Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 14, 1978)
Letters Tell ’em about it According to Daniel Ellsberg, the neutron bomb and the cruise mis sle are new weapons of destruc tion which must be stopped if we are to save ourselves and future generations. Because of its preci sion, its limited fallout and be cause it could kill people without damaging property, the neutron invites use. Though President Carter has said he would not use it if it were developed, the neutron bomb, according to Ellsberg, would most likely be the first nuc lear weapon to be used since Nagasaki, thus tnggering the use of others. President Carter now appears to be unready to decide on whether or not to begin N-Bomb production. Tell your friends to call and write the White House, Washington, D C. 20500 to urge the President to cancel development of the neutron bomb. (Phone the White House before 8 a.m. at 1-202-456-1414 for 21 cents.) David Zupan Graduate Student, Education Proven record On KUGN's talk-radio show, March 28,1978, Rep. Jim Weaver surprised a few listeners. When asked about his position on the decommissioning of Tro jan, Weaver stated, “I have no position on that, ft (Trojan) is going and it’s giving relative inexpensive electricity...” His statement makes one wonder if Weaver has not sold out to the utility com panies and their money. Also when asked about what type of campaign he was going to run, Weaver replied, “Oh, I’m not. I’m just going to do my job.” If Weaver is not going to campaign, then why the large number of mailout literature in such a short time period? Plus, why the cam paign office with a paid saff that has committed Weaver to per sonal appearances throughout the district? Could it be that Weaver is saying one thing and doing another? County Commissioner Bob Wood, in contrast, brings to the people of the 4th District a proven record of working with and for the people. Bob Wood speaks to the issues and is unafraid to take this campaign to the people. I support Bob Wood for Con gress and urge others to join me. Craig Frasier 365 E. 16th, #10, Eugene Credit for work The ad in the Friday, April 7 issue of the Daily Emerald might have given the erroneous impres sion that course credit is available for merely working on the Wood for Congress campaign. This is not the case. Credit can be ar ranged with individual professors for academic work associated with such an experience — exten sive reading and a term paper, for example. In other words, credit is not given by the University for just campaign work. If you want to develop an academic program related to such activity, and if you can find a pro fessor interested sufficiently to support it, then credit is possible. Pam Burke Senior, Business Management Toothful fate When a student asked Pres. Boyd April 5 why he had the 23 students arrested, he said he had them arrested because it would have been too expensive to let them stay. It is hard to believe that it would have cost more to let them stay than it will to have them ar rested, booked and now tried sepaparately. If leaving them there “made no sense,” having them arrested made less. It was both expensive Duck Soup Oregon Daily Emerald “Nice to know there’s nothing mysterious behind those errant radio signals.” and unnecessary. If the protestors had no legitimate grievance, why not ask them to turn out the lights when they left, and when the At torney General gave his opinion in “10 days” it would have shown how foolish they were for not wait ing patiently for the “wheels of government to turn.” But two and a half more months have passed while the wheels of government spin in 10 day cycles. Even if the Attorney General gave his opinion today he would have caused an unnecessary delay of five months. Time has shown the protestors grievances to be legitimate. Pres ident Boyd has shown that he treats people with grievances as potential martyrs, and that he in tends to make sure the lions have teeth. Dana Towle Senior, Music -opinion Nigeria’s position in Africa Submitted by Bruce Bowers of the People for Southern African Freedom At about the same time that the U.S. Army was carrying out its genocidal “mopping up operations” among the Native Americans, an obscure army under hire by a British company was “making his tory” in a similar fashion over 10,000 miles away. In October of 1893, about 5,000 varriors of the Matabele tribe were massacred by the mercenaries of the British South Africa Company. This set into motion a grand capitalist enterprise that today flaunts itself as the “independent nation” known as Rhodesia. Recent pseudo events, such as U.N. Ambassador Young’s cocktail squabbles with British Ambassador Owen and Carter's patronizing stop-off in Nigeria, have brought Rhodesia into the headlines. It seems that the two major Western imperialist powers of the past century are having some difficulty proving to the world that they have “learned their lesson”. They now find themselves in the awkward position of rejecting a plan for the "peaceful transition to majority rule" in Rhodesia because the plan’s participants did not include Marxist guerilla leaders committed to the violent overthrow of the present Smith regime (Joshua Nkomo and Robert Mugabe of the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe). With such a stance Carter hopes to convince the world that the principles of democracy, not capitalism, constitute the driving force behind American foreign policy. Before desparate liberals start sighing with relief at this “turn-around” from a consistent policy of support for fascist dictators, a few questions must be ans wered. Question one: which country is the second major foreign supplier of oil after Suadi Arabia? Ans wer: Nigeria. Question two: Which country is viewed by the vast majority of black African states as con tributing most to their independent DEVELOP MENT? Answer: Cuba. Question three: In which country does the most maintenance of a pro Western stance mean the most to the continued expansion of capitalism in sub-Saharan Africa? Answer: A year ago I would have said South Africa, but now I think the answer is again Nigeria. It is my belief that U.S. foreign policy advisers are now viewing South Africa as an extremely risky op eration. Vorster has revealed himself to be inflexible in the face of insurmountable odds. His nationalism runs counter to the interests of the multi-national corporations which dominate his economy. As the major protector of these interests, the U.S. govern ment must at some point abandon Vorster, but this can only occur after it has gained the confidence of Vorster’s major opponents. Nigeria, as by far the most populous and prosperous of the Black African nations, is pivotal to this strategy. Cuba, fresh from its army’s triumphs in both Angola and Ethiopia, repres sents the major Marxist threat to the U.S. protected capitalist hegemony over the most of the continent. By appearing to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Patriotic Front, the U.S. government is simultane ously establishing credibility with Nigeria and other Black African Nations and serving further notice to Vorster that if he wants to maintain his racist empire he had better come up with a form of exploitation that is more in keeping with 20th Century capitalist de corum. It is difficult for most Americans properly to ana lyze the situation in Southern Africa, since the mass media is dominated by the perspective of the present Administration. I would therefore urge all those interested in obtaining a more balanced view to attend a lecture by Calistus Ndlovu, the U.N. rep resentative for the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe. He will be speaking today at 1 p.m. in 221 Allen Hall (the journalism building). Admission is free. f opinion Equal bloodbaths in Mid-East Submitted by Cliff Lamm Junior, Sociology During any political struggle it is difficult to find an objective portrayal of historical fact. This condition fosters certain misrep resentations of history which are then used to promote political aims. The recent opinion appearing in the Emerald “U S. media distort truth of Israeli terrorism” is a case in point. Perhaps, it is guilty of the same bias through which it denounced the U S. media. The prevailing tactic used was to present historical occur ances or movements out of context. For example, the Deir Yassin massacre was indeed hor rendous. However, the Irgun, a Jewish terrorist group, was re sponsible whereas the Jewish Agency and Jewish population large denounced that act. In fact, the Jewish Agency continually sought the elimination of the Irgun, which it achieved in 1948. To attribute Deir Yassin to Zionists at large is an injustice. Further more, both the Arabs and the Jews have commited bloodbaths of equal magnitude. I beg the author to remember the massacre on Mount Scopus killing hospital personnel, the 39 Jewish workers killed in the Haifa oil refinery and the sniping in 1948 that claimed an average of 50 Jews a week whether military or civilian. The author also stated that "the Zionists have forcefully evicted the Palestians from their homes." However, since 1947 a gradual exodus of the wealthy Palestinians has been underway to wait until "the Jews are swept into the sea." the Absence of these local notables left the remaining Arabs without many potential leaders and at the mercy of anxiety and fear. This is evident in the Jewish takeover of Haifa in 1947. 60,000 Arabs fled Haifa after the surrender though they had apparently nothing to fear. In fact, the Jews did everything they could to prevent the Arabs from leaving which was confirmed by the British District Superinten dent of Police. Israeli aggression must be understood in the context of the Arab’s war of attrition. Beginning in August 1929 with a series of riots and demonstrations against Jews which resulted in 472 Jewish and 268 Arab deaths up to the recent attack on a Jewish sightseeing bus north of Tel Aviv, the Arabs have constantly harassed Israel. Supplied and trained by such Arab countries as Egypt and Syria, the Palestinians have continued guerrilla ac tivities along the borders. In 1950, Egypt closed the Suez Canal to Israeli shipping. Also in that same time, the Gulf of Aquaba, Israel’s only other route to Asia, was blocked to all shipping. In 1950, the Arab League officially drew up a formal boycott to prohibit any form of cooperation between the Arab states and Israel including trade, shipping and cultural relations. In the face of economic crisis and constant deaths during guerilla attacks Israel was in a state of siege. Its very existence was threatened. These kinds of policies have led to Israeli retaliatory raids. }rtrc is necessarY examine any contributing fac • analyzing an incident. Failure to do so propagates toThnLASHa fina'note- Perhaps Arab denial of the JeSshright ptoe^EmeS, Same d‘scrim‘"atk>n »** '<* has been J
