Oregon Daily Emerald
Tliesday, November 15, 2005
NEWS STAFF
(541)346-5511
PARKER HOWELL
EDITOR IN CHIEF
SHADRA BEESLEY
MANAGING EDITOR
MEGHANN M. CUNIFF
JARED PABEN
NEWS EDITORS
EVA SYLWESTER
SENIOR NEWS REPORTER
KELLY BROWN
KATY GAGNON
CHRISTOPHER HAGAN
BRITTNI M(X;LENAHAN
NICHOLAS WILBUR
NEWS REPORTERS
JOE BAILEY
EMILY SMITH
PART-TIME NEWS REPORTERS
SHAWN MILLER
SPORTS EDITOR
SCOTTI. ADAMS
LUKE ANDREWS
JEFFREY DRANSFEI.DT
SPORTS REPORTERS
AMY EIGHTY
PULSE EDITOR
TREVOR DAVIS
KRISTEN GERHARD
ANDREW MCCOLLUM
PULSE REPORTERS
AII.F.E SIATER
COMMENTARY EDITOR
GABE BRADLEY
JESSICA DERLETH
ARMY FETH
COLUMNISTS
TIM BOBOSKY
PHOTO EDITOR
NICOLE BARKER
SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
KATE HORTON
ZANE RUT
PHOTOGRAPHERS
JONAH SCHROGIN
DESIGN EDITOR
JOHN AYRES
MOLLY BEDFORD
OSSIE BLADINE
KERI SPANGLER
DESIGNERS
CHRIS TODD
. GRAPHIC ARTIST
AARON DUCHATEAU
ILLUSTRATOR
DAWN HELZER
REBECCA TAYLOR
COPY CHIEFS
JENNY DORNER
BRYN JANSSON
JOSH NORRIS
JENNA ROHRBACHER
MATE TIFFANY
COPYEDITORS
STEVEN NEUMAN
ONLINE/SUPPLEMENTS EDITOR
TIMOTHY ROBINSON
WEBMASTER
BUSINESS
(541)346-5511
JUDY RIEDI.
GENERAL MANAGER
KATHY CARBONE
BUSINESS MANAGER
LAUNA DE GIUST1
RECEPTIONIST
JILL ATKINSON
LUKE BELLOTTI
RYAN JOHNSON
SEBASTIAN STORLORZ
NICKVICINO
DISTRIBUTION
ADVERTISING
(541)346-3712
MELISSA GUST
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR
MIA LEIDELMEYER
SALES MANAGER
KELLEE KAUFTHEIl.
IOHN KELLY
LINDSEY FERGUSON
WINTER GIBBS
KATE HIRONAKA
DESI MCCORMICK
STEPHEN MILLER
KATHRYN O'SHEA EVANS
CODY WILSON
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
BONA LEE
AD ASSISTANT
CLASSIFIED
(541)3464343
TRINA SHANAMAN
CLASSIFIED MANAGER
USA CLARK
AN DO
AMANDA KANTOR
KERI SPANGLER
KATIE STRINGER
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
ASSOCIATES
PRODUCTION
(541) 3464381
MICHELE ROSS
PRODUCTION MANAGER
KIRA PARK
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
JAMIE ACKERMAN
CA1TLIN MCCURDY
ERIN MCKENZIE
JONAH SCHROGIN
TERRY STRONG
DESIGNERS
The Oregon Daily Emerald is pub
lished dally Monday through Fri
day during the school year by the
Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing
Co. Inc., at the University ot 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
Guest commentary
Professor should keep attacks free
of unjustified claims of racism
In response to Professor Cole
man’s editorial (“Out-of-control foot
ball fan behavior is intolerable,” ODE
Nov. 9), 1 am one of the many stu
dents who is also disappointed with
the behavior of our disrespectful stu
dents and fans. I completely agree
that the University should not toler
ate the behavior that occurs within
the student section.
However, you seem surprised that
the students booed the opposing
band. No, it is not the best demon
stration of sportsmanship, but it is
not surprising. As a senior member of
the Oregon Marching Band, I have
been booed at every single away
game I have attended for the past
four years. I have had things yelled at
me, thrown at me; I have been spit at,
sworn at and physically pushed. The
OMB has a tradition of clapping and
cheering for the opposing band, and
also creating gift bags for visiting mu
sicians and are recognized as a classy
organization.
I have friends in the UW and OSU
bands that enjoy visiting our stadium
because of the warm encouragement
provided by our band. I have certain
ly been embarrassed at the behavior
of our student section, booing every
thing not in green and yellow, sneak
ing in alcohol and drugs, passing out
and puking in the stands ... it is dis
gusting, but you, professor, shifted
your attack in such random ways that
I feel your argument has been com
pletely invalidated. For example, the
racial implications of booing some
Husky band members. Our drum ma
jors are booed along with our band as
we travel, and our drum majors are
all white!
The booing of the UW drum major,
particularly after a dropped baton,
was not a racial issue. The students
booed before they could see who the
drum major was!
Following the unjustified racial
statement, you began to insult our
band. Given that you are not part of
the School of Music, it is perhaps jus
tifiable that you do not understand
how to compare marching bands. For
clarification, the UW band is a tradi
tional marching band, limiting their
repertoire to marches and using a
showy technique called “high step.”
They employ simple moves in order
to allow focus on stand-still music
and drill visuals. Their uniforms re
flect their traditional style.
The OMB is a contemporary march
ing band. We play many different tunes
and do not limit our repertoire. Just
think about the last eight years of
shows, or maybe you haven’t paid
enough attention to the music, given
the distraction of our shiny “military
helmets.” We also use a different
marching technique to make our mo
tions more uniform. A couple of years
ago, it was decided that we would
change our uniforms to something
more contemporary: new and different,
to reflect our style. Yes, our uniforms
are very different than UW but so is our
style and music. We are a very re
spectable marching band; one of the
top in the country. But I guess you are
probably too concerned with the
racism in the student section and the
shiny helmets on the field to listen to us
play. Try purchasing an OMB CD and
supporting the school that you so elo
quently referred to as “well-respected.”
Beth Overgard is a University senior,
and four-year OMB member
INBOX
Your rights aren't on hold
during confrontations
Thank you for publishing
Jonathan Irwin’s account of last
month’s Critical Mass bike ride (“Po
lice hostility toward bicyclists hinders
progressive movement,” ODE Nov.
8). Being that I was one of the cy
clists who got detained and cited, I’m
glad the Emerald is helping spread
awareness of the regularly occurring
harassment that Critical Mass partici
pants suffer by the Eugene Police. I
would like to take this opportunity to
remind readers of their rights, quot
ed from lawcollective.org:
“If an officer tries to start a conver
sation with you, find out whether
you’re free to go. If you are, then you
should leave immediately, without
saying anything else.
“If you’re not free to go, the police
may merely be “detaining” you
while they decide if they have
enough evidence for an arrest. Dur
ing this period, say nothing except:
I’m going to remain silent. I would
like to see a lawyer.
“If you are arrested, you’ll have to
give your name and show ID to be
considered for release. Except when
an officer’s asking for your name or
ID, say: I’m going to remain silent. I
would like to see a lawyer. Don’t an
swer any other questions or make
any remarks.
“ (When others are being detained)
you have the right to observe and film
the police. You can stay as close as is
necessary to see and hear clearly, as
long as you don’t interfere with the of
ficer’s ‘work.’”
The more people know their rights,
the less easy it is for police to put false
statements in the report. Keep this in
formation in mind even if you think
you’ll never have to use it.
Ashley Wright
University Alumna
Do research before saying
unfounded judgments
I would like to respond to Alex De
ley’s guest commentary regarding the
Nov. 1 visit by Dr. Mitchell Bard that
was sponsored by Oregon Hillel and
the Jewish Student Union (“Narrow
minds inhibit peace,” ODE Nov. 10).
Mr. Deley should get his facts
straight. Dr. Bard is not presently affil
iated with AIPAC (the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee). Second,
Mr. Deley’s criticism that Dr. Bard re
fused to answer a particular question
posed to him “immediately after the
lecture” is also incorrect; we allowed
Dr. Bard approximately 45 minutes af
ter the lecture for questions, and no
question similar to the one that Mr.
Deley described was posed by anyone
in the audience. If there were a private
exchange with Dr. Bard as he was
leaving, then the criticism is nonethe
less unfounded and misleading.
As to the content of Dr. Bard’s talk,
Oregon Hillel invites speakers with a
wide variety of viewpoints in order to
foster dialogue and discussion; I am
happy that we were successful in pro
voking discussion.
Together with that, I might add that
it is ironic that Mr. Deley’s anguish
and disagreement of Dr. Bard’s de
scription of Hezbollah as a terrorist
organization comes in the same week
that the Argentinean government con
nected Hezbollah directly to the 1994
bombing of the Jewish Community
Center in Buenos Aires that killed 85
and injured 200 civilians — the worst
terrorist attack in Argentina’s history:
www.cnn.eom/2005/WORLD/ameri
cas/ll/09/argentina.bombing.ap/.
Thank you for the opportunity to *
set the record straight.
Hal M. Applebaum
Executive Director
Oregon Hillel
Professor's letter implies
racism at football game
Emeritus Professor E.L. Coleman’s
letter (“Out-of-control football fan
behavior is intolerable,” ODE Nov. 9)
takes an admirable stand against re
cent behavior at Duck football
games, and correctly calls for the
censure of those fans who display
unbecoming conduct.
Where Coleman goes wrong, how
ever, is in the insinuation that a chorus
of boos following an African-American
drum major’s fumble were racially mo
tivated. While in no way discounting
the centuries of very real enormities
endured by blacks, frankly, it is absurd
to presume that race played any factor
in the case at hand. Indeed, someone
of Coleman’s impressive accomplish
ments in the field of African-American
studies (he is listed in “Who’s Who in
Black America”) should know better
than to resort to a wholesale character
ization of all the fans who laughed at
the drum major’s mistake as having
done so on the basis of racial prejudice.
And while it’s worth noting that I
harbor no misconceptions of racism as
solely a thing of the past, it is disingen
uous for Coleman to impulsively as
sume that racism was at play here. In
doing so, Coleman does us all a dis
service, and does nothing to further
advance a productive dialogue on the
state of race relations today.
Miles Church Kane
University student
OREGON DAILY EMERALD LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the editor and guest commentanes 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 venfication. The Emerald reserves the right to edit for space, grammar and style. Guest submissions are published at the discretion of the Emerald.
■ Editorial
Mutual
respect is
necessary
for change
After an extended period of near-silence,
French President Jacques Chirac has finally
come out with a statement addressing the root
cause of recent rioting in France. During his
first major speech since the youth riots began,
Chirac called attention to the “deep malaise”
and discrimination within French society,
which led to underprivileged community
members taking matters into their own hands.
He pledged to create a civil service that
would offer jobs and training for 50,000
youths by 2007. With this move, Chirac is pro
viding his country with options and ideas be
sides deportation and curfews. Perhaps Chirac
has realized that the root problems of the ri
oting stem far beyond youth unrest and the
desire to burn things.
Thankfully, Chirac has promised to work
toward equal opportunity for French youth.
Unfortunately, there is still much work to be
done. He must acknowledge and also pledge
to deal with the state of impoverished French
suburbs, as well as the issue of discrimination
faced by many Muslims in France. Chirac’s re
cent statement that foreign rioters ought to
lose their French citizenship is probably not
the best way to quell religious, ethnic, or
racial tensions.
Chirac is correct in his belief that “[If] one
belongs to our national community one must
respect the rules.” In order to create a nation
of people who respect the rules, those citizens
must first be secure in the knowledge that they
are an important part of their national commu
nity. Now is the time for Chirac to prove his re
gard for the underprivileged, and encourage a
mutuality of respect.
Congress' voting-rights review
should consider immigrants
Next week, Congress will complete its review
of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and decide which
portions of the act should to be renewed. One
provision, debated before the House Judiciary
Committee earlier this month, mandates bilin
gual election material for certain jurisdictions. If
an election jurisdiction’s voting population in
cludes more than 5 percent (or, at least 10,000
citizens) of people who speak a single minority
language, then bilingual ballots, pamphlets, etc.
must be offered.
Those who oppose renewing the bilingual
voting provision claim that the government
shouldn’t waste resources translating election
material, because the test to become a U.S. citi
zen already mandates a knowledge of reading
and understanding the English language. If vot
ers have become U.S. citizens, they must al
ready have a comprehension of the language;
therefore, bilingual ballots are unnecessary.
This argument, however, fails to take into ac
count the fact that people without a firm grasp
on the English language will be at a disadvan
tage if election material includes complicated
wording or colloquial phrases. Why take a step
to make voting more difficult for any portion of
the population?
When deciding which parts of the act should
be renewed, Congress ought to remember the
United State’s historical position as a nation of
immigrants. Approving a decision that decreas
es minority participation in democracy would
be a decidedly un-American move. Financial
ramifications, and minimal ones at that, should
not dictate the disappearance of bilingual
election materials.