Oregon daily emerald., February 21, 1973, Page 5, Image 5

—
Commentary
Iranians arrested at consulate
Editor’s note: The following com
mentary begins with portions of a
statement released by the Iranian
Students’ Association supporting the 4i
Iranian students recently arrested in San
Francisco while protesting political
repression by the Iranian government.
The following ISA statement is a resolution
passed by the Eugene People’s Workshop
Against U.S. Imperialism.
On June 26, 1970, 41 Iranian students
from Northern California went to the
Iranian Consulate in San Francisco to
protest recent political arrest and to
present a list of demands to the consulate.
Four months previously there had been
a bus strike in Iran in which some ten
thousand riders protested the fare-hike
ordered by the government. Over 2,000
people had been arrested.
No Names
At the time of the consulate protest,
there was no news of the names or the
alleged “crimes” of at least 200 of these
people who were still held in jail. Besides
these prisoners, the Shah’s dictatorial
regime had arrested and imprisoned
thousands of intellectuals and other people
because they opposed the government’s
policies.
In June of 1970 there were over 20,000
political prisoners in the Shah’s prisms.
These opponents of the Shah were sub
jected to physical and mental torture by
Savak (Shah’s secret police).
Considering the political situation in
Iran, it was not surprising that the Iranian
students here protested the arrival in San
Francisco of the Shah’s sister, Princess
Ashraf. At that time Ashraf was the head
of the U.N.’s Human Rights Commission
and was attending the 25th anniversary of
the founding of the U.N.
Ironically, not a trace of respect for
human rights can be found in Iran. The
Shah has consistently denied the most
basic democratic rights to the Iranian
people. Freedom of speech, press, and
assembly are nonexistent. Stating one’s
political views if they are critical of the
government is forbidden; the “offenders”
are subjected to severe torture and many
are sentenced to death.
Requested meeting
To protest the unlawful arrests and
inhumane treatment of political prisoners,
the 41 students went to the Iranian Con
sulate. They demanded not only the
release of the names of the political
prisoners, but a press conference with
Ashraf during which they could voice their
grievances. The 41 invited members of the
press to accompany them. When they
entered the consulate, the students
requested a meeting with Parviz Adle, the
Consul General.
Instead of discussing the issues with the
students, the Consul General ordered the
San Francisco police to arrest them. The
41 were roughed up by the police, arrested
and jailed on several phoney charges.
All of the charges except a misdemeanor
were later dropped and the 41 were sen
tenced to 35 days in jail and fined. All of
them served the sentence and have paid
the fines.
Refused passports
For over 2l/z years now the consulate has
refused with absolutely no legal basis to
renew the passports of the 41. The reason
the consulate gives privately is “orders
from the Iranian Government..”
The opposition of Iranian students to the
policies of the Shah’s dictatorial rule has
resulted in similar acts of repression by
the Iranian regime. In addition to
harassing the families of the students in
Iran, cutting the student’s funds,
threatening and beating them, a favorite
tactic of the regime has been the illegal
refusal to renew passports.
For example, in 1965, the Iranian Em
bassy in Austria refused to extend the
passports of some 35 Iranian students
there. This also has occurred in Italy,
Germany, and France where the C.I.S. has
organized successful campaigns to defend
Iranian students. It is clear that the
refusal of the Iranian government to
renew the passports is illegal and that our
demand for passport renewal is quite just.
It is only with4the vast support of public
opinion that we can isolate the regime and
expose the Shah’s repressive tactics.
Public pressure
The pressure of public opinion can force
the consulate to renew the 41’s passports
and restore their legal and democratic
rights. We hope to organize professors,
lawyers, and all concerned individuals and
organizations into committees to work
effectively toward this goal.
We urge everyone to call the Iranian
Consulate or to send telegrams asking why
the 41’s passports have not been renewed.
Letters to the editors of local papers is
another effective means of publicizing the
illegality and injustice of the repressive
measures taken by the Iranian regime.
The pressure of public opinion is the
most effective means of exposing the
Iranian government and securing the
renewal of the 41’s passports.
To: Iranian Consulate General, San
Francisco, California
Subject: Concerning the 41 Iranian
students under threat of illegal deportation
to Iran.
We, the participants of the People’s
Workshop Against U. S. Imperialism,
condemn the actions of the Iranian and the
U. S. Governments for suppressing the just
rights of the Iranian students and peoples
to legally ami lawfully protest the
repressive actions of the Iranian Govern
ment by:
1) Having the 41 Iranian students
illegally arrested and imprisoned for one
month.
2) Conspiring with U. S. immigration
officials to discontinue the extension of the
41 Iranian students’ visas.
3) Revoking the 41 Iranian students’
passports as a precondition for depor
tation and possible execution in Iran
because the Slab’s regime accepts no
opposition.
We demand that:
1) the Iranian Government (Consulate
General) return the extended passports to
the 41 Iranian students immediately.
2) the U.S. Government validate these
students’ visas.
3) the U. S. Government stop all these
acts of repression against Iranian students
and all other Third World patriots who
exercise their rights to speak the truth.
4) the present Iranian Government stop
all barbaric acts of torture and execution
against Iranian people and patriots.
We fully support the just struggle of the
Confederation of Iranian Students (N.U.)
in presenting to the people of the world the
truth of the Iranian situation.
People’s Workshop
against U. S. Imperialism
Eugene, Oregon
343-8387
Letters
Becoming a tyrant
I had several reactions after reading
Professor Rousseve’s commentary in the
Emerald of Feb. 19. First of all, I am
always pleased when I hear somebody
advocating society producing for need
rather than for profit, and certainly
Rousseve is no exception here. But what
did bother me was the attitude of
benevolence that ran through the article.
This type of “enlightened” thinking is so
common among many who call them
selves “social democrats,” and it is a line
of thinking that I feel does more harm than
good.
Condescension among those that profess
socialism can only lead to disaster.
Whenever an intellectual takes the at
titude that he is essentially superior to
those that he is attempting to “save,” be
becomes a tyrant. Even when he takes that
attitude that he can actually
“save” anyone, he becomes a tyrant.
There is no such thing as a “benevolent”
or “enlightened" government that stays
that way very long, it rapidly deteriorates
to a bureaucracy that serves merely to
protect those that hold the real power in
society.
The true problem of our society is that it
is controlled by a system that refuses to
allow the overwhelming majority of people
to gain control over their own lives.
It is for the elimination of this state of
affairs that socialism should be directed.
No one can be “given” this control by
another, it must be fought and worked for
by all involved.
I am astonished that a socialist with a
Ph.D. like Rousseve would attribute socio
economic status to “genes” and “luck.”
He might as well attribute it to spots on the
sun. This type of position denies that
economic standing is determined by the
deliberate workings of an economic
system, a system that might very well see
Rousseve at the “bottom of the economic
hierarchy” if there is suddenly a drastic
decrease in demand for Professors of
education. Rousseve can be a victim as
much as anyone else.
The attitude of socialism should be
toward changing people’s lives, not
changing people. The effort should be to
have people gain control of their lives
through co-operation and solidarity, not to
make them merely pawns of public policy.
This of course is not easy to do, nobody
said that it was, but I believe it should be
worked for.
I sympathize with Professor Rousseve’s
intent, but I personally feel he has missed
the boat. I have always been skeptical of
“social democracy,” and his article has
maintained my skepticism.
Dean Nolan
KWAXII
I was disappointed in your article
covering the conflicts in the Division of
Broadcast Services at the University; also
in your phenomenal ability to delay and
misplace letters written to the editor. The
article which appeared on Feb. 7 never
mentioned KWAX II, except as a nebulous
entity which might broadcast programs
from city hall, wnich sounds even more
boring than the daytime programming.
Who would stay up from midnight to two to
listen to that?
In actuality, KWAX II has some in
novative programming and a lot of
creative energy, and gives access to air
time to anyone with something to say or
play that would be of interest to the
community.
Monday nights are open to local
musicians, poets, and other artists;
previous Mondays we’ve had an interview
with several Vietnamese students, a forum
on Sylvia Plath, and music that you don’t
hear anywhere else.
Tuesdays are a fine bluegrass and
country show; Wednesdays are soul music
and jazz. Thursdays there’s music from
Brazil and Africa, and old-time and
avante-garde jazz from all over the world.
On Fridays there’s more time for local
contributions in two hours of free form
programming.
It’s unfortunate that the entrenched
bureaucracy in the Division of Broadcast
Services refuses to admit that we’re doing
something worthwhile. If we had some air
time during the day, KWAX might have
more than the estimated 200 listeners we
have now. A little support from the
students and community might encourage
DBS to open themselves up to the energy
which we put into KWAX II not for money
or credit or even recognition but for pure
enjoyment.
Barbara Laverty
People must speak
It is time for the people of Oregon to rise
up in protest at what many feel is the
apparent disregard of the needs of
children and families in this state by the
Department of Human Resources and its
Children Services Division. Since last fall I
have read of crisis after crisis concerning
child care programs funded through the
Community Coordinated Child Care
operation (4-C’s).
Because I am a user of private day care
services, my children are not directly
involved in this issue. My concern is for the
number of Oregon citizens whoa re trying to
maintain and-or upgrade their em
ployment ability but require adequate
child care arrangements to do so. They
have been living a nightmare due to the
confusion and uncertainty of the eligibility
requirements and fee schedules imposed
by the Department of Human Resources,
an office that is supposedly established to
help people.
It is my understanding that child care
programs must be tightened for lack of
public funding, but the manner in which
the Department of Human Resources has
gone about this task alarms me. Since
January the Children Services Division
has:
1) Decided a fiscal crisis existed for the
day care program and initiated
emergency action to implement the
proposed changes in eligibility and fee
scale by February 15, 1973;
2) Modified the proposed changes as a
result of public testimony and protest, but
allowed the deadlines to remain intact;
3) Communicated with the 4-C Councils
mainly in the form of unwritten verbal
statements which were often incomplete
or not timely;
4) Implemented a policy of com
municating directly with provider
agencies instead of through the
established 4-C Councils;
5) Scheduled only one hearing in the
entire state to receive public testimony
and input on the latest tee schedule ana
eligibility requirements.
Inave been impressed with the efforts of
the Metropolitan 4-C Council to coodinate
child care programs and to try to meet the
needs of the community on this matter. I
have become a volunteer for this 4-C
Council because I believed in the sincerity
and competence of the Council and in the
need for local control of such a program. I
am sorry that only one public hearing for
the entire state has been scheduled on the
subject of the fee schedule and eligibility.
It is to be held on February 26th at Mt.
Hood Community College in Gresham.
It is my hope that at this hearing and in
the future the Department of Human
Resources will seek a free exchange of
ideas on the child care issue from the 4-C
Councils, the provider agencies, parents of
day care children and concerned citizens.
If government in Oregon is to be truly
representative of the people, then the
people must speak!
Sincerely,
Deanna Spooner
2901 S£. 118th
Portland, Oregon