Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Monday, May 19,2003
Editorial
America needs
to learn that
killing won’t
end terrorism
Terrorist bombings last week in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,
and in Casablanca, Morocco, have left many Americans
concerned about safety and asking questions about the
“war on terror.” It’s smart to ask questions, especially as
U.S. efforts to make Americans safer — primarily by at
tacking and killing people, but also by supposedly im
proving homeland security — are plagued by problems
and may be making the world less safe.
Two items, in particular, stand out as noteworthy ex
amples of how silly it is to believe America can just
stamp out terrorism with a strong boot. The first regards
the Transportation Security Administration and the sec
ond has to do with 75th Exploitation Task Force.
As reported by The Washington Post on Friday,
the TSA hired new screeners for the nation’s air
ports so quickly that 40 percent of the country’s
55,600 security screeners haven’t undergone in
depth background checks. Dozens of screeners, the
Post reported, at Los Angeles International Airport
and John F. Kennedy International Airport were dis
covered to have criminal records, including convic
tions of assault with a deadly weapon and felony
gun possession.
The TSA needs to fix this situation and be sure its
screeners are not themselves potential threats. But the
beleaguered agency’s woes don’t stop there. As The Wall
Street Journal reported in April, the TSA’s “No-Fly” list,
a list of names airlines are required to cross-reference
with their passenger lists in an effort to screen out poten
tial threats, is riddled with problems. Airline technology,
the paper reported, is old and results in many false posi
tives. Innocent people get repeatedly detained, in other
words, taking up valuable time that could be spent iden
tifying terrorists.
Then there’s the TSA’s CAPPS II program, a comput
er-assisted screening system that searches more than
100 computer database sources for personal informa
tion about passengers in the hopes of identifying them
as terrorists. Yeah, because when terrorists are filling
out forms, they usually put “suicide bomber” in the
“Occupation” field. Right.
CAPPS II has caused Delta Airlines plenty of negative
publicity, as many Americans are rightfully worried
about the potential invasion of privacy issues that the
system brings up. A Web site detailing efforts to fight
CAPPS II offers news about Delta’s involvement; check
it out at www.boycottdelta.com.
The second item of concern is more straightfor
ward. The 75th Exploitation Task Force, the only
publicly disclosed U.S. attempt to find weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq, is leaving at the end of
this month with nothing to show for its efforts. The
Washington Post reported last week that Task
Force members themselves no longer believe there
are any WMDs. Most of the top-priority sites have
been searched, and nothing has been revealed.
Game over.
Both of these examples show that if America is to be
successful in reducing terrorism — because eliminating
attacks is clearly not possible — it needs to carefully
and thoughtfully address the reasons behind terrorism.
It needs to carefully plan homeland defense, rather than
have knee-jerk responses borne of fear. It needs to reas
sure Americans that the world hasn’t really changed;
only our understanding of it has.
And as shown by Israel’s long history and the past
week’s bombings, Americans need to realize that killing
and killing and killing won’t eliminate the problem. It
will only make it worse.
Editorial policy
This editorial represents the opinion of the
Emerairfeditoriai board. Responses can be
sent to letters^dailyemeraldxom.
Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Presidents Richard Nixon and George
W. Bush couldn’t be more different per
sonally. Nixon grew up poor, while Bush
enjoyed all the benefits due a congress
man’s son. Nixon’s working-class upbring
ing made him deeply suspicious of privi
leged Ivy Leaguers;
Bush is a privileged
Ivy Leaguer.
Yet despite their
different back
grounds, the two
presidents couldn’t
agree more on do
mestic spying, pres
idential secrecy and
rewarding big con
tributors with posh
ambassador posts.
Perhaps the
most dangerous of
Richard Nixon’s many frightening com
pulsions was his long and fierce cam
paign to spy on American citizens.
Nixon’s insatiable appetite for domes
tic surveillance resulted in the CIA accu
mulating files on more than 7,200 Amer
icans, many of whom had done nothing
more than criticize the president. The
CIA under Nixon read private mail, in
stalled wiretaps and conducted break-ins
against U.fl citizens.
Nixon and the CIA knew that many of
their methods were illegal. Yet despite
the CIA’s record in such matters, Presi
dent Bush is now trying to greatly expand
the CIA’s domestic spying capabilities.
According to the Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel, the Bush administration qui
etly slipped provisions into an omnibus
Chuck
Slothower
Clocktower hush
intelligence bill to authorize the GIA
and the military to issue what are
known as “national security letters.”
These fuzzy-sounding issues aren’t
Christmas cards from servicemen, but
rather subpoenas that would require
private institutions to release records of
Americans’ phone calls, bank transac
tions and e-mail communications,
Currendy, only the FBI has the author-,
ity to issue such subpoenas. Why? Well,
the FBI has an inherent safeguard that
the CIA and military lack: It has to make
sure that the information it gathers can
be used in court.
If the FBI were to abuse its power to is
sue national security letters, courts could
throw out any illegally gathered evidence.
The CIA and military have no such safe
guards. They could potentially use national
security letters to monitor American citi
zens without repercussions.
Thankfully, Senate Democrats forced
the removal of Bush’s power grab from the
intelligence bill. But don’t expect the Bush
administration to give up on seeking un
precedented domestic spying powers.
Both Nixon and Bush see the presiden
cy as above public disclosure. Nixon kept
records of nearly everything and refused
to release any of it until ordered to do so
by a court. Even then, Nixon’s records
were marked by erasures and omissions.
Men like Vice President Dick Cheney
and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
both former Nixon officials, saw how Con
gress snatched up Nixon’s documents.
They have vowed, as former Nixon coun
sel John Dean has said, to prevent the
same thing from happening to Bush.
On the Commentary page, I tell you
what I think regularly. And much of the
time, you respond with opinions on
topics from abortion to public displays
of homosexual af
fection to interna
tional politics.
Now, I want to
know what you
think of the Emer
ald. We’re current
ly conducting a
readership survey
to determine who
reads the paper,
what parts they
read, what they
like and don’t like,
and what their spending habits are.
Why are we doing this? First and fore
Michael J.
Kleckner
The editors office
most, we want input on improving the
paper from those who mean the most to
us — our readers, our clients and mem
bers of the community. We also want to
know where our readers shop and what
types of items they buy, so that we can
provide the best advertising possible.
We’ve put together an online survey
that will provide crucial information
about our strengths and weaknesses so
we can continue to offer a high-quali
ty community newspaper. Please be
candid — we can’t improve without
honest feedback.
We have hired Pulse Research, Inc., a
nationally respected, independent
newspaper research firm in Portland, to
tabulate the results and provide us with
data analysis. And everyone — the
news, classified advertising, display ad
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor:
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Page Assistant
Salena De La Cruz
Peter Utsey Emerald
Presidential similitude
Another disturbing parallel between
Nixon and Bush is both men’s practice of
rewarding loyal contributors with ambas
sador posts to great vacation spots. Bush
rewarded a contributor named Mercer
Reynolds, a Cincinnati oilman who
helped raised $605,082 for Bush, with
the ambassadorship to Switzerland, ac
cording to the Associated Press.
Bush’s second-ranging fundraiser,
Ronald Weiser, got the ambassadorship
to the Slovak Republic. Hi$ number three
fundraiser, Howard Leach, is now the
ambassador to France.
People close to the Nixon administra
tion went to jail for stuff like this. Her
bert Kalmbach, an attorney and friend
to Nixon, got six months behind bars
for promising a wealthy contributor a
European ambassadorship in exchange
for $100,000.
While, unlike in Nixon’s case, no hard
evidence has yet come to light of a direct
quid pro quo relationship between the
ambassadors’ contributions to Bush and
their foreign appointments, the coinci
dence is far too striking to dismiss.
Two years into Nixon’s first term, no
one could have imagined that he would
be forced to resign his office in disgrace.
Bush, as far as we know, has thus far
managed to stay within the letter of the
law. Time will tell if he can continue to
do so and end his administration on his
own terms.
Contact the columnist
atchuckslothower@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily represent
those of the Emerald.
Your opinions can’t be wrons this time!
vertising, production and circulation
departments — will use this informa
tion to do their jobs better.
To show our gratitude for complet
ing the survey, we are offering a ,$100
cash prize, a $50 cash prize and a $25
Campus Cash prize. Winners will be
selected from everyone who completes
the survey.
So what are you waiting for? Go to the
nearest computer, point the browser at
www.pulseresearch.com/dailyemerald
and take the survey! It’s secure, private
and takes about 10 to 15 minutes.
And in this case, no matter what opin
ion you express, no one is going to say
you’re wrong. That’s a rare opportunity;
take advantage of it.
Contact the editor in chief
at editor@dailyemerald.com.