Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (May 7, 1971)
William F. Buckley, Jr .
Busing and the court
W 1 JIS
lv Nfc. M
." ; 1
time for the same illicit,
A few years back, when
the minds of the American
been regarded as seditious.
TnHav compliance with
- -j - i- t
lead Americans to prove
lave been no
Is of the open ,
Vie side had the
fesday's open he
Jipport to State
I most surprising
. The two had I
i their fellow sti.
!nt Nixon's pol .
iis full support 7
Js support the
jport the resolifi'-i:
1 no research pd .
1 70 per cent of
ort it. What's
4igh "Do it forL
the most impel '
i li Nebraska, likp
jhat students ar
h made out to be
. They want
!md its sacrednE .
ng that they wat :
have learned a
a the attainmel
j be incompatitt
!t majority is J
parent to all Art
ling up is being;
h emissaries lil
Ither things, he I
Jig said his govq
' and more time
1 to the edit
War. Perhaps th
Vesent its views.
f ration, speaKer;
tame from two
I their school anc
ila faster withdr
fman of the Deri
. 6 is a movement
. iducted on the b
;. hd students whe
i braska Republic
& officially opft
1 . I
,-of the hearing
1p in many oth
t part, they're p
ie earth. Theyj
I to conserve fit
1 continue to k
Itructive to all c
fhe human was
the South Viet!
Tung. He's tr
I D.C. and spol
Ity to bring his i
Ivernment of T
Imagine that, a;
f the Nazi war i
ince with such i
is not seditioi
L i .
: t 70
if lriatiriv nrvirkii'rtl I
WASHINGTON-"The footprints (of the Soviet missiles)
indicate that they just happen to fall in somewhat the precise
area in which our Minuteman silos are located."
That was President Nixon in June of 1969. It is essential to
understand both the truth and the falseness of what the
President said in order to understand and assess what the
secretary of defense and Sen. Henry Jackson (D-Wash.) are
now asking us to do.
WHAT THE PRESIDENT said was true. An intelligence
analysis of a single Russian missile test matched on an overlay
one of our land-based missile sites. But what the President was
suggesting-that all of our missile sites were in danger because
the Russians had developed their ovn version of MIRV- was
not true. It was, in fact, dangerously false. Yet partly on fhe
basis of the President's statement, the Congress
authorized-and we are now proceeding to build-two ABM
sites at a cost of $3 to $4 billion.
Two ABMs represented a near-defeat for the Pentagon. It
wants a lot more. On the drawing boards right now are $12 to
$15 million worth of ABM system, and the American people
are just beginning to hear the alarm essential to their approval.
This time the alarm is not "footprints," but holes in the
ground. According to Sen. Jackson, our intelligence satellites
show that the Russians have recently dug 41 new holes. He
hypothesizes that these new holes are for a newly designed
CARRY THE PENTAGON hypothesis a little further. Why
would the Russians build and install such a missile? To knock
out our land-based missiles. And what can we do about it?
Build more ABMs.
Like the President's alarm of last year, there is truth to the
new one. Nobody doubts our intelligence agencies' report that
satellites reveal 41 new holes. But once again, the suggestion
that the 41 new holes- or as many more as the Soviets
dig -will give them a decisive nuclear-strategic superiority
unless we counter with more ABMs is dangerously false.
It is false, first, because we have no evidence that the Soviet
Union has tested MIRV.
SECOND, if the Russians do possess MIRV, and are
building the holes in order to install a MIRV successor to the
SS-9, it will delay their nuclear threat by three or more years.
In 1969, Secretary Laird estimated that the U.S.S.R. would
have 420 operational missies by 1974. Our deterrent has been
predicated on this estimate. If in fact the Soviet Union is now
starting a new weapons system, it will be almost impossible for
them to reach the target date we have already prepared for.
Third, the deterrent we have planned-according to
Defense -is still impregnable. It is based upon 5,000
underwater weapons, less than 100 of which would be
sufficient to wipe out the Soviet Union. Secretary Laird is on
record about this deterrent as follows:
"According to our best current estimates, we believe that
our submarines can be considered virtually invulnerable today.
With a highly concentrated effort, the Soviet navy might today
be able to localize and destroy at sea one or two submarines.
But the massive and expensive undertaking that would be
required to extend such a capability. . . would take time and
would certainly be evident."
SO THE CURRENT ALARM should not cause anybody to
tremble-or to ask for more ABMs. Perhaps the new holes in
the Russian ground represent ah effort to harden their missle
fits. If so, the Russians are only registering their fear that we
are preparing a pre-emptive strike-a fear precisely matching our
Sen. Jackson and the Pentagon budget-builders nc speaKs
for may be right. But if so, the new Soviet missile is one we
have already prepared for in advance. The Soviet move-if it is
a move-can thus only be regarded as delaying a threat.
MICK MORIARTY, editor
CONNIE WINKLER, managing editor
JOHN DVORAK, news editor
GENE HILLM AN, advertising manager
JAMES HORNER, chairman, publications committee
Slaff wrl.enr. Gary Se.crest, Maha ltanert.D.e Brink.
Carol Goefchlu., Steve Stra-ser Bart Becker M'ke Wilkin .
Charlie Hardier, Marsha Kahm, Steve Kadel Dennis Snyder,
Ann l'ede?Sen, Roxanne Rog.ra.Vkkl Fuloa. Steve Arv.netta.
SporU editor: Cull Folda, Bill Ganel. Fntertalnment editor.
U ry Ku"er. Literary editor: Alan Boye. Fast campua
editor Marline T.mmerm.n. Art.ats: L.nd , Lake. Greg
Scott Design editor: Jim Gray. Copy editors. Tom
Unsworth Bm Sm.therman. Laura Wll.ers. Night editor: Leo
Schleicher. Night editorial assistant: Sara Trask.
Coord.na.or: Sandra Carter.
Hllger. Jane Kldwell. Ken Sevenker. Tom M H Owens
Business assistants: Janice Stapleman, C harlotte Owens.
Telephones: editor: 472-iS88. now: 2S81, advertising:
2 510. Second clasK postage rates paid at Lincoln, Nehr.
Subscription rales arc $5 per semester or $8.30 per year.
Published Monday through I riday during the school year
except during vacution and exam periods. Member ol Hie
Intercollegiule Press, National Educational Averting Service.
College Press Service.
Address: The Daily Nebraskun. .14 Nebraska Union.
University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Nebraska f.8508.
The recent decision by the Supreme Court
would appear to do more than merely authorize
busing in order to achieve school integration. It
can be read to require it.
Now it is important to recognize that the
Supreme Court has undertaken what no
previous court undertook to do.
Important-extremely important-to bear in
mind that the Supreme Court has undertaken
to do what no major politician ever
recommended. Take Senator Robert Kennedy,
whose instincts after he became famous were
always with the liberal-left in American politics.
Even so, Senator Kennedy, as far back as 1965,
came out against busing as a means of achieving
integration in the public schools.
I DO NOT adduce Senator Kennedy in order
to make an undeniable moral point. He is a
useful witness, it would seem, for an argument
based on political reality. That is to say, if the
left -Democratic wing of American politics
opposes busing, one must assume that, roughly
speaking, the whole of the political body politic
opposes busing. Does that mean only the whole
of the white body politics? The figures appear to
deny this. Even in 1965, a poll of the attitudes
of black citizens in New York City showed that
compulsory school integration had disappeared
from the list of the most wanted social reforms.
Now, six years later, the advocates of busing are
the ideologized integrationists of years gone by:
men of high ideals, and exemplary ambitions
for the Negro people, such men as Roy Wilkins
of the NAACP. But they are out of touch with
reality. So is the Supreme Court.
Charles Evans Hughes (who would become
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and
very nearly the president of the United States)
said it all plainly when he was governor of New
York. In a speech delivered on May 3, 1907:
. . I tell you, ladies and gentlemen, no
more insidious assault could be made upon the
independence and esteem of the judiciary than
to burden it with these questions of
administration-questions which lie close to the
public impatience, and in regard to which the
people are going to insist on having
administration by officers directly accountable
to them. . . You will turn upon our courts - the
final safeguard of our liberties - that hostile
and perhaps violent criticism from which they
should be shielded andwill be shielded if left to
the jurisdictions which it was intended they
THE DEFENDANTS, in the most recent
contention (Charlotte-Mecklenburg) tried
vainly to show the Supreme Court that it was
being asked to adopt a line of action altogether
different from the line in Brown v Board of
Education, in which the Court had ruled that
compulsory segregation was unlawful. "The
United States, in its brief to this Court in the
Brown case, said that under the Constitution,
'the decisive inquiry is whether race of color
has been entirely eliminated as a criterion in the
admission of pupils to public schools.' Insofar
as the plaintiffs have been able to ascertain,
nobody claimed anything in Brown save that
states should be required to cease excluding
children from schools and assigning children to
schools on the basis of race. Since this is all that
was asked or argued, is it not reasonable to say
that this is all that Brown decided, and that
Brown is not- authority for requirements
We all know what has now happened,
namely that the Supreme Court has ruled that
the color of a student's skin is precisely the
datum which must be considered by the school
board in determining to which school he shall
be sent. And, inasmuch as there are differences
of opinion among administrators, teachers,
parents, and, yes, children, on whether in any
particular situation you have got yourself a
prudential arrangement or a constitutional
crisis, the Supreme Court has now involved
itself in precisely the kind of thing that Chief
Justice Hughes warned against. And the
question, in an age when the desirability of
law-and-order means more and more, in
proportion as there is less and less law and
order, you have a situation in which the
Supreme Court, in pursuit of visions of racial
justice, is alienating white and black people,
separately; and, together, white and black
people who would settle gladly for a
Supreme Court that concerns itself for the
maintenance of old laws, rather than for the
improvisation of new ones.
Lincoln or Omaha
$90150 per wecEi
Excellent Working Conditions
Interviewing Monday, May 10
Room 225 Nebraska Union
FRIDAY, MAY X 1971
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
Powered by Open ONI