Arizona Republic from Phoenix, Arizona on November 6, 1969 · Page 15
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version
November 6, 1969

A Publisher Extra Newspaper

Arizona Republic from Phoenix, Arizona · Page 15

Publication:
Location:
Phoenix, Arizona
Issue Date:
Thursday, November 6, 1969
Page:
Page 15
Cancel
Start Free Trial

Page 15 article text (OCR)

ALL EDITKJE& not agree tilth a rfcrt thai you say, but I tfill fy to the hath ydur right to say it . t * Voltaire • THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC— 'Believe Me, FoZfo, It's Working. Hear The Hissing Of Hot Air? 9 Thursday, Nov. 6, 1969 Page 7 The People Speak Arab Student From Lebanon Replies To 4 ConfusedP Letter Editor, The Arizona Republic: Louis M. Hasbany's letter to the editor (Oct. 28) drew my attention to some untrue statements and malicious attack on the Arabhood of Lebanon. Had this letter been written to a Lebanese newspaper, I would not have taken the trouble to answer it. This is because the Lebanese people know that they are Arabs and the letter would have been interpreted as a joke! However, since the American public is somewhat remote from what happens in the Middle East, I thought it may serve the purpose of a better understanding on part of the American people to point out the following facts: 1. The relations between Lebanon and Israel were far from "harmonious" due to the continuous Israeli aggression on Lebanese territory. This aggression was climaxed by the notorious Israeli air raid on Lebanon International Airport in which 13 Lebanese commercial planes were destroyed. The pretext given by Israel was that two Palestinian commandos happened to pass through Beirut Airport before' attacking an Israeli plane in Athens. Therefore, the claim that Lebanon and Israel lived in "harmony" is invalid. 2. LEBANON is a member of the Arab League and is defined by its con- They Know Why Recently you published a letter from someone who wrote that he came in contact with some military personnel who didn't know "why we were in Vietnam." May I suggest that the writer did not try to quote anyone but some disgruntled few, or perhaps he is a liar. My work brings me into contact with military personnel all day and every day in my job. (And only military for 40-plus hours a week.) I also have a son who just completed four years in the Air Force, another son is in the Navy, and yet another son in the Army in Vietnam. These people know why we (or they) are in Vietnam. They also know the sense of futility that denies them the use of their capabilities to win the war they know they can. They also deplore the graft and corruption. But they also know WHY they are there, and they know a satisfaction that no bleeding heart over here can ever attain. So lest your readers place too much stock in the testimony of a few misfits, let them listen to the vast majority of these youngsters who know why much better than most of us. Have a beer or a cup of coffee with the next serviceman you meet You'll sleep much better that night. GEORGE O'BRIEN Worse Than Reports I am a teen-ager from Carefree and I'm concerned about the "music festivals" that have recently been held in our area. After reading past reports on these "festivals" I feel they are worse than have been reported to be. On one of the evenings on which a "festival" was being held, I just happened to be on my way through Carefree. Although it was said that not much "pot" was being used, the presence of it was obvious as I drove by. It still puzzles me why they would need bed rolls just to listen to their music. Another fact that bothers me is that a large percentage present were past teen-age level; yet these "festivals" are believed by many to be teen-age functions. How long can this go on without it having serious effects on our community and it's youth? TRINA MARTN, Carefree Fraternity Praised The other day on TV I saw where instead of blowing hundreds of dollars on lumber and paint to make a float for the homecoming parade, the Alpha Tau Omegas at ASU spent money on paint and lumber to fix up homes in the LEAP area which were in dire need of repairs. To the men of ATQ may I say your money and time was well spent Thank you for showing us older folks how stupid some of us were for blowing money 'on such non-essentials as floats, etc. Coming from a rather poor family background myself, when I was in school 1 couldn't imagine spending all that money om something to tramp around the football field for one night and then never be used again. But I wasn't brave enough to put my thoughts into action by voicing my opinion about such stitution as an Arab state. Furthermore, its elected parliament and its president identify Lebanon as an Arab state; ironically, an unknown individual identifies otherwise! 3. The conflict between the Palestinian commandos and the Lebanese government is not by any means Christian vs. Moslem. Many Christians are active members of the guerrilla organization. A case in point is that Dr. George Habish, a Christian, is the leader of the second largest guerrilla organization. The Christian Arabs, hand in hand with their Moslem Arab brothers, have led many nationalist organizations through the Arab world in their struggle against occupying power — the latest being Israel. 4. Rashid Karami was appointed by the president of the Republic of Lebanon who happens to be a Christian; it is rather regrettable to assert that he is against the Christian Lebanese while he is appointed by a Christian president. 5. SYRIA AND IRAQ are ruled by the same party (Baathist) which was founded by an Arab Christian. Moreover, the assertion that Hasbany made that the Iraqis and the Syrians are "uneducated and backward" can be refuted by the fact that Iraq was the only country which at one-time had 11 members of its cabinet with Ph.D degrees. It is my intention to help clear Hasbany's clouded mind, whose long absence' (10 years!) may have contributed to his confusion. (By the way, I am a Christian Arab from Lebanon, and a graduate student at Arizona State University.) .- JAMAL SARKIS, Tempe Hint To Politicians We spent a most enjoyable Sunday at our State Fair, marred by only one thing: All advertising on the Fair plainly states that this year the admission fee is $1.50 for adults and includes the Coliseum shows on a first come, first served basis. • How come the State 'Fair Coliseum ushers refused to seat fairgoers in Section 3-R? '-.-.•'• The aisles were barred by -the ushers and when we asked point blank why, they replied, "These seats are reserved for people with tickets for them, or in other words, politicians." If our elected officials, paid by our taxes, want to see the shows at the Coliseum, I, for one, suggest they get there early like the rest of us. MRS. J. W. GEORGE Far From Peace Recently, I was searching the headlines at a news stand. I noticed the Chicago Tribune. Its headline read: Time To End the War: Nixon. ' _ . I bought a copy of the paper and thought to myself: "This is the day the nation has been waiting for." The headline was so suggestive and so promising that it made me feel peace was around the corner. After I finished reading the article, with all its "ifs" and "buts," the headline lost its identity. Disappointedly, I realized the whole thing was just another political tranquilizer. In my opinion, we are at present as far from an honorable peace as we are from here to Macao. ALEX FUNK Excellent Reporting Your recent series of articles by Peter Mann on the Chicano Movement in Phoenix was a real contribution to a better understanding of human relations in our city. His treatment was objective and sensitive and displayed excellent balance. At its meeting on Oct. 20, the Phoenix Human Relations Commission resolved unanimously to extend congratulations to him for this community service. A. M.POSNER, Chairman, Phoenix Human Relations Commission .-.*-•• Cars & Harm |f THEY are going to start taking products off the market because they MAY cause harm to humans, why not ban the sale of cars? R. MICHAEL O'HARKA M.D. Doesn't Figure Cyclamates are banned because they cause cancer Present Draft Regulations Discriminate Against Poor Chemical Sprays In Vietnam Another Kind Of Massacre By FRANK MANKIEWICZ andTOMBRADEN WASHINGTON — Those who are concerned over a possible massacre—even of women and children—in South Vietnam when U.S. troops depart might consider the fact that we now spray enormous amounts of an anticrop chemical throughout South -Vietnam which has been known for three years to cause deformed births in test animals—at a rate of 100 per cent. Use of the chemical, described by our government as "probably dangerous," is now banned in "populated areas" and on or near food products in the United States, but the Pentagon announced last week that it would continue to use it in Vietnam, where Army Service Manuals set forth its appropriate use against food supplies. * * * IN ADDITION, it is widely used in areas where the population captures its drinking water from rain, by the use of roof gutters and barrels, and where wells are sunk into soil saturated with the chemical. This chemical, along with other herbicides and defoliants, was developed by the Army at Fort Dietrich, Md., in the 1950s, and it quickly found acceptance in agriculture. After an early refusal to do so, the United States began to "defoliate" in a small way in Vietnam in 1963, and we also sprayed 741 acres of rice—a program to "deny" the VC the crop (i.e. to starve the families who lived there). But by 1967 we attacked 221,000 acres of crops and were defoliating nearly 1.5 million acres in Vietnam and—to be sure—in Laos. There was only a slight drop in 1968. Army Training Circular TC 3-16, dated April, 1969, describes the "antiplant" chemicals along with what are called "riot control agents." Specifically, what is used in Vietnam is called "Orange," a 50-50 mixture of 2,4,5T and another defoliant called 2-4D. Troops are instructed to spray it on "mangrove or highland trees or broad-leafed crops (such as beans, corn, bananas and to- matoes) and rice." "Orange" and other chemicals are described as having a "high offensive potential" to destroy food supplies and to deny the enemy food by rendering the soil sterile. * * * JUST HOW HIGH an "offensive potential" this chemical warfare had was not really known until 1966 when, for the first time, the National Institutes of Health commissioned tests on pregnant animals. The study showed that severe malformation of offspring occurred in rats at the rate of 39 per cent—as against a normal rate of 10 per cent—when they were given a small dose. When this dose .was increased to the level a Vietnamese woman might consume in a few days in her drinking water, the rate of fetal malformation rose to 90 per cent and beyond. Whether the rate of human malformation from contact with this chemical is greater or less than with rats is, of course, unknown. In the case of Thalidomide, it turned out to be greater. It was this that prompted the finding that 2,4,5T was seriously hazardous and "probably dangerous" and caused its removal from the domestic market in the United States. The President's science adviser, Dr. Lee du Bridge, perhaps adumbrating the Pentagon's refusal to cut down its use against Asians, said only that the rate of fetal malformation was "greater than expected." * * * WHAT AMAZES the scientists who discovered the report only by chance is that for 15 years no thought was given to testing the chemical OB animals, that for three years a finding of "probable danger" was ignored or hidden and that we continue to use it in Vietnam against the civilian population. Not since the Romans salted the land after destroying Carthage has a nation taken pains to visit the war upon future generations. By DAVID CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — In deciding to postpone until next year consideration of the draft reform bill which President Nixon recommended and the House passed, the Democratic leaders of the Senate have taken a heavy responsibility on themselves and their party. The inequities of the present draft law are so obvious and the corrosive effects of its continuance so severe that the decision to delay relief — even the partial relief promised by the Nixon plan — is one for which the Democrats can properly be held to political account. Some of the arguments for delay are reasonable enough in themselves. The Senate calendar for the remainder of the year is crowded with matters of some urgency, including the Haynsworth nomination, the tax reform bill and most of the tardy appropriations measures. * + * WHILE CONGRESS itself is at least partially to blame for the logjam, there is no doubt that adding draft reform to the agenda would be burdensome. But this would not be the case if the advocates of major draft reform — including Senators Hart, Hatfield and Kennedy — were willing to pass the simple measure the President requested, authorizing a random lottery system, and to delay consideration of other changes until next year. In rejecting the half-loaf proposition passed by the House the liberals have exposed themselves to accusations of political opportunism, which are probably unjust. What can be questioned is whether their holdout tactics take into account the urgency of some immediate relief from the inequities of the present system. Just how urgent draft reform is can perhaps be better seen from this college community than from Washington. The present system keeps young men in a state of jeopardy for the unconscionable period of 7V 2 years. Their fate is controlled by a complex of regulations, which are subject to constant change and which are applied by local boards in so capricious a manner as to make the ultimate decisions on induction or deferment seem highly arbitrary to the individual concerned. The present regulations discriminate against the poor, the less-educated and the minorities, and work in favor of the wealthy, better-educated whites, who can find temporary and sometimes per- S. BRODER manent draft-havens in college, in graduate school, in teaching and in other favored professions. * * * Trying To Stop The Clock MRS. M. C. AIXSCHWAGEK, Mesa Tobacco causes cancer in people, yet is not banne4. Something doesn't figure, HAHRYPUTMAN -««f <,-',' /-,-, ,'. -i. Kin* Fntun* Syndic»t«i In?.; 1969. IT IS EASY to guess the kind of resentment this stirs among draftees toward those who enjoy draft-exemptions while preparing themselves for lucrative, high-status careers. If the veterans of Vietnam do not despise the college- trained contemporaries who manage to avoid the draft, they are a darn sight more forgiving than we have any right to expect. Equally serious is the effect of the current system on the draft-exempt college students themselves. From their privileged sanctuaries, they have become the most severe critics of the Vietnam war, the "military-industrial complex" and the (purposes of American foreign policy. One cannot say to what extent their criticisms stem from their need to rationalize their own advantageous position in the draft, but the connection between privilege and protest is hard to overlook. Today's campus culture sanctions the use of almost any lawful tactic — and some of questionable legality — to avoid the draft. Career decisions are routinely altered to improve the odds on staying out of the army. Uncounted numbers of young men have taken up teaching because it is draft-exempt, thus increasing the likelihood that their views of military service are passed on 'to those still below draft age. What it does to this country if a whole generation of its potential leaders grow up with this cynical view of the obligations of national service cannot be calculated. But that is the price we pay for the present draft law. * * * THE SENATE Democrats note quite correctly that Mr. Nixon's plan will not reach all these evils, and they claim he can do almost as much by executive order as by legislation. They vow to consider major reform next year. But is that enough, under the circumstances? If. there are inequities that can be dealt with by legislation now, is there not an obligation to legislate? When the system of government is as seriously challenged as ours is today, is there not a duty to act when the opportunity for action exists? A Congress that procrastinates is no help in an era of confrontation politics. Tales Of Maxi And Men ByARTBUCHWALD WASHINGTON - I have refrained from making any comment about the maxi-length skirt up until now in hopes that it would go away. But I'm starting to see more of them on the streets and I can no longer remain silent. Heaven knows I'm not a prude when it comes to women's clothes, but when ladies from good families start showing their ankles in public, then I think someone has to make a stand. Our society is not ready for the maxi. The shock of seeing women of excellent breeding walking down Fifth Avenue in New York with the bottom of their legs protruding from their skirts can only destroy the fabric and morals of this nation. How can men go about their business and keep their minds on their work when they are dazzled by the shameful sights of women flaunting the lower portions of their legs in front of every Tqm, Dick and Harry? * * * A' WELL-TURNED ANKLE can produce the most evil thoughts in any normal man, and the women who are wearing maxis, without knowing it, are exciting and provoking men into a state of frenzy. I confess that even someone like myself, who has lived a pure and monastic existence, finds it hard to contain my ardor when I see a maxi. There is too much flesh showing for one person to bear. Only .the greatest of will power has prevented me from going up and putting a hand on a shapely calf just to make sure it's real. The worst part for most males, when a woman wears a maxi-length skirt, is when she is sitting down. Then the maxi has a tendency to slide up, and you can see part of her shin. Even when she is wearing stockings, the effect of seeing a lady's shin can cause any red-blooded man to go berserk. * *' * TIME AND TIME AGAIN, I have seen women purposely lift their maxi two, three, sometimes four inches above their ankles in a flirtatious manner without thinking through the consequences. A woman fails to realize that such brazen behavior can only suggest to a man that she is leading him on, and eventually he will attempt to kiss her, a situation she will be sorry she got into. I am not just speaking for myself when I discuss the havoc that the maxi is causing in our everyday life. I have a friend who is unable to give dictation to his secretary since she started wearing a maxi. When she sits, legs crossed and .boots showing, he loses all train of thought. He has warned her if ah* continues wearing a maxi to work, he will have to let her go. * • » I KNOW ANOTHER MAN, of impec- cable reputation, without a breath Of scandal associated with his name, who was given a lift in a car by his friend's wife. In order to drive she had to lift her maxi to her knees. Someone on the bus saw her driving that way, and the man was so disgraced he had to leave the neighborhood. There are probably hundreds of similar cases where the maxi-length skirt has played its share in breaking up homes and causing men to resort to violent and unpredictable behavior. The danger of the maxi skirt, as I see it, is that if it becomes acceptable, the dress and coat designers could be encouraged to make the length even shorter. This year the ankles are showing, next year the upper part of the lower leg could be featured. Where will it all end? * * * I SAY THAT UNLESS the trend is reversed and we reject the maxi-length skirt as immoral, our women will become nothing but sex objects to be stared at on the streets, accosted in stores and kissed in their homes. For after all, despite the strict moral climate we now live in, everybody is only human. Observations By SYDNEY J. HARRIS The biblical Injunction ought to be modified to read — love of other people's money is the root of evil. * * * The difference between a "moralizer" and a genuine moralist is that the moralizer believes that all human acts are either right or wrong and puts them in rigid categories, while the moralist knows that 90 per cent of human behavior is morally neutral, and reserves bis judgment (and bis indignation) for the 10 per cent that touch on basic relations between men, * * * The epitaph for our century (if anyone is left to read it) was expressed by Winston Churchill, when he observed: "The power of man has grown in every sphere, except over himself." *»•"•' It's an interesting psychic quirk that the same person who will modestly disclaim praise that be deserves will eagerly lap up a compliment that is outrageously beyond the truth. * .* * Whatever their differences, ail reduq? ing diets have the same fundamental de- feet — they apply to people. ••,;•. ;* .* «! : o ' , ; v'' The hope that one will change after you marry him is usually fulfilled, but ; rarely in quite the way it ~m» hoped for.

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page