PAGE TWO
THE BENNETT BANNER
FRIDAY, MARCH 1, 1985
Reagan’s scheme hurts talks
Recently President Reagan said that even if the nuclear arms race was
ended the United States would still want to develop Star Wars. In layman’s
terms Star Wars is a space-based defense system of offensive weapons.
The way the nuclear arms situation stands now both the United States and
the Soviet Union have more than enough fire power to destroy each other. The
nuclear issue has gained so much media attention increasing public awareness
to the extent that more pressure is being placed on the government of the USSR
and the U.S. to stop the deployment of nuclear weapons.
The most recent arms talks in Geneva didn’t look as promising as they could
have been because of the President’s implicit instructions to refuse to use Star
Wars a.s a bargaining chip.
At the present time, Reagan intends to continue with research despite what
effect it might have on future arms reduction talks. Reagan supports this by
saying that the only weapon that we have against the USSR is the knowledge
that we can destroy each other; therefore we need an edge. The Soviet Union
is quick to point out that during the past two major wars the U.S. has been the
one to use nuclear weapons, not the USSR.
Congress is also a little skeptical about the Star Wars plan in the sense
that it is afraid that the Russians will not see it as an act of good faith. The
Soviet Union has enforced this opinion during the Geneva talks. The Russians
let it be known that they did not and would not tolerate the deployment of the
Star Wars plan. President Reagan has made it clear that he believes that his
space-based defense plan would be needed even if the super powers agreed to
abolish all nuclear weapons.
Reagan is so confident about Star Wars that the program is receiving a
sharp increase in funds from Reagan’s budget. No expense is being spared in
trying to gain support from U.S. allies. Recently Secretary of Defense Caspar
Weinberger delivered a speech before a security seminar in West Germany ap
pealing to Western European nations to support the Reagan administration’s
space defense program. It is President Reagan’s hope that wth the develop
ment of Star Wars both sides will agree to reduce their nuclear arsenals.
Critics of the plan say that if the plans for Star Wars continue, it is very
probable that more offensive weapons systems will be developed to circumvent
them. Unless some sort of compromise is reached, the future reduction
talks vdll prove as unprofitable as the Geneva talks did. (Pamela Gary)
Are you being victimized by seif-ensiavemenl!
The year is 1985 and where do we go from here? Take a look at history.
For so long our sisters have been oppressed, used and abused, but through it
all they fought on and exemplified the determination and strength that was part
of their nature. _ • j ^ i
We are the daughters of African kings and queens. The period of slavery
was very demeaning. Some say it is over. But when we fail ™
character, fail to be what we can be, deny ourselves what is rightfully ours and
entrap ourselves in our own ignorance, is this not slavery?
We look at prostitutes as degrading persons with no sense of value or
spect for themselves, but we play games with others in order to disclose a side
of our being we are not and settle for whatever we can get without question.
Is this not prostitution? ...
If we are to be the women we were meant to be, exhibiting the character
of our ancestors, we must stop enslaving ourselves; we must stop prostituting
ourselves; we must begin to examine our inner ideals, values and goals.
Then and only then can we move ahead. The year is 1985. We must get our
priorities in order, make a conscientious decision about what we want to do and
expect, and make this year a solid foundation for continued growth.
(Karen R. Taylor)
Tliere’s a dupe born every minute
a column
by Vicky Dunn
The wonder of the circus
never ceases to thrill me.
Flashing, sequined outfits;
blinking lights that keep time
with my heart and the bass
drum in the orchestra; sticky
cotton candy and every other
fattening treat sold at astro
nomical prices all typify the
circus. But it’s the gaudy
kind of adventure one can
only stand to go on once a
year.
Unfortunately, something
about the circus urges me to
spend, spend and spend more!
I am a victim of cunning ad
vertising schemes. I bought
one stuffed animal after one
book after one balloon after
another balloon, until my
arms were fairly dragging
the ground with precious
booty. I bought things with
out any particular purpose
but that filled my need to
buy. If you think of such an
expenditure as a small rip-
off, and have not recognized
the larger one, let me remove
the proverbial scales from
your eyes.
I love the circus almost as
much as any other young
adult whose entertainments
can range from anything
like that to something
totally unchildlike. But, I still
know a dupe when I see one.
The major attraction at this
year’s show was the “living
unicorn.” (Just between us,
pampered sheep do strange
unicorns make.)
So who is responsible for
this year’s gross misadvertis-
ing? If we blame the show’s
producers, we must also re
alize our responsibility. We
demand that the “Greatest
Show On Earth’’ be
unearthly.
Advertisers purposefully
present illusions. Once they
get our attention, they liter
ally can’t afford to lose it.
And yes, they will even lie
to get it. What happens more
often, though, is that they
simply divert us and subtly
con us. The unicorn promo
tion was blatant, however.
Throughout the show, I
couldn’t help wondering if
anyone really believed the lie,
or worse yet, if we didn’t care
that it was a lie. Do we calm
ly sit by as others bombard
us with misinformation sim
ply because we want to be
entertained?
Perhaps promoters only
want to appease our demands
for the impossible, and we
are the real culprits. The real
tragedy lies there— that we
settle for nothing.
Did he or didn^t he?
“Atlanta Child Murders”
Produces dissatisfaction
a column
by Dee Evans
The docudrama, “The At
lanta Child Murders,” which
aired Feb. 10 and 12, was not
considered as one of televi
sion’s greatest productions,
nor did it come close.
This docudrama just
caused controversy among its
producers, disturbances with
those actually involved with
the incidents and confusion
among the viewers. It is as
if a group of people took a
serious situation and for en
tertainment purposes turned
it into a comedy.
Many of the viewers agree
that the docudrama was not
a good representation of the
actual account. According to
junior Amanda Smith, an
English major from Char
lotte, “I was totally disap
pointed with the movie. Wil
liams was portrayed as a
comedian out for jokes. The
sensitivity of the actual inci
dent was lost because of poor
representation. ”
The movie tended to sway
towards the idea that Wayne
Williams was innocent. In ad
dition, viewers feel that they
were not presented with a
clear, precise picture of the
actual incident. The viewers
were left puzzled and con
fused. Sophomore Melanie
Hubbard, a journalism major
from Indianapolis, says, “the
movie gave me insight into
the trial itself; however, it
didn’t tell me anything about
the murders of the children
in detail.”
Freshman psychology ma
jor, Kim Mozingo from De
troit, agrees, sajang, “basical
ly I couldn’t come to any con
clusion as to whether Wil
liams was innocent or guilty
because all the substantial
evidence was not presented in
the movie.”
Moreover, the movie cre
ated an uproar of opinions.
Some people remained with
their first impression, and
some changed their minds
after watching the movie.
Others still remain undecided
as to whether or not Williams
was guilty. “I feel Williams
was unjustly punished,” says
nursing major Countess Can-
nady, a sophomore from
Winston-Salem.
Sophomore Lisa Matthews,
a pre-law major says, “I don’t
feel that Williams’ trial was
justice. I can only say that
there was proven evidence
against him. I hope someday,
somehow that this case will
become solved in a way that
would satisfy the parents of
the deceased.”
Perhaps the only accom
plishment of the show was to
make the murders a subject
of conversation again.
Letter to the Editor: Amnesty International asks aid in stopping human rights violations in Peru
To the Editor.
Atrocities committed by Peru
vian government forces in the
country’s remote highland prov
inces have reached unprecedented
levels in the country’s modern
history, according to a report re
leased by Amnesty International
in January.
Hundreds of Peruvians have
been tortured and killed during
the last two years, and more than
1,000 have disappeared after gov
ernment agents seized them with
out warrant from their homes.
Many of the victims are students
and teachers killed because of
their alleged association with the
Shining Path armed opposition
group.
Editor-in-Chief Dee Evans
Associate Editors Avanti Allen, Alalna Cloud
Vicky Dunn, Tricia Hairston, Karen R. Taylor
Reporters Chandra Austin, Yvonne Breece, Karen Exum
Margo Gilmore, Mardell Griffin, Shonna Luten
Ellesia McCracken, Bernice Scott
Adviser Michael Gaspeny
Opinions expressed in columns and letters to the editor belong to
the authors, not to the staff of the Banner.
Send letters to the editor to Box 2. All mail must be signed by hand.
An army patrol abducted Pedro
Gomez, a university student, when
he returned from Lima to his
parents’ rural home 18 months
ago. He has not been seen since
the abduction. Arguimedes As-
carza, an 18-year-old student
from the Ayacucho highlands, al
so remains among the “disap
peared.” Hooded men dressed in
army uniforms abducted him from
his home in July 1983.
Massive human rights violations
began to occur in Peru in Decem
ber 1982 when the government of
President Fernando Belaunde
Terry placed nine western prov
inces under military rule. Shining
Path guerrillas have been espe
cially active in these provinces,
targeting government security
personnel and local community
leaders for execution-style kill
ings. Last summer the government
extended the Emergency Zone to
13 provinces.
Despite domestic and interna
tional protest against the “dirty
wars” waged by government au
thorities, military forces, Peruvian
police and the civil guard continue
to violate citizens’ human rights
with impunity. While condemning
the killings and other abuses com
mitted by the Shining Path, Am
nesty International has called up
on the government of President
Belaunde to observe international
standards for protection of in
dividual citizens’ fundamental
human rights.
Students and teachers in the
Emergency Zone have suffered
brutal treatment, in part because
young people have been recruited
into the guerrilla movement. Evi
dence compiled by Amnesty In
ternational suggiests that military
agents suspect young people of
participating in guerrilla activity.
Victims of government agents
also include farmers, lawyers,
journalists and leaders of peasant
organizations and trade unions.
Security forces have dumped or
buried hundreds of bodies at sev
eral sites in the Emergency Zone.
Fifty bodies were found in sev
en shallow graves at one site last
summer. At other sites military
authorities have obstructed ex
humation or identification of
corpses, whch often bear marks
of torture and a single gunshot
wound in the head. Removal of
clothing, severing of fingers, and
the mutilation of facial features
render identification difficult.
A Peruvian woman testified
that she and her daughter had
searched for her missing son “at
the place where the dead bodies
appear. But we have only found
the collar of his shirt, which the
marines used as a blindfold on
another person.”
Numerous victims of “disap
pearance” were last seen £dive at
one of two government detention
centers. The Huanta Stadium, a
concrete structure built in 1974
for sporting events, serves as a
provincial naval command head
quarters. Authorities have denied
detaining, many of the prisoners
held under the grandstand and in
open areas of the stadium.
Los Cabitos Barracks, a regional
army headquarters, reportedly
serves as the Emergency Zone’s
main interrogation and detention
center. Prisoners released from
the barracks have testified that
they saw people held there whom
authorities denied detaining.
These testimonies suppKjrt evi
dence that guards in the barracks
systematically torture detainees.
(See page 3)