• "Freeport is the largest integrated producer of diammonium phosphate, the product produced by our facilities on the Mississippi River, and Freeport is proud of the fact that it provides nutrients that are responsible for a major portion of the agricultural output of this country and many countries around the world."
• "The attacks made against our company relating to its operations in Indonesia are not only false, but they go far beyond just being wrong. They charge that Moffett, `via Freeport-McMoRan,' is `directly responsible for the illness and deaths of thousands of Indonesians.' This is totally ridiculous slander and the writer of this lie should be ashamed. It would be a physical impossibility for the allegations to be true, since there are not `thousands of Indonesians' who could even remotely be impacted by our operations. Further, there is absolutely no evidence that even suggests that any people have been so harmed by our operations."
• "The National Wildlife Federation has recognized our efforts by making the company the first recipient of the Corporation Conservation Council award."

• "Our 1991 New Orleanian of the Year is the dynamo behind Freeport-McMoRan's many civic and charitable contributions, Jim Bob Moffett."
• Many charitable contributions enumerated.
• "When David Duke landed a spot in the runoff against Edwin Edwards in October, most business leaders gagged at the prospect of having to choose between what they viewed as twin evils. Moffett, who had joined other business leaders in backing third place finisher Buddy Roemer, said he `didn't give it five minutes thought' before wholeheartedly endorsing Edwards. His quick announcement that a Duke victory would be bad for business in Louisiana -- including a personal threat to move his company out of the state if Duke were to win -- helped galvanize the business community against Duke at a time when he appeared to be gaining momentum."

• "With all this in mind, I know I shocked many people by agreeing to go to work for Jim Bob Moffett and Freeport-McMoRan Inc. `How can you do this?' many have asked. `How can you go to work for the enemy?' The answer is simple: It was easy. It made sense. It was the logical next step. I've worked to protect the environment as a journalist and as a researcher; now I'm doing the same work for a corporation that can take the concepts I've written about and make them a reality."
• "But there are two promises I've made to myself and to Moffett: I'm not going to lie about anything we're doing and I'm not going to be part of an operation that pollutes Barton Creek or Barton Springs. I guess you could call me the canary in Jim Bob's coal mine."

"Munninghoff said the Freeport Co Ltd is morally responsible for the human rights violations because the Amungme tribesmen, who live in the Jayawijaya mountains, have become victims due to their protest and opposition to Freeport's indiscriminate exploitation of natural resources in the area."

• "Alarm bells are sounding in Rapoport's head, right? He knows about insurance. That's where he made his fortune. Wrong again, quiche-breath. Rappy apparently is sleeping through this one. He must be swallowing, still, Freeport's denials, despite a gargantuan motive for lying ($50 billion in gold reserves). How will he feel later if the allegations prove to be true and he did zero to check them out? It will be too late after he's off the board, which is a lock for February 1997."
• "And now we have Yankee Bob Berdahl, UT president, telling the Daily Texan in its Nov. 3 edition, `I don't know why it would,' when asked if the insurance cancellation might affect acceptance of a $2 million contribution of Jim Bob Moffett and his wife Louise. The regents last spring approved naming a new molecular biology building for the Moffetts. Moffett is Freeport's chairman, and, in my opinion, the man most responsible for persuading Yankee chancellor Bill Cunningham, himself ignorant about football, to hire John Mackovic as UT coach. How long, O Israel, must we suffer these outlanders?"

• "I believe that it is time for me to express my own position on the matter, not in an effort to silence discussion, nor on behalf of one side or the other, but because my obligation as president of The University is to clarify what I consider to be this institution's present and future best interest."
• "I therefore cannot support any effort to reverse commitments already made by the University and Board of Regents with regard to the naming of the molecular biology building."

• "The issue is like the elephant in the living room that no one discusses. What elephant?"
• "His (Cunningham's) silence is deafening."
• "So, bring in the debate. The faculty shouldn't fear jeopardizing Berdahl. He's strong. If a slightly unruly faculty is grounds for dismissing a UT-Austin president, then UT is a sorry place not worthy of a man with Berdahl's talents."

• "Cloos (UT geology professor) offered, "First of all, in this era when government support of academic research has shrunk, Freeport-McMoRan has provided nearly $2 million since 1989 to UT as pure research grants in direct support of basic geological studies in the New Guinea region."
• "Boyer termed the partnership between Freeport and the university a `model' and reported these observations from a trip to the mine area this September, `I encountered warm, friendly people who are appreciative of the employment opportunities of the mine operation.'" (That was UT geology professor and former dean Robert E. Boyer, who should not be confused with Robert S. Boyer, UT professor of computer sciences, mathematics, and philosophy, who is an opponent of naming the building for Moffett and the editor for this web page.)

• "What are the responsibilities of a U.S. multinational firm to obey presumably immutable human rights and environmental considerations, when operating under inferior laws and customs in a Third World nation? Can you be moral and competitive at once? If an academic community can't debate these issues -- focusing on Freeport-McMoRan -- just where does that debate occur? The United Nations? Congress? I don't think so."
• "... it would be more reassuring to see Chancellor Cunningham speak to the issue -- not on background, not in a prepared text, but in an open, candid meeting with the press or faculty."

• "First, was there a conflict of interest when, in 1990, Cunningham solicited the funds from the Moffetts, and in 1993 from Freeport, that were eventually used to complete the funding of the molecular biology building? I do not believe a conflict existed."
• "The second question regarding a possible conflict of interest has to do with the research contract that exists between the UT-Austin department of geological sciences and Freeport. ... There is no conflict of interest for Cunningham with respect to the research contract that the department of geological sciences has with Freeport."
• "First, the university does not accept proprietary research contracts."
• "Second, all of the results of university research must be available for publication in scholarly journals and elsewhere."
• "The primary way of avoiding a conflict of interest is to ensure that everyone who ultimately makes a university decision is aware of any personal or professional relationships that might be viewed as influencing the decision."
• "The Board of Regents is well aware that a number of important issues regarding naming of buildings and conflict of interest have been raised in recent weeks."

• "Q. What are the `moral boundaries' of a great university, and do they reasonably accommodate -- in the form of a named building -- the honoring of Freeport-McMoRan? A. ... How does a university judge the cleanliness of a corporation? What about the contribution of a Carnegie? A Rockefeller. And Duke: Here is a fine university built on tobacco money."
• "Q. In Texas, are university faculty fully protected in debating sensitive issues affecting powerful clients of the university? A. I don't want to be the president of a university that doesn't have that. If the regents are upset, so be it."

• The Daily Texan has run several lengthy articles in which various members of the UT community opine that there are conflicts of interest between the responsibilities of William H. Cunningham as chancellor of the UT System and his membership on the board of directors of Freeport-McMoRan Inc.
• Further, it would be unreasonable to assume that there may be a financial gain for Freeport or the Moffetts because of having a name on a building at the University.

• "It takes time and energy to tell the true story, but as Mark Twain said, we've got our shoes on now and we are catching up."
• "For more information, call 1-800-303-5550, or write Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc., P.O. Box 51777, New Orleans, LA 70151, Attn: Greg Probst."

• "By admission of Freeport executives, the event (a Feld speech) is photographed and recorded by Freeport representatives. Doesn't such surveillance chill academic freedom?"
• "Members of Congress from Texas and Louisiana, elected by the people but frequently rented by big corporations, raise unbridled hell in Washington -- blocking appointments and hassling the Overseas Private Investment Corp., which has pulled its insurance of Freeport's Indonesian mining operation. Who represents the citizen?"
• "A high university system official, whose voice should be firm and clear in support of his faculty's right to free speech, falls silent, caught in a conflict by the payments he received by serving on the board of a corporation that now threatens those scholars who work for him."

• "William Cunningham, chancellor of the University of Texas System, was wise to give up his seat on the Freeport-McMoRan board of directors."
• "Cunningham's resignation, however, sends a strong message to faculty and staff that open debate and free thought are still ideals the University of Texas holds dear."

• "Harvey Himberg, OPIC's top environmental specialist who visited the site in remote Irian Jaya (West Papua) in July 1994, had previously praised the mine as a model of environmental responsibility. If the alleged dangers from massive pollution that Himberg uncovered in mid-1994 were so serious, why delay for a year and a half to terminate the project?"
• "To be sure, Freeport doesn't seem beyond criticism. After a three-day visit to Irian Jaya (West Papua) in 1991 the World Wildlife Fund decided there were too many uncertainties about the project to endorse it -- and this was before the project more than doubled its scope. A WWF consultant followed up in January 1995 with another critical report."
• "In fact, one could argue that Freeport -- despite the environmental tradeoffs -- is the best thing to happen to Irian Jaya (West Papua) since the Stone Age, in which its inhabitants were mostly languishing until the company arrived."

• "If you have been reading about Freeport-McMoRan these days, chances are it's not good. Over the last year the US mining group has found itself accused of all manner of environmental and human rights abuses stemming from its $3 billion gold- and copper-minging operations in Irian Jaya (West Papua) Indonesia's largest single investment. The closer you look at the charges, however, the more they say about the accusers than about the accused."
• "The battleground has now shifted to the World Bank, whose insurance arm holds a similar policy for $50 million."
• "What we do see however, is a company that has behaved with a reasonable good faith that appears to be absent in its accusers."

• "This allegation of Freeport participation in human rights violations is based on a report issued in April by a non-governmental activist group called the Australian Council for Overseas Aid (ACFOA). The ACFOA report, however, has been disproved by two thorough investigations. Those investigations - by the Catholic Bishop of Jayapura, Irian Jaya (West Papua), whose report was issued in August; and by the Indonesian National Commission on Human Rights, whose report was issued September 22 - concluded that human rights abuses did occur in Irian Jaya (West Papua), but that Freeport was not responsible for those tragic incidents."
• "Most recently, even ACFOA's own executive director has retreated from the Freeport allegations, saying that they cannot be verified."

• "ACFOA is not an `activist group,' but an umbrella organization of more than ninety Australian Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), which monitors Australian foreign policy matters. ... the overall reliability of the report is apparent to any objective reader."
• "The two reports (Munninghoff and Human Rights Commission) disclaim any knowledge of Freeport's involvement or lack thereof ... For Egan to assert that these reports, with their tepid disclaimers, exonerate his corporation is laughable; for him to use them in an attempt to discredit legitimate critics is an outrage."
• "For many years, the Freeport-McMoRan Copper and Gold Corporation has been in a direct and mutually sustaining partnership with the Suharto government, by all objective accounts one of the most corrupt and brutal dictatorships on earth. ("one of the worst massacres in recent history; in less than a year up to one million people killed" - Amnesty International), and they continue to rule by terror, intimidation, torture and brute force, sustained in no small measure by the income they receive from their stolen `national treasure' -- Freeport's Irian Jaya (West Papua) mine."
• "Freeport, Moffett, Egan and their Austin colleagues have long enjoyed the staggering financial benefits of their deal with the devil; now that the overwhelming human costs are becoming known to the rest of the world, they are desperate to keep that story from getting out."

• "The armed rebels are fighting for the independence of Irian Jaya (West Papua), which they call West Papua. More specifically, the issues are land rights, which they say have been usurped by transmigrants and the Freeport Mining operation, and environmental degradation. Their pamphlets, widely distributed since the kidnapping, contest Indonesia's rule of Irian Jaya (West Papua), which was formerly a Dutch colony, and ceded to the Republic in the late 1960s through the United Nations."
• "Freeport-McMoRan Cleared by Commission but Still Under Attack. Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights exonerated Freeport-McMoRan of human rights violations in Irian Jaya (West Papua) when its investigation concluded that sixteen civilians reported killed and four more missing were a direct result of military operations dealing with security disturbances from the Free Papua Movement, an armed separatist group. The military's (ABRI) own investigation revealed that soldiers had violated acceptable procedures and would be punished."
• "Freeport has finalized a management plan to deal with the impact of its mining tailings on the Aiwa River system, the core issue of Wahli's opposition, and allocated US$500,000 to finance additional environmental and social audits by two international companies, Dames & Moore and Labat Anderson. The results are expected to be made public in early 1996."
• "Freeport Off the Hook, Military Found Responsible for Irian Jaya (West Papua) Abuses. Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) confirmed human rights violations in Irian Jaya (West Papua) in a press statement released in late September following its investigation: `...based on testimony from 40 witnesses and 14 sources, [the Commission] concludes that between October 1994 and June 1995, there have been violations of human rights...' The Commission's report further stated that the incidents occurred during military operations connected with ABRI's (the military) effort to deal with security disturbances from the Free Papua Movement, an armed separatist group, and in safe-guarding the mining operation of PT Freeport Indonesia."

• "Bunch has never swerved from his apparent guiding principle: The end justifies the means and the truth should never stand in the way."
• "Bill Bunch showed up at Freeport's Nov. 14 press conference regarding its Indonesian mine with 25 Earth First and campus protestors, falsely claiming to be reporters. When they were not admitted, Bunch told them `You can cause as much trouble as you want. We'll defend you, in court.'"

• "1. One aspect of `cheap' is the sweetheart nature of the deal. The Moffetts' donation amounts to $2 million out of a total building cost of $26 million. Of that total cost, $9 million comes from student fees alone."
• "2. It is a disgrace for `a university of the first class' to name a building after the CEO of a company that has threatened to sue three of its professors for exercising their right of free speech. Even a source friendly to Freeport, the Far Eastern Economic Review, concluded that `we are not suggesting that there no serious abuses in Irian Jaya (West Papua) or that Freeport does not have an obligation to make things better.'"
• "3. Highhanded nonresponses, while having a venerable tradition at the University, won't cut it any more. Coverage of this issue and others is becoming more thorough, especially in the various Austin papers. Chancellor Cunningham's refusal to sit down with an editorial board sends out the wrong message about the accountability of a public university."

• "Cunningham said the letters had no influence on his decision to resign. God, he must think people are incredibly dumb."
• "Cline, by the way, received a Jan. 9 letter from Cunningham in which the latter said he supports `the principal [sic] of academic freedom.' It makes all of us proud that the chancellor of the august University of Texas System -- second only to the University of California System -- can be just another good ol' boy who does not know the difference between principal and principle. And spell-check didn't help him because the wrong word also is a word. Poor `Business School Bill.' He just lost another 10 points in his futile effort to win the respect of real academicians."
• "UT president Bob Berdahl continued to take the stand (beginning in the Dec. 12 Statesman and later) that UT must remain `neutral' as to the origin of gifts, noting the assessment of the ethics of multinational corporations would be a `morass [without] any consistency or any meaning.' No one wonders what he would do with a $3 million gift from the Ku Klux Klan. What about a gift from Suddam Hussein? From the Bosnian Serbs? He probably would reject those. What about a gift from OPEC? Getting a little tougher? Or from the National Rifle Association? The Michigan Militia? Timothy McVeigh? Gosh, this neutrality stance can get dicey. This wouldn't have anything to do with the size of the gift, would it? Suppose Freeport offered $1,000 on condition it be publicized? Is this like the joke about the guy who propositioned a woman, offering $1 million, then $20? She accepted the first but said of the second, `What do you think I am?' `We know what you are; now we're haggling over price.'"
• "Who really knows whether Freeport security personnel participated in the atrocities? Only Freeport and a dictator who stands to make $5 billion from the operation of the mine have unescorted and unscheduled access to the property. Suppose for the sake of argument the abuses are even worse than the allegations say they are. In that case, even if Freeport and Suharto allowed unescorted and unscheduled access to an unbiased outsider -- which they have not done, by the way -- how many tribes people would talk freely to a stranger who would be there for one day, never to be seen by them again? Here's the point: It is one thing for Freeport to blame Indonesian military, which we hear is very young and poorly trained, for human-rights abuses on and near mine property. It is another to say Freeport owes no obligation to tell Suharto it cannot condone those actions. It should have asked for a reduction of, or even the removal of, those military forces and insist that no human-rights abuses be inflicted on that property. Instead, Freeport acknowledges abuses are occurring but washes its hands of any responsibility."

• "As long as Freeport is attacking the academic freedom of the UT community, the faculty protests over naming a building for Moffett will continue. The faculty are understandably concerned when the regents propose to honor a man who has attacked professors' academic freedom and free speech rights."
• "But the mere absence of a lawsuit does not mean that Freeport has not tried to silence the faculty. Berdahl is blatantly wrong in suggesting that Freeport's threats to sue UT professors are not meant to intimidate and silence."

• "Alleged human rights abuses. This would appear to be no longer an issue."
• "I suggested Freeport withdraw its threat against the critics; so far it has not done so. I also asked the firm to document its charges that its critics had accused the firm of `murder'. So far, Freeport has not done so."
• "The Wall Street Journal has likened Moffett's public relations style to that of a howitzer. Such weaponry is undesirable -- and ultimately unsuccessful -- against a free press, a university faculty, ... and the people of Austin."

• "And while the boundary between the company and the military in the past has been poorly defined, it seems clear that Freeport employees had no direct connection with abuses by the Indonesian army against civilians and guerillas in the area."
• "Environmental absolutists may not be satisfied unless the mining is abandoned. But Indonesia will develop its resources one way or another, and this corner of Irian Jaya (West Papua) might well be in better hands with Freeport than some other company with less interest in accomodating its human and ecological setting."

• "Corporate donations are not free. They buy loyalty. Virtually every institution in town to which Freeport has contributed has rushed to press to protest Freeport's innocence."
• "Nor are the media beyond influence. Freeport's first reaction to media criticism has been to buy it."
• "Looking at the Irian Jaya (West Papua) mine and the wasted river that carries its discharge to the sea, it seems obvious that no company could have gotten away with this kind of operation in the United States."

• "Cunningham resigned from the wrong institution."
• "As they say in the newspapers, `Cunningham denied any impropriety.' If it waddles like an impropriety and it quacks like an impropriety and waggles its tail like an impropriety, it's probably an impropriety."

• "Freeport has cooperated fully at all levels with the independent audit team." (Discusses the recent Dames & Moore audit. Quotes some of the good stuff, ignores all of the bad stuff, e.g., destruction of 11 square miles of vegetation and the high copper level in the water. -- rsb)
• "Freeport's OPIC Mine Insurance Has been Reinstated." (Mentions $100 million trust fund for remediation as part of the deal. -- rsb)
• "An Agreement Has Been Reached with Our Indonesian Neighbors. On April 13 in Irian Jaya (West Papua), Indonesia, Freeport finalized an agreement with local indigenous leaders to continue the enhancement of direct benefits to those tribes whose original lands have been impacted by the company's operations." (Comment on this statement by Robert S. Boyer: Some reports about this "agreement" seem contradictory in the extreme. Some early reports said that the indigenous people said nothing beyond `thank you, we'll take a look at your offer' upon receipt of Freeport's offer. Several months later, it was made about as clear as possible, in a statement by the indigenous people, that no such agreement with the indigenous people exists. It appears that Freeport is now taking the position, cf. the Times Picayune for July 3, that the agreement is not with the indigenous people but only with the Indonesian government, which is said to be the most corrupt in the world.)

• "Sources close to the situation said that Freeport will not be allowed to apply for insurance from OPIC after that (Dec '96). In an interview with the Chronicle, however, Ruth Harkin, the president and CEO of OPIC, would not confirm that. `In our settlement agreement, we did not address ourselves beyond the end of the year,' she said."
• "Harkin added that she was particularly pleased with the change in Freeport's attitude, saying the company is `addressing themselves to a wide range of things that weren't discussed before.'"

• "During the cold war, Washington too often overlooked the Suharto Government's repressive ways along with its forcible annexation and occupation of East Timor."
• "America should stand behind the efforts of Indonesia's impressive network of independent civic organizations to smooth the transition toward a more democratic future."
• "In Jakarta, Ambassador Stapleton Roy has set a good example by standing up to pressure from Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc., which wants Washington to withdraw financial support from a local environmental organization that has challenged the company's mining practices."

• "Selling fighter jets to Indonesia before Suharto institutes serious political reforms would seem a blanket U.S. endorsement of an autocratic and corrupt government."
• "Though the Clinton administration has sometimes scolded Indonesia for human rights abuses, it has been so intent on expanding economic ties that Suharto has felt little pressure to change his autocratic ways. This docile U.S. policy seems even more misplaced after the summer's events."

• "Berdahl's resignation was an act of conscience."
• "The University of Texas is trapped in old values, the values of good ol' boys who ruled from frontier days and knew only politics, micromanagement and control."
• "Yet the UT System sent two very dangerous signals in recent years suggesting that integrity is a distant vision. The UT System stood silently -- really in complicity -- as Jim Bob Moffett, a New Orleans mining company chief executive, sought to intimidate UT-Austin faculty with threats of lawsuits. The professors had had the nerve to question whether a building should be named for Moffett, who gave millions but led a company criticized for alleged human rights violations in Indonesia."
• "Why shouldn't a legislative leader see universities as special interests, like the horse-tack industry, when the head of the system (Cunningham) sets up a PAC? The PAC is a disaster, an outrage, an offense to higher education, and it should be dropped now."

"I don't think Berdahl was responsible for the naming controversy he got caught in," said Durbin, who chaired the University's advisory committee on the naming of buildings following the Moffett building controversy. "I inherited some of it and was also responsible for some of it. I also did not question that inheritance," Berdahl said. "I didn't object to the debate, but the criticism that suggested I lost control was a thorough misunderstanding of the University. Universities are not places that one controls. They are free and ordered space," Berdahl explained. "You can't control free and ordered space."

"When he announced last month he would leave at the end of June to head the University of California at Berkeley, Berdahl said he gave the faculty more decision-making authority but did not always feel empowered to do his job by UT System Chancellor William Cunningham. Berdahl did not mention names Monday, but the faculty seemed to get the message. `I think what he was saying was more than philosophical,' said Alan Friedman, a professor of English."

"In the last five years, tuition and fees have gone up astronomically and state funding has gone down, so your University is as broke as you are.

"Because it's broke, the University is naming a building after Jim Bob Moffett -- I'm not going to call the guy names, but do we really want someone with this reputation, or even with the name "Jim Bob," to adorn our buildings ad infinitum? -- and our good President Robert Berdahl is headed for the greener pastures of Berkeley.

"We've also lost Mark Yudof, meaning my two favorite administrators -- two of the best you'll find anywhere -- have decided for whatever reason to leave a university they love and head to California and Minnesota. How bad must things be if people are leaving Austin for Minnesota?

"In addition, we have to make it through the immediate future with no affirmative action policy and no tenure policy.

"All told, your University, which has no money, no president, no provost, no affirmative action policy and no tenure guarantees, has to try to recruit top-ranked faculty to maintain it's image as a top public institution. Say you're a professor. How appealing does this university look to you? What kind of students are we going to attract if the faculty level starts falling off? What happens if we get a lousy president this time and faculty members decide they've had enough and start taking other offers? And what happens to the value of our degrees if Orwellian-UT materializes?"

"While in some Asian countries prosperity has brought popular demands for a more open political system, this has not yet happened in Indonesia. Despite impressive economic growth, Indonesia's middle class is still small by Asian standards, and largely made up of Chinese merchants, who tend not to be political, and Government-employed schoolteachers and bureaucrats. The events of the last year are the first signs of a movement that may one day bring democracy to Indonesia. They are apparently enough to scare Mr. Suharto."

"Daniel Start: Certainly the area is worse off from the human rights point of view. Essentially every area is now militarised as a result of the kidnappings. The Red Cross can't go there because the government claims it's not safe for them, and of course it's very difficult for anyone to go there now because of what happened to us. However, I do understand and feel more sympathetic than I ever did to the amount of anger and resentment that was within a number of the people in that area. This wasn't just some kind of movement that wanted some whimsical free country so they could run their own government, this was a people who'd really suffered an enormous amount, had become used to life and death of family members being killed by the Indonesian military, of having their rights taken away. And that the reason these people wanted a free country, is they really wanted to be treated with the dignity that they deserved, and I can understand perhaps how that kind of treatment might bring a man to commit murder."

• "It is astonishing to see University of Texas officials stalk so dangerously close to, if not beyond, the line of legality in aggressively pushing their agenda through the Legislature this year."
• "(UT Chancellor)Cunningham insists he and other officials are not lobbying the Legislature, only providing information, which they legally are allowed to do. Yet his stand favoring the Capitol-views exemption and opposing the bill raising academic standards for athletes are well known, effectively obscuring the line between informing and lobbying. (Rep. Ron) Wilson observed this week that any other state official would be fired for pushing legislators the way UT officials have done. Legal or not, the nakedly commercial agenda of UT's officials leaves a sour taste."

• "Between the mid 1960s and 1980s tens of thousands of Papuans were killed or forced to flee when the Indonesian military strafed and napalmed villages from the air. As recently as May 1995, not long before our team left for Irian Jaya (West Papua), eleven civilians, including women and children, who were gathered for prayer in remote forest, were shot dead at point blank range by an Indonesian military patrol. It was months before the story filtered through to the outside world. The army claimed they were OPM rebels. In fact they were a group of families in hiding after the military had burnt down their village. At the same time others people were abducted from Papuan resettlement camps and shot. Many more were tortured and interrogated. All this was in response to a series of peaceful OPM demonstrations protesting at the theft of Papuan land by Freeport and the Indonesian government."
• "Almost every Papuan believes in the cause of the OPM. Even at Freeport, where some men are lucky enough to get menial work, the support is still strong. When I explained to one Freeport worker that I had been a hostage with the OPM and knew many of the leaders, he took my arm and said, 'This is so good. You must bring us guns so we can continue our fight for our free country.' What clouds the issues for many outside observers is that the second cause closest to the Papuans' hearts is there their desire to own money. Although many will privately declare that 'Freeport must close,' the subtext is: 'Until it does, give me a job.' The Indonesian authorities translate this as approval for their exploitative 'development' programmes, whether they be the Freeport mine or the new towns built for the hundreds of migrants that pour into Irian Jaya (West Papua) every week. While all this goes on around, the naked, uneducated, unemployable Papuans can only watch from the sidelines, reduced to ignorant squatters on their own land."
• "I asked for news from the village and he told me who had been shot when the military came in to rescue us. 'Now the army are everywhere,' he said in his broken Indonesian 'They have beaten many people. Some families are still hiding in the forest and are very sick. Those who have returned need permits even to go to the gardens for potatoes or the river to wash.'"
• "'This is war and Indonesia will never win.' Or, in the scorched words of the rebel leader: 'It is better we all die as Papuans than live to watch our children grow up as Indonesians.' How could I be angry when perhaps even I would be driven to kill somebody in the fight for my country and people?"
• "The sadness for me was not that the Indonesians would never be defeated, but that they would never even begin to understand why the Papuans were fighting. The Indonesians don't think they are doing wrong. To them the Papuans are uncivilised people, 'smelly', 'stupid' and 'cannibalistic'."

Budiardjo to Cook. The head of Tapol writes to the British Foreign Secretary about recent events near the Freeport mine.

• "Fairness dictates we divorce our observations of the building from our feelings about its namesake donors, the CEO of Freeport-McMoRan and his wife, he being the most vilified figure in recent Austin history. This is a good thing, because Barton Springs Zone developer Jim Bob has enough bad press without bearing Moffett Hall's sins as well."
• "Sadly, Moffett is at best a blurry reproduction of its sources -- it tries to be loud and proud and witty, but instead comes off as simply tacky, a 200-foot-long Vegas hooker turned to stone."
• "To be precise, the Moffett building is not really stone, but rather, cast concrete dyed to match limestone, and sandstone, and granite, and then striped and swirled like seven-layer dip across the self-consciously 'monumental' facade, in blobby medallions joining the windows, along the curved and bloated panels that decapitate the entryway, and up the superfluous gables with superfluous portholes, creating in profile the accidental silhouette of Woodsy Owl. (Give a hoot! Don't pollute!) This clashes, needless to say, with the aquamarine (!) window frames, and that color continues inside, in the carpet and on the walls and on fat-assed and closely spaced columns that maintain that special Vegas look, Caesars Palace variant."

  "And then there are the studs -- these polished black granite pointy things that cover the building, in regular right-angled lines that harmonize poorly with the curved and parfaited surfaces beneath them. The studs extend right up to adjacent buildings like Experimental Science, slated for near-term renovation and hopefully not destined for similar architectural bondage-tart wear. They also cover the interior of the entryway, making entry to Moffett like running a gauntlet, with granite spikes poised to spring out, sword-and-sorcery style, and impale unlucky wayfarers."

  "So, if we're judging it against the premise of the Campus Master Planning Committee that UT is 'an unnecessarily fragmented campus, both functionally and aesthetically, [and] there is a strong resolve to improve on the campus character... developed over the last 30 years,' then Moffett gets a big red F, with no extra credit for being 'distinctive.'"

The Loyola Greens and the Delta Greens will cosponsor a panel discussion on the topic "Has Loyola Leased The Ivory Tower? The Freeport Affair Revisited" on Tuesday, October 21 at 7:30 PM in Nunemaker Auditorium of Monroe Hall at Loyola University. The panel will address the issue of Freeport McMoRan, the university, and corporate greenwashing. Participants will include Prof. Stephen Feld, a Freeport critic, formerly at the University of Texas at Austin, Prof. Bob Thomas, who was hired to fill the Freeport endowed chair in Environmental Communications, and Prof. John Clark, Professor of Philosophy and Chair of the Loyola Environmental Studies Program. Organizers have also invited Freeport CEO Jim Bob Moffett, Freeport spokesperson Garland Robinette, Fr. Bernard Knoth, President of Loyola, and other Loyola faculty members.

The discussion is in part a response to a recent article by Prof. Julia Fox, a former Loyola faculty member, entitled "Leasing the Ivory Tower at a Social Justice University: Freeport McMoRan, Loyola University, New Orleans, and Corporate Greenwashing." This article, published in the journal "Organization and Environment," continues the debate over the environmental and human rights record of Freeport and its influence on the media, government and the academic world.

For further information, contact Teresa Hill, president of the Loyola Greens, at 897-5170.

"Moslem scholars Amien Rais and Abdurrahman Wahid, respectively chairman of Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama Moslem organizations, are known to be outspoken social and political commentators. Both have significant political bearing given their millions of supporters and followers. The two are also noted to often stand in opposition over many issues. However, when it comes to the question of what constitutes Indonesia's most important future challenges, both share similar concerns.

Question: On several occasions you have put forward what you call "the national agenda" or Indonesia's most pressing challenges. Can you elaborate?

Answer: I believe the most important challenge is for Indonesia to protect its natural resources. Over the past 30 years, we have been robbed. We are being pushed into bankruptcy.

Take for example the gigantic exploitation of our mining resources by PT Freeport in Irian Jaya (West Papua). The environment of the province is in the process of being destroyed. Between 1973 and 1997, the company has excavated 1,650 tons of gold, giving them an estimated revenue of Rp 400 trillion.

The sad thing is we don't even have access to the company's bookkeeping. So, the most important thing for us to do is to protect our forests, our land and our oil resources, so they're not robbed further."

• "When Flannery tries to explain in pidgin why he is circumcised ("Ol tumbuna bilong mi i save rausim laplap bilong kok bilong pikinini man") and his companions split their sides with mirth, he realises that it sounds to them much weirder than wearing a penis gourd or the head of a rhinoceros beetle through a perforation in the nose."
• "Missionaries have trampled on local rituals and beliefs with massive insensitivity throughout the highlands (though Flannery finds one splendid Irish Catholic missionary who has revived local traditions and allowed bare-breasted dancing in church)."
• "In an unusual gesture, Flannery dedicates his book to Jim Bob Moffett, the American head of the Freeport mining company and his ilk, 'in the hope that, through reading it, they will understand a little better the people whose lives they so profoundly change'."

Freeport-McMoRan

Q. Do you worry at all that your tenure will be forever associated with the Freeport-McMoRan controversy?

A. No.

Q. Do you think that whole situation was over-exaggerated at the time?

A. Yes, I really do, and I have reflected on that several times, and what's interesting to me is to go back and look on that. We really had one professor, Professor Feld, who was an anthropologist, who really made this a cause on the campus. The interesting thing to me, as I look back on it, is that Professor Feld never visited the mine site. And for him to be able to capture the campus in the way that he did, without ever even visiting the mine site, or for that matter without ever having -- to my knowledge -- any one-to-one discussions with people at Freeport, is amazing to me.

Q. Did you ever visit the mine site?

A. Yes. It's an amazing facility. If you would go there, you would say to yourself: "How can a company afford to provide facilities for employees and create the infrastructure that exists to deal with the pollution and people problems?" They provide family housing, medical benefits, a hospital. The answer is this: It's the biggest gold mine in the world.

Q. So why do you think there was ever a controversy in the first place?

A. It was difficult to get the proper information out there. Every effort was made. But if you finally look at the true facts of the situation, the people who did visit there did think it was a fine facility. There was nothing to be embarrassed about ... The other thing I would say is that the whole thing ended, really, when Jim Bob Moffett said to a number of people who were being very critical, "If you libel me, I will sue you." And that ended it.

Q. So, years later, how should we perceive Jim Bob Moffett?

A. I think history will treat him very positively. At a time when the University's microbiology program could not move forward toward its goals, Moffett should be suitably recognized as a significant benefactor of that program. Also, his support of geology made it possible for PhD students to do research in various geological locations throughout the world. Jim Bob Moffett has been a great friend of mine and the University.

It's a rare occasion when UT System Chancellor William Cunningham will speak publicly about the most indelible stain on his long university career. But in an interview published in today's Texan, Cunningham finally revisited his relationship with Freeport-McMoRan Inc., four years after a controversy that humiliated the University and could have cost him his job.

If you were expecting a shred of remorse or an admission of wrongdoing -- don't hold your breath. Cunningham is clearly attempting to revise history, hoping that the UT community will forgive and forget his prior sins.

Cunningham shouldn't hold his breath, either.

The Freeport controversy reached a boiling point in 1995. At the center was the naming of the molecular biology building for Jim Bob Moffett, Freeport's CEO and a close friend of Cunningham's. Moffett's $2 million donation to the building secured his place on the nameplate, despite the widespread protest from thousands of students and faculty.

Why did the UT community react so violently to the suggestion that Moffett's name grace the campus? Because he represented a company whose environmental and human rights record was far from perfect, and was, in fact, deplorable.

Several non-profit and religious agencies documented serious environmental and human rights abuses in Freeport's Indonesian mines. It was enough to raise the eyebrows of the U.S. government, who refused to insure Freeport's Indonesian operation in 1995.

So here was Cunningham: On the one hand, he had a campus full of students and faculty -- whom he presumably works for -- clearly asking him to change the building's name. On the other hand, his old buddy Jim Bob was waving a $2 million check in his face. Who do you think he sided with? If you're not sure, check out the building on Speedway across from the RLM.

There's one other nuance to this mess: The whole time, Cunningham was a handsomely paid member of the Freeport board of directors, making hundreds of thousands in compensation and stock options. Knowing this, it's not hard to figure out why Cunningham was -- and still is -- willing to defend the deplorable actions of this company.

But knowing Cunningham was in their pocket wasn't enough for Freeport. They certainly didn't like all the bad press about environmental abuse and human rights violations appearing on the pages of The Statesman, The Austin Chronicle and The Texan. So they threatened to sue three professors and several Austin activists, including current City Council Member Darryl Slusher, for libel.

Make no mistake, this was corporate intimidation, pure and simple. The letters sent to the professors cited no specific incidents of illegal speech, but the First Amendment went out the window nonetheless.

Faced with a lawsuit against three of his professors, Cunningham resigned from the Freeport board, no longer able to maintain such a gross conflict of interest.

The whole episode was nothing short of a disgrace for the University. Judging from his comments today, Cunningham seems more than ready to blame faculty members, the media and the government for the controversy.

But his myopic rhetoric fails to allocate any of that responsibility to himself. And for that reason, history will judge his actions harshly.

Forgive and forget? Not a chance.