Internet Payments

Secure & Reliable

Your data is encrypted and secure with us.
Godaddyseal image
VeraSafe Security Seal

Lethbridge Herald Newspaper Archives

- Page 4

Join us for 7 days to view your results

Enter your details to get started

or Login

What will you discover?

  • 108,666,265 Obituaries
  • 86,129,063 Archives
  • Birth & Marriages
  • Arrests & legal notices
  • And so much more
Issue Date:
Pages Available: 20

Search All United States newspapers

Research your ancestors and family tree, historical events, famous people and so much more!

Browse U.S. Newspaper Archives


Select the state you are looking for from the map or the list below

OCR Text

Lethbridge Herald (Newspaper) - August 7, 1970, Lethbridge, Alberta 4 - THE IETHBRIDGE HERAID - Friday, August 7, 1970 Maurice Western Official Arab Line-up... The fissures in the Arab world present serious obstacles to eventual Middle East peace - to put it in mild terms. In order to have even a sketchy understanding of the deep divisions which make a settlement of the dispute incredibly difficult, it is necessary to have a broad outline of the line-up of nations clearly in mind. Officially the Arab governments are divided into three categories in their view of the ceasefire - those who oppose it, those who favor it, and those who hold "no opinion" but sit anxiously on the sidelines with a wet finger to the wind. President Nasser of Egypt leads the nations who have already agreed to the Rogers proposal of a 90 day ceasefire. He has the backing of .Jordan, Lebanon, North Yemen, Libya and Sudan. These nations may vary somewhat in the degree of firmness with which they support Egypt's stance, but they can be considered to be well established in Nasser's camp. Aligned against Nasser are the governments of Iraq, Syria and Algeria, with Iraq leading the opposition pack. Of the three, Syria appears at the moment to be the most likely to change its stand, although such an eventuality is only a faint hope. Arabian regimes are not noted for their reliability when it comes to political loyalties. Those standing on the sidelines at present are Kuwait, Morocco, Tunisia, South Yemen and Saudi Arabia. In this group the key figure is King Faisal of Saudi Arabia. Last year he told President Nasser he would not stand in the way of a peaceful settlement, but he is now under heavy pressure from the Palestinians to change his stand. Faisal has given financial support to both Egypt and the guerrillas. If he should decide to favor one side or the other, it could tip the scales in the coming showdown. This over-simplified and necessarily brief outline gives the alignment oi' established, though in some cases, tenuously established, Arab regimes. But it is the unofficial force, that even now is causing the greatest disruption. This is of course the guerrilla group which poses the most serious threat of all in the progress towards the peace talks, to the security of Israel during the ceasefire period, and to the internal peace of the countries from which they operate. The guerrillas oppose all moves which might lead to recognition of Israel's right to exist by Arab governments. They want nothing less than the elimination of Israel as a nation. .. And Unofficial But the guerrillas are divided too- from an organizational point of view and from an ideological one as well. The largest and most influential of the guerrilla complex is a coalition of el-Fatah, who are the organized fighters, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) an umbrella resistance organization set up in 1964. It is headed by Hasir Arafat, the most influential of all the Palestinian leaders. The men at the top in el-Fatah come mostly from educated Palestinians-in-exile who believe that the Arab states have neglected the Palestinians in their own self interest. Since 1964 el-Fatah has broadened its base, become well organized into a formidable military threat and although its leaders still come from the professional and intellectual classes it has been able to draw thousands of the rank and file Palestinian workers, artisans and farmers to its cause. Fatah's primary objective is a solution, on its terms, of the Palestinian question. Ideological policies and commitments to other Arab nations are sublimated. They can wait. The smaller and extreme left-wing guerrilla groups include the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, led by Dr. George Habash, the Palestine Democratic Front, and the Saiqua, a militant pan-Arab socialist Baath party. They view the struggle with Israel as only part of a revolutionary socialist, anti - imperialist movement encompassing the entire Arab world. These smaller groups generally speaking are the terrorists, the bomb throwers and hi-j ackers. The Fatah, again speaking in general terms, is more inclined to face realities, to understand politics, to compromise, to distinguish the possible from the impossible. It is also reputed to wish to avoid a military showdown in Jordan. There have even been reports that some el-Fatah supporters would settle for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the conquered areas, rather than hold out for the elimination of the nation itself. These reports however, remain unconfirmed. El-Fatah to the outside world presents a solid anti-Israeli front. From all this fragmentation of interest and ideology, can peace, even an uneasy peace be achieved? A disenchanted world watches with faint hope, but with a measure of thanks that the attempt will be made. Art Buchwald WASHINGTON-One of the major goals of our American foreign policy is to haive countries all over the world hold free elections. As part of this policy, the State Department has been urging politicians to come to the United States and study our political system. A recent visitor was Ramat Gow of the tiny republic of Nonomura. Ramat Gow met with officials of both parties and received a marvelous insight into how American politics works. He was also briefed by Starkely Merri-weather, of Starkely, Ramsden and Phipps, a public-relations company specializing in electing public officials. "How does one get elected?" Ramat Gow asked. "Well, first you need money. You have to have campaign funds to spend on billboards, flyers, radio and television." "I see. And how does one get this money?" "The best and easiest way", said Meri-weather, "is to approach lobbyists representing vested interests in your country who are willing to contribute large sums of money to political candidates." "Ah, but if we accepted money from people who have vested interests would we not be obligated to protect these people after we were elected?" "Exactly. That's the whole idea. They're not financing you because they like the cut of your jib." "Is there no other way of holding elections without asking for money from the vested people?" "We haven't come up with any," Merri-weather said. "The American political system is open to anyone in this country, providing he or she can afford it. You see, Mr. Ramat Gow, the most important thing in a political campaign is to get through to your people that your candidate is the best man for the job. This is done through advertising. We sell our politicians in the United States just like we sell our soap. We offer extra ingredients that brand X doesn't have. Now this takes money. You have to keep hitting the American people over the head before you get through to them." "That's very interesting," Ramat Gow said. "So the man with the most money is the one who is likely to win in United States?" "I wouldn't go that far. You have to give the candidate charisma." "How do you do that?" "By spending money. The old days of a candidate going out and pressing the flesh are just about over. It's the candidate who comes on for a minute during a football game on TV that's going to take all the marbles." "This is most constructive. I wish to run for the Senate of my Parliament. What do you suggest I do?" "Well, the first thing you do is hold a big dinner. Invite the heads of the oil companies, the labor unions and the trucking people and make them each cough up $100 a plate." "What occasion should I say we are holding the dinner for?" "Your birthday." "Alas, my birthday is in December." "Who the hell knovs the difference? After you get the money, you can make Ramat Gow a household word." "Thank you very much, Mr. Merriweath-er. I have learned more from you in half an hour about the democratic process than I have learned from all other government officials combined. One more thing. How do you make a TV commercial? (Toronto Telegram News Service) Elusive Argument On Aboriginal Rights QTTAWA - The department of Indian affairs, in the face of a request from a broadly representative Eskimo conference at Coppermine for recognition of "our rights as aboriginals in the lands of the North." has reiterated the extraordinary position of last year that the government does not recognize aboriginal rights. In regard to the claims, a policy paper observes: "These are so general and undefined that it is not realistic to think of them as specific claims capable of remedy except through a policy and program that will end injustice to Indians as members of the Canadian community." It is highlv probable that the Canadian Eskimos were encouraged to make representations at this time by the fact that the United States is making a large and costly settlement with t h e Eskimos of Alaska. Mr. Chretien has observed on television that the two cases are different, since the Americans bought Alaska from Russia. Unquestionably there are differences. The Americans saved their aboriginals from a Russian future. Many peoples, the Czechs, for example, might feel that such a service definitely lessened the U.S. obligation. The significance of the projected American settlement and of contemporary developments in the Canadian North is doubtless that they have given the iBslcJmos and some Indians (the Eskimos according to a Supreme Court decision are legally Indians) much greater appreciation of the potential value of their claims. Had there been a settlement years ago when the government had no doubts about the aboriginal title, the cost would have been small. Now, because of government's neglect, the prospective bill is high. S'o the claims, 'in the government's view, have become so general and undefined that it is not realistic to think of them as specific and "capable of remedy." The moral argument, to say the least of it, is elusive. A small debt is valid and should be honored by government; if it becomes too large it becomes invalid and the government is entitled to renege. Reports suggest that Indians and Eskimos have difficulty in following the government's reasoning. White citizens may have the same problem. The policy statement quoted above hopelessly confuses two quite separate things. It suggests that the claims will be satisfied by a policy and program that will end injustice to Indians as members of the Canadian community. But the government surely has a re- sponsibility to end injustice, so far as possible, to all groups in the community whether they are red, white, black or any other color. What minister would deny this? Moreover, this responsibility, whatever its dimensions, would have existed if there had never been any aboriginal rights or treaties based upon them. If the government expropriates a man's house it does not refuse compensation on the ground that he enjoys the same benefits in the form of family allowances, medicare, the Canada Pension Plan and so on possessed by other citizens whether they have ever owned houses or not. It recognizes by compensa tion a particular right, but in the case of the Eskimos it proposes to submerge this by unilateral decision in the generality of rights enjoyed by Canadians. In order to do this, and so to dodge its obligations, the government is borrowing from the techniques of Stalin. It is rewriting the history of the country. Stalin limited him self more or less to some three decades. But Ottawa, no piker in these matters, proposes to wipe out two centuries. The record goes back at least to the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which declared it "just and reasonable and essential to our interest and the security of our colonies that the several nations or tribes or'Indians with whom we are connected or who live under our protection sho.uld not be molested or disturbed in the possession of such parts of pur Dominions and territories as not having been ceded to or purchased by us are reserved to them, or any of them as their hunting grounds." It also provided that no individual could acquire title to land except through the Crown as intermediary and it set out a procedure for acquisition by the Crown: "If at any time any of the said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said lands the same shall be purchased only for us in our name at some public meeting or assembly of the said Indians to be held for that purpose . . ." While this did not apply at the time of Rupertsland, presumably because the Hudson's Bay company was not then in the land business. The principle was observed later. Thus Lord Selkirk was required to negotiate with the Indians before placing settlers on the land. With the transfer of the country to the Dominion, Parliament in its first address to Her Majesty promised to settle the question of Indian claims in conformity with the principles honored by the British Crown. Except where matters were simply neglected, practice accorded with this. Cessions of BERRY'S WORLD BALM'S Tot c 1970 If MCA, Inc "Let's play football. I'll be spokesmen for the plcnvr-. and you represent team owners," c 1970 ht HHA, loo, "Things have gotten so tough, Harry, I may haye to go go out of business." territory were made by treaty, the consent of the Indians being obtained at meetings (and subsequent adhesion of bands down to 1930). If there was no aboriginal title, what was the point of including such language as the following in Treaty Number 11 covering the Mackenzie? "The said Indians do hereby cede, release, surrender and yield up to the government ... all their rights titles and privileges whatsoever to the lands included within the following limits ..." No doubt the bargains were bad from the Indian point of view, some worse than others. What the government offered was niggardly but at least it paid something to extinguish the Indian title. If there was an aboriginal title - and this was conceded for two inconvenient centuries -it must have been shared by all the native people. But the government, which always took the initiative in these matters, has not yet settled, or even attempted to settle, with the Eskimos. Being in default and alarmed by the prospects, it now says that it does not recognize aboriginal rights. The Indians maintain that some treaty provisions have been dishonored. C e r tainly some treaties have not been implemented; the Mackenzie land question, for example, having been left in abeyance to the present day. This argument sufficiently impressed the government that it sought for some time to establish a treaty claims commission. But the basis of the treaties was recognition of an aboriginal title. If there is not and presumably never was an aboriginal title, what confidence can Indians have that anything will be done about infractions of treaties that rested on nothing? Naturally, the government offers all sorts of reassurances, but even if its intentions are excellent the Indians can have no particular reason for confidence. After all, the intentions of one government are certainly not binding on its successors. If the present attitude of the department is an aberration and it turns out that there is an aboriginal title, it does not follow that it must necessarily be extinguished by land .grants or medicine chests or beads. The nature of the compensation obviously is a matter for negotiation. Unilateral decision by government will merely convince the Eskimos that they are the victims of a swindle. It remains to be demonstrated that this is not the case. (Herald Ottawa Bureau) Charles Foley Safety Crusader Nader Leads War On Pollution T OS ANGELES - A crack posse of Naders' Raiders, a roving self - appointed band of vigilantes which sows panic in America's bureaucracies and boardrooms, has descended on California to investigate "the use and abuse" of the West's most precious asset-land. To many of the Golden State's acquisitive citizens, this mission appears both useless and uncalled for. Land has been an obsessive local interest for a century or more. So many fortunes have been made on it that everyone knows how usefully "real estate" can double and treble money in months rather than years. Now that even the mountains and deserts are being built on, it is regarded as an abuse of opportunity to Leave any of it in its natural state. Mr. Ralph Nader, the task force leader, has made his name, at 35, a household word, not in profit but in preservation: of natural resources, wild life and, incidentally, mankind. He is the foe of the "fast buck." In California, which bu y s more cars than any other state in the United States, Nader is best known for his book, Unsafe At Any Speed, which forced the automobile manufacturers to introduce anti-smog and safety gadgets. All very fine, but car prices jumped. Since then he has done battle with supermarkets and meat - packers, color - television manufacturers awl t'he makers of baby-food, all in the interest of the ordinary consumer who - at the start-saw little to complain of. Gradually, over the last five years, this one-man guardian of 204 million Americans has managed to create a climate of concern. Having been denounced by outraged big businessmen as an ignorant "muckraker," Nader has now won acceptance of at least some of his ideas by tycoons such as David Rockefeller and Henry Ford II. Converted Congressmen have steered through five "Nader" laws which should give consumers a better deal. Unclean fish, fatty hot dogs, tractors which tip over have all had his attention. Other Nader campaigns have helped to bring restrictions on and DDT, exaggerated salesman ship, shoddy trade practices. He works like a man possessed to cut through the protective layers of corporate responsibility. "Some of these people," he says, "are utterly confounded when we come to investigate their practices. They've forgotten what citizens look like." He has also resisted all attempts to make him a folklore hero or a social lion. A pale, lanky young man in a shiny suit, Nader lives in a Washington rooming house and writes his scalding reports on a second - hand typewriter, working an 18 hour day. His meetings with secret informers from public and private offices take place in the street or busy hotel lobbies. He shuns parties, lives frugally on fees from speeches and articles which advertise his cause. Field research, as in the California project, must be left to the summer months, when students on vacatioii flock to help. He accepts one volunteer in 20, creaming off some of the finest talent in the country. The r.ew Californian task force includes a dozen law students and graduates, headed by 24 year old Robert Felmuth, from Stanford university. Among its members is the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Nader's sister Laura, a professor of anthropology at the Berkeley campus of California University, is taking an interest in the project. Miss Nader shares her brother's f e i v o r for fair play. "Ralph's campaign shows how one man devoid of any special influence, can do something to change big business and big government," she says. "In today's computerized world, that's a challenge to society to live up to its promise and should stim- ulate more people to fulfil their potential." Sooner or later, Nader's mission will have to be taken over by a professional organization: a Senate Bill to set up a department of consumer affairs is already in the works. Will Nader then drop his watchdog role? Nothing is less likely. As his sister puts it, with a smile, "if you institutionalize consumer prot e c t i o n, eventually Ralph will have to investigate the institution." On flying visits to Los Angeles and San Francisco lately, Nader himself has struck some , memorable sparks. Here are a few: "The issue in America is not lov.e it or leave it: the issue is to make the country lovable." "Society is like a fish. It rots from the head down." "It's odd that those who are militant about restoring our environment are called radicals, while those who seem bent on destroying it are called conservatives." "It's a crime for a man to relieve himself in the Sacramento River.but not for an industry to do so." "General Motors, largest manufacturer in the world, produces 35 per cent of the nation's air pollution. And I'll bet you don't even know the name of its president." "We all get upset by crime in the streets and violence on our campuses. Consumers w ere swindled out of $80,000 million last year. If we reacted with the same vigor to violence from big business we might do something about it." "Muggers are jailed. Smog-gers aren't. Muggers don't have stockholders." Nader does not reserve his barbs for administration and corporative targets. He also upbraids the people at the bottom of the ladder - "manipulated, defrauded, overtaxed, cheated, poisoned and powerless" - who waste their lime on things that don't matter instead of trying to right an upside-down society. He wants to form groups in every city and country, supported by professionals in the community, advised by engineers and economists and supported by an involved, informed citizenry which would not be distracted by political red herrings. Patriotism is not enough. "The flag should stand for peace, justice and equity. Not for a figleaf covering dishonesty and political cowardice." One of his team leaders, John Schulz, an assistant professor of law at the University of Southern California, reports that Nader's outspokenness conceals a painfully shy disposition and unexpected modesty. He often works behind the scenes, leaving others to take credit. "Ralph does four men's work, seven days a week," says Schulz. "He has tremendous in- tellectual charisma for young people and is a well - spring of ideas. What keeps him going? An endless sense of indignation and outrage over the wprld we live in." With President Nixon calling for a Bill of Rights for buyers, "consumerism" seems here to stay. Politicians now recognize it as a vote - catching issue. There has been a surge of activity on several fronts in which this new young Zola has shown an interest. Even Governor Ronald Reagan of California, so often quoted for the axiom that "when you've seen one redwood, you've seen them all," shows signs of jumping on Nader's conservationist bandwagg o n. This is election year. (Written for The Herald and The Observer, London) LOOKING BACKWARD THROUGH THE HERALD 1920-Western cities are facing a housing shortage and Lethbridge needs at least 100 new homes. To date this summer only ten have been erected. 1930-The controversial question of the ultimate route of the Sunshine Trail has now been definitely decided and will go via High River into Calgary. 1940-A concentration of at least two Italian divisions was reported on the Libyan frontier near the Mediterrean coast and it appears the Italians are ready to advance into Egypt in an attempt to fulfill one of Mussolini's dreams of possession of Suez. 1950 - Pre-harvest estimates on the CPR Lethbridge division for 1950 indicate an average yield of about 18 bushels per acre. i960-A mysterious explosion shook many parts of south Alberta August 8 and the earth tremor was felt over an area of about 100 miles from Etzi-kom to Raymond. Police and gas officials have been unable to shed any light on it. The Lethbridge Herald 304 7th St. S., Lethbridge, Alberta LETHBRIDGE HERALD CO. LTD., Proprietors and Publishers Published 1905 - 1954, by Hon. W. A. BUCHANAN Second Class Mall Registration No. 0012 Member of The Canadian Press and the Canadian Dally Newspaper Publishers' Association and t he Audit Bureau of Circulations CLEO W. MOWERS, Editor and Publisher THOMAS H. ADAMS, General Manager JOE BALLA WILLIAM HAY Managing Editor Associate Editor ROY F. MILES DOUGLAS K. WALKER Advertising Manager Editorial Page Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH" ;