Page 2
University Daily Kansan Wednesday, April 1, 1964
U.S. Neutralization
What's going on in Washington in the way of changing our foreign policy? Are the Johnson Administration and the Democratic leaders in Congress, notably Senators Mansfield and Fulbright, collaborating in softening public opinion toward U.S. withdrawal from the trouble spots of the world?
Sen. Mansfield of Montana, the Senate majority leader and chief spokesman for his party's man in the White House, recently agreed with President De Gaulle of France that "neutralization" of South Viet Nam may be the best way out of that mess.
Now comes Sen. Fulbright, of Arkansas, the intellectual who is chairman of the Senate's Foreign Affairs Committee, advocating:
(1) Acceptance of Communist Cuba and an end to our economic and political resistance to Castro-communism.
(2) Acceptance of the Panamanian President's demand that the United States agree in advance to negotiate changes in the Canal Zone Treaty, thus abandoning President Johnson's stand for discussion after Panama restores diplomatic recognition, but with no promise to negotiate changes.
The White House says that Sen. Fulbright has some interesting ideas but that he did not consult the Administration before making his speech. But between the Mansfield and Fulbright speeches, the President himself digressed from his talk to the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Conference to make some foreign affairs observations pointing in the same direction.
"The world has changed and so has the method of dealing with disruptions of the peace," said President Johnson, raising again the spectre of nuclear war which could "wipe out from 50 to 100 million of our people . . . in a matter of an hour."
"We, the most powerful nation in the world, can afford to be patient," he said. "Our ultimate
strength is clear . . . power brings obligation . . .
The power of this country and the world expect more from their leaders than just a show of brute force. So, our hope and our purpose is to employ reasoned agreement instead of ready aggression; to preserve our honor without a world in ruins; to substitute, if we can, understanding for retaliation."
Is the President saying the United States is guilty of "aggression" in sending troops to help the South Vietnamese defend themselves from the Communist aggressor in North Viet Nam, Ho Chi Minh? In embargoing trade with Communist Cuba and trying to prevent Castro's agents from destroying other Latin American governments? In holding fast against Panamanian mobs in the Canal Zone which is deeded to the United States in perpetuity?
If these three speeches are trial balloons, sent up to see if the people would welcome withdrawal to "Fortress America" and the isolationism which failed to keep us out of two world wars, the President is likely to get a clear answer. Americans have not forgotten Neville Chamberlain nor our own isolationists of old.
If the President has no ready solution to the world's problems in which the United States cannot escape involvement, let him say so. The nation will understand. But let him not seek to lead us down the garden path with a blindfold over our eyes, in fear and trembling that the nuclear missile will arrive if we look at the cold realities of Communist aggression and elect to resist.
We believe the American people do not share the faint-hearted apprehensions of many in official Washington. We believe Americans will never be agreeable to surrender to communism, which is Sen. Mansfield's solution in Viet Nam and Sen. Fulbright's solution in Cuba. The President will be wrong if he associates himself with these sentiments.
- Portland Oregonian
The People Say...
More Discrimination
Unfortunately, some elements find it desirable to discriminate against those of us who have long legs, excluding us from swimming pools, barber shops, restaurants, and fraternities like KKK.
Since this long-legged discrimination, an affront to human dignity, is based purely on prejudice, I recommend the following actions to curb it:
1) We must abolish long-legged discrimination in all retail establishments. The fact that the retailer owns his store, his merchandise, and his service has nothing to do with it; he should be forced by law to allow me on his property, regardless of his feelings toward me.
2) We can picket the campus Greek Week and the Kappa Kappa Kappa house, in order to help KKK accept people with long legs.
3) We can circulate numerous complaining petitions carried by long-legged individuals who sympathize with our cause.
4) We must establish the LLRCC (Long-Legged Rights on Campus Commission) which will organize and coordinate the efforts of those who attempt to change the lamentable existing conditions.
Long-legged individuals, lovers of freedom, etc.—Unite! Under our leader, Martin Luther Long, chairman of NAALL (National Association for the advancement of Long Leggers) and under the slogan, "We shall over-conquer," we long-leggers shall rise to victory, equality, etc., and establish the long-legged individual as a proper pillar of society, a member-in-good-standing of KKK, and an integral part of the campus Greek Week.
Augusta freshman
***
KULAC Complaint
Recently, the campus has been beset by a storm of demonstration and protest, all emanating from one source, the Kansas University Liberal Action Committee. This organization, or rather the people behind it, seem to be involved in every bit of unorthodoxy
which exists on this campus.
Although they lend their support to a few causes which appear to be worthwhile, it would appear that their motives are questionable. Why does the same group of individuals back the Student Peace Union and Civil Rights Co-ordinating Committee, as well as KULAC? Could it be that they are seeking only sensation? Why does the rank and file of this organization consist of individuals who could hardly be considered representative of the average KU student? Could it be that KULAC is designed to allow the non-conformist to alleviate his frustration. I leave the answers to these questions to be determined by each individual.
While I do not oppose the existence of such an organization on campus, I do feel that these observations should be aired to enable the student who considers taking a subscription to the Kansas Free Press or buying a one-dollar membership in KULAC, to consider the uses of his pledging his name and his money. If he is able to identify himself with the leadership of KULAC, then he should contribute, but at least, let him consider the individuals, motives, and results which he is supporting.
Thomas Shores
Kansas City graduate student
Blasts Kothari Edition
I have been an avid reader of newspapers ever since my high school days, but never have I come across a journalist of Mr. Kothari's calibre. God save the professional! His articles (apparently he is required to write something every week) never fail to manifest the lowest and the most amorphous in the art of writing, and are almost invariably a mangle of uninformed and irresponsible journalism. He evaluates the world that passes before his limited vision with utter disregard for facts.
His recent article, "Kashmir Conflict Causes Violations," surpasses his previous pathetic attempts. For example, he accuses
Editor:
Pakistan for seeking China's aid to end Indian oppression in occupied Kashmir. If the current public pronouncements of Pakistan's President are any guide, the above accusation must be a figment of Mr. Kothari's blurred imagination. President Ayub, while deploring the long and explosive conflict between India and Pakistan, has said, "Any student of history knows that this sub-continent (Indo-Pakistan sub-continent) has been invaded (from outside) whenever there was internal strife and hostility." Pakistan, being a part of this sub-continent, can hardly afford to tolerate any outside intervention. Further, it seems that Mr. Kothari is ignorant of the fact that the Chinese are already in control of the territory they claim in Ladakh, because of India's inability and unwillingness to defend an area which she could not legitimately call her own. After all they, the Indians, too had occupied Kashmir by force and against the wishes of the people of the unfortunate land.
May I ask who are those "political crities," excluding Mr. Kothari himself, who "believes" that Pakistan has no case in Kashmir? I quote only one source, because of lack of space, to expose Mr. Kothari's lack of knowledge about the matter. The New York Times, February 25, 1964, wrote in part:
"The Pakistanis have, however, good reason to be discouraged and disgusted on the subject of Kashmir. It was taken from them by a trick in 1947 . . . Pakistan has the better side of justice on its side . . . Prime Minister Nehru, normally so high minded, lost his sense of political morality when it came to Kashmir."
Indeed it is the Indian case about Kashmir which lacks substance, blotted as it is with broken promises and Russian vetoes. I challenge Mr. Kothari, or anyone else for that matter, to discuss with me the respective merits of India-Pakistan cases with regard to Kashmir in a public debate
Rab Malik
Pakistan Graduate Student
"Open Up That Golden Gate California, Here We Come!"
Poll Finds Rockefeller Falling Down and Out
If the most recent Gallup poll is valid, Nelson Rockefeller's chances of capturing the GOP presidential nomination are negligible. In fact, it appears that Rockefeller won't even influence the making of the party platform.
Gallup asked 3,000 GOP county chairmen to state their preference for 1964. With sixty per cent responding, Rockefeller got 117 votes--only six per cent, finishing behind Goldwater (the winner), Nixeau, Lodge, and Scranton.
The chairmen were asked to indicate a second-place choice should their number one man not be nominated. Rockefeller came out worse after the second choice votes of Goldwater supporters were allocated.
HE FINISHED behind Nixon. Lodge, and Scranton.
At this time, Rockefeller was fresh from a smashing victory in the 1958 New York elections and was considered the bright light of the GOP fold.
Compare this to Rockefeller's 1960 position when Nixon felt the New York governor enough of a force to compromise the Republican platform to gain his support.
Since then, Rockefeller has suffered from a less emphatic win in the 1962 gubernatorial elections, followed by his divorce, the death of his son, and several serious setbacks with his home state legislature.
BOOK REVIEWS
THE UNIVERSE OF SCIENCE, by Charles-Noel Martin (Hill and Wang $3.95).
This is a book not for the advanced scholar but for the beginner or the layman interested in science. Charles-Noel Martin is a French nuclear physicist and journalist, and he attempts to survey what man knows concerning the structure of the universe.
Martin begins with the area of the tiniest of particles and proceeds to the vast universe itself. The first section concerns, then, the infinitesimal—cosmic rays, particles and anti-particles, matter, atoms, molecules and crystals. There then is a section on life, dealing with giant molecules, viruses and bacteria, life on other worlds.
"The Planet Earth" concerns itself with the beginnings, changes in climate, the question of whether there was a deluge, earth studies, space exploration. The final section deals with infinities—the planets, the sun, galaxies, evolution of the stars, the cosmologies, and structure of the universe.
Excellent black and white photographs accompany the text.
Dailij Yränsan
111 Flint Hall
University of Kansas student newspaper UNiversity 4-2646, newsroom UNiversity 4-3198, business office
P A
Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904, triweekly 1908,daily Jan. 16,1912.
Member Inland Daily Press Association, Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York 22, N.Y. News service: United Press International. Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays, University holidays, and examination periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas.