Issuu on Google+







3 novehber


Few -attend anfjlwar fully Rain, signs of apathy, disillusionment, and claims of inadequate publicity, marked record low attendance at friday’s Vietmobilization committee nam anti-war rally and teach-in. The film on Vietnam drew about a dozen students, the outdoor rally in the rain at the arts quadrangle some thirty people, and the seven afternoon workshops around 75 persons. The series of events was organized by the Vietman mobilization committee to coincide with two weeks of anti-war and political involvement by students in america. In preparation for friday the VMC had appealed for cancellation of classes by talking with president Matthews, addressing the senate, and sending letters to faculty members.

-Steve Izma, the chevron

What if they called a demonstration, mitte did just that.

and nobody


came. 3 The Vietnam mobilization



But classes were held and there have been no reports of in-class discussions. Nor was support forthcoming from various circles of known concerned people who seem disheartened with this sort of thing as an effective course of action. When approached about the day of protest, Larry Burko, president of the federation of stu-

dents, exclaimed “oh, not another one! ” The VMC didn’t commence publicity aimed at the student body until the middle of last week, which has been suggested as a facLc)r in small student turnout. . The VMC put forth their theme in three slogans : “ ‘withdraw US troops from Indo-China now, end Canada’s complicity/support canadian independence, publish all research on campus.” The workshops were centered around these topics with emphasis on research project AF-AFOSR 127467 being done for the US military on this campus. The project con-, terns ingnition of solid fuel proAbie Weisfeld, VMC pellants. spokesman, said the university is doing research for Cyanimid, a major supplier of war materials. The possibility of organizing a student-faculty referendum was discussed to determine the general consensus on campus. Also dealt with in the workshops was the myth that the activists are all arts students. It turn out that with one or two exceptions, the VMC on campus is composed ofmath and science undergrads and grads.


Law ‘n order /


for campus _ . -

by Dave Britton


At a campus center board meeting held last week, a motion was passed calling for a general users’ meeting for tonight to discuss nonstudent use of the building. This is the first time such a meeting has been called to consider non-student use of the building, but the question of denying nonstudents access to the campus center is certainly not new. In fact, since the campus center was built in 1968, people have continuously argued as to who should be allowed to use it. The administration gave up its claims on the running of the building (they own it) after the physical expulsion of the center manager by students in 1969. Now the building belongs to the students who elect board members to look after the administration of the building. The board’s representative organizations, the federation of students and the campus center board decided to call a general users’ meeting to air and hopefully determine the opinion of students concerning non-student use of the center. It had been the practice until now to consider the campus center and its facilities as a “community resource”, and that events scheduled in common areas of the building be open to everyone.

movies, lectures, general programs-all have been strictly open when sponsored in the great hall. Though the center’s population consisted largely at first of university students, there soon came high schoolers looking for the stimuli the university environment promised to provide. Soon there were groups of isolated high schoolers and eventually even “minors”. This conflux of different types of non-university students greatly intensified within the last year until at present, there are few representative types not present. The building’s habituees seem to include at various times: public and high school kids, bikers, pushers, dealers, narcs and occassionally the odd disturbed parent or teacher. It is the conflicts among these social types and the predominence of one or two of them that constitutes the present “problem” the campus centerfaces. The presence, of such large numbers of high school people presents an open market, more or less, for the drug culture. The existence of marijuana and chemicals was forcibly brought to many people’s attention last summer when the RCMP raided the campus center. Since then, it has been no secret that along with increasing drug use came more and more dealers Dances,

Various traces of and pushers. both soft and hard drugs have been found. Whether or not this is considered bad is clearly the next phase. Money carried by dealers, pushers and those wishing to cop presents a lucritive market. During this summer, there was in fact, a protection racket being operated in the building. One beating and a knifing seemed to have been a direct result. . Although this seems evidence to many that the building should be closed to non-university students, where else in Kitchener-Waterloo can high school youth congregate in c,enters? People have problems-street people and kids from well-off homes have more than most. .A counselling’ services spokes man mentions his department is swamped with referals to non-university students. In an attempt to remedy this siservices tuation, counselling people from Waterloo Lutheran and the U of W approached the high school boards asking that drop-in centers be established in certain schools. During this past summer, many high school centers had an average turnover of from between 100 and 150 people a night. The local branch. of the addiction research foundation organized a group of paid and --



volunteer workers to attend not only those centers, but also the Fat Angel drop-in center in downtown Kitchener, and the campus center. Since the summer, centers in the high schools have closed, as has the Fat Angel. With no other place for people to crash, need more be said? In other words, the cities of Kitchener-Waterloo which have done very little to alleviate street problems, and have in many cases blocked or balked at attempts to find solutions, are graciously letting the campus center handle the entire situation. . We might imagine what the real situation off-campus is like, considering what goes on in the campus center as merelv an indicator. 1 Furthermore, the cities are not about to do anything as long as the campus center is available and can drain off some of the load. Where are the cities’ social workers and psychologists? Where are the cities’ drop-in centres? What are the cities’plans in this regard, or have they any at all except to increase the police force? These are questions which must have forthcoming answers. Dave Britton is a campus centei turnkey and second-year psychology student.


BC uses WmeVvqr/ act -


Student or. Faculty’ member to sell’ top line Hi-Fi equipment on commission basis Details from I. C. Fronts



such! as 1.. what




2. where

3. how


of birth

I get


iS the next



pite assurances from the federal Trudeau !government that the War Measures ‘Act is not in effeet in Canada, Premier Wacky Bennett of British Columbia doesn’tagree. ,


contraceptives? pill?

e. what

is the

5. what




6. what



7. what




I do if I find


The B.C. government now has the power to immediately dismiss without hearings teachers from schools and universities if the teachers in any way advocate the policies of the FLQ or the overthrow of democratically elected governments - by violent -means.


use? I read?





tie hav’e ANSWERS

(and more)


CONTROL CENTEP ROOM206 . \.’ Campus’Center Universky of Waterloo,


*’ /





The edict ’ is worded so loosely that any individual teacher supporting such demands as public ownership could be summarily dismissed, ‘as many of the policies outlined in the FLQ Manifesto are shared by other -political parties including not only the -Parti Quebecoii, but the NDP and the Liberalparty..

C0 M PA RS ITA R:stauray’--;~a Waterloo 30% STU-DENTliSCOtiNT ON. I EAlg

($1.90 and over)

Breakfast Specials 830 to 11:30 ’ 59 to 99” Open 8:30 a.m. to 1 a.m. daily - Sun 9 am - 10 p.m. Dine & Dance 9 am to 1 am Mon to Sat

Creek who suggested class that bothu”sides be examined before the sent a telegram of supTrudeau, and a philosophy at the University ,of who openly supported

to his should students port to professor Victoria the FLQ.

The B.C move prompted the Canadian Association of University Teachers to say the move “places the teachers of that province in a position so vulnerable to abuse it is shocking.”

Alwyn Berland, executive secretary of CAUT, said in a press re1ease’ “This act negates the civil . rights of the teachers and sets them apart as a marked group entitled to less ‘justice under the


law AS well it removes safe

gua& over



. ‘7 -

The B.C. School Trustees’ ‘Association has promised to “rigidly enforce” the edict, but said it is conf jdent the ruling will not be abused.


(We ‘must assume of course’ that Social Credit supports none of the policies outlined in the The move could legally- be FLQ Manifesto such as eradicaas endangering the tion of poverty, slums and- un- - interpreted jobs of any teachers who ‘supemployment. ) port the struggles of the Viet. Since the measure was imnamese, the American blacks, /plemented through an order-inor any other forces which adcouncil by the Bennett governvacate the overthrow of any ment; two teachers have been democratically elected governdismissed-a high school teacher merits. \




VANCOUVEIj (CUP)' - Des- in Dawson



*%***************************&**)I * SPECMLlZlNG -IN CHINESE *


* * * * * *

’ . : * /Meeting-F&s - Memberships i - Vermont Trip Description


, GRAND ** v 8





10 King S. Waterloo

* * $

6I & C Bldg. - ZO6k- 8:OOpm Nqv. 3


(open 7 am to 1 am) (take out o;bers) MEAL CARD $5.50 VALiJE FOR ONLY


. *

z * *

[ *

* *

. g $5.bO


operated -byrRay Cohen

OPENING .’ SOoN at 322 King St W / I Kitchener

This is not an ad’-- it’s a pretty picture, (there are so many thqse days.) If you would like to know jtist how good a Citroen really is, why not speak to ,an ’ owrier of one, or better yet see us for a test .drive. We know you will be pleased.



Courtlanb Kitchener







,EAT,. -DRINK. ‘and ,BE


Free coffee with any food order for U of W/ Studentq at the Westmount’Pkce 418 the chevron



, \




I \

( \’

Y \

! e

Library hits women According to government regulations an employer is required to provide a female employee working till mid-nite a ride home _ if she would otherwise have to walk. It seems that this law, rather than improving women’s working conditions is depriving them of job opportunities. A quick survey of female employees working at the arts circulation desk of the library shows that only one is in need of taxi service home; the rest have their own transportation or live very close to the library. Those people working there will tell you that this low number is no mere coincidence but that women are hired on the basis of whether or not they need transportation. When assistant head librarian Paul Wiens was asked to clarify this hiring policy he explained that employees were chosen “only on the basis of experience and personality”. But what are you to do if you have two people of equal

Does -




qualifications and one doesn’t have her own transportation? “If we began hiring at the library on the basis of need we would be turning the library into a charitable institution rather than a service organization. ” It’s all economics isn’t it? ’

Bombs replace Lenin on tube OTTAWA (GINS)-The government tv network CBC cancelled an hour-long documentary film on Lenin this week and replaced it with another on avalanches that contained instructions on how to make home-made bombs, according to George Hees, MP for Prince Edward Hastings. He wondered whether such instuctions were appropriate in Canada at this time. FLQ sympathizers within’ the ranks of the CBC allegedly caused the switch to uccur.

anvbodv II

The following speech was delivered one week ago friday at the inaugural dinner for administration president Burt Matthews, and received special praise from any of those present. . .

I AM INDEED PLEASED you asked me to attend tonight in order that I might bring greetings from the federation of students to our new administration president. The federation has asked me to express its sincere hope that we might continue to deal with mutual regard in our appointed tasks as custodians of the university community. Many times in the coming year though this university community will collide with itself - parts of it renting apart the facades of decorum to which we all pay due homage; it is to be remembered always that we are on the same ball team; our goals and aims (no matter how they might conflict or differ) are ultimately united by the tradition of liberal education which binds us all to the same shaft. * * * And what of this “liberal education” in a conservative province - is it enough to expect merely efficiency from administration, decorum from faculty and apathy from the general student body? In other words, how can we congregate our factions into homogeneity with the same, mutually-beneficial goals of self-enrichment and co-operative enhancement? HOW, in other words, can we relate in harmony and respect, the Cadillac society of our board to the Volkswagon budgets of our students?, HOW may we relate in harmony and respect, the reserved parking spaces of our faculty to the mile-and-a-half walks of our support staff? HOW may we relate, in harmony and respect, the faculty club mentality to the food co-ops of our people? * * * These are questions we may strive to understand - in the board room, the administration office; our bedrooms and living rooms; the campus center great hall. Together, we must relate our divergencies and, in turn, relate these to the world around us, the world beyond University avenue and the world beyond KitchenerWaterloo. There are cynics at the university who say there is no hope; no chance for communication. But they are wrong. The liberal tradition proves they are wrong - memos prove they are wrong, meetings prove they are wrong; committees prove them wrong. For the one thing that ensures continued successful inter-face at our university is tolerance. Without tolerance, the university would collapse and order would crumble. Without tolerance of those around us, we could do no good; ensure no respect; de-


A local gendarme keeps an eye on the activities of the Kitchener-Waterloo Vietnam mobilization committee. The VMC paraded through the streets of the Waterloo county capital last Saturday morning and afternoon.


mand no order; call for no submission to what is proclaimed the general good. But the cynics argue that such tolerance is oppressive ; and by their arguments, they destroy the credibility we allowed them for indeed, in their haste, they have lost the very tolerance they seek to uphold. The university, by definition, cannot be oppressive for we have enshrined here all the principles of western democracy which make our society just: the wise use of intellectual freedom, the judicial application of community atmosphere, Jhe responsible avowal of free enquiry, and finally, the tactful’breakdown of academic competition. There are the means here to achieve greatness if only greatness were meant to be achieved. And our intellectual free enterprise can grow strongly with chaste consensus of opinion. The tolerance of each student, each professor, and each staff person is manditory to overcome the oppression of the foreboding’ spectre of the unfamiliar; for who of us wants open risk; who of us wants overt criticism; who of us wants obvious reconstruction of the university? For, as we welcome Dr. Matthews to our fold, we do not want a mere semblance of normalcy to greet ,him. Rather, we must confront normalcy as it really is a dedicated, struggling group of people; pushing their luck for the furtherance of everyone’s vested interests, yet in an atmosphere of mutual regard, in order that skirting the issues becomes as aimiable and beneficial as possible in our attempts to -tackle all problems. This is one aspect of the university we must not forget. The nature of discontent must not interfere with our perception of normal values when we come to confront our traditions for the purpose of effecting change. , We must bear in mind that what appears to be, may not necessarily be what is; ‘and while similarly, what to many people may not be believed because it appears to be what it is not; that which appears to be what it is may not be believed because it conflicts with what we would like it to appear to be. * * * In essence then, a university may not be believed by those who would prefer it to be other than that which is deliberately construed to be its image. This is what we should all be working against, for as has been pointed out many times before, it is often the image that is most important; the image which holds the true meaning of the form. Yet, have I not just said we should confront normalcy as it is, and not deal merely with semblance? There is really, in the two principles, no contradiction if we examine the publics to which each applies. To the public of the outside world, we must correspond in word and deed to the mystified image it cherishes, respects and identifies-with during Open House. But to the public of the university it behooves

to’ dinner


US ‘to acknowledge tolerance under presIt should very well keep an associate sure and resolve to disuade blind accep- busy developing the patterns of these betance of the images each of our various haviors. factions has of each of the others. We have come now to the crucial stage in our quest for the ultimate union of huThus, we may honestly deal not merely with the semblance of normalcy; but with man potential and awareness of probnormalcy itself when ironing out problems beyond our immediate environment. lems. These lessons should also pave the This applies not only to our university, but way for saving ourselves from seething to the hundreds of other institutions of discontent, both on campus and throughlearning across Canada, and indeed, aout society in general. cross the world. * * * For what is it that binds the activity of Turning aside, then,. from the philosoone secretary at the university of Water,phical and moral determinism of the uniloo and her perception of her interaction versity, we can examine perhpas the most with the entire university and world procrucial aspect of the university - the syscess to the activity of a gate attendant at tem of interaction among and between not the university of Wisconsin? And what only groups but individuals as well; and binds their activity, in turn, to the pernot merely from group to group, but from ception and environmental controls of an group to individual and vice versa. exploited laborer in Northern Ireland? * * * It can easily be said, I think, that the The answer is Trust. Trust in the awareecology of the interaction we witness here can be said to be a function of both the sitness of those in whose hands the fate of uation and the environment. . . in short, all processes rest. Your hands. Our hands. the systems analysis of behavior patterns We have been invested to our positions of concludes that when given parties comtrust by the awareness of our people, and mence with physical and environmentally we must carry out responsibilities based on this awareness. determined activities, progression of behavior becomes second, verbal diaIndeed, some have even gone so far as to suggest that our responsibility is not logue, and third, spiritual identification and co-existence among groups or individmerely seeing to the functional realization uals. But how, more precisely, can we apof such awareness, but is to broaden that ply this to the university? awareness beyond its present level. This * * * is very much a revolutionary concept as Consider the application of this theory far as the university is concerned, for it to the operations aspect of the university, means that we must not only reconcife certainly from a business standpoint, one Cadillac society with Volkswagon budgets, of the most important facets of the univerbut seek to make our people aware of why sity module. there is the difference in the first place Such a systems approach for example, between the two. to the movement of a secretary at lunch toI Though we can all see the problems which this choice involves, it should be our and from the cafeteria; measuring her environmental interaction throughout the belief that the great liberal traditions . procedure and correlating it with mood. which made the very conflict itself, can alsuccess at job and productivity; and to the so preside over the reso/utionary process number of students and/.or faculty her as well: a resolutionary process, we must movement affects, will give us a subjecadmit first and foremost,, which has its be-. tive determination (though by its nature ginning within these very halls. of unconsciousness, it is quite objective) By this, I am not suggesting we confine of the success or failure of any particular our awareness - for I have pointed out behavior setting - whether only appearthat we must analyse our own environing to be good or bad, or whether actually ment in relation to others around and beeffective. ’ yond ours - rather, I am reiterating what And determining this, is determining has always remained the bulwark of uniwhether the so-called “community of versity tradition : intellectual objectivity. . * * * scholars” actually means anything to the secretary, or whether in fact, it counts For what do riots in the streets mean or only as an empty phrase. matter if they cannot be detached from The systems approach, with proper praxis and studied by those with knowlpsychological guidance, is undoubtedly edgeable and respected frames of referthe best way to gauge the economic viaence? bility of the moral and intellectual transWhat matters injustice if it cannot first actions that occur at our university. Enube dissected into the abstract theorums meration of these transactions is importof our judicial tradition? ant, as they include the entire broad specAnd so it goes on, each further case a trum of our “community” : those between demonstration that while revolution may students, between students and faculty, be the gut process of change, it needs obamong faculty itself and between faculty jectivity validity to make it legitimate. * * * and administration. Transactions occurYou, gathered here tonight, will make ing among administrators, and between administration and staff; among staff revolution legi timate. Once again, I extend greetings and welmembers and between staff and students - and, ultimately, between students and come to Dr. Matthews, and thank you all for your attentive patience. Thank you. administration. tuesday

2 november


(I L-26)



by Brenda

chevron WHEN-WATER


somewhat mediocre farce but in spite of the script Jaine MacGillivray as the minor character fill manages to brighten it.


If the weather and the usual epidemic of cough and cold has you down, here is something to revive your spirit. No, this ’ is not an aspirin commercial. It is the Blackfriars’ play at the humani ties theatre. It consists of four separate skits. The first three centers on marriage, and of course sex, with a balanced mixture of humour and melancholy that gives the play depth versus it just being plain funny . ‘I’m Herbert’ is a delightful interpretation by Russ Scott and Susan Downs of a septugenarian couple who squable over each other’s faulty memory, then relapse into savouring the delicious memories of past rolmance. The Footsteps of Doves’ is a






has a touch of tragicomedy as the generation gap is dramatized with director Paul Roland excelling in the lead. The fourth skit entitled 7he Schock of Recognition’ is the grand finale of the production. It is witty, superbly cast and acted. Miller, a well known playwright insists that in his new play the leading man makes his first appearance in the nude, looking “pathetic and ridiculous” John Ryrie is hilarious in the / role of Pawling, an unknown, who appears for an audition. On the whole the show is enjoyable, expertly performed and up to par with many a professional group.



Party this friday find out where come to the office


I \-

10% Discount

on all stereo


I- ’





short, probably because so much of it was taken up with babble and what seemed to be cheap ways of getting applause (example-upon mentioning women’s liberation, which Haven’s as a political person has previously supported, he gave the thunbs down sign which illicited applause and laughter from his attentive audience). But’ when he was performing you could almost forget his stoned conversation. His guitar work is both exact and intense, his voice rasping, his material suited to his abilities, whether he is playing James Taylor’s ‘Fire and Rain’ or one of his new songs of the evening ‘Freedom’ which had the entire audience on its feet clapping for freedom along with him. But half a dozen songs dispersed among so much personal tripaping Just L wasn 71 t enougn. tor many of his listeners and the -. , . T1 fticnie, Havens concert was on the whole disappointing.




Wed. Nov. 4,11:30a.m.

& accessories




to all students’

Man-Wed 9:30 am to 9: 00 pm Thurs & Fri 9:30 am to 9:30 pm Saturday 9: 30 am to 5: 30 pm


Question of the week: Why is it that entertainers are more and more beginning to exploit their captive audience by endless talk of their personal thoughts on the state of the universe and the destiny and downfall of mankind? Friday night in the phys-ed building people paid up to four dollars to hear Richie Havens and his warm up act Kathy Smith expound at length upon anything which seemed to enter their minds. Kathy Smith, aside from the fact that some may remember hearing that she opened the Isle of Wight pop festival this year in Britain, is probably unknown in most of Canada. : Her guitar work and much of her music was reminiscent of Joni Mitchell as was her nervous manner, but an otherwise decent set could have bee]n much better if she had dispens ed with fill-in-the-silence chatter between the songs. His one set seemed extremelv

$529 Lps as low as $3.87 $i a29 Ll~s as low as $4.66 At least


chevron staff


University of Waterloo CONCERT BAND directed by Alfred Kunz The 45 member band who rehearses weekly at 5:30 p.m. Wednesdays was a smashing success at Convocation. Some of the music that will be performed on the-programme of varied concert band music will be the “Egmont Overture” “Ave Verum” by Moby Beethoven, zart, and “Villabella” a very fine contemporary march. Theatre of the Arts Free Admission. / * * *

Fri. Nov. 6,11:30 a.m. Film - Civilization EXPERIENCE” mission :

“THE LIGHT A.L. 116 Free

OF Ad-

* * *

Sat. Nov. 7 8:15p.m. DR. JOHN RUTH, Lecturer ‘Corning to Terms with our Heritage” Conrad Grebel College’ Series Theatre of the Arts Admission $2.00 Children under 12 $1.00 Central Box Office Ext. 2126. * * * * *

Sun.Nov. 8 8:OOp.m. CLAUDE SAVARD, pianist, who has won many international competitions. A French-Canadian, he has toured extensively in Canada, Europe and the United States. His programme features works by Mozart, Beethoven, Chopin, Schubert and Debussy. Theatre of the Arts Admission $1.50 Students $1.00 Central Box Office Ext. \ 2126.


420 the chevron



Kathy in the home featured Havens. inson,

Smith (left) entertained first half of the Comingconcert last friday which $7,500 worth of Ritchie . Photos by Peter Wilkthe chevron.

Havens was!


2 november

1970 (1 L-26)



by Chaplain


Chaplain Morrison, an associate professo/ Waterloo 7 Lutheran university history at has studied the history of the Vietnam flict for many years, here Lipdates the

/- !


HE ORIGINS OF THE PRESENT war in Vietnam go back to the struggle for vietnamese independence against a french colonial regime in the>1940’s and 1950’s, one of many such revolutionary movements which developed in -the third world during and after world war 11. The Vietnamese revolution was peculiar in one respect, however-its m . leadership was communist. Years before, the father of the Vietnamese independence movement, Ho Chi Minh,” had decided that communist doctrine and discipline offered the best means of ‘overthrowing french rule. Notwithstanding Ho Chi Minh’s commitment to communism, the american government under Franklin D. Roosevelt provided aid and assistance to the movement during the second world war, in order to defeat a common en&my, the japanese, who were then occupying Vietnam. After the war the ffench tried to restore their colonial regime in Vietnam using a Vietnamese collaborator, Bao Dai-a policy which brought them into direct conflict with Ho Chi Minh and his colleauges, who were trying to establish an indepepdent nation. Fighting began in 1946, after the french shelled the city of Haiphong. Then ensuing Vietnamese war for independence was, like the american revolutidA, aIso a civil war iii which many vietnames fought bn the side of the french colonialists. In the meantime, the changing shape of world politics had changed american policy-toward Vietnam. As the United States became more and more committed to a cold war against “communism”, ’ support began to develop in America for the french / colonial effort in Vietnam. Following Mao Tse XTung’s triumph in China in 1949 and the outbreak of the korean war in 1950, the american public tended to identify all communists as part of an international conspiracy to conquer the world. It__was in this atmosphere that the american government began to finance the french effort in Vietnail paying 80 percent of the military cost of the way ina the years from 1950 to f954.

Accord at Geneva In spite- of american aid, however, the french gave up the struggle in 1954 and agreed to s/ettle the conflict peaceably at an international conference in Geneva, attended by the majorpbwers of the world. The Geneva accords provided for a ceasefire and regroupment of military forces into provisional northern and sourthern zones, divided at the 17th parallel. Ipplemen@tion of the ceasefire and regroupment agreements were to be overseen by an international control commission composed of ‘representatives from one western nation, Canada, one communist nation, Poland, and one neutral, India. The commission was also to supervise the im-’ plementationof the political agreements reached at Geneva, which included nationwide elections to be held in two years to establish a permanent vietnamese government. By dividing the country’ into provisional zones, the accords prevented the immediate cgming to power of a vietminh government for all Vietnam, which had seemed \ inevitable given the. f rench unwillingness to continue fighting. But the comtion assumption was that they had only delayed this* outcome, since the vietminh appeared certain to -win the elections in 1956. .For this reason the american government refused to join France, Britain, Russia and-china in ratifying the accords. It did, however, make a unilateral declaration not to interfere with them. _ Ironically, both presidents Johnson and Nixon have repeatedly paid lip-service t@ the Geneva Accords, ‘the latest example being the October 7th proposal: American policy from 1954 on was to render permanent the temporary situation created by the accords, a divided Vietnam, and thus avoid the end to which their political terms seemed inevitably to point, a Vietnam united under Communist leadership. The United States government had already pressured France into having Bao Dabppoint as his pre’mier Ngo Dien Diem, who had remained out of the country . during. the revolutionary struggle. After the Geneva Conference, -Diem cooperated with ‘the-united States to substitute american for french &flue&e in the south&n zone of Vietnam. By 1955 he had replaced Bao Dai as head of government and was in a position to reject the’overtures of Hi> Chi Minh’s gotiernment in Hanoi for discussions of the nationwide elections projected bythe Geneva accords. Recognizing that, he would lose the elections




422 the chevron

history to the present. Morrison also last frida ys rally protesting continued ican presence in Vietnam.


who conwar’s \



spoke at amer-

-, TI : --$I .

ports in 1957 and 1962 condemning other american violations of the accords. But squardron leader Hugh Campbell, who served with the commission from 1961 to 1963, has testified that he was instructed by his superiors to ignore american violations of the accords in that ,period. In 1965,-when the United States began major escalations of the war, Canada fully supported the , american action both in the commission and out of it. -In spite of the--increased american military support, the position of the Saigon regime continued to deteriorate to the point where the american gayernment became convinced that Diem would lose the war. When Washington signaled that a new government would be welcome in Saigon, lead&s of Diem’s army deposed and murdered him and es- tablished a military junta to rule in his place. The NLF continued to gain ground, however, and by 1964 was-on the brink of victory. The american government, now headed by president Johnson, decided to avert this defeat by a massive military intervention. The way was prepared in the summer of 1964 by sending American destroyers repeatedly into the territorial waters claimed by the North Vietnamese governpent near-the site of a south Vietnamese commando raid on the North. Even after a north Vietnamese message had been intercepted suggesting the probability of an attack on the destroyers, they were ordered once more to penetrate north Vietnamese waters. Fo!iowing this penetration the destroyers reported they had been attacked, but \nhetheran actual attack took place has never been finally determined. . The Johnson administration however responded by bombing North Vietnam for the first time and ’ introducing into congress the gulf of Tonkin r&olution which it had apparently drawn up before .I that “to stay in Vietn any incident occured, giving it authority “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed atfail to respond to the f tack against the forces of-the United States and to - people-peace. ’’ prevent further aggression.” “The war itself,” tk overwhelming atrocity Johnson refused to commit himself on the usethe massive destructio of this ‘authority in the election campaign promising the american people that “We are not going a widespread vietndrr States and the Saigon rt to send american boys nine or ten thousand miles The efforts of the s away from home to do what asian boys ought timatize itself do not to be doing for themselves.” But in 1965 the -administration did begin to send hatred. The elections tion in the fall of 1967 large numbers of american combat troops to Vietnam and by the end of the yea_r there were more less by a large portio , Revolutionary warface does not require simply dispopulation, because al than 180,000 fighting men there. At the. same content among the masses but a sense of desperatime the government began to bomb both North military ticket .were I tion and a grim determination to end injustice and vance and because the Vietnam qnd the NLF-controlled areas in South humilr’ation, Ii demands patience with prolonged suf. ,’ larities( both during the Vietnam. , fering and a determined conspiracy of silence and tion itself. mi’litanc y. -The justification for the new policy was that the war was a war of aggression by North Vietnam. The committee of the By the end of the 1950’s the revolution had gathwhich investigated th As it turned out, however, the pentagon’s own ered sufficient momentum for the Hanoi governfigure of the number of north Vietnamese regusixteen to three again: ment to recognize the southern rebels and provide, junta had to assistance in organizing the struggle. lar troops fighting in South Vietnam was 400 at . military the time of the american escalation, a time when get>he assembly to act Believing like all Vietnamese, including Diem In the spring of 196$ that Vietnam was one country and that they had ‘ the United States already had 25,000 of its own troops in Vietnam. Moreover, the claim totally who arranged the elec been cheated of the fruits of their victory in 1954, president in them, to:‘d Ho Chi kink and his colleagues probably had no ignored the fact that Vietnam was one and not two countries.. “Our last elections wal qualms about interfering in affairs in the south. But a mockery. They were plagued with internal difficulties of their oWn and The north Vietnamese began to commit their troops in the south as the american militarywhich is wrong and corl uncertain about the success of the revolution in Ky might have adder buildups continued, though at a much slGwer the South, they were slow to came to its assistance. rate. In 1967, when the size of the american force confirmed in power a After 1959, they began to send southern vietminh including himself ,:hc approached half a million men, the pentagon eswho had been regrouped in 1954 back to their local timated that there were 50,000 to 60,000 north vietin the war of independ communities in the south to fight in the revolution. *regarded by many viet namese troops fighting in the south. -In 1960 they helped the southern rebels to form the was by americans after national liberation front, a coalition of anti-Diem groups under communist leadership. Furthermore, the ela North Vietnamese assistance was still limited, governments before it As the magnitude of the war increased so too lords in a country -*df however, As late as 1963, general Paul D. Harkins did the damage to the society. The american polcommander of the american forces in Vietnam adbers of landless peasa: icy of search-and-destroy missions and indiscrimis for land of their own 1 mitted : “The guerrillas are obviously not being inate bombing of NLF-controlled areas demolishreinforced or supplied systematically from North Finally, the governs ed villages, killing and wounding combatants Vietnam, China or any other place. ” torial and repressive and non-combatants alike and transforming a subIn violation of the COI stantial portion of the south Vietnamese into refsored and enormous’ nl - ugee’s. are held without. trial. In the fall of 1967 a senate investigating commitIn the meantime, the american. military -coytee estimated the yearly toll of civilian casualties A recent investiga! kitment in Vietnam was irrcreasing. At-first the prisons revealed amon in Vietnam at about 150,000 persons; the totalUnited States simply trained the south Vietnamese number of refugees at that time was estimais commonly used to army and supplied it with weapons. But after 1960 large numbers of chill ted at about‘ four million persons, one fourth of the number of military personnel was increased South Vietnam’s entire population. The committee barbarou: condition& and gradually americans began to participate more soners are not adherer concluded from its investigations that most of and more in the war itself. is the runne’ the casualties -and refugees were the result By the beginning of 1965, there were 23,000 amer-- of , prisoners in the elections of 19 ican military personnel in Vietnam. As the United american military action. At about the same time-the director, co-director “* crime for which he wa States commitment grew in the early 1960’s there -advocating peace talks and- five other workers from the international was evidently american pressure on Canada for volunteer service program in South I Vietnam, greater support for _her effort. Although Canada who had spent years doing humanitarian work had with1 the other members of the international there, resigned in protest against american milicontrol commission ‘allowed the United States and Diem to sabatdge the political terms of the accords tary policy. In a letter to president Johnson signedThe weaknesses of t by forty-three of the IVS workers they worte meant that as the sot iri 1956, the Canadian representative did sign re-

Diem took the position that since his government. had not approved the accords, it was not bound by thein. Although this &and conflicted with the language of the accords which bound the french agents in Vietnam, or their successors, the international control tiommission, including Canadg, made no effort to force the Diem .government^to conform with the politi,cal terms providing for national elections. -The Geneva accords also allowed Vietnamese to transfer from one zone to another if they chose. A substantial portion of the _catholic community living ‘in the northern zone-roughly three quarters of a million people-emigrated to the south so that they might live under a government headed by a fellow catholic rather than by the communist, Ho Chi Minh. _ r It was largely these militantly anti-communist 1catholic emigres whom Diem drew upon. to staff his government and who provided the principal basis of support for that government. In 1956, as the time for the elections came and went, Diem sent his’appointees into the villages of the southern zone to replace the officials whb had previously been locally elected+ The unpopularity of the Saigon otficials in the villages, many of whom were corrupt, was one cdndition leading to a resumption of the Vietnamese revolution. A second condition was Diem’s effort to crush’ all political opposition to his government, non-communist, as well as communist. The methods used, destruction of hostile villages, arbitrary arrest of -suspected dissidents, concentration camps, executions, etc., are those popularly associated with communist governments, a point made in a ringing denunciation of the r.uthlessness atid brutality of the regime by a group of anti-Vietnamese lead?ers in Saigon in 1960. The group included seven of Diem’s former cabinet ministers. The former vietminh whom Diem was trying to destroy renewed the revolutionary struggle in the southern zone. The most spectacular though not the most significant aspect of this revolution was the rebels “terroristic” attacks on the Saigon officials in the villages. This was simply part of the larger struggle between the government and the rebels for the control and support of the people, a struggle which the rebels began to win. Unless a government is extraordinarily alienated from a large portion of its people no revolutionary movement can hope to succeed. As one leader of the movements for algerian independence put it:



,Fun atid- more cjames

The military gari7e .



These pages are written in Montreal in the midst of a whirlpool of events gin to glimpse. This is not an explanation of the grievances of Quebec-

whose final solution one can only bethat must come later, and some even

think it’s already too late for that, years too late. This special preliminary report has been prepared by the staff of Last Post magazine, w&king with journalists in Montreal, Ottawa and Quebec City, whose examinatioh of events, and their treatment in the English press outside Quebec, has given them the profound conviction that too much has not been to/d, and too many questions have failed to be raised in the explosion of events. / It is our aim-those at the Last Post and those of us in the papers and broadcast media who have joined the Last Post in this effort-to raise questions about the motives of men in power in the cataclvsmic davs of O&o-

of Monday,

tie, fought



in the ballot box. The streets

have been quiet, re-

1 in Montreal.

fleeted the left’s shedding

its student

image and working

down to the U.S. to make his first - _major


plea for American

In Ottawa, .Prime Minister Trudeau delivered a glowing Throne speech at the opening of parliament, expressing his confidence in the state of Canadian confederation. Parliament was gearing for its first maior debate on the





Then, the whole balloon began to burst. In the early morning of Monday, October 5, James Cross was kidnapped, whisked away from his home on wealthy Redpath Crescent by four men in a cab. Hours later, the police announced that it had received, via a popular French radio station, a communique from a group that claimed to be a cell of the FLQ, and that James Cross would only be re!eased if the government released 23 men jailed for terrorist and

vision network, delivered $500;000 in gold bars, released the identification of an informer who had turned some previous FLQ men in, and rehired the Lapalme postal delivery men whom the government fired for striking. The government, in a series of statements that culminated the following Saturday with the televised speech of Quebec’s Justice Minister Jerome Choquette, said “no”. ’ Within half an hour of Choquette’s speech (too soon for it to be a response to his speech ), Pierre Laporte, the Labor Minister of the Quebec Government, and Bourassa’s number two man, if not the strongman of the Liberal government, was kidnapped by four other men outside his home in suburban Montreal. The confusion in government circles in Ottawa and Quebec City following this resulted on Thursday, Oct. 15, in the entry into Montreal of 7,500 federal troops armed to the teeth, reportedly to “aid the police” by guarding principal buildings and people. The troops were later called into Ottawa’s exclusive Rockcliffe Park section to guard members of parliament and cabinet ministers. On Oct. 16, at 4 o’clock in the morning the Trudeau government invoked the War Measures Act, the most powerful document at its disposal, giving it next to dictatorial powers. On Saturday night, following a curious set of events no one has yet been able to explain, the body of Pierre Laporte was found by the police in the trunk of a car near the St. Hubert air force base in suburban Montreal. A nation’s hysteria is unleashed. Suddenly we are back where we were five years ago. A cold civil war is being fought along national and linguistic grounds. The country is polarized, but not on social issues, on issues of language and race. The political life of this country is never going to be the same. Quebec is never going to be the same. What happened to so disturb the calm of a listless October and so hurl a nation into a tortured vortex of political explosions, so violent a shift of the forces in this country, so sudden an alteration of the stakes of the political game? Who wins, who loses? What happened between October 5, and today? Who was making what decisions? What were their strategies? What may be the fruits of their strategies? . Was it a hunt for kidnappers and terrorists, a hunt that went wild, or were there more basic, long-term motives that directed the men in power over the first four weeks? With an urgency that cannot be underestimated, we must begin to piece together the beginnings of answers to these questions.








Theplot f all the strange answers that have blown in the October wind, none has been stranger than the coup d’etat that never took place. This supposed plot-or these plots, for the exact details depend on which government spokesman you happen to be listening to-has been referred to again and again since October 16, and it is worth examining closely. The most recent version of the conspiracy theory is that of Defence Minister Donald MacDonald. According to MacDonald, we are on a “revolutionary timetable”, and the kidnappings are part of a “well-known revolutionary formula.” In a CTV interview, October 25 he said that “on the whole, you had a pattern of incidents here which, given the revolutionary ideology we’re talking about, in other situations and in other countries has escalated itself up into a state of disorder in which it will be virtually impossible to carry on the normal processes of government and which would provide, if you like, a situation ripe for revolutionary action.” Another important characteristic of the FLQ is “the fact that they’re not organized. If in fact there had been a highly structured organization it would have been even easier for the police to break.” On October 15, however, Montreal police chief Mardel StAubin, said he was having difficulty investigating the FLQ because of “the internal organization of the movement, as it is divided into numerous small cells.” It was St-Aubin’s statement, along with covering letters from Mayor Drapeau and Premier Bourassa, that was used in the House of Commons the next day to justify the invocation of the War Measures Act. According to Nick Auf der Maur, a CBC Montreal broadcaster and member of the Last Post editorial co-operative who was arrested under the Act and spent three days inside Quebec Provincial Police cells, the police in their questioning appeared to believe that every demonstration,‘bombing, and strike that had happened in Quebec in the last two years was part of the conspiracy. He says they see the FLQ as being organized along the lines of the Mafia, and they believe that if they could only find Comrade Big the game would be UP. St-Aubin said the kidnappings are “only the beginning” of “seditious and insurrectional activities.” But Bourassa’ the next day said the FLQ had reached the “final stage” of its plan. The first threestages of the plan had already been carried out: violent demonstrations, bombings, and spectacular kidnappings, in that order. “The fourth step-the most important-is selective assassinations.” The government had “every reason to believe” the FLQ was now prepared to carry these out. He added that “already” political leaders had received assassination threats. There were hints at more than this. Federal Justice Minister John Turner said October 21 that “it might not ever be possible to disclose to the public the information on which the government made its decision.” Prime Minister Trudeau, however, said in the House October 26 that “the facts on which we did act are known to the people of Canada and indeed to this House.” When Opposition Leader Stanfield immediately pointed out the apparent discrepancy between Trudeau’s statement and Turner’s, the Prime Minister said there was in fact no discrepancy. There may be information, he said, that the public doesn’t know. But that is irrelevant, since the known information was what the government had acted upon. Perhaps the fullest exposition of the conspiracy theory came from Jean Marchand, once a prominent Quebec labor leader, and today not only the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion in the Trudeau Cabinet, but also the man charged with keeping an eye on his five million restless countrymen who‘live in Canada’s second-largest province. “Those who are well-protected behind the Rockies or even in the centre of Toronto don’t know what is happening in Quebec right now,” declared the Quebec expert in the House of Commons a few hours after the War Measures Act had been signed. There were conspirators who had “infiltrated all the vital places of the province of Quebec, in all the key posts


October 16? Why did it give credence to a picture of the FLQ that could not be believed by anyone who had any knowledge of the situation in Quebec, that it could not have believed itself, but that might conceivably be widely believed in English Canada since the government and the police are the only sources of information? One clue comes from Jean Marchand’s Vancouver interview, for it contains more than the accusations that made the headlines (reaction to his statement about FRAP was so adverse that Prime Minister Trudeau had to dissociate himself from it the next day, and Marchand himself had to back off). Marchand made some other statements in that interview that, in the long term, may be a lot more significant. Having averred that there are between 1,000 and 3,000 members of the FLQ, Marchand says: “Now all members of the FLQ .are not terrorists. But the:k are enough to create a lot of trouble and a lot of killing and this is what we are trying to prevent.” ‘Not all FLQ members are terrorists! Then what are they? where important decisions are taken.” There were at least Who is the FLQ? two tons of dynamite, detonators_ and electric circ!its for Or more to the point: Who isn’t? setting off bombs, thousands of rifles and machine guns, If not all members of the FLQ are carrying arms, planning bombs. “For whoever knows the FLQ right now,” said the assassinations and stashing bombs, what are they doing? Orknows this organization well shuddering expert, “whoever ganizing in the labor unions, perhaps. Organizing demonstracannot do otherwise than recognize that the provincial state tions, or working with FRAP and the Parti Quebecois. of Quebec and the federal state are really in danger in CanaMaybe if you’re a leftist or a Pequiste, you’re ineffect FLQ? da. The net is suddenly a little wider, and out -for more fish, than As the startled members of the House of Commons soaked we have been led to believe from the impression that the this up Marchand perorated: “If we had not acted today, and government was just hunting two or three kidnapping cells. if, in a month or a year separation had come about, I know Is Marchand saying that the FLQ is everyone who is workvery well what would have been said in this House: ‘What sort ing for a socialist or independent Quebec? of government is this? You had all that information in your Let’s follow more of Marchand’s interesting analysis. hands and you could have used emergency powers and you He says: “How in a society like ours can such a movement did not do it. It’s a government of incompetent people.’ ” like the FLQ flourish. You knew a year ago, two years ago Just to make sure that the people who lived behind the or even five years ago that there were FLQ members. But as Rockies, well-protected from the fanatics of French Canada knew what was going on, Marchand re-stated and even ela- long as they do not recourse to violence, under which law can you do anything?” ~ I borated his claims on a British Columbia hot-line show a week None, Mr. Marcband. If they do not resort to violence they after the government had struck. He had a new sensation to are not violating the Criminal Code. But perhaps exactly wh,.t offer: the Front d’ Action Politique (FRAP), the main opposiMarchand is saying is that we need laws by which the governtion party in Montreal’s civic election, only days away, was a front for the FL&, (whose membership hadnow shrunk to ment can arrest and prosecute those that follow their political aims even by peaceful means. This seems incredible, so let’s “between 1,006 and 3,000”). There were to be explosions, follow what he said further: ‘more kidnappings, perhaps assassinations on election day. He makes the point that “it is not the individual action Anarchy was then to spread through the province, and after we are worried about now. It’s this vast organ&&ion supported the province the nation. Thrones were to topple as the conby other bona fide organizations who are supporting, indirectspiracy leapfrogged across the continent. ly at least, the FLQ.” In the end, of course, none of this happened. And perhaps Mr. Marchand is not worried about the kidnappers, he more surprisingly, remarkably few conspirators were turned seems to be saying, but about the people who “do not recourse up by police. Even with the awesome powers of the War Measnow a “vast organization”-who are ures Act, with its license to search, seize and arrest on no to violence.” People--it’s supported by bona fide groups. stronger grounds than mere suspicion, and with so many raids What are these people doing? Where are they? that, after 2,900, even the most conscientious reporters lost Marchand refers to “many important institutions in Quebec” count, the police could come up with fewer than 400 captives. that have been “infiltrated” by this strange breed of non-vioAnd of those, they could hold onto only 150 as October closed. , lent FLQers. Is it these 150 people then who have placed the established If there are so many people, in so many areas and instituorder in Canada in grave danger? If so, they must indeed tions, it’s going to be pretty hard to ferret them out. Espebe supermen. And the police do not appear to be trying very cially if they lack the decency to commit a criminal act and hard to find out. According to Auf der Maur, Robert Lemieux, job of destroying them. the lawyer who had acted as negotiator for the FLQ, was facilitate the govern-ment’s And so we come to the most distressing statement of all, questioned for a total of two minutes during the first eight bluntly. days of his imprisonment. Pierre Vallieres, a leader of the and Marchand states the aims of the government 1966 FLQ, was also questioned for,two minutes in these eight “Well, if it had been an isolated case of kidnapping I don’t days. Charles Gagnon, another leader of the 1966 FLQ, was think we would have been justified in invoking the War Measnot questioned at all. ures Act because there the Criminal Code would have been On Ohe occasion, Prime Minister Trudeau observed to a enough to try and get those men and punish them. But there and we have no instrument, no instrubemused House that Kerensky too had been “pooh-poohing the is a whole organization ment to get those people and question them.” possibility of an insurrection.” Let’s summarize the implications of Marchand’s logic. Mr. Trudeau is wrong; Kerensky knew very well that there There is a vast conspiracy of people numbering from 1,000 was going to be an insurrection, and with good reason. For to state the parallel is to see its absurdity. Was Montreal on Oc- to 3,000. They are not all terrorists; in fact some hold highly respectober 16 Petrograd, where in the Putilov plant 40,900 worktable and critical positions, and some have the protection of ers were prepared to go out into the streets, and the Grenade other bona fide groups. works had its entire work force mobilized in the Red Guards? They must be rooted out. Or was it Moscow, brought to its knees during the final weeks The Criminal Code permits us to root out kidnappers and of the old order by widespread strikes? Still the government now chose to spread scare stories a- killers, but not people who commit no crimes. Therefore we need an “instrument” by which we can go bout a sudden revolutionary upheaval, a notion it had repeatedly dismissed in the past. A year ago, Montreal’s Dra- after these people who commit no crimes, and it’s not simply a question of kidnappers. peau administration journeyed to Ottawa for the governIs the Trudeau government seeking a circumvention of the ment’s investigation into the activities of the Company of Young Canadians. Piles of captured documents were pro- laws of this country in order to launch a hunt that extends induced to demonstrate that a far-ranging comspiracy was on to the highest reaches of Quebec, into the most respected, the move. It was repeatedly noted at the time that, while the bona fide groups, in order to ferret out these dangerous peodocuments showed lots of smoke, it was difficult to find any ple? Whom is the Trudeau government after? fire. Beyond the well-known fact that FLQ cells existed, and might carry out isolated, anarchistic acts, the rest was vapor. The Drapeau administration’s evidence was laughed out of town. Two previous, abortive attempts (according to the police) at kidnapping people in high places, including the American he apprehended insurrection-coup-plot-uprising-reconsul-general in Montreal, had been taken with equanimity. volt grows more ridiculous every day, and it is eviAnd so, indeed, had the kidnapping of James Cross: there had dent that it does so from statements made even by been no indication in the first week of the crisis that upholders federal ministers. Certainly, as far as armed uprisof the status quo had better nerve themselves for the crunch. ings of one to three thousand people are concerned, the go Nor did even the second kidnapping, that of Pierre Laporte, vernment never believed its own case. It allowed and encourbring about sudden fears of insurrection. Why then did the aged the story to spread in order to use it as currency to buy government choose to unleash the vast conspiracy theory on time and public support to keep the War Measures Act in

The politics



force. It is possible to piece together with some certainty that Trudeau, on the eve of implementing the emergency powers, feared he was losing control of the situation in Quebec, of French public opinion, to the nationalists and moderate separatists. The Prime Minister had grounds for such fears. Contrary to the early statements by both federal and provincial spokesmen, a significant portion of the Quebec population had-not recoiled in revulsion at the FLQ’s action. Predictably radical youth, certain labor organizations, and a startling percentage of average citizens were reacting favorably to the content of the FLQ’s political analysis, if not to their modus operundi. But even while most of the sympathetic repudiated the acts themselves, the FLQ’s highwaymanelan and the governments’ inept responses left many Quebecois inwardly pleased. ’ That much can be established. Whether Trudeau thought the strange events in Quebec. were bringing the province as close as it had ever come to separating, however, can only be speculated right now. What is very probable is that, as hints in the Marchand interview might suggest, Trudeau at least saw the opportunity to move decisively against the separatist-nationalist tide in Quebec and set it back for years, if not stem it forever. One of the most significant statements of the motives of the Trudeau government, and the steps by which it arrived at making the drastic move on October 16, is to be found in a column by Toronto Star Ottawa editor Anthony Westell appearing the day after the Act was invoked. Westell, a longtime Ottawa columnist formerly with the Globe and Mail, has extremely good sources inside the Liberal cabinet, and, along with Toronto Star editor Peter Newman, is one of the three or four most important Liberal Party intimates in the national press gallery. ’ Writing under the heading “The Agony Behind Trudeau’s Decision”, Westell examined the basic premises on which Trudeau approaches the current situation in Quebec: “The answer begins with Trudeau’s analysis of the rise of separatism in the past five years. The decline and fall of the Lesage Liberal government, he believes, left a power vacuum which Union Nationale premier Daniel Johnson did not fill because he never took a firm position for federalism. R,ene Levesque left the Liberals to lead the Parti Quebecois into the void, and win almost a quarter of the votes in the election this year.” The Trudeau administration’s entire strategy toward Quebec is to make sure that the vacuum of social contradictions -and frustrations is never left as open territory to the separatists, and particularly to Rene Levesque. The Trudeau government fell over backwards pumping money and organizational talent into the election campaign of new Liberal leader Robert Bourassa, scarcely concealing the influx of everything from top advisers to Trudeau’s personal hairdresser to Bourassa’s side. The province was saturated with a welloiled campaign that reeked of money, and no one had any

doubts that much, if not most of it, came from the federal Liberals. When the FLQ struck, Westell reports, “Trudeau’s instinct was to refuse negotiations or concessions to the terrorists. Nor were there any doves in the federal cabinet.��� conBut he stresses that “. . .Trudeau grew increasingly cerned at the threat to Bourassa’s fledgling and inexperienced government posed by the new terrorism.” Initially, the threat came from one specific source-the vacillation of the Quebec cabinet in the face of Laporte’s kidnapping five days after Cross’s abduction. Trudeau’s strategy of strength depended on Bourassa ethe pillar of fortitude around merging as the strongman, which Quebec could rally, the dam that could keep the floodtides of nationalist and separatist feeling from moving into that dangerous political vacuum of which Westell spoke. “But with the kidnapping of Quebec Labor Minister Pierre Laporte, the crisis changed and deepened. It became at once a terrible -question striking deep into the hearts and consciences of Bourassa’s own ministers. Many Quebec Liberals owe more friendship to Laporte‘than to Bourassa, a relative newcomer. In the cabinet pressing around the young minister at the moment of crisis, there ivere agonized men who wanted nothing more than to save their colleague. “The pressure on Bourassa was enormous. The danger last weekend that he would cave in, opening a disastrous new power vacuum, seemed terribly real.” It has been reliably reported by several journalists, and Westell carries the information, that Trudeau spent hours on the phone at his Harrington Lake summer home encouraging the premier to hold fast. Marc Lalonde, one of Trudeau’s top advisors, is believed to have rushed to Quebec City to buttress the premier at this juncture, when, according to several reports, Bourassa’s cabinet was on the verge of crumbling. The leadership of the crisis, which had appeared to come largely from Quebec with‘Trudeau in the background making sure things went as he wanted them to, suddenly began to revert to Ottawa. Here the crux of the entire crisis developed. It centres around the way public opinion in Quebec was reacting to the kidnapping. Trudeau made at least one tactical error, and one massive political blunder. Those mistakes proved to be the factors destroying his strategy. Pierre Desrosiers suggests in the weekly Montreal paper Quebec-Presse an interpretation that has also been voiced by Parti Quebecois economic expert Jacques Parizeau, and backed up by some reporters in Ottawa. It is this: Trudeau’s initial tactic had been to remain firm, in an effort to force the FLQ’s hand. They might have killed Cross: Desrosiers and Parizeau suggest Trudeau was prepared to let that happen, betting public opinion would swing to him out of revulsion. But instead, the FLQ upped the ante. It kidnapped Pierre Laporte. Trudeau’s tactic to back the FLQ into a corner had failed. This unexpected response to Trudeau’s immediate strategy, however, would only have been a temporary tactical setback, if Trudeau had not made one critical political error of judgement. He totally misread the climate of public opinion in Quebec. . Westell himself makes this point: “Another minister feared that after the first shock and outrage at the kidnappings, Quebec opinion was being won around to the rationalization that while violence may be wrong, the terrorists. were somehow glamorous patriots fighting a noble cause-the same sort of shift of opinion that happened after Charles de Gaulle’s ‘Vive le Quebec Libre’ speech in 1967. “A backbencher close to Trudeau expressed much the same fear more precisely,” Westell states, “when he said that the Quebec media-television, radio, newspaperswere heavily infiltrated by FLQ propagandists and suggested drastic action would be necessary to eventually deal with the problem.” By “FLQ propagandists”, of course, the backbencher meant journalists who were expressing the sympathy felt by many in Quebec for the goals and principles expressed in the FLQ manifesto. “A Montreal MP, on the ‘other hand,” Westell continues, “told the Liberal caucus Wednesday that the FLQ was appealing dangerously well to real grievances among French Canadians, and that it would not stand for repression.” We have confirmed that this “Montreal MP” was Marcel Prud’homme, who was taken aback when he took a poll in his constituency and found that the vast majority of the young supported what the FLQ did, and that the older constituents violently condemned the tactic but frequently expressed some sympathy for the content of the manifesto. Prud’homme communicated these facts to an emergency caucus meeting. Trudeau himself let slip in the Commons a thought that had been more and more in his mind by now: the media were playing into the hands of the FLQ by giving them too much publicity. The government was so frazzled by this PR problem that, while the cabinet was planning the emergency regulations, it actually considered press censorship, of which Trudeau was the leading advocate. Trudeau’s aides had initially tried to suppress the publica-

tion of the FLQ manifesto in the Quebec papers, one of them arguing for an hour with the editor of the National Union paper Montreal Matin, in vain, against running the text. “As the week wore on,” Westell reported in the Toronto Star, “the question as to how to quiet the Quebec media came more frequently into conversations around the government. “This was because the critical battle was seen as the struggle for public opinion. Would Quebecers rally to law, order and a strong Bourassa government, or drift towards a new ‘moderate’ position?” Others arguing in support of this thesis report that Trudeau, when he was unable to-prevent the spread of the manifesto in the Quebec press, himself ordered the CBC’s French network to broadcast the manifesto, as the FLQ had demanded. They’ argue that this was a sign of Trudeau’s overconfidence that the broadcasting of the manifesto would actually cause Quebecois to react against its ‘extreme’ language. In any event, on October 8, the manifesto was broadcast over the CBC’s French network in Quebec, as demanded by the FLQ, and subsequently published in most of the province’s major commercial newspapers. The document, broadly expressing many of Quebec’s long-standing grievances, states that the FLQ is a 2esponse to aggression”, emphasizes the foreign exploitation of labor and resources, and voices the need for a mass-based revolutionary upheaval. Its spirit was one with which many Quebecois found they could identify, and their clearly established failure to retreat in horror provided the federal government with its greatest shock. ’ FRAP, Montreal’s union-and-citizen-based civic opposition movement, publicly endorsed the objectives of the manifesto, while rejecting the FLQ’s tactics. It added that it could not condemn the violence of the FLQ without condemning the violence of the system, and its statement enumerated a long list of labor and political conflicts. It also noted that the FLQ’s terrorism is directed not against wage workers but against the violence of the establishment. However, FRAP said it opted to fight with democratic means. The executive committee of the Laurentian and Montreal Councils of the Confederation of National Trade Unions expressed their unequivocal support of the manifesto. Montreal Council president Michel Chartrand (now in jail) said the authorities were getting extremely agitated by the possible death of two men but did not seem to be able to summon the same anxiety for thousands of people whose lives were potentially threatened by a walkout of medical specialists. Later he said “who’s scared of the FLQ? Are the workers terrorized by the FLQ? Are the students terrorized by the FLQ? The only people who are afraid of the FLQ are those who should be scared-the power elite. So who says the FLQ is terrorizing the population?” The union-financed weekly Quebec-Presse editorialized that the FLQ’s analysis was “exact”, and that the horror of an armed, clandestine movement should be counterpointed to the horror of the better-armed, equally clandestine established authority. A survey of opinions on “hot-line” programs on popular French stations in Montreal showed that the vast majority of callers condemned the actual acts of the FLQ, but over 50 per cent supported the spirit of the manifesto. A CBC interviewer took a survey in front of a French Catholic church after 11 o’clock mass on Sunday, and found that condemnation of the acts was almost universal, but that half the people he talked to expressed sympathy for the things said in the FLQ manifesto. Student newspapers came out in favor of the FLQ, some with grave reservations about the tactics, others not. At 1’Universite du Quebec, virtually the entire student body went- on strike in support of the FLQ’s aims. About 30 per cent of the faculty walked out too. At l’universite de Montreal, 1,500 students struck and said they would go into the community to muster backing for the FLQ’s goals. Several junior colleges and even some high schools closed down. Only hours before the War Measures Act was brought in, with federal troops already patrolling Montreal’s streets, about 3,000 students rallied at the Paul Sauve Arena to hear Michel Chartrand, Pierre Vallieres, Charles Gagnon, and the undisputed hero of the day, Robert Lemieux. Fists raised, they chanted “FLQ. . . FLQ! “, just as Ottawa was preparing to make their cry illegal. Opposition was also coming from other, more unexpected sources. On Wednesday, October 14, a group of FrenchCanadian moderates, led by Rene Levesque and Claude Ryan (whom no one had ever imagined as political allies) issued an attack on Trudeau’s statements, lambasted the premier of Ontario, John Robarts, for shooting his mouth off, and urged the government to release the 23 prisoners the FLQ wanted transported to Cuba or Algeria. The group criticized “certain outside attitudes. . .which add to an atmosphere that has already taken on military overtones-(a situation) -which can be blamed on Ottawa.” It is a matter of general agreement among the Ottawa press corps that it was this statement that tipped the baPante. Trudeau realized he was losing ground in Quebec, that a flood-tide of opposition to Ottawa was rising. With the Bourassa government shaking in the corner, a new alliance of nationalists and liberals and separatists threatened to-fill the vacuum.

J S - Three


. I

In a Calgary speech on October 20, Liberal MP Patrick Mahoney said that the statement by ten Quebec leaders (the Ryan-Levesque statement) urging the exchange of 23 prisoners for the kidnap victims prompted the government to invoke the War Measures Act because these statements tended “to give leadership in the direction of eroding the will to resist

FLQ demands.”

Anthony Westell confirmed the motivation: “Only a tew weeks betore, Levesque‘s separatists had been extremists on the Quebec spectrum. With the emergence of terrorism as the new extreme, the perspective changed. Suddenly Levesque was appearing with Montreal editor Claude Ryan, a nationalist, on a platform urging peace with the FLQ-a new, moderate centre, as it appeared to some. “For Trudeau, the moment for decisive action to stop the drift in opinion was rapidly approaching.” In a democratic society, drifts of opinions are supposed to be countered by other opinions. Opinions are legal. But the opinions of Quebecois who did not support the FLQ but shared some of the views the FLQ and the left have been voicing for years were apparently not to be tolerated. Pierre Elliott Trudeau had to suspend democracy. He could not triumph in Quebec by moral leadership or by the reason of his position. He had to suspend the laws of the country and the constitutional rights of citizens’ to combat a drift in opinion. On Thursday, October’ 15, 7,500 federal troops moved into Montreal. At four in the morning of the next day, the War Measures Act was invoked.

The purpose n-the last week, the Trudeau government has written a new and still more implausible chapter into this already strange history. This is the affair of the provisional government. ( Rumors that s>me prominent French Canadians had planned to set up such a government just before the passage of the War Measures Act had been circulating in Montreal police circles for a week, but there was no public mention of it until Sunday, October 25. Mayor Jean Drapeau, who has just swept into a fifth term as Mayor with control of,all 52 City Council seats, referred vaguely to the danger from a “provisional committee” that had planned to seize state power in Quebec. The next day, the Toronto Star published a story saying the Trudeau government had implemented the War Measures Act because it was convinced “a plan existed to replace the Quebec government of Premier Robert Bourassa.” The story quoted “top level sources” saying “. . .a group of influential Quebecers had set out to see whether they might supplant the legitimately elected provincial government with what they conceived as an interim administration having enough moral authority to restore public order.” The Star credited the story only “from our Ottawa bureau”; there was no byline. However, the next day Toronto Telegram columnist Douglas Fisher wrote that “both the run of rumour among reporters and the internal evidence of the style and material in the story suggest that it was really the work of Peter Newman, now editor-in-chief of the Toronto Daily Star.” Other sources confirm that Newman, a major Liberal Party confidant, was in fact the author of the story. Drapeau’s story now had to be taken more seriously. In an interview with an American reporter the same day, the mayor said “conversations had been held” by influential Quebecersof “good faith” to set up a regime. Although these men of good faith did not intend to open the door to the FLQ, Drapeau said, they would be used by the FLQ. Predictably, ,Robert Stanfield was on his feet in the Commons the next afternoon asking the Prime Minister to account for the reports. Was this part of the unrevealed information \ that had led the government to invoke the War Measures Act? The Prime Minister said no. But he also refused to repudiate the rumors unequivocally, saying it was not the government’s “habit to deny or confirm such reports.” Other journalists report that Newman not only went to “toplevel sources”, he went to the top source of them all, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, and that the basic outline of the story, at least, came from him. Other cabinet ministers and high civil servants were only too happy to confirm the story to their favorite reporters. There appears to be little doubt that the story got out not only with the Liberal government’s knowledge, but with its active encouragement. Newman’s story did not name names of people involved in the supposed provisional government plot, but it was clear he was implicating the “influential Quebecers” who had signed the statement of October 14 calling for an exchange with the FLQ. Claude Ryan and Rene Levesque both denied the report Wednesday morning, Ryan in an editorial in Le Devoir, L&esque in his column in Le Journal de Montreal. Ryan strongly denounced the government for playing the game of the deliberate leak. “This is so gross,” he said, “that the more one tries to untangle it, the more it appears ridiculous and stupid. I was going to write: malicious. I am not sure of that. Mr. Trudeau and his friends are out to get certain ’ dissidents: I nevertheless don’t believe them capable of such


S - Four

baseness. I would rather believe that they were carried away by panic.“ The next day, a far more plausible version of what had happened appeared in several newspapers, and has been confirmed by the Last Post’s own sources. The alleged plot to overthrow the Bourassa government was in fact, a plot to save that government. Just before the passage of the War Measures Act, there was widespread concern in Quebec about the position of the Quebec government. All the direction in dealing with the CrossLaporte kidnappings was coming from Ottawa, which was imposing a hard line in refusing to negotiate with the FLQ. In addition, Bourassa was facing extreme pressure from the Drapeau-Saulnier administration in Montreal. Most of the intelligence upon which government decisions were based was provided by the Montreal police force’ and their go-between. Michel Cot& the city’s chief legal counsel. Earlier in the week, the Montreal police had arrested lawyer Robert Lemieux and seized all his confidential legal documents, in defiance of the provincial government. Montreal police were operating independently of the provincial government, while the Drapeau equipe consulted directly with Ottawa. Bourassa was left with the feeling that he had virtually no control over Quebec’s most powerful police force, while being faced with a Trudeau-Drapeau axis that was calling all the shots. Within Bourassa’s own cabinet, there was considerable support for the idea of making a deal to save Laporte, but! reports Dominique Clift in The Montreal Star, most of the political heavyweights-Justice Minister Jerome Choquette, Education Minister Guy Saint-Pierre, Finance Minister Raymond Garneau, and Health Minister Claude Castonguaysupported the hard line. Choquette even placed his resignation on the table as a gesture of determination, Clift says. Bourassa, who privately shared the doubts about the hard line and the concern about the position of his government, was caught in the middle. This was the reason for his ambiguous public statements during the crisis, carefully designed to pacify both the ‘hard-liners and those who wanted to negotiate. It was in this context that proposals were made that Bourassa open his cabinet to include a broad spectrum of Quebec leaders, to enable it to deal more credibly and effectively both with the FLQ and with Ottawa. Claude Ryan broached the idea to many people who, along with him, might be included in such a cabinet. , Clift concludes that treating the suggestion as a plot to overthrow the government “was in fact a smearing and dishonest representation of Ryan’s proposal which had nothing subversive in it but had been naively inspired by vanity and misplaced sense of his own political importance.” The idea of opening his cabinet came up in one conversation between Bourassa and a friend after troops had already entered Montreal and just hours before the passage of the War Measures Act. “I thought of that,” Bourassa said, “but it was too late.” What concerned Ottawa when it heard about the proposal, however, was that it might indeed have worked, that such a Quebec government might have been able to deal firmly with Ottawa and take its own course in dealing with the FLQ. There was nothing unconstitutional about the proposal, but it was one more indication of the degree to which Ottawa was losing control over opinion in Quebec. Like Lyndon Johnson; faced with the prospect of a democratic, left-liberal government in Santo Domingo, Pierre Elliott Trudeau moved in. LBJ had his lists of “known Communists” to justify the invasion. But the New York Times found that several of the “known Communists” were in fact dead, others were out of the country, still others were in jail. Trudeau’s revelations of conspiracies are of the same order. He will no doubt come up with documents to “prove” his charges: such documents have been popping up for years. On October 29, the Toronto Telegram came up with an Alice-inWonderland report of terrorist plots to assassinate five hundred prominent Quebecers; these reports will recur. But the real coup d’etat this October was carried out by Pierre Elliott Trudeau, who with one stroke effected a vast shift of political power. Trudeau “seized the opportunity of the Cross-Laporte kidnappings,” says Parti Quebecois economist Jacques Parizeau, to carry out “the inevitable confrontation which had to come sooner or later between Ottawa and Quebec.” He set back political dialogue in this country ten years, even beyond the stage of “what does Quebec want?” to “what kind of people are we dealing with?” Initially, ,Trudeau attempted a policy which depended on broad support in Quebec. The policy failed because that support did not exist. The result was a new policy-a policy of making a virtual desert of all opposition in Quebec, radical, liberal, nationalist, even, in some cases, conservative. The instrument of that policy was the War Measures Act. This policy too depends on public support, this time the blind, uninformed support of English Canadians. 11 cannot succeed without their support. They are being used as pawns in a cynical and destructive game. English Canadians must decide whether they are willing to be used in that way.

a radical Canadian newsmagazine Articles like the one in this paper appear in every issue of Last Post magazine; created to dig out and publish facts which are omitted, ignored or obscured by the commercial press.

COMING in the next LAST POST an expanded ding:




” the roots of conflict in Quebec . ” FRAP and the democratic alternative * tales of a prisoner of war ” behind the Drapeau mask ” tensions in the media ” repercussions for the Left ” the story of Pierre Vallieres PLUS

The Nova Scotia Fishermen Strike: six months of strugile


01 can’t enclose change)



find the Last Post anywhere! I 65 cents (incl. postage & exfor the latest issue.

0 I enclose scription.

$4 for a l-year (8-issue) (Institutional rate: $7.)

01 enclose tion(s)


for -gift




City (give


Send with


or money



THE LAST POST, t?‘O. Box 98, Station Montreal 130, Que. Northern



G, inc.


alienation from the Thieu government to a high ~ point in Vietnam. The government’s response has been an intensification of repression. This past spring and summer Saigon police attacked and beat not only students and Buddhist demonstrators but also disabled Vietnamese army veterans when they dehanded that the government provide them with decent housing. On july 15 president Thieu threatened to beat to death anyone who advocated peace via negotiations with the NLF. In spite of this, the demand for peace has grown. On September 21, Ngo Cong Due, one of the most influential politicians in Saigon, put forward a set of proposals which were endorsed by a number of Vietnamese leaders, including the assistant archbishop of the catholic church in Saigon and the vice-president of the national assembly. The proposals began with the statethis atrocious and endless Vietment, “Whereas nam total

war is threatening destruction..., *I and

vie tnamese



went on to demand the withdrawal of american support from the Thieu government, the withdrawal of american troops from Vietnam, and the representation of nonaligned forces in south Vietnam in the negotiations. President Nixon totally overlooked Due’s statement in his own proposals of October 7. Implicit in these proposals is the assumption that the Thieu regime is the legitimage government of south Vietnam and will organize any future election to determine the future of the country. Since any election organized by the Thieu regime promises to be a repeat of the election of 1967, the acceptance of this assumption would appear to be tantamount to the NLF’s acceptance of military defeat.

ind remain silent is to need of the Vietnamese Nent on to say, “is an Lccording to the letter,South Vietnam created :,atred of the United e. In government to legi2ar to have offset this under a new constitu? regarded as meaning!he south Vietnamese *ious contenders to the 1 off the ballot in adrere widespread irregunpaign and in the electin Vietnamese assembly lections recommended leir validation, and the !rt all its influence to ;hem. neral Nguyen Cao Ky, IS and was elected the ;;opean correspondent : oss of time and money; eful to elect, a regime 3d and weak.” at the%lections merely lta of military leaders ,,ght with the french e and are consequently lese as Benedict Arnold ire revolution. d government like the a government of landZhere are large numwhose strongest desire 1.

; is every bit as dictathe Diem regime _was. ution the press is ceners of political persons of south Vietnamese ;her things that torture aintain discipline, that 1 are being held under that most of the priIf the NLF. Among the presidential candidate Trong Dinh Dzu. The lntenced five years was I the NLF.

le NLF Saigon government has 1 was more and more

polarized between the NLF and the government by the intensified revolutionary conflict, NLF strength increased in spite of the toll taken by american firepower. By early 1968 the United States claimed to have killed over a quarter of a million enemy troops but the “enemy” was stronger than ever. This was forcibly brought home in the Tet offensive in february of 1968, in which virtually all the cities of South Vietnam were attacked, several were captured and one, the ancient capital of Hue, was held for twenty-five days against a bombing and artillery attack. which destroyed four-fifths of the city. The damage wrought not only to Hue but to all of Vietnam during the Tet offensive surpassed everything which had gone before. The comments of an american major about the city of Ben Tre seemed to characterize the entire american effort in Vietnam : “It became necessary to destroy the town

to save it. ”

The Tet offensive also shattered the confidence of the american people in the ability of their government to achieve a military victory in Vietnam and precipitated a financial crisis in The United States. This eventually drove the Johnson administration to seek peace negotiations through the halting of the bombing of North Vietnam. The peace negotiations began in Paris in the fall of 1968, but stalled on the american government’s unwillingness to abandon its policy of undeviating support for the Saigon regime. Recently on a trip to Vietnam, president Nixon named the leader of that government, Nguyen Van Thieu, as one of the great statesmen of our time. It seems obvious tha the NLF and the north Vietnamese will not agree to a settlement which includes the present leadership of the Saigon regime.

Vietnamization In response to growing domestic pressure against the war in 1969, the Nixon administration began a gradual reduction of the number of american troops in Vietnam. The official policy of the administraton became the “Vietnamization” of the war, an expansion of the military forces of the Saigon government, allowing an incremental withdrawal of Americans. With Vietnamization came a change in military tactics involving greater reliance than ever upon sophisticated weapons. Instead of searching out the enemy and trying to destroy them, U.S. ground troops would simply make contact with the enemy and then saturate the area with bombs and artillery. This has had the effect of reducing american casualties in Vietnam, which was one of the principal domestic concerns about the war;

but the cumulative destruction of the society in south Vietnam continues. It is difficult to imagine the effect of a bombing so intense that it exceeds the total tonnage of bombs dropped in all theatres in world war 11. Portions of the Vietnamese landscape are pockmarked with bomb craters which fill up with water and become the breeding ground for malarial mosquitoes. Destruction is not limited to physical damage, however. The evolution of an economy totally dependent upon the american war effort has also had devastating effects upon Vietnam. Prices are currently rising at the rate of fifty percent per year. The main victims of this rampant inflation are those who are already destitute. Those who flourish are those who batten off the rich Americans. Bribery and corruption have become a way of life, in marked contrast with the austerity of the peasant society in north Vietnam. One member of the national assembly in Saigon estimates that the war has created 400,000 south Vietnamese prostitutes. According to the administration’s public statements, the program of Vietnamization has been successful. But Admiral Smedburg, one of the retired officers’with whom president Nixon conferred on the eve of the may 1 Cambodian invasion, reported that the president told him that without the invasion the program would suffer a disastrous defeat. It was presumably to prevent this defeat and to demonstrate to the world that the U.S. was not a “pitiful helpless giant” that president Nixon ordered american troops into eastern Cambodia, which the NLF, and north Vietnamese troops had been using as a sanctuary from the fighting in Vietnam. The opportunity for the invasion was provided by the overthrow of the neutralist head of state Prince Sihanouk by a pro-american faction headed by Lon Nol. The consequences of the Cambodian invasion on Vietnam are still unclear. What is clear is that the invasion extended the horrors of the vietnamese war to the Cambodian people with the country now being subject, like Vietnam, to american bombing. Reports from Cambodia indicate that the revolutionary movement within Cambodia which Sihanouk has been calling for against the Lon No1 government has been strengthened by the invasion and may eventually succeed, with north Vietnamese assistance, in controlling the country.

Shift to Politics In south Vietnam the main struggle appears to have shifted, at least temporarily, from the military to the political realm. Whatever their military efficacy, the policies of the Nixon administration have brought anit-american feeling and

The evidence suggests that the PresidentS proposals were aimed not at the NL F and the north Vietnamese but at domestic opinjon in the U.S.

Two days after the president spoke, secretary of state Rogers .was asked why, in view of the administration’s professed belief in secret rather than public diplomacy, the president’s proposals has not been communicated privately at Paris. Admitting that the administration had no indication from its conversations that the “other side” would be interested in the proposals, Rogers went on to explain that “because there has been division in our own country, and because there has been some opposition in the international community to some of the actions of our government in the past, we‘ thought it was desirable for the President to make a major statement on it which would be so forthcoming that it would be widely accepted.” The administration was reported to be particularly concerned by a Gallup poll showing that a large majority of Americans favored the scheduled withdrawal of all Americans from Vietnam, a proposal it had successfully defeated in congress this summer.

Manipulating i This handling of


its diplomatic policy, coupled with total support for the Thieu-Ky regime points to the conclusion that the administration is bent on continuing the war in order to maintain a permanent presence in Vietnam while manipulating domestic public opinion to accept this. The

cooperation of the news media in neglecting to report the news events of Vietnam ‘suggests that this policy may be successful. But this will not be a sdlution to the problem of Vietnam, only an exhaustion of the effort to solve it. And Vietnam is only the most dramatic of America’s unsolved roblems. The sense of failure has produced a cfeep despair in Americans. The rage of the Weathermen, the explosion of heroin addiction among the young, and the apathy of the general public are simply manifestations of that despair. The Vietnam war is a crucial element in the current american crisis, precisely because for so many Americans the war served as a lightning flash which illuminated the darker side of a society in which we had stumbled for too long, blind. If the pervasive despair in America suggests that the re-examination of its social and political institutions had come too late to change the course of the nation, perhaps Canadians can learn something from the american experience. Does not the war indicate that the american way is not the way for Canada to follow? At a time when America threatens to engulf Canada economically and control her politically, do not Canadians /e&ire a new declaration of independence?


2 november


(I 1:26)





The Warrior defense kept the Stang ballcarriers within ) the identifiable tackler is Brian West@ (55). Full story



their grasp in last sa&dayS’3-2 is found on page 9.


chter /





discussion on the use’of the campus center’

8 pm tuesdai


A battle of number 1 position. in rugger .between Renison College and St. Jeromes helped to heighten the excitement .of homecoming weekend. The outcome of this game determined playoff positions against the third and fourth place teams, Co-op and Vl-N. Renison College looks a little too powerful for everyone in our estimation and they should strum their way to a championship on Wednesday afternoon at 4:00 pm on the columbia No. 4 field.

nov. 3

center gieat htill ’

Campus \



Sunday afternoon saw the soccer playoffs kicked into action. Conrad Grebel College played Vl-W in the first game followed by VZSE against St. Jeromes, with Renison and the Grads completing the quarter final series, in a very tough contest for the macKay bowl. It’s a toss up between Conrad Grebel and the Grads, both sporting impressive league Statistics, but the bye the Grads received in the semifinals ‘could be the determining factor in bringing them their first championship this season. friday, november 6 at 3:30 pm on Columbia No. 1 field will give us the final outcome. The‘ first week in the basket,ball schedule provided some interesting outcomes with St. (Pauls upsetting Renison 30 to 23 while Lower Math swamped their Upper Class mates 39-19. St. Jeromes overpowered Conrad 47-17 and Env. Studies dribbled by Lower Eng 28-22. The Village League will be very close if the first week is any indication. It was VZNW 31- Vl-E 23; V2-SE 30Vl-S 26; and Vl-N 31- Vl-W 23.

,Goi& *to. see another Kitschy movie? ’ ’ -. Tf$ film art this time - see

unique short films from Paris-, New York, Praque, Tokyo, ’ London s&es of three prograins Program Program Program

I- Friday, Nov, 6 2 - Friday, Nov. 13, 3 - Friday, No+< 20

All programs



Playoffs will be the talk on campus for the next two weeks as four major leagues move into their-final stages. The flag football quarter .finals saw Renison squeak by VZSE, 13-10, while VZNW pulled the biggest upset of the season by downing the first place Upper Faculty team Phys. Ed & Ret 3-l. This is the first time in the history of intramurals that a second place team has dethroned a first place Upper Faculty team in the playoffs. Science shut out Env. Studies 26-O and St. Jeromes slipped by Lower Math 39-O. These results bring :out some very interesting matches for the semi-finals; Renison will play VB-NW and Science plays St: Jeromes. From our high and mighty prediction booth we see V2-NW and St. Jeromes in the finals with St. Jeromes victori6us in a very close game. Our final standings show the following winning their respective leagues: VZSE, Village League; St. Jeromes, Resident League : : Phys. Ed & ‘Ret, Upper Faculty; and Env. Studies, Lower Faculty. The winner of the vinnicombe cup in lacrosse will be determined on tuesday, november 3 at 3:45‘ ‘pm on Columbia field. Upper Eng and Science met in the semi-finals with Upper Eng victorious. Co-op who had a bye in the semi’s will play tonight against Upper Eng.

in AL113 ,at 7:OO pm and 9:00 pm ’

Series ticket : students $3.00 (3 programs) others $4.00 Single ticket : ‘students “1.25 (one program) other $1.50 all tickets at the door

12 University


Watelr loo 745-2251

424 the chevron ! ‘.

’ :’

The competitive hockey season is into its second week. ,A11 of the teams got the rust. off their blades last, week and had an opportunity to view the competition. The newly entered Lutheran team -won 5their season opener over Env. Studies 4-l. Other interesting games saw St. Jeromes beat Conrad Grebel 7-4, Renison 5-2 over St. Paul and

last- year’s champions the Grads defeated Phys. Ed & Rec. 5-2. In the Village League it could be anybodies season with 3 tied games occurring in the first week of play. With scores like these there is no way we are going to make a prediction on this year’s champ. At the recreational team level we have four leagues now in operation including broomball, floor hockey, ice hockey and volleyball. , Our co-Ed broomball league has to be the most successful with 18 teams now sweeping the ball around the rink. Such great teams as the Belly Bouncers, the A2rd Varks, the Furrie Freaks and the Bawlers could help to make this season the best if not the -wettest we have ever had. A reminder also that beginning this thursday, november 5th; at Waterloo Arena a recreational free skating period is scheduled from l:OO-3:00 pm. This will be a weekly event, open to- everyone at the university.



.Several upcoming tournaments should make the month of november a busy time on campus. A Men’s Singles Squash Tournament begins Nov. 9. Entries should be in to the receptionist in the athletic complex by november 6th. The entries will be divided into four sections-colleges, Villages, Upper Faculty and Lower Faculty. All players from the colleges or village. units must play on ‘. november 9 and 10th while the faculty sections play on the 11th and 12th. A single elimination series will determine the- four top players from each section to participate in a championship series the following week. All six courts on the closed side squash area will be avAilable from 7 : OO10: 00 pm monday to thursday. ‘. A draw for each section will be made as entrants arrive at the courts,. Other tournaments scheduled are a Singles Badminton Tournament’ and an Archery Tournament. Both will htake place dur- \ ingthe week of november 16-20. For those who want to get out of the gym and onto the ice a Co-Ed Bonspiel is your answer. All interested curlers should submit their team to the receptionist in the athletic complex. This event will take place on november 22 at the Granite Club. Finally, an All-Comers Swim Meet is scheduled for november 25th. This is a co-ed event which needs ybur participation to be successful. Further announcements will be made in the near future regarding the events that are offered and entry date. / November will be a busy but interesting month in intramurals. Make it an interesting and enjoyable month for yourselfPARTICIPATE.







The Squash Club is reserving courts 1012, 1015 from1 3 : 15-5:30 every week monday to thursday. An instructional clinic will be held from 3: 15-4: 00 and from 4: 00-5: 30 team practices will take \ place. This will be open to club members only, and for further information contact John Cushing at 578-2178 or Dr. Nash at ext. 2610. Note : This thursday at 7 $0 pm the A and B finals of the Open Squash Tournament will be held.

Stangs squeeze


The teams that now rank as quarter and on third down came the two top defenses in the the first of two questionable de0-QAA, met last Saturday at cisions by the coach. With the Seagrams Stadium.’ The outcome ball on the 21 yard line it seemed was a disappointment to the a likely situation for a field goal large homecoming crowd as the try but instead Brent Rotondo was Western Mustangs squeezed by sent in to kick the ball out of the our luckless Warriors by the end zone for a single point. The Western team by virtue of score 3-2. The game saw another a fine punt return and some ofstellar effort by our defense who held the Mustangs all afternoon fense found themselves of the Warrior 36 yard line. They surand only once let them get withprised their hosts with a quick in field goal range. kick which ended up in the end The Western offense was hamzone for the tying point. pered by the fact that their After the Western team had number one quarterback Steve Stefanko was sitting out the game mismanaged the second half kickoff they kicked the ball to with an injury, and the backfield juggling didn’t help their play. the leagues leading punt return-n er, and McLellan brought the Our offense played well enough to win which was refreshing in ball back 31 yards to the Mustang’s 50. Crosby proceeded to itself, but unfortunately a couple of questionable decisions on the hit Wayne Fox with a pass, good for 26 yards and got another 5 part of head coach Wally Delahey and the officials stole the yards from Bill Hogan before win from the deserving team. the third down blues hit. This The Warriors started the game time the Warriors found themwith the intention of running the selves punting from the MusMustangs out of the ball park. tang 19 yard line and as expected Rotondo scored a single. But their initial drive fizzled at The Warrior offense started to the Western 35 and a field goal was attempted. roll off some impressive yardage by Lapensee The muddy field contributed to in the third quarter only to lose a poor snap and the kick fell it to some outright stupid calls short and Western took over on by what can only be termed the their own two yard line. worst refs in the 0-QAA. The penon The team then traded punts, ’ alties and a losing battle punts between Knill and Rotondo the Warrior defense then stopped saw the Mustangs attempting a Peter Quinlan and his offense’ field goal from the Warrior 15. when they forced a fumble which Knill’s attempt went wide, and was recovered by Bob Padfield. Western settled for the tying The teams found both defenses single point . too much for their limited offenses and punt swapping was The last quarter featured both the order of the day. The Wardefenses again, with the Western rior defense tired of this and exteam forcing a Brian Beatyy Warrior Paul Knill in trying to fumble (his first of the year) avoid the strong Warrior punt and then reliable Stu Koch inrush fumbled the ball which tercepting to get the ball right was recovered by Robert Sagan. back. Again penalties forced the It was now early in the second Warrior offense in the wrong



The rugger Warriors saw any hope for their finishing the season on a winning note smashed last Saturday as the strong rugger team from Western rolled to a 20-3 victory. This enabled the Mustangs to finish the season with an unblemished record and of course first place. It left our Warriors mired in the cellar with a dismal record of one win and four losses. Western opened the scoring on a penalty kick .from the twentyfive yard line. The Mustangs kept up the pressure and a fine run by their inside center gave the Western team another three points. This try was subseqently converted to make the score 8-O. Later in the half the Musable to score on tangs were another penalty kick when one of the Warriors moved offside. In the past minutes of the half the Mustangs scored another try on a hard push from the Western forwards. The convert was no good and the half ended with the Mustangs out in front by fourteen. . _. The first half was characterized by some very poor ball handling on the part of both teams. This was due to the wet field which made the ball very greasy. This continued to be a factor in the quality of the rest of the game. Waterloo opened the scoring in the second half on a penalty kick by Ray Leach. The Mustangs continued to score on a real fine effort by the outside center who ran the ball 50 yards for a well earned try. The final scoring came late’ in the game when the Mustangs pushed over the Warrior line for another try. Neither of these last two trys were converted and the final

rolled into the end zone where it was grounded for the single. Thus making the final score Western 3 and the Warriors 2. The game statistics show that the Warriors did indeed deserve to win. They had more first downs, -gained more yards rushing and passing and led in all departments except punting yardage and scoring. It’s a shame that our offense finally came through and got more scoring opportunities than the opposition but still had to settle for another loss. -




Free delivery to U of W Campus orders over $2.00



y leaving?

uuk&t~ aj u/at&Q BOOK STORE .PRE-INVENTORY SALE NOVEMBER 9TH - 12TH A Selection of Books Games Candles and Other Miscellaneous items


With this being the final game of the official season the rugger club don’t have a very impressive record to spur them on next year. But considering the numerous injuries which made it hard

to keep a first team together and the fact that a host of rookies have now tasted their first blood. Maybe it won’t have been such a dismal season after all. This won’t be answered until the 71 version has dressed and shown their colours. But this desk would like to congratulate and thank the players, coaches and, all concerned for carrying this schools colours in a game that never draws the recognition it deserves either from the fans or the powers that be.

Soccer team

wins final



It always seems that fans and sports writers are eager to jump on the coach of a losing team but how long must you be impartial to losing records and the excuses. The game had many reasons why the Warriors were beaten and the strategy decided upon, on the two real scoring opportunities in itself is not really that important. But it seems that I have written this game report before and when you start thinking back over this and last season there seems to have been the same mistakes made before. Maybe this isn’t important as long as the fans and players enjoy themselves, but why are there always team members leaving before the season is over, probably just poor loosers.


score was Western 20 and Water‘i loo 3. Throughout the game the Waterloo forwards seemed to be winning the scums and line outs, however the Mustangs certainly out hustled the Warriors when it came to loose rucks and the


The soccer Warriors ended a ed away by teammate Ed Murphy. Rob in the opinion of not too bright season on a happy note last Saturday as they played coach Norm McKee is by far the best keeper in the league. spoilers and ruined Western’s chances of a playoff berth with Western in no way dominated a 2-l victory. the last half. Angelo Dagestino The Warriors struck quickly kept the Western defense wide when Bruce Bills chipped a shot awake with some fine dribbling. towards the goal that scooted At the 40 minute mark Mike past the Western keeper and Skoblowkowski drifted a low trickled inside the right post. free kick on net. The shot eluded The Warriors continued to husthe Western keeper just long tle throughout the half and forcenough for Mike Davis to score ed the Western defense into’ the winning goal. numerous mistakes. It was not Waterloo totally dominated until the twenty minute mark the remainder of the game. Jack that the Mustangs were able to Sturken hit the post from point muster their first shot. and blank range, Trev Palmer However, Western did come on Tony Travis also narrowly misstrong and near the end of the half sed adding to the final score. managed to score from close The Warriors final record of range at the 44th minute mark. The half ended in l-l stakemate. ’ two ,wins and one tie is good for Western had an edge in play in fourth place. The team was unfortunate not to have had a betthe second half but found it difter finish, considering that four ficult to beat the Waterloo offof their five defeats were by one side trap. Rob Gillespie made goal. things a little more difficult with next season prosome fine saves from close range. However, Rob also stopped two breakamises to be maybe a title year ways and on the one occasion as the entire contingent will be he was beaten the ball was headreturning.

Hours: 8:30 - 5:00 p.m.



AN ACTUARIAL CAREER a representative of


be interviewing on campus

Thursday,November19th 1970 For further details contact: Coordination and Placement Office


2 november

1970 (I 1:26)



, - .


- .

. , I








426 the chevron

love songâ&#x20AC;?

is taken



a guerrilla







and black, t



by Eric


and Brad



:.:.v .::


.... . p-p .... . ..y<:,.>.,jz; ... .x. :,,:yjy...;:.: ..... 9. .... .:.:F,.> ..+:.:j:. : ..:i..> . .,: ..: .:.<~... >:.: ................ . .......... . j-j.:. ........... . :, .py. p.;.@ .,::~.~..:%~.j:~:.~..:.~ .. ‘.> ‘Vf< ,.j“ ...:*,...... ....)6:...~..~.~;2f.:~.~. . ..:+ ,, ,, .......< ~~~~~~:~~~~~.~~:~~~~~ ,,: p y$&;..& ).’ :: ...:......:y a;<‘..j.. ..... :.:. . 2’ p,,s:2.. ...< ,: .... 3-.....;;. “’ ,...I... (. ,<..y..y. ...... ‘.’ .:.:. ,:: ,,:... . . +;,<,,;:; .: : .... . :,, ....... “: ... ” ..“. :y, :.,., ....... ,‘Z,, ..:::.‘.:” ,p ....:.;y .: :::. .,, :., ..‘:... . . : ... :......~~..~. . & 2.:...:,.$j,‘.‘~~.:” $.J+ p,yg ,.:,” ... ..:.... >‘:W& . ..$...:~‘J$$ $;...:gjy ” ;+y>;, i’. A),.:, :.‘+.< : :,* :::.:s.: ..... .... . z.,.. ..E.Y? .........a >:.:i.c.y;.,l: .....Tq <I.<.>...... ....... : .... , .. ; ... .. ‘.‘.‘~>.,~,,.‘, .... .< ::.: f: . :‘::,$.: , ,,;.p ..:.y.;.:+<,., p . c.:,:&?$y&%;.+:. .. .........‘.” .. .:..2’.... ..,. . ... r’.) , :y:..:j;..:i:> j3).g.~:.,gJ’.>~ ..... ........ yj,_:...) .......i.. .I, . :.:.::.: ..* 2...... . ..:.:, ...*, ,.r’... s.:: “,, . . , ,,:%> ... ...... ... <., ..<, :j. .. ..:t:. .* ..f ..><. : ... ,....., ..... . . < ..c>.,+, . ,+. ...... r..s . ... ......t”.,;, .... . ..... ..... j. ,,,e .....<.:. ... :..:.:./....... ...... .. .:>.,:.&y,:,$ .L ‘:.* :...‘..: j ... < .::...:,> ,,,..:...:‘..: . ....=:.:.x ...:s. .:.: .:... ...,,0. . ..t.c.,>. ,s. ..s~.*~~::~;;.~~.~~~~~~~~~: ...... .+;~y>:.: 1:.. ‘:: ‘: .........:. .... 6........ ‘: .:. .. ,,.,.*a<. ::.: .... ::, , ... ..I .... ’ :. .... , ,: .... 7’ c ‘+’ .z ..::.... :;, ‘4 L ” ..:..:. .. .z . ..L,:, < .. .: .. : .....$$.,gJ ~~~~~~~~~,~~~?~~,,~ ,;;: .;;j$.q;:~ “k x.: .$,...~ ,,., ..... .,::c ~.+“,... .. .‘... >.Y,, ::2 .“,,.’ < ..... :.:, ...... .? j. ... ~, :,.:: ... r ,: .... ..,.... . ,~......., ..... . ..:......... .., .... . . :..< . ..‘....A ....... .. .%:..:.c’..& ..:: ... ‘.“,, ..... ....;:. .....‘,.$’ ..... :;~~.~.::.j,:~~..~..:..:. :.:z .... .*..r .. :2’.....:,:: i <..>>.i..: .....: .Y 5:............ .,., .;< :.Y.-.. ..... y..I,, J&j&,-~.~ p~::~~::. f.&.pz& ......./. :y..<:.;. ...:. A’ 5...:..,x ........ , .p.... ......I.::<.: Y &, I....... , ., .. ‘:., ........ ..:.’ ..$.J ,F., : ... :“: ,.,y.‘.,: .? :. ., ... . .. ‘.<Y .: A . , ...... ....... .: .:’ ;.p;.j’;:,y.j.. : :, y:.;..: ..: .>:+s? ..<..:c.... ...... j~...xz..,p.A .. .,..z,.<. ’ ./.. A ... .... ; .“.,:E : ....‘2,:, :- .... . :.\ ....... .p... .. ....... ;j:. :J.; (,... .::. ......... ... .,, .,?Y : , ...:)..... ..‘., i ... . A.:. ..j .. .$“., I:,’ ‘2: c> .. :.’...> .., ., ... :,.:+ .y: .O.’+:j;::. ... :.:. ..:...:: .;yj.:g w j; : :. ... ..:v :j?*.& 5.9; ,: & ; ;;,:::‘.z ~~~~~~~~~~~.~.:.~ i.$&j .. .*xp: .:j. .~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~~~.:. .,.;. >* I ..~~.$..&.&13~+. :,” ... .. ..$.... >,,,‘,,j :. .,,&: ’ .; J 4 i:‘.” .. .: ....... ,:.: :. i ..:. .. .. . ............... :.:. ) :.’ :., .:, ... -0 ,::;*.,:. .... ....r<.., :.:. .. +;.: ...... ,,,q .; .:. , ., .: ...... .:.I. .2...... . . . . : ,~, ...,‘. .:.:..... ..~...‘..~ ..............;: ,.j....:.‘.::.:~. ...< >: .. .,, .,: :,, _ . ..:. $. .<,, ., ~,.~, .,., :. :j ,:. .:; .. ::. .: ;.’ ,y ...., ........ 2.‘., . .+%.5’ n,,~~.Z, ......... 2: .... ..y 4 >...:*........ $ .:~ .... . A ) .... . >.??.,:: .. ;.: .... .: :,.,’ p .c. z ‘.‘:.< ::. .: .‘.> ‘y.. ........ . .... :..:. .... C. .. ....... :_ ........ .. .Y;,;:,~.: y ,,I? :, I ,<, : c ....... :.; ,:,., :.y.; .. c .) ........ . .~:::.jc?:~.~;: .. .. ::+ 1. ::+:. ?: ::.I.:: . ;.:<-,z ..z ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:..~~.~~~:::~~~~~..:~~.~~.;~. ,.y ... ...... ........ .,, :, .>q .?A’ .> .: .... . . ..x. .. ....... .<. ... ,: .: :; : . .. : <: ... ,.; Y :’ .,:’ > .... ,.y,v: ..:..:: .jc: ..; . .I? ..: : >I’. ... ..;.... . .i ..:....y.;. ) p :.:.jx. .y$......... .,.x&f .;y ... .. :. yx ‘,.:+.:‘): >..‘....<::‘:p $~g?;.?y A.,,‘j&*+. .....i’....., ... . ..j&& .a;< .Zp.$x ... .j&, ;A< .v ....... :*<< Xj .> .... ‘.::~~~.~~~*.~~.~,“::? >>j ... . ....... .~?.~.,~~~..~j~~.~~~,:~~ ...... f +:>..... . ..>.. ..... ...i. .. .v .Zi ;. :S- : :: ,,I ” , ; :j ...; ..; r/S .:... j >,., < .. $<’... ; .... ” ,.:.:.f.?~:..~~~~ .: ‘?; -.‘...~..~..:.~..~:~::~; ,,.;: .g.;.+pi! .~~“~~‘ ” 9’ ) .‘..“:$$,.$q.: -;t:l,;~~,,:~,;.;~~~j:~~~~~~~:~~,.~~~:~ .y....: ...;:~,.~;~,:~~~~;~:.~,~~,~~~~~ ,,,‘,.~,:I.‘,,~,:::~~.~~~~ .... :..~;:;~~~~~...~~~~~..:~.~;~:::;; ;;y;~;j~.$ :: ~1,;:‘~~?‘~::. . ..x . z..* .. ‘.... . .c.%$.-.$.‘I~+.::.~ ...... ‘:.....P ..+..<3 .. ...<.:. .w+.~@@? @$&$&&gpj ~@$g.~~~~~ 9 :a >,$+.y, . : ;;Y; .g,; ;~‘p;.y+. : ..:::.*.f,.x ... i :; .. . ..:. ..$:..;$<. ....... ..:~..:y~.~ , . i?; ......:’ ..$ .:.......: ., ,,,,, , .. .pj::.:.s: ., ......... . ..... i:A . , . : ... .:: P ,:,.’ .:’ f. ‘:y .) ... .:. ‘.j ......... .... ...... .: ..... i .., . . . q ... <.. .yj:..~::.+<.~. ’ ............. .4- 4 . Q,;.$j@$;Y;y;~,,j 2” :..,: >.” .... :..\....: .. :.:.: ; ... ..:. <2 , 5:: ...... .::. ,,c .... .p ,<” , ~~~...~~;“;. Y.Y.$f,; ~~$$.$.$+ :;;, ,..:f: .. . .. . .% . . ~,,;;:,,‘,:,~~~~~~~; ; q,’ ;> f .z. ‘1,:: .,$: ,(cg; $$gQ.Y, j3&. .: :; ‘i; ,y$:.:g ~~~;,6.:.:~~~:~,~~~~~~ ..~.~~~~~~~~ .~ ,~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~.~~~_ ;:.; ;~gizj~ . . . I. , , . $ :$.:.g. kgL@jf . ..ja ,.z.' . : ..<. 2.... *. .. .. ..~...:.;‘~::,2 4 ... .~.‘~~...‘~ ..... ,;.:,“,,’ ..:.... ” : .: . . ~‘~.,.,“j; 1.:; . ;..“.yz. ,,, ,,,; : ., ...... . , . . . > : t i <. . , . . ._ ,'> /-~~~~~..~.~~:.~~~..:~ . . . .. ,. : . : ,. : ,:,.& ,'i.,., .J'&j< 0 3 I . , . . ,a>< j Y . . . . x . , : :,:: ..:. ‘I ........... ........... 0.’ ... y ...... ,,:.: ;.: . . <.... . ......y ..... ‘;< .y .; ... :‘.: ... ;...7 .:.. : .:j . . .... . . . . .:.:. .... , .’ . . . <.” . . . .GA . . . . . . . .j .‘.V. ~-. ‘0. ‘X.2. :.p ‘:,:;.;,A .....e . , A.. :x . ..~j...j~:...<~ . . w . . . . . xx..+ . y , . . . . y. . . . . . . x . ..~...~..~~~~.~~~,.~~~~ . . . : . j,&.>.& :. .: ,, . . . . . .T? ... , ... (.... ;’ .. .... (.,,, ... 5 ...... . ......... :<,.‘i.: .... :: ‘.: ” :;’ ..:,.. :.:y :: .;. >...... , .. ; ...... ,,I, ...... I ..... ::A:..>.., ..... . .... :, ;;;; ..:.:: , .:......r. ................



) ..... :.


. . . ..._.. .. .. .. .. ‘..,.,,i’,~,~,~,.,.,.,~; . . .,... .,,.,. :. . . . ,,...A... .::.:j:‘:y.:j ..:. Y ‘.:+:“j i: ‘.:. ..v.:... . ...A. .‘..,y.:.:.::::. ,, ..,:,,,;::.:.: _ ..::.j : ,_,,,:j,:j‘,.,::: ‘: :.:: t.:.:.:x’c,; :.:, ,,..,.:.y: ,,_:.:: .s ‘.‘r.:.:.:.~.‘.:.‘.:::::~~:. t.‘.:.,.:.:.‘::.::. y: y:;? :.. ..A:‘. i .T.%.. . . . : .,.,.A.. .’ _” :,:,:..“.’‘,.,,/,._ ..... ,, ,,_ . ::_”_,.,.,.... “.‘.+.::z+:.:::. ...;,,,., _ .:..‘.X:_ :..:. ,:.;” ;:.:...>..:..,:: .i ”.”. . .;:;;; .. ..,i,...,.+...._ ,, :+: 5.’.,..:..,..,.,i;,. .“’‘2 ‘. .”Pi’.::.:.‘.‘:,~ ..““‘....‘...Z..‘.:i ..:. . . . .,........_ .. .,.. /.,..,,,,.,._ _.,.___‘,;. ;,;::.,:, .,, ;:y.; __,,,_,,,,, i,.’ .+:.:: y:.:.:.::; ,,,,. ,, :.ii .,... ‘Vi’. “..” ,.,...... : :‘=:, .n.............. “‘i.:, ,., .: :- .‘+:‘..:‘. ,. _. ,,,,;,,.,.;,,:,:.:.,.,:.,,,,..,,,,, x.x::..:.:.:.,..:.:.,j: ..:,,::.....: . “~~‘ :.:,:.~~~~~.~. :,,._, :’,.,,,‘7 z$4: ..~.:,:.~.:~..:~:~:.: ‘.’.Z’.:‘+.‘.‘...:: .’ ‘.“” .““. ““‘_..:.:+: j i.,.:.::,. ““‘.+-,: :~~~~:“:.‘-+ :‘:..‘. i “‘.Z.‘.” . . . ,,,,,,., A . .;.:,:.... ,, ,.,.,; ‘:~:,~:~ .,,::::;.,. ‘.‘.......~,: ::.:.. :...;.“.....,,i.~..,:,.~~.: ” . . .‘. ..~‘. :.‘~:.:.xj;j .:,. “‘.’‘h : :.“:,~.;~~,i:.:: .. ..Z ,. .:(:,,,: . ..“’. . . ~;i.‘. ” *:‘.“.“‘.‘. :,,,,;. ‘,,.,).,.,, ” .,.,‘.“’;,.,.‘.‘... ‘...“. ‘..”.‘.‘“‘.‘.:‘::.:C.:‘.:.: ‘.‘. .‘.. . . . . ..:.:.s .,......:.:..,:~ :,.,_ .,..:.,::,;:: ,,.j ,:::,: __,:i :2-.: :++:+.. ...c : i::.:+.: :..::.y.,.. -“.‘;.‘i.;;....... ‘.~,:,~,~,~.~2:,~,~~~, .... .,:,:.::::.. (,.,”,,:, .a::‘:‘.‘.:: :.:.:: :::.::,: ~ ::::.::,:,.: I :.::,>I: ,..;,s,:;: ,.,“’ : . . .‘.::.::; ::~:~:~:x.~:~~::::::. .-::‘~‘. .G. :x:: : :.,.>., .,‘. ..:,,.,.: ...’ :,:. .,:,::.~;.~,,.,.,.,~; . . . . . . y.y+..:::. ::.j‘.,.:iia,:::,:,: ““‘..A. :.y.. . . ..,.,.., ,.,.,.,..,.,.,.~ ._; .‘.‘:‘:&:: .:.:./.+:. :,..:.: .’ ‘-‘:::cx .:c:. .:.:.:.: ...+. ..:,.j. .,.,.~~,,,.,:( :..... g::: _ ). .,_ ,.:;,: __, $..g>::.:..:.:.: ” ._.:.““.‘.’ ‘“...A.... ‘:‘: : n... . ..;.,.,,,,, .~::::::‘:~.::&w. . . .., .:,.,,(.‘;.:. ....,, :::_.,,,, ..,.,:.:...: “‘A”.” _‘...:.:::.:,,,:::.: z“‘... ..:,:,,::..:,:,,:;.:. ,_s:..i..ri.,.,/ ,_‘.‘. ..,,,.,,,, ,,:: ~~:::~~~~:~:.~~:‘~.~,,:~,:~.:::.::::.. i:::‘i:“‘:+-‘(. V.‘. . . . A.,/. ...: . . . ,:,;, ..:::: . _,.,.,.. . ..i.. .._.:.. /.j _,,.,.... ..: :; :,:‘, ,:~ :::j:.:‘::~~,.:::,::: ..’. . :.:.:.,, :-rx.“: “%.‘..‘...’ +...,::., “‘~“:s’.‘:.% ‘-,_,.,., =:~:, :’ ... ‘.‘“5i. :‘.‘.i .).‘.’i.:.:.. .. ...,.:.: .=.+ .,.::::”_,,, (.. :,:.:,:; L ,,_ “Y”‘. “““.’ y,;, ,.:, ::.,“::. ““.. ),.. . .‘v../ n :;;:: Y ~.“.. . ::.,:,:::.:, :zi-..,,_.,.,, ,.‘,.___ +:.:..::: .,:..,,.‘.,,., .,” ~,::~~.,~~~~ ).$:,:.i ::::i:::ii:,l;yz ‘I<$. ‘%.‘A ,.....A.... : : ..‘. :~...~:::::.:~j:.:..:: ..:., :..._:: ::..,: ..:.:.,..:, ,, ,,::,...j;,:::> ,.:;:~;~~,::...:.:.‘. .. . :..::: .; :; :”,. : ,,y. . . . . .,;:.:..:..:: :, : :z.:... . , ‘ i . . . . . . ,.,,.,.,. . . . . . . . . . . .,.,. : Z” “““:‘.‘...:,i,.......:-. i. i.. ., ,. . . . . ..,. _,,,,, ,.:.:.: .,: ‘.., __ ..,:. ..:...: ::::?.y” ‘..+A. . . ...v...:...:..:.:.:.: . . . . . . ,:::: .,..... ,.”:,,,::...,.,.,,., . . . ., _.. _ : ..,_ ,:. . . ..::q “...’ i .::y:.:.... -:=~::::.:.xj:+:.:.y.:.:.:::.:.. jr,: :.,::): ,:,:,::.: . . ( ::. . . .,E-i.. A:::‘. ,:,:qj. : y :.:,, ‘A. :., I::...:.:. .,~...~.:.2;. . . ,:;. ., . ‘:;,;;> .:.. ,..;. :.. ..” ‘.“$ ;:.x.: ::: ..;. .: ‘,,,~$$x~x:~~ . . . :y,::.?$. :‘f: g. .:z :> Xi’.. ..:.:...: :::.: ::::::; :“‘.~.‘.‘.~:~:~:‘.~.E’::..:::.::.:.:..:::::;’,: . I;. . ..:.:..... . . _,,,,,, :,....,,,,...,,.,:,.,,:,,,,, A.... :?c:“‘:~~::”: : :‘z. :.::::i.:.:.:.,:.:.:.:. :...:,,, ,,.,..:. .,, ,, ..,:,,.. ...., 1.,,:, _ _ ,,,, ,. . . . . .,:.,.:.,~.: : ‘::“*:j:: .::.‘.:...:::3 . . .:.: . . . ,:y.:..;:...:...: “~.~::~.::~~:.:~,: ...:,.: . :: . . ..,. .,.,;,, i:,$ 2:::: . . . . “.:.:.‘s..:... ::,. i;.;<,: :.:.....;,+.‘.~,, ::.,::~~j: 4: ” ::;.; :. ,:$ .~ ‘“‘-.=.. . . . . :...:. . . . . :.,\ i. : : i.. .,. . .:.. . : . . . .:.::.::.:::::::.::~.~~..:~.~.,...~~: ._ .$$$:: $g, c,:, :.; :..:.. ..i. .: . :.::::: . . ..:.: . :.j. . . : . . . ..j ‘:. ..: . . :::.:.T i.~.~~~~:~~~~:~:~.~~:;~~~:~.~,.~.~,:~.:~:~:~~::::.$.;j,~: &~:~~:~~.$g$~~ ;:I, ;$ .: .i:-.::j:.>.:j:$ ..~’ ;,.: . ..y __ ,..:... ‘,: :. ;:j :.: . .:j:..: . :.:.:. :p:.::,:,:.A:.,:: .:. : _ ..: . . . . . . .:... ..‘i ._ :., :’ :,‘..:::: :‘.: :.::::::::: .,,:,:‘:::I ..i.: j .~..::‘::,:.~i,::~~.::.:.:” :,,,-.~~ ,:..: < :,y”:: i~:~~ .k(:, ‘j ,* ..,:I g ‘::.: .;;; ,.:”;,,, py ; :‘.~~~~~.~.’ .y:‘*:.>.: :: 3 :::~=“Y~: :.x..:.:.: . . .g$j::+..:.. . . :,,,,.:.$?,::.<.’i;: .:..: : ::x -‘;..::.::.: ~,~ .‘.9.. “j::;:.;~:3:j ,f’ ,x ::;::y:‘:i ? :::.::: ‘::.::.::::..::::::::::li::. : : ...:::::.>:::::::..j,: jr.;: .“.‘A j:;::.:.i :;:::::~:::.,.;’ /...,::..:..,: ,.,.,,,.:,: z,,,..,:,:: ,, ,:. . ‘y’:,,:.:j:.:: i ,‘.‘::i. :. ‘: il.. ,. ,:: ,;: :f’ .i.:,.y .. “..,/A ,.,..._ :,... 2. ::.,.:.



‘~~+~i’:~~~~(p ::::,::::x::j.:::.:::.:::.. .,. .,...: _:.:.:.:.:j ‘,.i,,i,..:,:, (.: ,:: :’:.,:,.:.: :.::,i ,,‘: ,~lJ$ .;fy*$ ““ys”‘~.~“‘.‘.:‘.‘.‘.‘.: .A..:....,.,,r:...:.. :.... ...,‘,‘;.~.~,;,,.,,~,,‘: ,,. ,,:; :,:.::. ~~~~~~~~~:;,~ cg;: ..ii. .y,::.:;::..~g$.$,,::~;,, ~~..:.:~~~~~~~~ by John ::~:‘.‘:~.:~~,.::~::::.:.::::::i.:.:~..: ..:a. .....:...:.:.,: .:i ..:. ..:... 5’ ‘,: ~,:., ,.,,, _,,,., ‘:‘DAZ ‘.‘.’ “h’ .A..... .‘j ...,,,I .:.:.: .....:.i,.,., ..:... .:.:.:. ,._ :,‘.‘(:“.“‘.... :.,:yy,:’ V’ ,,.’:.:..‘5’ ./.... .,._iir,~ .... .‘,...;; ....:.: :.:., ,,~,~... _. I.,. .‘,., ;...i..: :(:. “.‘.’ y::;:..... .:,..:...::.:.;~.:.6.~~~~~~~~:~~ :..‘A..:.:.: ?.::.:w:~: .,...,. ,.,. :,.,.._, “‘“‘.in.,‘..‘;‘, .a’.‘. .,.,.,., ...,.. .,., _.., ,.,, ,, ““‘C :‘:“.‘.‘+:..:.: ....._ .,_ ,,, ,_ :,:._ ,,.I.:,. :.,.;. ,.. “C’.‘.‘.. .:.:.:..::A.. .:.,.:.::::::.:.:jj:.:... .‘=-=v.. ,.,. ..,. ii:.,: :):: _, ;,:;.. ,..‘,‘.‘. :...,, .::...2. :..,._._ ....,.;,,,,,,, :‘..]“‘.‘.y i:‘..‘. i~~:.:,,::::::.‘i:...:::. :.,.,.;,,.’ ,,, .:.:.A:.,.:.: .,,. ...,,....:....‘“..:~~~~~~~,~.., _:’i ,,,, :,..,_ .....,.‘i .,...:....._ :.:.....:.: ...i..:...: ....._:’ chevron .x....“’...‘?:’ .._,

.,.,.: 6,'.:.:.:g



.T' ::

Fulton staff


a summer resort on the Bruce Peninsula of ATE IN AUGUST, at Oliphant, Ontario, I was seeking shelter, from an impending storm and met a young lad accommodation with two pretty young from Washington. DC, who suggested english girls from Montreal. Their cottage was some mile and a half from the general store where we made our introductions. He carried my guitar, and I my bedroll, down the sticky tar-pitch road running along the beach. He spoke proudly of the july 4th “smoke-in” at .the Washington monument and the thousands of peace marchers there. singing to myself as he rapped: “Chopper chopper I smiled silently in Vietnamese, please come down; us little specks watch your whirly-bird thou art; which part has to be missing to get you to flutter softly to our spot. 7 Children, children, that circle there is where I wish to land so stand back a bit; this machine is crashing for some strange reason.” His enthusiasm had waned a bit and he asked my opinions of the war. “Well,” I said, “just don’t put an ‘M’ on Napal. His rhetoric flame lost to the Lake Huron breeze, he could only be rebundaht so I interrupted to ask some personal questions and -gain some insight to his motivation .....“my father is head of the interstate-highway and traffic authority in Washington”. We had arrived at the girls’ cottage. I had shortly taken possesion of my young friend’s PEACE There was marijuana. ring. A beautiful leather band with a heavy iron peace symbol. It cost me two songs and sixty cents. Late that night, in the best of english, I made my final farewells to all, and as a bolt a nearby tree and scared the shit out of lightening flood-lit my heroic form, uprooted of all of us I cried out “Stop your father, stop the cars, to hell with Vietnam.” ’ I waited out the storm in a nearby boathouse,, trying to make sense of the evening, including my own ridiculous exit, and began plotting a fantasy-revolution of children to stop the cars-beginning by letting the air out of tires, then, as the revolution would in wall-crashes, over-ramp and overgain support, continuing with total destruction cliff leaps, and intersection fires until the highways were cleared except for commercars like antiques and racing cial vehicles to maintain the economy and ‘special’ machines with qualified drivers. I got to imagine de-winged F-104 fighter planes set on truck chasses patrolling the highways at two hundred miles an hour firing nine thousand rounds a minute up the ass of every Lincoln, Chev or Ford that dared to run...... But I wondered then what would be the real effect on the young man. Would he begin a revolution to undo his fathers too are invited to think evil rebel thoughts like “walk” and “bicycle”... I later hawked the peace ring to a carnie barker at the CNE for three free rounds on a machine gun. Fun.

the dlevrm member: Canadian university press (CUP) and underground press syndicate (UPS). subscriber: iberation news service (LNS) and chevron International news service (GINS). the chevron is a Jewsfeature tabloid published offset fifty-two times a year*{1970-71) on tuesdays and fridays by :he federation of students, incorporated university of Waterloo. Content is the responsibility of the chevron staff, Independent of the federation and the university administration.offices in the campus center; phone (519) 578-7070 or university local 3443; telex 0295 - 748. I clrculatton: 10,500 (tuesdays) 13.000 hdays)’ Alex



New contest time: We’re running out of money, so the reward for correctly identifying the book from which the following quotation is taken will merely be your name in the chevron. Here goes: “Above all, our war of self-determination has the revolutionary dimension of the emergence of a NEW SOCIETY-a progressive black people’s republic that is destined to play a decisive role not only in Africa, but in the world. Whatever the role may be whether in victory or defeat we cannot say, but no struggle as Africans seeking self-determination for Africa is revolutionary, for we stand alone without political support from. the outside ‘except from other Africans. For us, therefore to abandon the fight would mean to abandon the revolution of the masses. Biafra is. more than a government or a place; it is an idea about freedom. To fight for it, perhaps live for it, if one is lucky, is our consuming passion.” production assistant: Al Lukachko coordinators: Bob Epp & Bill Sheldon (news), Tom Purdy & Peter Wilkinson (photo) Ross Bell (entertainment), Bryan Anderson (sports), rats (features) gord moore, brenda Wilson, mihail murgoci, john Simpson, lowell vanzuiden, krista tomory, dianne caron, Steve izma, shane roberts, anita epp, chap morrison, dave britton, the boys at the Last Post (whose writing is very nice, but really doesn’t say too- much that hasn’t already been hashed over considerably) and daine luckachko. And now a paid announcement to whom it may concern: don’t flush your tart tins down the toilet.


2 november

1970 (I k26)



,c::: :::.. :::. :::. ;::. ;;:. :;:. :::. :::.. . :.:.:.: :;:: :..:. :::. :::. :.;:.: .‘.‘.‘. ;::. _‘.‘.‘. :::

Worried about the timing of your car

1. :::. ;:: .‘..‘..’ : .‘.‘.’ :::,: ;;:_ :::.


of fj._ W-TERLOO .,‘_..’ :::;:::.: . ‘.:. ‘._ RINGS : ‘,:,_:: ;;:: ::.

repairs? Don’t. Quality workmanship,

r-/r-,T< ,--Al r\-r-^ 1‘.

:_ ‘.:

diagwstic equipment, and a ride tO w I school are all part of the bargain.

:::. :: ::. ‘.’ ;::.::. ::.






:::... .:._. '.;:_ ::. _’.. :.,::. :.:,::




GOLD 32 50 SILVER 15 00

:::: :.:.:.:

.::.::::f SOLD ,.::. _‘._’.:‘.




:::.: .:::.:.. _.:. .’..






30 KlfIG






We have

NEW STOCK since but this is our



MON. THROUGHFRI. 10 am - 9 pm SAT. SUN. & HOLIDAYS loam - 6 pm

. SWEATERS Regularly



to $24.95

NOW s350td $1250 This sale will not be repeated

Tues - Fri. 1 pmto8pm

92 lodge St. Waterloo (one block from university & weber) 428

the chevron









::::. :::: :::: :;:: ;::: :::.:::: ;::: :::: ::... :::: :. :: :::: :::. .‘.‘.’

of the BLQCK LURLnuT




;:.:.:.:. :::: ,.:.:.:. :::: ;;::.



Visit the Pop Shoppe and “do your own thing”. At the Pop Shoppe you buy your soft drinks by the case, but you get to mix the flavours you want, choose from many flavours which include ginger ale, cola, orange, grapefruit, cream soda, lime ricky plus many others. “FOR QUALITY AND PRICE, CANADA’S BEST BUY” -


You To U. of W.

DO YOUR i OWN nibdG-! .


::::. ;;::. ::::. . :; ,:-:..‘ . :. ::

:.:. .,. :::.:.: ,:_;::: .::_ _‘.‘. ;:::. .;:;_ ,,:.:.:.:. ;:::: ::::: ::::.


...‘.I :‘_::::: ;:::

. : 1.::. ‘...

;_ : : _ :::: ;:: .. .; :: : :. . : . : . . .‘.’ :::: ; :_:.:

Let Us Drive


Saturday Samtolpm 210 REGINA