Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHmAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevai"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must ba noted in all reprints.
SATURDAY, MARCH 2, 1963 NIGHT EDITOR: BARBARA LAZARUS
"Who Said Anything About Driving Out Castro?
We're Talking About Kennedy"
'MY INDIANA HOME':
Subversive Plot
Foiled Again
The Government Never Lies
It Just 'Fibs'About News
MANY METAPHORES have been made about
the chameleon that changes its color to
defend itself, and even more has been written
on the man who does one wrong thing and is
drawn into a web of deception to conceal it.
In essence, the whole literature of America
has been a moral judgement on the necessity
for honesty and truth. Recently, the film "Billy
Budd" reiterated the necessity of following
the rules in spite of the immediate conse-
quences.
IN VIEW of the fact that the whole fabric
of American society has been built on the
assumption that the means determines the
ends, the recent actions of the Kennedy Ad-
ministration are totally inexcusable.
The "re-arrangement" of the news in the
Cuban and Vietnam affairs and the general
attitude that the American public is not to
be trusted with information indicates a basic
breakdown of the very society they are attempt-
ing to protect.
Malcolm Kilduff, assistant to Pierre Salinger,
told a group of assembled editors at the Over-
seas Press Club conference last weekend that
national security was more important than the
truth and that the administration could con-
tinue to restrict information affecting national
security.
HE THEN went on to say that the Kennedy
Administration had never "manipulated"
the news and would never do so. In the same
five minutes he admitted that they had "fibbed
a little" in the midst of the Cuban furor. The
fourth stand he made was that they would
evade questions when the truth in that area
would "hurt" national security.
In a course of a 20 minute speech he took
four different stands on the release policy on
security information-each wrong ... although
some more wrong than others.
Let us put the news handling in context.
In a world under the damoclesian sword of
the "20-minute-death," open exchange of in-
formation and the establishment of trust is
all-important among and within nations. Two
wrongs do not make a right, although the
Soviets do it, the censoring of information does
not add to international trust. Nor does it
help national morale and trust when the public
realizes that it is being spoon-fed measured
information on question on national policy.
THE FIRST general policy stated that even-
ing was that national security was more
important than the truth. What "nation" is
this security attempting to protect that the
most sacred pillar must be torn down to save
it? What price is "victory" or "continued
security" if that province protected is exactly
like the "enemy?"
A more detailed consideration of ethics
comes with examination of Kilduff's second
and third claims about policy. The second
claim was that the administration had never
manipulated the news. This is glorious if pos-
sible. However, upon further questioning it
became clear that they had never perma-
nently manipulated the news. In other words
they had the decency not blatantly to falsify
history, for that attribute can only be one of
a totalitarian regime.
The third claim shows the absolute hypocrisy
of the second. Although the administration
never manipulates the news, Kilduff admitted
it does "fib" a little on major crises or when
the correct news is not "helpful to the cause."
The measure of a man used to be that of
honesty and the ability to do the job. I am
one of those anacronistic idealists who be-
lieve that a job is not done well unless it is
blessed with the truth. And of course, there
is an itsy-bitsy nagging question: What is the
difference between fibbing and lying?
The fourth claim is that the administra-
tion would evade questions that would involve
an area of touchy security. This stand was
taken after much questioning from the as-
sembled college editors and seems to be a
good synthesis of the others. It is also an
indication of a tightrope that might con-
ceivably be walked.
T HERE IS a possibility that national security
can be compatible with the truth and the
free desimination of information. It involves a
higher degree of trust however. The newspapers
must be given the opportunity to censor the
majority of information that comes into the
hands of the administration, that includes
CIA reports. On questions of vital security,
of which there; might be one or two a year,
the administration might refuse to release any
information at all. This is far preferable to
lying to the public or "manipulating" the
news.
The problem of newspapers censoring them-
selves is a great one. That newspapers must
be given the information to fulfill their func-
tion in society as the eyes and ears of the
public is not to be questioned. A vital part
of this function is the continuation of free
competition among newspapers and news agen-
cies. This competition insures that no vested or
unhealthy interest can muffle news by control
of newspapers.
The question is, how can the press be trust-
ed to censor itself on questions of public secur-
ity under the pressures of competition?
The answer lies in the delegation of the
powers of the press on vital matters to an
impartial elected board of free newsmen. This
board would be elected for a three-year term
by the news agencies of the nation.
These men, freed from any affiliation with
their individual agencies for that period, would
see all news and decide, in conference with the
administration, what should legitimately be
held back. This would serve a dual purpose, it
would allow the administration to release more
information and be constantly under the sur-
veilance of the free press, and it would solve
the problem of the pressure of competition
for the story of individual newspapers.
THAT THE ADMINISTRATION is now com-
pletely in the wrong to continually hide
and distort news for "security's" sake is self-
evident. They are setting an example and liv-
ing by a creed that could lead us right up to
the back door of a police state.
That the administration does this out of
fear and an unbearable feeling of immediate
responsibility for the nation's welfare, is to
be understood. The press of the United States
should extend to them a bridge of trust before
they "wade too deep."
-CAROLINE DOW
Personnel Director
> F =
:. : - :z :-
: ::
', . t '
~ '
__
_ .
-
ta T - 1*
1
; : ' ~;,, . Cod
, " "
,r. .
-" s
11963 : °f:. .
: ..
!n.... .. .
t «
'.,.
: a.
,r °
p
KENNEDY AND BETANCOURT:
A Real Alliance for Progress
Rush Is Over, Life Isn't
By ROBERT SELWA
WASHINGTON has changed.
ed LatindAmerican dictators us-
ed to find a welcome mat and a
medal of honor awaiting them in
the United States Capitol. Now
it is a Latin American democrat
who is welcomed and honored.
This was illustrated this past
week when Romulo Betancourt,
the president of Venezuela, came
to our country. Betancourt is ex-
pected to become the first elected
civilian president in Venezuela's
history of dictatorships and civil
wars to serve out his term. His
rule has been the longest demo-
cratic rule that Venezuela has ex-
perienced. It was fitting that this
and Betancourt's other achieve-
ments were honored by the United
States last week.
President John F. Kennedy
abandoned the formal language
that usually surrounds a reception
and that is often so hollow. In-
stead, Kennedy spoke extemporan-
eously, straightforwardly. "You
represent all we admire in a poli-
tical leader," Kennedy told Betan-
court. "You are a symbol of what
we wish for our country and our
sister republics of the hemisphere.
It is no accident that you and
your country have been marked
number one in their (Communist)
efforts to eliminate you and what
you stand for and the progress
that you represent."
Kennedy, Dan Kurzman of The
Washington Post noted, offered
compliments "which observers
could not recall having ever been
equalled in White House verbal
extravagance." Betancourt, ob-
viously moved, replied that Ven-
ezuela stands with the United
States in joint dedication to West-
ern democratic ideals.
* * *
BETANCOURT'S REPLY was
true in respect to his government
and to the party he leads, Accion
Democratica. For years AD 4nd
Betancourt have been fighting for
the welfare of the great masses
of Venezuela. They have organ-
ized the oil workers, improv:ed
their standards, recognized their
unions and given them collective
bargaining rights. Betancourt and
AD have promoted the desperately
needed land reform, giving count-
less peasants a piece of land they
can call their own.
Betancourt and AD have been
building schools for children and
have been providing adult educa-
tion for grownups, most of whom
can neither read nor write. The
government has eradicated ma-
laria, which used to hit one out
of every five Venezuelans every
year, and the result is that life
expectancy has increased from 45
years in the 1940's to 64 years to-
day,
Betancourt and AD have been
developing the economy of Ven-
ezuela through the building of
highways and railroads, the con-
structing of airports, the enlarg-
ing of the merchant marine, the
their esteem for each other so
high.
* * *
THIS HAS NOT always been
the case in Betancourt-United
States relations. Betancourt has
been in power since 1958, Ken-
nedy since 1961. Previous to Bet-
ancourt was one of Venezuela's
worst dictators, Marcos Perez
Jimenez; before the Kennedy Ad-
ministration was an administra-
tion that didn't care much about
the welfare of Latin America-
the administration of Dwight
Eisenhower.
Jimenez deposed the young
democratic government of Ven-
ezuela in 1948, ruled for a decade.
In 1952 he permitted an election,
saw that he was losing, imposed
a tight censorship on the election
returns, ordered that the counting
of the ballots be stopped, and an-
nounced his own victory. His re-
gime was as thoroughly despotic
and brutal as any that Venezuela
has ever suffered. It included the
use of torture and assassination
at a concentration camp, the
abolition of labor unions, the re-
moval of independent-minded
teachers from the schools, the
tossing in jail or exiling of edi-
tors, the barring from the mails
of critical foreign journals, and
the closing of the universities.
* * *
JIMENEZ was given an en-
thusiastic welcome in Washington.
Eisenhower conferred upon him
the Legion of Merit. When Jim-
enez was finally ejected by a
popular rebellion in 1958, the
United States permitted him to
settle in Miami.
While Jimenez was in power,
Betancourt was in exile in Puerto
Rico. The government of Puerto
Rico was requested by an official.
of the Eisenhower Administration
to get Betancourt out of that
United States territory because
his presence was embarrassing.
Betancourt departed.
iHis return to the United States
last week was in the Kennedy
Administration's atmosphere of
friendship and concern for the
welfare of Venezuela. But most
important, it was an atmosphere
of trying to help the peoples of.
the Amercias. The masses of Ven-
ezuela have long lived in oppres-
sion and poverty; working to-
gether, the governments of Ven-
ezuela and the United States can
remedy this.
In 1958 Vice-President Richard
Nixon was stoned and spit upon
in Caracas. The hate toward the
United States resulting from the
Eisenhower Administration's pol-
icies toward Latin America, can
change to affection if Betancourt
and Kennedy are successful. Ven-
ezuela is one of the best hopes of
Latin America because of an eco-
nomic base that is much better
than those of the other "republics"
south of the border. The Alliance
For Progress is one of the best
hopes for improving United
States-Latin American relations,
since it strikes at the real needs
of the masses.
Venezuela has a dreary past and
United States policy has a dreary
past; but now there are signs of
the beginning of a bright future.
Washington's welcome for Betan-
court was one of these signs.
By JEAN TENANDER
WORRIED MONROE County
Prosecutor, Thomas A. Hoad-
iey, seems to be a trifle undecided
on the charges to use against In-
diana University's Young Socialist
Alliance. He has tried several on
for size in the past two weeks,
but rumor has it that he has
still failed to find a perfect fit.
It all began last October when
a group of 15 students at Indiana
staged a demonstration in pro-
test of Kennedy's action in Cuba.
Actually there were 315 students
involved in the protest but that
may not count because the extra
300 students weren't protesting the
same thing that the original 15
were protesting. The 300 students
were protesting against the 15
students protesting against Ken-
nedy. Only they protested by hit-
ting and kicking the 15 students
protesting against Kennedy (which
isn't really a very nice way to
protest) and then Hoadley pro-
tested too-also against the 15
students protesting against Ken-
nedy.
Hoadey was upset because he
thought the students demonstrat-
ing against Kennedy were organiz-
ed as "a deliberate provocation to
incite to riot." He was also upset
because some of the demonstra-
tors were YSA members. As a
matter of fact he was probably
more upset bythis than by any-
thing else, but he hadn't been
elected county prosecutor yet and
he couldn't do very much except
sputter.
NOBODY LISTENED to Hoad-
ley's sputtering except a few YSA
members who detected a man
dedicated to completing what he
had begun as the future county
prosecutor. (YSA didn't happen
to be the group that organized
the demonstratoin, by the way,
but that is obviously irrelevant.)
Because they had been listening
with half an ear to the rumblings
from Monroe County, the prose-
cutor's rapier-like move on Feb.
18 (Hoadley was elected' in Jan-
uary) did not come as too much
of a surprise to YSA members. It
did come as a surprise to the
university, the administration and
the campus.
Feb. 18 was the day Hoadley ac-
cused YSA of being a subversive
organization dedicated to the vio-
lent overthrow of the United
States government. He also asked
the university to withdraw its
recognition of the group on the
grounds that it was in violation
of the State Anti-Subversive Act
of 1951. Threats that the October
demonstration could be defined as
a case of "unlawful assembly" had
not worked very well. This seemed
a magnificent alternative.
/ * * *
UNFORTUNATELY, things did
not work out as smoothly as they
should have. Richard Stein, U.S.
attorney at Indianapolis, kept say-
ing things like "the Indiana Anti-
State Subversive Act 1951 may be
un-constitutional." Apparently an
annoying 1958 Supreme Court de-
cision had declared a similar sta-
tute in Pennsylvania un-constitu-
tional on the basis that sedition
and subversion are essentially the
province of the federal govern-
ment.
Hoadley pulled himself together,
however, and said in reply: "Stein
has no business telling the state
of Indiana whether a criminal
statute is constitutional or un-
constitutional. I'm inclined to test
it, even if it must go through the
Supreme Court."
But other busybodies - the
speaker of theIndiana Civil Lib-
erties Union, the secretary of.aca-
demic affairs at the university, the
head of the university NAACP
chapter, for example-kept point-
ing out that the act might very
well be un-constitutional.
* * *
SECTION 105204 says: "It shall
be unlawful to be a member of
the Communist Party or any
party, group or organization which
advocates in any manner the over-
throw, destruction, or alteration of
the constitutional form of gov-
ernment of the United States or
of the state of Indiana or any
political sub-division thereof, by
revolution, force, violence, sedi-
tion, or which engages in any un-
American activities."
There is no indication anywhere
in the act of what an "un-Ameri-
can activity" is. The broadness of
the language and of the listed
prescriptions make the constitu-
tional guarantees of freedom of
speech, press, and assembly a
mockery. But it is on the statute
books and that's a pretty good
justification in anyone's language
for its application. Right?
* * *
MORE MEDDLERS tried to
cloud the issue by indicating a
belief that the status of campus
organizations should be exclusively
within the jurisdiction of the uni-
versity. If the university is to be
considered an independent organ-
ization it should be treated as
such. Action by concerned county
prosecutors in areas where the
university is theoretically auton-
omous. not only undermine this
autonomy but set precedents for
believe in the violent overthrow of
the government. According to YSA
membership, the only sense in
which they are revolutionary is in
that they seek economic and social
change but they do not seek this
through revolution or violence.
They do, however, agree with the
works of Marx, Lenin, and Trot-
sky and this is probably where
Hoadley got confused. It's happen-
ed to others.
Therefore, even though he had
the administration's pledge to co-
operate with an investigation of
the situation by the state attorney
general, Hoadley was still not in
the position he wanted to be in.
All these petty little contradictions
kept popping to destroy his at-
tempt to protect the Indiana cam-
pus from subversion. Being of un-
daunted courage he tried one
more time.
HOADLEY HAD discovered, or
thought he had discovered, that
YSA "admitted" being the youth
group of the Socialist Worker
Party. And since the SWP is on
the Attorney General's list of sub-
versive organizations, YSA would
definitely have to go.
Once again YSA members mess-
ed things up by pointing out~ that
they were not the youth movement
of the SWP. Paulanne Groninger,
a YSA member, said YSA was pro-
grammatically and organization-
ally independent and has no con-
nections with the SWP whatso-
ever. Although the Young Social-
ist, the national YSA newspaper,
said in May of 1960 that support-
ers of the Young Socialists have
come into basic political solidarity,
on the principles of revolutionary
socialism with the SWP," Miss
Goninger said this referred to
ideas and not party discipline.
The revised statement of pur-
pose on file at the university says:
"The Indiana University YSA will
not be a disciplined body as the
National YSA is to some degree."
HOADLEY SEEMS to have
jumped the -gun. He was so wor-
ried about the possibility that
there might indeed be Commun-
ism on the campus that he didn't
bother to consult the university
before he informed the press of his
fears. The first the administration
heard of the situation came from
the morning newspapers. Strange
that Hoadley couldn't have taken
the trouble to call and tell In-
diana about his efforts to purge
the campus of its undesirable ele-
ments. Maybe he was afraid the
university might succeed in prov-
ing he was wrong before he had
a chance to make his debut as a
Communist exterminator. Now he
doesn't have to worry because no-
body ever backs down after ac-
cusing somebody of being un-
American. That would be un-
American. The problem is that
somebody has got to teach Hoadley
what being an American is.
'SUMMERSKIN':
Interesting
monotony
T HE EXCITEMENT and traumas of sorority
rush are finally over, leaving the disap-
pointed and ecstatic, the rejected and the
accepted. Each year fresmmen women and
many upperclassmen place themselves in the
hectic rat race voluntarily and are offered,
like a piece of candy, the sorority-the sup-
posedly ultimate achievement of the Michigan
woman.
Yet this piece of candy, which becomes so
habit-forming and enticing to those who stick
it out through final deserts, is often cruelly
yanked away from many of them. Those who
are fortunate enough to pledge, who have made
no enemies during rush and have handled
themselves well in the brief "rush-type" con-
versations, get the chance to see that sorority
is not the ultmate. It is composed of normal
human beings, having no more or less human
kindness or outstanding qualities than anyone
else.
EACH YEAR many top "rave" women come
through rush and choose not to pledge any
house. For them the choice is between Martha
Cook, a co-op or even a dormitory and the
sorority. They are, perhaps, afraid or unwill-
ing to place their emotions on the line and feel
that sorority will bind, rather than enhance
their individuality and talent. These women
will be an addition to the living unit they have
chosen and will realize the very potentiality
that was recognized by the sorority women
judging them during rush. These women ul-
timately did not preference and may doubt
their decision at first, but later will never
question it. Perhaps as time goes on, more
and more of these women will drop rush alto-
- -4-t - .. # , ..te+- +, e. 1 -..ms 4,-r es~ r
members which sustains itself for one month.
It makes the faces of members glow when the
door springs open, and rushees anxiously pour
in. It forces rushees to try to banish nervous-
ness and longing from their faces. Rush forces
many fine women to become so wrapped up in
the whole situation that their entire lives and
thoughts center on sorority and sorority alone.
NOW THAT the whole fiasco is over and life
is returning to normal, these women must
reorient their lives to the values that were im-
portant to them before rush and are still im-
portant. They must remember that they came
to the University for an education, to live
and work with people in a dormitory or in
some extra-curricular activity.
They must remember that they were judged
not by adults or persons in a position of
authority, but by their own peers, who can and
very often do make mistakes and misjudg-
ments. They must not 'condemn themselves
and try to change who or what they are just
because they were turned down by "the sys-
tem." In a sense the person who did not pledge
should not dwell on the fact the decision was
made against her, and should try to realize
her potentials in re-enforcing lasting and not
transcient values. Rush is over, but life is not,
and this should always be remembered by
those who did not pledge.
The lucky few who pledged should realize
just how fortunate they are to have been
chosen. Numerically the odds are very small
that the many who began will have a happy
completion to their trial. They will find that
sorority is not all that rush made it appear
and may even feel a sense of depression, ques-
I
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
ISA Action Interim
To the Editor:
THE NEWS as printed in Thurs-
day's Daily about the "election"
of Isaac Adalemo, '64, to "ISA
Post" (the office was not speci-
fied) needs some clarification.
I would like to inform you that
the International Students As-
sociation does not hold its annual
elections until late in the Spring
Semester. The president of the ISA
elected in a general election last
spring and whose term does not
end until the end of this semes-
ter resigned at the beginning of
the semester for personal reasons.
Since the vice-president, who
normally would have taken over
the presidency, has transferred to
another school, he also had to
resign from his post. Unfortun-
ately the present constitution does
not provide for the filling of either
or both positions under such un-
usual circumstances.
IN ITS MEETING of February
21, the executive committee of the
ISA discussed the situation and
vice-president respectively until
the next general elections.
-Ramez Ibrahim, Grad
ISA Executive Secretary
Motives .
To the Editor:
AM FRANKLY puzzled by the
exact motives which prompted
Paul A. Hudon (Low-Simmer,
Wednesday) to become the self-
anointed Sarah Gibson Blanding
of Michigan men. Although as a
woman, I laud his sentiments, I
question just who are the "we"
who have chosen the "soaring" ap-
proach to sex, and also if the
"placid lake, the breathtaking
mountain range, . . et al" don't
suggest a cross between a Salem
cigarette and the Grand Canon
Suite. Perhaps Mr. Hudon is mak-
ing this voluntary confessional
preparatory to giving up sex for
Lent.
-Barbara Strauss, '66
Unf air:.
To the Editor:
T HE OLD MAN with the dark
crusty skin grimaced at the
girl on the beach. "It's the time of
year now when your dark summer-
skih begins to peel off. But you're
not like the rest of us. You're
white."
This image brings into sharp
focus the allegory that Leopold
Torre Nilsson presents in his movie
playing at the Cinema Guild to-
night and tomorrow night, "Sum-
merskin."
"Summerskin" is an allegory of
a man dying of an incurable dis-
ease and seemingly being cured
by his love for a morally corrupt
but sensitive young girl. She, in
her lazy degradation, seems to be
cured of her moral disease by the
man's love for her. But she re-
treats from him in shock when
he discovers he is cured and wants
her to marry him. In parallel to
the physically sick man and the
morally sick girl is the society
in which they live with rich ease.
There can be no reconciliation
between the girl and man, and
neither can there be with any
similar elements of their society.
* * *
THE SUMMERSKIN of exper-
ience shows lilly white on her
body. She. can't shed the exper-
ience of the season as~ the old
man sheds his summerskin in the
autumn, and neither can she give
herself to the experience. Not un-
til the very end of the movie do
her feelings well up in the form
of tears and this is the first drop
of real emotion that Nilsson al-
lows on the screen.
Working very methodically-at
times even a feverishly slow pace
-Nilsson attempts to show the
moral degradation of upper class
Argentine society. The most strik-
ing way he does this is with the
absolute dryness of his direction
and script. The cinematography is
clear and unexciting. The acting is
the same. In fact, everything about
the movie is boring and listless
/
4