 1925 which prohibited the use of chemical warfare.
Many sources in the Middle East claim that Iraq uses poison gas whenever it gives them the military advantage.
The United States has withheld comment so far, but the recent evidence is too strong to overlook forever.
In the past, the State Department condemned the use of chemical weapons, and Secretary of State George P. Shultz bluntly told Iraqi's Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz that troops should ston using poison gas.
After condemning Iraq last year, the United States imposed restrictions on the sale of five chemical compounds that can be used to manufacture mustard or nerve gas. The European Economic Community and Japan followed suit.
Clients of the Soviet Union have been charged with causing chemical "Yellow Rains" in Cambodia and Laos, as well as Iraq
The Soviet Union did not.
Indeed, the Soviet Union itself has been accused of using poisonous gas to quell the stubborn Afghan rebels.
possibly gels. Then again, Radio Moscow recently asserted that it had "facts and proof" that the United States had used chemical weapons in southeast Asia and Afghanistan.
The U.S. military is by no means free from sins of omission and commission, but it's no match for the Russians in routine, preposterous distortion of facts.
The U.S. has had a unilateral moratorium on chemical weapon production since 1969.
In the midst of his campaign last year, President Reagan called for a "comprehensive worldwide ban on these terrible weapons." Yet, for the fourth time in four years, he has asked Congress to lift the ban on poisonous gas and push full steam ahead.
Reagan claimed that the United States couldn't negotiate a chemical weapons treaty without more nerve gas, mustard gas, disease bombs and defoliants.
But the United States has made no further efforts to negotiate a chemical weapons treaty with the Soviet Union.
The House overwhelmingly rejected the $95 million proposal. That was sane.
In nations like Iraq, power diplomacy has been rejected, and chemical warfare is now just one more way to kill.
A welcome sign
With felt markers, posterboard and creative slogans, protesters on campus have been drawing attention to various issues.
The chants and the placards were a welcome sight. Recent demonstrations have shown the value of making a point in public.
The Kansas University Endowment Association's investments in companies doing business in South Africa were the target of one group of demonstrators. Louis Farrakhan's visit to the Hill was cause for another sizeable protest.
In both cases, the issues were something that people felt strongly about. Others may not agree with the points that the protesters made, but at least those who took the time to rally made the average student, caught up in the day-to-day concerns of university life, stop and think.
It may have been only for a moment or two that someone, rushing in or out of Strong Hall, glanced at the protesters' signs.
And people going into Hoch Auditorium may have thought those demonstrating against Farrakhan were wasting their time.
But no matter. The protesters succeeded.
They had their acts together, and people took notice.
Not only were both the divestment and Farrakhan groups organized, but their rallies were peaceful.
Those who demonstrated made their points without offending others. People paid attention because the groups were too vocal and visible to be ignored, not because they were violent.
Maybe large numbers were not won over to one side or another, but making people aware of some important issues made the peaceful demonstrations worthwhile.
The University Daily Kansan invites individuals and groups to submit guest columns. Columns should be typewritten and double-spaced and should not exceed 625 words. They should include the writer's name, address and phone number. Columns can be mailed or brought to the Kansan office, 111 Stuffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit or reject columns.
GUEST COLUMNS
OK actor is hit in big league politics
When promising young baseball players make it to the major leagues, there always is some skepchimp that tries to figure out how tough the toucher competition of "the bigs."
"Can he hit the curve?" or "Can he throw anything except smoke?"
are the kind of questions asked about young "phenones" who have been hitting 40 at Buffalo or striking out 15 batters a game for Tidewater.
washington insiders ask similar questions about new presidents. "Can he keep up his popularity? Can congress to pass his programs?"
There were doubts about Ronald Reagan in 1980 because he had been an actor of modest success in Hollywood and a governor of moderate accomplishment in California before coming to office. He had clear that Reagan indeed could hold his own in big league politics.
Now, however, there is a sneaking suspicion that Reagan may be some
kind of political phenomenon, a "natural," blessed with a combination of luck and talent that allows him to gain from his successes and escape the consequences of his mistakes.
It is too soon to make a final judgment about Reagan's second term, but he certainly has started it
ARNOLD SAWISLAK United Press International
with a bang. By getting a reluctant Republican-led Senate and a hostile Democratic-controlled House to authorize construction of another 21 MX missiles, this lame duck president already has made some history.
defeats in the first year of his second term — the ill-fated attempt to pack the Supreme Court.
By way of perspective, it should be noted that the president who set the standard by which his 20th Century D. Roosevelt, took one of his worst
There was no legal limit on presidential terms then, so FDR did not have the loss of clout that is supposed to go with lame duck politics. In 1936, even bigger 1936 electoral votes landslide than Reagan had in 1948.
It is possible to downsize the mapvictory of Reagan's first term — the massive tax reduction — by suggesting that it is not hard to convince members of Congress that part of statesmanship is to take less money away from the people on whose goodwill their political lives depend.
Recall that the original reason given for building MX was that the
But with the MX, Reagan had to sell a weapon system that even the most ferocious hawks in Congress had the deepest doubts about.
Soviet Union's big new missiles could smash the United States' Minuteman force in their underground silos.
The MX system was supposed to eliminate that danger, but all of the ideas that were offered to hide it from the Russians were dismissed as impractical. As a last resort, it was decided to put the MX into the same Minuteman silos that were supposed to be so vulnerable and try to protect the new missile with some additional cement.
At a time when the federal deficit was running in the range of $200 billion, this scheme was conservatively priced at only $40 billion.
The whole sound dealt fishy to a lot of members of Congress, and many of them said so. But in the end they went along with it, giving Reagan the first major victory of his lame duck term. The jury may still be out on the rest of his second four years, but the record so far is at least semi-phonemical.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Pro party . . .
To the editor
In his article he mentions that "even illyhilite fraternities harbor anarchists." It would be absurd to imagine that any close-knit group would be totally free of people who have a tendency to rebel against power. A fraternity is every bit as imperfect as the society we live in.
I am writing in regard to William Dann's paid advertisement, which appeared in the University Daily Kansan April 1.
The KU fraternity system, however, is not full of anarchists, and I must say that I cannot accept that description as an appropriate judgment of my character or the character of my fraternity system.
I respect your right to voice your views, Dann, about our fraternities and our parties, but there are other views, such as Michael Pauler's (March 22 letter to the editor), which in all fairness must be considered in this matter You may continue to think that fraternity parties are violent "explosions," which graphically demonstrate conscience of their patrons. That will just make it even more difficult for the next fraternity that wishes to stage an event not only to have fun, but to help other people as well.
Believe me, Dann, fraternities at KU do not use the word philanthropy to justify every urge to throw another wild party. We mean philanthropy. We want to raise money for the KU Hilltop Center children. People can party anywhere and anytime they want. On the other hand, it's not every day you can honestly help other people through such events.
If you admonish our event, then you are throwing up a blockade against every other fraternity that wishes to raise money for a worthy cause. At least we are trying. Why hinder us?
By the way, admission is $4, not 50 cents.
and con party
Wilmette, Ill., sophomore
Richard Hayes
In your letter to the editor, you made three statements that sound questionable and highly opinionated. In the first statement, you asserted that "every open party with which I have been associated has been shut down by 12 or 12:30 a.m." I think you would do a little research, you would find that a majority of the Greek-sponsored events do not disperse by midnight or even by 12:30 a.m.
In response to the decision not to close Stewart Avenue, I would like to offer this reply to Michael Pauler's letter to the editor in the March 22 edition of the University Daily Kansan.
The next controversial statement you made was in reference to your belief that a fraternity does not exist at KU which portrays the same behavior as the depiction of the state university frat made popular by the film industry. As a recent KU graduate and Jaybowl employee, I have personally witnessed enough abusive misbehavior by fraternity members to start my own 13-week sitcom on a major network this fall. If you need any further proof, I suggest you look on the front page of the March 29 Kansas, paying particular attention to the lower left-hand
To the editor:
Overlooking the first two statements, your third is by far the most ludicrous. A short trip to the history books should prove that the city of Lawrence existed long before KU, would appear to contradict your comment that, "Lawrence exists because of the University of Kansas." Lawrence can survive just fine on its own, thank you.
corner. To quote one fraternity member, "We carried the fun a little too far."
In summation, in your few short semesters at KU, have you learned to be respectful of the long-term resident as well as respecting the migratory life of a college student? In regards to your closing sentence, you may memorize two-year-old child sooner than you think, experiencing the irony of the letter you wrote during your brief residence in Larryville.
William A. Siebenaler
1985 KU graduate
and Lawrence resident
Too one-sided
Unfortunately this meeting and discussion is not to take place, at least not as far as the individual who has written the article, in mind of intellectual freedom, is concerned.
To the editor:
Picture if you can a man who comes to your community and conducts himself in such a manner that it is apparent that he is delighted to be there. He is charged with the emotions that are associated with true intellectual freedoms. This man has a written invitation to participate in a panel discussion at your school with well-known individuals who have very strong views on the subject of racism.
As we all know, this subject and related factors are matters of extreme importance to us all. This discussion, public discussion no less, would do much to clear the air on a cloudy issue, and it would serve as a
platform on which to build communications and a common understanding of a national problem.
It appears that this individual, the Rev Richard G. Butler of the Church of Jesus Christ Christian of Aryan Nations, has been dropped from the panel. His written invitation and telephone assurances of rebursement of expenses are apparently worthless. One would hope that this is not an example of Kansas hospitality. The saddest point is the fact that students will be denied the opportunity to hear a point of view that has a large following across the country. An open and frank discussion between Louis Farrakhan of the Nations of Islam and Butler of the Aryan Nations could only be beneficial to all that are concerned about this problem. Instead of this open and frank discussion, the students of the University of Kansas are to be treated to the tired discourse of Andrew Young and others of similar establishment views.
The fact that Butler has been cut out of the panel group does no harm to him or his church, but it does bring a disservice to those who will be watching the discussion on television. Now that Butler has been omitted from the panel, the catalyst that would have made it a media event is missing, and your University may be the site of another one sidestep in the process of delivering subject. One does hope that should the occasion arise, the students will demand to hear the other side of the issue.
R. I. Eddy Sandpoint, Idaho, resident