Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (March 5, 1987)
Editorial President's speech was not reassuring Although a fine piece of rhetoric. President Reagan’s nationally televised speech last night was nothing more than superficial pap. The president did a lot of talking in his 13-minute address, but said little. Questions still linger about where the money allegedly diverted to the Contras went, who exactly was involved and to what extent, and whether he still is willing to deal with so-called moderate elements in Iran. If anything, the president raised even more questions about his shaky administraion. He often noted certain members of his administration, or “ freelancers,” surrep titiously took matters into their own hands in the Iran Contra affair, but that he was ultimately responsible. He then offered a naval analogy that improprieties “happened on my watch.” The president is chief of command, not merely a watchman. He should have known what was going on — so why didn’t he? He explained he did not address the nation concerning the Iran-Contra affair for the past three months because he was waiting for the Tower report to come out. He did not want to offer any “sketchy reports or possibly erroneous statements, which would then have to be corrected.” He needed the report to tell him what went on, which is sad enough, but this also implies that what he did say in his speech was more like a forced confession. He reminded the nation that he had previously said he didn’t trade arms for hostages. The president stated he still believes this to be true, even though "the facts of the evidence tell me it is not.” So which is it? Moreover, he believed the arms shipments offered a stategic opening to the Iranian government. This calls into question his policy on terrorism. The administration has fingered Syria, Lybia and Iran as terrorist nations. But it’s in teresting to note that while the United States was bombing Tripoli in April of 1986, it was simultaneously selling weapons to Tehran. Reagan never admitted that he made mistakes, he mere ly said that “mistakes were made” in implementing the policy of arms to Iran. Does this mean the president still would consider shipping arms to that government? The president called on Vice President George Bush to review the administration’s terrorist policy. The irony here is that the policy is fine — simply, don’t deal with terrorists — if only the administration would stick to it. He also addressed the issue of not remembering whether he authorized the first shipments of arms to Iran. He cited “no one kept proper records of meetings or decisions,” which led to his failure to recollect prior approval. This is nothing less than bizarre. As ABC White House correspon dent Sam Donaldson noted after the speech, it isn’t a matter of which day the shipments were sent, but whether he authorized them in advance. If he didn’t authorize the first shipments, why didn't he? If he did, then why didn’t he keep closer tabs on this policy? In short, his speech was not very comforting nor convin cing. and everything he said could and should have been said last fall. Furthermore, there are no indications he can or will change his "hands-off” management style — leaving many to wonder if safeguards exist to protect the nation from this happening again. Oregon Daily Emerald The Oreoon Dally Emerald Is published Monday through Friday except during exam week and vacations by the Oreaon Daily Emerald Publishing Co . at the University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon. 97403 The Emerald operates Independently of the University with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial Union and Is a member of the Associated Press The Emerald is private property The unlawful removal or use of papers is prosecutable by law General Staff Advertising Director Susan Thelen Production Manager Wayne Michael Lottinville Classified Advertising Alyson Simmons Assistant to the Publisher Jean Ownbey Advertising Sales: Peter LaFleur / Sales Manager Teresa Acosta, Beryl Israel, Janelle Heitmann, Laura Goldstein, Catherine Lilja, Rick Martz, Joseph Menzel, Peter Miller, Joan Wildermuth News and Editorial 686-5511 Display Advertising and Business 686 3712 Classified Advertising 686-4343 Letter Perfect Graphics 686 5511 Production 686 4381 Circulation 686 5511 Editor Managing Editor News Editor Spectrum Editor Spectrum Assistant Editor Editorial Page Editors Sports Editor Photo Editor Spectrum Photo Editor Graphics Editor Night Editor Michelle Brence Lucinda Dillon Michael Rivers Stephen Maher Stanley Nelson Michael Drummond Angie Muniz Capi Lynn Michael Wilhelm John Giustlna Lorraine Rath Lucinda Dillon Associate Editors Community Politics Higher Education / Administration University Affairs Student Government Student Activities General Assignment General Assignment General Assignment Jolayne Houtz Nick Reed Chris Norred B J Thomsen Carolyn Lamberson Sarah Kitchen Karen Creighton Dennis Fernandes Scott Maben Reporters: Sean Axmaker, Mary Courtis, Gary Henley, Janet Paulson Photographers: Sherlyn Bjorkgren, Shu-Shing Chen Maria Corvallis, Derrel Hewitt, Bobbie Lo, Dan Wheeler Production: Michele Ross / Ad Coordinator Kelly Alexandre. Ronwin Nicole Ashton, Virginia Baniaga. Samantha Barbitta, Sandra Bevans. Sara Briscoe. Shu Shing Chen, Janet Emery, Judith Gatz, Lisa Haggerty, Donna Leslie, Curtis Lott. Steve Lundgren, Kelli Mason! Mike McGraw, Rob Miles, Angela Muniz. Julie Paul, Ingrid White, Serena Williams, X Kang Xie NATIONAL DEBT & umsy sae*ce *1N £PrfE Of INTERMITTENT ATTEMPTS TO CHOP if DOWN, if WILL UNDOUBTEDLY GROW FOREVER" Letters Take your pick The Brian Frary/Charlie Richards crusade to “prove” that there are no “fallacies” in “the” Bible is as ridiculous as someone trying to “prove” that the entirety of English is con tained in “the” dictionary. Which Bible? The New American? The New English? The Anchor Bible? The Jerusalem Bible? The New Catholic Edition? The Authoriz ed King James Version? Perhaps their own edition? All of these Bibles differ from each other in details ranging from slight to profound. ALL versions come to us via NUMEROUS translators and editors, all of whom have — deliberately or accidentally — provided their own interpreta tion of various parts. Since the 1977 publication of the New Testament texts discovered in 1945 at Nag Ham madi, Egypt, it has become ever more apparent that vast segments of most modern Bibles were selected for inclusion on the basis of political expediency rather than divine inspiration. Thus we have the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but not (until 1977) those of Thomas, Philip, or Mary; we have had the Apocalypse of John, but not the Apocalypse of Peter, etc., etc. In short, there is no “Bible”; there are many different bibles. Before offering to “prove” a particular version infallible, these gentlemen need to pro vide some compelling reasons as to why we should be looking at their particular version, and not someone else’s. Hiawatha Music graduate By the people This letter is for people who watched “Amerika" to see what it was about. Those who, rather than judging for themselves, decided to let the establishment media provide them with a pre digested “respectable” point of view might as well stop reading. As you probably noticed, this movie was not particularly “anti-Russian.” The main Rus sian charcters were portrayed almost sympathetically, as peo ple trying to do their job in a way that would cause the least harm, as they saw it. The main military bad guy wasn't even Russian. Maybe the movie wasn’t about Russians at all. This was primarily a movie about Americans, and their reaction to loss of freedom. One message that came across clear ly is that a military occupation, even under relatively benign Letters Policy The Emerald will attempt to print all letters containing fair comment on topics of interest to the University community. Letters to the editor must be limited to 250 words, typed, signed and the identification of the writer must be verified when the letter is turned in. The Emerald reserves the right to edit any letter for length or style. Let ters to the editor should be turn ed into the Emerald office. Suite 300. EMU. leadership, would mean misery for millions, and that in such a situation the cost of resistance would be so high that most Americans would, in one way or another, give up. The most disturbing thing about the behavior of these fic tional Americans is its similari ty to that of real Americans to day. Even with no tanks and helicopter gunships threatening them, Americans are losing their freedom at an alarming rate. Although the "cost of resistance" would simply be taking responsibility for their own lives, most Americans are giving up without a fight. If Americans don’t get serious soon about preserving liberty here at home, Amerika will be reality within a generation. Nobody will have to invade. We are quite capable of bringing it upon ourselves. Joseph W. Dehn HI Eugene Observations Just a few observations on the modern social scene: 1. KOZY Dateline is replacing Guido’s as the place to meet babes. 2. Athletes with a “nervous piss" are more nervous when monitored on drug-test day. 3. Homosexuals that finally “came out of the closet” are now back with the hangers and the vacuum cleaner. 4. Casual sex fans find sex considerably less casual in rub ber gloves and condoms. 5. Oral sex fans that swallow ed before don’t swallow any more. 6. Anal sex fans are a dying breed. 7. Scowling fundamentalists have cramps in their faces from smiling so much. 8. Liberals like myself are becoming a bit more pragmatic. Blake Hastings Sociology
