100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

September 30, 1985 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1985-09-30

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

OPINION
Page 4 Monday, September 30, 1985 The Michigan Daily

Edite etichigan
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Couzens policy problematic

Vol. XCVI, No. 18

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board

Faux pas

FTER TWO months of cover
up French Prime Minister
Fabius finally named former
Defense Minister Charles Hernu
and former intelligence head
Pierre Lacoste as being ultimately
responsible for ordering the July 10
bombing of the Greenpeace ship,
Rainbow Warrior.
The day before Hernu's
resignation, he still professed his
innocence. Last week President
Mitterand did acknowledge French
responsibility for the bombing but
refused to disclose the names of
those agents who actually carried
out the mission. Mitterand argued
that since the agents had faithfully
followed their superior's orders
they were not directly accountable
for their actions.
Mitterand's rationalization has
met interesting reaction, notably
the plea of Klaus Barbie, Gestapo
Chief of Lyons, who earlier this
week demanded release from
prison since he, like the French
agents, was only following orders
when he committed his crimes.
As New Zealand Prime Minister
David Lange points out, this is not a
time of war. "Just following or-
ders" is not a viable excuse for
terrorist action and only reinforces
France's harsh role in the bom-
bing.
Additionally, it's disturbing to
note that opposition leaders
within France claim they would
have carried out similar actions -
only they would not have bungled
them.
While the opposition leaders'
position seems to indicate that
French citizens could have
tolerated terrorism of the Green-

peace ship, they do not seem to be
able to accept the lies they have
been told. In an atmosphere
reminiscent of Watergate, Mit-
terand's administration has lost
credibility with the people at a
crucial time. Mitterand's Socialist
party currently holds a majority in
Parliament, but with elections
coming in March, it's almost cer-
tain that- they will lose that
majority.
Mitterand would then be the
Prime Minister from a minority
party, an unprecedented situation
in the current Fifth Republic, and
could potentially cripple the gover-
nment's ability to pass any
legislation.
But the implications of the Fren-
ch government's sanctioned
terrorism go beyond that country's
borders. Whenever Western
nations criticize Soviet bloc coun-
tries for quelling dissent, they do so
from an implied "moral
highground." The French,
although not acting for any country
other than itself, have undercut
that notion for all "free" nations.
It is even more frightening to
think that the French government
is admitting that it slipped up in
executing the sinking. Such an
"admission" is a tacit confession
that similar activities take place
with some frequency, only they go
unnoticed because they are

By Sherif Emil
It is very frustrating to have someone else
discuss matters that affect you personally
without attempting to represent your point of
view on these matters. The Daily has been
discussing the enforcement of the alcohol
policy in Couzens and its implications on the
Housing Division as a whole for some time
now. While many references were made to
Couzens staff, their opinions were never
represented or even considered.
As a second year Resident Advisor in
Couzens, I thought it's about time to represent
the view points of the staff, the people who
have to deal with these issues day and night.
While I don't claim to be speaking for all the
resident staff here, I do claim to speak from
personal experience and a desire to shed a
different light on this whole subject.
The issues we're struggling with as resident
staff are very different from the issues
focused upon by the Daily. Let me first men-
tion the University Alcohol Policy. Contrary
to what many may think, the policy goes far
beyond simply asking people to restrain
alcohol consumption to their private rooms.
In fact, this is only one section of a policy
composed of a preamble and eight sections.
In Article One, the policy obligates students
to obey Michigan laws concerning consum-
ption of alcoholic beverages.. In the past, en-
forcement of the policy simply meant asking
Emil is a senior in the school of engineering.

people to drink only in their rooms. Thus, we
were in effect telling residents it's o.k. to
violate Article One if they respect Article
Two.
I, for one, was quite disillusioned with this
policy last year. If we're going to enforce
something as important as the Alcohol Policy,
then let's make it a realistic one. In addition,
certain dorms known for their loose standar-
ds, had no enforcement whatsoever and this
undermined the policy even more due to the
complete lack of consistency. Couzens is
bringing attention to the real meaning of the
alcohol policy. Housing will have to come to
terms with this policy now. They can either
reconsider it or decide to make it a consistent
one. Enough hypocrisy!
Another main issue we have to deal with
here in Couzens is the consequences of enfor-
cing the policy on the relationshipsbetween
resident staff and residents. This has been of
utmost concern to everyone who lives here
since Couzens has always been famous for its
warm and friendly atmosphere. Staff enjoy a
certain degree of autonomy on their in-
dividual corridors. To be honest, I have not
had any significant problems with my own
residents because I try to emphasize that a
personal, friendly, and mutually respectful
atmosphere on the hall should override
problems emanating from policies and
procedures.
The main problem comes when I have to
approach residents of another corridor in or-
der to enforce policy. My job is then seen as

mainly a policing one and this does create a
certain amout of tension. Frankly, I cannot
say I am satisfied with the general at-
mosphere in Couzens thus, far this year. I
think it will take an effort on everyone's part 4
to improve it. Furthermore, that should
definitely be another area to be carefully con-
sidered by the Housing Division when they
discuss the issue.
Last, but certainly not least, there is the
issue of responsible drinking. And this is what
scares me to death about any policy that is not
wisely formulated or enforced. Will this
policy help or hinder responsible drinking? If
this criterium is not considered, we would be
committing a fatal mistake. I have worked4
with residents who had significant alcohol
problems in the past and I have been through
some very scary moments with them. To me,
the heart of any policy is its effect on people's
problems. If the policy is an obstacle in
helping people, then it should be recon-
sidered.
What I am trying to say is this. The issue is
far more serious and important than whether
Housing should allow kegs or not or what to do
about minors drinking. An effective alcohol
policy should include the input of serious
residents as well as resident staff and ad-
ministrators. It should be considered in the
context of dorm life in general. Alcohol does
not exist in a vacuum all by itself. On the con-
trary, as the University realizes, it is a fact in
the lives of many of the residents and should
be dealth with as such.

ALL R\&T , YOU SovieTS,
uEQ T ~
AND \TS ?PICS COULDT 6O
A5 \k&\-\ S 40 1LL\OQJ
OLLA S
LETTERS

THE BIGGEST, SADDEST BRRGAINING
CHIP EvER

Tc

0ST WTSF

OF

LiT\Ck. CaITAL.

-
-

h.%, I

"properly"executed.
In any event, the
ship is drydocked
photographer is dead'

Greenpeace
and their
as the result

of a government sanctioned act of
violence.
France has a great deal of ex-
plaining to do.

MAWS WE SKOULD
LeT Tr=M Oc? t
o

Kicking the leaves

W HY, IF the sun is shining, is
it suddenly starting to feel a
bit chilly outside?
Technically, of course, it's
because the shine of the angular
height of the sun above the
horizonis decreasing, and con-
sequently less solar radiation is
striking the northern hemisphere.
But down here on Earth, it means
that fall is upon us.+
60 degree afternoons aren't exac-
tly freezing, but they are nippy af-
ter a summerful of 80 degreee nir-
vanas.
And suddenly leaves are begin-
ning to change colors in an
unrehearsed last gasp spectacle. T-
shirts are slowly giving way to
jackets and sweaters, and shorts
are growing to full length pants.
But fall on a university campus is

most ominous as an indicator of
time. Chilly weather means mid-
terms and finals cannot be far
behind.
To a community that relies
largely on walking as a means of
transport, the hazards of winter
are all too familiar.
Steaming breath and frozen
shoes provide various degrees of
distraction along the "on my way
to my 9 o'clock" walk, and as well
as corresponding degrees of
discomfort. Meanwhile other
degrees, namely Fahrenheit,
become an endangered species.
But the frozen walk is still a ways
away - the red leaf does not a bliz-
zard make - and there is still time
for a few more late afternoon
strolls, with bright-colored leaves
to boot.
- - - -
l~

rl

Paying for the impossible dream

To the Daily:
This letter is in response to
Charles D. Lipsig and Seth B.
Klukoff's letter in last Monday's
issue of the Daily ("SDI might
make nuclear weapons obsolete,"
Sept. 23). I would like to express
my "fascist closemindedness"
towards SDI they feel I and many
others suffer from.
Strategic Defense Initiative,
better known as and more ap-
propriately titled as "Star
Wars," is a fantasy of Ronald
Reagan's that has drifted into the
minds of others, this idea of a
protective "shield" above us that
would "make nuclear weapons
obsolete," so to speak. So to
speak.
First of all, any such fantasy
turned to reality has been proved
mathematically and physically
impossible, or impossible as least
until the laws of math and
physics change. Secondly, this
fantasy has been given an
estimated expense budget of
nearly one trillion dollars over
the next few years; I didn't
realize there was that much sur-
lus cash floating around,
especially to be used towards the
impossible dream. Finally, for
any defensive measure, there is a

Russia certainly will not sit back
to watch. They may try to build
up their own offense more. Or, if
they are led to believe Star Wars
might work, they would be in-
cined to impose a first strike
before it's "too late."
If we broke the stretches of our
imagination and pretended that
the U.S. had developed a Star
Wars system that was judeged
incredible as being 50% effective,
what then? Russia launches
10,000 warheads, of which 5000 hit
pime U.S. targets, like cities; not
bad for a trillion bucks. And
that's at 50% effectiveness, which
is very generous. Maybe Russia
could send over a few thousand
cheap, dummy warheads as well;
BLOOM COUNTY

let Star Wars stop a few of those,
instead.
Seth and Charles, nuclear
holocaust is a serious matter, not

to be taken so lightly by you
Mr. Reagan.

anA

-Noah D. Glick
September 25, 1985

Regental ethics

To the Daily:
What? Am I to understand that
last Friday the Regents voted
against apartheid and condoned
the potentially destabilizing SDI?
Is this not a condemnation of
oppression as immoral while em-

bracing potential genocide as
moral enough? This is an inver-
ted scale indeed. Before
requiring our business majors to
study ethics let's teach ou
Regents some of the basics.
-J. Ames
September 24

Letters to
spaced, and

the Daily should by typed, triple-
signed by the individual authors.

by Berke Breathed

AMYs fN 2qWfVf4,
IIN N^ A
MX7N- 66.
77N657 em
Il~40

FR R BREK.
C-
0
0,
I 1 4 11

,>
' ( '7 .
. ,,

0
- oE
I'1CI

."i n nmu~

i

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan