Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 9, 1969)
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1969 PAGE 2 THE DAILY NEBRASKAN Anti-trippers trip The death of Art Linkletter's daughter Diane, attributed by her father to drugs, following close on the heels of a lenghty examination of "Drugs "arid the Young" in Time magazine, is an assurance that the "Drug Problem" will loom large in the " minds of the middle-aged, at least for awhile. Linkletter Wednesday called on parents to warn -their children against the dangers of drugs. ---" 4.j want tne parents, and I want their kids, "to read about this and be shocked, be frightened -at what can happen," he said in ,a newspaper story by the Associated Press. mi Definitely parents and children alike should be shocked at what can happen. However, they ..also should become aware of what does happen, ;;and why it happens. Drugs, like alcohol, can be a frightening thing. '.'Even a mild, non-addictive hallucogenic drug such as marijuana can produce a psychological dependence. This dependency is much like that "sometimes caused by alcohol, and sometimes leads " users to less predictable addictive drugs. r Still, what Time called "a growing band of responsible advocates of legalization (of mari juana)" realize that drug use, especially of marl ..Juana, has grown to a point where anti-drug legislation might well be as ludicrous and inef fective as Prohibition. Legal controls could help .prevent the dangers of unscrupulous sellers who 'peddle marijuana mixed with addictive drugs or chemical compounds still more dangerous than mesculine, LSD or amphetamines. , . Linkletter called on parents to begin a barrage rf anti-drug education, stressing repetition. Both , one-sided and repetitive education have proven completely Ineffective on today's young person. Raised on a school diet of pure patriotism, young people look around and realize facts prove that the extravagant claims of justice, equality and freedom are empty words. Such disillusionment has produced the equal extravagance of the ex treme left, of revolution and anarchy, because the discrepancy seems too big to fight. , In the same way, extravagant claims against drags don't match with reality. The college student sees friends who smoke marijuana but never get addicted to it or any other drug; see, dad, pot doesn't lead straight to heroin. One of the most effective anti-drug commercials -hows people all for drugs, then people all against. , "But neither of these is true," the ad continues, "the only thing we really know about marijuana is that you can get five years for it." . Parents who make unfounded, blanket statements about drugs need be disproven only once to rip the whole blanket to shreds. As the so-called drug culture grows larger and 'larger, young people should be made aware of the possible dangers and side effects, even more of the lack of knowledge about both. They should be encouraged to consider the fact ;tlKit any drug, like alcohol, is a kind of temporary escape from everyday life, that it can become . a too-easy way to ignore personal and societal problems that cry for solution. They should be made aware that any such artificial copout holds ' the most potential danger for the people most drawn 't'd it, the emotionally unstable. """ But exhortation and repetition has never been, is not and wont be the way to encourage ; serious consideration of potential problems, or the "weighing of them against pleasures, sensations and thought processes produced by drug. Parents will not convice the generation they call rebellious of anything if they continue to use the old talking-down attitude. They can present us with the facts and speculations, and let us make our own decisions we will anyway, and might do It better if both sides are brought into the open. Maybe in such an open atmosphere parents can learn something, too a lot about their children and the world that shapes them. Holly Rosenberg er DAILY NEBRASKAN ' Sacand alau ata aald at Llncaln, Ma. Tatannenati 1 Hilar 4J UU, Nm 41-UW. tlnliwM 4'MItt. taburtDtle ralai MMw aamaitar ar M ar yaar. PwBlltkad MaMay. Wadnaaday, Tftwtday and Prlday dHa th Miwol yr mwt darlna; vacation and uam aarlada at M Nt- kraua Untan, Lineal N. ftttmaw at Inraratflaflalt frata, NatnMl dvctHMtt Advartlilraj aarvica. Ta Bally Nahraaka la a tradant avaHcaHan, Indaaandant at Ma Unlvanlty at Naftraikat admlnUtratl, tacvlty ana iradant Idltarlal Start tar Naaar day Manaainf Hilar Kant Cackiaa, Nam drtar dim Padaraani Niaht Nam dliara J. L. Schmidt, Day PIHali dltarlal Aulttant Molly Katanbtraan Aiilitam Newt dliar Janal Manwalli Saerla Hilar Randy Yarki Ntkraifca Haft Wrltara Jenn Ovarak, illl Smltharman, tara Schwladar, alary taacraat, Stava Sinclair, tachitiar Sintn, Linda McClara. Mlka arntl. Sua Parlay. Sylvia La. Ran WMttan, Caral Andarwar kalaarapnara Dan Ladaiy. Jan HmIkimt, J mi Daa. Jan Natlandarft. Mlka Mayman Cavy (altar Sata danklm, fata Maud, Cannl WHnklar, Saaaa ScMlcntarnalar, Val Marin. utlnata tlalt OaalnaM Manaaar Id Icanaaia Latal Ad Manaaar J. L. Schmidt, Nattanal Ad Manaaar Miraarrl Ann rawni laakkaaaar a awliai IuiIncm Sacraiary and Safcaartalla Manaaar Janat aatmaai Cimiiallan Manaaar Jama Sialiari Clartlflad Ad Manaaar Jima Wayanari Advarlliint Raarananlallvaa J. L. tenmidl. Marfarat An trawn. Jal Davit, iaa WIIm. LkMa Nebraskan editorial page 1 ' One cease-fire he favors! Evans and Novak Nixon talk 'scares helP out of senate By Rowland Evans and Robert Novak Washington Leaving the White House after a somber 100-minute talk with President Nixon last week, one Republican Senator turned to another and remarked that Mr. Nixon "is talking about the war just like Johnson used to talk." What triggered this comparison between Mr. Nixon and former President Johnson, who was driven out of office by the war in Vietnam, was fiartly President Nixon's apparent confidence that ianol would soon have to enter serious negotiations to end the war (a conviction of Mr. Johnson's that was never satisfied). The other explanation for the Senator's remark comparing the two Presidents was Mr. Nixon's flat assertion during the long session over coffee in the Oval Office that he would never sacrifice the nation's long-range interest by "bugging out" no matter how far he went down in the polls even if he dropped all the way (he said with a wry smile) "to 5 percent." That, too, sounded to the dozen Republican Senators on the evening of Sept. 30 Just like the Lyndon Johnson of two years ago, six months before be astonished the nation with his no second term announcement. Even more Interesting to some of those present, however, was something else Mr. Nixon said. Asked by Sen. Edward J. Curnry of Florida why the United States did not apply enough m Hilary power "to win the war," Mr. Nixon replied thut the military option was still open. He emphasized that the last thing he wanted to do was to exercise that option, but said the option had to be kept alive until the North Viet namese entered serious negotiations. At that, another of the Republicans present asked what the President meant by the "military option" a renewal of the bombing of the North, Including such targets as the docks In Haiphong harbor, or did he mean a military invasion of North Vietnam? In his response, Mr. Nixon hedged, but acknowledged that the military "option" might in clude all that. Whereupon, another of the Republicans said he hoped there wouldn't be any public speculation from the Administration on re-Americanizing the war. The Republicans, he said, were already in a political bind over the war and talk about military reescalatlon would only make it worse. Mr. Nixon replied that he understood that point. Later, two of the Republicans who heard Mr. Nixon that evening told us that they were deeply distrubed. One said flatly: "He scared the hell out if me." In hard fact, however, it is unlikely that Presi dent Nixon would suddenly change the whole direc tion of his careful strategy to de-Americanize or Vietnamize the war. In the first place, it is too early to know how fast that process, which has been national policy for only six months, can move how fast U.S. troops can be withdrawn and replaced by Saigon's troops. But more Important, the President knows that any switch to military escalation by the U.S. would cripple hlg Administration before the end of Its first year and wreck his own party. Accordingly, the Johnson-style talk from Mr. Nixon last week seems to have been mainly a psychological ploy directed both at Hanoi and at restive Republicans in Congress now publicly breaking away from the Nixon leadership on the war. Mr. Nixon has been around long enough to know that no conversation with as many as a dozen or more Senators can stay private for long, particularly when its important aspect is a revela tion of the Presidential mood and not any hard, classified information. Thus, to Hanoi, by this reasoning, Mr. Nixon was conveying a calculated message of his growing Impudence In a way that would carry more convic tion than a public statement, and that would not expose him to the political criticism of a public statement. And to restive Republican politicians, Mr. Nixon was in effect warning that if they do not support his Vietnamization plan, and show Hanoi a united front at least of Republicans, the result may be far worse. If this Is an accurate appraisal of what the President was trying to accomplish on Sept. 3,0 it shows clearly how tenuous his bargaining position with both Hanoi and his own party here at home has become. Like Mr. Johnson before him, he may be finding it Impossible to pacify both South Vietnam and his own country at the same time. Plaid ntarprltaa. Inc. Incline btlow iurraet of ihit world, tintibtn loeftf, cHr eutur Tfcrtwi. A toohfr flierr. Ilk, 1 l t nt ntrot ana villain hopes tnJits rhor. f'lrf our own C0lrya WttJf U) hwi mmwihii) limit iinmi niajiu MM..MMM, Ml.kAdnMdA Aardvork! AarJvof-k! Runl Ha Ha Ha Gullible hos They'll never learn. eroes in tin in the seawee ... by Jim Evinger The questions raised by members of the Lincoln press at a local press conference this week about the October 15 Moratorium all pointed toward a pervasive attitude In the Lincoln community about the Moratorium, that attitude being the reluctance of the local citizenry to allow the Moratorium to be anything but a "campus incident." The reporters questioned how broad-based the October 15 activities in Lincoln will be. They ques tioned if there would be a responsive show of support by the non-student, non-faoulty population of this city. Those reporters were proper In asking what commitment the local citizenry has made thus far for that day. They were wrong In Judging a lack of visible support as an indication that there Is no community support for the Moratorium. And such a presentation to the Lincoln com munity of the efforts that have been mainly campus-centered will only create a self-fulfilling prophecy that will discourage any community s'how of concern visible, vocal or otherwise. Nebraskans are rather latent in their support for any issue or personality. Acknowledging th fact that this is the heartland of Nixon support, there is at least tacit consent for the goal of ending the Vietnam war among these people. This is whai the Moratorium is all about. It will be highly significant if a large number of University students and faculty display visible sup. port for the Moratorium by marching to the Capitol and participating in the vigil on October 15. If that be all, the Moratorium will have been signifi cant but ineffective. For the Moratorium to truly mean something for the entire community, state and nation, Lincoln citizens and press will have to lend their support. The nature of that support can best be determined by those people themselves. U.S. senators, including George McGovern, Edmund Muskie, Edward Kennedy and William Fulbright, have announced they will not attend legislative sessions on October 15. The mayor of Buffalo, New York, has proclaimed his city an official participant, and announced there will bo a rally at the steps of city hall, according to Time magazine. This week Time reports of businessmen's rallies scheduled in Chicago and on Wall Street in New York CUy. Religious groups nationally have also endorsed the Moratorium, urging church members to participate. For some this means simply wearing black armbands that day; for others, it means writing letters to local papers. The president of Rutgers University several weeks ago consented to suspend all classes and personally conduct a discussion with students on the war. We each operate In our Individual sphere of Influence and only by exerting that individual pressure around the nat'on can there be legitimate claim that the people want the war over. If the Lincoln community is not part of the local efforts to end U.S. Involvement, then the activities will be indigenous to the University population in Lincoln. To make a difference, all citizens must demonstrate their support in their own ways Tho success and effect of Lincoln's Moratorium ac tivitles must not be determined solely by warm bodies gathered at a vigil on the iteps of the Nebraska State Capitol building Open forum- Dear Editor: Viet Nam! We are there. Very few like it, but we are there. The question no longer Is, "Should we stay?" but "how do we get out?" Many Americans are dying and no one can give a satisfactory answer why, but everyone wants us to get out. The alternatives are easy in theory, but difficult in prac tice. Ho Chi Minn Is dead, and those who are replacing hint are avowed enthusiasts of the doctrine International revolu tion. Pressures from the Idealists and oppressed Negro cry to the President to bring the boys home. The President will have to com ply to save himself, If for no other reason. He has pledged himself to that goal and stated that he expects to be held strictly accountable for that pledge. How can he bring them home? He can retreat. "Bug-out." Bring alll the men back as fast as he Is able. This leaves a poorly prepared South Vietnamese army to assume the entire defense, which they will son have to do anyway. At the present time the Vietnamese forces surely would not be able to withs tand the onslaught thut would ensue, and thousands of Vketnam?se vMi suffer the same fate as the 2.000 that were mass murdered at Hue during the Tet offensive. On the international scene, which the idealist and peace loving youths do not want to consider, the faith in the United States find In hr word would be void. Even Heath in England and tin Prime Minister of Sweden, both bitter war critics, admit that they would have to reassess their own reliances on the United State's treaties and pronouncements. If we don't care about any settlement in Vietnam and bring the troops home, what will happen to the peoples of Cambodia, Laos and Thailand? These people care what government rules them and possess a national spirit. Even today they are set upon by the same people we are fighting In Vietnam. Do we Just walk away bhwlng kisses goodby? The President can withdraw. He is. Rowland Evans said in a speech here that the withdrawal Is not fast enough because pressures will not permit the President to follow his plan. The plan call for withdrawal at a pace to force Hanoi to come seriously to the bargaining table. If this could happen, a semblance of peace might come to Southeast Asia for the first time in more than, SO years. However, any fool can see U is asinine for Hanoi to bargain now) given a little more time, the marchers will do the fighting for them. More than likely tb marchers and Hanoi will win, and the President win be forced to bring the men home too soon, leaving a vacuum into which only mora blood will flow. But we don't care. It won't be American blood. The idiots were dumb enough to believe we wouldn't desert tlvam, iHaRyberf r
