The Charlotte News

Wednesday, September 14, 1955


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports from Geneva that the Communist Chinese Ambassador, Wang Ping-nan, had proposed this date to conduct talks "at a higher level" with the U.S., presumably to be between Secretary of State Dulles and Premier and Foreign Minister Chou En-lai. Wang had also demanded removal of the Western trade embargo against the Chinese Government. U.S. Ambassador Alexis Johnson had refused for the time being to discuss anything other than the repatriation of the American civilians held in China. There were still 19 American civilians being held in jail, but Chinese officials said that machinery had been established so that they could arrange to go home. The 22 other American civilians, whose release had been promised the previous week, remained in Communist territory. The U.S. had agreed to facilitate the departure of Chinese students within the U.S. who wanted to return to Communist China, having originally come to the country on student visas prior to the revolution in 1949, when the Chinese government was still in the hands of the Nationalists. The Communist Chinese delegation had contended earlier this date that the announcements on the civilians had concluded the first phase of the negotiations and they wanted to move on to the second phase, which would include discussions about reopening trade between Communist China and the West. The two ambassadors had met for an hour and 40 minutes this date, but apparently had reached no agreement on what they would next discuss, agreeing to meet again the following Tuesday. An American spokesman made no mention of the new demands. A Chinese spokesman said that the Chinese Ambassador had proposed taking up the question of lifting the trade embargo and engaging in preparatory work for the Chinese-American negotiations at a higher level.

At Stead Air Force Base in Nevada, it was reported that Air Force headquarters in Washington was working on a new curriculum to be used in the school at the base which was seeking to teach downed fliers how to escape an enemy and, failing that, how to endure brainwashing techniques when captured. The commander of the school told reporters invited to the base that he was seriously considering taking an interim step to modify one phase of the training program which had come under public scrutiny, that he might decide to conduct the interrogation phase of the course with only his professional instructors serving in the role of the prisoners. At present, approximately 5 percent of the students were subjected to the intense interrogation techniques designed to humiliate and break down the students in an effort to try to help them withstand such techniques when captured in a future war. The commander said that if he made the change, volunteers would not be accepted for the interrogation part of the program.

In New York, disgruntled longshoremen this date called off their protest strike which had disrupted East Coast and Gulf Coast shipping for the previous eight days, with more than 5,000 longshoremen providing their approval to a plan designed to allow them to air their grievances before a citizens committee. As the vote was being taken, a New York judge had issued an ultimatum, that if the workers did not return to work by noon, the union, the independent International Longshoremen's Association, which had called the strike and had maintained it despite a temporary restraining order being issued by the court earlier to return to work, would be held in criminal and civil contempt. There was some cheering but also some booing after the vote had been taken. The strike had been called in protest of practices alleged against the Waterfront Commission of New Jersey and New York, which was designed to eliminate the longstanding racketeering plaguing the waterfront. The union claimed that the Commission had been discriminatory against the union in its regulation of employment practices.

In Southern Pines, N.C., a black couple, originally from Jamaica, N.Y., who had bought a $12,000 house in an all-white neighborhood, said this date that they intended to move into the house unless someone paid them $20,000 for it by the following day. They had rejected a compromise suggested by the developer of the subdivision in which they had bought the property, whereby he would, through an intermediary, take over the loan on the house which the couple had aquired from a white woman, effectively assuming the $12,000 indebtedness they had undertaken on the house, and then promising to build them a similar house on lots which the couple already owned on the edge of a black community, additionally reducing the usual charge for such a house by $1,000. The couple said that they were not interested in building at present and if they changed their minds later, they had their own builder and their own house plans, that they were interested only in moving into the home which they had just bought, unless those who objected to it wanted to pay them to keep out. White property owners of the neighborhood had met Sunday and drafted a statement declaring that the $20,000 which the couple had sought was an exorbitant price for the five-room frame house. The wife of the black couple had stated that there had been a time for friendly compromise but that the time had now passed, as threats and abuse were being directed against them over the telephone by a few people, one woman in particular. She said they were sorry that others were hurt because of the actions of a few cranks, but that they were not children to be frightened into running away. She was a former police woman in Toledo, O., and stated that the unidentified female caller had told her: "If you move into that house, you will never come out." She said that she and her 68-year old husband, a retired New York City post office employee, planned to protect their home, "as anyone will find out if he sets foot on our property with wrong intent." She said if others would attend to their own business, they would attend to theirs, and everyone would get along all right. She said the property was guarded and would be guarded as long as necessary.

Howard Whitman, in the third of a series of articles on the lost art of parenting, stresses the role of fathers this date, indicating that he had never seen a case of fatherhood fall into such a low state as that which he observed in San Francisco when he was accompanying three Juvenile Bureau officers on a motor patrol, responding to a call at an apartment in the North Beach area. When they arrived, a man, about 48, was seated in a chair in the sitting room sobbing and sniveling, saying that he had called the police because they needed to help him with his boy, that he could not handle him anymore. He said that his son not only disobeyed, taunted and flouted his father's authority, but actually intimidated him. He said that he was not afraid of physical violence from the boy, but that the boy had called him every name there was and he had no control over him, that he came and went as he pleased and he did not know where he was at the present time, that when he objected, the boy raised his fist to him. Mr. Whitman states that over the previous 20 years, there had been a steady revolt against the authority of the father in the home, that some experts had conjured pictures of the harsh, browbeating father who stood over the children with a figurative bullwhip in hand, ready to use force at the slightest challenge to his authority, presenting him as an authoritarian figure. He indicates that it was questionable whether such a figure ever actually existed to the extent the experts claimed, and whether he was as wicked as they had suggested. But by presenting that image, they had stripped away not only tyranny, but also emasculated much of the strength and leadership of the father in the home. He was no longer to be the head of the family but merely some sort of appendage, and the idea that he was the rock and protector of the family had been junked as old-fashioned. The trend had been described in that manner by Lawrence Frank, formerly the head of the Zachry Institute of Human Development, saying that the father had been forgotten, left hanging on a limb looking at his child with bewilderment, not sure whether he knew the child and wondering about his place in the modern family. Dr. Edward Humphreys of the Norristown State Hospital in Pennsylvania had said: "The nebulosity of the father figure is becoming a key factor in mental upsets. Without a clearly defined father role, how can we help young boys to discover their future roles as men?" Psychologists had also caused offspring to attribute to the father every negative trait which they possessed, because supposedly the father had rejected his children, failed to provide love, was over-demanding and a feared bully. Mr. Whitman indicates that a lot of that ascription of fault had now been eliminated, as it was being recognized that the father was human, after all, that it was mentally unhealthy and infantile to use him as a scapegoat for a person's own shortcomings. Leaders in sociology and psychology now were recognizing the need for a clearly defined father role in the home and restoration of the father's functions as head of the family. The family needed a male role model and small boys needed to find in their father the prototype of a man whom they could admire, emulate and sometimes view as a hero. Children, themselves, communicated that need in their own language when they said to a child next door: "My father is stronger than your father," or "My father knows more than your father does." Young girls also needed a male identification figure against whom to measure their relationships with other males and eventually their selection of a mate. At Western Reserve University Medical School in Cleveland, Prof. Emma Plank, a specialist in child development, had said: "The growing child needs masculine identification, the boy seeing in his father a goal which he will one day reach himself and the girl building an image of maleness and a pattern for male-female relationships. Without such a pattern, the girl may have considerable fear and doubt about just what the male-female relationship may be." The new trend also called for a clarification of roles, as, for awhile, the experts had been getting the two parents mixed up, the father being relegated to the role of a surrogate mother. Now, it was acknowledged that fathers did not make very good mothers, any more than mothers made very good fathers, with the consequence that the two-headed family concept was being abandoned as unsatisfactory.

In Los Angeles, an earthquake had shaken parts of the city this date, prompting numerous calls to police switchboards in the early morning hours when the mild temblor occurred. A Gardena resident reported that he thought there had been an explosion, but police could not locate any. Reports also came from other southern suburbs of the city, but there were no indications of damage. The quake was not felt in the midtown area or to the northwest and southwest of the city. A seismologist at the California Institute of Technology said that various reports indicated that the quake must have been a small, local shock, perhaps centered just off the coast. He stated that a determination of the epicenter might be obtained when the seismology laboratory opened later in the day. Such seismic activity was not infrequent.

In Miami, the Weather Bureau indicated that a new tropical storm was forming in the Atlantic this date, just as Hurricane Hilda had smashed into the mountain ranges of eastern Cuba. Reconnaissance aircraft had spotted Ione, the ninth tropical storm of the season, 320 miles east of San Juan, Puerto Rico, and 1,400 miles southeast of Miami, with its highest wind speeds estimated at between 65 and 70 mph, expected to reach hurricane strength, 75 mph, by midafternoon. The Bureau said that Hilda presented no threat to the U.S. at present, that it was headed westward into the Gulf of Mexico, but beyond that, they could not determine its course. It was packing winds of 90 mph when it made landfall on Cuba, after which its intensity had dropped such that winds were at 55 to 70 mph as it departed Cuba and entered the Caribbean. It was expected to regain hurricane intensity within 24 hours while coursing over water.

Emery Wister of The News reports again on Vicki, the small elephant which had become scared when a calf startled it, prompting its escape from the Airport Park Zoo the prior Sunday, remaining at large in a wooded area to which it had taken refuge at the time. Smoky Strickland, a former animal trainer, who had taken it upon himself to try to coax Vicki back to the zoo, had wound up being charged by the elephant after he managed to get his hook in its ear, prompting the elephant then to tear his shirt and then tear the bark off of a tree behind which he took refuge. He said that he was so tired that he could not do anything more until the following day. The previous day, the Marks Shows, appearing presently at the Gastonia fair, had sent over a full-grown elephant on the theory that it might be able to lure Vicki from the woods into the open, but nothing much had transpired, Vicki having put in an appearance but ducked right back into the woods again. The previous night, the elephant had walked out by itself and strolled into the adjoining trucking firm's yard, but Mr. Strickland, when informed of the appearance, had hurriedly rushed to the scene without any help, and had been unable to corral the animal alone. Vicki had gone through a stout wire fence as though it were tissue paper and returned to the wooded area. The Marks Shows then sent over three elephants during the morning, but after two hours of waiting around, Vicki had not made an appearance. Mr. Strickland then formed a posse of eight men armed with sticks to try to get Vicki again out into the open, but thus far, they had achieved no success. How many more days this non-story will continue, only you, the dedicated reader, can guess. For our time and interest, it should have ended with one paragraph on Monday and been done with it. Until Vicki rampages down a principal thoroughfare of Charlotte or into a residential neighborhood, which appeared quite unlikely, it remains a silly, trivial story consuming of space better left to more serious reportage, at least on the front page of the newspaper. Place it by the comics section or in the circus freaks section.

On the editorial page, "Bugabears: One Destroyed, One Raised" tells of a special committee of the American Legion having destroyed the bugabear that UNESCO was an atheistic, communistic, subversive organization working for world government. The Legion committee, comprised of top Legion officials, stated in a detailed report, following an 18-month investigation, that the longstanding allegations against UNESCO were not true. The investigation entailed examination of records and publications of the organization, speeches and publications cited by and written by critics of it, all references to it during a nine-year period by the Daily Worker, and a search for any UNESCO material which might be offered in Communist-operated bookstores.

It indicates that by its thorough work, the committee had earned the thanks of Americans and had set an example for all to follow when they felt compelled to sit in judgment of other groups or individuals.

But shortly after the committee's report had been issued, the Legion's national commander, Seaborn Collins, had charged that the Fund for the Republic, set up by the Ford Foundation in 1952, was threatening and might succeed in crippling the national security. He based his opinion on the Fund's alleged "propaganda" that communism was not a threat to the U.S., that sinister forces under the pretext of fighting communism were the real danger, that security measures were un-American and were being used to harass and persecute innocent people, and that intelligent and educated people were aware of those things but were opposed by the ignorant who were being misled by evil demagogues. It finds that Mr. Collins had essentially charged the Fund with being subversive, but without marshaling any evidence to back up his assertion.

It indicates that it was obvious in many security cases that the system wound up persecuting innocent people, and that such "anti-Communists" as Senator McCarthy had done much harm to the fabric of U.S. justice and sense of fair play. Moreover, the Fund had, in February, 1955, made a $50,000 contribution to the American Heritage Council for a two-year program dealing with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, in cooperation with the Illinois Department of the American Legion—which had, it indicates, proved its Americanism at one point by asserting that the Girl Scouts was an organization tinged with un-Americanism.

The president of the Fund—it says erroneously—, was Paul Hoffman, chairman of the board of Studebaker-Packard Corporation, a Republican and a friend of the President. Its board of directors included the chairman of the board of Provident Mutual Life Insurance Co., the president of Woodley Petroleum Co., and the president of the Crown Zellerbach Corp. of San Francisco. The Fund had made grants to cities, towns, universities, bar associations and religious organizations for studies ranging from civil liberties to better housing. It concludes that if Mr. Collins were to assign the Legion's special committee to investigate the Fund, its report surely would be received with more respect by the public.

The piece is confusing the Ford Foundation, of which Mr. Hoffman had been president until 1953, before returning to Studebaker, with the Fund for the Republic, which was headed by Robert Hutchins, former president of the University of Chicago. The Fund would eventually become, in 1959, the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, at which time former News editor Harry Ashmore would resign his post as editor of the Arkansas Gazette, after having won a Pulitzer Prize in 1958 for his level-headed editorials during the Little Rock school integration crisis of 1957-58, and join the Center. In any event, we do not disturb the editorial's mistakes in that regard, as they were basically inconsequential to the valid point it was making.

"The Real Test Is Contamination" indicates that the verbal heroics indulged in by Coast Guard officials, when they had announced the clearance finally of the honor graduate of the Merchant Marine Academy who had initially been refused a commission because his mother had been a Communist many years earlier, had not been appropriate. They said that they were maintaining the basic American principles of "fair play and justice" by deciding the former cadet's case on his own merits as an adult. But rather than rejecting the principle to which it had initially adhered, guilt by association, it had effectively embraced it more tightly than ever by indicating that the young man no longer had a close relationship with his mother, "especially during his scholastic and more mature years."

It finds that if the converse had been true, presumably he would have remained unacceptable, which was patently absurd. It suggests that while association might sometimes taint a person, the determining factor was the extent of the taint and not merely the association.

"Culture: Spreading Round the Joy" tells of culture arriving in Charlotte in the coming months, with a new civic opera program in prospect, the Mint Museum of Art having opened its doors again the previous day, and the Boston Symphony and the Ballet Espagnole set to perform during the fall in the new Auditorium. Many other events were still in the planning stage.

It indicates that with enough additional facilities at last available to permit expansion of Charlotte's artistic horizons, the cultural opportunities were unlimited. It suggests that the culture of the city would increase as the city grew and that the leaders of culture within the city had a duty to see that its cultural life increased steadily in intensity and quality, becoming available to as many members of the community as possible.

Obviously, with the advent of the NASCAR Museum in Charlotte a few years ago, it finally reached the apex of cultural awareness and maturity, beyond which it could not go further without reaching the forbidden realm of the empyrean. Anyway, it was a good idea, and we commend the newspaper for at least being optimistic. It is hard to repeal the rather mediocre tastes, inevitably becoming more mediocre by the day, of the entire society, and probably the entire world as well. Whereas television could have been a leader in developing some degree of appreciation of culture, it ultimately gave way to the pocketbook, sold out, and left culture on the side of the road a beggar, without much hope of catching a ride from most passersby.

A piece from the Memphis Press-Scimitar, titled "Just an Ordinary Cat", indicates that a friend had a gray cat which was ordinary, but meant a lot to the family who owned it, with the children and mother winding up in tears when it went missing for a day. The family had driven around the neighborhood but saw no sign of the cat, the father eventually commenting that either it had gotten lost or was dead. But the children and the mother would not give up, and the children had gone searching the following day and found their cat in a tree in a neighbor's yard some distance away. Driving around, the family had not been able to see it in the neighbor's backyard. Below the tree, a dog maintained watch, causing the cat to be leery of descent. During the subsequent search by the children, the cat recognized them and began to meow. The man who resided on the property where the cat was treed obtained a ladder and got the cat down. The gray cat was now at home and peace had settled on the household.

Between the food stories and the animal stories appearing so prominently in the newspaper of late, excluding many far more important and interesting stories, we are about ready to quit the newspaper. Sixty-seven year old animal stories and food stories do not much interest maintain. We are in need of a store of toothpicks to keep our eyelids semi-open. We suppose one could see this particular piece, or one like it, as perhaps offering some inspiration to Truman Capote three years later in inserting "cat" into "Breakfast at Tiffany's", a red cat to complement a gray one, and the conflict the feline produced at the end until resolving itself into a passionate kiss in the rain, at least in the film version of the story, but that is stretching an eyelid, to try to stimulate a modicum of interest in the inherently uninteresting to anyone save the family in question, much too far.

Drew Pearson's column, still being written by his staff while he was on vacation, indicates that a gigantic land grab was in the works, with the catch being that only a few insiders could obtain the prize, ten million acres of oil-rich farmland located mostly in Montana, Wyoming and the Dakotas. The land had been bought by the Federal Government as a relief measure during the dust bowl era of the 1930's, and the Government now intended to turn all of the arable acreage back to private ownership, which was ostensibly a worthy plan. But Texas Congressman W. R. Poage had rigged the deal to enrich a few fellow Texans, drafting a bill which would not only give his friends first priority on purchase of the land but would turn over the oil rights to them as well, with much of the acreage lying on the edge of the Williston Basin, an oil-rich area. The first option to purchase would, under the bill, go to those whose land was expropriated by the Government during World War II, camouflaging the Congressman's intent to benefit his friends who had happened to sell the land to the Army after Pearl Harbor. The bill would also force the sale of oil rights along with the land, robbing the taxpayers of royalties thereon. The Government, under the bill, could not retain any of the land, though it might be desirable to prevent future dust bowl conditions.

The bill was on its way to becoming law, as Mr. Poage had slipped it through the House Agriculture Committee unnoticed and uncontested during the closing minutes of the previous session of Congress. Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson, however, was now aware of the situation and was prepared to fight the bill in the coming session of 1956.

The political romance between former President Truman and Adlai Stevenson had cooled off, according to a leak from a secret huddle in Indiana between the former President, DNC chairman Paul Butler and former chairman Frank McKinney.

Marquis Childs, en route back to the U.S., tells of the second part of the effort to end the cold war to begin on October 25, when the Big Four foreign ministers would gather in follow-up to the summit conference of July among the Big Four heads of state. Certain of the problems with which they would deal, notably the reunification of Germany, appeared insoluble on any agreed basis and if the meeting were to become mired in such obstacles, then the benefits derived from the summit conference would be dissipated.

Much foolish talk had transpired in the wake of the summit conference, assuming that the West had agreed to reduce its strength by reaching an accord with the Soviets who were weak and in need of a truce in the cold war. Mr. Childs suggests that the President might have a greater sense of realism or it might be more accurate to suggest that the Geneva conference and the agreement to try to agree was a direct consequence of the course that the President had followed since first entering politics.

In that regard, the President and the Republicans had engaged in two political campaigns, the 1952 presidential campaign and then the midterm elections of 1954, based on a promise of peace at any price, attributing to the Democrats the large toll of casualties in World War I, World War II and the Korean War. The Administration had lived up to the promise to lower taxes and reduce the military establishment, with six divisions withdrawn from the Far East, despite several areas there remaining critical. That had reduced American military strength, notwithstanding the presumed efficacy of specialized nuclear weapons, and stood as an example to other NATO allies to reduce their military commitments.

Late the prior April, shortly before the May NATO meeting, General Alfred Gruenther, supreme commander of NATO, in a report on the capabilities of NATO, showed that only three countries, the U.S., Canada and Turkey, had lived up to their commitments, while some were greatly behind. The General had wanted a showdown on the commitments, with the foreign ministers called on to say whether their countries would deliver on their paper promises. That was considered impolitic and the General was told that the NATO defense ministers would be confronted with the harsh report at a special meeting in October. All of that had occurred prior to the summit conference.

The troubles within NATO had become evident, particularly with respect to France, the weakness of which was made evident by the headlines out of Morocco involving the nationalists there. As the North African crisis had grown more intense, the French had withdrawn one of their NATO divisions merely by notifying NATO headquarters that it was being done.

The primary deterrent to aggression by the Soviets had been the U.S. arsenal of nuclear weapons and the Strategic Air Command, with the Soviet nuclear striking capability considered to render the cold war a stalemate, both sides realizing that a war could mean the end of civilization and perhaps the annihilation of the human race.

The trouble within the Soviet bloc was widely known and it might be the primary reason for the willingness of the Soviet leaders to negotiate a truce in the cold war, and it was inherent in the President's realism that he understood the nature of the present opportunity for negotiation.

Mr. Childs concludes that a negotiated truce did not mean that the major differences were to be swept under the rug, for doing that would set a trap for a future blowup. He posits, however, that a negotiated controlled peace, which would neither constitute surrender nor victory, might be possible, given the situation.

The Congressional Quarterly indicates that mavericks of each party had cost their party victories during the 1955 Congressional session, based on the Quarterly's analysis of party unity. By bolting their party line, they had helped the opposition during showdown roll call votes, citing as example the Senate rejection, by a vote of 50 to 44, of an amendment to reduce individual income taxes, with Republicans opposing it by a vote of 45 to 1, while Democrats had voted for the reduction 43 to 5. The defection of the five Democrats in that instance had killed the amendment. Democratic mavericks had also defeated the majority on three other showdowns, when the Senate had approved the sale of Government synthetic rubber plants, had confirmed the President's nomination of John Hall to a Federal post, and when it watered down restrictions on the Government's use of businessmen working without compensation, so-called WOC's. Virginia Democratic Senators Harry F. Byrd and Willis Robertson had been the bolters on four of those votes, and Senator Allen Ellender of Louisiana had voted with the Democratic majority on the WOC issue, but bolted on the other three.

Defectors from the Senate Republicans had led to the defeat of four roll calls favored by the Republicans, when the Senate voted to kill an amendment which would have reduced a pay raise for postal workers, when it rejected a cut in public housing, when it restored funds cut from the Marine Corps budget, and when it upheld a ban on transfer of certain Defense Department work to private industry. Senator William Langer of North Dakota had bolted on all four of those roll calls.

But defections in the House had been greater among Republicans than among Democrats, with only one defeat caused by Democratic defections, when 29 Democrats joined the Republican majority in refusing to authorize investigation of trading in Federal Government securities. Defections from the Republicans, on the other hand, had occurred in eight instances in the House, when it upheld a reduction in individual income taxes, rejected an amendment to limit to one dollar per month the fee paid to educational institutions for reports on enrolled veterans, approved a large postal pay increase, refused to strike peanuts from the list of basic farm commodities receiving price supports, rejected a motion to recommit a bill to restore rigid farm price supports, passed the rigid supports bill, approved a compromise version of the housing bill, and upheld a restriction on turning over certain Defense Department work to private industry. There was no single Republican who had bolted the party line on all eight of those roll call votes, but Representative Usher Burdick of North Dakota had voted against his party majority on seven of the votes, opposing the Democrats only on the income tax cut. Four Republicans had bolted on five of the roll calls.

Some of the wins and losses had been only tentative, with some of the decisions having been reversed, some watered down through compromise and still others not to reach final decision until 1956.

Robert C. Ruark, still in Palamos, Spain, indicates that with his boys gone from the house, he was miserably lonely and so were the dogs. They had a hectic summer, with the children of his various friends having lived with them. He says that he had never met two such unscrupulous confidence men in his life, with one of them, age 11, being a "Machiavelli without portfolio". The father of the other boy, Mr. Ruark's agent, had just been fired, though not being aware of it yet, as he had hired the man's 12-year old son in his stead. He says that the latter could make an easy living in Montmartre, when he was not torturing the dogs with his whistle, and could take over the Rockefeller estate without much effort.

He goes on in that vein, concluding that they had taught the boys two things during the summer, one of them learning how to read a book completely, and the other having learned to respond to "Sit!"—though, he notes, the dogs had learned the same command with less trouble. But the house remained unendurably quiet and he missed his children, hoped that it would get to be the following summer very soon so that he could have the "GRUESOME TWOSOME" back again, noting that the poor consul had given them that name before he had signed a formal surrender and fell on his sword.

A letter writer from Myrtle Beach, S.C., says that he had just read, with considerable disgust, the statement made by former President Truman that at no time had General MacArthur held back from his attacking the Communists. He wonders how a man in public life could have made a deal with foreign powers to sell the U.S. down the river to the British, French and Dutch colonial interests, while allowing "all the contemptible things to be done to our soldiers after they were captured, to allow the Reds to make fools of us on every quarter and now at this late date to say that he played ball with MacArthur." He says that the former President's "highly placed traitors and spies" had worked out the details of the U.N. Charter, which he refers to as a debating society, lacking all form. He believes that both former President Truman and President Eisenhower had been guilty of the "most flagrant disregard of the rights of Americans and American servicemen and until we get rid of this United Nations humbug, that one started and the other has continued, we will have little peace in the world and no standing or national honor left." He thinks that the least former President Truman could do would be to retire "to his hole and pull the roof in on himself." He says that General MacArthur would survive the centuries as a great man after the former President had "gone to whatever reward he has earned."

Framed Edition
[Return to Links
Page by Subject] [Return to Links-Page by Date] [Return to News<i><i><i>—</i></i></i>Framed Edition]
Links-Date Links-Subj.