4A - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, April 11, 2001 L71 be £ibion grn iu 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 daily. letters~umich. edu I'm sorry Ms. Albright, I am for Real AMER G. ZAHR THE PROGRESSIVE PEN " , - EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 GEOFFREY GAGNON Editor in Chief MICHAEL GRASS NICHOLAS WOOMER Editorial Page Editors Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily s editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not ;necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily I heard a news story the other week that horrified me. Our University has hired for- mer Secretary of State rMadeleine Albright for a two-year stint at our busi- ness school. She is hop- ing, she says, to bring together her experience working with economically emerging Third World democracies and her experiences in human rights to help the William Davidson Institute, a branch of the School of Business Administration dedicated to helping such countries form economic policy. She is here to give us her experience on human rights. Human rights. Let me say it again. Human rights. And the scariest part is that I am not joking. What is our university thinking? Does not our president understand that hiring someone who has such an abysmal history, especially in the realm of foreign policy and human rights, will do nothing more than hurt our own reputation as an internationally respect- ed university? Some of you may have no idea what I am talking about. And it is just this ignorance that the University administration is probably depending on when they decide to hire some- one like Albright. First of all, it is important to note why our university hired her. Most probably, they thought it would bring some sort of stature, create valuable connections for the University, and so on. Most of all, I'm sure many administrators thought it would pretty cool to say we have a former secretary of state working for the University as a "dis- tinguished scholar." But some important ele- ments of Albright's recent past must be revealed in order for the University commu- nity to completely understand what kind of person we are allowing to represent us on the world scene. We are talking about a woman who told Colin Powell, who felt that the U.S. should not commit military forces to Bosnia until there was a clear political objective: "What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it?" Powell remarked in his book, My Ameri- can Journey, "I thought I would have an aneurysm ... American G.I.s were not toy soldiers to be moved around on some sort of global game board." We are talking about a woman who, on May 12, 1996 on 60 Min- utes, engaged in the following exchange with Leslie Stahl. Stahl, speaking of U.S. sanc- tions against Iraq, asked "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And - and you know, is the price worth it?" Our future faculty member replied, with no hesitation, "The price - we think the price is worth it." We are talking about a woman who stated publicly that it is not "good idea" to link trade issues with human rights issues (Washington Post, March 1, 1999). Are you kidding me? We are talking about a woman who, while giving an interview on the Today Show on NBC on February 19, 1998, stated, in relation to Iraq, "if we have to use force, it is because we are America! We are the indis- pensable nation. We stand tall, and we see further into the future." We are talking about a woman who, when asked if it is not hypo- critical to punish Burma for human rights violations while refraining from sanctions on China for similar actions, stated in The Washington Post of April 23, 1997, "We have consistent principles and flexible tac- 0 tics." And she's serious. We are talking about a woman who basically had no productive role in the premiere foreign policy issue of the Clinton administration, the Middle East "peace process," because of her history in treating Arab nations, and her seeming unwillingness to admit her Jewish heritage until after news agencies broke it following her confirmation as secretary of state. Who is our administration trying to kid? There have been, and will continue to be, out- cries and protests against this hiring of some- one who has taken no action against countries like China and Israel for the human right vio- lations of their leaders, while punishing and making an example of the Iraqi population, of whom over 1.2 million have died due to an American sanction regime, for the human rights violations of their leaders. And now this woman, who has always held political expedi- ency higher than human rights, who sacrificed international law and human rights in order to further "American interests," is going to be an icon of our University. It should most proba- bly make you very sick. I Amer G. Zahr's column runs every other Wednesday. Give him feedback at www.michigandaily.com/forum or via e-mail at zahragdumich.edu. i' . Be careful in taking editorial positions TO THE DAILY: When the Daily stakes out a position, it is critical that it accept the responsibility of con- sidering the consequences of that position. A case in point is the editorial calling for the ban- ning of depleted uranium weapons ("Irresponsi- ble weapons," 4/5/01), a position which itself may have great merit. Depleted uranium is used because its great density - among the highest of any material in nature - makes it extraordinarily effective for punching through armor. By calling for its abo- lition - a potentially justified action - the Daily is implicitly calling for one of three polit- ically unpopular alternatives; some combination of an increase in military research and develop- ment targeted at developing an environmentally friendlier alternative (like energy or particle beam weapons), increased military spending to replace depleted uranium with more expensive existing alternatives (like more armor-piercing missiles) or acceptance of higher American casualties in combat from use of less effective means of attacking armor, i.e. more of your roommates and neighbors buried in foreign soil to avoid collateral environmental damage. Any of these stances are liable to anger much of the Daily's readership. They are, how- ever, the full spectrum of the unavoidable, although undiscussed, direct possible conse- quences of the position advocated by the Daily. It is the responsibility of the Daily, on this and other controversial issues, to be honest enough to acknowledge the results of what it calls for IVA II 14 PF D,41l14NOT Sor . o Ve i bar FOR ,' I.- CI., C..A a - all the results of what they call for - and accept the responsibility for them. That is the required burden of taking a public stand, espe- cially as an editorial and journalistic enterprise. JEFF HUO Medical School Athletes deserve earlier registration To THE DAILY: In response to the Daily's April 9 editorial, "Prime CRISP times?" I am in disagreement with the opinion that stated giving athletes bet- ter registration times is unfair. Athletes must abide by a strict, rigorous time schedule that may only allow for a specific block of time dur- ing the day for classes. While it is true that the rest of the student body must coordinate their schedules around extra-curricular activities and work, most of us do not have to coordinate our schedule with other teammates' schedules, coaches schedules, game schedules, travel time and facility availability. I am not a varsity athlete, but I recognize the hard work and time management skills that ath- letes must have in order to represent the Univer- sity proudly on the athletic field and perform 0 well in the classroom. I don't think making a small adjustment in an athlete's registration time is insulting, unfair or dramatically decreas- es the chance of a non-athlete getting into a class he or she wants to. If the University com- munity wants to continue to support our athletes on the field and court, we must also support them in the classroom. SARA ANDERSON LSA junior I- - 1 11 --- 11 - --", , ., " - -- - -- UNMASKING THE CODE VIEWS ON THE RYA HUGHES CoE :.:,. For more information on the Code of Student Conduct, visit www.michigandaily.com/code Drop the charges against Ryan Hughes Unpopular speech should not be countered with violence VIEWPOINT VIEWPOINT On April 3, the University Office of Stu- dent Conflict Resolution hauled Ryan Hugh- es, an LSA junior and an openly bisexual political activist, into a kangaroo court pro- ceeding. Hughes' case is being adjudicated under the Student Code of Conduct. Hughes is charged with vandalism and assault by the Department of Public Safety. These charges are completely unfounded, politically moti- vated, and a gross violation of Hughes' First Amendment rights. These charges must be dropped now. . Hughes is accused of vandalism and assault for allegedly spray-painting the picket sign and the face of a far right-wing anti-gay bigot who openly advocates the assault and murder of lesbians and gay men. The picket sign, which was allegedly spray-painted and is the only physical evidence of the alleged vandalism, was destroyed by DPS even though they knew that Code charges were pending against Hughes. The anti-gay bigot told the police that he was not spray-painted in the face. Despite the urgings of the police, the Kiss-in were confronted by a group of anti-gay violence mongers. The anti-gay big- ots had traveled from Kansas to Ann Arbor to harass and threaten lesbians and gay men at the University in order to intimidate all les- bians and gay men from being openly out. The kiss-in participants who assembled on the diag tried to get the anti-gay crusaders to stop harassing them primarily by chanting 'at them. Someone tried unsuccessfully to graffi- ti with spray paint one of the anti-gay crusad- er's signs. The anti-gay bigots were completely unfazed. They continued to taunt and threaten the lesbian and gay participants in the kiss-in. The free speech rights of the anti-gay bigots were never limited or threat- ened. Hughes and the other lesbian/gay protest- ers and their supporters had every right to protect their demonstration and their persons from assault. DPS did not lift a finger to pro- tect the lesbian/gay demonstration. Instead, they arrested Hughes and then charged him under the Code of Student Conduct. Appar- ently, DPS and the University administration believe that right wing advocates of genocide against lesbians and gay men are welcome on tion's unconscionable prosecution of Hugh is to put a welcome sign out at the Universi for all violence-mongering groups. This po cy says to those who would maim, bash, a murder: You are welcome here, the Univer ty administration will bend over backwards be on your side. The Code is devoid of all fundamental d process rights, from the right to legal couns to the right to exclude hearsay evidence the right to obtain a jury trial, and despite t veneer of student and faculty participatio the Code accords a maximum imbalance power in the administration's favor. Throug out Hughes' case, the administration ori agents have played the role of complainar prosecutor, victim, judge, jury and executio er in tandem. The administration claims ind pendence from the charges, yet its DPS is t complainant. The administration claims n to be prosecuting Hughes, yet it has broug the charges against him. The administrati claims not to have judged Hughes, yet it his accuser. The administration offers its as adjudicator in its case against Hughes a reserves the right to determine the sanction. The Code is meant to confuse, scare a On April 3, Ryan Hughes, charged for vandalism and assault during the Feb. 16, 2001 "Kiss-In" on the Diag, entered the first phase of disciplinary hearings under es the University's Student Code of Con- ty duct. li- The Office of Student Conflict and nd Resolution alleges that Hughes spray- si- painted the sign of a member of the West- to boro Baptist Church who was protesting the rally and Kiss-In, activities that were ue the final events of Queer Visibility Week. sel However, the Student Code of Con- to duct, which this summer will uselessly be he renamed the Statement of Student Rights n, and Responsibilities, by no means allows of for a fair hearing. h- Under the Code, hearsay is admissible its and attorneys are not allowed to speak on nt; behalf of the "accused" (according to the n- transcript of Hughes' meeting, Keith Elkin, le- OSCR director, has said that there are no he "defendants" in Code hearings). ot There is no assurance that student pan- ;ht elists will be unbiased and accused stu- on dents face the possibility of facing is OSCR's own brand of "double jeopardy": elf Students who have been acquitted of the nd same charges in criminal or civil court still may be sanctioned under the Code. nd There is no question that the Code, in its antees the right to free speech. While the message of the protesters at the Kiss-In is inhuman and despicable, their peaceful protest was perfectly constitutional and deserves to be protected. Unpopular speech, though often offen- sive, bigoted and in general poor taste, is still free speech. The Constitution's guar- antee of free speech to the American peo- ple is imperative to a society that is built upon peaceful dialogue. While it is easy to argue that the protesters of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Associa- tion events did not set out with the intent of creating a forum for the exchange of ideas and opinions, because they remained peaceful they had a right to protest as equally as the Kiss-In supporters had a right to rally. Violence is an inexcusable and an ille- gal reaction to someone else's exercise of his or her right to free speech. Whoever spray-painted the sign of a protester attempted to deny a group, albeit a bigoted group, of the same rights that guaranteed supporters of the LGBT community the. ability to peacefully assemble and express an opinion. It is unfortunate that groups such as the Westboro Baptist Church masquerade under the guise of religion to offend, intim- idate and dehumanize other people; it is unfortunate that groups with the specific mission to make personal attacks and cause A