North Carolina Newspapers

Tuesday, September 29, 1964 Volume 73, Number 11 i ! uty? Sailg Star 72 Years of Editorial Freedom Offices on the second floor f Orakass Memorial. Telephone nomber: Editorial, sports, news 933-1012. Business, cir. culation, advertising 933-1163. Address: Box 1380. Chapel QiH. N. C Second class postage paid at the Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C, pursuant m Act of March 8, 187f. Subscription rates: (4.50 per semester; tS per year. DMfehoA r Mmufart Yn ml nation wriode and vacation?, throughout the iemlo year by the Publications Board of the University of North Carolina. Printed by the Chapel HTll Publishing Company. Inc.. 581 West Franklin Street. Chapel HHL N. C Hi A New Face In Jim Brame and Bob Wilson found themselves vith another rival Sunday night Don Wilson. Riding the crest of oratory from " Chuck Neely and in an impassioned speech, Wilson took charge of the Stu- dent Party by convincingly defeating two challengers for the party chairman ship. The immediate result of the evening was that control of the party may pass out of the hands of the Old Guard. The long-range result will certainly be a . tremendous battle for the vice-presi- s dential plum when nominations for spring student body posts come up. ' Wilson received 42 votes, followed by Bill Woodall with 17 and Bill Weems e with nine. Woodall was backed by ex party chairman Paul Dickson, who, how ever, did not participate in the hour- ' lOng aiSCUSSlUIl Ji. Hie Ldliumao. I A word should be said for Dickson. He pulled the party out of its political limbo and gave it some life. The inef fectiveness of past chairmen was a difficult thing to overcome, but today the party is in good .shape. J. lie KJIU. KxiliXLU. jiCJvawii, uiui Hays, Bob Wilson backed Woodall for the top post. The objection to his candi dacy was that he had been a member of the party less than a week, having just How much control they will have over the new chairman is yet to be seen. So what will happen when spring rolls around? Brame, of course, isj the best-known of the three.0 He is president , of his class at this time, and indications are lit! Will tiiSJJUC LKJ Ulrtl yUSl dgcllll. C hope he does. He is an excellent administrator, and possesses the skill so necessary to being preident of anything leadership. Bob Wilson has done a good job in An Old Struggle view is clouded by partisan politics. He is an excellent speaker and a good cam paigner, but he has yet to prove he is his own man and not the tool of others. And Don Wilson, certainly the most aggressive of the three, still has to prove himself. He has his chance now. Certainly at least two will try for the Veep nomination behind Dickson. It could be a battle royal, as all three will have well-organized support and convincing arguments why they should be the man. Dickson, of course, can be a campus LB J, and force the convention to ac cept his man. This would point to Don Wilson, the only one of the three not in a fraternity (after all, when you are the party of the Residence Hall man,; how can you have an all-fraternity slate?) But, when you get right down to it, both Bob Wilson and Brame have close ties in the Residence Halls, and, indeed, figure to gain a great deal of support from those voter-crammed places. And they would siphon many votes in the fraternities. We hope the three will look out for student government before their own desires. Don Wilson hit the University Party as being led by people "desiring only for personal power" (a debatable point) , and we hope the three will heed his words and not allow the Student Party to go in this direction, as, un fortunately, it has in the past. The; Student Party is blessed with ex cellent candidates, and certainly the campus and student government will benefit. If they insist on killing off each other, then it is doubtful if any will be elected. But if they live up to their glorious statements, then the campus will have no problems. Lessons From The Warren Commission o The Warren Commission has issued its report concluding that Lee Harvey ; Oswald alone must bear an historical burden of guilt for the slaying of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and has thereby rung down the curtain on 10 months of suspicion, doubt, fear, accusation and e rumor. . ,The report is an impressive one in both scope and depth, and it does not hesitate to hurl criticism at persons and organizations whose failures enabled Oswald to perch unmolested in that sixth-floor window of the Texas Book Depository last November and kill the President of the United States. In thus throwing the spotlight of fact upon that dark day, and in berating the Secret Service and the FBI, the Com mission has apparently performed its task well. The initial report runs 296,000 words, and there are more volumes to follow. In carrying out its investigation, the commission members listened to or read more than 27,000 interviews with persons who said they had "facts" con cerning the case. The Commission went so far as to trace the serial number of Oswald's Italian rifle, ascertaining that THE DAILY TAR HEEL Fred Seely, Hugh Stevens Co-Editors Associate Editor Pete Wales Managing Editor Mike Yopp Photo Editor Jock Lauterer Sports Editor Larry Tarleton Reporters John Greenbacker Kerry Sipe Business Manager Jack Harrington Secretary Mary Ellison Strother Advertising Manager : Woody Sobol Sales - i . Dick Baddour Jim Ogburn, Stuart Flicklen, Jim Potter it was the only one ever issued by the Italian army with that exact number. And they proved through scientific tests that Oswald's rifle fired the fatal bullet "to the exclusion of all other weapons." The results of such exhaustive re search and investigation are as con clusive as they could possibly be, es pecially in light of Oswald's having been silenced by Jack Ruby only a few hours after his arrest. Robert Oswald, brother of the accused assassin, read the report and said he was convinced "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that his brother was the killer. Such irrefutable conclusions are a tribute to the work of the Warren Commission. But if the report is impressive, it is certainly unpleasant. It allays some what the fear of many Americans that President Kennedy's death resulted from some dread conspiracy, but it is hardly comforting to realize that all the hatred and discontent necessary to per petrate such a terrible crime could be contained in the misshapen thoughts of one man. The report does indicate, however, that we have learned some lessons from that one man lessons about protec tion for the President, cooperation be tween governmental agencies, and more realistic Federal statutes regarding such crimes. These lessons are incorpor ated in a series of recommendations made by the Warren Commission, many of which call for action by the President or the Congress. We applaud President Johnson for his quick action regarding certain of these proposals, and we sincerely hope that Congress will not adjourn without acting on the Commission's report. For whatever we do, though it must truth fully be called "too little, too late," will help prevent future attempts on the life of our President. 'Spilled Coke On Himself f ig$ps i 14 f " " w m yA f V- -. -.-. .vw :- . H-:-:-:i:-:;.-.5-.-c .:-x-:-:-.-:-:---:-:-:-.-:-:-;-:-:-:-x-;-:-:-:-:-.--'-' Letters To The Editors Mumbles Right And Left Barry Called An Opportunist Editors, The Tar Heel: In Chuck Neely's article, "GOP Farm Policy Accents Freedom" (DTH Sept. 24), Mr. Neely quoted the Republican presidential nomr, inee's speech in Raleigh as say ing that he "re-iterated his long standing belief that farm subsi dies should be abolished, not over-night by one catastrophic presidential proclamation . . . but rather by a series of mild, grad ual reforms, tailored to the vary ing needs of different crops" (un derlining supplied by author.) This sounds very nice, but if the Arizona Senator has said this, then he has a very short mem ory; and his opinions now sharp ly differ with those he wrote a fow years ago in the Conscience of. a Conservative (Macfadden Edition Chapter 11): "Doing something sbout it means and there can be no equivocation here prompt and final termina tion of the farm subsidy pro gram . . . ." It is hard to believe that this is the same man speaking these two quotes. Why do you think Sen. Goldwater changed his posi tion to the first quote? It seems obvious that deep in the heart of the area covered by the subsidy programs it seemed wise for Sen. Goldwater to change his position so as not to alarm too many people who are affected by the program with his plans to wreck rural America. Sen. Gold water showed his lack of under standing toward or concern for the plight of the small farmer with this compassionate solution. "There is no more reason to help inefficient farmers than to help inefficient merchants, pro fessional men and football play ers" (speech UCLA November 13, 1964.) Without any further discussion I believe that it can be concluded that a man who changes his opinion so frequent ly and so radically can neither be called sincere, or stable, nor can he be said to have any real opinions on the subject except those mat are politically oppor tunistic. Thomas J. Lobl 7 Old West DTH News Is Unfit' To Print Editors, The Tar Heel: Dou you honestly consider yourselves putting out a news paper? At a brief glance it has the shape and color of a newspaper, but that is about as far as the comparison can go. On closer observation it looks more like a patchwork quilt of advertise ments and various and" sundry articles lifted from other papers. Surely, in an environment such as Chapel Hill, and on such a large and liberal campus as this, you can find some news to fill yonr paper without having to re sort to so many outside sources. Take, for example, your series on extremists. Chapel Hill has just as interesting individuals as Maurice McCrackin to write about, and perhaps even more in teresting since these people are members of our community. Why don't you let us know what the Chapel Hill CORE is doing now, or why aren't you giving us more information on the gubernatorial race since the results of the election will cer tainly effect the University? And your "stimulating" edi torials! Surely North Carolina politics would provide much more interesting material to edi torialize on than using your space as a column where you may air your gripes about automobile re pair service. So far your paper has been about on the level of a high school publication. Please, give us some news! ; You once said for us to give -you some time to get under way. Well, I've been waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and still I .will continue to wait AND hope that this pittance of a so-called paper will improve. I hope this waiting will SOON be worthwhile. Judy . Gray 155 Nurses Dorm Debate Would Help Electorate Editors, The Tar Heels: I must dissent from the Daily Tar Heel editorial of Sept. 24 entitled "L.B.J, and That Bad Word Debate." First, the editors state that President Johnson's refusal to de bate is intelligent, as national security may be endangered to the heat of argument. Sen. Goldwater has made sev eral proposals for a debate for mat which would eliminate this possibility. First, Sen. Goldwater has sug gested that debate involving re buttal and cross-examination be taped in advance, and that any portions detrimental to national security be deleted in advance of airing. A second proposal by the Sena tor is that a panel of four to eight responsible journalists, such as James Reston and David Law rence, be selected, one-half by each candidate, to put questions to the presidential aspirants. A third proposal from Gold water is that presidential candi dates present opening and clos ing statements, and that the vice presidential candidates engage in rebuttal and cross-examination. Next, the editorial states that President Johnson's decision is politically respectable, on the basis that he need not be ensnar ed into an "image-oriented" de bate to his own probable loss. Certainly, if President Johnson is the prudent, reasonable, pro gressive statesman his adherents have pictured him to be, he would contrast quite well with a reactionary, irresponsible and elf-cntradictorv Goldwater. " J am most gratified that the editors noted their objection to the President's dubious circum locution of the debate question. As was correctly implied, Presi dent Johnson should have direct ly and openly refused ;Sen. Gold water's debate invitations, ex plaining his reasons for so doing. One further point regarding de bates: President Kennedy had stated that, in standing for re election, he would debate. To some it would appear incumbent upon his successor to pursue that commitment. Unfortunately, the final two paragraphs of the editorial re-. flecta deplorable attitude on the part of its authors. Certainly they may heartily dissent from Goldwater's views, but the expression of their dis agreement should be both factu ally based and restrained by the cardinal rule of journalism, ob jectivity, which rends unaccept able the arrogant and contemptu ous tone of these paragraphs. The most startling statement in these paragraphs, and indeed in the entire editorial, is that per haps the Senator "has seen his own inability to really stir a crowd." One has but to review the headlines of local papers for the past two weeks to find that Goldwater not. only . draws large audiences wherever he speaks, but that in virtually every in stance these audiences are not only enthusiastic, but fervent, vo cal, and genuinely inspired. Indeed, some liberal columnists have noted with alarmed dismay what they view as the "fanatic fervor" of a great number of the Goldwater audiences. Further, the Senator obviously has been pleased with his response throughout the nation and has said so. . ' I would hope that future edi torial comment upon the various aspects of the presidential cam paign will reflect more thorough knowledge and a more consider ed attitude. William Graham Otis 225 Joyner Housing Rule Protects Student Editors, The Tar Heels: In the Thursday, Sept. 24, edi tion of the Daily Tar Heel, you used a considerable portion of the first two pages to present your views on a so-called "dis criminatory housing law." I do not know who made this law, which states that "insofar as possible, initial room assign ments will be made according to race," but it was a wise decision. I come from the eastern part of this state, an area where ra cial discrimination, although somewhat exaggerated out of proportion, does exist. My op position to the repeal of this housing law does not, however, stem entirely from whatever "racial prejudice" I may have. I believe from what I have read about this law that it was meant to prevent confusion and ill feel ings among students and their parents. Many white students simply do not want to room with Negroes, and, if there is no way to tell beforehand if one of the occu pants of a room is a Negro, then the white students in that room might very easily become angry with the University for forcing them into an unpleasant situa tion. If a white student wishes to room with a Negro, then he should be allowed to if he has his parents permission. Regard less of how "mature" or "adult" some of us may think we are, our parents still have, or at least should have, some measure of control over us. As for your statement that this law challenges the ability of the students to make intelligent de cisions, I have seen several times when students were NOT able to make a truly intelligent decision. I do not call sitting in the middle Book 'Development In Rowan's US1A Is- By NORWOOD PRATT Early last May the New York Times inserted on the bottom of page 387 of a Sunday edition a brief item regarding the "Book Development Program," of the United States Information Agency. As usual, it was the following Wednesday before I decided I had suffered enough guilt for my lack of interest in public affairs and could throw away the paper without having to read it. While I was stuffing the whole weighty mass into the trash-can book review first the USIA article caught my at tention. "Special-to-the-N.Y.-Times' re ported that the United States Information Agency had re quested that the appropriation for its Book Development Pro gram be increased from $90,000 to $195,000 for the coming year. Under this program, "Special" continued, USIA subsidizes pub lication of certain books for dis tribution here and abroad; a book on Fidel Castro was among those "developed" in this way. Only a week earlier I had been arguing with a Cuban delegate to the UN I'd met at a party given by some Quaker group to encourage informal contacts be tween Cubans and Americans. The argument made me espec ially curious about the book. "None of your important writ ers on Cuba like our revolution," he had said, but only one or two are trying to print the truth about it. Some are even in the pay of your government to keep the American public con vinced that the official propa ganda about Cuba is true." I told him that was impossible. In this country we have a free press and people can make up their own minds. I had to admit that almost everybody accepts the official points of view any way; but I insisted that it was unthinkable for the .American government to propagandize the people the way he suggested. When I read about the USIA Book Development Program, however, I decided to investi gate for myself. The following month my congressman forward ed to me USIA's reply to my enquiries. "Stanley PJesente, General Counsel and Congres sional Liason," who signed the t -letter could have been hired only for his name and certainly :not his style. His letter left me even more confused and curious since the only two sentences I fully understood said: "In response to Mr. Pratt s request for a list of the books USIA has backed, I am sorry to say that such a list is not avail able. The Agency has determin ed that the national interest dictates that the titles of these books not be disclosed." As things turned out I was working for a while this summer and got an opportunity to hear Carl Rowan, director of the USIA, talk about this program. In explaining the American Way of Life to people overseas, he said, it' was sometimes neces sary to have material specially suited to the job. For example, he once men tioned to Bennett Cerf Mr. Rowan's own publisher that USIA needed a simple book ex plaining our Social Security . System in terms that anyone, Frenchman and Pakistani alike, could understand. "Bennett grinned the way Bennett does," Mr. Rowan re ported, and then worked out an arrangement for such a book to be written and published by Random House with USIA help. This explanation carried all the conviction of a travel folder extolling the comforts of Lap land; and Mr. Rowan's au diencemyself included scorn ed embarrassed at his obvious difficulties in describing hU function in pote language. ' When afterwards I did ask about the Castro book, ho stam mered a moment and then pass ed on to the next questioner. Ever since then. I've been ft ill more curious about the books USIA "develops" for us all to read. I even wrote Bennett Ccrf and asked how many books Randcm House could produce for $195,000. The answer, oa "What's My Line" stationery, said that the interests of the American Way of Life dictated that the number not be disclosed. I have dismissed this letter as a hoax. Recently, however, new in formation on this program has come to light in testimony taken in executive session of the House Appropriations Commit tee March 5. The questions and answers that interested me most are as follows: "Mr. John Rooney (D-N.Y.): At page 18-7 entitled "Book Development" you would seek an increase from $90,000 to $195,000 in the coming year. What is the alleged necessity for that? "Mr. Reed Harris (Informa tion Center Service, USIA): That is the program under which we can have books written to our ' own specifications, books that would not otherwise be put out, especially those books that have strong anti-Communist content and follow other themes that are particularly useful for our purposes. Under the book development program, we con trol the thing from the very idea down to the final edited manuscript." "Mr. Rooney: How many writers do you have in the USIA? "Mr. Louis Fanget (Chief, Publications Division): We do not employ any writers on the staff. We try to reach outside commercial writers who have stature in the literary world, we try to get them to do books. This results in greater credibili ty, sir." "Mr. Glenard Lipscomb (R. Calif.): How many ; books do you have of the nature of (de leted) which were financed by USIA but are now being put out. by American publishers for sale in the United States? 'Mr. Fanget: Sir, it is our in tent to have all the books pub lished by the American publish er for sale commercially not only in the United States but we hope overseas so that the book has the credibility we want it to have. "Mr. Lipscomb: I'm having a hard time understanding why USIA must finance a book and then have it go on the market for sale. If a, publisher thinks a book is good "Mr. Fanget: The kinds of books we support are those that would not be published ordinarily. "Mr. Lipscomb: Why not? "Mr. Fanget: Because they would be difficult, to sell. An American publisher would not ordinarily publish an anti-Communist book because they do not sell commercially. And even those published commercially sometimes have some Federal support behind them . . . " I'm sure the USIA is every bit as American as Truth and the Bill of Rights and, as a good citizen, I will continue to read unknowingly the books it "de velops" and believe them loyal ly. ' Even so, I notice UNC Press has recently published a book on Cuba and I just wonder .... Racing Fans Seek Violent Spectacles By ALAN BANOV Who killed Jim Pardue? And who killed Fireball Roberts, Joe Weatherly, and Eddie Sachs? "Not we," reply the car-makers, building bigger and faster models. "Our cars were good, their engines powerful, their bodies strong and sturdy." Who killed Jim Pardue? "Not we," retort the tire-makers, testing their products at 150 mph. "Our men have produced the best tires ever they've won on all the tracks." Who killed Jim Pardue? "Not we," say the track own- of Franklin Street or participat ing in a hunger strike in front of the post office the result of an intelligent decision. I have only one suggestion con cerning what can be done, and that is TO LEAVE THE LAW AS IT IS. John L. Murchison 217 Alexander ers, counting their stacks of mon ey. "We just give the people what they want. They want speed, action, excitement. We give it to 'em." Who killed Jim Pardue? "We did it," confessed the mob, overflowing the stands. "We killed Jim Pardue. "Yes, we wanted speed, action, excitement. But we also wanted accidents big, noisy, bloody, ac cidents. We wanted violence, and we got it." You got it all right. And so did Pardue, Roberts, Weatherly and other racing drivers. If the public wouldn't ogle over these thrill-and-kill spectacles, their deaths would have been avoided. The immediate banning of rac ing is not proposed. Neither is the immediate ending of big en gines advocated. However, the gradual phasing out of auto-racing would save a few more lives for more con structive contributions to society.