The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, November 05, 1969, Page PAGE 2, Image 2

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

Vietnam speech:
same old Nixon
President Nixon's long-awaited speech on Viet
nam said nothing new. He merely reiterated his
stand on the war, a position which has so seriously
divided the country the past few months.
The speech, however, did show the country
that the President Is seemingly sincere in bis posi
tion and believes the majority of the public agrees
with him. Further, It was an opportunity for the
ftublic to hear arguments for an "honorable peace"
n a rather reasoned, low-key manner.
There were ironies in the speech. One, pointed
out by a CBS news commentator, Is that Nixon
in one breath talked of keeping up the reputation
and respect of the United States to countries
abroad, and In the next breath indirectly admitted
that complete military victory isn't possible because
the United States is withdrawing troops.
Another Irony Is that Nixon talked of Viet
namization of the war, preparing South Vietnam
troops to take over the fighting and then withdraw
ing American troops. He then said that if infiltration
or fighting is increased by the enemy in the south,
the United States would not stand back or sit
still. If the South Vietnamese forces are really
prepared, why would the United States have to
worry if fighting increased in South Vietnam?
The reaction to the speech has been firming
of positions, both pro and con. For example most
of those national leaders opposed to Nixon's policy
in Vietnam, but willing to wait until after the
speech to voice additional criticism (hoping for
a new troop withdraw or change in policy), have
said the speech was a disappointment and that
renewed criticism is in order.
In another sense, one feels sorry for Nixon.
As national editorial columnist Rowland Evans said
in Lincoln Sept. 30, Nixon has done more to get
the United States out of Vietnam than Johnson
did during his entire administration. Nixon has
shifted the direction of the war to Vietnamlzation
and has started troop withdraws.
But, Evans said, the tragedy of the situation
for Nixon is that this change in policy has come
too little and too late. Nixon is forced to take
all the criticism for a situation with which he
really had little to do. Vietnam is a type of disease,
Evans said, which has infected Nixon just as it
has infected all those with whom it comes in
The real question remains: exactly where does
public opinion stand in the country. Does a majority
of the American public want us to get out now?
Nixon had his say.
Now it is time for the other side to have
its say.
Roger Boye
Where is pride?
Cleanliness Is next to Godliness. In this age
Of the "God is dead" theory, one questions where
that leaves cleanliness especially in the Union's
main lounge.
It is somewhat revolting to observe the disarray
of furniture and the garbage littered on the floor
there between Union opening and closing times
each day.
Outsiders no doubt wonder at the lack of pride
that so many students openly display in keeping
their University clean. The city dump is about
a mile north of Lincoln. Let's keep it there.
Keut Cockson
Seem clan eeetae aM at Lincoln, Hut.
Telephoned laitar 47M9M. Newo 471-Uet, llnu 471-MM.
JuDicrlpllon ratei art $4 per aemeitor or M per year.
PeblKne Monday. Weaneedey, Thondey and Prlday dgrtna Hie
achoel yaar oncepl Ogrme vacation! and aam periods al M No-
kraika Union. Lincoln Nab.
Monitor at Intoreolleflale Praaa, National Iducatlonol Advertlilna
utlneu JtaM
otlneea Manaoar If Icenotle; Local M Manager J. L. Ichmldii
National Ad Manaear Margaret Ann Brown tookkeeeer den
owllnj Bvtlneta locrotory and JuBierlptlon Manager Janet
eatmant ClmrleHen Manager Jemee Helton Claiiilltd Ad
Manager Juno Waeonori Advertising Reprotentallvee J. L.
echmldi. Margaret Ann rown. Joel Deli, Joe Wilton, Linda
Vebraskan editorial page
Meanwhile, in Vietnam
Banned pesticide used by U.S.
by Frank Manklewicz and Tom Braden
Washington Those who are concerned over
a possible massacre even of women and children
in South Vietnam when U.S. troops depart might
consider the fact that we now spray enormous
amounts of an anticrop chemical throughout South
Vietnam which has been known for three years
to cause deformed births in test animals at
a rate of 100 per cent.
At least four newspapers in South Vietnam
printed stories and pictures last summer
of deformed babies born in villages sprayed with
the chemical (called 2, 4. 5T), and the newspapers
were promptly closed down by the Thieu govern
ment for "interfering with the war effort."
Use of the chemical, described by our
government as "probably dangcrcus," is now ban
ned in "populated areas" and on or near food
products in the United States, but the Pentagon
announced last week that it would continue to use
it in Vietnam, where Army Service Manuals set
forth its appropriate use against food supplies.
In addition, it is widely used in areas where
the population captures its drinking water from
rain, by the use of roof gutters and barrels, and
where wells are sunk into soil saturated with the
This chemical, along with other herbicides and
defoliants, was developed by the Army at Fort
Dietrich, Md., in the 1950s, and it quickly found
acceptance in agriculture. After an early refusal
to do so, the United States began to "defoliate"
in a small way in Vietnam in 1963, and we also
sprayed 741 acres of rice a program to "deny"
the VC the crop (i.e. to starve the families who
lived there).
But by 1967 we attacked 221,000 acres of crops
and were detoliuting nearly 1.5 million acres in
Vietnam and to be sure in Laos. There
was only a slight drop in 1968.
Army Training Circular TC 3-16, dated April,
1969, describes the "antiplant" chemicals along with
what are called "riot control agents." Specifically,
what is used in Vietnam is called "Orange," a
50-50 mixture of 2, 4, 5T and another defoliant
called 2-4D. Troops are instructed to spray It on
"mangrove or highland trees or broad leafed crops
(such as beans, corn, bananas and tomatoes) and
rice." "Orange" and other chemicals are described
as having a "high offensive potential" to destroy
food supplies and to deny the enemy food by
rendering the soil sterile.
Just how high an "offensive potential" this
chemical warfare had was not really known until
1966 when, for the first time, the National Institutes
of Health commissioned tests on pregnant
The study showed that severe malformation
of offspring occurred in rats at the rate of 39
as against a normal rate of 10 when they
were given a small dose. When this dose was
increased to the level a Vietnamese woman might
consume in a few days in her drinking water,
the rate of fetal malformation rose to 90 and
Whether the rate of human malformation from
contact with this chemical is greater or less than
with rats is, of course, unknown. In the case of
Thalidomide, it turned out to be greater.
It was this that prompted the finding that 2,
4, 5T was seriously hazardous and "probably
dangerous" and caused Its removal from the
domestic market in the United States. The
President's science adviser, Dr. Lee du Bridge,
perhaps adumbrating the Pentagon's refusal to cut
down its use against Asians, said only that the
rate of fetal malformation was "greater than ex
pected." If you expect 10, one would imagine that
100 would rate stronger language than "greater
than expected."
What amazes the scientists who discovered the
report only by chance is that for 15 years no
thought was given to testing the chemical on
animals, that for three years a finding of "probable
dunger" was Ignored or hidden and that we continue
to use it in Vietnam against the civilian popula
tion. Not since the Romans salted the land
after destroying Carthage has a naiion taken pains
to visit the war upon future generations.
Laa Angelee Tlmoa
the lower
by Michael Egger, David Paas, Tom SledeJl
What with the militant student protest over
Vietnam, civil rights, poverty, and campus reform,
student government as an institution has been
shoved aside. And rightly so.
The most obvious fault of student government
Is tn its organizations. The premise is that the
trappings of power assure success; abundance of
form triumphs over lack of substance. Thus we
see the proliferation of Institutions, committees,
and ad hoc assemblies.
Student leaders fall into thinking that if only
they observe proper parliamentary procedure (ac
cording to Robert's Rules of Order) the ad
ministration will note their desires, and Student
Senate will have Instituted the millennium.
If this were the sum of student government,
then it could be written off as a harmless extracur.
ricular activity. But advocates of student govern
ment make three claims in Its favor: communica
tion with the administration, artoitrating university
regulations, and general curriculum reform.
Concerning communication with the ad
ministration, Student Senate la seen as a half-way
house for student opinion. Senate is elected by
students and therefore reflects the range of campus
opinion (which Is sheer sophistry). Our elected
representatives can then make known to the ad
ministration the opinions of the student body for
its consideration.
But general experience of university life In
forms us that this is not the way things operate.
Individuals and groups outside student government
have considerably more influence on administra
tions than any Student Senate in its present form,
ever will have.
Student governments are also held to be
responsible for enforcing certain university regula
tions (e.g. cheating on examinations) by means
of student courts. First, many students would rather
be judged by their academic superiors than their
Secondly, student courts amount to playing at
life. The decisions of any student court are
reviewable by the faculty and administration.
Further, the student courts are so closely watched
over by the administration as to be rendered In
capable of independent judgment.
Finally, the claim is made that Student Senates
are a vehicle for reform of curriculums and general
university hiring policies. Student government will
amass the legitimate grievances of students In these
areas and present them for action to the proper
university officials.
But here again one runs up against the limita
tions of contemporary student senates. Constitu
tionally, student governments are political struc
tures containing highly political Individuals. Yet
the decisions to be made are non-political in the
extreme, requiring diplomacy, tact, and any numb
er of intellectual virtues not present within a
political institution.
Thus we see the creation of our own Council
on Student Life, which is charged with duties that
Student Senate itself should see as its own major
Students arc dissatisfied with governments that
claim to have legislative and policy powers, but
in reality function as bureaucracies. Student Senate
pretends to be what it Is not and promises to
deliver what it cannot.
Even though covered with a multitude of sins,
there is still room for some type of student govern
ment in the university. But first students
themselves must gat over their delusions as to
what such an organization can accomplish. It can
not single-handed accomplish anything.
Its success Is dependent on the confidence that
the administration and faculty have In Individual
student leaders. And there Is not much confidence
when Student Senate is more concerned with the
mechanics of rewriting Its constitution than with
developing realistic and meaningful goals.
Radical conference confronts issues in face of heated rhetoric
By Rick Fitch
Toronto (CPS) More than 500 radicals
representing six countries and every conceivable
" political orientation within the New Left gathered
here Oct. 23-26 for what amounted to a mass
psychoanalysis of the student protest movement.
Meeting at York University's Glendon College
for a conference titled "Year of the Barricade,"
the delegates struggled, sometimes far Into the
night, over such subjects as the feasibility of a
student-worker alliance, women's liberation,
cultural oppression, the value of a liberal universi
ty, tha effect of American capitalism on Canada,
and the oppression of French Canadians in
Most of the delegates were from Canada and
about 200 were from Glendon College itself. Includ
ed In this group were many of the more "moderate
radicals" who determined In large part the direc
tion, scope and tone of the conference. They forced
purely Ideological struggles between the followers
of Marx, Mao, Trotsky and others down to a more
personal level.
Instead of concentrating on the tactics and
strategy of combating U.S. Imperialism, the con
ference wag plunged Into a deep and Introspective
examination of fundamental issues.
For example, early in the conference some
delegates decided to organize a demonstration
against a Toronto newspaper. The Globe and Mail,
because of its guilt in whipping up an atmosphere
of fear and hysteria in the province of Quebec
by calling members of the French liberation move
ment there anarchists and nihilists.
The issue came to the floor during Saturday's
denary when a member of the SDS Weathermen
action suggested the demonstration be conducted
under the Viet Cong flag to show solidarity with
the Third World's revolutionary struggles, lie also
said a U.S. business such as Standard Oil Company
In Toronto should be a target since capitalism
Is the underlying force behind all oppression.
Initial debate was limited to the time, place
and logistics of the demonstration. But there
followed an outpouring of resentment, apparently
built up during the first two days of the conference,
against those vaguely referred to as leaders of
the movement who would drag all the rest la
a flash of fiery rhetoric out to confront the estab
lishment. One high school student, in a moment of rare
poignancy, said, "I dont even know whether I'm
right or left or what. And you want us to get
our heads bashed In by the Pigs I use that
because you understand, eh? so we'll hate Pigs
for the rest of our lives. So we smas'i the Toronto
Globe and Mail?"
A girl drew loud applause when she accused
the radical leadership of being unable to relate
to people. "This place is cold," she said. "Peaple
can't be treated as objects to be manipulated; they
have to feel things."
Those who had previously taken the body's
will to demonstrate fur granted then turned their
efforts toward convincing the less radical students
of the need to educate people by having the action.
Mike Klonsky, active in America's Revolutionary
Youth Movement II, a wing of SDS, said the Globe
and Mall Is Involved in the oppression of the French
not only through its slanted news coverage, but
because Us owners are members of Canada's elite
ruling class, which perpetrates an exploitative
capitalist system.
Others said that the English Canadians who
control Canada are Inextricably tied with American
capitalism which has fostered U.S. imperialism
abroad and political oppression, racism, militarism
and poverty among the masses at home. They
advocated putting abstract theory into practice by
About half the delegates participated in a
peaceful march to the newspaper Sunday night,
carrying signs protesltng the falsehoods about the
Quebec situation disseminated through the press
and supporting the French Liberation movement.
The march was evidence of another turmoil
of the conference, that concerned with women's
liberation. Women attending the conference, acting
in a manner reminiscent of the Black Student
Unions at U.S. colleges, banded together and plan
ned their action themselves., Inviting males if they
cared to come.
The issue was easily the most controversial
of the conference. During Friday's plenary on
"Women's oppression," charges of male chauvinism
flew as fast and hard as did charges of bourgeois
elitism In the more ideologically oriented sessions.
Panelists from New York and Canadian
women's movements agreed that women are trap
ped la their roles as sex objects, mothers,
housewives, the weaker sex. and workers capable
of only menial tasks like baby-sitting and
secretarial work. "This fact Is coming down on
every woman like the draft is coming down on
American men," said one panelist.
Others pointed out that North Vietnamese
women have formed the backbone of Viet Cong
resistance and called for better birth control pills,
legal abortions, and movement day care centers
o a
S 0
for children as a means of freeing women to engage
in the actual waging of the revolution.
A woman In the audience laid the protest
movement Is filled with male supremtets because,
"Revolution Is a virile trap." Like the manhood
rites held by many Indian and African tribes,
participation in a revolutionary activity serves as
a test of manhood, she said.
Some males objected to the Idea of Women's"
liberation on the grounds that it would split, not
unify the protest movement. Women countered,
saying that females need to be "strong autonomous
individuals" if the revolution Is to succeed.
Of the Americans at the conference, Klonsky,
a former national secretary of SDS, was the best
received. He likened the worker to a fish who
sees a worm at the end of a fishing line, the
worm representing the immediate gains possible
under capitalism. "We've got to convince him It's
in his best Interests not to eat that worm," he
The cultural revolution was much in evidence
at the conference. While some went to a
performance by American folkslnger Phil Ochs
Friday night (he donated proceeds to radical
causes), others attended a sort of participation
theatre put on by a group calling Itself the "Theatre
passe Murallle."
Members of the cast, beating on pots, garbage
can tops, and other impedimenta of percussion,
divested themselves of most of their clothes and
eventually enticed the audience onto the stage,
then outside In the 30 degree weather to ogle the
moon, then back Inside where something called
a "group grope" was held.
In the women's lounge, a group of delegates
took up empty pop cans and banged them together
in an eerie, high-pitched jungle beat, chanting like
Bengal warriors across the room every now and
then. Saturday night, the Vancouver Street Theatre
presented "The Bribe," a play about a hippie nam
ed Luchessi who wished to go to bed wi!h this
girl whose father, disliking him on sight, bribed
the local cops to have him Jailed.
The moral of this play, described here only
superficially, was that money gets you. Anything,
and under capitalism, only a few can share the
wtalth. Hence, a few have lots of anything they
want, and the rest can't get anything, regardless
of their desires. At the play's conclusion, the au
dience, perhaps weary of the conference's fac
tionalism and lad to be able to agree on someihing
together, formed chains of people whirling merrily
around the room