Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Oct. 10, 1989, edition 1 / Page 10
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
10The Daily Tar HeelTuesday, October 10, 1989 lllrlt-filr 97th year of editorial freedom Sharon Kebschull, Editor WlLUAM TACGART, Managing Editor Mary Jo Dunnington, Editorial Page Editor TAMMY BLACKARD, Editorial Page Editor Justin McGuire. University F.ditnr JENNY CLONINGER, University Editor Jessica Lanning, City Editor CARA BONNETT, Arts and Features Editor Kelly Thompson, Omnibus Editor DAVID SuROWIECKI, Photography Editor KAREN Dunn, State and National Editor TOM PARKS, Business Editor Dave Glenn, Sports Editor Melanie Black, Design Editor JULIA COON, News Editor Let hearing be held Delays in grievance process bad for all board opinion By now, many -readers are probably weary of reading about the University police department. Stories come out every day about the latest stage of police offi cers grievances against the department's hiring and promotion practices and the stories have been coming out for well over a year. In the latest news, Officer Keith Edwards has had her grievance hearing delayed again, an inexcusable move taken by the state. : N.C. Assistant Attorney General Lars Nance, representing the University, re quested last Thursday that an administra tive trial judge delay Edwards' Monday grievance hearing and dismiss the case. Edwards has taken her charges of discrimi nation in the hiring process to Step 4, the highest level of appeal for a state em ployee, even though other officers have dropped their complaints and even though this has taken up most of her time since 1 987. In the meantime, the University looks disorganized and the police department seems too full of internal problems to operate effectively. It's time to get these complaints cleared up and move on to reforming the police department enough to stand up to outside scrutiny. Today, one day after Edwards' trial was to begin, the judge will hold a pre-trial hearing on the delay and dismissal mo tions. Even if he allows the case to con tinue, the state has effectively delayed the trial for at least a day. Nance said Monday's hearing should be delayed because Edwards' attorney, Alan McSurely, asked to subpoena 34 witnesses, many of whom Nance was not familiar with. That's a fair argument, but by now, the police department has re ceived widepublicity of its problems, and nobody has taken this in hand and dealt with it quickly and effectively. Certainly, the case requires a fair amount of time to study the charges and compile a defense, but this only makes the state look as if it cannot defend the police department's practices. While that may not be the case in the least, it simply adds to the sinking reputation of the department. Members of the University community should be con cerned about the effect these delays are having on the department. While the state may have an equally substantial defense, it seems now that Edwards' complaint has a fair amount to back it up. It's time to let both sides be heard rather than moving to delay this and dismiss it outright. If Edwards really has no grounds to complain, let that come out in the hearing. If the case does not come before the judge, it will leave festering sores in the department and too many unanswered questions in the people the police are supposed to serve. Dismissing this case would be unfair to all affected by it, even those only indirectly affected. The state cannot let that happen. The right ranking? Poll may fool students and officials UNC can start whistling the Carolina Fight projectsas the Alumni Center. Unfortunately, Song over its ranking of 18th in a U.S. News much of the money UNC receives (or should and World Report poll an advancement receive) are not spent on the most necessary from last year's number 23! UNC can now additions to the campus, such as the Black flaunt its Carolina-blue face to all those skep- Cultural Center, for which students have cam tics who said the University is going downhill, paigned for about five years. The fact that top professors are leaving, the The legislature and many administrators state Legislature spends our tuition on highway have given little support the requests from funds and the libraries' budgets are constantly teaching assistants for a raise. And budgets are being cut certainly doesn't mean anything. swiftly dwindling this year, $60,000 was According to 56 percent of the public uni- slashed from, the library's budget for periodi- versities polled, UNC comes in at number 18 cals. The entire library budget was meagerly among its peer institu tions. Poll-takers were to judge universities on faculty strength, aca demic excellence and administrative and fi nancial leadership and basketball team simply me how UNC holds up to these categories: Faculty strength. A beautiful campus andUNC's respected cannot be enough. While many excellent professors remain at UNC, it is fair to scold the N.C. General As sembly for not attempting to retain more pro fessors. According to 1986 figures, full profes sors receive a base salary of $42,000 with a few benefits thrown into the package. At least 69 comparable universities pay more than this. How could UNC possibly be ranked ahead of those other 69 schools with more appealing pay? Maybe the other categoriesdid it for UNC. Administrative and financial support. Well, the chairman of the Board of Governors does support university programs throughout the system, as shown by Roddy Jones' support for N.C. State University's Athletic Director Jim Valvano. But that was at State, not UNC. The University does get many donations from alumni, but too often they go toward such increased by 1 percent, despitehikes in book and periodical pricest. No, this also does not seem to be the cate gory for which UNC won the 18th slot. Academic excel lence. This one is pretty tough to dispute. UNC annually has a chal lenging admissions pool from which to choose. However, despite the high quality of students, if the curriculum is not stimulating and chal lenging, students will inevitably suffer. Maybe student quality has stayed high so far, but if UNC keeps ignoring its other responsibilities, it will discourage students from attending UNC. Editors of U.S. News and World Report admit that any survey such as this cannot be accurate because many other factors should be considered. But students, the administration and the legislature may still be fooled by the high ranking, and that would be wrong. UNC must continue to strive for excellence and improvement. A beautiful campus and a na tionally-respected basketball team simply can not be enough for UNC to make the ranks. Jennifer Wing The Daily Tar Heel Editorial Writers: James Burroughs and Jennifer Wing. Assistant Editors: Jessica Yates, arts and features; Kim Avetta, Karen Dennis and Wendy Johnson, design; Charles Britain, editorial page; Staci Cox, managing; B Buckberry and Steve Wilson, news; Lisa Reichle and Richard Smith, Omnibus; Evan Eile, photography; Andrew Podolsky, Jay Reed and Jamie Rosenberg, sports; Kari Barlow, state and national; Will Spears and Amy Wajda, university; Writers: Steve Adams, Craig Allen, Cathy Apgar, Marcie Bailey, Tim Bennett, Crystal Bernstein, Jennifer Blackwell, Lynette Blair, Wendy Bounds, Stephen Bryan, Sarah Cagle, Julie Campbell, Terri Canaday, Heather Clapp, Judy Dore, Wagner Dotto, Mark Folk, Julie Gammill, Kevin Greene, Chris Helms, Joey Hill, Katherine Houston, Stephanie Johnston, Gabriele Jones, Stacey Kaplan, Jason Kelly, Lloyd Lagos, Tracy Lawson, David Lloyd, Rheta Logan, Sheila Long, Alan Martin, Kimberly Maxwell, Beth Meckley, Jeff Moyer, He lie Nielsen, Glenn O'Neal, Simone Pam, Jannette Pippin, Myron Pitts, Becky Riddick, Vanessa Shelton, Katherine Snow, Kyle York Spencer, Mike Sutton, Bill Taggart, Cameron Tew, Christine Thomas, Tim Truzy, Emilie Van Poucke, Sandy Wall, Chuck Williams, Nancy Wykle. Sports: Neil Amato, Mark Anderson, Jason Bates, John Bland, Laurie Dhue, Christina Frohock, Scott Gold, Warren Hynes, Doug Hoogervorst, David Kupstas, Bethany Litton, Bobby McCroskey, Brock Page, Natalie Sekicky, Eric Wagnon and Steve Walston. Arts and Features: Cheryl Allen, Lisa Antonucci, Noah Bartolucci, Clark Benbow, Shields Brewer, Gretchen Davis, Diana Florence, Cricket French, Wendy Grady, Vicki Hyman, Mara Lee, Tim Little, Matthew McCafferty, Carrie McLaren, Elizabeth Murray, D'Ann Pletcher, Leigh Pressley, Eric Rosen, Hasie Sirisena, Heather Smith, Brian Springer, Bevin Weeks and Laura Williams. Photography: Steven Exum, Regina Holder, Tracey Langhome and Kathy Michel. Copy Editors: James Benton, Susan Comfort, Rebecca Duckett, Joy Golden, Stephanie Harper, Angela Hill, Susan Holdsclaw, Anne Isenhower, Debrah Norman, George Quintero, JoAnn Rodak, Kristin Scheve, Joe Seagle, Kelley Shaw, Clare Weickert, Steffanie Woodfin and Cameron Young. Cartoonists: Adam Cohen, Pete Corson, Alex De Grand, David Estoye, Greg Humphreys and Mike Sutton. Business and Advertising: Kevin Schwartz, director; Bob Bates, advertising director; Leslie Humphrey, classified ad manager; Kirsten Burkart, assistant classified ad manager; Janet Gordon, Angela Spivey, classified assistants; Amanda Tilley, advertising manager; Sabrina Goodson, business manager; Allison Ashworth, assistant business manager; Lora Gay, Kristi Greeson, Beth Harding, Lavonne Leinster, Tracy Proctor, Kevin Reperowitz, Alicia Satterwhite, Pam Thompson and Jill Whitley, display advertising representatives; Kim Blass, creative director; Pam Strickland, marketing director; Sherrie Davis, Ingrid Jones, Shannon Kelly and Tammy Newton, sales assistants; Laura Richards, typist. Subscriptions: Ken Murphy, manager. Distribution: RDS Carriers. Production : Bill Leslie and Stacy Wynn, managers: Anita Bentley, assistant manager; Brian Campbell, Stephanie Locklear, John Nipp and Greg Miller, assistants. Printing: The Village Companies. Rebirth. Noriega beats the Bosh leaguers O n yet another pressing issue, George Bush still has not taken decisive action. During the brutal crackdown in China, he chose to remain cautious, perhaps wisely. When Colonel William Higgins was reportedly murdered in the Middle East, he again opted for inaction. Despite his promises to present a successful, innovative war on drugs, he came up with a shaky, underfunded program. No tangible harm to the Bush ad ministration can be traced to these indecisive stances it has taken, but last week's misadven tures in Panama dealt the administration a damaging blow. Conflicting news reports still abound a week after the attempted coup of Panamanian Maj. Moises Giroldi Vega to displace strong man, dictator and accused drug trafficker Gen. Manuel Noriega, but one thing is painfully clear; the Bush team was absolutely out to lunch. Overthrowing Noriega might not be desir able. It would be nice to bring him to the United States to face drug trafficking charges, but clean way to do that exists U.S. military intervention could result in the loss of incalcu lable lives. It is also not clear what would happen once someone deposed him. Civil war in Panama could easily ignite between the new leaders and the pro-Noriega forces this type of situation is never cut-and-dry. But that's why the bureaucrats and policy makers are paid big salaries to analyze these situ ations. The travesty of last week's coup attempt is not that the United States chose' not to inter vene and back up the rebels with U.S. fire power. Rather, it is the process by which that decision was reached that should alarm those who have placed these "leaders" in charge of such important matters. At this time last year, Bush promised voters he would work for the removal of Noriega (despite his previously established ties to the leader). Six months ago, he implied support for a coup by saying he would "love to see the mi J& PC Chris I Landgraff Staff Columnist leader removed" by rebel forces. A brief description of the events leading to the coup show the inadequacy of planning among Bush, the National Security Council, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the defense secretary and the secretary of state. (Notice that no one was looking for Quayle.) Last Sunday night, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell were notified by Giroldi's wife that a coup was going to take place on Monday if Noriega did not go to his headquar ters. Giroldi had met with two CIA officers on Sunday and expressed concern about the Panamanian Army's Fifth and Seventh Com panies. He wanted guaranteed sanctuary for himself and his family, and he wanted the U.S. military forces in Panama City to block three streets to prevent pro-Noriega reinforcements from reaching Noriega's headquarters. Giroldi's wife did not leave a phone number at which the major could be reached. By Monday morning, Bush officials met to discuss what action they could take. They knew Giroldi was a high-level Noriega offi cial, but intelligence reports showed he helped suppress a previous coup attempt. Cheney was afraid the whole thing was a setup. The rebels did not attempt the coup Mon day, giving U.S. officials more time to decide on appropriate action. It isn't clear whether U.S. intelligence agents were supposed to gather more data on such questions as the like lihood of the coup, the possibilities of success or whether the rebels would be democratic. No one outside of the White House can be quite sure what they were doing. All we know for certain is that there was mass confusion in the Oval Office. Giroldi's wife called Washington Monday night to say that the coup would take place on Tuesday even if Noriega went to his headquar ters. Sure enough, Noriega's compound was seized the next morning. U.S. officials decided to close off this country's military bases, par tially blocking the route of Noriega's reinforce ments, but not preventing the Seventh Company from getting to the compound. In fact, even as U.S. observers saw a Panamanian military plane on the runway and watched military trucks cruise past the U.S. embassy, no one warned the rebels who were reportedly detaining Noriega of Noriega's reinforcements. Shortly after noon, it was announced that the rebels had Noriega under control. Minutes later, two rebel representatives went to Fort Clayton to ask for U.S. help in delivering Noriega. Appar ently, the U.S. military commander in Panama was given permission to take custody of Noriega if this could be done peacefully. Unfortunately, this extremely conservative decision was made too late, as the coup collapsed about 2 p.m. Bush's lack of planning is analogous to a dog chasing a car. If the car stops, the dog doesn't know what to do with it. Similarly, despite all his talk about wanting Noriega out, he had no clue about what to do once he was presented with the opportunity. If the United States has such an interest in Noriega's downfall and extradition, why were no contingency plans drawn up in case of a coup? Why didn't U.S. intelligence know how easily Giroldi could successfully seize power? Why was the CIA not included in any of the meetings between high-level members of the Bush administration? What will happen when the stakes are higher and a quick decision must be made? Unless the next three years are nothing but smooth sailing, we could be in trouble. Chris Landgraff is a junior political science major from Atlanta, Ga. Readers9 Forum Protesters should have stayed to learn To the editor: Wednesday I attended a lecture by Amoldo Ramos, a representa tive of the Salvadorian FMLN FDR national liberation fronts. As I walked down the long hall on the second floor of the Union, I saw a crowd of people holding signs in front of the door to the lecture room. My first thought was that the Institute for Latin American Studies was welcoming Mr. Ramos with a bit of flair, but as I got closer, I saw tombstone shaped signs with anti-FMLN slogans which were, ironically, reminiscent of CIA Action Com mittee signs! A friend of mine was among the protesters, and from him I learned that this was a College Republicans protest. "Fine," I thought, "this will make things more interesting." The real sur prise came when, instead of lis tening to Mr. Ramos and then asking some tough questions, most of the protesters took their signs and left. Somehow, that didn't seem to be the intelligent move. I had come with a neutral mindset to hear Mr. Ramos and to learn more about the current situation in El Salvador. It seems to me that a person who would take the time to make a sign and to greet an important speaker in such a rude way would, at the very least, stay on to hear what the man had to say. By leaving, these protesters arrogantly implied that they had nothing to learn from this man, who is a Washington representa tive for these groups in his coun try. After all, the presentation was entitled "Prospects forPeace."The protesters might be interested to know that Mr. Ramos' focus was on a new willingness on the part of the FMLN to engage in open negotiations with the Salvadorian government, without precondi tions. This in itself represents a major shift in the FMLN's posi tion. This message made me wonder even more why the pro testers didn't stay. It seems that they would welcome such a mes sage. Perhaps they were afraid that Mr. Ramos would challenge their pre-existing perceptions of the Salvadorian situation, or per haps this was just one more ex ample of the narrow-minded atti tude which seems to pervade this campus and American politics in general. Please do not think, though, that I fault this hardy band of protesters. After all, as we all know, communists like Arnoldo Ramos are evil, American presidents never lie, the CIA is a bunch of home-grown boys who would never do anything mean and my personal favorite America is always right! Is any one listening? DEREK WHITAKER Sophomore International Studies Republican alarmed at group's actions To the editor: Once again, the College Re publicans have shown their ina bility to promote thoughtful and intelligent dialogue on UNC's campus. Their sophomoric method of protesting Arnold Ramos' visit and the recent poster satire are embarrassing examples of this. If Republicans were a political minority in this country, and had little social and political influence, these tactics could be excused as attempts to get atten tion. This is not, however,, the case. As campus representatives of the group that currently wields political power, the College Re publicans give the impression of being self-righteous thugs. Speaking as a lifelong Repub lican, I have become increasingly alarmed by the vulgar, simplistic ideology of the College Republi cans. Those of us who would rather think than chant don't share their views or approve of their meth ods. Perhaps someone will take the recent actions of these young brownshirts as a challenge to form a new group of campus Republi cans who can successfully par ticipate in the political discourse on this campus. MAGGIE HAWORTH Graduate student Library science Homosexuals should not boycott bar To the editor: In regard to Jean Dobbs' letter ("Discrimination surfaces at local bar," Oct. 4), I was both amused and angered to learn of the owner of On The Hill's attempting to discriminate against gays by dis couraging their admittance at the door. I am amused that the owner believes that his employees can identify every gay customer on sight. If it were so easy to identify homosexuals, our's would be a very different world. Much to his chagrin, this confused man is al lowing admittance of hundreds of gays and lesbians who are not identifiable by any special mark ings. In fact, they look just like anyone else walking down Fran klin Street. At least one out of every 10. customers in this or any other establishment on any given day is gay. What this man is ac complishing is a discrimination against heterosexual or homosex ual persons who dress in a way that could be described as radical or progressive (this description fits many a black clad youth with earrings in Chapel Hill). My amusement at this man's ignorance was mixed with anger. My impulse was to call on the campus community to boycott On The Hill and close the place down. However, a better idea occurred to me. Why not give this guy his worst nightmare incarnate? Every gay and lesbian person in Chapel Hill should become a regular at On The Hill. Stage a sort of "dance-in" and, in the process, create the largest "gay hangout" Chapel Hill has ever seenl CGLA should plan an "On The HillT night. Pay the cover meet the dress code just go! I know, the owner profits from this. But, it is better to make him one very unhappy entrepreneur than face the alternatives. We could accept the status quo (discrimination) and let him get away with it. We could attempt to close him down with a boycott. But, more likely, he would be replaced with a similar person, who would open another WASPish hangout. So why not seize this opportunity to create a gaylesbian dance spot here in Chapel Hill. It sounds better than driving to Dur ham or Raleigh, doesn't it? LISA LANIER Graduate student Law Letters policy The Daily Tar Heel welcomes reader comments and criticisms. When writing letters to the editor, please follow these guidelines: ; All letters must be dated and signed by the author(s), with a limit of two signatures per letter. All letters must be typed and double-spaced, for ease of editing. M ost letters run from one to two pages, but longer letters may be run as guest columns. t
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 10, 1989, edition 1
10
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75