6The Daily Tar HeelMonday, September 26, 1983 (Uh p latlg (Ear Brrl 91st year of editorial freedom Kerry DeRochi, Editor ALISON DAVIS, Managing Editor JEFF HlIAY, Associate Editor LISA PULLEN, University Editor CHRISTINE MANUEL, State and National Editor MIKE DESiSTI, Sports Editor BILL RlEDY. News Editor John Conway, cuy Editor KAREN FISHER, Features Editor JE GROVE, Arts Editor CHARLES W. LEDFORD, Photography Editor Ready, set, wait A basketball player of Michael Jordan's caliber only comes around about once a decade. He enters the University, makes magic with the golden leather ball, and is instantly deified. As a freshman, he becomes the hunted autograph hounds, pro scouts and even fellow students are always in hot pursuit. An NCAA select committee has a proposal that would reduce that sort of attention: Make freshmen ineligible to participate in varsity football and basketball. The proposal is backed by the theory that making freshmen ineligible will lead to better grades and higher graduation rates for athletes. Perhaps by seeming like every other freshman, they will develop a sense of the need for a balance between sports and studies. The recommendation has been endorsed by several area college coaches and officials, including UNC basketball coach Dean Smith and football coach Dick Crum. Both say that if freshman eligibility were abolished, first-year players still would participate in freshman or junior varsity programs. There would be fewer games, less travel, less demand ing practice time. There would be a smoother transition to life away from home, an increased academic load and new social environment. They could concentrate more on school work less on athletics. Opponents to the plan, however, argue that the rule is not needed because freshmen still will have to practice daily, even on junior varsity teams. They maintain that few freshmen ever play on the varsity teams to begin with. Such views, however, are short-sighted at best. Certainly this plan is not the end-all answer to the problem of balancing athletics and academics. And certainly it can be argued that such a ruling will only postpone by a year the transformation of high school students into cam pus gods. The committee's proposal can be taken as only one part of a continuing effort to educate the athletes. Already strict academic stan dards for athletes have been approved. Now, by limiting a freshman par ticipation in varsity sports, the committee is ensuring that the quality of education isn't lost in a crowd of autograph seekers. An open letter... Padraic Baxter President, . Carolina Athletic Association Dear Padraic, Hi. This is Yure Nmomma, remember me? Right, I'm the one you never really liked. You called my friends jerks. You didn't want me to run for Homecoming Queen. Why, P.B?you don't mind it if I call you P.B., do you? Was it the way I wore my hair? My dress? My legs? I just don 't understand it, P.B. After all, I always thought I was a pretty good guy kind of like you, P.B. - - --,- - ....... 4 But, no, you didn 't see it that way. You said you didn 't like my name. You were afraid I'd hurt your reputation, that I wasn 't pretty enough to be Homecoming Queen. You even called me a joke. Well, as they say, P.B., the joke's on you. You probably never thought I had a chance, did you? But I was ready for you; I even took lessons. Ever heard of a guy named Hugh G. Reckshun? Ha. I bet you didn 't vote for him either. Well, P.B., it's getting late and I've got to water my roses. My date is at the door. We're off to the coronation ball I'll save a dance for you. Hey, no hard feelings, huh, big guy? After all, it isn't everyone who gets to sleep in Teague. Long live the Queen. t Yours truly, Yure Nmomma it v I it i i c4 i y " ( y': - ? 4 - -fcaJv-A , xi xSv 'v-rf: ?.-:--.--.---'.v ' . c rS-SSiWriSHv-- if ..:.:; N lCk'c I'll The Daily Tar Heel Editorial Writers: Frank Bruni, Charles Ellmaker and Kelly Simmons Assistant Managing Editors: Joel Broadway, Tracy Hilton and Michael Toole Assistant News Editor: Melissa Moore News: Tracy Adams, Dick Anderson, Joseph Berryhill, Angela Booze, J. Bonasia, Keith Bradsher, Amy Brannen, Lisa Brantley, Hope Buffington, Tom Conlon, Kathie Collins, Kate Cooper, Teresa Cox, Lynn Davis, Dennis Dowdy, Chris Edwards, Suzanne Evans, Kathy Farley, Steve Ferguson, Genie French, Kim Gilley, Marymelda Hall, Andy Hodges, Sue Kuhn, Liz Lucas, Thad Ogburn, Beth O'Kelley, Janet Olson, Rosemary Osborne, Heidi Owen, Beth Ownley, Cindy Parker, Donna Pazdan, Ben Perkowski, Frank Proctor, Linda Queen, Sarah Raper, Mary Alice Resch, Cindi Ross, Katherine Schultz, Sharon Sheridan, Deborah Simp kins, Jodi Smith, Sally Smith, Lisa Stewart, Mark Stinneford, Carrie Szymeczek, Liz Saylor, Mike Sobeiro, Amy Tanner, Doug Tate, Wayne Thompson, Vance Trefethen, Chuck Wall ington, Scott Wharton, Lynda Wolf, Rebekah Wright, Jim Zook, Kyle Marshall, assistant state and national editor, and Stuart Tonkinson, assistant university editor. Sports: Frank Kennedy and Kurt Rosenberg, assistant sports editors. Glenna Burr ess, Kimball Crossley, Pete Fields, John Hackney, Lonnie McCullough, Robyn Norwood, Michael Pers inger, Julie Peters, Glen Peterson, Lee Roberts, Mike Schoor, Scott Smith, Mike Waters, David Wells, Eddie Woolen and Bob Young. Features: Dawn Brazell, Clarice Bickford, Tom Camacho, Toni Carter, Margaret Claiborne, Karen Cotten, Cindy Dunlevy, Charles Gibbs, Tom Grey, Kathy Hopper, Dana Jackson, Charles Karnes, Joel Katzenstein, Dianna Massie, Kathy Norcross, Jane Osment, Clinton Weaver and Mike Truell, assistant features editor. Arts: Steve Carr, Ivy Hilliard, Jo Ellen Meekins, Gigi Sonner," Sheryl Thomas and David Schmidt, assistant arts editor. Graphic Arts: Jamie Francis, Lori Heeman, Ryke Longest, Jeff Neuville, Zane Saunders and Lori Thomas, photographers. Business: Anne Fulcher, business manager; Tammy Martin, accounts receivable clerk; Dawn Welch, circulationdistribution manager; William Austin, assistant circulationdistribution manager; Patti Pittman, classified advertising manager; Julie Jones, assistant classified adver tising manager; Debbie McCurdy, secretaryreceptionist. Advertising: Paula Brewer, advertising manager; Mike Tabor, advertising coordinator; Laura Austin, Melanie Eubanks, Kevin Freidheim, Patricia Gorry, Terry Lee, Doug Robinson and Anneli Zeck ad representatives. . ' . Composition: UNC-CH Printing Department Printing: Hinton Press, Inc. of Mebane. w Jti&. United (?) Nations On the defensive A dark record By STUAR T TONKINSON By MARK LANGSTON President Reagan speaks to the world today. " Reagan, who will address the United Nations General Assembly, is expected tc focus on the shooting down of Korean Air Lines Flight 007. Having spent most of Sunday night flipping through his thesaurus, Reagan will probably present us with a whole new batch of graphic adjectives. One man who would love to have a chance to respond to Reagan's comments is Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko. Gromyko wanted to come; he has made this annual trip to New York since 1957. But New York Gov. Mario Cuomo decided to assert his authority and deny landing rights to the Soviet mission. New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, recognizing a good thing when he saw it, quickly included his state in the ban. . "Flight 007 originated at Kennedy Airport and carried many innocent people from our region. It would be callous indeed to now allow the authors of that destructive act to use our airports," the governors said. Igor Yakolev, a Soviet U.N. delegate, suggested that such behavior was irresponsi ble for the U.N.'s host nation. After all, the United Nations standards for something greater, something that transcends the petty rivalries of those who call themselves superpowers. U.S. delegate Charles M. Lichenstein, a firm lover of apple pie and baseball, said that if Yakolev did not care for New York, then he could just take the next boat back to Lower Slobokvia. "The members of the U.S. mission to the United Nations will be down at dockside waving you a fond farewell as you sail into the sunset," Lichenstein told a U.N. com mittee. . 1 . International relations experts agree that Lichenstein was merely being helpful in recommending that Yakoev travel by boat, since planes that enter Soviet airspace show a disagreeable tendency to get in the way of heat-seeking missiles. Global politics certainly can get petty at times. It's sad, though, that Reagan has no more constructive way of inaugurating the 38th General Assembly., Yes, the death of the 269 , passengers aboard Flight 007 is a tragedy; and yes, the discussion of ways to prevent similar events is a proper .topic for the United Nations, but there are at present far' more pressing issues for the United Nations to discuss. Current emergencies which deserve more of Reagan's attention are: The civil war in Lebanon, where peacekeeping ' troops are entering their second year of increasing military involvement in an ever-escalating war, with no real end in sight. Strife in Central America, where Reagan's bilateral commission has done little to alleviate prob lems. The continuing Iran-Iraq war, which threatens the world's oil supply. The threat to the world banking system. The proposed Soviet ban of outer space weapons. The Soviet fighting in Afghanistan and the use of chemical weapons in that war. Although Reagan will probably leave these topics untouched, a summit of world leaders Tuesday and Wednesday is expected to discuss disarmament, world economic problems and the improvement of the United Nation's image in other words, the nitty gritty of global affairs. Present at the meeting will be the leaders of France, Canada, Egypt, Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, Poland and 2Vz dozen others. This meeting is the largest of its kind since 1960. But don't expect any attention to be given to.it. Most of the emphasis will be placed on Reagan's declaration today. That is a serious mistake. And it is a uniquely American one. Americans dislike the criticism hurled at their country almost daily by foreign representatives. After all, Americans virtually rebuilt the world following World War II. Further, it is the American taxpayers' money that is responsible for U.N. buildings and the support of U.N. delegates. To many Americans, the behavior of delegates who castigate the United States for its policies are biting the hand that feeds them. Any nation resents criticism directed at it and the United States feels especially foolish for guaranteeing the airing of such criticism. Most Americans, disturbed by the rash of attacks delivered by delegates of com munist and developing nations, say that the United Nations is an unnecessary waste of American property; if foreigners dislike Americans, why can't they just meet somewhere else? The United Nations does represent something greater. It is a concept, represen tative of a hope that delegates from all the world's nations can rationally discuss their various goals, arriving at decisions and policies beneficial to all. Who better to sub sidize and support the organization than the United States, that great social experi ment, with a constitution so many of the world's revolutionaries have looked to for inspiration? The League of Nations failed, because debate became centered on per sonal disputes. The United Nations, whose secretary-general can come from the richest or poorest nation, cannot be allowed to descend to the same level. At stake in this 38th assembly is the fate of the United Nations, important in its own right as a global forum. Americans are rightly concerned about the volume of criticism coming from that forum, but the solution does not lie in stifling the voices. Disagreement exists, whether heard or not; it would be better for the United States to take advantage of the United Nations and listen to that criticism. Stuart Tonkinson, a sophomore economics major from St. Louis, is a member of the UNC Model U.N. Club and assistant university editor for The Daily Tar Heel. It has been interesting listening to all the debate concerning the United States and ; its role in the United Nations since it began some days ago with Soviet Ambassador Andrei Gromyko's cancellation of plans to attend the next General Assembly session. I say interesting basically because of two reactions, one in which we are hearing from -the American public an idea not promoted in-quite some time, and the second being a rehashing of the same old thing but in newer, more ridiculous ways of expression. A wonderful example of the latter is the Sept. 20 editorial in The Daily Tar Heel, "Dis united Nations." This article starts by apparently praising President Reagan for his moderation in. replying to the Korean Air Lines tragedy, using it as a "mandate for greater U.S. ef forts toward arms-control negotiations and world peace." It then goes on to question Reagans renewed commitment for better relations because of an alleged U.S. failure "to expedite the difficult arrival" of Ambassador Gromyko in travelling to the U.N. General Assembly meeting. The article upholds Soviet protests, stating that the United States failed "to both ensure Gromyko's safety and provide suitable ar rangements for his arrival." The article goes on to claim that this failure was due to -the unwillingness of New York and New Jersey to protect "Gromyko's special civilian jet" from "uncontrollable public demonstrations" at their commercial airports, in stead ordering the plane to arrive at a military base about two hours' drive from. Manhattan. This re-routing is claimed by the Soviets as a violation of the treaty agree ment that put the U.N. headquarters in New York City back in 1947. Looking at the facts, one can see this for exactly what it is a smokescreen. Since shooting down the KAL jetliner, the Soviets have enjoyed no peace from most of the , world's press, and are therefore grasping at the first issue they can find to get the heat ' off themselves and back onto the United States. Apparently, once again the press is playing a willing accessory. The DTH article is so filled with misinformation that it -comes close to being a Soviet press release. All it needs are a few phrases here and there about decadent Western imperialism. First of all, the State Department never refused Gromyko landing privileges at a commercial airport because of any great concern for his safety. Rather it was because of President Reagan's moderate response to the KAL tragedy, banning the Soviet airline Aeroflot in the United States commer cially. The DTH neglects to inform its readership that . "Gromyko's special civilian jet" is part of the Aeroflot line and therefore banned from any commer cial airport. As for the assertion that landing at the military airport "two hours by car from Manhattan" is not suitable, I must wonder if the DTH writers have ever heard of the marvelous invention called the helicopter, which the U.N. building, I believe, is equipped to handle; the U.S. military possesses at least a few very speedy ones. And should Gromyko still feel these accommodations inadequate, he could always fly other than Aeroflot. Perhaps Korean Air Lines? Going on further, I wonder how the DTH can con cern itself so with our supposed failure to provide for the safety of the Soviet ambassador when the Soviet Union only weeks ago certainly made no such provi sions for U.S. Congressman Larry MacDonald, whom they shot out of the sky with 268 other innocent pec pie. And the Soviets have the mcrecGbTe gall to com plain about the arrangements of our air travel?! The . very country that has broken more treaties probably than any nation in history is accusing the United States of misconduct? This contention is so much fairy tale . that it is hardly worthy of a reply. And yet the DTH comes nowhere near acknowledging this truth. That truth is now developing into a new reaction in the American public. Tired from years of the United Nations' inaction and from its use by the Soviets as a base for propagandizing and espionage, the American public is reviving an idea that has been politically shelved for quite some time. No longer is the role of the United States in the United Nations sacrosanct; now we are asking ourselves whether the United Nations ought to remain on American soil, and even if the United States should com pletely withdraw. The latter idea, while growing stronger, is far from universally popular, but the notion that the United Nations not remain in the United States is " achieving significant support. Despite having conducted an earlier scientific poll of 501 people, ABC television conducted a telephone poll during its Nightline program recently. This poll repudiated the former as more than 100,000 people replied in the first hour alone, voting more than 2-to-l against the United Nations remaining in this country. Granting even the possible bias of this poll, this result clearly shows a grow ing public sentiment. The U.S. delegation to the United Nations apparently feels the same way When in terviewed on Nightline, one high-ranking member promised that should the United Nations leave the country, his delegation would be at the docks waving goodbye. Even U.S. Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick stated reservedly that the United Nations should be based every other six months in Moscow to allow the world to see firsthand what life in the Soviet Union is really like. This idea is indeed a novel one. But it probably will never be adopted because the Soviets, despite their loud protestations over Gromyko's travel arrangements, are very -unlikely to want to lose their New York base of operations, nor would they care to foot the bill for thousands of diplomats mnning loose in the Soviet Union. Yet, if we think back upon the United Nations' dismal record on human rights and peace with -perhaps a slight touch of sarcasm in heart, the perfect solution to the question of where to base the United Nations comes to mind. From September through March we can base it at the North Pole. Then for the rest of the year we can move it to the South Pole, thereby ensuring the United Nations its rightful place, having put it where the sun never shines. The present record of the United Nations is, after all, about as dark. Mark Langston is a junior business administration major from Greensboro. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR A demagogue does not a statesman make To the editor: As the product of a political science ma jor, Bill Marsh's column, "At the Helm of the common man's interest" (DTH, Sept. 19), is an excellent example of political naivete. Marsh reflected his ignorance by wrongly stating there were no personal or political advantages to be gained by Helms' opposition to the 5 cents-per-gallon increase in gasoline tax. American oil industry interests have been significant contributors to Helms' National Congres sional Club. From my perspective, a Texas oil millionaire does not typify the common man the . North Carolina tobacco and very unequal school systems existed. Until leaving the state in 1964, I was "bused" to achieve racial segregation. As a syndicated radio commentator in the ear ly years, Helms espoused continuing sup port for the various instruments the state and local governments used to foster racial segregation. Such was his vision of a free, farmer is a better example. Curiously, Marsh omitted reference to Helm's crucial support for the 8 cents-per-pack tobacco tax. My public education began in the 1950s in Robeson County. Because of the Lumbee Indian population, three separate although "apartheid," America. How ever, when busing began to be used to achieve racial integration, Helms cried out that this instrument was unjust. During World War II, Japanese Americans were wrongly incarcerated. Equity justifies their compensation. Greater wrongs have been perpetrated upon American Indians and blacks. Equi ty justifies their compensation even more. However, Helms (and probably Marsh) feels there has been no wrongdoing. He is a conservative who desires to preserve racism. A demagogue yes; a statesman no. When Helms publishes an open letter to North Carolinians repudiating his his torical racism, supporting Affirmative Ac tion programs that are conceptually forms of deserved compensation, and vowing that "Dixie should never rise again," he will be a statesman with political courage. R.D. Locklear Chapel Hill Tainted topography for To the editor: I'd like to commend James A. Wellons his column, "Integrated brothers (DTH, Sept. 22). I'm a black Resident Assistant in a North Campus residence hall and there are two things I hope for: 1) that more blacks move to North Campus and give whites (and. themselves) a chance to live with a "mysterious race" and 2) that their integrated living arraiuieiaun Uc a pleasant learning experience. Thanks to Wellons for honestly explaining that it can be. You've probably spoken for many students who, as a result of living together, can relate to other races as sisters and brothers. - Adneatria J. Parker Cobb College without chaos To the editor: I'd like to apologize for my class for not holding enough riots to satisfy Murphy Evans' radical thirst ("Tangled up in blue," DTH, Sept. 12). but for those of us who came to college to get an education : and prepare for the future, college life here at UNC is just fine. Zoran Mihailovich Morrison Hni Am AMDTHISOHE fiOESTO THAT BWNDE OM ELM STREET,, PANT, Ml STOP PR00L,STOR PANT, PANT, STOP,