Oregon Daily Emerald
Monday, April 25, 2005
NEWS STAFF
(541)346-5511
JEN SUDICK
EDITOR IN CHIEF
STEVEN R. NEUMAN
MANAGING EDITOR
[ARED PABEN
AY1SHA YAHYA
NEWS EDITORS
MEGHANN CUNIFF
PARKER HOWE1X
SENIOR NEWS REPORTERS
MORIAII BAI.ING1T
AMANDA BOLSINGF.R
ADAM CHERRY
EMILY SMITH
EVA SYLWESTER
SHELDON TRAVER
NEWS REPORTERS
CLAYTON JONES
SPORTS EDITOR
JON ROETMAN
SENIOR SPORTS REPORTER
STEPHEN MILLER
BRIAN SMITH
SPORTS REPORTERS
RYAN NYBURG
PULSE EDITOR
AMY EIGHTY
SENIOR PULSE REPORTER
JOSHUA L1NTEREUR
PULSE REPORTER
CAT BALDWIN
PULSE CARTOONIST
AILEE SLATER
COMMENTARY EDITOR
GABE BRADLEY
ANNF.MARIE KNEPPER
CHUCK SLOTHOWER
JENNIFER MCBRIDE
COLUMNISTS
ASHLEY GRIFFIN
SUPPLEMENT
FREELANCE EDITOR
DANIELLE HICKEY
PHOTO EDITOR
LAUREN WIMER
SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
NICOLE BARKER
TIM BOBOSKY
PHOTOGRAPHER
KATE HORTON
ZANER1TT
PART-TIME PHOTOGRAPHERS
BRET FURTWANGLER
GRAPHIC ARTIST
DUSTIN REESE
SENIOR DESIGNER
ELLIOTT ASBURY
WENDY KIEFFER
AMANDA LEE
JONAH SCHROGIN
DESIGNERS
SHADRA BEESLEY
JEANN1F. EVERS
COPY CHIEFS
KIMBERLY BLACKFIELD
JOSH NORRIS
SPORTS COPY EDITORS
GREG BILS1AND
AMBER LINDROS
NEWS COPY EDITORS
JENNY GERWICK
PULSE COPY EDITOR
ADRIENNE NELSON
ONLINE EDITOR
WEBMASTER
(541)346-5511
JUDY RIEDL
GENERAL MANAGER
KATHYCARBONE
BUSINESS MANAGER
LALINA DE G1USTI
RECEPTIONIST
JERED NAGEL
PATRICK SCHMERBER
HOLLY STEIN
JANA SWANSON
ROB WEGNER
CAROLYN ZIMMERMAN
DISTRIBUTION
ADVERTISING
_ (541) 346-3712
MELISSA GUST
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR
TYLER MACK
SALES MANAGER
MATT BETZ
HERON CAUSCH-DOLEN
MEGAN HAM1JN
KATE HIRONAKA
MAEGAN KASER-LEE
KELLEE KAUFTHEIL
MIA LEIDELMEYER
SHANNON ROGERS
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
CLASSIFIED
(541) 3464343
IRINA SHANAMAN
CLASSIFIED MANAGER
KORALYNN BASHAM
ANDO
KAIY GAGNON
KERI SPANGLER
KAHE STRINGER
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
ASSOCIATES
PRODUCTION
(541)346-4381
MICHELE ROSS
PRODUCTION MANAGER
TARA SLOAN
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
JEN CRAM LET
KRISTEN DICHARRY
CAMERON GAUT
SABRINA GOWEITE
JONAH SCHROGIN
DESIGNERS
The Oregon Daily Emerald is pub
lished daily Monday through Fri
day during the school year by the
Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing
Co. Inc., at the University of Ore
gon, Eugene, Ore. The Emerald
operates independently of the
University with offices in Suite
300 of the Erb Memorial Union.
The Emerald is private property.
Unlawful removal or use of
papers is prosecutable by law.
“THERE HE IS, BOYS .. . PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE!”
Bret Furtwangler | Graphic artist
■ In my opinion
The /w justice of U.S. justice
I am a serious fan of the U.S. legal
system. Those who stand accused of
crime are innocent until proven guilty,
citizens have a right to trial by jury
and there are rules against cruel and
unusual punishment. Of course, in re
ality, these staples of American justice
don’t always pan out so well. Genetic
evidence indicates that more than a
few citizens have been wrongly exe
cuted, police brutality and issues such
as racial profiling are still present in
many areas and access to a legal sys
tem that works for you depends more
on your annual income than your in
nocence or guilt. However, the biggest
problems plaguing the U.S. justice sys
tem right now are two intertwined fac
tors: hypocrisy and patriotism.
Zacarias Moussaoui is a French citi
zen who was planning to fly a plane
into the White House on behalf of
none other than Osama bin Laden. Af
ter Sept. 11, Moussaoui never got a
chance to complete his mission, and
he now sits poised to be the only per
son prosecuted for involvement in the
Sept. 11 attacks. If U.S. lawyers get
their way, he will pay for that involve
ment with his life.
Moussaoui has been charged, in
essence, with planning to hurt Ameri
can citizens, and for this our govern
ment believes he should die — a prob
able, acceptable conclusion of our
government, until one considers the
myriad of U.S. soldiers escaping even
the most menial prosecution for then
heinous crimes on foreign soil. The
Bush administration is once again
proving itself to be rampant with
hypocrisy. You want harm against hu
manity, let me give you two words:
Abu Ghraib. Is considering harm to
ward American citizens worse than
actually harming an Iraqi life? Appar
ently so. Whereas U.S. citizens are
people to be protected at the utmost
cost, foreign citizens are acceptable ca
sualties of war and the rash thinking
AILEE SLATER
FURTHER FROM PERFECTION
that accompanies it.
Luckily, Human Rights Watch rec
ommended this week that a special
prosecutor be assigned to look into
the role of senior defense officials
within the Abu Ghraib abuses. In
deed, it seems obvious that any inves
tigation into the questionable actions
of subordinates should include an
analysis of their superiors. Moussaoui
is slated to receive the death penalty,
so one can only imagine that the offi
cial under whom he was working (i.e.
Osama bin Laden) would receive a
sentence of at least the same magni
tude if apprehended. If the United
States is willing to sentence Mous
saoui and bin Laden to death for con
spiring to harm people, Donald Rums
feld and then-commander of U.S.
troops Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez
should at least be investigated for
their orders to use “painful stress situ
ations” and myriad other tactics that
broke the Geneva Conventions.
Perhaps Rumsfeld and Sanchez
were too far up on the chain of com
mand. Perhaps they had no idea their
orders would be magnified to induce
the horrific abuse at Abu Ghraib. But
what about the other commanding of
ficials who were physically present at
the scene of the abuse? One, just one
of those commanders was given any
sort of reprimand. The other superior
officers, Sanchez included, were re
lieved of blame for “mitigating circum
stances,” such as the fact that “U.S.
military command was short of senior
officers.” I guess we’re left to assume
that lower rank officers thought put
ting prisoners into grossly inappropri
ate sexual positions with each other
was the only way to bring in more
army officials. The real mitigating cir
cumstance is the U.S. government’s
apparent core belief that authorizing
harsh treatment of prisoners and
breaking international war codes is
OK, as long as the welfare of America
remains stable.
On the other side of this debate is a
somewhat logical argument that the
soldiers actually committing the abuse
deserve the harshest punishment; af
ter all, they were the human beings
physically executing torture. But once
again, to charge only these lower-level
soldiers is hypocritical of the U.S. gov
ernment. Rumsfeld, Sanchez and the
other exonerated officials may have
not personally tortured Iraqis; but, like
the conspiring of Moussaoui, Ameri
can officials’ orders and planning still
ultimately led to the abuse.
The United States should not op
erate itself legally under the pretense
of patriotism; what benefits America
is acceptable, what harms America
is not. The ends should not justify
the means, especially when those
means are just a facade of national
security based on homeland affilia
tion. Our country is in a state where
“terrorism” is designated the ulti
mate evil and anyone working for
terrorism is deemed worthy of the
harshest treatment. Those working
“against terrorism” (such as the offi
cials in charge at Abu Ghraib) are
granted extreme leniency because of
their job description.
One of America’s biggest buzz
words is and has always been justice.
Unfortunately, as a buzz word and in
general, justice is being swiftly re
placed by terrorism.
aileeslater@ dailyemerald. com
OREGON DAILY EMERALD LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged, and should be sent to letters@dailyemerald.com or submitted at the Oregon Daily Emerald office, EMU Suite 300. Electronic
submissions are preferred Letters are limited to 250 words, and guest commentaries to 550 words. Authors are limited to one submission per calendar month Submissions should
include phone number and address for verification. The Emerald reserves the rigfit to edit for space, grammar and style. Guest submissions are published at the discretion of the Emerald.
■ Editorial
Bush should
acknowledge
party unity
on Bolton
Last week, President Bush made an inter
esting request to the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations, the group in charge of con
firming his chosen U.N. ambassador, John
Bolton: Bush asked the panel to “put aside
politics,” indicating his opinion that a rejec
tion of Bolton would simply be a factor of De
mocrats versus Republicans. However, in the
case of Bolton’s confirmation, Bush is serious
ly mistaken. The problems with Bolton as po
tential ambassador to the United Nations are
myriad, and they are being discussed by both
Democrats and Republicans alike.
The first strike against Bolton is his widely
published statement in which he was quoted as
saying there is no such thing as the United Na
tions. No wonder members of the committee
are reluctant to confirm this man; it’s a danger
ous game to hire someone for the purpose of in
teracting with an organization that, in the per
son’s mind, may or may not exist. Can our
nation expect that Bolton would be experienced
or knowledgeable about the inner-workings of
the United Nations with respect to his earlier
comments on it?
strike two is tne disparity between Bolton s
qualifications and the needs of the job he is slat
ed to fill. Issues of peacekeeping and worldwide
diplomacy are especially important to the Unit
ed States at a time when we have already alien
ated so many countries with cries of “with us
or against us.” As ambassador to the United
Nations, Bolton would be filling a primarily
diplomatic job, yet Bolton’s personality and
work tactics have been descried repeatedly as
tough-minded and bullying. There is nothing
wrong with politicians who stay firm to their
beliefs, but in the case of a U.N. diplomat, it
seems obvious that a bully is exactly what the
United States does not need handling its inter
national relations. Ex-State Department official
Carl Ford has even testified that Bolton was
abusive toward his junior staff.
Interestingly, Bush made a valid point
when asking that party politics not come into
play while the panel makes its decision. Un
fortunately for Bush, some members of his
own party are just as reluctant as Democrats
to approve Bolton. The Senate Foreign Rela
tions committee is made up of eight Democ
rats and 10 Republicans. As of now, at least
one Republican had indicated he may side
with Democrats and vote against the nomina
tion of Bolton. After hearing witnesses called
by committee Democrats, Republican Senator
George Voinovich said he didn’t “feel comfort
able about voting for Mr. Bolton.”
If disagreement over President Bush’s nomi
nation of John Bolton has crossed party lines,
chances are good there is a real issue here, not
just another Republican/Democrat squabble.
President Bush should recognize this fact. In
stead of asking the parties to put aside politics,
Bush needs to take a second glance at the sur
rounding political world and recognize that
Bolton is not the best choice for ambassador to
the United Nations. It is a diplomatic organiza
tion; if the United States hopes to maintain
friendly ties with that organization and the
countries involved in it, Bush must choose a
different nominee.
EDITORIAL BOARD
Jennifer Sudick
Editor in Chief
Ailee Slater
Commentary Editor
Steven R. Neuman
Managing Editor
Shadra Beesley
Copy Chief
Adrienne Nelson
Online Editor