To the Editors of The Crimson:

In reference to your editorial in the September 20 issue of The Crimson ("Staying Calm"), it is incredibly foolish to suppose that the way to stay calm is by not facing the facts. As the dissenting opinion on the same page pointed out, blaming the murder of 269 innocent individuals on such an amorphous "criminal" as the Cold War is ludicrous. No matter how you look at it as calmly as coolly as you please. Flight 007 was shot down by a Russian jet fighter. It's that plain and simple. Any other "explanation" fails to face the facts.

The Soviet assert that they were well within their bounds by shooting down an unarmed civilian aircraft simply because it had violated their airspace. With no evidence whatsoever, they claim (after numerous other claims were exposed as blatant lies at a special session of the U.N. General Assembly) that they believes the airliner was a tool of Western espionage. Moreover, they claim it was the West who engineered such a blatant provocation and that the United States was guilty of inciting a global wave of anti-Soviet hysteria.

Let us turn the tables for a moment. A Soviet jetliner just happens to stray over the northern tip of Alaska near some U.S. military installations. It is impossible to tell whether the plane is on a reconnaissance mission or simply off course. An American jet fighter pursues the Russian civilian plane for two hours and then shoots it down. The Soviets would immediately condemn the act as imperialist. Cold War brutality. Our allies would openly condemn the act, as would the rest of the world. The Russians would most probably take the opportunity to encourage Third World nations to avoid such barbarie capitalists and turn to the inherently peace-loving security of communism. Needless to say, the respect the world's citizens hold for us would inevitably--and deservedly--trade drastically.

The biggest point, though is the fact that our own people would become completely disillusioned with their government and condemn the act more vociferously than anyone else. But this is to be expected--and desired--in a nation that is based upon the rights of the individual. And it America ever did perform such an act, not only would we deserve more condemnation than could possibly be voiced, we would be unable to truthfully, from that point on, call ourselves a democratic people who respect the inherent right of individuals.

However, when the Russians perform the above act, while it is met with obvious revulsion, people are quick to place at least partial blame on others. Newspaper editorials state that the innocent passengers were victims of the Cold War and that it relations cool even the slightest bit between the two superpowers, it is the United States fault. How can such a double standard he stomached, let alone justified.'

Obviously staying calm is an utter necessity--but that doesn't mean blinding ourselves to the facts. To suppose that strict sanctions against the Soviet Union (not a militaristic response at all) would assure that the world would be a less safe place to be is asinine. Just as the schoolyard bully will do as no one puts his foot down and stands up to him, so will the Soviet Union do as it please until we do something.

I support standing up to Russians by cutting off shipments of grain and high technology, it may cause a small sacrifice on our part, but what does it take to finally spur us into taking action that would check such Soviet atrocities--another massacre of 269 innocent individuals? Only in this way will the Soviet Union realize it can't shatter any and all human rights institutions with impunity. Let's stand up to this bully and make our schoolyard safer for all Christopher D. Roy '86