4
Monday, November 22, 1976
University Daily Kansan
Comment
Opinions on this page reflect the view of only the writer.
JFK killing recalled
Thirteen years ago today, I was a third grader.
I don't think we did much at school that day, but then, I don't remember much about the morning. All I remember is the afternoon. Thanksgiving vacation was coming, and I was part of a class full of students who were getting out to get out of school. We weren't much interested in doing multiplication tables, especially so soon after lunch.
I THINK the teacher was eager, too. She didn't much like teaching multiplication, so she passed out a bunch of flashcards. We were to color them, and she would put them up on the bulletin board.
I didn't know much about the world in those days. I knew how to walk single-file and buy a lunch ticket, but that was about all. I didn't know anything about the President, or Dallas, or how to pronounce "assassination."
And then the principal broke in on the public address system. "We think the President has been shot." He played radio news reports over the system, and we all sat there and listened. We heard the whole thing, right up until they said he had died.
I REMEMBER how some of us kids reacted. We were sort of scared. Most of us had never heard of a President being assassinated. No one could shoot the President. We were sad, I guess, but mostly we felt threatened. It was as if something very sinister had gripped the country. Who, or what?
Thirteen years is a long time to hold vivid memory, especially of some childhood scene. And I wasn't even involved, not really. But maybe I was. Maybe we all were. Maybe the day President John Kennedy was killed is a day engraved in many minds.
I suppose that's why it deeply troubles me, and many others, to read stories like the one published in 1864 by Patasha as a 1864 memo from then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover said Lee Harvey
Oswald told Cuban officials in advance about his plan to shoot Kennedy.
WE ALL really want to believe that Oswald acted alone and that there wasn't a conspiracy. But increasingly frequent reports tying Kennedy's death to Castro just won't let us believe that anymore. The Warren Commission's report, the official explanation of the assassination, has been kicked around like an old tin can. It is full of holes and fissures that only new investigation can fill.
This latest story says that the memo was addressed to the commission, which was appointed by Kennedy's death, but that no commission members recall having received the memo.
Information such as this, if it's true, demands response. The existence of such a memo would strongly suggest that Oswald, Cuba and Kennedy's death were somehow closely connected. It also would cast suspicion on both Hoover and the commission, both of which are said to have had the memo.
NETHER OF these suggestions should be ignored. For 13 years, the nation's law enforcement agencies have, in effect, treated Kennedy's death as if it was no more than the death of some of our own officers. They not only miffed if the public or the press asks them to answer to the controversies surrounding the commission's report.
Perhaps fears of international or internal governmental conspiracy are as foolish as a child's fear of the dark. If so, it won't hurt to question whether if they are indeed as foolish as some say.
All I know is it's been 13 years, and the circumstances surrounding the death of a U.S. President have never been clearly explained. People are still upset about the shooting. They won't easily forget. And they are going to keep on asking "who, or what?"
By Mary Ann Daugherty
Contributing Writer
LOS ANGELES—This is the city—Los Angeles, Calif. The city has taxis, the city has buses, the city has cops. The city has tourists. That's where we are in. We're Kansans.
"Bet Hollywood is really a big deal back in Kansas," says a cashier at Universal Studios as she searches for a sequined Hollywood t-shirts.
Harrumph for Hollywood!
"Not really," we deadpan, picking up our shirts and walking out the door.
Not really, we said, but we may have been lying. After all, he is KU student journalists get to go to a convention in the "Big Lemon"." And, after all, the book is Hollywood is Hollywood.
Or is it? Let's follow Dorothy's second cousins as they take a guided tour of Oz—Universal Studios:
12:35 P.M. PST
Here we are now, getting on the bus, our nametags slyly slipped into our pockets. We are all determined not to act like a teenager with a momentary lapse when one of us felt a palm tree to see if it was real, we have succeeded. We even managed to remain in the room and into MacLean Stevenson at Burbank's NB教科社.
But this is the supreme test—Hollywood. At Universal Studios, we will see stars from comedy and drama even Bruce the Chance of "Jaw" fame. The question is whether we will maintain our calm or whether we will embark on the front of God and everybody.
1:07 P.M. PST
We arrive. The reconstituted school bus glides majestically into a parking place. The driver of the bus, we have discovered, is himself a celebrity. He is a part-time carpet-cleaner who has cleaned carpets for both John Wayne and Donald
The lines are amazingly long and the crowds are huge. It is obvious that what is keeping Universal in business isn't its movies or music. Every five or 10 minutes a Glamor Tour, heavy with tourists, sets out on another tour. And this goes on
all day long, all year long. We can almost smell the money.
Jim Bates
Editorial Editor
Before boarding a Glamor-Tram, we decide to rent a pocket Instantmatic to help us remember our experience. The man at the camera booth notices our accents.
"Where are you people from?" he asks patronizingly. "Kansas."
1:12 P.M. PST
"Kansas, huh," the man says,
completely unimpressed.
"Dorothy, right? Ding-dong, the bitch is dead, and all that?"
We negotiate the camera rental, and he hands us the pocket Instrumental.
O'Conner. Needless to say, we're impressed.
"Yeah.
"Now to work it," he begins, all you have to do . . .
We explain that we know how to work a pocket Instantic. "Really," he says, "You have
"Really," he says, "You have them in Kansas?"
We grumble and head for the GlamorTram.
1:59 P.M. PST
Randy, he says, "I have them in Kansas?" We grumble and head for the
With the help of our perky guide Traci, and our Tram-ing agent Michael, Hollywood the way it really is. Suddenly Frank makes a
2:10 P.M.PST
There is a huge rumbling sound, like the sound of a toilet flushing played at 16 r.p.m. Six medium-sized rubber rocks bounce down a cliff toward the GlamorTram. Five of them are suspended on a platform shield on the side of the road. The other one bounces ridiculously over the bus and into the distance.
"Be honest, now," Traci says. "How many of you came here to see a movie star?"
Two ladies from Milwaukee, a retired plumber and one of the student journalists wave their hands.
Somewhere in the back of the tram, a woman smirks.
"Whew," says Tract, wiping her forehead with her wrist. "That was a close one, wasn't it, guys?"
"Come on now. Really!"
A five-year-old boy from Idaho joins the throng.
"Well then, I've got bad news for you—it's Saturday and all the stars are off work. But don't worry. It isn't hopeless. Just last week Telly Savalin drew on a dress (gasps) and once Walter Matthau actually disguised himself and went along with a tour. Oh that Walter, he's such a card."
"Frank. Oh, Frank. Don't take the short cut, Frank. You know these rocks are Frank. Oh, Franaugh!"
With reverent whispers and exclamations of awe, the tour
2:14 P.M.PST
gets off the tram and walks through Julie London and another "Emergency" star's dressing rooms.
"wrong turn" and Tracid goes into an act worthy of the worst movie Universal ever did.
Neither looked as if it has been used lately.
The walking tour continues onto a sound stage where the tourists see a mock-up of the iridesse set and a horror set.
"Let me show you how it works," she says, and she pushes a mysterious button.
The highlight of the horror set comes when Tract notices the tourists gazing at womentouching at a huge, stuffed griffin.
The griffin shudders, and its wings raise a full three inches and drop again. Then the act is repeated. The crowd applauds.
Back on the GlamorTran again, we drive past such landmark buildings as the house. Then Frank loses control again.
"Frank . . . Not the old bridge, Frank . . . You know how dangerous it is . . . Frank! Frankkkkk!"
The last hour has been interesting, but unevenness. The mock towns are far more interesting than the griffin, and, aside from the fact that every single set of words "make" and "The Six Million Dollar Man," it's been very untyack.
Boards fall off the bridge, and it drops a full foot or two beneath the bus. Then the process is reversed as Traci jokes, "Sure scared you, didn't we?"
3:49 P.M. PST
The only real laugh came about 10 minutes ago, when
Tract showed us the mock-up of a 747 being readied for Universal's "Airport 1977."
"It's an exciting movie," she said, "about a 74 that turns upside down and sinks in the Bermuda Triangle."
We had to smoker at that one. But now everyone is getting a bit tense, because we are coming closer to the one thing all we have been waiting to see—Bruce the Shark, comics creator and a blacker. Whenever we pass a body of water, there is a scramble for cameras and a whitening of knuckles.
Finally, the big moment comes. The former Tram is what looks like a fake other fake New England resort on the edge of a farm pond, when suddenly the Tram lists the water and the big fish leaps.
The cameras clink furiously,
trying to focus on teeth, mouth,
head and, oh yes, those doll-like
eyes.
Unfortunately it isn't even the real fake shark used in the film. The real fake shark especially built to score the GlamorTram riders.
4:28 P.M.PST
THE NEW Mexico area director for OSHA was very impressed by Mr. Robert McCoy, magistrate Robert McCoy, read him the law creating OSHA and
This is the city. That was the tour. We're still Kansans.
Some of the most pleasant stories that come along have to do with combats between David and Goliath—especially when the combatms turn out according to the instructions. Albuquerque of such a struggle, David won, and Goliath is much annoyed.
"Where's your warrant?" she asked. They didn't have one. "Sorry, boys," she said, and closed the door.
Oh well, we philosopher,
touring Universal is just one of
those things you have to do
when you're in Los Angeles.
Luckily for us, we didn't go
there with any dreams or
illusions or high hopes. Luckily
for us we're cynics.
Cast in the role of David, in this particular drama, is a 100 per cent free and independent play by Bruce Hertzler by name. The part of Goliath, as you may have surmised, is played by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to ensure that all court, Hertzler has succeeded in bringing the giant to his knees.
That is what happened on a February day in 1975, when two OSHA inspectors, John Parsons and Rodney Prows, approached the company. This is a small plant, employing only five persons, engaged in the manufacture of cardboard boxes and the reloading of cartridges. The OSHA gushworms wanted to have the company hostel, president of the company, meet them at the door.
Sigh. There is nothing worse than having your cynicism about a myth proved right.
THE CASE prompts a word of advice to every businessman, small or large, who objects to the visits of OSHA inspectors: Tell 'em to give a warrant! If the inspectors refuse to get a warrant, throw the bums politely out.
obtained a warrant. In April, the inspectors returned. The Hertzlers, undawnted, said they would challenge the validity of the warrant. They retained the complaint and got a preliminary injunction.
OSHA a modern Goliath
The mills of the law grind slowly. It wasn't until late
August of this year that a three-judge federal court unanimously uphold the Hertzers' challenge. The Fourth Amendment, the court said, demands a showing of how far before the warrant may be validly issued. No such showing had been made. The warrant was therefore void.
says that warrants may issue only upon a showing of probable cause, "particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
THIS JUDICIAL conflict ultimately will have to be resolved by the Supreme Court. It has been said that Mexico was so courage that defenders of personal liberty are bound to be encouraged. What the Fourth Amendment guarantees is that "the right of the people to be secure in their homes from unreasonable effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." The amendment
Yes, it would slow the inspectors down. But the slow and constitutional way is infinitely the better way. The Fourth Amendment dates from Magna Carta; it is among the most glorious provisions of the Constitution that protects even the lowest citizen from the hobnail intrusions of the omnionnet state.
This is at least the second such ruling against OSHA. In a Texas case a couple of years ago involving the Gibson's identity disclosure, the identical decree came down. Meanwhile, however, in a Georgia case, a federal court ruled the other way; in Georgia, the authority of OSHA to enter without a warrant was upheld.
James J. Kilpatrick (c) 1976 Washington Star Syndicate, Inc.
YES, THIS would inconvenience the bureaucracy.
To operate within the plain boundaries of the Fourth Amendment would impose no prohibition on OSHA inspectors. Such a procedure would require no more than a sworn statement, presumably from some anxious neighbors, to condition exists at such-and-such a plant. Thus armed with probably cause, inspectors would encounter no difficulty in valid search warrants.
The Department of Labor naturally will appeal the Hertzler decision it will be allowed to enforce. If the contitutional issue can still be resolved, Meanwhile, enough law has been written by district courts to hearten other impingements on Gellish. Tryants can be toppled. Nothing more is required than the will to try.
OPEC
WASHINGTON
Blaming of 'Zionist forces' unfounded
To the Editor:
Thursday through Friday, June 20 and Monday through Thursday, June 21 and July 4 except Saturday Sunday and Halloween. Subscriptions by mail are a $5 member or $8 subscription by email. A year outside the county. Student subscriptions are a $7 fee. In-state students receive a $6 fee.
This is in response to Shawkat Hammoudheh's letter to the editor of Nov. 17. Obviously, Mr. Hammoudheh was perturbed by the fact that someone, or a group of people, altered copies of a filer that appeared on campus recently to advertise "A Week of Adventures." The Revolution sponsored by the Iranian Students Association and the Organization of Arab Students." The fact that he felt the need to distort reality has provoked me to respond.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
**Lester Grimm**
Managing Editor
Yael Abouhaklah
Manager Editing
Jim Bates
Counsel Editor
Steven Bremen
Associate Campus Editor
Sheri Badwin,
Assistant Campus Editor
Chuck Walters
Photo Editor
Dave Reger
Staff Photographers
George Millerer,
Sports Editor
Steve Schleidert
Etainment Editor
Alison Gwinn
Entertainment Editor
Editor
Debbie Gump
or Editorial Editor
Jim Bates
Business Manager Terry Hanson
Altered fliers defended To the Editor;
Stephen W. Nichols Gladstone, Mo., senior Member, Lawrence ACLU
Assistant Business Manager Carole Rosskoster
Advertising Manager Jain Clemente
Classified Manager Sarah McAnally
Classified Manager Sarah McAnaly
National Advertising Manager Timothy O'Shaughn
National Advertising Manager Timothy O'Shaughn
Mr. Hammond makes the totally unfounded assumption that the fliers were altered by "bionist forces." Why was he not among the immature high school children or some pranksters? Why not someone who has a real bone to pick with Arab nationalism, such as a former independent gas station owner who has since lost his hip and is now dulled or embrane? Or why not a Lebanese who deplores Palestinian presence in a country that is the Riversa of the Middle East turned blood-bath? If Mr. Hammond believes that "the enemy hinders his support thal allegations with evidence before acuse without any probable cause.
Miss Daughterhy then proceeds to give
miss her own view of the organization's
"broader purposes," whi-b she says
simply is "to protect individual rights
and personal freedoms." Miss
Daughterhy concludes that because
Glimore, of his own "free will" wants
to die at the hands of the state, the ACLU,
ambitious in protecting our personal freedoms.
In regard to the letter from the
mouch, who ostensibly wrote his letter to the editor with the approval, or at least the blessing, of the Iranian president, for the establishment of American tax dollars and military hardware to keep Palestinians from their home" as "an injustice" when he asked that Shakwat the Shah of Iran's dictatorial habit. I suggest that Shawkat Hammamol
Furthermore, Mr. Hammoudepera perverts the reality of the situation in Egypt and Palestine, and don't fear the truth. If the Palestinians really knew the facts, they would be venting their hostilities not upon the Israelis but upon other Arab governments. The Bank Arab populations to thrive in fifth and despair following the 1948 war instead of offering them decent housing and adequate nourishment. Moreover, Israel is an island of true democracy in the Middle East, a sea of totallitarian dictatorships.
order on Gary Glmore, in spite of his wishes that they go ahead.
Finally, it is ironic that Mr. Ham-
Readers Respond
rethink this position. My office is stocked with a plethora of material dealing with the "truth" he has so eloquently misrepresented.
Director, Hillel, KU. Jewish Students
ACLU's support valid
To the Editor:
In an article dated Wednesday entitled "Ulah case a nightmare," we saw Mary Ann Dangherly's views on "the right to die," or more specifically, the right of Gary Mark Gilmore, an inmate in a Utah State Penitentiary, to allow her to be held in certain conditions reporter is entitled to her own value judgments with regard to such a complex issue as the "right," if it is to die.
Answer, included in the article is Miss Daugherty's personal chastisement of the American Civil Liberties Union. Of the more exaggerated remarks made by Miss Daugherty with regard to the ACLI, it has been stated that he recently has seemed to have its representatives poling at every case on the dockets, to assess its own crusades." This charge referred to the ACLI's efforts in Utah to restrain the state from carrying out an execution
as upholders of personal freedoms,
should be supporting him.
Unfortunately, Miss Daugherty has made a complex issue into a very simple one. First, she has improperly defined the "broader purposes" of the ACLU, and has then gone on to ignore the fundamental nature of life will in the Gilmore case. The ACLU's purpose is, agreed, to protect individual rights, but further, to protect such rights in opposition to the powers of the state. Thus, the ACLU must make sure never has the right to take a life, regardless of Gilmore's wishes.
I question whether Gilmore's death wish is truly voluntary. If Mr. Gilmore could be released, would he still want execution, or is it simply that he would rather have "it" than imprisonment? In short, the ACU that is simplest if guilty of inflicted capital punishment are inferred capital punishment. They argue that if state capital punishment didn't exist, Gilmore wouldn't have such an option to have the state kill him. Would they the abolition of capital punishment rob him of his supposed right to have the state kill him? The answer is no, Gilmore would Daugherty and every individual to support the efforts of the ACLU and others, who can never be too zealous or
botsarian graduate student on how "Zionists shroud truth," let me say the following: I write a small department newsletter that is put together with an eye to keep people from taking themselves too seriously; therefore, they should not file a question appeared, they were quickly brought to my attention. I know who the perpetrators are, and they are certainly not "Zionists."
I believe they were making a social comment on all fliers and demonstrations. The attack on the hoax flies is certainly a more flagrant abuse of freedom of speech than the humorous fliers could ever be.
I believe most Americans are deeply sorry that the Mideast has had problems for a thousand years, and now we know that there is simple solution; however, this seems to me to be an example of politics interfering with clear thinking. I believe they should go home to fight their enemies or take their others fight their own battles—after all, we have managed to stay out of Beirut and Ireland.
Twyla Snow
Secretary Department of Aerospace Engineering
Diam
Pa Stu
I
Son made own decision To the Editor:
I don't personally know Mr. and Mrs. Richard Anderson of Prairie Village who sit before their fireplace these days, but I do know that their lost son, nor do I know that son, Phil. To offer comments on any member of the Anderson family would be to descrend the tearjerrier journeyman level of the Kusansi Nov. 18th account.
But I would like to say this: every family whose child leaves home to go to college has, in some sense, "lost" that "child."
True, not all children become adults quite so dramatically or part from parents by putting so much distance, literal and psychological, between them. But whenever a "child" leaves home and becomes something that goes against the parents' grain, someone or another does it. In this case, it is the Integrated Humanities program of studies that is being held responsible.
Accom ad are offe sex, col BRING.
15 wor
fwee
Each s
wow
Phil Anderson didn't become a felon or a junkie lost in the drug scene, as have other sons and daughters of recent years. For that, Pearson wouldn't have been able to make a difference in a vocation, repellent indeed to anti-Catholics, but one that parents with different orientations would have accepted with pride and joy. A parent who respects a child as an human being has the responsibility for a chosen way of life—a way of life chosen after childhood ended. Many factors—never just one—contribute to a young person's choice, even when they are not fully integrated Humanities Program as a way of coping with their own unhappiness is a parental "easy out."
AD DI to run
to run
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
ERRO
Constance Scheerer
1637 Illinois St.
STER of an other you v at the