Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012, June 07, 2001, Page 2, Image 2

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Thursday
Editor in chief: Jack Clifford
Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard
Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu
EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com
May
th you
•*>
w
ell, goodness. The phantom
Earth Liberation Front strikes
again. Universities, Eugene car
dealerships, hybrid tree farms
— and now logging trucks. The Register
Guard noted on Saturday that no one has
been hurt in ELF’s four-year “spree.” Maybe
they’ve been up to some “zany antics,” but
our trusty Federal Bureau of Investigation
has seen fit to label this group a terrorist or
ganization, when really, each word fits nei
ther of those labels.
ELF has no official membership roles, nor
is it directed by a centralized leadership. It
consists, rather, of small, independent
groups; it’s hardly an “organization” as stu
dents of the King’s English would define it.
As to the “terrorist” moniker, let’s face it:
Terrorism, as it is defined by our govern
ment and media, is merely something that
hurts your stock options. Calling Ezra
Pound an “elitist” would have flattered the
man, and based on society’s view of “terror
ism, ” ELF may with gratitude receive the
“terrorist” label (although the citizenry of
our grand Commonwealth of Morons is
surely swayed by such ignorant rhetoric to a
negative view of the group).
OK, my bag’s empty and the cat is
nowhere to be seen. Insofar as the ELF exists
on any tangible level, I applaud what they’re
doing. And why not? These folks have
gumption, and they’ve saved a lot more trees
and made our water that much better to
drink in a mere four years than most futile,
letter-writing souls could hope to salvage in
a decade, or maybe two.
Remember that no one has been hurt over
the course of this dastardly “spree” — and I
refer, of course, only to physical wounds. A
few wallets have been battered to be sure,
but then, nothing hits the front pages like a
lost dollar. To achieve political change —
and I don’t mean petty legislative conces
sions — a person or group must target some
infrastructure, and if they do their job right,
no one will be hurt or killed.
Terrorism, as Webster defines it, is simply
V
Peter Utsey for the Emerald
the use of violence to coerce a particular po
litical outcome. Sounds like most military
operations to me, but somehow the United
States’ bombings of foreign embassies, for
example, always seems to escape the “ter
rorist” classification. Quite simply, the ELF
isn’t doing anything wrong. Rather, the
problem is that we — you, me, all of us —
have been led to believe that such acts are
bad or, heaven forbid, illegal.
Come to think of it, Saturday was a news
day of the first order. Directly above the ELF
story was the main headline: ‘Timber firm
lays off 235.” Seems Weyerhaeuser didn’t
make quite enough profit last year, so it was
compelled to distribute the infamous pink
slip to, among others, 140 Springfield work
ers, who only recently returned from an 18
day strike.
All of which has question marks dancing in
my head. Weyerhaeuser can week our forests
and then proceed to wreck the lives of its
workers, and yet, the ELF is suddenly the vil
lain because someone destroyed one logging
truck? Here’s to “free enterprise” and its meat
grinder realities, I suppose, but I don’t claim to
understand such abject idiocy.
Granted, I’m not out there with the ELF —
inasmuch as that’s possible for anyone — lev
eling poplar farms or bombing logging trucks,
but may the force nevertheless be with them.
That someone was recently able to do $1 mil
lion worth of damage to those beastly SUVs at
a local dealership deserves a hearty round of
applause and drinks on the house. That was
no “terrorist story”; that was a wonderfully
heartwarming human-interest issue.
After all, it is you, me and our prospective
progeny for whom groups like the ELF are
working. May we all be able to drink clean
water and visit a pristine wilderness area
fifty years from now. If we are able to do so,
make no mistake about it, we’ll have the ELF
and similar “organizations” to thank for it.
Aaron McKenzie is a columnist for the Oregon Daily
Emerald. His views do not necessarily represent those
of the Emerald. He can be reached at
awmckenzie@yahoo.com.
Stop alcohol problems at the source
Guest Commentary
Mason
Gummer
—— ...«»“•“
I am writing in response to the Beginning Underage
Success Through Educational Diversion (BUSTED) pro
gram, which was featured in the Emerald (“BUSTED
proves successful,” ODE, June 5). While I think it’s great
that BUSTED is offered for $35 as an alternative to a
ridiculous $250 minor-in-possession ticket, it isn’t going
to be telling us minors anything we don’t know already.
Most kids have already been educated about the effects
and dangers of alcohol in high school health classes or
simply by virtue of living in a society of alcohol drinkers.
We know drinking and driving causes accidents and is un
safe, we know alcohol loosens inhibitions, we know a per
son can die of alcohol poisoning if he or she drinks too
much ... and yet we still drink.
The thing is, nothing is going to convince us minors that
waiting another year or two will make any difference in
our ability to drink responsibly, especially considering
that the govemment/society deems those of us ages 18-20
responsible enough to vote and live on our own, not to
mention join the armed forces and learn to kill people, but
yet we can’t have a beer. It makes no sense.
It’s simply human psychology that if you tell young
people they can’t have something, they’re going to want
it, particularly when they see older people using it. In
much of Europe they have no minimum drinking age, and
they also have fewer cases of alcoholism than the United
States does. It’s simple: If you take the forbidden mystique
out of alcohol, then kids can no longer use it as a tool of
rebellion and therefore won’t be so apt to binge drink. Kids
should be educated so they know how alcohol will affect
them and how it can be dangerous, but forbidding it will
only make them idolize alcohol more.
Did anyone have much of a problem getting alcohol
when they were in high school? Does any minor in col
lege now have any problem getting it? Half of my friends
are 21. Am I supposed to watch them drink and wait a
year and a half before I join them because then I’ll be re
sponsible enough? Please people, let’s stop making a big
deal over drinking laws. They are pointless.
If you really want to stop kids from drinking, then
change our culture to one where adults don’t drink and
kids have no example to follow. Otherwise, let it be.
Mason Gummer is a sophomore sociology major.
Letter to the editor
Harrington billboard shows
backward priorities
If the University’s Athletic De
partment can raise $250,000 in
private money from “six or eight
key guys” to buy a huge billboard
in New York City for three
months touting Joey Harrington
for the Heisman Trophy, then they
clearly don’t need a $2 million an
nual subsidy from the Universi
ty’s general fund. (The Register
Guard, May 31 and June 4.)
To heck with phasing out this
subsidy across four years, as the
department reluctantly agreed to
do recently. Cut them off right
now! Then spend that $2 million
on faculty salaries, which are
among the lowest among univer
sities of comparable size and
stature.
Don’t get me wrong. I attend
Duck sporting events and want to
see our teams do well, but the
University should be investing its
limited revenues in its core mis
sion, not athletics. If the Athletic
Department wants to buy frivo
lous billboards in New York City
with donated money, that’s fine,
but then it shouldn’t expect any
University money for its pro
grams.
Mike Bellotti may be a great
football coach, but he’s got it all
backward when it comes to Uni
versity priorities. In describing
the importance of the 100-foot-tall
billboard, he said, “We want to
make a statement that if you come
to Oregon and are an outstanding
player for four years, we’ll pro
mote you equally or better than
what anybody else would do.”
Excuse me. Shouldn’t the Uni
versity be striving to make this
kind of statement about its teach
ers, staff and students, not its
“players”?
Kurt Willcox
Eugene