4
Thursday, October 9.1975
University Daily Kansan
DRUG line needed
The Dial DRUG line, which made its debut in Lawrence in April, was recently criticized by the Lawrence City Commission for reporting that heroin was being used by Lawrence High School students.
Some members of the commission thought that by giving out such information they could describe certain drug "fantastic" digital DRUG line would promote drug abuse.
The drug line could be much more effective in meeting its goal of providing drug information if its operators took a less floppy attitude toward drug abuse. However, the need for the drug line is unquestionable.
The fact is that some people are going to use drugs, regardless of what a drug line is.
A recorded message that says heroin is available to high school students won't cause those who have never considered trying heroin to say, "Wow! I think I'll try getting high on that for a change."
If a high school student is actually using heroin, he is doing it to compensate for inadecquacies in his life. When such inadecquacies exist and the tendency to abuse narcotics is present at age 16 or 17, the existence of drug use will have no effect on whether the student actually tries hard drugs.
There are two ways of dealing with a problem. One is to try to bring it to attention, or to bring it to the attention of someone else.
By seeking to suppress the Dial DRUG line, the city commission is advocating the second alternative. If heroin abuse is a problem in the high school, it won't be solved if people refuse to admit or recognize it.
The Dial DRUG line is actually
rendering a public service by bringing the problem out in the open. If there are heroin addicts in the high school, they won't be helped unless people become aware that there is heroin abuse in the high school.
Drug laws will never be universally obeyed because they deal with questions of ethics. If someone sees nothing wrong with smoking pot or taking acid, chances are that the existence of a law won't stop him from doing it.
The city commission can deny the fact that people in Lawrence use drugs, but the denial doesn't change the fact that they do. This isn't a utopia where everyone is a law abiding citizen. Some laws here and there live by their own subjective ethics rather than a universal code of morals.
Since drug use can't realistically be controlled, the next best thing to do is to protect the lives of those who choose to use drugs.
Although lethal drugs are sold infrequently in Lawrence, there is the possibility that someone out to make a few bucks might substitute strychnine for mescaline. The Dial DRUG line frequent people from taking their last trip
Even though drug users are breaking the law, they are human beings with a right to live. If the drug line can save the life, it will have rendered a service.
Although perhaps the format of the Dial DRUG line should be changed, it shouldn't be discontinued. If the city commission votes to discontinue the drug line, it will be doing a great disservice to the community.
Jain Penner Contributing Writer
Jain Penner
Nothing about Gerald Ford's present actions reminds him of the past, so free is McClory's nature of that "corrosive cynicism deplored by men of Kaiser, who is actually the committee's adversary in the present struggle.
When Richard Nixon in the spring of 1974 ignored requests and defied subpoenas for his tapes and sent the committee to remove him, he heavily deceived transcripts, McCloyne amplied him.
So now he thinks it is wonderful that the CIA has spewed four volumes of materials to the committee and busy until the committee expires next January. The fact that it is not what the committee wants does not trouble McClary. "Always looks on the bright side."
Mary McGrory
WASHINGTON - The House Select Committee on Intelligence has the same problem as the House impeachment committee. His party is a fussy, amiable, building, sixterm Republican representative who, despite searing experiences with Richard Nixon, cannot bring himself to believe that any Republican president must keep anything from Conress.
"I am an optimist," he said sumily during the committee's deliberations about the next steen.
McClory's chairman, silver-haired, razor-tongued Otis Pike of New York, shook his head,
Just as he once saw Richard Nixon's stonewalling as a kind of military threat, Mr. McClory today divines in the CIA's refusal to provide information genuine desire to lead to its destruction.
Amnesiac stalls action
ground his teeth and broke into McClory's raptures.
"The reason I don't think we will get the material is because we haven't got it," Pike said sardonically.
McClory, in the end voted for two counts of impeachment, kept warning the committee that confrontation could be avoided. They also members go to the full House for support of their subpoenaes, they might lose. And if they go to court, they could lose a dlose time, which is, of course, what any the White House wants.
The members of the committee, who in general share a common interest in this CTA the "best intelligence system in the world" nor his
hope of White House compliance, voted 10-2 against the Clarence resolution to let the Clerk vote. "We only want it, not what it wants them to see."
Much damage was done to any residual good will by last week's arrogant appearance by the vice president Kissinger's State Department deputy and disciple, who could not conceal his resentment at being called down from the office of guarized by more Congressmen.
A beefy, belligerent man,
Eagleburger enunciated a doctrine that breathtakingly
shows the importance of advice to
"secretarial privilege."
The secretary of state, he told the amazed members, had decided that second-
level employees of the department could not testify. The argument made was that they must be spared public dersion for the bad advice they had given in confidence.
but the committee is following a course that shows that the underlings are being muzzled not because they gave bad information but because of information which was either brushed aside or cooked by superiors now badly in need of the confidentiality cloak. The history of the McCarthy era, ally evoked, was that the underlings were because they were wrong but because they were prematurely right.
House would regard the committee's request for a vote of confidence as "premature" seems more hopeful than realism and so he flung his glove to the floor without first having counted his troops.
McClory's fears that the
A decisive House vote of confidence, which could lead to a contempt citation for CIA Director William E. Colby, would eliminate for practical purposes the need of the FSA to court to use for its right to the documents. And it doesn't seem likely that in the face of House sentiment, Gerald Ford would take the initiative and go o to court to protect documents from Congress. He must occasionally be forced to box. (Bob) 1972 Washington Star Syndicate.
Readers Respond /
To the Editor:
Did you ever see the face of a person who'd just been told that William Shockley was going to debate his views with a professor here on the KU campus? The widening of the eyes, the excited half-smile = "good!" Indeed, what was Ward Harkayv's first reaction to the news?
Hypothesis: The vast majority of people at KU weren't looking forward to that debate because they thought it would be too painful for people to controversial ideas or any of the other commendable goals mentioned in Harkawy's editorial, "Cancellation Deplorable." In fact, I'm almost sure that the biggest problem in America has been exposed and discussed once or twice before.
Let's face it: the prospect of a debate between a convinced, "scientific" racist and a professor from this school was a difficult argument in which neither debater would, obviously, ever change views, on one of the most emotional subjects of our time, ending, with a little luck, in a screaming match between masters and shoving contests among the watchers! Ow, wow.
I, too, believe that racism must be expunged from our society. But the way to achieve this is through a better intellectual recognition, setting it up in a debate, and then showing how violently the vast majority of people at KU oppose racism in an atmosphere that is conducive to progress.
Ward Harkavay, of course, did give a great many people's automatic reaction to the cancellation of the debate. The answer is with automatic reactions is that they tend to be unthinkable.
Valerie J. Meyers Overland Park Senior
Open forum needed
To the Editor:
Before the first mention of his name in the Kani, many of the University community had never heard of William Schuyler, a founding of his purported theories, ranging from moral outrage to smug satisfaction for certain sectors of the white population. Most people were astounded that a scientist of Shockley's caliber would miss the good news he expressed reprehensible end. Others, pointed out that Shockley was a physicist, and dismissed his
Shockley's theory is that intelligence, as measured by the IQ test, is inheritable. In support of this theory, he cites scientific evidence from experiments in the fields of developmental psychology and genetics.
claims. They said Shockley wan't an expert in genetics and couldn't be taken seriously, not realizing that any scientist who wins the Nobel Prize is careless. He thought, regardless of the field.
Dr. Richard Lewontin,
professor of genetics at Harvard,
takes issue with Shockley's theories. Citing numerous experiments, he systematically refutes the claim that Shockley uses and subsequently invalidates the theory of inheritance of IQ.
This is the scientific method. Only those theories that stand up to scientific scrutiny over a period of time will survive. An open forum for all ideas, no questions, is necessary. Rehe前应 they may seem, is absolutely necessary if the method is to work. By canceling the Shockley-Goldsbay debate, the KU community has succeeded only in yelling louder against yellers in theory, rather than discrediting and forever silencing them.
Bob Hermann
St. Louis Graduate Student
SUA Forums fickle
To the Editor:
about leaving a kitchen *kitchen?*. His qualification that the debate would have been of little consequence can only leave us with the sense of security; it's comforting to know that such bright, perceptive, narrow-minded individuals have a hand in selecting speakers for SUA Forums.
The recent cancellation of the Shockley-Goldsbay debate points out the dual evaluation by which SUA Forums evaluates its speaker series. On one hand, the speakers "attackors" such as Bernadette Devlin, Dick Gregory, Daniel Berrigan, Barbara Munick, ad infinitum, as in invited, renumerated, hospitably received speakers. On the other hand, the maniacus" such as Shockley, Vern Miller, Ronald Zeigler, H. R. Haladem, etc., who are either shunned by SUA Forums, or treated in such a derogatory manner by the University staff, apparently apparent the prejudicial feeling that that person's ideas and viewpoints are invalid.
Bengston's remarks that the debate would have been socially divisible may be true, but no less so. He was not sponsored by SUA Forums. The difference, I suppose, is that the antagonism would have been reduced to one and the same "sacred" sector of society (do I bear someone saying something
Rogers' indirect broadside on what some would call the scientific method should redirect the University in its research activities. I had to convince them to evaluate facts on their merit (or lack of same) rather than their source.
As a matriter of clarification, I personally have no judgment as to Shockley's theories (with the exception of relating to semiconductor device technology). I have heard neither arguments for nor arguments against his theories, and it would be prejudicial for him to believe that situation without doing so. Can this not be true for others as well?
thousand dollars! That's a lot of money to spend on a debate on whether blacks are stupid (even though SUA apparently hoped for a clear negative), and they want the money on demonstrations of black brilliance. Do you realize that the money could have gone to the poets Imamu Baraka and Nikki Golovni or the musicians Archie Shepp and Ornette Coleman or maybe to Jacob Blake or Rizal Quatale? And then we would all have benefited.
Then I learned that the debate is to be paid for nonetheless, and that the cost is $2,000. Two
It was with initial relief that I read the report in Friday's Kansan of the cancellation of the Shockley-Goldsby debate. Although we do not oppose Shockley's right to speak, mainly for tactical reasons, we are still reluctant to spend money wasted on such rubbish. A debate on the genetic inferiority or non-inferiority of black people, indeed. That sounds about as worthwhile as reopening the discussion on whether the Earth is really flat or whether the Tear ruled by divine right. I was glaue to see this report and had been saved, as I figured it could run into $300 or $400.
Theory foolish
David Petrie
Pratt Graduate Student
To the Editor:
This is not to say that Shockley's ideas are insignificant and harmless. Far from it. This country is currently witnessing an upheaval in the polarization between these forces and the enemies of racism. The KKK and Nazis are organizing and recruiting, civil rights are under attack and the present economic crisis is hardest of all. The forces of racism range over an entire spectrum of methods and public faces, from the mobs in Boston which have brutally beaten blacks fortunate enough to be brought into their neighborhoods, through the President of the United States and other officials whose public
pronouncements encourage racist violence, to professors who are personally participate in lynch mobs or even use words like "nigger" in public, but who give moral support with their racial beliefs.
William Shockley is not just a nice professor with some screwy ideas. He gives academic justification to a brutal movement which seeks to prevent equality of education for black children in Houston and which attempts to roll back the paltry gains won in the civil rights struggle.
The Young Socialist Alliance does not contend that Shockley and others like him should be used in the teaching we have too much first-hand experience with the denial of freedom of speech and we know against whom it would later be used—with the promise that ways to use the sponsorship of the University and the activity fees of students.
Chris Sart
Organizer, Young Socialist
Alliance
Beware of old age!
If you are 20 years old, unsightly and overgrown—beware! The same reasons were given by the University of Kansas for the removal of the Russian olive trees around the Chi Omega fountain.
To the Editor:
Robin Walker
Robin Walker
Shawnee Mission Senior
Kerry Kapfer
Lawrence Senior
Firemen supported
To the Editor:
This is in reply to the opinion expressed by Jain Penner of the Kansas City, Mo., striking fireman. Penner should buy a stove to heat the room and enable her to see both sides of the conflict, as a very blased picture was provided. Therefore, I will present the conflict of the conflict. Some very important facts were omitted in the story.
The first significant fact that was omitted was the reason for the fireman's strike in the first place. Pemer states that "after several threats and warnings, the 848 firemen staged a walkout demanding higher pay. They wrote to her asking for $10,200." She neglected to say that the reason the fireman struck was to achieve pay parity with the public employee such as the police force.
The job of firemen is ever bit as dangerous as the job of policemen, and as such, the men are entitled to equal pay.
The article also fails to point out any of the other important facets of the dispute, except the fact that it created a public discontent. In addition, the fact that the firemen were completely ready to negotiate, arbitrate, mediate or take care of the dispute in any manner feasible. The only holdup was the failure to present an image as a candidate for vice-president, the mayor, Charles Wheeler, took an uncompromising stand and refused to negotiate until the mayor agreed thus enabling him to attain the bargaining advantage.
While it is true that public employees are forbidden by law to strike, the right to strike is the only weapon of organized labor that is powerful enough to bring management to the bargaining table. If the right to strike had been retracted from unions or union strikes, the working masses would have remained unorganized, repressed and working 12 hours a day for substandard wages. Therefore, it wouldn't be correct to punish
the firemen for expressing their sole weapon—the right to strike. Norman Spero Kansas City, Kan. Sentor
Judgment chided
To the Editor:
1
Does the University Daily Kansan news staff now plan to expand their sensationalistic tone and increase its cteditselling RU students? I presume that the answer is no because such details are neither interesting nor pertinent and instead, they are in a newspaper of this size.
In addition, despite the article in Monday's Kansan concerning a "stabbing," a more serious injury to a student in the same living group was ignored, presumably because it occurred during an intramural football game.
I must question the priorities of a newspaper which dedicates four inches of space to an unanticipated permanent consequence while in the same issue only seven lines describe the selection of new panhelenic officers, whose work requires a living environment of more than 800 students for the next year and beyond.
Cronite said live coverage of the speech would mean that any
By JOHN JOHNSTON Assistant Campus Editor
Ford's TV campaign checked
In a surprise, precedent-setting move Monday night, the CBS and NBC networks refused the request of President Ford for a prime-time broadcast of his message on tax cuts. Although the story received attention at the time, its effects are important contributions to election reform since Watergate.
The Kansas City Times chose to bury the story on page 44 of Tuesday morning's edition, but you can be sure the story was given a bit more attention at jobs in Washington. The action could have far reaching effects could have far reaching effects on the electoral process.
By JOHN JOHNSTON
Walter Crankite told his viewers Monday night CBS News reported President's message wouldn't be carried because Ford was a declared candidate for the presidential nomination.
Bill Blessing
Lake Quivira Junior
other declared candidate for the Republican nomination could demand equal time for his own "message" under regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
The action taken by the two networks is encouraging. The question of how much network activity has long been at the heart of the election reform issue. Challengers in the past have argued they didn't have the resources to power the campaign against president. The limits recently placed on spending have further
The network said when urgent situations arose, live coverage of presidential addresses would be provided.
It is difficult to decide when a president is using television or radio, when he is using it in the interest of the people. Presidents should have access to the news, but this right can be missed.
The equalizing effect of this
restricted their ability to compete.
Presidents receive enormous nightly coverage anyway, as they make their way along the campaign trail tiffing babies and shaking hands with the common man.
The danger of this situation was evident during Nixon's presidency. Nixon not only used television far more than any of his predecessors, but he dogged the confrontations of the press conference far more than most presidents. Through the use of television he could present his opinion unchallenged, from the confines of his office to the streets of Lincoln and pictures of his family as props.
move on the electoral process may be small, but it is significant and should be applauded. It's good to know that
all the "nattering nabobs of negativism" aren't sleeping. There are a few good watchdogs left.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Published at the University of Kansas wesam-*
*and edu-tion. Postage paid during academic*
*periods. Second-class postage paid at Law-
nard's post office, or $12 per semester or*
$13 per year in DePaul County and $14 per*
subscriptions are $1.35 per subscription paid through
Editor Dennis Ellsworth
Associate Editor Campus Editor
Debbie Gump Carla Young
Dobble Group John Johnson
Assistant Campus Editors John Johnson
Chief Photographer David Crawshaw
Staff Photographers George Miller III
Sports Editor Penny Price
Sports Editor Abaoulahkhan
Sports Editor
Business Manager
Assistant Business Manager Advertising Manager
Assistant Business Manager Advertising Manager
Associate Advertising Manager Bory Carman
Anti-Sales Manager Lin-Richaye
Classified Advertising Manager Gary Burch
Advertising Manager Debbie Service
National Advertising Manager Matt Winters
Promotion Manager Dale Davis
Photographer Debbie Watts