Lethbridge Herald (Newspaper) - January 30, 1971, Lethbridge, Alberta
EDITORIALS Dave Humphreys PM's statement on recent arms issue No reasons needed Another- group of citizens has blocked the plan to establish a home for foster children with problems. This is the second demonstration of unwillingness to co-operate in a worthwhile venture in rehabilitation. The selection of a house in a different part of the city was protested a few weeks ago. In both instances the protesters drew up a list of reasons why the home would be objectionable in their midst. The reasons touch on such things as the possible adverse influence of maladjusted children or other youngsters; the likelihood that property values would deteriorate in the neighborhood; and the unsuitability of the house itself. No reasons are really necessary to insure that the application for such a home will be rejected. It would be folly to locate a home for children among people who do not want them. Opposition is scarcely to be considered therapeutic in connection with young people who may already harbor ideas that the world,is against them. The social development de- partment has no intention of forcing an unwilling community to accept a group home, because it simply wouldn't work. Perhaps the people who sign petitions like those objecting to locating a home for children in the neighborhood need to find "reasons" for doing so. It goes against the grain of most people's sensibilities to reject something that could be beneficial for a group of young people and for society as a whole. No doubt there is a risk in having several emotionally disturbed children located together in one's neighborhood. The challenge of being sufficiently understanding and accepting in order to provide a helpful climate is very great and might not be met. Then the other children in the area might be even more adversely influenced than normally. Somewhere in Lethbridge there must be a neighborhood that will welcome the presence of a group of hitherto unwanted children. It is to be hoped that those searching for it will not- grow weary. SINGAPORE - Only by reading the transcript of Prime Minister Trudeau's press conference here is it possible to understand the prime minister's thinking on the South African arms issue and his role during the Commonwealth conference here. Because his press conference was for Canadians only it has taken some time for Mr. Trudeau's position to come clear to non-Canadians. Immediately after the conference, on the basis of partial reports, observers were joking about "Trudeau and his scenario." One report here said he predicted another Vietnam in South Africa. Perhaps not forgetting what he considered to be the unkind treatment he got from the British press in London at the last conference, the prime minister made it a point to have nothing to do with them. Those who read the transcript published Hands off Mr. Acheson! Former top officials in the U.S. State Department have been setting off alarms indicating that Chancellor Willy Brandt's Ostpolitik (moves towards detente with East Europe and the U.S.S.R), may result in West Germany ending up in the Soviet political camp. Dean Acheson, former secretary of state, fired the first explosion with a suggestion that President Nixon ought to "cool off Brandt in the mad race to Moscow." There has been a flurry of diplomatic activity between the West Germans and the U.S. in recent weeks, most of it in an attempt to cool Washington critics and reinforce Mr. Brandt's statements that he has no wish or intention of taking his country out of the Western sphere of influence. That Mr. Brandt has shown independence in making his own decisions about West Germany's foreign affairs position is certainly true. But it is hard to see where his public statements or actions could be interpreted as going soft on the Berlin issue. He knows quite well that if he should go too far in his move towards detente with Poland and Russia that his own parliament will refuse to ratify the treaty which is the lynch pin of Ostpolitik. Brandt has been accused of making too many concessions in his haste to make things up with the U.S.S.R., but he replies simply that he has relinquished nothing that was not lost long ago. He is an eminently practical man who recognizes that post-war realities cannot be simply willed away. They are a fact of German and West European life. Brandt knows that eventually a deal will have to be made regarding the status of Berlin, and that it will have to be acceptable to both the NATO alii-ance and the Russians. It will probably take the form of a reduction of the West German federal presence in Berlin in exchange for an improved arrangement with the Russians on the access routes to the city. Statements from the Cold War American warriors should not be allowed to cause a rift between Germany and the U.S. and they won't. But they have caused much embarrassment to Mr. Brandt by providing the ammunition his domestic political opponents are looking for. Mr. Acheson and his die - hard colleagues of a former time might think about this before they make the kind of statements they've been giving forth with lately. They achieve no purpose except to suggest the possibility of a rift between the U.S. and Germany which neither country seeks, and they achieve nothing except to undermine the existing confidence which has been built over the past twenty-five years and more. Weekend Meditation Faith in people TT is a dreadful thing to have con-tempt for any human being. It is one of the worst evils of today. Schweitzer wrote of "reverence for life" as the supreme virtue. He carried it to extreme lengths, something like the Indian Jains who are fearful of killing even the smallest insect. So Schweitzer would not even kill destructive ants or blood-sucking mosquitoes, both highly dangerous. But his extreme is better than the other extreme of contempt for life whicn one finds in society today and worst of all in the lands of dictators. In Russia whole nations have been slaughtered or deported - the Crimean Tartars, the Caspian Kalmucks and the Caucasian Chechens, for example. There were others, and the utter ruthlessness with which Stalin and Lenin slaughtered or starved millions of peasants to death was the horror of the world until Hitler showed that the Russians had no monopoly on contempt of life. In the United States and Canada, however, tens of thousands are slaughtered on the highways and over a million wounded without any great outcry of indignation. Both the murder and suicide rates have climbed upward spectacularly. Little wonder when the report from Vietnam reads that the "allied" forces had so many "kills" to their credit, or that whole villages of men, women, and children, were wiped out. How easily the public mind has become calloused with reading that the casualties in Vietnam were low this week, only 50 killed and 300 wounded! Human life is cheap these days. Abortion is performed casually now in Toronto. Contempt for life! How wicked and cruel it is! Jesus warned that anyone calling his brother a fool was in danger of going to Hell. Jesus was the supreme optimist regarding human nature, llwugh he knew the evils of man more than anyone else. "He knew what was in man," the Bible says. Again we read of a confrontation with the Sadducecs and Jesus "perceived their wickedness." On the other hand he saw good in men where others never saw it. No one except Jesus would have seen the possibilities in Simon who became known as Peter, the Rock. Nor would anyone else have seen a saint in the rough, tough tax-collector, Matthew the Publican. Once Jesus was approached by a bras h young fellow who turned his back on him rnd walked away, not heeding his advice. It is said, however, that Jesus 'loved later were impressed. Whatever the reason it was a pity because his contribution has not been fully understood and was underrated outside Canada. Here is the relevant extract from the prime minister's press conference: It (the study group) is not really putting it aside, because all parties remain free to go home and do what they want to. The British prime minister made it quite clear that he saw certain obligations and he did not think that this conference had the right to absolve him of those legal obligations he might have, if he has to fulfil them. On the other hand, the Africa countries are not, as a result of this going home and saying that the sale of arms, if it does happen, is a good thing. So everyone maintains his own positions, but we've agreed that it would be useful, rather than to continue the discussion here at any greater length, to have a committee try to examine it in greater depth. What I've been hoping and indeed saying is that any time we gained would be used to, not rehash the same arguments, but perhaps to try to set the problem in a larger context, in a more long-term perspective. Because, as I see it, the issue of whether to sell or not to sell, the immediate issue before us, is a relatively secondary one. The British make certain arguments saying that they should do it, the others make certain arguments saying that they shouldn't do it, and both advance legal, moral, economic, strategic and political arguments. And you know we make them back and forth. But the position I've been trying to press on some of my colleagues is that the immediate issue can only be understood if it's placed in a scenario of the future of Africa. In other him." The word in Greek - for the Greeks had five words for love - means "esteemed him," or "prized him." Jesus saw the magnificent potential in the young man. Every man has an astonishing potential of which he himself is at best dimly aware. Emerson said that he never met anyone who did not know more about something than he did. He once watched a couple of men trying to get a calf into a barn without any luck. A young servant girl came up, put her hand in some milk and put her fingers into the mouth of the calf. It followed her easily into the barn. Emerson looked at her with admiring eyes and remarked, "I like people who can do things." Many a man has owed his success in life to the fact that someone saw merit in him when he did not see any himself. Edison was sent home from school as a hopeless dunce, incapable of learning, but his mother taught him herself. One of Scotland's greatest scholars was called the most hopeless student in the school. A teacher said this to the inspector right before the boy. It would have crushed him except for the fact that the inspector put his arm over the lad's shoulders and said. "Never mind, my boy, you'll be a great scholar some day." So George Adam Clarke did astonish everyone. The list could go on indefinitely. The Christians coined a word for love - "agape" - and it was an intellectual rather than an emotional word. It implied an appreciation of the other person, a realization of the divine capability of every human creature. Thus a Christian, about to be killed by a brutal soldier in a Chinese war, looked at his murdered and said, "And thou too art divine." To love your neighbor as yourself, as the Bible commands, you must realize your neighbor's and your own potential. Otherwise the command to love is futile. The key to peace in the world, the key to friendship between races and classes, Ls an apprehension of the potential of men, all men. The philosopher, Emmanuel Kant, used to take off his hat to every boy he met. Such faith is not easy when there is so much bestiality walking the earth. It requires insight and imagination. PRAYER: 0 God, give me eyes to see the divine image stamped on every man and to know every man as a child of God. F.S.M. "Now You Can Go Out and Get a Job in a Gas Station!" words, if, to ensure the security of the sea lanes, we take steps against communism, we encourage the British to take steps which make the assurance of Communist penetration of Africa even greater, then we have perhaps not gained much. And therefore, we must look not only at the problem of security of the ocean, but the whole question of radical relations in Africa. And if while we're arguing this s h o r t-term immediate question, we permit circumstances to develop which could end up that in ten years more or less we have another Vietnam on our hands, we have another Mid-East situation on our hands, then not only will that be . disastrous for Africa, but I submit it will be disastrous for the world. A bloody racial war in Africa could leave nobody unconcerned. We saw that even the Vietnam war has divided not only the United States but many other Western nations, between themselves, amongst themselves, and inside of themselves. Even the question of Nigeria, you'll recall, a year-and-a-half, two years ago, in Canada, the question of Nigeria and those who supported Bia-fra concerned Canadians very deeply and divided us amongst ourselves. So if we set up the circumstances where a racial war in Africa, black against white, is even more probable, then we will have done a very poor service to posterity, to say nothing about the moral indignity, the moral abomination, of racial discrimination which debases not only the states who practise it but those individuals who have it in their hearts. It poisons the relations between human beings. It makes peace in the world a less possible matter, a less possible eventuality. So, it's this kind of things that I say we've been trying to impress on everyone, the whole long-term scenario. And I've enjoined everyone to not just talk about the short-term but the long-term scenario as he sees it. In other words, it isn't just enough for Britain to say, "Well, we must make shipping safer on the oceans." He must say how the total racial problem in southern Africa develops according to his view of the future. And how the present can be justified in the light of his total commitment to peace. And I said the same thing to President Kaun-da and President Obote: It is not sufficient to tell Britain not to sell arms to South Africa lest that cause a racial war b*� cause what will your position be if Britain does not sell arms to South Africa - does the right thing by you? Will this be the end of the matter? What is your scenario for the future? If Britain should make that decision, what will you say about France and Italy and those other countries? And even if those other countries do not sell, what then will you say about Portugal? Will you guarantee that if these countries don't sell arms to South Africa we will not have a racial war in South Africa, that you will go on record as being against such a war? Probably not. You will also want the Portuguese to get out of Angola and Mozambique. And what will your position then be on the presence of Portugal in NATO? And what will your position be on the mere trading with South Africa by all nations, which you say now is all right? Or are you going to say at some point, "well you are strengthening the motives for an eventual civil war there?" And what if none of this happens? What if none of us co-operate in any way with South Africa? South Africa still remains the strongest military power, by far, s o u t h of the Sahara and will remain such, especially if you add it on to Rhodesia, for a long while to come. So what if all the Western nations behave well. Are you going to say then there will be no racial war? And if there is a racial war won't.you still blame the white nations or the Western nations for being the cause of it? And even if you don't, what about the Communists? What about the freedom fighters? Who's going to arm them? It's unlikely, I said, that Canada would ever want to arm freedom fighters though we might respect the justice of their cause. So who's going to arm them? If it's the Communists from some part of the world, aren't they going to get the credit for being on the side of the Africans, of the black Africans? You know what is the total picture. Where do you want it all to end? How do you see a racial war being avoided in South Africa? In other words, you are just asking the British to take the first step but you're not telling them or us or any of us what the next steps are. And this is what the Commonwealth meetings should be used for, in order that together we try and establish a scenario for world peace and especially for racial harmony in Africa. (Herald London Bureau) Tim Traynor The curious case of the FBI and the Berrigans WASHINGTON - The world can only watch and wonder at the latest bizarre happenings on the troubled American stage. The government claims knowledge of a dire plot, and has implicated a nun and a number of priests, including Philip and Daniel Ber-rigan, Jesuit priests currently serving prison terms for the destruction of military draft records. The basic pattern is all too familiar - defensive authority ranged against supposed extremism in the anti-war cause. But the episode is altogether extraordinary in particulars, ranging from the involvement of the churchmen to the alleged plans for sabotaging the heating systems of Washington buildings and the kidnapping of presidential advisor Henry Kissinger, with the aim of forcing the government to adopt a policy of faster pullout from Indochina. (The Berrigans have responded that the government has resorted, Nazi-style, to fabricated charges in order to smear opponents of the war.1 A further twist Ls the fact that - more than a month before charges were laid - FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover made the whole affair known to Congress, and a public airing followed. While it is difficult at this stage to make much ot the case in its essentials, something further can usefully be said about the involvement of Mr. Hoover, and the consequent highly critical questioning as to his actions and his attitudes toward the individuals involved. This is of special significance coming against a background of increasing talk of the advisability of Mr. Hoover's retirement, and of broad controversy over the operations of the FBI and Mr. Hoover's posture, specifically his outspoken disparagement of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. (Not to mention former Attorney- General Ramsey Clark, who was scorned by Mr. Hoover as a "softie" after he stated that the FBI's efficiency had been impaired by the prejudices of the director.) With terrorism assuming large proportions, Mr. Hoover in recent months has spoken out with increasing force against leftist extremists, and extremist participation in antiwar groups. This has coincided with a drive to create 1,000 new FBI agents, some of whom would have the job of counteracting campus and other bombing. It was while testifying on this matter to a congressional committee that Mr. Hoover initially spoke of the alleged kid-nap-sabotage plot. (It was immediately charged by Berrigan allies that Mr. Hoover raised the spectre of a plot to strengthen his case for the agents, and it has subsequently been charged that the govern- Letter to the editor Conclusions Now that city council has (h nally approved its building of the hotel in Shoppers World, against the wishes of some 430 residents of the Glendale area, will they now consider reducing the property values on city assessment rolls? This hotel project will un-doubtedly lower property values very considerably in this sub-division. From what I have read, I can only conclude that Lethbridge is getting a hotel where nobody in the area wanted it, and the other hotel project on the Hull property will probably not go through, and that property will again revert to the city, under the agreement with Marathon Realty, as there will not be room for both hotels at the present time. GLENDALE RESIDENT. Lethbridge. ment was obliged to carry through with legal action to protect Mr. Hoover, whose actions had been strongly challenged.) The airing of the plot story in the press prompted protests and demands for either a retraction or for proceedings against the alleged conspirators. To the astonishment of the political world, this demand was voiced most strongly by Rep. William Anderson, a former naval officer who captained the nuclear submarine Nautilus on its pioneering trip to the North Pole before entering Congress, where he was thought of as cautious and with conservative leanings. Rep. Anderson showed himself to be deeply worried about the country as a consequence of experiences on a tour of Vietnam-including a look at South Vietnamese jail practices - and subsequent contact with the Berrigans in their U.S. jail. His concern was that, under the strain of the U.S. involvement in Indochina, the government was loosening its grip on basic humanitarian precepts and constitutional guidelines. The airing of the charges against the Berrigans was, he fell, to-lally out of place in any other context than an outright indictment. This has now happened, at least with respect to one of the brothers. (Six individuals have been indicted, but seven others, including one of the Berrigans, have simply been named co-conspirators.) Rep. Anderson pulled no punches in a speech in the House of Representatives. As the Berrigans had been converted by the war from gentleness and social work to imprisoned radicals, so Mr. Hoover, who had dwiicated a lifetime of service to the country and the observance of due process of law had been moved by war-generated pressures to "resort to tactics reminiscent of McCarthyism" overstepping constitutional bounds. He expressed concern that Mr. Hoover had developed "such a degree of rage and fear that his purpose is to discredit all who peaceably and without violence oppose the Vietnam war." Having made clear his scepticism about the Berrigans' involvement in the alleged plot, Rep. Anderson cited a number of examples of harsh treatment of the Berrigans and charged the justice department - of which the FBI is a part - with displaying "a tolerant attitude toward repressive harassment." The "verbal assault" by Mr. Hoover climaxed a series of events which seemed to form "an outrageous pattern of fear and repression." He concluded: "Either the Berrigans ... are dangerous or there is a still more dangerous plot afoot to repress their political dissent against the war and injustice." Broadening his scope, Rep. Anderson demanded of the FBI that it "cease and desist in any witch hunts which may be draining their energies and resources away from the apprehension of hard-core criminals which breed fear in the very fabric of society . . ." Mr. Hoover should display more awareness of the social causes of crime, he added. As to the over-all course of national affairs, Rep. Anderson said there must be a strong national defence capacity, but it also had to be recognized that "our concern for military destruction, if Pentagon budgets and our present actions in Vietnam are reliable criteria for judgment, takes priority over our concern for the positive factors of humanistic development which may in fact be the only course to peace." (Herald Washington Bureau) Looking backward Through the Herald 1921 - Cardston is to get a new CPR station. Work will begin in the spring and the road to the station will be cindered as soon as the excavation is finished. 1931 - There will be 1,429 miles of gravelled road in Alberta by July, according to N. H. Bradley, district road engineer. 1M1 - Britain's triumphant desert armies have captured Derna and now move on Bengasi. Operations on all African fronts are under acceleration in the hopes of cracking Italy's African empire. 1951 - Plans for construction of two new large business buildings have been announced. The old city hall and court house sites are involved. I9BJ-Prime Minister Diefen-baker said in the Commons that a parliamentary committee should study the War Measures Act and its constitutional powers in peacetime. The act was originally passed during the First World War. The Lethbridge Herald 504 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 ot The Canadian Press and the Canadian Dally Newspaper Publishers' Association and the Audit Bureau ot circulations CLEO W. MOWERS, Editor �nd Publisher THOMAS H. ADAMS, General Manager JOE BALLA Managing Editor ROY F. MILES Advertising Manager WILLIAM HAY Associate Editor DOUGLAS K. WALKER Editorial Page Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH"