Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 31, 1973)
At the Impeachment rally Saturday, one
youngster made reference to the possible
assassination of the President. Whether the remark
was a statement of opinion or a rhetorical devise is
unknown. But one thing seems certain: something is
dreadfully wrong in our society when murder would
even be suggested, no matter what the context, as a
solution to a political problem.
Perhaps the root of this kind of thinking lies in
events of the last decade. Beginning with the 1963
assassination of President John F. Kennedy, those
years were marred with violence. The young must
bear its scars.
But beyond historical events, there are immediate
causes. One of them must be TV violence,
particularly in children's cartoon shows and some
commercials. A study quoted in U.S. News & World
Report showed that nine out of 10 cartoons aired in
the 1972-73 television season depicted some kind of
This is distressing when one considers that today's
child, by the time he is graduated from high school,
will have spent more time in front of the boob-tube
than in the classroom. Psychologists know there is a
relationship between the amount of violence viewed
and the aggression levels of the viewers. Children are
more inclined to be aggressive after watching violence
than are adults.
The programs, however, are not the only villains.
TV commercials also must take their toll. During a
one-minute commercial for a martial arts movie, one
can watch necks being broken, stabbings, eyes being
gouged out, people being lashed with karate sticks,
and other atrocities committed.
If the networks won't cut back their violence diet,
then Congress must. The minds of young people
should not be allowed to be influenced in this way.
Michael (O.J.) Nelson
A letter from the editor
This isn't an editorial; it's more like an
explanation. Its subject is errors.
Occasionally, a mistake appear in the Daily
Nebraskan, the kind of mistake not often found in a
professional publication. When one appears, it is due
not to malice, but to human frailty, and when that
happens we make an apology in the form of a
It is these errors which might perhaps help us
appreciate the student press. For it is on the student
press where many professional newsmen make their
first slip-ups. Because they have made them while
working for a student publication and felt shame in
making them, they might make fewer mistakes later.
The Daily Nebraskan always tries to publish
accurate information. When we err, we criticize
ourselves as severely as those persons who we criticize
in our editorials for the errors they make.
The Daily Nebraskan staff will continue to try to
produce the best publication possible.
Michael (O.J.) Nelson
Uftte-DV 4Bu11Zi WwOofiRiKiCr 40 YfeACSoJ TClMlCWaJ6S
v wr'"' .:- C"
By Jawad Azzeh
Jawad Azzc'n is from Pakistan. He is a graduate student in
Tor the fourth ti.ne in 25 years, the Middle East is faced
with another war and another ceasefire.
Will this be the last war? And will this ceasefire bring a
lasting peace in that area of the world? These are the questions
we must ask ourselves. The answer to these questions is simple
if one tries to be objective in discussing the issues behind the
continued conflict there. There must be justice to all the
people of the Mideast and the rights of the Palestinian people
must be restored.
Since the creation of the State of Israel in 1943, 1.5
million Palestinians are living in camps under miserable
conditions. They were driven out of their homes and their
lands, so that Jews from all over the world might resettle in
their homeland. One cannot expect such acts to be tolerated in
the space age in this so called "civilized world."
The United Nations has adopted one resolution after
another for the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian
people. All were ignored by Israel.
Noi only that, hut in 19G7, poor Israel, which is
surrounded by Arabs who want to destroy it, as Israeli
propaganda machines claim, attacked three Arab countries and
occupied their lands. U.N. resolution No. 242 of November
19G7 was adopted, calling upon Israel to return all occupied
Aral) territories and to restore the Palestinian rights.
Again Israel ignored the resolution to gain time, assuming
that time is on its side. Israeli officials repeatedly said that the
return of the Golan Heights, the Ga?a Strip, Jerusalem, and
Sharm El Sheikh is not negotiable. Israel insisted on
adjustments lo its pre -19G7 borders. This position is in direct
conflict with U.N. resolutions and U.S. declarations over the
past 20 years, which rerognie ii. independence and the
tenitorial integrity of all nations in the aiea.
But was this U.S. policy applied since 19G7? The answer is
no. It seems this principle is applied only in favoi of Israel.
Otherwise, how could the United States continue to supply
arms to Israel while it occupies the lands of three Arab
countries, and defies all U.N. resolutions on the disputed
issues? Or how could the United States veto a Security Council
resolution demanding an Israeli withdrawal from all occupied
Arab territories? And does the United States expect the Arab
people to continue their friendly relations with this country?
Shouldn t the Arabs use their resources to defend their
existence? Or could the use of oil for the defense of those
legitimate rights be called blackmail?
The Arab people have always been friendly to the United
ot-.es. They would like such friendly ,elations to continue, on
the ba.is of mutual respect and interests. It is therefore
;mp..Tat,ve that the U.S. try to preserve those relations by
"la; ,K,li,:V towa.ds Arabs and Israelis. Such a
cwLZf! 9 1 a jmt ,K'i,cc ,o al1 thc countrics
if nAVfn1 M"lt' hra,;l WUld U! 10
rir I wire W I FT-""'" COn,'UCit' Wars do l
li I .- V h,m'J ,norc wars- Th-' o'y way to
Arab I ii ids J '" return all conquered
" ' , ;:;'J,,,T ,h,!.ljW,ul ,i''h,s of Palestinian
(M.opie to return lo their homeland.
wnrlnnsday, October 31, 1973
Powered by Open ONI