4
Tuesday, September 21, 1976
University Daily Kansan
Comment
Opinions on this page reflect the view of only the writer.
Student voice needed
When the College Assembly meets today, something will be missing. That something is student representation.
The Assembly, which is the governing body for the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, is supposed to have about 600 members—150 of them students. But many were scheduled last spring to form an elections committee, no students came.
AS A result, there were no elections and, therefore, no student representatives. And there won't be any student representatives until October, when the Assembly会议 will probably be before the Student Senate elections already planned.
Now for the important question: What difference does it make?
Does it really hurt students to be without representation on the Assembly a couple of months later? A couple of years longer? Would hurt if there was no assembly? At all?
THESE ARE not especially offbeat or deviant questions. In fact, both the readers who didn't yawn and skip this editorial as soon as they saw the headline have probably asked themselves similar questions already. For most students, college government is a mysterious and extremely boring thing.
And, as far as mysterious and boring are concerned, most students are
probably right. But mysterious and boring don't necessarily mean useless.
Believe it or not, the Assembly really does have a reason for existing and, believe it or not, student representation on the Assembly really does matter.
THE ASSEMBLY votes on curriculum changes, drop-add policy, major requirements, and more issues. These are matters that can and do affect the student.
Of course the Assembly may go for months without voting on anything important and, during such meetings, the student representatives prove themselves by letting SenEx and other powerful executive committees do all the dirty work.
BUT EVERY once in a while something different will come along. An administrator has a solution he wants to "see implemented." Maybe it is a student representatives can make a few suggestions and help vote it through.
The truth about Kennedy
Or if it is a bad one, the students can fight it and at least try to add a few nonadministration, nonfaculty opinions.
Only 25 per cent of the Assembly members are students, so they can't be counted as members. Only 10 per cent is better than 0 per cent, and a squeaky voice is better than none.
By Jim Bates
Editorial Editor
The House of Representatives took a long overdue step Friday when they voted to investigate the nomination of President Kennedy.
For a dozen years, the official pronouncement of the United States government has been that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, was guilty of murdering John Kennedy in Dallas. The Justice Department headed by the Chief Justice of the United States, Earl Warren, said it had found no evidence of conspiracy.
THE COMMISSION ruled that Oswald, from the Texas School Book Depository above, had been arrested in morocco, had fired one bullet that went through Kennedy's neck and injured Texas Gov. John Connally and another officer, who failed to缴封 the President in the head.
There are those who still believe that this—the Warren Commission's version of what occurred—is true. And there works because we believe a radio works because there is a little man inside.
In 1966 and 1967, several books were published that seriously questioned the findings of the Warren Commission. As more has become known about the proceedings of the commission, more and more people have come to question the Warren Commission was set up to establish political truth, to stamp out rumors of conspiracy. Its job wasn't to find the real truth.
TRANSCRIPTS OF THE commission's meetings show that at every turn the committee has come up with new theories their theory that Oswald acted
Greg Hack Contributing Writer
However, the commission then analyzed a film of the assassination, taken by a Dallas dressmaker, Abraham Zapurder. The film showed that the time between Kennedy's death and Connally's being hit was too short for Oswald to have fired a shot, reloaded and fired again.
The commission needed a new theory, one that would explain why he had shot Kennedy and Connally. The commission adopted the theory that one bullet struck Kennedy, exited from the front of his neck, and hit Con'ni
alone. They were ready to print that Oswald fired one shot that struck Kennedy in the back, another shot that hit Connally and a third shot that killed Kennedy.
THE THEORY, being untrue,
had its problems. Secret Service men riding in the car behind Kennedy testified that the first bullet that hit Kennedy entered below his right shoulder. A second bullet the bullet, if fired from above by Oswald, would have had to enter the upper portion of Kennedy's neck to exit from the
other questions to be asked by the investigative committee established last week. Was Oswald involved in the crime at all, or was he framed? Who else was involved?
IT SHOULD BE clear that, by 1967, anyone who read the Warren Report and the books by its critics knew that the single-bullet theory—the only way Oswald could possibly have acted alone—was at best a one in a billion possibility.
It is known that organized crime hated Kennedy, because the President and his brother Robert, then attorney general, were waging a war on organized crime. It is known that many Cubans, bitter over the Bay of Pigs, fought with the President. And it is known that the CIA, which Kennedy had vowed to reorganize or dismantle, was unhappy with the President.
Letters
Liquor laws set state's morals
To the Editor:
Re: "Kansas Liquor Laws Unprofitable" in the issue of Sept. 16:
The writer seems to believe that the liquor laws of the state need changing because of the added revenue the state pays for alcohol. The state realized that current regulations give the people of Kansas a legitimate choice; the state does not officially condone drinking, but offers private clubs, or those to whom they must have alcohol.
The writer implies that because present laws do not curb drinking, we should legalize it. If this is true, why don't we legalize murder? Present laws don't curb that too successfully. The point of the law is to set a moral standard for the state, one that the people have supported by referrents in the past.
readily accept the testimony of two doctors who contradicted their earlier autopsy report, and of Kennedy's wounds in the Warren Report or in its more than 28 volumes of testimony
without providing any solution to the alcohol problem." Would making open saloons legal provide a real solution to the problem? (Come to talk of it, maybe it would—everyone would drink in the saloons, become socialites and then the problem would be solved—even though no one would be left in the state.)
Finally, the writer states that the present laws "hurt the state's business
One must question the goals and morals of society when the almighty dollar is worth more than the lives that have been lost. These are goals I frankly do not approve.
wound in the front of his neck. Agent Clint Hill, brought into the autopsy room specifically to examine the wounds, said the wound was below the shoulder, not in the President's neck. Two FBI men at the autopsy concurred with Hill.
Censorship just
In 1972, it became an impossibility. Cyril Wecht, a Pittsburgh coroner, was finally given permission to examine the photographs of Kennedy's wounds.
Does M. Driller (Kansan, Sept. 16)
give complete immunity for any
indecency any individual with a head full of
dollar signs and a soul full of nothing
The materials that were in question in the Wichita obscurity trial are debasing and demanding to the human procreative act and the relationship that develops it. They are depersonalizing, nourishing the viewing of people and the need to add to the already immense problem of depersonalization and alienation in our urbanized society. The are a disintegrative factor in a society in which every day, increasing numbers of people decide to blow their brains out—or the brains of mothers, their sisters, half a dozen menmen, or 23 of the nearest bystanders.
cares to publish while interests such as
*rabid fanatics?* . Forces are simply
*rabid fanatics?* .
The justification for some basic censorship lies simply in the age-old and traditional right of societies to legislate for their own survival.
Richard Burkard Kansas City, Kan. freshman
Three doctors performed the autopsy. The official diagram of wounds put the President's back wound six inches below the neck. Even in the face of this evidence, the commission said the back wound was instead a seek wound.
Mr. Fuller's dripping cynicism and contempt for Kansas, its citizens and their motives, is evident. I would suggest that if the gentleman is so concerned about the fate of the "successful and lurid sex journal" Screw, he should take one healthy step over the state line and concern himself with it there.
The Warren Commission did its job—to stamp out rumors of conspiracy. The hot political climate that followed the Missile Crisis was cooled down. But now, as rumors, destroyed the truth. Now it is time to try to find out who killed the President.
Damn reactionary, aren't I?
Thomas M. Krische
Lawrence junior
In regard to Ms. Daugherty's concert article of Sept. 15: Putting Bachman Turner Overdrive between Elton John and The Who in a story about great bands and the future of music between George Washington and Abe Lincoln in a photograph of great presidents.
Bands misplaced
To the Editor:
Wecht saw in the photographs that Kennedy's back wound was just that—a back wound. There was no wound in the back of Kennedy's neck, and the single-bullet theory was laid to rest.
Dan Harrell Larned junior
Energy policy is slowly fading
the soft shuffle of papers. The several agencies concerned with energy appear to be laboring mightly. Whatever shortages one hears about, these agencies report statements, reports, forms, speeches and miscellaneous publications.
THE ONLY "EVIDENCE" of the existence of a wound in the back of Kennedy's neck is the testimony of two of the doctors involved in the attack. A neck wound's existence after the commission had adopted the single-bullet theory. The commission failed to ask them why absolutely no mention had been made of a neck wound in the autopsy reports.
What ever became of a national energy policy? It hasn't been heard from latex. An uneasy impression will not go away that in terms of both conservation and development, we are drifting—just muddling along.
By JAMES KILPATRICK
embargo that began in October, 1973, had some good effect. For the first time, great numbers of our people became aware of certain rules that should have been evident all along.
Here in Washington, one listens for the impact of hard decisions, and one hears mainly
Suddenly came recognition that the United States, which depends on oil for its economic life, was critically dependent on crude. When the oil began to sink in that conservation and development
TWO OR three years ago, if you recall, it appeared that a small sense of urgency was beginning to take root. The oil
were problems not only for America, but for the world.
THE EMBARGO ended in mid-March of 1974. What happened to the fired-up sense of urgency? The steam leaked from the cabin as the conservation programs of 1974. Our cities are brightly lit by night. The 55-mile speed limit is universally disdained.
The American Petroleum Institute has the most
authoritative figures on the oil picture. This is the sobering fact: We are now importing 41 per cent of our demand. In the period immediately before the embargo, imports from Arab countries increased barrels a day. That figure is now 2 million barrels a day.
We have just about doubled the level of dependency on Arab states. Total imports of petroleum products are running at 6.8 million barrels a day, a demand of 16.7 million.
What will it take to revitalize the effort? Another embargo? Massive brownouts? Rigorous restrictions upon consumption, and another forthcoming. Once they get good and galvanized, the American people are the greatest bunch of three-shift, full-throttle, gung-hou miracle machines whose lively shock to get them going. Mere exhortations accomplish little, and statistics are a bore.
URGENCY HAS faded not only on the conservation side, but also on the development side. We ought to be far along in this direction, and we are promising offshore areas, but progress is exceedingly slow.
'WHITE LEDHANT ANYONE?'
We ought to be investing billions of energy programs—to harness infinite sources of energy in the sun, that produces hydrogen and the injection of water.
SO WE muddle along. The Alaskan pipeline should be brought in, and we bring in 600,000 to a million barrels a day. Four or five years hence, offshore wells may make an important con-
It is all pretty ifo, hh-oom and may-and-might. When it comes to an energy policy, the image of America is not the stern vignette of Uncle Sam. It is more like the magazine's Alfred E. Newman. What? Me worry! It's no way to lead the free world.
THERE ARE thousands of
What weaker sex?
Staff Writer
By CHUCK ALEXANDER
I have been aware of this fact since my shortpants days when one of my grade school teachers pointed out that worldwide, women outnumbered men almost two to one.
By the time I was in high school, I was taller, more mature and stronger than most girls my age, but it didn't seem much difference—they always seemed to get better grades.
But I was wrong.
With the curent efforts to
enhance self-defense in the art of
self-defense and with some
females sporting more brawn
than Mr. America, my claim to
superior strength is being
much more effective.
CONTENT with being taller and stronger than most women (I never wanted to be an Einstein anyway), I thought I'd found a place in life where I could live out my days unchallenged by the women of the world.
them from the rear for fear I'll be drawn and quarted before I can voice my harmless intentions.
I've also given up surprising women friends by grabbing
I NO LONGER feel an obligation to walk my date to her door because I think she's more able to defend herself than I am. I don't think I should be one who's attacked while walking back to the car.
IF ONLYL remember when a woman in an improp touch football game was more of a man, and when even those days have gone
Women with the passing skill of Joe Nama and the running ability of Gale Sayers are the winners in a game of sandlot games. Ive observed.
A few years ago, it seemed more women wanted sex-controlled girls. But with the prospect of women controlling everything from the home to the government, the culture was changing. Sex chances are understandable.
All men are created equal. All women are created equal. But not all women are equal to women.
Poor Helen Puchalski.
A couple of weeks ago, this 29-year-old mental patient jumped the gates surrounding the White House to try to see the President.
Ford runs 'em hard
SHE WAS caught and charged with unlawful entry. President Ford wasn't at home anyway; he was playing golf and staying at his Midwestern White House in Vail, Colo.
By BILL SNIFFEN
But how could Miss Puchalski have known that, unless she had been following Ford's antics on television?
Twice yearly, viewers are treated to sights of Ford barely missing four-foot horses sliding down skies on his regal posterior.
Twice yearly, reporters get the chance to clear their lungs as they huff and puff in thin mountain air.
It's a splendid sight to see a tanned, refreshed president with his trademark, looking the picture of health. After all, Mr. Ford has been president a bit more than two years, and the office does take care of that.
Unfortunately, all of this leaves the Puchalski of the world in a bind. Risking death another uninvited White House gatecrasher was shot to death a few months ago, age and what?
EITHER the President should stay at home (he'd get more use
TWICE YEARLY, Secret Service agents receive remedial work in golf and sking.
White House gates without getting caught.
Perhaps he could conduct seminars on how to jump the
out of his sunken swimming pool) or he should schedule visits with his constituents—deranged or not.
At least he could tell the Puchalskis of the world how to hone their putting or how to sharpen their schuising.
11
thin But had
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
A Pacemaker award winner
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom--684-4810
Business Office--684-4358
Published at the University of Kansas daily August 26, 2014 *The Journal* June and July罢 except Saturday; Sunday and Holly-June. Subscriptions are $3.00 each. 86044. Subscriptions by mail are $9 a semester or $13 a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are a year outside the county. Mail student subscriptions to: UWKSales@uwk.edu.
Editor
Managing Editor Editorial Editor Jim Impey
Fast Ababishka Jim Impey
Associate Campus Editor Stewart Branwyn
Associate Campus Editors Sheri Baldwain
Chuck Alexander Photo Editor Jeff Koehler
Staff Photographers George Millemer,
Sports Editor Steve Schowfield
Associate Sports Editor Alison Cooke
Gary Viez Entertainment Editor Alice Lowe
Elizabeth Leech Contributing Writers John Fulner, Greg Hack
Copy Chiefs John Fulner, Greg Hack
Make-up Editors Greg Hack, Lynda Guinn
Make-up Editors Chuck Alexander
Chuck Alexander Jay Bernis Kate
Business Manager
Terev Hansam
Assistant Business Manager Carole Renkoenbocker Advertising Manager Jace Clements Manager Jennifer Bauer Classified Manager Sarah McAhnley Assistant Business Manager Sarah McAhnley Operating Manager Timothy O'Bua
News Advisor ² Publisher Business Advisor Bob Giles David Dary Mel Adams