T7ho has the onus now?
During last Monday's meeting, Robert Raun,
president of the Board of Regents, announced that
the board had decided to divulge its reasons for
blocking the faculty appointment of Michael Davis.
Raun stated that the regents had approved the
"final form" of the letter and that it would be for
warded to Davis "for his release."
Those who were following the Davis case close
ly hoped that the reasons would be made public
soon and were encouraged when Davis (who had
not yet received the letter) stated that he could
"could think of no reason" why he would not re
lease them.
As the week wore on, there was increasing
criticism of Davis for not having released the letter
and speculation grew that the regents' arguments
were so strong that they had silenced him. How
ever, in a telephone conversation last evening,
Davis said he was composing a reply and that a
copy of the regents' letter and his reply would be
mailed to Dr. Robert Dewey, chairman of the
Philosophy Department.
Davis also mentioned that he didn't receive the
letter till Friday, four days after the regents an
nounced that the "final form" had been approved,
and that the letter would be "forwarded." He also
said that the postmark on the regents' letter head
Oct. 14 two days after the board's announce
ment. This is not the first time that correspondence
from the regents has moved so slowly. During their
first September meeting, the regents stated that a
reply to a letter from Davis had been composed and
would be sent to him. That was on a Monday and
Davis had not received the letter by noon of the fol
lowing Friday. Davis, however, gave his permission
to release that letter to The Nebraksan on Thurs
day evening.
By procrastinating, the Board of Regents has
damaged Michael Davis' position in the public eye.
Their own slowness has appeared to be Davis' and
has brought him unjust criticism. Since no facts
have yet been made known, much of Davis' credi
bility rests on appearances and it is most unforturn
ate that the regents should damage this man's posi
tion because of their tardiness while no shadow
falls on them.
Sheldon's short shorts
The Nebraska Union will sponsor "Short Suite".,
a series of ten short films, at Sheldon Gallery on
Tuesday. In the past few years, poor attendance
has marked the Sheldon film series and finally
forced its closing. The Nebraskan hopes that efforts
such as "Short Suite" will be a success and that an
audience for this sort of entertainment can be cul
tivated and that one day the Gallery might able
to sponsor its own series again.
THE NEBRASKAN
Telephones: Editor; 42-2508, Business: 472-2SW, Newt: 4H-25TO. Second clasa
postage cjid at Lincoln. Neb.
Subscription rates ere $5 per semester or M.SO per year. Published Monday.
Wednesday, Thursday and Friday during fha school year exepnt during vaca
tions and exam periods. Member ot the Intercollegiate Press, National Educa
tio'ot Advertising Service.
The Nr-brasKan Is student publication. Independent f the University of Neb
rnslia's administration, faculty and sludent government.
Address: The Nubroskan
Z4 Hsbi a:si.a Union
University ot Nebraska
Lincoln, Nebraska 85U
Editorial Staff
Editor: Kelley Baker; Managing Editor: Connie Winkler) News Editor: Bill
Smllherman; Sports Editors: Jim Johnston and Rooer Rite; Nebraskan Staff
Writers: Cory Severest, John Dvorak, Mick Morlarty, Dave Brink, Steve
Slrasser, Sue Schafer, Steve Kadel, Pat McTee, Carol Goerschlust Photogia
pivrs: O.in Ladely, Mike Hay man; Entertainment Editor: Fred E'senharti
Liturary Editor: Alan Boye; News Assistant: Marsha Bangers Copy Editors:
Laura Partsch, Jim Gray, Warren Obr, Blythe Erlckson; Night Newt Editor:
lorn Lansworth, Night News Assistant: Leo Schleicher.
Business Staff
Business Manager: Pat OINatBlei Coordinator: Sandra Carter; Subscription
and Clavjitied Ad Manaqer; Jan Boatman; Salesmen: Oreo. Scott, I. Jan
Kidwell, J. J. shields; Circulation Managers: Chuck Baldulf, Barry Pilger,
John Waggoner.
w
$H$flpy i-
Vv"
7J,
'There's a bomb set to go off . . .
Our man hoppe
Slaughter of the innocents
by Arthur Hoppe
A young girl I know and love phoned
me the other morning, her voice uneasy
and unsure.
She hud been awakened in her college
dormitory by the loudspeaker. It ordered
her to evacuate her room immediately.
An anonymous caller had warned that
a bomb had been planted somewhere
on the campus.
"Do you know anything about it?"
the young girl asked hopefully. I said
I didn't, but I'd cheek. Should I call
her back? "No," she said, "I guess
it doesn't really matter, does it?"
What she wanted from me, I think,
was reassurance some verity in this
new world of bombings, kidnapings and
hijackings where innocence is no pro
tection. I couldn't give it to her. I said the
things you say: Don't worry, it's pro
bably just a hoax. Don't worry, don't
worry . . .
"I know," she said and I could sense
her fear. "But it's un awful way to
start the day."
This time, it was a hoax. This time,
there was no bomb. And yet I think
the fear, hers and mine, was justified.
I don't so much fear the bombs. The
chances of my being blown to bits are,
thus far at least, infinitesimal. What
1 fear Is the self-righteousness of the
bombers these young people who
would slaughter the innocent to build
a better world.
I have met a few. In many ways
I admire them. The ones I met are
bright. They are dedicated to doing good
for mankind. They are ready to sacrifice
themselves for their Ideals. And they
are oh-so-tcrribly sure they are right.
I fear this most.
For each man must justify to himself
what he does. How much easier it is
to Justify your means when you are
absolutely certain your ends are
righteous. How easy it was for Lee
Harvey Oswald. How easy it was for
Sirhan Sirhan.
"What does it matter if a few innocent
people die here?" these young militants
say. "You are slaughtering thousands
of innocent people in Vietnam. The
System must be destroyed."
How sure they are of this. To prevent
the slaughter of innocents, they would
slaughter the innocents.
"We'll spread fear," they say. "And
when The System is frightened enough,
it will react with repression. And when
the repression becomes bad enough, the
people will join in our revolution."
And what frightens me is not that
they may be wrong in these tactics,
but that they may be right.
For the fear is spreading now. A few
innocent people have been killed, a score
of buildings blown up, a hundred bomb
hoaxes called in.
On Capitol Hill, Congressmen
nervously debate more repressive anti
crime legislation. The fear i s
spreading.
An! with it comes an unease. Kor
our system is bused on the concept
that innocence is the best protection
from harm. And now innocence is no
protection at all.
So it may come. In the ugliness of
our fear, in our own self-righteousness,
we may set forth to hunt down and
kill these bombers, slaughtering the in
nocents who get In our way.
Perhaps, in the end, the bombers may
even win. But I don't think they will
build a better world. For I keep thinking
buck to that young girl the way
her voice sounded, the way she had
been awakened to another day.
And I think that if you must
methodically set about to frighten even
one innocent young girl to build a new
world, it won't be a damned bit better
than the one w e've got.
PAGE 4
THE NEBRASJCAN
MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1970
