Evening star., 1953-12-04
More on Wiretuppino
w. G..

How do you reconcile your approval
of overlapping legalization with your
condemnation of McCarthy's judging
a man by the company he keeps?
Ever since the days of old Aesop,
people have been saying, Birds of a
feather flock together" In recent
years people say, where there is
smoke there must be fire."
These methods of appraising the
situation were outlined by Senator
Jenner, FBI Chief j. Edgar Hoover and
Attorney General Brownell. They told
how spies in the Roosevelt and Tru-
man administrations worked together,
played together and often lived to-
gether. They hired each other, pro-
NOTED each other, gave character ref
erences for each other, etc.
But when Mccarthy uses the guilt
by-association technique for putting
the finger on security risk, you accuse
him of malice and distortion of the
truth, and condemn him for his meth
DDS.
Nevertheless, you approve of tapping
telephone wires to put the finger on
suspects. This method of securing evil
dence invades the privacy of mans
home. Thus far, even Harry Truman
has not accused Mccarthy of invading
any ones home to secure evidence.
Don't get me wrong; am not op-
posed to legalizing wire-tap evidence.
But in the interest of consistency
whats sauce for the goose is sauce for
the gander) if you say wire tapping is
ok. then you should stop condemning
Mccarthy for his method of judging
men by the company they keep. In
other words. don't blow hot from one
side of our editorial page and cold from
the other side.
Robert A. Mullen.
For years have almost daily read the
editorials and readers comments in
The Evening and Sunday Star. have
agreed with some and disagreed with
others. Until very recently believed
tive and respectful of the contrary and
conflicting opinions of those who took
the time and trouble to write letters to
the editor
The Editors note" written in rebuff
tai to November 81 letter from Mr..
E. c. Davis, dealing with an editorial
on tapping. must raise serious
doubt in the minds of objective persons
regarding the fairness and objectivity
of your editors have reference to the
last sentence in the Editors note"
which refers to the views of those who
disagree with The Star on the issue in
oIIeStjon oS "nonSenSical" Ohvi0ISlV
the editor who wrote this believes The
Stars views to be sensible and the views
of those who disagree to be nonsensical.
This indicates a complete diSreSpect for
the opinions of those who disagree; the
same kind of disreSpect shown by the
Communists who consider the views
and arguments against communism
"nonsensical"; the same kind of dis
respect shown by Hitler and Mussolini
who considered the views and argu-
mentS against their relationships mon
senSical';; the same kind of disrespect
shown by Peron who considers his op-
position as "nonsenSical."
This kind of attitude on the part of
those who have the opportunity and
position to mold public opinion runs
counter to the basic concepts OF fair
play and decency and is usually en-
ployed by "hard losers" when they can
not produce logical argument to sup
port their position.
I am surprised and disappointed at
what appears to be new and narrow
policy of your paper.
A. ]. Hayes.