"My husband, Donald, is a Sergeant 1st Class in the Army. He's been a prisoner inVietnam for 4 years. They're bargaining to get the prisoners released.

But what I want to know... is he still alive? Is he well? I can't find out. Hanoi won't tell our government. Hanoi won't tell me." There need be no''bargaining table'' when the plea is for humane treatment of prisoners of war.

T HE prisoner-of-war issue is complex and confusing. It is loaded with political over- tones and emotional tension. But one side of the prisoner-of- war issue is simple. That's the part which deals with the condi- tion of prisoners. Who are they? Where are they? How are they? Those are the questions the families of American prisoners want answered. Those are the questions the conscience of the world wants answered ... now. Of course, they want the war to end and the prisoners of war to be released as soon as possible. But meanwhile there is no need for Hanoi and its allies to delay

even a day in answering this plea: Admit official neutral observ- ers into the prison camps in North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Cam- bodia and Laos, where Americans are being held in secret captivity. Assure the world, through these neutral observers, that American prisoners are being decently and humanely treated, according to the standards of civilized nations. Hanoi can do this without bargaining, even without consul- tation. By opening the prisons now to official neutral observers, Hanoi would earn the gratitude of mil- lions of Americans and find new stature in the eyes of the world. We ask and pray they will.

SUPPORT OUR PLEA TOHANOI AND ITS ALLIES: Clear away the doubts - Open your prison camps to neutral observers ... now!

We ask no more than we give. All American and South Viemamese prison camps are in- ~ected regularly by official neutral observers- The IntemationaICommittee 0f the RedCross.

+ American Red Cross fl National League of Families ofAmerican Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia. 1608 "K" Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006 Advertising contributed for the public good












HELENE HE I T Business Manager






LARRY FRITZ Featu re Editor






NANCY DICK Graphics Editor



HEDDA GORDON Copy & Proofs



BILL SEWARD Circulation Manager

STA FF: Eric Chaffee,Barry Cohen, Frank Ca stillo, Joy Cummin gs, George Howell, ~endy Hughes, Michael Sajecki, Janet ,.Weinberg, Steve Baskin, Charles Fontana, Marcia Ry becznski, Hea ther In gram, Mike Kaiser, Nancy Doherty, Jim Pastrick , Ann Schillinger, Ste ven Wa ldman, Christopher Sajecki, Gloria Simon , Gretchen Siebert , Dick Manning, Jo Ann Pizzo, Mary Sul- livan . STR A IT magazin , is publish ed f ortnigh tty IJy the students of th e New Y o rh State Univers it y College at Buffalo. 1 300 El m wood A ven ue. Buffalo, New Yorh , 14 222. Office 111 th e SUCB Student U n ion, room 401 ; telepho ne I 716 1 862-5326, 86 2-5 32 7. Publishing an d operating funds allocated thro ugh th e Publica tions B oard at · SUCB u nd er th e ausp ices of th e United Students' Government. SUCB , and lhrough advertising i11co m e. STRAIT is d istrib uted (r,e to all members o f the SUCB communit y and to studen ts at other selec ted campuses o n th e Niagara Fro ntier. Price p er copy for all o thers: 35 cent .,; $4 .50 year (1 -1 iss ues/. For advertising rates, contact th e Business Manager at 862-5326. Circulation : 8,000. U nsolicited manuscript., will be considered fo r publication by the resp ective edito rs, bu.I S'fRAI T will not be responsible for their re turn. Persons n o t associated with SUCB w ill no t be discriminated against in terms o f manuscript o r graphic publication. Letters to the ed ito r must be designated as such and must be received by this magazine fil)e ful,I da ys prior lo the issuance o f each magazine. Letters and sho rt art icles f or th e Interchange wtll be printed verbatim and uncensored , and mu st be received one weeh prior to the issuance of each magaz ine. Editorial policy is determined b y the Editorial Board. STRAIT is temporarily servic ed by lternate F eatures Service (AFS) and is a subscriber to College Press Service (CPS) , Denver, Colorado. Copyright 1971 ; all right., reserved: no portion of this magazine, its verbal or pictoral content may be reprinted in any manner wit-hout the express consent of the Editor-in-Chief. Printed in the United States of



36 Cl RCUM LOCUM 1-------------------------------~ In This Issue The poignant epic of Uncle Sam in search of the men for whom he lusts has taken on some new aspects . In this, our last issue of the semester , we bring out the most dramatic of these : an exclusive interview with the Buffalo Five by Jeanne Mahoney underscores some of the philosophies , motives and convictions behind their aggressive but non-violent act against the Selective Service Headquarters in Buffalo ; a special news article on refusal of induction "A Step of Y eczns 1 t at eta S W at appens W en a prospective inductee says " no ·," a guide to the new exemptions and classifications under the 1971 Selective Service Amendment; and a personal report from columnist George Howell on the process of n'!aching a point of Conscientious ObJ'ection . STRAIT magazine has concerned itself this semester with, among other things , the fight to establish the position of Artist-In-Residence at u . n our secon issue we e itoria y presented t e i ea an the structure and proposed a man to fill it. It has been a long process. The last , most dramatic - and possibly the most important - step came last week at a USG Judicial Council meeting. A dramatized transcript appears ere as an IDCent1ve Or improvement. A wintery photo essay by Barry Cohen and a review of Ralph Nader's visit to Buffalo last week round the j,ssue out. We hope it provides good reading between , after or even during your . inals. 1--...;..;;.;_______________________________ --I GRAPHICS CREDITS : Wendy Hughes : Cover; Barry Cohen : 16, 20, 21, 32; Barry O en an Nancy Dick: 10; courtesy of Albright · Knox Art Museum: 31; courtesy S CB I d d 11 h d d · h • · f · f H N y I appy ew ear. C h d C · " b M · Y arc1a R b k ' h d iJ h h h OnSClence ,

of Eire County Savings Bank : 19.

America by RecordPress

Editorials Resistance vs. Servitude The old questions of war vs. peace, servitude vs. resistance are still very much with us. And the saga which accompanies it, the lustfulness of the uncle image for the healthy, youthful men who can help to once again prove in a strange, ethnocentric way his country's rightfulness to the world. The characters, the scenario and method change periodically but the essence remains: that .this lust for healthy men is outright obscene - even overtly masochistic for both the nation and the individuals. Politics, economics and ideology being what they are, a country, once it has attached itself to the cancer of ethnocentrism - which is exactly what our foreign policy amounts to despite the fact that, sociologically speaking, we are not a true ethnic group - will never again be cured and remain at peace. History bears this out quite well. No politi- cian be he democratic, republican, liberal, conser- vative or even radical can doctor this cancer. So that just about rules the war vs. peace question out of order. The other question, however, is somewhat different. But before we examine the aspects of resistance and servitude, let's take a look at what the armed services have been in the past. The venerable old uncle has always managed to find the men to satisfy his cancerous lust: at first it was honorable and rewarding to serve the armed forces, one could hold his heac.. high and with servi- tude behind him, it was a key to respect; further on it became expected of ?311 fit men to fill an obli- gation of birth, to say "thank you," to insure the perpetuation of• the American Dream - one could pass on stories to a grandchild; then it became more of a personal incentive whereby a young man could "see the world," and "become a man," it was a certain way to cure wanderlust and possibly bring home a bride - later one could sit in endless bars over endless beers with endless tales of duty served and bravery. All of these have developed into important in- fluences on the culture and, indeed, have even brought forth sub-cultures of their own. Con- scription has always maintained a role in this mass culture, never quite the same as the volunteer, how- ever. But one attitude was consistent: one was tapped, so one went, knowing full well that his equals would also be called and serve with him: Not so today. A new factor has added to a new variation in the "draft/war" subculture, splitting it somewhat down the middle. We are now faced with

a form of conscription which is, in fact, n,a "selective" at all, but rather random - replacing t19 oldstyle solidarity kind of "draft/war" subculture with a schizoid sub-culture: those who served on one side, those who have not on the other. And that's not to mention all those who found it morally impossible to remain a part of either - those who have found refuge in Canada, Sweden, et. al. One might well view the entire random or lot- tery draft somewhat paranoically but nonetheless validly as the administration's attempt to deliber- ately divide a potentially strong and viable and perhaps "radical" sub-culture. Is it too idealistic to expect that we can all unite in a massive resistance campaign (they can't jail us all)? Regretably, it seems obvious that this is not a reality. And as con- scientious, respectful people we cannot ridicule those who do answer the tap for we are each step- ping to the beat of a slightly different drum. We . can only empathize with them and engage in acts of resistance for them, in their behalf. All individual acts of resistance are ultimately one · woven to- gether in a mesh that will be impervious to further war and conscription. This can be the solidarity of - our age; our own sub-culture, unlike the previous ones which, when strong enough can bring the war machine and SS numbers to an end. Thus, in answer to the two original questions: wa begets servitude, servitude begets war: resistance begets peace, peace begets unity. We must be willing. ASE

The Court As Defendant On Friday, 3 December, 1971 the meeting of the USG Judicial Council ended prematurely without solving the specific business of deliberating on the briefs that had been brought before the council. The hearing turned into a "sham" - a word slinging free-for-all where victory lay in the throat of the speaker . And many were victorious. The contest was a four-way street - both sides right, and both sides wrong . The sham was the result of a blatant lack of respect for the court by the persons that the court is supposed to serve. The sham was the result of a lack of research , thorough preparation, and a definition of the end that the court wished to serve . Broad rules by the justices, and an unspoken policy of "making the rules as they played the game" provoked the mockery. Hence, an overt dis- satisfaction, facietiousness , and the dissolution of the Friday hearing. Why was the session ended so abruptly? Was it to stifle the remarks and stinging questions of the students? Or was it ended so that the justices could clear the room, and work towards clearing the haze of interpretation that make the rules of the game? It seems that the primary cause of the 3 December disruption lay in the shakiness of the cornerstone on which the Council is built - the USG constitution. The points that the prosecuters, in this case the students, questioned, and that the defendants, or justices, maintained is due to the interpretation of an extremely elastic constitution. Specifically: Article V, Section II, Subsection 1 of the USG constitution states that "the Judicial Council may not function with less than four members ." Ambiguity: Function : Does this mean that the council must have four members present at a meeting, or hearing in order to deliberate on a case? Or does this mean that the council need have only four elected members, and only a part of that elected body present to rule on a case? Another point that depicts the unlimited tensile strength of the constitution is that "the Judicial Council shall meet within one week after the filing date of a case." (Art. V, Sec. III, C.)

Is "meet" defined as a coming together of only the justices that will rule on the case? Or is "meet" defined as a coming together of justices, prose- cuters, and defendants in a court hearing? One week of seven consecutive days, or one week of seven consecutive school days? Section III, Subsection F-7 of the same article holds that a function of the Judicial Council is "to give an opinion on interpretation of the USG Constitution and the constitutions of all approved organizations upon the request of either House of Congress." Iri amicus curiae I offer the point that an opinion is not a ruling; advice is not law. "All decisions and rulings must be made by a majority of the justices . (Section III, Subsection F-8)" Which majority of which justices? Is a ruling effective if the number of justices constituting the majority is either not known or not present? At this time, there is a question as to how many persons actually serve as legally elected justices on Buffalo State College's Judicial Council. One (two?) of the justices was not present at the Friday hearing. The same one (two?) did not serve as a deliberating member of the council on the briefs that were filed prior to the 3 December session. Judjcial Council was established with more than one ruling justice, a wise move on the part of the original USG constitution committee. In a con- stitutional case, a pooling together of facts and general knowledge is imperative in the construction of a fair decision. In the I'affair de couer a variety of views and opinions on rulings is necessary in the construction of a fair decision. The Judicial Council was designed to serve the students of this campus. It will be able to better serve those students if the questions, ambiguities, and definitions are determined and solved - tightly, and unequivocably. Demanding undue respect has only solicited a stream of pathetic, court fool antics by jesters that hold themselves as a mirror to the judiciary itself. A solution? Possibly, the construction of a tighter courtyard with posted rules of play would provoke the respect that the court was denied. Before attempting to interpret USG, perhaps USG should attempt to define the court. BC


Conscientious Objector


• Ill


If the tone of this little history of my en- counters with the Selective Service System seems a bit oppressed or depressed, it is because I have an Induction Order for December 8, the day this maga- zine is to be issued . You may be reading this while I am at the Induction Center. As for what I will do once I get down there, I can't say yet. But I can tell you about all the interesting things that I did to be rewarded with this predicament. To begin, last February I found myself, along with 100 other young, draft eligible men, seated in the Induction Center on Main Street, waiting for our romp through . the Pre-Induction Physical cere- monies. What a cheerful sight, to see all of us asking the Sergeant to read off our lottery numbers just to be sure that our boards had not made a mistake with our ranks. There was a lot of good-natured kidding as everyone listened to those low ones being called out "You've got a 13, kid!" and "You've got 76, buddy!" Just cheerful. The physical was really kind of amusing. All one hundred of us standing ir all kinds of interes- ting and instructive lines, finding out who had wax in their ears and who had low blood pressure. One of my fondest memories has to be when they tested our blood pressure. On the physical sheet, there are three spaces that have to be filled in: blood pressure after one, two and three minutes. The doctor places a black band around your arm, pumps you up so many hundreds of pounds, lets the device set on your arm for a few seconds, efficiently reads the dial, and places that reading in all three spaces. Next to the time test it says, "Blood pressure after exercise." This exercise consisted of twelve of us forming two lines, facing each other, putting our arms out, rotating our wrists, pulling our arms back, squatting down and taking three steps, Donald Duck style. As we stood up, the doctor went around, listening to our hearts. One guy down the end of the other line must have had a pretty piss-poor heart because when the doctor got to him and heard his heart, he started yelling for the other doc- tors to come down and have a listen. Poor guy, just 6

not Army material. He probably died of a heart attack walking down the stairs from the physical. All during the proceedings, I kept having a panicky case of wandering mind. My head kept jumping from all the advantages and privileges one has in the Air Force, to all the moral self-decency I could feel if I went the C.O .. route. Each of course, had its advantages. If I went into the Air Force, as I had ·been seriously thinking of for the past few years, I figured I'd probably qualify for a good job, would meet other guys like myself who really didn't want to be in the military but who could grin and bear it. Not only that, but I'd probably never have anything to do with combat- which reminds me of a cartoon in Playboy where . you can see the pilot talking to another guy in the plane's cockpit, while millions of bombs are falling out of its belly; the caption under the drawing reads, "I just make believe that there's nobody down there." In the Air Force, I'd probably never have to bomb anyone myself, but I'd be doing a good job making sure that somebody else could, and that is a little more than guilt by association. The other alternative was equally ambiguous. I never liked mass violence very much, and I had seri- ous doubts about the war in Viet Nam. I have a strong moral backround that has always placed strong value on responsibility for all my actions, which is essential to any C.O.'s outlook. However, I wasn't sure that I met the religious qualifications. Also, I wasn't sure that I opposed all wars. And of · course, there was always the hassle of sitting in W'.J Harrisburg for two years because my board and I tlidn 't see eye to eye. (cont'd on page 22)

the direction of his course. For in becoming a sincerely dedicated civil disobedient it is possible to step away from the natural flow of living and to make a decision rather than accepting the decision of another . In a sense, personal conscience and public responsibility cannot be separated . This is because personal acts can have a great effect on larger groups of people. Because of this, the decision one makes in becoming a civil disobedient must reflect serious consideration of the far-reaching conse- quences. The concern should not be for personal gratification, but for serious analysis and exposition of a particular problem with a constructive motive intended. Of course, a well meant purpose does not change the illegality involved, but it can expose im- proper methods of dealing with certain problems. There are many objections raised toward the practice of civil disobedience which deal with the attitude that a civil disobedient, whether or not he be morally responsible for his act, is wrong in existing laws for any purpose . Apparently this arises from the opinion that once a community has been organized and restrained with laws, these laws are the best designed thus far, and any attempt at change should confine itself within the boundaries of the law. Regardless of the validity of this point, another point should be made--this is the relation between law and personal committment. The law is a man-made order. It is an attempt at consistence in an inconsistent world. While laws greatly facilitate the protection and structure of men and their lives, it undertakes an immense task. For often it involves itself (many times unavoidably) with the ethical constitution of man. It is relatively simple to create a law which insists upon the registration of all automobiles, for this is a rather neutral request. However, many other laws pit the individual, not only against other men, but against a faceless system. These laws attempt to evoke a constant set of values i.e. participation in the draft. The problem is that registration of vehicles does not threaten a man's moral code, while the draft may do so. Therefore, considering total obedience to "the law" as a necessity does not allow for consideration of the different implications of the laws. While all laws must be considered the legal measurement of themselves, they are not consistent in their aims. Obviously anyone can violate any law he chooses, but any violation must be considered an illegal act because the standards, however arbitrary and unfair, have been broken. The measure of the morality of such an act can only be dealt with on a personal level, for just as morality cannot be legisla- ted, it can neither be judged by laws. In the end, the consequences must be met regardless of their validity and man is left to his own devices to deal with responsibility to others and responsibility to himself.



Under loose examination, the act of civil dis- obedience is often sub-divided into two aspects. These are, disobedience as a matter of public duty and responsibility. The conflict lies within the inconsistency with which the total community of man regards mankind. Specifically, this is the differ- ence between personal committment and public conscience . Of course, the act of purposely defying man- made law must be recognized as revolving around many ramifications which are sometimes hidden, sometimes misunderstood. But the stark choice which a civil disobedient must make, assuming his sincerity, is whether or not to trust his own moral judgement above the will of the people (loosely manifested through laws). Perhaps the difficulty is that man was not satisfied with the most basic rules that he created. As civilization evolved, it became more and more difficult for him to adjust to the insecurity of large numbers. The prospect of having more people and thus more problems may have been responsible in part for a defensive move--- the creation of laws which often departed from neutral ground and involved themselves with morality. And so the problem becomes clearer-- man cannot legislate morality. He can try to set up a system to facilitate everyday living, but he cannot approach the con- science of another with an authority reserved for his own conscience. Therefore, while we must consider everyone as a part of the human community with rights and responsibilities, we must also recognize the existence of personal rights and responsibilities. Often the argument is made which attempts to elevate the status of the personal conscience over the good of the majority. This, however, ultimately reverts to the fact that regardless of who makes this judgement, it is only a matter of opinion, and of course, these opinions result from individual values which are in no way universally consistent. Perhaps it is because man now has so little control over his own life that he strives to take advantage of those situations where he can exercise 7


pouring of good will. After all , we all know full well where the road lea'ds to that is paved with good intentions. The trouble lies not with the elderly , not with A Congress , and not even with the customary., hypocrisy of the administra tion , although it may well prevent any real results . It lies with the in- ability and incredible unwillingness of the "leaders" to recognize a sickness which is rampant in the land : Gerontophobia : the unreasonable fear and/or irrational hatred of the elderly by society and them- selves. Twenty per cent of the population, according to our studies, are infected, in varying degrees ; sometimes the young males more than the middle aged females ; some ethnic groups more than others; the results are not all in ; lack of money , staff of- ficial and interest have prevented us from reaching final conclusions . If twenty per cent of the population would suffer from say, claustrophobia, money , staff and official interest would be immediately available ; it would mean, for instance a redesigning of all eleva- tor shafts. But it is much simpler to declare that this attitude toward the elderly , while unpleasant, should be changed, and deny the sick character which assigns twenty million persons to the scrap heap , in a society which is posessed by the ideals of youth, health and work . Thus , we find medical gerontophobia among physicians and the medical establishment, including a gerontologists and geriatricians who set out to help • · the elderly ; legal gerontophobia in the halls of the legislatures, the courts, and the legal profession; architectural gerontophobia and others in the realm of the social gerontophobiac including social work- ers, and all those who can not stand the autonomy and integrity of the elderly individual ; who frown on their courtship and sex mores; who try to force their politics on them. The only exception is economic gerontophobia which is underdeveloped indeed, because it has become abundantly clear that the elderly constitute a new and largely untapped market in spite of the fact that many must live below the poverty line; for even they are most cruelly exploited by the med- ical, the legal, the social work establishments, as well as by landlords, hotels and real estate and in- surance interests, to name a few . Thus not the individual aged but society needs education, change and readjustment. Unless the fact and causes of the disease are recognized qua disease, there are only palliatives, only a quantative hope; unless a well-financed and planned mass educational campaign together with insights therapy of the widest order is instituted, unless its youth will reconsider and turn around, this society will suffer and perish as all societies have suffered who have deliberately relinquished or were forced to abandon their old and the values for which they stand .




More than twenty years ago it was quite obvious that the most exploited , the most unwanted group in the American society - perhaps with the exception of the American Indian - were the Elderly . Old age started for many at 45; retirement was compulsory; social security was not general by any means ; there was no health insurance except at prohibitive cost and professionals who dared work- ing for the Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill could be deprived of their livlihood. Much has been achieved in the intervening years. Today gerontology: the science of ageing and geriatrics: the medical specialty concerned with the aged are respected and social gerontology has become an occasionally well-endowed gentleman's paradise . At the moment of this writing the White House Conference on Ageing meets to give policy and direction to the wishes and needs of the elderly . Some 3500 delegates selected , elected and ap- pointed by organizations, communities, states, and the federal government are deliberating in the fond hope that every opinion will be heard before the administration makes up its collective honorable mind to fit these wishes and needs into the socio- political-economic fabric of the great American society. Innumerable discussions over the past months, and indeed years, have shaped and sharpened these proposals and millions are hoping against hope that the failure of the 1961 Conference will not be re- peated. Nevertheless such failure is almost certain, in spite, or perhaps because of the horrifying out- 8

Stop mealtime polluti 0 n

Give the Non-Smoker a Break at the Table

Interview with the Buffalo Five



JEANNE MAHONEY n the night of Saturday, August 21, 1971, the Buffalo Five were arrested by FBI agents and Buffalo police in the old Federal Building in Buffalo while attempting to destroy draft records and re- move files from the office of army intelligence . (STRAIT 29 September) They were arraigned later Sunday and charged with theft of government property, destruction of government property, and committing a crime on a federal reservation. At a pre-trial hearing on August 31 , the five were or- dered held for further action by the federal grand jury. Indictments against the five on charges of con- spiracy, theft of government property, and burglary were announced by U.S. attorney general John Mitchell on Sept. 30, 1971. Since then they have made appearances on several campuses, on tele-

vision, and at countless living room raps addressing themselves to the compelling reasons which led them to act. · The five, Chuck Darst, Maureen (Meaux) Considine, Ann l'v13sters, Jim Martin and Jeremiah Horrigan agreed to let me interview them for Strait, however, once gathered, the interview turned into a much less formal conversation among the Five themselves, my husband Mack, and myself. Since they have answered "interview" questions so often and since the facts of their action and their arrest are so widely known, and also since the con- versation touched on so many related but not so frequently discussed topics, it seemed much better to let it stand in this informal state rather than force it into an interview situation. What follows is a condensation of a 1 ½ hour taped conversation.

+ANN MASTERS: 26; raised in Buffalo where she attended Mt. St. Mary Academy and the Univer- sity of Buffalo. She spent one year as a Vista Volun- teer in the south Bronx area of NYC . For the last two years she has been teaching a course in Human Relations for the City University of New York , Adult Education Programs.

JEREMIAH HORRIGAN+: 21; raised in Buffalo where he attended Canisius high school; went to Fordham University where he partic- ipated in anti-ROTC activi- ties and peace campaigns. also operated Resistance Bookstore in Ithaca, N .Y., worked on the Harrisburg Defense Committee and was arrested in Washing- ton, D .C. during the May Day activities.

+MAUREEN CONSIDINE: 21; attended school in Buffalo; spent four years at St. Mary's College in Notre Dame, Indiana; throughout her summers she worked for the Christian Appalachian Project; after partici- pating in the student strike after US inva- sion of Cambodia in Spring of 1970 she left school to work as a student co-ordinator for Congressional peace candidate Tom Flaherty. This past spring she taught a course on the Theology and Psychology of the Theory of Non-Violence and a social problems seminar at Mount Saint Joseph's Academy in Buffalo. She has been active in the Buffalo Harrisburg Defense Committee.

the Catonsville 9. Chuck taught at the Free Univer- sity at Notre Dame before coming to Buffalo in Dec- ember 1970 where he be- came active in the Harris- burg Defense Committee. JIM MARTIN~: Born and raised in Michigan . He spent 8 years study ing for the missionary priesthood. After leaving the seminary he joined the Peace Corps and spent one year in Gambia, West Africa.

--CHARLES LEE DARST: 22; grew up in eastern Kentucky and Nashville; entered the University of Notre Dame; destroyed his draft card on October 15, 1969 with six others at Notre Dame including two professors and a girl during the Offertory of a mass for peace; left Notre Dame in 1970 to work on a book of poetry, short stories and essays written by his older brother who died in 1969, he was a member of

JEREMIAH : People ask us who our action was directed to - wards - the lawmakers 7 It wasn 't to petition the government. e didn't hope to change the draft laws. We were appealing rectly to the people in Buffalo . We didn't ir.tend to be caught - we wanted to make the action itself unavoidable . Now that we 've been caught I feel I have to make myself un- avoidable . People have to confront me. I feel l have to let them know it was a legitimate action - illegal but legitimate . CHUCK : I don 't see the action so much in a political context , I view the action more in the historical context - in the same vein as other non-violent acts of direct resistance and also as a thorn in the side of the community . They can 't ignore it. Although Meaux doesn't like the term, I like to think of it as sort of an invitation to people to live a different kind of life . MEAUX : It should be more of a challenge than an invitation . An invitation is too easy a thing to get out of, but a challenge puts it in a different context . JEANNE : As far as reaching the people in Buffalo and as far as it being an invitation or a challenge , the fact that you were caught enhances these possibilities. For instance, the three re - cent actions in Niagara Falls , Batavia and Geneseo can pretty much be ignored by the community but the public can't ignore your action because you 're before them and you keep challenging them. CHUCK : I think the only reason the public can ignore actions that are successful - successful in that those who did them get away is because there aren 't enough of them . If a draft board was being ripped off on the average of one a day , it would be something that the public couldn't ignore. JEANNE : But would they feel that they, personally had to meet this challenge 7 JEREMIAH : Probably not as much as if the people involved were caught , surfaced or created for themselves an alternative. The alternative in our action was the possibility of getting away with the army intelligence files . An alternative to being arrested or surfacing is pretty necessary - extremely necessary . There's something to the personal witness thing that you just can't get around. Very few actions have created good alter- natives. Those in my mind that have are the Medea and the Pentagon papers. When the Pentagon papers came out they were also Daniel Ellsberg's Pentagon papers - he eventually surfaced, and he wanted publicity when he surfaced . MACK : Getting back to Chuck 's comment about one-a-day rip-offs, what do you think would really happen if there were an increasing number of draft boards being ripped off? CHUCK : I'm sensitive to that portion of society that would decry that as acts of guerilla violence and would ask for in- creased security around those things and greater punishment under the law for people caught doing those acts, but I think there is a significant, if not larger, portion of society that would begin to realize what the draft really means both to Americans being drafted and to Asians and Latin Americans being killed under the ugly hand of the American military - and probably people would be Jumping on the bandwagon - liberals anyway - to abolish the draft . That's the best I could hope for anyway. MEAUX: I wonder how different it would be if there were a sprinkling of people getting caught along with a lot of people getting away. I'm really gald that we 're here now after these three other rip-offs and that we're able to speak to that be- cause there is some serious educational work that has to be done and that responsibility has kind of fallen to us. The people involved couldn't do it. Somebody has got to get to people and tell them important things such as not being able to be drafted with an incomplete file - plus that there's the whole thing Chuck was saying about what the draft really is. Without people like us around attempts would be made to cover these things up as much as possible . 11

"We wanted to make the action itself unavoidable" JEREMIAH : There's a thing in the New and Improved East Coast Conspiracy statement that really strikes me - its ad- dressed to Hoover, Mitchell and Nixon and I think it can be applied to the general population , that one of the hopes of the people who did these three actions and that we've since become spokesmen for , is that these three people and the American population has to recognize that Guatamalans are people , Dominicans are people , Vietnamese are people . Some- how there is that really narrow perspective (and people on the left are as much subject to this as others) that when American casualties drop somehow things are better - that it makes little or no difference that , as in the case of Vietnam, more people are being killed daily. There's the feeling that just because American boys aren't dying nobody else is dying - and that's what Nixon has been able to use - just winding down the war show - increased bombing raids but bringing the boys back home or a percentage back home by election year. Somehow the war is out of the consciousness of people. We've got to have that real hope that somehow we can begin to regard everybody as people - as people that are being killed or as victims that are just there for the taking - for the napalm and the pellet bombs. We 've got to realize that there is no differ- ence between an American mother and a Vietnamese mother and that people are people are people are people . MA c K : Do you think that successful draft board raids (successful in that files are destroyed and the raiders get away clean) are a good educational tool , since you don 't have the publicity that is drawn by having the raiders around to explain the rationale behind the action? ANN: Well, as with any educational tool, it depends on how you use it. There have to be people that are around to use it right. There has to be some kind of organized system for get- ting the news out to people because the press isn't going to do it . I think that the only reason the New and Improved East Coast Conspiracy actions made headlines was because of our action. It was something that was familiar to people - but it wasn't headlines for Jong and probably nothing will ever be printed about it again unless people are caught. It 's sensation- alism and the press isn't interested in education - so there have to be groups of people around who are concerned with the educational value of any action. MACK: So you're really dependent on sources other than media sources for education. ANN : Oh yes. I think that kind of organization is really impor- tant. There have to be organizations who are committed on their own level to high risk - because certainly this kind of situation is high risk. Metro-Act in Rochester really put them- selves on the line printing and leafleting and distributing news about the East Coast Conspiracy because they left themselves open to grand jury subpoenas. So that when we talk about risk, about change , there are different levels of that. People take those risks on different levels to accomplish different things. JEREMIAH : One of the things I've run into and I think we've all run into - the kids being called kids and being thought of as such. Some people profess a lot of hope in the younger gen- eration and decry their own generation. I feel that that's really a defensive way of looking at things. When are parents going to stop Jetting their kids do it all 7 When are parents going to get their heads busted and stop cheering their children? (cont 'd. on page 25)

EDUCATED GHOSTS WRITE FOR PROFIT NEW~ A ghost writing company started in Denver , Colorado , and extended to campuses across the nation , expects to sell more than $100 ,000 worth of term papers , master 's thesis and doctoral disertations during the academic year . Research and Educational Associates, Ltd . (REA) , is a limited stock company with five youthful share- holders . The research and writing is supervised by Larry Groeger , 20 , and undergraduate philosophy major at Denver's Metropolitan State College . If all goes well REA 's founders expect to double or even triple their expanse before next spring . Recruiting an expert staff is no problem, Groeger says . Because so many college graduates can 't find jobs, REA simply advertises for ghosts in the help wanted columns of local papers . Dr. Frederick P. Thieme , an administrator of the University of Colorado , makes the observation : " It's a sad and lamentable thing. Apparently we 've over-emphasised the importance of a degree ." REA charges $3 to $4 per page, depending on the subject 's difficulty and the amount of research required . Most of the clients , Groeger says, are sincere persons who do not feel prepared by the university and find the demands of the professors unreasonable . He added, "Usually they 're rich kids ." Even rich kids run short of cash occasionally, but soon REA's papers will be able to be bought through Bank-Americard or Master Charge . ZERO AID FOR ZERO GROWTH John C. Mahoney , an officer of Zero Population Growth (ZPG) , said that the developed nations should cut off aid to India and some South American nations and let the people there starve . His position was that aid from the U.S., the Soviet Union , and China should only go to countries that can make use of it "and then we should tie it to a very strong population policy ." Walace Irwin, a U.S. diplomat said that Montgomery's suggestion was politically unrealistic . The three nations are competing for the friendship of the other nations , " and letting a whole nation starve isn 't likely to win their friendship," he said. Two students at a regional conference challenged Montgomery's assertion that China "has one of the best population policies in the world and doesn 't need anybody 's help now," but India is beyond help . They contended that about 40 years ago China had a situation similiar to that of India's, an~ that Montgomery probably would have concluded that China should be abandoned. Montgomery said that he d. not agree with "common sense " solutions to ecological problems because they were too slow to motivate changes . Rather, he advocated trial and error to arrive at the only answer for the world - fewer people . REHNQUIST OPPOSITION: TRICKLE TO FLOOD The Supreme Court nomination of Associate Attorney General William Rehnquist only produced a trickle of opposition at first, but has been turned into a flood by the NAACP, AFL-CIO, the ACLU, and the predomin- antly black National Bar Association. Opposition to Rehnquist's nomination was also expected from some sections of the more liberal Republicans, but it appeared with unexpected severity from the Ripon Society, a group of professionals and businessmen in Cambridge, Massachusettes - also Republican Party regulars. The Society 's reasons were similiar to those of other more liberal opposition . Rehnquist has advocated the extension of powers to the executive branch without bounds . In a recent newsletter of the Society, The Ripon Forum stated that it was "somewhat difficult to muster a struggle against Rehnquist when the President maintains his nomination has something to do with 'respect for the law' ." Other reasons for the opposition were that Rehnquist contended that the government had the right to engage in wire-tapping without court supervision when "national security is at stake ." He also is said to have invented in a post-facto manner, the doctrine of 'qualified martial law' to account for the illegal arrests of 13,000 anti-war protesters last spring. SUPPORT SLIPPED UP BY SIMPLE SEMANTICS An error in semantics may have cost David Meiswinkle, Student Government President of Rutgers University the support of the state legislature in his campaign for the legalization of marijuana . In a letter written to the legislature by Meiswinkle seeking their views on the matter, one clause read, "We demand that you, as a candidate for legislature of New Jersy respond to this issue immediately." According to the SGA officials the word demand was an error and the word request was intended. Assemblyman Richard De Korte wrote, "Any of my constituents and any resident from the state can solicit from me my opinions . I do not, however, respond to demands." Other legislators were not so kind. Assemblyman James Turner wrote, "I am unalterably opposed to the legalization of marijuana ." He concluded, "I am happy that you wrote me, though . The contents of your letter will cause me to look askance at any budget requests from Rutgers which come before the Legislature . I certainly do not want my tax dollars used to subsidize the type of higher education you seem to epitomize." Compiled by J o Ann Pizzo

"You are about to be inducted into the Armed Forces of the United States, in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, or in the Marine Corps, as indicated by the service announced following your name when called. You will take one step for- ward as your name and service are called and such step will constitute your induction into the Armed Forces indicated."


A Step Of Conscience

•MARCIA RYBECZNSKI One step forward. The left foot a couple of inches up and then the right foot. You stand a little closer to the directing officer in front of you. One step forward in silence. You are now a member of the Armed Forces of the United States and the few inches covered by your quiet step have transferred you from civilian life into the world of the military. But perhaps you did not take that step forward. Rather, you are asked if you are refusing induction, and do not answer but stand stiff and frozen to the spot. A captain advises you that you are committing a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, $10,000 fine, or both. But you only hear the same words your conscience whispered to you a thousand times before • your unspoken answer to the order and because of it, you stand still. The next year or two will be spent opposing the government's order for induction. The courts must somehow be shown that the order was illegal or unfair. You might spend a few more years in prison, leaving behind family and friends, your job and your freedom. But you stand still and do not move.

Interpretation of the meaning of these three requirements can be difficult and Supreme Court decisions have attempted to clarify certain definitions. The question of sincerity is especially hard to define. APPEALING: If the registrant does not receive his desired classification, he has 30 days to appeal it. Judicial review of a draft classification is generally prohibited unless the applicant wishes to bring a suit afainst his board, charging them with "blatent lawlessness" . This case is brought up only when it seems obvious that the local board has made a legal error. The suit is seldom available to reg- istrants and demands "exceptional cir- cumstances", such as the board clearly acting outsicie of its authority. For most registrants, an appeal must be made to the draft board. At this per- sonal appearance, the applicant is free to discuss his classification and point out evidence in his file which would support his placement in his desired status. If at this time, the board feels that pertinent information has been presented or pointed out, an applicant's classification will be reopened. If not, the applicant may seek a state appeal, which is conducted solely on paper. As a last resort, a nation- al appeal is sometimesmade to review the decision of the state. REFUSAL OF INDUCTION: If all appeals fail, the resister must face the possibility of induction. On the day he is ordered to report, he shows up with the rest of the draftees at 7 :30 a.m. at the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station (AFEES). For the most part, the morning and part of the after- noon will be taken up with a physical examination or inspection, processing of various papers and possibly also in taking the AFQT (Armed Forces Qualifications Test). Any where from 2:30 to 4:30 in the afternoon, the induction ceremony is held. . If when the resister's name and service is called, he refuses to step forward, he is

The decision of a young man to refuse induction should be backed by thought that examines the reasons behind his convictions and the extent to which he is willing to back them up. Dave Edwards, a counselor at the Buffalo Draft Counseling Center on North Parade Street, noted the fact about 70 to 80 percent of all men who in some manner avoid induction, do end up in some sort of military uniform. The thought of a prison sentence • of a few years behind bars • is hard for most youth to face. The individuals who do go through with a court trial will either be acquitted and face a reprocessing of their classification. Or they might be convicted and face a sentence in prison or a proba- tionary period. In either case, they may have to face an order for induction again. The story of what actually happens when an individual refuses induction can differ greatly . Edwards provided a composite picture of how many draftees lead up to refusal and what happens afterwards. The story, however, presents only a very general picture of the basic procedures since individual cases may differ greatly.


The first step most draft resisters take is to apply for Conscientious Objector status, I-0 and I-A-0. These two clas- sifications provide for exemptions from active military duty. Objectors in class I-A-0 may be asked to serve in a non- combatant capacity such as in a medical department. 1-0 objectors are exempted from combatant and noncombatant service, but may be asked to perform civilian alternative service. A grant of either of these two clas- sifications is based on the filing of the Special Form for Conscientious Objector (SSS Form No . 150) and by an informal appearance in front of the applicant's draft board. The board then attempts to discern if the applicant fulfills the three main criteria for defining conscientious objection: One, that the registrant be "conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form"; two, that his ob- jections are based on religious training and belief; three, that his beliefs are sin- cere. 13



EFFECT OF 1971 AMEND- MENT TO THE MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT Students who were qualified for 2-S deferments during the 1970-71 regular academic year will be able to obtain deferments until they graduate , reach age 24 or fail to make satisfactory progress toward their degrees. Not covered by the 1971 amend· ments. The current policy was set by Regulation.



Registrants had a right to 2-S deferments if they were students in good standing, were making pro- gress to ward a Baccalaureate degree, -and had not reached their 24th birthday. Registrants had a right to 2-A deferments if they were students in good standing and were making satisfactory progress toward the completion of their programs . Students who were not qualified for 2-S deferments and who received induction orders were classified l·S(C) until the end of their current academic year, with the exception of certain graduate students whose inductions were postponed until the end of their current academic year. A quota and call system was used to apportion the national draft call to the state headquarters, who in turn apportioned the call to the individual draft boards.


Undergraduate student

Students who were not qualified for 2-S undergraduate deferments during the 1970-71 regular academic year will not be considered for 2-S deferments. Students who were not qualified for student deferments during the 1970-71 academic year will not be considered for 2-A deferments. For those progr-.ims with no formai academic year, 1 July will be the cut-off date. Undergraduate and graduate students who receiv e their induction orders will have their induction postponed until the end of their current academic term, quarter, or semester, except for those students in their last academic year, who will be postponed until the end of the academic year. A Uniform National Call for issuing induction orders under the lottery system will be authorized. Under the Uniform National Call, all young men with the same lot- tery numbers who are subject to induction that year will receive induction notice at approximately the same time . A new classification, 4-G, will be established for those surviving sons and sole surviving sons who are exempt from service during peacetime. The registrant will be entitled to such time for his personal ap· pearance as is reasonably necessary for a fair presentation of his claim. Normally 15 minutes shall be deemed adaquate for this purpose. Not more than three witnesses can be presented during this period. If ·he elects to meet with his appeal board, the same criteria pertains, except with respect to present witnesses. If he desires the reasons for adverse decisions, he will have to request them from his local board in writing within 30 days of the date of mailing of his latest notice of classification, A young man will have to register in the period from 30 days prior to his birthday through 30 days fol• lowing bis birthday. Registrants will be given a minimum of 30 days notice of their induction, measured from the mailing date of the induction order. Classification 1-Y will be abolished. Those registrants with temporary disqualifications subject to re-examination will be kept in Class l·A until their status is resolved; those registrants with disqualifications will be classified 4-F. The Regulations will implement the 1971 amendments which limit service on local and appeal boards to 20 years and set a maximum age limit for service at age 65. A minimum age limit of age 18 has been set for appointment to local boards.

1 deferments

Deferments for students in junior colleges, trade and technical schools, and apprenticeship programs

The 1-S(C) classfication re- quirement was replaced by a requirement to grant a post- ponement of induction. The amendments also require the granting of a postponement for the fuU academic year, if it is the student's last year in school.

Temporary deferments and post· ponements for college students

Uniform National Call

The amendments removed the requirement to use the quota and call system and authorized other methods for issuing calls for induction.

In addition to those who qualify for the sole surviving son exemption, young men of families in which the father; a brother or a sister was killed in action or died in the line of duty while serving in the armed forces after 31 December, 1959, or died thereafter of disease or injury incurred in the line of duty, or is in a captured or missing in action status, will be eligible for the exemption. Each registrant was given the right to bring witnesses to his per- sonal appearances and to present his case before a quorum of his local board. The registrant also was given the right to appear in person before an appeal board and, if the case is referred to the Presidential appeal board, to appear in person before that board. Further, the registrant was given the right to request a written statement from the local or appeal board of the reasons why his classification request was denied. Not covered in 1971 amendments; policy set by Reg- ulations. Not covered in 1971 amend· ments; policy set by Regulations.

Young men were eligible for sole surviving son exemptions if they were the sole surviving son of a family in which the father or one or more sons or daughters were killed in action or died in the line of duty,

Eligibility for surviving son exemptions

Procedural rights of registrants

Registrants were entitled to a personal appearance before their local draft board following each classification derision; a quorum of the board was not required at per- sonal appearances. No witnesses were allowed at the personal appearance. Registrants also had the right to appeal their classifi- cation action to a state appeal board and, if the decision of the satte board was less than unan- imous, to appeal to a Presidential appeal board. Neither a personal appearance nor witnesses were allowed at these appeals. A registrant was required to register within five working days following his 18th birthday. A registrant received a minimum of 10 days notice of his induction, measured from the mailing date of the induction order. A registrant was classified l • Y if he had a medical or moral dis· qualification for military service except in time of war or national emergency, The disqualification could either be permanent or temporary. Citizens could not be appointed to local or appeal boards unless they were at least 30 years of age. They could not serve beyond their 75th birthday, or for more than 25 years.

Time period for registration

Time period given registrants after receipt of Induction order

Classification 1-Y

Not covered in the 1971 amend· ments; policy set by regulations.

Requirements for appointment and rvlce on local and appeal boards

See next column.


Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40

Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter