Miami Hurricane, October 03, 1969

              Bond Cancels
Julian Bond didn’t make it again. Bond reportedly had to attend a special Congressional hearing Wednesday. The lecture has not been rescheduled.
SN»
Volutili 45, No. 6
Fashion Section
284-4401
armane
Friday, October 3, 1969
Response On Viet Issue Termed 'Overwelming ’
[
The Moratorium
MMH

By PAUL BARGER
O* Th, Humean« Staff
The Vietnam Moratorium scheduled for Oct. 15 is well into its plan of action. With over a hundred people now on the organizational staff headed by Marty Weinkle and Pete Yaffe.
“The turnout has been overwhelming but we need many more people to help,” Weinkle said. The Moratorium committee is hoping to acquire greater numbers of students to help in the organization of floor meetings in all the dorms. These meetings would be aimed at explaining the issues and acquiring the students’ support. They will ask ror endorsement of the movement and participation on that day,
Oct. 15, in the form of taking time off from classes to protest the Vietnam War and to actively work for peace by discussing the issues and problems created by the Asian war.
A table in the Breezeway Is being manned by supporters passing out bumper stickers and buttons enscrihed with the words “Work for Peace.” They are presenting petitions and asking for signatures and monetary support to finance the literature and administrative expenditures. The petition itself states that the undersigned believes the ending of the Vietnam War to be the primary goal of our nation and that he pledges his support and calls upon others to
join in this “plea for peace.”
Weinkle said, "Petitions are being signed by many but we need more signatures to show a response from this academic community."
Besides presenting the petition, the table is also enlisting workers and passing out leaflets with various quotes by military and political personnel pointing up the fallacies of the war.
The response from the students was paralleled by similar actions from the fac-u 11 y and administration. Weinkle said, “This is the first time the UM students, faculty and administration have become involved in a project together.” Weinkle said he felt there was no competition between the
groups, rather a complete coordination between the efforts of the active faculty, administrative and student workers.
Heading up the faculty response are Dr. David Saltz-man and Dr. J. A. Painter who are eliciting support for the movement and organizing the other faculty members. Faculty members endorsing the effort include Dr. West-phal. Dr. Coyle, Dr. Faber and Dr. Dubner. According to Weinkle, the local news media have been favorable
toward the Moratorium and have been cooperating with the efforts of the staff.
Father Henry Minich and Father Tom Crowder, chap-plains on campus, have been seeking the support of clergy throughout the community. They have made a portion of their time available to aid in the organization of the project. The two clergymen are coming into the Moratorium office every day to make suggestions and help out
The committee is begin-
ning to contact some of the UM trustees in an effort to enlist them as speakers and supporters for Oct. 15, athough to date no response has been received.
According to Weinkle and Yaffe congressional support of the Moratorium is increasing.
In support of this, Weinkle said, “Every day more Congressmen and Senators are moving to favor the Moratorium. They are realizing that Nixon’s campaign promises are not the same as his present course of action.”
There is presently opposition by a small group of Republicans. Senator Scott (R-Pa.) and Senator Griffin (R-Mich.) have asked for a 60 day moratorium on dissent.
“We feel this will in no way hamper our efforts but serve to strengthen them,’ Weinkle said. “What Nixon has not been able to do in eight months certainly can’t be accomplished in 60 days by silencing the American people.”
Recognizing the existence of political opposition to the Moratorim on campus, Weinkle and Yaffe said, “It is unfortunate that a political organization on campus is opposing our efforts. The Moratorium is an apolitical effort representing the desire for peace from all elements of the political spectrum.”
The Moratorium is planned to begin on Oct. 14 and extend through the 15th. The
following activities are scheduled for the two days:
—Reading of the 45,000 killed in the Vietnam War
—N o n	denominational
services.
—Draft counseling.
—Speeches from members of the student body, faculty. administration, clergy and community.
—Open mikes available for any who wish to express their feelings.
—Folk music.
—A meditation area.
—A candlelight march the evening of the 15th.
Weinkle and Yaffe summed up the tenor of the Moratorium saying "It is obvious that the emphasis of the two days’ activities is a ■plea for peace.’ ”
Stanford Won’t Support Moratorium
—Photo by a. B. POPE
Chairman Marty Winkle Man« the Gavel
... of council meeting ft ednendtry
Council Refuses Moratorium Stand
Bv CAROL COPLAND
Of Th* Hurrlcono staff
After an hour-and-a-half of discussion, the Council of Presidents Wednesday refused to take a stand on the moratorium scheduled for Oct. 15.
In explaining what the Vietnam moratorium committee was, Marty Weinkle said. “They are simply a group of citizens who wish peace.”
Weinkle asked for the
Hurricane j ¡Apologizes
The Hurricane apolo- | I gizes for an inaccuracy in | I the Sept. 30 edition. A * S front page s'or’ cntlt’ed | £ “Rain and Small Crowd 1 1 Couldn’t Stop Love-In” I I described and quoted Dr. | Gary Salzman when it | should have been Dr. Da- g | vid Saltzman.
Gadfly Kingpin Rocky I Walters claims the story I had another inaccuracy. In j a typical temper tantrum, | Walters Informed us that « the Love-In was sponsored j by the Gadflies and not 1 created by Matt Green, j Walters said Green did | help with the organization of the Love-In but was not a member of Gadflies. Meanwhile, Green claims he is the creator. What’s a mother to do? — Ed.
council's support, stressing that they would be voting as Individuals and not as presidents. At this point, arguments began.
The Sigma Chi representatives said, “We were called to represent our groups, not as individuals. In other words, we have no business bee.” He then moved to table the motion and the group agreed to table by an overwhelming majority.
Feeling among some delegates was typified by Jacob Szapiro, who yelled, “Let's give a damn, we have been apathetic for too long, it’s time we did something."
“The university has never taken a stand on anything like this, and I think it is important,” said Marty Weinkle.
USG, N1RHA, and the AWS Central Council have r.ll endorsed the moratorium.
"The Council of Presidents Is supposedly made up of the traders on this campus. I would have felt much better if they had taken a definite stand on the issue, one way or the other, rather than table the motion, which settled nothing,” said Weinkle.
“This is the paramount issue facing the people of the U.S. today, and 1 wish these people, as student leaders, had been more decisive."
The Council passed a motion that the chair appoint a committee to write a constitution. The committee is to be headed by Mark Krasnow.
To avoid what happened today, the constitutional committee was created to clarify the position of council presidents.
Untenured
Profs
Organize
By CRAIG PETERSON
N«Wt E<Nt8r
A number of untenured faculty members have expressed interest in forming an organization to “represent the values and interests of younger faculty members in the conduct of the university.”
The group’s organizers said they seé three major areas demanding special attention. The first is the governing of the university in which, they claim, untenured faculty members currently have little voice.
In their second major point, the group feels both they as faculty, and the students have an interest in “the educational betterment and excellence that any university has as its primary goal.” They would seek Increased cooperation between faculty and students In planning the curriculum and educational programs to better serve the nèeds of the Individual student.
One suggestion for obtaining this is both through established University programs and a faculty-student development of a Free University program.
The group's last point asks that students as well as faculty help fulfill the University’s role of “guardian of civilized values and the critical and moral intelligence which compels the wider community and society to ponder its course of action,” as stated by Rutgers University President Mason Gross.
As an example, the group’s spokesman pointed to the presence and variety of classified and defense-related research being engaged in by UM.
“As members of the academic community, we cannot and should not delegate our responsibilities in this area to either thé administration alone, or to an infrequently convened Board of Trustees,” he said. “The University must also take a more active and positive role as an agent in effecting the entree of the black man into full social citizenship.”
Group organizers ask that untenured faculty members interested in "realizing thè programs and goals” are invited to attend the organizational meeting Monday, Oct. 6 at 4 p.m. in the Beaumont Lecture Hall.
■ if ★ it.
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI
tZtAl SAILZS. KZKZA 3Ü24
October 1, 1969
erflit tr
Tai hüóorr
Sr. Mirtin R. Weinkle Mr. Peter Yaffe
Undergraduate Student Government University of Miami
Dear Marty and Peter:
Your letter to me of September 24, 1969, raises a fundamental question as to the appropriate role a university president should assume with regard to public Issues. I agree with you that a university president should speak out from time to time. I believe further that he himself should Initiate or select the occasions. I do not think genuine academic leadership and the cause of academic freedom Itself are served by a university president when he responds to a request presented 1n the context of a university coirmitment to a crusade or campaign to secure the adoption of one particular viewpoint.
As you will readily agree, the University must be committed to the proposition that there can be no restriction upon the expression of opinion on the campus.
Thus the University can adopt no official position or "line” on public issues or controversies, because to do so would indeed tend to inhibit freedom of expression on our campus. Each member of our academic community should feel free to speak out, always realizing at the sane tine that he is not speaking for the University.
Since I arrived at the University seven years ago, I have spoken out on a number of controversial issues. On each of these occasions I spoke on my own initiative and took positions that reflected my own best judgment. In other words I must always select the time, occasion, and theme for my observations.
I must be wary of any effort to "capture” my office philosophically for, and thus to seem to throw the weight of the University behind, one position in a public controversy. Inasmuch as your program scheduled for October 15 is designed to press one particular viewpoint with all the effectiveness you can conwand, I bélieve I should not be a part of it. Nor do I wish, by responding affirmatively to your invitation, to give rise to the Inference (which would surely be drawn that I aporove whatever program the Vietnam Moratorium Committee may adopt on October-15 or In subsequent months.
In weighing the Issues Involved, I do not see how the President of the University can follow any other course. He cannot seem to be sanctioning what aopears to be the loudest voice of the moment. What happens when the next round of pressures 1s applied? While you may be enthusiastic about my speaking out in favor of the cause you sponsor, what would be your response If I complied with the next plea, with which you might well disagree? One of the first problems I experienced at our university was a strongly-backed movement to eliminate from the library Important materials necessary for the objective study of, and research on, a neighboring country. Obviously the University could not accede to such a request, no matter how clamorous the appeal.
Please do not interpret the observations In this letter to mean that I do not think 1n the slightest that you or any other group with any other point of view should not speak out. By urging upon your colleagues of the academic community your vigorous views on the Vietnam War, you are merely availing yourselves of the opportunity that exists on this camous for all students to speak their minds—al 1 within the framework of tolerance of the views of others and their right to hold and express them.
As to your implied conviction that I should end all University business on October 15 in support of the Vietnam Moratorium, I must here repeat my stated policy that nothing must interfere with the regularly scheduled academic program of the University. The very preservation of academic freedom precludes permitting any single cause from disrupting the academic process. Only in cases of announced holidays, emergencies, or designated days of national mourning should the University close down. University business must be conducted as usual on October 15, with classes scheduled as usual, leaving to Individual students the choice as to whether they go to class on that day or, in fact, any other day 1n accordance with the recently adopted voluntary attendance policy. Any other course would be to abridge arbitrarily the rights of those students who would wish to continue their academic pursuits on October 15 or on other days that might be selected for the promotion of special causes.
Sincerely yours,
HKS;ac
Henrvklng^tanford Presi dent
A private, independent, international university
7*"
Defines His Role In Class Boycott
By MARK BERMAN
01 Th* Hurrlcam Stall
In a reply to a letter received last week from student leaders of the Vietnam Moratorium Committee, UM President Henry King Stanford chose not to take an active role in supporting the group’s particular views.
“Inasmuch as your program scheduled for October 15 is designed to press one particular viewpoint with all the effectiveness you can command, I believe I should not be a part of it,” said Dr. Stanford in a letter addressed to Martin Weinkle and Peter Yaffe, moratorium student coordi-	■
nators.
“Dr. Stanford answered no questions,” said Weinkle. “He only defined his feelings of what a university president should be. The answer ... . a politician."
Yaffe said Dr. Stanford avadad the issues. "All that we are asking for is peace and nothing else,” he said.
A 11 h ough they gave their opinions on the letter, Yaffe and Weinkle stressed that they were not the only mem-STANFORD bers of the committee.
In a statement released shortly after Dr. Stanford gave his reply, the Moratorium Committee said its objectives did not call for a mandatory class boycott, but instead for a request that the university community should reflect upon its own views Oct. 15.
“It’s incomprehensible to me why Dr. Stanford did not come out and endorse our efforts for seeking peace,” said Yaffe.
“The Vietnam Moratorium Committee is a political organization,” said Weinkle. “We asked for the views of an individual on what we are pleading for, peace. Dr. Stanford needed only write back a two line letter ... “I support fully the efforts of those individuals working for peace.’ ”
“Nothing else has worked, said Yaffe. Wars have settled nothing —let’s try peace for
once.”
“And who doesn’t want peace?” he said.
“In effect, in not taking any stand, Dr. Stanford has perhaps destroyed much of what we are trying to do. He said nothing.” said Weinkle.
USG Supports Class Halt Oct. 15
By MARK BERMAN
04 Th. HurrtclM Still
USG Council voted Monday to "support the Vietnam Moratorium Committee's endeavors in its search for peace."
Junior Bruce O’Boyle proposed the measure but was opposed by Sally Kunkie, who said the wording was unclear.
She said she didn't know for what sha was voting and said she was opposed to the committee's call for a halt to research and classroom work on Oct. 15.
“I’m afraid of what the program might turn into,” she said.
i
The proposal's wording was changed several times and the motion was tabled until sophomore Barry Taylor recommended an acceptable one.
Vice president Marty Weinkle broke a tie to untable the motion, which was finally passed by a vote of 8-3-1.
In other action Council approved a proclamation urging the Faculty Senate to take action on abolishing mid-term grade reports, and disapproved of a proclamation asking President Henry King Stanford to publicly voice his advice and recommendations on Current national issues.
O'Boyle authored both proclamations. The first one asks for faculty and student response as "proof that the abolishment o f mid-term grade reports is necessary for academic reform” and calls the system obsolete.
The second bill proposed that USG ask President Stanford to speak out on such issues as Vietnam, the draft and the Anti-ballistic missile system. It failed by an 8-6 roll-call vote.
Jane Hershman was elected president pro-tempore of USG Council to preside over meetings in the absence of the vice president.
Bill Council re-introduced
the bill for the election of a president pro-tempore, which which proposed by Barry Taylor last year and tabled.
USG also authorized the October election of five members to a seven member Student Entertainment Committee.
The chairman will still be appointed and for this year only, a voting undersecretary will be appointed. Other members will be elected at large In the October Freshman Class Elections. Next year the undersecretary will be elected also.
New SEC members will be required to have the same qualifications as USG Coun-
cil members.
Currently, SEC documents are being reviewed by council members, Sally Kunkie, Toby Lacritz, David Selby, and Barry Taylor.
Council also ratified the appointment of seven members to the Student Election Board: Steve Berman, Bertha Berriz, Tom Lefllne, Norm Levin, George Rabat, Rhona Reichelle, and Ron Resh-evsky.
Junior Ira Pollack questioned Rabat's appointment because he is a graduate student Pollack said he didn't think a graduate student should participate in an undergraduate student government.
Cubans
Charge
Bias
By CHARLES HUBER
Hurrlcn. ftM«rt«r
In a letter to UM President Henry King Stanford, the Federation of Cuban Students has charged desertmin-ation in their current efforts to obtain a meeting room for the group.
"The Cuban students bn this campus feel that they have been discriminated against because they aré a minority, even if a sizable one,” the letter read. "How can the 2,000 Cubans on this campus make a valid contribution without a regular working place whéré they can meet and exchange ideas?”
At Tuesday’s meeting of
the Union Board of Governors, UBOG voted to “temporarily” provide office space for FCS in Room S21t In the Union. FCS was to share this room with the Council of International Students Organizations.
UBOG declared that FCS should remain in this room until a storage room in the Union could be renovated for office use. The estimated cost of renovation is at least $5,000.
As he left the UBOG meet-i n g, Guillermo Socarra!, president of FCS, Said that Cuban students “were mad.” He said that théy are “not just Cuban exiles, but students, and deserve to be treated as such.” He claimed that President Jim Yasser, “who is supposed to represent ail the students, is not trying to help the Cuban students.”
Wednesday afternoon, some 40 FCS members presented Dr. Stanford with a letter requesting that he take a personal Interest In their problem. The letter read that, having “exhauated all the normal established channels, with no effective results,” the FCS ia appealing to Dr. Stanford as a “last recourse.” FCS suggested that they be given Room S205 In the Union.
Raul Rodriguez, a member of FCS’ executive council, said that the council is “under pressure fr6m Cuban students because our space la not adequate and wé cannot be held responsible for any actions of Cuban students.”