THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
Editorials
Commentary
Monday, November 20, 1967
Poge 2
"1
'A
01
''"'ft.
Who Is Wrong?
Knowing that demonstrations are being planned
against Dow Chemical Co. today, the Daily Nebraskan
would like to reiterate its editorial statements made last
Wednesday:
.'But if there are University students and professors
who believe that the company should not manufacture
hapalm, we would not discourage them from letting their
feelings and opinions be known.
' "But only if they do it peacefully and without ob
structing Dow Chemical from recruiting or allowing oth
er students to talk with Dow Chemical.
: ''Students have 'he right to demonstrate and protest
against that which they disagree and we would be
disappointed if they did not make use of this right. But
this is good only insofar as it does not interfere with
the respective rights of others."
I But the Daily Nebraskan cannot understand w h y
the manufacturers of this weapon should be the ones to
be hit by demonstrations. It seems far more logical to
protest against those who use this weapon.
One might say that protests against the U.S. govern
ment's use of napalm have been so far ineffective. But
it seems unlikely that the protests against Dow which
manufactures napalm will be much more effective.
There are other weapons of war which equal napalm
in eliminating or deforming mankind. And it seems that
one should also protest against these equally-horrifying
weapons of war, and specifically those companies which
manufacture these weapons.
Granted that napalm seems to be exceptionally in
humane method of waging war. But for that matter are
there any means of waging war which are humane?
k
The Daily Nebraskan applauds those who make their
opinions known on this issue as long as they respect
the rights of others but questions whether this dem
onstration a protest against the manufacturer and not
the user is not directed against the wrong individuals.
Today, Tomorrow . . .
Is it not rather ironic that a nation which has
been so bountifully blessed should need a special day
on which to give thanks for its many gifts?
And is it not rather ironic that the people of this
nation almost without exception think in the nega
tive what it does not have instead of ir. the posi
tive what it does have?
And needless to say. the press is probably as guilty
as the public of accentuating the negative and de-emphasizing
the positive perhaps somewhat indicative of
the society which it reports.
One would have to admit that the progressiveness
6f this country, and of this campus, has been a result
of those who criticize negatively the engrained institu
tion. : But this does not mean that one should never recog
nize the positive things which have been accomplished,
or say thank-you, or at least be cognizant of the many
gmall things which benefit our lives every day.
: Today, tomorrow, or any other day, not just Thanks
giving Day, is the proper time to recognize those many
fhings, great and small, for which Americans should be
grateful.
: Americans need not, and should not. wait for Thanks
giving Day to give thanks. Thanksgiving Day should be
just a little part of every day.
I GrandSprix
I by George Kaufman
: A coed accosted me the other day in front of the
Union and said, accusingly, "If you're so liberal, how
come you're not a hippie?"
f And, being an honest and forthright man at heart,
I think it only fair that I should answer this question for
all my wondering readers who might very well be asking
the same question at this moment.
: The truth is, readers, that I once was a hippie. Not
many people know about this side of my life because it
didn't last long.
; Yes. as a young lad of 17, I ran away from home
and pilgrimaged to San Francisco to join what was then
Unknowingly the core and embryo, as it were, of the
flower -children who have made the Haight-Ashbury sec
tion of San Francisco so famous today.
: But somehow I just didn't fit I couldn't bring my
ielf to conform to the social mores of this new sub-bul-ture
despite the glamour of being a part of it.
: For one thing, pot made me sick and LSD made me
dizzy. And then when someone told me it could make me
Impotent. I gave it up for good.
; And I just couldn t bring myself to hug other boys
at the love-ins ... I tried, Leary knows I tried, but I
was just too uncomfortable.
And, too, my beard itched and when I let my hair
grow long my dandruff got terrible and I found I couldn't
go to sleep at night, my whole head itching and burning.
And the bells. My gawd, how those bells drove me
batty. Day in, day out, people trooping in and out of
my pad doing their thing and jingling the bells. I got
fhese headaches constantly.
And then came the final blow I found I was allergic
to flowers.
So I decided to leave my new friends behind and
seek a society where I could be free and live the way I
was most comfortable without having to pretend to be
something I wasn't.
: Somewhere where I would not have to be such a
hypocrite just to please my friends and my new 'family'..
; So J returned home and learned the greatest lesson
ef my young life: That to be true to oneself, one does
pot have to choose between making love and war.
Sir'kS
m AW mW MM JMWT MM I VZJV U'X I D
l
8?
CAMPUS OPINION
sorry T.C.. but t StvyS
ftl&HT HERE. TttftT Wg'flE
hot Composed to &t started
until SAftuy HSH
Our Man Hoppe
Elbie Jay
Loves Dissert
Arthur Hoppe
Howdy there, folks. How y'all? Time
for another chapter of The Real Great
Society, that rollickin' tee-vee series fea
turin' the rootin'-tootin' Jay Family and
starring ol' Elbie Jay the kind of feller
who never takes no for an answer. Not
that he gets much opportunity.
As we join up with ol' Elbie today
he and his two sidekicks Dean and Mac.
are settin' in the parlor. There's some
whoppin' and hollerin' goin' on outside
and the three are lookin' mighty glum.
Elbie (irritably): Just you listen to those
voices of dissent and disunity out there
protestin' my war. For the sake of na
tional unity, why can't they be loyal
Americans and support me in my heart
felt desire to bring our boys home from
Vee-yet-nayem?
Dean: What are they shouting, sir?
Elbie: As usual, they're shoutin', (he
shudders) "Bring our boys home from
Vee-yet-nayem."
Mac: Maybe you should make another
speech, sir, outling your wise policies and
brilliant goals.
Elbie: I made 43 this week already. Each
time I get up and I say in my magnani
mous fashion that their here's a free coun
try and any man's got the right to h i s
own opinions about the war.
Dean: That's right, sir.
Elbie: 'Course, logic requires I point
out that Hanoi is listenin' to every word.
And anybody who says he disagrees with
me is givin' aid and comfort to the en
emy. Not to mention the Republicans.
Mac: That's right, sir.
Elbie: And then I wind up on a kindly
note of reasonableness by puttin' the
two together. Any mangy, low-down, no
good, un-American. Commie-lovin' traitor,
I say reasonably, therefore has the per
fect right to disagree with me. As long
as he don't say so out loud.
Dean and Mac (together): That's right,
sir.
Elbie: And would you believe it? Some
of these polecats are goin' around savin'
I'm tryin' to stifle dissent. Me! Why, "can
you think of any man who loves dissent
more 'n me?
Dean and Mac (together): No!
Elbie (nodding): That's a word I dearly
love to hear you fellows say. If'n you fel
lows didn't say no to me once in a while
I might just conceivably make a mis
take. Dean and Mac (together): Impossible!
Elbie (smiling): Well, you got a right to
your opinion. But, truth is. I'm not infall
ible, I'm only a mere mortal human
bein!
Dean and Mac (together): You're dead
wrong, sir!
Elbie (beaming): And I respect you the
more for your honest dissent, (frowning)
But why can't all folks dissent like that?
If'n they did, I'd knuckle under, admit
I was wrong and change my humble
opinion of myself. No sacrifice is t o o
great. I say, for national unity.
Well, tune in again, folks. And mean
while, as you mosey down the windin'
trail of life, remember what Elbie's ol'
granddaddy used to say:
"Be toler&iii of your fellow man and
let him have any opinion he wants. As
long as it's your'n. And if'n it ain't, just
let him have it."
What Penalties For Pot Users?
Daily Nebraskan
Nov. 30, 1967
Vol. 1. No 4!
scmMHM tMataaa aaM t Lama, m
; TctopftaM! BattMm 472-8568, Nam tn-ae, Editor 473-590
I mm M 94 Ml NBMtv m M tmt ln a.
S'u.L.i ii?, tnwatar and rratap ttn-taa tka i
mi panada. oy nm wummtt at taa UtMn at Naoraaaa
f 0ja Paean liiimnimltf an .. p-nu.
tuMteatwaai anaii tr (ran aeiiaaranJa tar taa SokeaianiMaa ar aor peraca
;UMa t RvivrMtr. Maotm at Urn Kabraakaa ara r-mftiftWa nt what omt
aaaar n aa artatad
I Ummvr AmnoMtot ColtedaM PrM, maaM MvartlakH MtrvUa, Mar
faratad raDDAMl at Rnu fl fcOnaka llama. Laweai to. M9U.
: IW:if Bran ClhVi Muum ertilet Jwk laid: Nw Kdltar Chm Trill;
SilBl Hrw Brfitai Alaa PImwtoui. (editorial Pair Annual Jali Morru. SpnrU
CIM ttrk (iwdaa. Mjiai Saom rharttr navies. Aamtaai Nitm
tfwt CUtim. R.tKl n. HUH TVnlr. IMr Hixtuin. And Carrion v,try
ftill.n. M Iratwijl.. hrrv Mr!fnn. J in prtw. frltte Srtmrtlkopl: ( Vmo
Mtttw: fclrrtN Atuaari'. Mai CarJiHoa. arntar Coa? Ediuw. Lhr Tealmeier: Cwpy
trum. Ltuh Oatttrrialk. IVty Fimr. Jim Evmnr. Joo-, Sctamdi, Photoira-(ra-ra
MIMa tbvman mp4 ban Lutrlry
atMMsaaa jt!!'
Wanna Manatrr O latin Prtanm. national Artwrtfetac Manaxtr Roger Boret
yoaavuon at r CImtIw luxtr. bvcreury Janat ttuaUnas, BtmkJnvpiu ami
WaalWaaa Allan Bmtlt; nnanineMD Mar Jaaa Rnaii OrailatMa MaBwrrra
Jvkj hpvsriAufti anri (larr Hrmi ftaMa tuuim baa Clamk. kalttv ImSfc
Mt tUmit, km atiiin, Wat Motoa and kar trh.
By The CoDegiate Press
The two men in government who have
the most to say about what the govern
ment's policy on marijuana ought to be
offered sharply differing testimony before
a House subcommittee about what
should be done to pot-users.
Members of a House subcommittee
on government operations, hearing the
teslimoney early this week, showed a dis
tinct preference for Narcotics Bureau
Commissioner Henry Giordano's view
that pot users are ciminals and should
be subjtct to long jail terms ard stiff
fines.
When Dr. James Goddard, chief of the
Food and Drug Administration, suggested
that laws concerning marijuana use
might be too serve, some of the subcom
mittee members took him to task.
Goddard told the subcommittee, "I
don't think we should make criminals out
of the individuals who abuse" the drug.
Giordano, testifying the following
day, strongly disagreed. He conceded that
existing penalities for possession of mari
juana are severe but he said they should
remain so even if it means making a
criminal out of a pot-user.
The criminal pernalities for smoking
pot are a deterrent to its use. according
to Giordano, ile said that if Congress de
cides to lessen the penalties, "the sta
tistics on the use of the drug will go right
through the roof." lie added, "To say on
the Federal level that we shouldn't have
strong penalties for possession just
doesn't make sense to me."
Several congressmen suggested there
was no need for the committee even to
think about reducing the penalties for
possession of marijuana. Rather, they
said, Congress should be thinking
about making the penalties for possession
of LSD more severe, while leaving the
marijuana law alone.
Under present laws someone with
marijuana in his possession is guilty of
committing a felony and may receive up
to 10 years in prison and a $20,000 fine
for his first offense. Federal laws regard
ing LSD now say that agents may do no
more than seize a user's supply of the
drug.
Both Goddard and Giordano agreed
that LSD is far more dangerous than
marijuana and that efforts should be
made to close the gap in the penalties
with respect to the two drugs.
Although Goddard refused to suggest
what penalties should apply to pot users,
he indicated "they should be like those
now applied to LSD." Giordano said ap
plying the LSD penalty to marijuana
"would increase the problem tenfold."
Both Goddard and Giordano said the
use of pot should be controlled, but the
FDA Commissioner recommended cutting
off the supply as the primary means of
control. Giordano said that in addition to
cutting off the supply, the threat of a
criminal penalty for possession should
be retained as a deterrent to the use of
pot
Dear Editor:
I am wondering how a person, who
evidently has the intelligence to become
editor of a collegiate newspaper, could
have listened to Mr. Lane with an open
mind and still arrive at the conclusions
presented in the Daily Nebraskan's edi
torial "Credibility Gap."
It seems you have a rather naive at
titude by inferring that we should believe
the Warren Commission Report and the
CBS documentary, simply because they
were produced by "responsible people."
You fail to realize that first of all, both
productions represented only one point of
view, disallowing all contradictory evi
dence and secondly, that the federal gov
ernment is not the beautiful, uncorrupt
organization we would all like it to be.
I cannot help but think you jumped
off the wrong side of the fence concern
ing this issue.
Roger Stark
More Joan
Dear Editor:
Why does the Nebraskan think Joan
Baez is such a heroine? All she does is
make trouble. She hadn't done any more
good than the "passive" people she criti
cizes. Anybody can sing, even "passive"
people.
If the editor would read the books of
Dr. Tom Dooley, he would see how hypo
critical the Baez view of brotherhood is.
Joan is a mere exhibitionist. What good
has she done with her protests? Do you
think if she protested in Russia they
are murdering aggressors that they
would pull out of Vietnam? No, the Com
mies would just laugh at her. They'd say,
"If all Americans are as dumb as she, it
won't be long before we bury them."
To protest is nothing. It's too bad
Joanie djdnt apply to the nursing school
when she came here. Then she might see
how much good can be done quietly,
without fanfare. She might be able to see
how "passive" people have done more
good with their adrenalin than she has.
Harriet Lang
Dear Editor:
I attended the discussion held at Sch
ramm Hall Wednesday afternoon at
which Joan Baez and Ira Sandperl were
present. After listining to Miss Baez and
participating in a two-hour discussion
with Mr. Sandperl I have nothing but the
greatest admiration for their actions.
Their pacifict-humnistic philosophy is
far greater value than the frankly frightn
ing ideas of speaker censorship or "stu
dent spies."
When State Sen. Terry Carpenter is
able to advocate undercover agents and
say "I don't give a damn about what the
students think about this," he reveals him
self as the very type of personality which
Miss Baez and Mr. Sandperl are attempt
ing to resist.
We are out-Nazising the Nazis. They
were good teachers, but we are becom
ing even better. Nonviolence is our only
hope of countering the world-wide epidem
ic of violence.
Joseph A. Bunik
Dow
Dear Editor:
I write this letter as a supplement to
the advertisement for the Dow Chemical
Company which appears elsewhere in this
edition. The ad in question points out what
may well constitute complicity in a viola
tion of international law and simple
human decency, by virtue of this com
pany's production of napalm.
In making this kind of claim I do not
condone Viet Cong terrorism. I do, how
ever, point out two relevant facts: 1) It
is simple, historical matter of fact that
because of the great American firepower
superiority, most civilian deaths are
caused by American firepower weapons
and few of those have the macabre
sophistication of napalm. 2) We as Ameri
cans are responsible for what our coun
trymen do to the people of Vietnam. For
that matter, according to the Nuremberg
judgments, their blood is on the hands of
anyone who particpates in a crime against
humanity. The contents of the display
case on the first floor of the Union this
week may supply relevant evidence as
to wheather such crimes are being com
mitted. Today an opportunity presents itself,
in the person of the Dow recruiter, to con
front this issue. If you wonder what can
be done. 1 suggest that following possibil
ities. 1) Confront this recruiter himself
with the moral question of possible com
plicity in crimes against humanity. 2) Re
frain from buying Dow products. 3) In
form the officials of the company of the
steps you are taking and urge this highly
diversifed company to refuse any further
napalm contracts. These officials include
C. A. Gerstacker, chairman, and L. I.
Doan, chairman of the executive com
mittee. Their address is the Dow Chemi
cal Company, Midland, Mich.
fitenhen H. VIMS
Instructor of Philosophy
Fuzzy
Dear Editor:
As a member of the University Coun
seling Service, I wish to go on record as
being opposed to James H. Walters, who
now attempts to whitewash Dick Gregory's
remarks and, in the manner of the new
left, to hide behind the fuzzy idea of
"academic freedom."
Mr. Walters forgets that excesses
such as those mouthed by Gregory are
sure to bring excesses by those who op
pose the destruction of private property
now done in the name of "civil rights",
the denigration of the flag as an essen
tial symbol of national unity and the be
trayal of every man who ever fought for
this country in Gregory's characteriza
tion of our troops as Nazis.
I am ashamed of the fact that
Walters is a member of the University
faculty. To say that Gov. Tiemann or
anybody else has no right to know who
cheered for the things Gregorj advocated
is to tell us that we have no right to
know the name of the person making
threatening telephone calls. Such name
calling is always distasteful, but it is a
matter of self-defense.
I am glad to know the name of af
least one of the pro-Communist slobs who
cheered Gregory. If I see him coming up
my front walk. I shall now be able to take
appropriate actions against him. Now if
the other lovers of Chairman Mao, Greg,
ory, Baez and the like would like to step
forward ...
Frank S. Devme
Iii Defense
Dear Editor:
Scott Smith has implied that I am an
extremist, an infiltrator, a subverter. an
advocate of the overun of the U.S. and
that the Russian banner that I have is
an absurdity, a stain, an ugly mark upon
the H.S.S. complex.
How can he judge me as a subver
sive simplv from the color of my window?
How can lie project his feelings and opin
ions and see them as universal?
Scott Smith was the first person to
express displeasure at my window shade.
It was Nov. 7 at 19:30 hours that I first
leaned of his views on "political extrem
ists." I was returning to my room when I
saw between 10 and 15 of his "storm
troopers" bludgeoning upon my door. I
identifed myself and asked them what they
w a n t e d. Their spokesman informed me
that they wanted my banner. (I have been
informed that it was their intention to
force their way into my room, rip down
the banner and make a pyre of it in the
mall. "This is not cricket my fellow stu
dents." it is. infact. breaking and enter
ing, assualt. theft and destruction of pri
vate property. ) . .
I made no move to unlock the door.
Their spokesman, who reeked of spirits,
became quite irrational and began to
shake with rage. It is quite possible that
I could have met with physical abuse had
not the overwhelming majority of the per
sons on my floor turned out to support
me. The troopers then made their first
rational move, they left, with the threat
that they would have the banner before
the week was out.
That banner is just a piece of cloth
to me, it keeps the sun out of my room
in the day. What menas something to me
is my right to display it.
in my view, that the banner re
mained for nine weeks with no protest
means that nearly all the people who saw
it thought "He can display what he
wants, this is a free country." The Daily
Nebraskan has brought it to my atten
tion that some of the Nebraska law
makers disagree.
Scott Smith mentioned that no o n e
would be able to display a U.S. flag for
long in Russia and I am forced to agree.
I had naively thought that this was the
difference between a "free" country and '
a Communist one, obviously the differ
ence is not as great as I had imagined.
When I get a better understanding of
the wording of the law and the meaning
of the words "friendly nation" the ban
ner may again be seen. If you see it at
some later date do not think that is sup
ports the Communists and their plant
for world domination, think of our free
dom of speech, expression and rights as
individuals for this is what is signifies.
I have not been asked by any student
assistant, resident director or public of
fical to remove the banner, but I have
removed it is compliance with the law
quoted and seemingly interpreted by the
Daily Nebraskan. It is not my intention
to violate the law, but I do question its
validity and constitutionality.
I feel that a strong nation, one with .
strong popular support can allow much
freedom of speech and expression, per
haps this is why I felt depressed ai I
took down the red banner.
Now Scott Smith climb back in your
tree but remember that if you cut too
deep into the roots the tree may die.
Jim Clement
Strife
Dear Editor:
I would that every joint, marijuana or
tobacco, were a bullet, that we could end
a war more quickly and bring a gener
ation home.
I would that psychedelics were ex
plosive in another way, that people could
die more quickly and mercifully, less in
soul and more in body. For short lives
can have more meaning than long ones
eroded into the monotony of habit and the
misery of insanity.
When we realize that this is not the
never-ending war on Communism that
politicans talk of winning, but the grow
ing pains of maturing nation such as we
have seen before, in Russia: we can ap
ply to present strife Thomas Paine's state
ment: As parents, we can have no joy,
knowing that this government is not
sufiicently lasting to insure anything
which we may bequeath to posterity,
and by a plain method of argument,
as we are running the next generation
into debt, we ought to work at it,
otherwise we use them meanly and
pitifully ("Common Sense").
Echoed by J. R, Tolkien:
. -i . Yet it is not our part to
master all the tides of the world, but
to do what is in us for the succour
succor of those years wherein we are
set, uprooting the evil ia the field
that we know, so that those who live
after may have clean earth to til L
What weather they shall have is not
ours to rule. -"(The Return of the
King")
If the flower children, about whom
and among whom are all manners of
homicide and suicide which they could
object to or abstain from, are really
looking for love, let them look to this ,
reasoning. If they gee love not. have they
the strength for love?
Th iv u Robert G- Dalrymple
(I he Nebraskan reserves the right ta
condense letters. Unsigned letters will not
be printed.)
