4
Wednesday, September 8,1993
OPINION UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
THE ISSUE
After generations of bloodshed, Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to sign a peace treaty.
THE BACKGROUND
After capturing additional territory in a war 26 years ago, Israel occupied two regions that are home to many Palestinians - the West Bank (previously part of Jordan) and the Gaza Strip (previously part of Egypt). Israel claimed it needed the land for religious and security reasons. The Palestinian, led by the Palestinian Liberation Organization, have rebelled against Israeli rule. The Intifada (Palestinian revolt) has continued off and on for the past six years. Both sides have suffered greatly.
Middle East peace offers opportunity for success
The continuous conflict in the Middle East has been an open sore in the world for generations. Through war, terrorism and propaganda, the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel has affected United States foreign policy and sown deep bitterness on both sides of the conflict. The possibility of peace between Israel and the Palestinians could be as monumental as the end of the Berlin Wall coming down or the collapse of the Soviet Union. Both sides deserve the praise of the world for their courage in drafting a peace treaty.
THE ISSUE
As recently as the Gulf War, peace between Israel and the Palestinians was a pipe dream. But recently, representatives of the two parties have started talking peace. In a secret meeting last month in Norway, a landmark agreement was hammered out: Israel will be handing control of the Gaza Strip and the strategic city of Jericho over to the Palestinians, with negotiations on other territories to follow. In addition, both sides will recognize each other's right to exist. This treaty is now waiting to be signed, pending last minute details.
The treaty, once signed, will open up a world of opportunity. At peace, the two sides could cooperate to form a strong economy. Prospects for peace between Israel and other Arab nations will increase. Already Jordan and Israel, spurred on by the treaty, are closer to peace than ever before.
Not all is well, however. Extremists on both sides want to wreck the peace treaty. Radical Palestinian terrorists and gun-toting Israeli settlers will do everything in their power to scuttle peace. It is in the interests of the leadership of both sides to prevent this. The danger is particularly acute on the Palestinian side, where PLO splinter groups and the terrorist group Hamas have promised a bloody civil war if the peace treaty is signed. On the Israeli side, right-wing groups have made similarly threatening statements. Both the Israeli government and the Palestinian leadership should spare no effort in insuring that anti-peace groups are not successful.
The United States also must not let the opportunity for peace get away. It should continue to be actively involved in the peace process. It has strong ties to Israel and the region and stands to benefit from peace. Just two years ago the United States tied itself in knots trying to placate Israel and the Arabs during the Gulf War. With peace, foreign-policy headaches like this could be avoided.
It is time for optimism in the Middle East. Hopefully, the treaty between Israel and the Palestinians will be the all-important first step. The flower of peace is starting to open up. Now it must be watered.
MIKE SILVERMAN FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
MTV's video censorship contradicts open stance
HOOD
UDK 93
One of the highlights — if I can call that — of this summer was "Beavis and Butthead." They were on the cover of Rolling Stone, ABC News did a short piece on them, and even The New York Times mentioned them in a recent editorial. Clearly, they are hot.
KC TRAUER, Editor
JOE HARDER, CHRISTINE LAUE
Managing editors
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
For those not yet initiated, Beavis and Butthead are animated teenagers who have a show on MTV. They spend their days either destroying things (and/or themselves) or watching videos; occasionally, they go to school. Their philosophy is that they like things that are "cool" and don't like things that "suck." Their humor revolves around bodily functions and words and phrases that, when stretched to their outer limits, may refer to genitalia.
While appeasing everyone isn't inherently bad, it can lead to contra-
Essentially, MTV wants to be everybody's buddy. At times, it works very well. Last year, though biased toward Bill Clinton, the network gave time to all the candidates and to both of the national conventions. But at other times it means condemning the openly homophobic, racist and xenophobic Guns 'N Roses song "One in a Million" while continuing to play other Guns 'N Roses videos. The end result sounds less like a philosophy than a fashion, a politically-correct "stance" that becomes indisinguishable from, say, the VJ Kennedy's attempts at wearing "grunge" clothes.
They are funny, in a kind of moronic way. Butthead, the Einstein of the pair, controls a magic remote control that lets him change videos whenever he wants. (I would love to get ahold of one of those myself.) Together they watch videos and comment on them. Their comments are the funniest part of the show (example: "Depeche Mode is French for 'We wussies'"); in part because "Beavis and Buthead" represent a large segment of MTV's audience. With the program, the network brilliantly appeases both 15-year-olds such as Beavis and/or Buthead and older audiences who like to think they are beyond sophomoric humor.
So those who still want their MTV are forced to accept it, contradictions and all. Perhaps salvation can come, finally, from Butthead, who rightly acknowledges that Kris Kross "could kick Axl's ass."
Nathan Olson is a Lawrence graduate student majoring in English.
the very concept against which the program on neo-Nazis was trying fight.
young people who flirted while washing their clothes. The flirting was contrasted by an old woman who sneered at the couple. At one point the woman picked up a newspaper. It was written in Hebrew.
What purpose did it serve to add that little detail? The old woman was the only negative figure in the video, and to associate that negativity with her Judaism bordered on anti-Semitism
BILL SKEET, Systems coordinator
(THANK GOODNESS)
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Kansan over reacting about Fiske's comment
Assistant to the editor . J.R. Clairborne
News . Stacey Friedman
Editorial . Territhyn McCormick
Campus . Ben Grove
Sports . Kristi Fogli
Photo . Klip Chin, Renee Kneeer
Features . Erza Walo
Graphics . John Paul Fogel
DUH - DUH - DAT'S ALL FOLKS!
If "Fiske's Guide makes KU appear anti-activist, "then perhaps it should be noted that the *Kansan*'s September 2 "Viewpoint" makes activist advocates (such as the *Kansan*) at KU appear either paranoid or pretentiously above criticism.
What botheres me the most, though, is MTV's supposed tough stance on "hate speech" while condoning it in videos. About six months ago, the network ran a fascinating program on the rise of neo-Nazi groups in Germany and the United States. The program was both terrifying and necessary. Yet about a year and a half the network showed a video by Amy Grant. The video showed an innocuous little scene in a laundromat between two
dictions, MTV consistently denounces censorship but censor videos, as in blurring a marijuana leaf in Dr. Dre's "Dre Day," and cutting an intense confrontation with the police in Ice Cube's "It was a Good Day." (Strange how both performers are Black, isn't it? At least Black Entertainment Television doesn't censor). Just as contradictory is a network that censor Madonna's breasts in "Justify My Love" but has no problem showing a piece of cherry pie fall into the lap of a young woman in Warrant's "Cherry Pie." (Can we say symbolism? Can we say sexism?)
Campus sales mgr...Ed Schager
Regional sales mgr...Jennifer Perrier
National sales mgr...Jennifer Evanson
Co-op sales mgr...Blythe Foote
Production mgrs...Jennifer Blowey
Marketing director...Shellfish
Creative director...Brian Fusco
Classified mgr...Janice Davis
PAT BOYLE, Business coordinator
The guide quoted an anonymous KU student as saying that race relations at KU are becoming more visible and tense because of the activist nature of minority groups," which are "widely supported." It seems, therefore, that the *Kansan*'s lament that this quote "criticizes race relations" and "presents activism at KU
STAFF COLUMNIST
AMY CASEY
Business manager
AMY STUMBO
Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES
Sales and marketing adviser
dictions MTV consistently
**letters** should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
**Guest columns** should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 780 words. The writer will be photographed.
They must receive the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansas newsroom, 111 Stauffer Fint Hall.
Further, if KU is truly a forum for diversity and a "flagship for education," how shall it continue to thrive as such if certain groups — or certain Kansan editors — adopt a self-righteous attitude of unassailable perfection in their endeavors?
Read More.
Overland Park sophomore
How can groups hope to "raise awareness" and "combat racism" while protesting, educating and informing without heightening visibility, and, logically, tension? The visibility and tension may have existed prior to the surge of these groups. Fiske's guide merely accrets these groups with increasing them a bit, which seems necessary for such problems to be dealt with effectively. Chill, Kansan — I doubt seriously that Fiske presented KU as an oppressive, liberal stinkhole. I was under the assumption that activist groups use visibility and tension to raise awareness of the (supposedly) imperative problems of race relations.
There is a growing fear in the United States of "society" corrupping our children. I fear parents who do not teach their children to think for themselves or find out who they truly are.
as the cause of racial tensions instead of the solution" reflects a degree of paranoia on the part of activists and their supporters — or at least on the part of those who write for the Kansan. The report simply states that relations are tense and visible due to activist groups; it does not criticize said tension or visibility. Lighten up!
Patrick Dilley is a Lawrence graduate student majoring in N higher education.
Children discover the complexities and verisimilitudes of life at a young age, and they can be taught to discover their own feelings. I have a friend with a young son. She tries, when he asks about life, to give as objective a view as possible: the facts. Then she tells him her beliefs and those of others: the opinions. She encourages him to think about these things and to relate them to his own experiences. She teaches him to think about life and not to recite her beliefs.
STAFF COLUMNIST
Although I might disagree with the Smocks' message, I certainly do not begrudge them the right to voice their convictions. But try to remember when you were 7 years old. What did you believe? What did you feel strongly about? That your second grade teacher was the nicest, prettiest person you ever met? That you would always be close to your friends? That adults really knew what they were doing? Compare your childhood convictions, if you can remember them, with what you feel now. Have they changed?
PATRICK DILLEY Kids should be allowed to form their own opinions
I wasn't on campus last Monday to hear jed Smock's presentation, but the photo in Tuesday's Kansan caught my eye. Seven-year-old Evangeline Smock was shown reading from the Bible, a part of her family's crusade to reform our sinning students.
Two years ago in Wichita, some children and their parents were arrested for blockading clinics. I listened to the children speak on the radio and watched them talk to television reporters. I was struck by the unwavering stance these kids, 9 and 10 years old, were taking on issues they had probably neither received objective information or conflicting opinions about, nor experienced.
The language they used was beyond the vocabulary and structure of most children. The rapidity and clarity of their sentences appeared by rote to me, as if only a repetition, a supporting act in an adult play. Law enforcement and judicial agencies eventually concluded that the parents, by allowing and encouraging the children to participate in the anti-abortion activities, were endangering the children.
I believe such actions give children too little credit and too little respect. A child becomes an adult, eventually, who must think and reason for herself or himself. What purpose do we serve children if we only teach them to repeat what they are told? How is society bettered if our children cannot reason and cannot make up their own minds about any given subject? And how will they cope if, when they grow, they discover they do not agree with what they were made to say or do?
Children occupy a very special spot in our collective imagination in a bright grove of innocence and joy. We strive to protect them and to nurture them. I am sure that the parents of the Wichita children, and the Smocks, believe that is what they are doing.
University of Mars
by Joel Francke