100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

August 11, 1964 - Image 2

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1964-08-11

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

5 n
! Y I II i11 1 Y lrr rlrM r 111iYY IY

RIe Si ILJU Baily
Seventy-Third Year
ETED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICWHGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATMONS
WhereOpinionsAreFreeSTUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
'UESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1964 NIGHT EDITOR: ROBERT HIPPLER

FEIFFER

-r@ACHINCC ME:
BUTF IT PI PNT ;r,
MACKE IE
TO MF: ANDP .'
SAI TS At--
VERY S[MPUL,
-OE:Y C-A-T"
SPEC-L5 ~CAT
AND Z SAID WHY?

WVHYAND, I
5AIc WHO
MADE IT S
DID 600 MAKE
CAN'T X-Y-Z
S51-L.CAT?'

j(t! ir+ "
i ,

AND 95 5A1 D ECAUSE
IT MO~T TNAT5
WHY AND lSAID LW)W'
UOE:5N'T IT IF J WANf r «I OAN HES I
W06CAU$E RC N~AVE w
10? E RUV6 -

AN CS 15A1 DPUT WHAT
IF THE RULE:S ARE DUM13
AND C-A-T 5pE:LLIN6
FA$H1ONE:D AND XYZ
SPE:LLING CAT 15 NW -
ANP BE:TER AND 5NE
SAILD DON'T TR~Y ANP
MAWS~ THE:WORLD
LIVE:R TaivOR i&)U-

What Really Happened in
The Gulf of Tonkin?

DNE DOES NOT HAVE to see a Commu-
nist lurking behind every door to spec-
tlate that there is a great deal about the
ietnamese incidents of last week that is
ot being told. And one does not have
o envision a power elite hiding under
very bed to postulate a more sinister ex-
lpnation of recent events around the
iulf of Tonkin than that offered by the
administration.
According to President Johnson and
5ecretary of Defense McNamara, the
North Vietnamese launched PT boat at-
acks against the United States destroyer
Maddox on two separate occasions, firing
umerous torpedoes and other weapons
ut failing to inflict any damage at all
tpon the vessel. The Maddox, on the oth-
r hand, severely damaged a number of
rietnamese boats both times.
The United States had warned the
dorth Vietnamese of the danger of pro-
ocative acts and it had reemphasized
he warning following the first attack.
hen the North Vietnamese attacked
or the second time, the administration
elt compelled to demonstrate it meant
what it said. It therefore bombed a num-
er of North Vietnamese naval supply
snd harbor facilities.
'AT SUCH AN EXPLANATION is not
a full and/or honest one seems likely
then the following points are considered:
-Why would North Viet Nam want to
o anything intended particularly to pro-
oke the United States? The present guer-
lla war is going well for the North and
would want to take actions that would
iinimize the chances of increased United
tates' involvemnt, not maximize it.
-If the idea of the attacks was just to
ee how far the United States would go
r Viet Nam, why wouldn't the North
ioose a more militarily profitable 'tar-
et than a destroyer? An attack on an
rport in the South would have been
lore likely to succeed and would have
een much more worthwhile militarily.
-If the idea was to try to provoke the
nited States into doing something for
>me reason or other, why wasn't North
let Nam-and Red China, if she were
eally the one behind the attacks-far
tore prepared than she apparently was
3r aUnited States response? Certainly
massive air attack on the North and an
ivasion by South Vietnamese and U.S.
'oops could not be ruled out, and yet
iere is no indication that North Viet-
Proof
LNY GOOD, red-blooded, God-fearing,
whole-wheat American knows that the
wviet Union is leading a vile, monolithic
ad superhuman Conspiracy aimed at en-
aving the world.
Never before has this been so clear, for
over before has the Conspiracy been
cite as subtle. Never before have the
nssians actually passed up an opportu-
.ty to grab up new territory for the
Wees of darkness. But now, offered gold-
i opportunities to intervene in both Cy-
'us and Viet Nam, the cunning and in-
dious tyrants of the Kremlin have re-
Lsed!
What a brilliant and cunning strategic
aneuver!
Clearly, the Reds will stop at nothing
their fanatic drive for power. The only
)pe is for all Americans to remain con-
antly aware that the International Con-
iracy exists and always will, for a Coin-
unist can do no good. And, in case

ents in Cyprus or Viet Nam threaten to
lake your hold on this truth, the rest of
find that it helps to cover your eyes'
id ears and stick your head in the sand.
-K. WINTER
Editorial Stafff
3NNETH WINTER ...................... Co-Editor.
WARD HERSTEIN .................... Oo-Ecditor
ARY LOU BUTCHER............Associate Editor
ARLES TOWLE................... Sports Editor
FFREY GOODMAN .................... Night Editor
BERT HIPPLER........ .......... Night Editor
URENCE KIRSHBAUM ................ Night Editor

namese or Chinese forces were massed
for a response.
-If the attacks were staged by some
reckless North Vietnamese officer, why
was he allowed to launch the second one?
Surely Hanoi knew the risk involved in
such an attack, and surely it would have
stopped and severely reprimanded any-
one who had violated orders to try an
attack-and would have done so before
that person had a chance to attack again
a couple of days later.
-Finally, why did North Viet Nam
neither confirm nor deny the first attack
but term the second one "a sheer fabri-
cation?" Had it been responsible for both,
one would think they would treat both
the same way.
TO DENY the 'government explanation
of the incidents leaves a responsibility
to come up with a better one. Some theor-
ies have been put forward suggesting that
the attacks on the U.S. destroyer were
a case of mistaken identity or that the
destroyer was part of some South Viet-
namese raiding action on the North.
Another possibility is that at least the
second attack was launched by South
Vietnamese Premier Nguyen Khanh. His
motive would be 'to commit the .United
States further in Viet Nam. At present
the war is going badly and his regime is
In danger of collapsing. (The New York
Times reported the day of the second at-
tack that rumors of a coup were cir-
culating increasingly rapidly through Sai-
gon.) I
IT IS REASONABLE to think that
Khanh would try such a move. He risk-
ed seeing his country go down the drain
when he staged the coup that brought
him into power. Since he kept the man he
deposed, Duong Van Minh, in a govern-
ment post and recently (according to the
Times) even offered him the premiership
back to keep his government from com-
pletely collapsing, Khanh couldn't have
thought Minh such a bad manfor the
country; he must have just wanted to
rule himself. To stay in office he would
have been willing to try most anything.
After the first attack, probably mount-
ed by the North either by mistake, by a
reckless officer, or because the Maddox
was in territorial waters or aiding in a
South Vietnamese raid, Khanh set the
stage by saying that the United States
would be thought of as a "paper tiger" in
Southeast Asia unless it responded to such
assaults. He had been pushing the United
States for months to intensify the war in
Viet Nam, and now he was trying even
harder.
HEN THE U.S. failed to do anything
Wabout the first attack, Khanh launch-
ed the second one. The U.S. Navy said
the night of the second attack was dark
and stormy; the PT boats Khanh used
could have been made to resemble those
of the North closely enough so that the
sailors 'on the Maddox could not tell they
were not those of North Viet Nam.
It is possible that President Johnson
knew that Khanh was responsible for the
attack, but he had little alternative in
what he did. To acknowledge publicly
that Khanh was responsible would be dis-
astrous both at home and in Saigon. Re-
publicans might well ask how we could
support someone who tried so to manipu-
late us and even put our men in danger
in the process. And, if Khanh did not
get deposed of his own accord, U.S. ef-
forts to depose him would probably bring
such chaos that the South would go un-
der.

SUCH A THEORY would explain why
there was a second attack when the
North was aware of both the possible
consequences of it in terms of U.S. re-
sponse and of its foolhardinss. After all,
the first attack had done no damage but
had gotten some of the. attacking PT
boats banged up and possibly injured or
killed sailors on them. For the sake of
morale alone, to launch a second attack
would have been a very bad move.
Such a theory would also explain the
specific and vociferous denial by the
North of the second attack and the un-
DreDaredness of both North Viet Nam

AND I SAID WHYAR.6ow
RUC F,5AUWA'(5 R6 4
WHYW CAN'T NW R ULES cc.
E:VR OE: R1HT AND
S5HE: SAID I HAVCBEE
PAT5NT ONG E UOU)&H
WJITH YOU, YOUNG MAN,
NOWk SPEtL CAT THE
Rk5FIT WAAY OR IT5
B'ELL WITHOUT Tit

AND0 I 5AID, WWO R-!I6(2TV
AND SUE? SAID VNT 06
FR5,YOUj NE:ED TV AND
12 AID CANT .J V'
TAL (4ETtO PI AI
PWPLEAROUND IERe,
AND SHE 5A10 Y{:)U
OICKUP U P TUGS (3FVNNY
IDEAS r WI H Th:r e6-
(T56DW TwOU Tr i
FOR A MONTH 7

AND
CAT.

w~
a

NO MATTER
NOWR MUCH
T1' YTRY'
TO MAKE:
ME 1L.L
'SAVE
OFFeERNT:

f
k

A-B-'-D
5 fW$L~

'00 51

GP

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

U -I.

Criticizes H arr ih 'Go ldwater Case

To the Editor:
J WISH TO COMPLAIN concern-
'ing' the editorial "Refuting 'The
Case Against Goldwater," by Mi-
chael Harrah, published July 23.
I do not disagree with Mr. Har-
rah's apparent prejudices in favor
of Goldwater who is in my opinion
a man of his convictions and a
strong contender for the presi-
dency. However, I. am, highly dis-
appointed in the substance and
quality of Mr. Harrah's editorial.
I feel that he does not "refute"
anything; he does not show the
other side of the coin presented
"by some 'reporters"; he merely
adds more to the "Case Against
Goldwater."
Let me explain :and verify the
above conclusions. I have no quar-
rel with Mr. Harrah's stand; I
would like to find the 'rationale
which would permittme to con-
clude that the nation has the op-
portunity to be lead by a truly
great man. However, immediately
after the second quotation from
the New York Times, Mr. Harrah
had made five statementscall of
which are matters of dialectic,
none of which he supports with
facts, examples, .etc. Thus, the
first argument in this editorial
amounts to the quotation, and
Mr. Harrah's rebuttal, ' Oh, Yeah!"
I would ;like Mr. Harrah to
enumerate some of the good re-
actionarles (ones who have man-
aged to greatly benefit their coun-
trymen), and some of those who
have 'at least not been necessarily
bad. I would also like Mr. Harrah
to deny that tde "Goldwater Ma-
chine" Lwent to work early to
place strongly pro - Goldwater
people as delegates, thereby de-
ceiving many Republicans into
believing that they were represent-
ed at the Republican convention,
when actually only Goldwater and
his supporters were represented. I
would like Mr. Harrah to prove,
disprove, or clarify the reasons
why or why not Goldwater is in
such sharp disagreement with so
many Republicans if he is both in
step with the times, and the repe-
sentative and acknowledged leader
of the majority of them.
Below the next quote Mr. Har-
rah applauds Mr. Goldwater's
stand that the Federal government
should perform only those func-
tions which the Constitution in-
structs it to perform. He does not
refute the Times' argument; he
confirms it.
Apparently both Mr. Harrah and
Mr. Goldwater think that the Fed-
eral government overstepped in
initiating Social Security, Federal
food and drug laws and agencies,
aid to medical and military re-
search, etc. Perhaps we could sell
Social Security to some insurance
company;, the Post Office to a
trucking line, TVA to private in-
dustry, let the doctors take care
of medical research, and trust the
manufacturers and food processors
to maintain high standards (as
they did before enough cheated,
poisoned, and angry citizens de-
manded Federal action).
* * *
IN THE NEXT ARGUMENT, Mr.
Harrah does become more con-
crete and less dialectic. However,
Theodore Roosevelt was president
before either the U. S. or the
USSR had the atom bomb, and
further, Teddy Roosevelt stood for
many things which Goldwater
strongly opposes (e.g., Federal in-
tervention in labor-management
disputes). It is also a matter of
opinion as to whether Dulles was
more of a brinkman than Ken-
nedy (remember the day he
day he blockaded Cuba?) or Dean
Rusk (who recently called for and
got sanction against Cuba).
In the fifth argument in the
editorial, Mr. Harrah has reverted

people. I attempt to put these men
into office because I believe that
they know what is good or bad for
the people and will act according-
ly. In case, Mr. Harrah, you do not
know it, you support Goldwater
for the same reason. You believe
that he knows what is good and
bad for us, and that he will act
accordingly. You want him to be-
come president because it' is the
president's job to perceive what is
good and bad for his people and
to do something about it.
* * *
TO COUNT UP several more
items of illogical thinking, I have
seen Mr. Goldwater say one thing
one day, and revise it the next. I
do not believe that Mr. Goldwater
and his supporterssare right, and
that everyone who is against Gold-
water stands for is crazy or mean.
I assume that the Republican
party has made consistent progress
over the past twenty years, but ap-
parently they have just been
marking time, as Goldwater has
scrapped the complete works of
the same during that time period,
and the "up-to-date" GOP prin-
ciples completely repudiate every-
thing achieved in the 1960 plat-
form.
Perhaps Mr. Harrah 'can tell me
why Goldwater voted against clo-
ture. OK, he voted against the billt
itself, but why against cloture?
Did he think more discussion
would help his cause; was he un-
aware that filibustering makes
senators look like little boys; or
was he just stalling? Last but not
least is the fact that since Gold-'
water voted against any nation-
wide action to prevent the separ-
ate states from legislating separ-
ate-but-equal-policies, and laws
requiring Orientals to use white
washrooms and motels, but colored
facilities in lunchrooms and on

buses, why should he not go all the
way a iad vote against the economic.
compJeament to the civil rights.
bill (the Poverty Program) and.
there0y attempt to prevent any
natia mwide attempt to give the
unde rprivileged and stepped-on a
degroe of self-respect?
Cepr tainly there is a great deal
morel in the way of senseless dia-
lecti( and plain evasion of issues
and questions in Mr. Harrah's
editurial. I realize from reading
Mr. 'Harrah's past editorials that,
he ijs what many people believe
Goldwater is-a reactionary, in-
cohe rent, vascillating, old-fash-
ioneed:, etc. That is to say, Mr.
Harr 'ah does not think before he
spera ks (or writes). He merely
"rea cts." Very often, he revises
his points trying to "clarify" a
foo'ish statement without remov-
ing the foolishness. Even if Mr.
Go'iwater does not have this char-
actx*ristic; there is verys much to
feaiu from his supporters.
* * *
4S A LAST NOTE may I say
tha t I have written this letter
belieiving that someone ought to
say something. I believe that any-
on who has information to give,
per-ception to contribute ought to
be read. However, Mr. Harrah's
edi torial contains only the infor-
msation given in the Times' quotes,
on'ly the amount of perception be-
tv! Men Mr. Harrah's eyes and the
enhd of his nose. It is sufficient to
ali enate a few more people' from
th e cause which it is supposed to
support. It is a waste of space.
-A. Shook
Against CORE
'o the Editor:
1 HAD BEEN, until Sunday morn-
ing, a supporter of the Congress

of Racial Equality. I am not now,
and do not see that I can ever be
again. I write this letter not to
explain the change, but in hopes
of preventing others from making
the same mistake i giving the,
support that I did, and strength-
ening, perhaps, what opposition
CORE does have.
I attended what was a semi-
official CORE party with which
I can find no fault until the (na-,
tural enough) singing of "We
Shall Overcome" was peremptorily
interrupted:
."Oh, no, no. You can't sing this
song unless you mean it," he said.
"And if you mean it, stand up and
belt it out."
I left. ,
NOW IT HAPPENS I do mean
it, and I have stood to sing it
on occasion; but I will not be
told how to worship God, nor how
to honor my country, nor how to
sing my beliefs. It is Terror itself
alive, when men must serve as
told, and not as they would. For-
give me if I extrapolate too far,
but I must bear my witness. There
is no way to stop tyranny by giv-
ing it allegiance.
And it is not only tyranny. Our
little Authority sees the song as
a battle-cry and a glory-I can-
not but see it as sad that I must
do battle with my neighbors. That
CORE is militant, I am glad, but,
they do not weep at the cost of
their victories, and I am sorry.
Andl more. Of those there, I'
know at least two who do not
believe in the tribute they paid:
they gave * allegiance to raw
Authority. Fear is already in the
air, and it is exactly now that one
must not give in.
* * *, -
I HAVE CONTRIBUTED to
CORE; I wish that I had not. I

must be inalterably opposed
brotherhood which lives in
of doing what is not approve
and which takes its joy in c
coming, rather than in doing i
I had not known that CORE
such.
-Robert Farrell, Gr

Irish

STORY DISPENSERS
Deabri' esManaging,

To the Editor:
FORTUNATELY or unfortunate-
ly Jay Smith is not the only
one who has been concerned about
the discrepancies between my re-
view of the Irish Hill's production
of Richard III and George White's
subsequent reviews; this has been
bothering me as well. Mr. Smith's
letter to The Daily, however,
prompted me to make a return
visit to the Irish Hills to settle
for myself my judgement of their
production. This time, by compari-
son to Richard III I saw Comedy
of Errors. Mr. White is entitled
to his opinion as I am to mine-
this is still tlrd-rate theatre.
If the only prerequisite to being
called a "professional" theatre is
to pay the actors, even a minimal
sum, then I guess this group can
qualify for the title; however, if
"'professional" indicates anything
of tht caliber of the production
then, in my estimation this is not
a professional company.
There were some notable dif-
ferences between opening night
and this past Saturday-for one
thing, it was 'some 25 degrees
cooler; for another, the audience
on Saturday consisted of about
four times as many people as had
the opening night house (however,
the theatre was still less than half
full). This production did play
faster than the four-hour Richard
III; evertheless director Larry N.
Burns seems incapable ofttun-
ing himself to Shakespeare's
rhythm. Speed in the plaflng of
a production does not give comedy
any more than does slowness of
pace give tragedy, for speed alone
is not rhythm. In this current
endeavor, both humor and the
audience's understanding were
sacrificed to speed.
THE POETRY of Shakespeare
was never spoken. Mr. Victor
Raider-Wexler spits out his lines
as Antipholus of Syracuse with
the same intensity he spat out
Richard (although with a little
less pouting). Again I felt no real
characterization or character de-
velopment on the part of the ac-
tresses in the production, but
merely mechanical performances.
I am still singularly impressed by
George Wright's Dromio of Syra-
cuse. as I had been with his Duke .-
of Buckingham. Mr. Wright is
the only one in the company who
has some command and control
over and feeling for Shakespeare's
language.
Since this production has a
smaller cast than Richard fewer
of the highschool apprentc
appeared in it, and subsequently
the caliber improved at least a
little.cWhile Mrs. Burns did a com-
petent job costuming Richard, her
Comedy was very poorly done in
pseudo-Elizabethan style which
was, at best, distracting.
The gimmick of the two
"straight-men" attempting to tell
the actors (and audience) how
this play relates to Boys from Syr-
acuse and in which direction the
various cities lie, just doesn't come
off. I doubt that more than a

By ROBERT SELWA
Daily Correspondent
DEARBORN - The news man-
agers in Washington have
nothing on the administration of
Mayor' Orville L. Hubbard, for 23
years the controversial chief exec-
utive of Dearborn.
Hubbard has enviable tools to
work with: a city of 112,000 peo-
ple, a city most of whose taxes'
are paid by industry, and a con-
stituency that is strongly in fa-
vor of him.
The result: an almost unbeliev-
able $16 million city budget that
is several times as hefty as the
average budget for a city of Dear-
born's size. Of that $16 million,
some $41,000 is invested in a
Research and Information depart-
ment whose work in part consists
of building up the image of Hub-
bard and his administration.
The situation wouldn't be so bad
if the local newspapers weren't
so cooperative, but this in turn
results from the effectiveness of
the R and I department. A com-
bination of factors results in a
most successful attempt at gov-
ernmental news management and
in nearly complete lack of knowl-
edge among the citizenry about
how its news is served up.
* * *
THIS IS the process:
The R and I department, which
has four employes in the office,
writes up stories about the city
baby-sitting service and the oth-
er city services that the Hubbard
administration provides. City pho-
tographers take pictures to sup-

The stories and pictures are de-
I ivered personally to th local news-
papers by the head of the R and
X department, Alex Pilch, or one
4of his assistants. Most of the stor-
fes are published by the papers,
almost verbatim as the R and I
tdepartment wrote them.
This can be attributed in great
;part to the journalistic skills of
'Pilch, former news editor of The
Dearborn Guide, and his assist-
.ants, and also in part to the staffs
;of the local papers. For the staffs
are small and have much work to
-do. A well written story furnished
them ready to go saves them work.
* * *
THE R AND I stories are de-
fensible in the sense that they
are news. If the R and I depart-
.ment did not exist, the papers
probably would write up much of
what R and I writes up for them.
But if the papers did not have
the cooperation and assistance of
the R and I department, they
wouldn't run so much about the
Hubbard administration's services
as they do now. And undoubtedly
the stories would be written with
a more critical eye.
The Dearborn situation com-
pares with the situation in the
national and state governments
in this way: the other governments
try to do the same thing, but
are less successful than Dearborn's
government. The President's pub-
lic relations department gives out
news releases to reporters, and
the reporters take some informa-
tion and relect other information

This is not direct news manage-
ment by the R and I department
of what appears in the local pa-
pers, but is a definite, indirect
and subtle type of news man-
agement. Pilch takes the position
that the newspaper editor is the,
news manager, and in the strict
sense, this is true. But through
Pilch's services, valued at $12,800
in salary, and the services of his
department, valued at $41,000 in
expenditures by the administra-
tion, the city plays a significant
part in the news reporting process
of Dearborn.t
Pilch's role in this is greater
than merely preparing and deliv-
ering news stories (or a favorable
letter to Hubbard for use as a let-
ter-to-the-editor). He is a friend-
ly, good-humored individual whc
maintains good terms with news-
paper folk. He does not tell the
papers what to run. But by his
department's services and through
his conversations with journalists
he subtly and effectively influ--
ences what th papers do run. And
what the papers do not run.,
* * *
FOR INSTANCE, an effort was
made to run, as part of a re-
porter's column, a neutral expla-
nation of the R and I depart-
ment's news preparation role. But
Pilch's conversations with the re-
porter's editor, and the editor's
thoughts about his dependence on
R and I, stopped up the report.
Thus, there is not only influence
on the content of the news that
is reported, but also influence on
the reporting of the fact that
there is influence.

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan