Internet Payments

Secure & Reliable

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

Lethbridge Herald Newspaper Archives

- Page 3

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: 24

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, The (Newspaper) - October 23, 1973, Lethbridge, Alberta 4 THE LETHBRIDQE HERALD TuMdiy, October 23, 1973 Major Israeli victory The Middle East ceasefire came easier and quicker than anyone dared suspect just a week ago. But in retrospect there were certain hopeful portents. Russia's outspoken support of the Arab cause, even backed by massive replacement of destroyed armaments, had signs of mere rhetoric about it. Clearly this was becoming a Russian as well as an Arab crisis, as soon as a quick Arab victory was thrown into doubt. Secondly, the announced Arab aims were limited just the reconquest of pre-1967 Arab territory. Thirdly, if an Arab victory seemed assured the not-seriously-committed Arab countries such as Lebanon and Jordan probably would have jumped right in, to get in on the kill, so to speak. But they did not. Fourthly, the Arab oil sanctions against the United States, intended to force the U.S. to force Israel into sub- mission, clearly were not going to work, and Arab losses in oil revenue might have been more painful than U.S. losses in oil supplies. The U.S. was not going to be blackmailed. Fifthly, Israel's military resurgence after the first few days was enough to portend for the Arabs a costly and protracted war at best, defeat at worst. And sixthly, Israel, badly outnumbered by the Arabs, hardly had the stomach for a long war of attrition. So it was not real- ly surprising that both sides should have jumped at an opportunity for a ceasefire. There were two minor surprises, however. One was that the Russians should have worked so hard for it, and the other that the Arabs should have accepted it without exacting an Israeli promise to return to the 1967 boundaries. As it appears, this is a major Israeli victory, for it gives the promise of peace at last, peace, that the Arabs have never given Israel in its whole quarter-century of life. The 1948 and 1956 wars ended in ceasefires that depended on United Nations truce supervision teams with eyes and ears but no arms. Just before the 1967 war Nasser ordered these troops out of the Egyptian side of the border (Israel had not accepted them) and that was the first of the final steps to war. This time it is suggested that foreign troops once more be interposed between the Israelis and Egyptians. But if that happens, it should be only as part of a solemn peace agreement, and not as an Arab whim. Israel insists on defensible borders, and therefore must retain a presence on the Golan Heights. If the peace is to be genuine and the Suez canal is reopened, Israel must have equal international rights to the use of it. And Israel's right of access to the Gulf of Aqaba and thus the Indian Ocean, denied by Nasser, must be assured and protected. So. as far as Syria and Egypt are con- cerned, Israel may have won all that she ever asked for. But what about the West Bank and Jerusalem, where the dispute is with Jordan? Actually Israel and Jordan have already demonstrated they can get along very well together. The Palestinian refugees are another matter. How to reasonably satisfy them, how to give them some measure of justice, could be the main item of un- finished business. Reverse effects Oil embargoes imposed by Middle East nations will hurt the U.S. but not as much as the Arab leaders hope. Already it is apparent that using oil as blackmail will lot cause the U.S. to abandon Israel tfhich is the principal reason for the employment of that "weapon." When .hat lesson has been absorbed the Arabs will have to ponder the possibility that :utting off the U.S. oil supply could have i long-range deleterious effect on them. President Nixon's consultant on energy matters. Charles J. DiBona, has speculated that an extended interruption af oil supply might well be in the long-run best interest of the United States because it would "stimulate intense sublic efforts to increase supply and reduce demands." The embargo simply [orces the American people to begin to reduce their prodigal consumption of gasoline. There isn't the slightest doubt in the world that a 10 per cent saving :ould be effected almost immediately and with some good effects for Most large cities would be better Dlaces in which to live if more people :ould be persuaded to leave their cars at lome and use public transportation. This would reduce the pollution problem and :ould speed up the movement of people with a lessening of frustration. Until now attempts to induce urban dwellers to abandon their automobiles have been largely futile but the oil embargo with the consequent need for rationing has provided authorities with an instrument for gaining compliance. Research into alternative sources of energy will almost certainly be inten- sified even if the Arabs back off from continuing with their oil embargoes. The prospect of eventual exhaustion of oil resources is not nearly so effective a goal as the actual experience of privation. If cheaper alternatives are discovered it might mean that oil could be left to lie in the ground in the future. Such a prospect should be sobering to nations whose economies are based almost entirely on oil Even if that is not something they have to face for some time yet, there is an immediate conse- quence of their policy that could cause them to have regrets. They seem to be forgetting their dependence on Western financial investments, technology, con- sumer goods and foodstuffs. Should the U.S. and other nations want to retaliate it is not hard to imagine where the suf- fering would be greatest. In nothing is the oil embargo policy seen to be more futile than in the aim to divert political support from Israel to the Arabs What advantage is it to gain the support of weak African nations and lose whatever sympathy there is among the Western countries? THE CASSEROLE Another item for the "Progress, but at a rice" file: The U.S. federal aviation authori- y has asked all airlines to display "No moking" signs in the washrooms of all com- icrcial aircraft, following a 707 crash near 'ans caused by a fire that started in a washroom. A Peruvian woman has complained that her usband, an avid football fan, beats her whenever his favorite team loses, giving her t least one mighty whack for every goal the pposition scores. She could have it worse; he light have been a follower of CFL football, 'ith his pet team the Winnipeg Blue iombers. Reminiscing about his school days, Peter Ustinov recalled a report card upon which one of his teachers had written "He shows great originality, which should be discourag- ed at all costs The sovereign state of San Marion has finally decided to ease up a big on some of its age-old discrimination against women. As of October 1st it repealed the laws that forbid a woman to hold public office, or to make any kind of a contract. But a girl in San Marion still has a few problems; for one thing, she can be jailed for adultery though her husband can not, and she needs a special permit even to live in San Marion, if she should marry a foreigner. ON THE HILL By Joe Clark, MP for Rocky Mountain remember what I said about newfangled kitchen Nixon has more worries By William Safire, New York Times commentator WASHINGTON -From the president's point of view, the timing was perfect: 1. Elliot Richardson, who in the Agnew case showed himself to be the most Solomon-like compromiser since Henry Clay, had come up with a plan to respond to the court of appeals recommendation that the ex- ecutive branch work out a compromise on Archibald Cox's demand for the tapes. 2. Judge Sirica had dismiss- ed the Senate's case demanding the tapes, saying his court lacked jurisdiction at that point the Senate had nothing and was receptive to anything the president might offer 3 If Nixon carried the Cox case to the Supreme Court, the president would probably lose. 4. War was raging in the Middle East, providing dramatic evidence that the president needed to put the Watergate behind him so as to contain and end the war That was the moment for what Nixon likes to call "the big play" the dramatic gesture that seizes the in- itiative and transforms the situation, shaping rather than reacting to events. Nixon's "big play" focuses attention where he wants it, on the tapes, which do not worry him as much as less publicized targets of in- vestigation. Predictably, the fuss being raised is about what is to be summarized and what quoted verbatim (the in- dependent "verifier" is to take care of that) and whether the tapes have been tampered with (Senator Stennis is per- mitted to have the world's greatest tape technician sitting at his Finally, the big play solved the problem of the relentless force who could not be stopped with a "separation of powers" argument: the special prosecutor. Since Richardson, the Senate leaders and the courts would probably go along, Nixon believed, this play would effectively isolate the force that was effectively storming the citadel from within. Nixon crossed the Rubicon when he directed Cox not to challenge him in court: he was aware that Cox would probably defy him, and that he would then have the excuse to fire him As a power play, it seemed to make sense, it isolated and purged the one really dangerous threat to whatever secrets the president wanted kept secret, and it divided the Senate. Senators Stennis, Ervin and Baker, and the Senators who listen to them, are more powerful than the firebrands of the judiciary committee and others the Kennedys, Bayhs, Mondales who were doublecrossed in their Richardson confirma- tion by the dismissal of Cox With one hand, the Senate is being given information the courts would not help it get; with the other, the Senate is being double-dealt by the abrogation of the agreement to let Cox operate in- dependently Result: an inter- nal Senate fight. The one unexpected development in the big play was the sudden change of heart of Elliot Richardson: White House officials claim he was "on board" until Saturday afternoon, when Archy Cox threw grapplers around him and took him over the side. This is what should (and not necessarily will) happen next. After hot-headed impeach- ment demands and the venting of political fury, there will be a waiting-to-see how the courts will respond to the Nixon offer. If the president is held to be in contempt, and he does not purge himself, then the president will be im- peached, whether or not the Supreme Court decides a president can be held in con- tempt. My guess is the lower courts, perhaps with some modifications, will accept the offer: if not, the president will cave in the rest of the way on the tapes. (Remember, the tapes are the least of his Then a more realistic plan of "special prosecution" should be adopted by the legislative and judicial branches The department of justice, an arm of president, cannot properly in- vestigate the president: Henry Peterson is not about to drag Al Haig and Henry Kissinger in front of a grand jury and demand to know who broke what laws on wiretaps and other plumbing. Now is the time for the es- tablishment of a joint House- Senate investigating com- mittee, enabling the Congress to raise the rumpus it is entitl- ed to raise as a result of the Richardson confirmation doublecross. More important, in terms of getting to the truth and re- establishing faith in the self- cleansing process of the American system, the time has come for the courts to create the gutsiest, most leakproof "runaway grand jury" in American history. The president has shown he knows how to concede and survive; but in offering a new deal, he has reneged on another. It is not always smart to put the smart thing ahead of the right thing; his adversaries would do better to stop gurgling in outrage and start fashioning investigatory tools to find out what lies beyond the tapes. Good deal for Syncrude By A. J. Hooke, former Alberta cabinet minister "In sickness or in health, in soaring cost of living EDMONTON A short time ago the people of Alberta were privileged to listen to a telecast by Premier Lougheed in which he outlined the tremendous benefits which would be reaped by the people of Alberta from the develop- ment of our bituminous sands by a company known as Syncrude Long before the names of Premier Lougheed or Syncrude or even Great Cana- dian Oil Sands were known, it was my privilege as a member of the Legislature and as a cabinet minister for 26 years, to deal with propos- ed developments of the oil sands by different groups. I am familiar with the efforts of many men, especially Alberta's own Dr. Clark of the University of Alberta, to devise means of producing oil from the sands economically The work of Dr. Clark prov- ed the feasibility and in due course a company known as Great Canadian Oil Sands was permitted to operate a plant at Fort McMurray In pointing out that under the Syncrude program the government of Alberta would receive 50 per cent of net profits from the Syncrude operation, Premier Lougheed stated that Great Canadian Oil Sands, which started out to be a million investment, had become a million in- vestment and that their operations to date showed a loss of million. This state- ment would lead Albertans to believe that when the com- pany has suffered such losses, it could not possibly pay anything into the coffers of the province While Great Canadian Oil Sands was not required to pay a cash bonus, owing to the ex- perimental nature of their operations, it nevertheless, obliged to pay a royalty to the government on the very first barrel of syn- thetic crude they produced and upon every one since. Premier Lougheed might have carried his reference to Great Canadian Oil Sands a little further and have pointed out that a goodly portion of the loss by the company to which he referred was made up of an amount in excess of million already paid in royalties to the provincial government. This is a far cry from the proposed Syncrude program, which, if I under- stood Mr. Lougheed correctly, guarantees to Syncrude all its costs and an interest return on their proposed billipn in- vestment, before the province receives one cent of revenue. It is only fair to say, however, that I recognize the many side benefits which accrue to the province from the operations of both these companies. Great Canadian has already created jobs for 1500 people and according to their latest report, has made a total investment of in excess of million, million of which have been spent in Canada. They have likewise paid taxes to the three levels of government in excess of million. Similar side benefits undoubtedly will accrue from the Syncrude development A recent statement by the president of Great Canadian Oil Sands indicates that that company has been paying the provincial government lately eight per cent on the first 000 barrels of monthly produc- tion and 20 per cent on all monthly production in excess of barrels. His state- ment went on to point out that if the average daily produc- tion were barrels daily, one month's royalty to the government would be the equivalent of a quarter of a million barrels of synthetic crude oil to the government. This would be, in effect, a royalty rate of 14 per cent. I realize that the agreement with Syncrude has not been entirely completed and it might well be that beneficial changes will occur before it is finalized. However, in my opinion, if the company is per- mitted to recover all its costs, plus a guaranteed rate of in- terest on its investment, as we have been told, before Alberta residents reap one cent of royalty, we might find ourselves receiving 50 per cent of nothing Had Great Canadian Oil Sands received the same con- sideration from the Social Credit government as the one outlined for Syncrude by the Conservative government, we would not yet have received one red penny of royalty. If, as is indicated in the Lougheed statement, Syncrude is permitted a profit of eight per cent on its total in- vestment, when that invest- ment reaches billion, as is contemplated, the annual profit permitted would amount to million before the government participated. Only after that does the 50 per cent apply As it stands at this moment, it appears to be an excellent deal for the four companies: namely, Atlantic Richfield, Imperial Oil, City Service and Gulf Oil, which make up Syncrude. One job of an Alberta MP is to tell Easterners about Alberta As part of that job, I wrote the following column for the Ottawa Journal: "The basic issue in the current Alberta-Ottawa energy dispute is national un- ity, not the price of fuel. Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed has already com- mitted his government "to co- operate in an effort to insulate and protect the Canadian con- sumer." Alberta doesn't want to "gouge" anybody. But Alberta does want a chance to develop its own strong secondary industry and petroleum is the key to Alberta industrialization. Development of the Athabasca oil sands, in par- ticular, would allow the loca- tion in Alberta of major petrochemical industries producing agriculture chemicals, and various feed stocks right up to finished plastic products. Alberta could establish world-scale refineries of its own, instead of just shipping oil east for processing, to create jobs out- side Alberta. Yet Albertans have no reason to believe that Ottawa shares that goal. Most Alber- tans want Edmonton, not Ot- tawa, to have the power to make the key decisions about Alberta's industrial future. It was thought that Alber- ta's jurisdiction was clear because the constitution gives the provinces control of natural resources. But the Constitution gives Ottawa the power to impose taxes and tariffs, and when Donald MacDonald suddenly announc- ed an export tax on oil, without consultation with Alberta, that was naturally seen as a raid on Alberta's jurisdiction, a drain on Alber- ta's economy, and a threat to Alberta's future Albertans distrust Ottawa anyway The belief is common that national policy has usual- ly been weighted against us, from the tariffs of John A. MacDonald to the freight rates of Jean Marchand. That distrust has deepened in recent years, as a result of a series of unrelated acts, in- cluding: Bill C-176, which began as an attempt to force marketing boards on cattlemen, the prime minister's jest about selling- our-own wheat; the fear the Official Languages Act would bar unilingual Western Canadians from the senior public service; the toying with the "Royal" in RCMP. Alone, each was an irritant. Combined, they contributed to the rejection of the Liberal party in the West, and par- ticularly in Alberta, in 1972. Now, events have moved beyond irritation, and there is a very real fear about the future in Alberta. I choose these words deliberately, because they reflect what I find among my constituents and friends. Since June, three things have shaken Alberta. First, the Western Economic Opportunities Conference was disquieting, because it revealed a basic difference in attitude (and urgency) between Ottawa and the four Western governments Four premiers, of two different parties, un- ited to propose major changes in Confederation, while Ot- tawa proposed trifling changes. Second, export controls on cattle were slapped on without warning at the busiest time of the trading week, catching thousands of head of cattle on the move to market. At the least, the tim- ing of those controls convinc- ed Alberta cattlemen that Ot- tawa officials just did not un- derstand their business and livelihood Now, an export tax on oil, imposed without consultation, threatening Alberta's control of the resource that we con- sider the key to our industrial future. In that context, the Alberta- Ottawa dispute is not a con- test between producers and consumers at all. It is a con- test between Canadians with different views of Alberta's future and a contest about control of the resource which will determine that future It occurs to me that the Canadians most able to un- derstand Alberta's fears now, are the French speaking Canadians of Quebec We share a sense that the nation's growth has been against our interest, and there is a deter- mination in Alberta now, as there was in Quebec in the 1960s, to retain control of the instruments of our development." Letters Right to own schools Defence of the right to have separate schools and to resist proposals for consolidation does not depend on an argu- ment for the role of religion in education. For those who do not accept the Christian religion, for example, such arguments are meaningless. As well, an argument for separate schools on the grounds that they cultivate religious views, habits and at- titudes will inevitably be answered by the consolidators in the conventional way; namely, by asserting that religious values can be developed without separate schools The case for separate schools is simply that parents and any group in the com- munity have a perfect right to set up their own indeed, the exercise of this right is a major defence against the monolith of the state All of this is not to deny that the reason for having separate schools is a religious one. It is to remind everyone that no one has to justify his choice of schooling beyond his freedom as a parent. And financial pressures, so rampant everywhere, are a form of totalitarianism which we, as free men and women, should resist if we have any spirit at all. PETER HUNT Lethbridge. Way to understanding It was generous of Lloyd Weightman (Indian in- tegration, Oct. 19) to offer a place in the white community to "clean, well-mannered, respectful and ambitious" In- dians. With those prere- quisites, however, a large percentage of the whites would be excluded from the community. I cannot believe the Indian's destiny is to become a dark- skinned white man. I do not believe that the Indians look with envy on the white man's way of life. And I believe they have many good things to teach us. It is very desirable, I believe, to have a community in which a variety of cultures can co-exist, each learning from the others, each retain- ing its own identity. How much has Mr. Weightman bothered to learn about native Canadians? He is right in stating that under- standing is needed on both sides. A good start to under- standing would be a basic knowledge of each other's language. The native already knows English, Mr. Weight- man. JANET M. BLY Lethbridge. The Lethbridge Herald 504 7th St S Lelhbndge, Alberta LETHBRIDGE HERALD CO LTD Proprietors and Publishers Published 1905-1954. by Hon WA BUCHANAN Second Class Mail Registration No 0012 Member ol The Canadian press and the Canadian Daily Newspaper Publishers' Association and the Audit Bureau of Circulations CLEO W MOWERS. Editor and Publisher THOMAS H ADAMS General Manager DON PILLING WILLIAM HAY Managing Fciilor Associate Editor ROY MILES DOUGLAS K WALKER Advertising Manager Editorial Page Editor "THE HERALD SERVES THE SOUTH" ;