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,