Evening star., 1961-09-30

aroused 10 new resolve LOT
peace and disarmament by
President Kennedy's historic
speech at the United Nations.
The great governments of the
world have no need to be in
formed of the grim risk for
mankind resulting from the
continuous testing OF multi
megaton bombs. Soviet scien-
fists and leaders knew very
we'll what was involved as
they planned their agrees
Sive act. the resumption of
nuclear testing.
History shows a bitter
irony in the fact that the
biggest and most poisonous
bombs carry their radiation
load above the rain and
weather belts which usually
bring heavy fallout around
the area Of firing. AS the
Bulletin of the Atomic
Scientists" points out, strato-
spheric devices release their
radioactive load in the
higher part of the atmosphere
where it is free to be dis
seminated around the world
without immediate precipita-
ton mechaniSms. DeScension
and fallout come with deadly
surety, but it may take years,
perhaps as many as 10 or
more. During this time dis
tribution becomes world wide.
When the Stratospheric fall
out finally settles in the lower
tropoSphere. it is quickly re-
moved to the ground by rain
and snow.
All informed leaders know
the high atmosphere bomb
tests constitute a deliberate
act Of world aggression. What
a pretty proposition this is
for the U. NJ; what a dilemma
for those whose humanity
outweighs ambition!
Three and a half years
ago, when the other tests
were being carried out by
us, scientists around the
world we're up in arms. Linus
Pauling. Nobel Prize winning
chemist. estimated each ex-
plosion to doom $4,000 chill
dren to be born with defects
in brain or body. He sub
mitted to the U. N. a petition
from 9,235 world scientists
beseeching a ban on nuclear
tests.
1t staggers the imagina-
ton to guess the ultimate toll
from the total of all the
multimegaton devices whose
yield is equal to several mil
lion tons of TINT. Is there no
Linus Pauling now?
In this present tragic
rendezvous with radiation is
it our own program which
has kept public opinion from
forming here? Why is there
so little moral protest? Is it
our vested interest which has
kept the grim facts of radla-
tion from us?
Robert ZOerheide,
Minister, Cedar Lane Uni
tartan Church.
-
I read where President
Kennedy is fighting mad"
because he is now being criti-
cized by the Republican Par
ty. particularly by General
Eisenhower in his recent
Chicago speech. New York
Post editor. j. A. Weschler,
calls Eisenhower's criticism
a vulgar, partisan assault on
Mr.. Kennedy's conduct of
foreign affairs" I'm glad
the word policy wasn't used,
because that would certainly
be a misnomer. The word af-
fairs is more appropriate. The
catch-word used by the DEM
ocratS as a criticism was
craftsmanship" The key
now should be "fumbleitis."
The most adventurous state
ment uttered by Dean Rusk
to date is I'VE shall negoti-
ate" I don't doubt it.
Khrushchev demands and we
negotiate his demands.
I'm still waiting for the
strong leadership which was
promised during the cam
paign. Also, I remember con-
siderable talk about national
prestige or the lack of it. Now
l understand the prestige
polls have been discontinued
no doubt in view of the dip in
prestige.
Frankly, I think the Re-
publicans have been remark
ably restrained and have not
criticized enough. I'm be-
ginning to think it's against
the rules to do anything but
praise this administration.
This administration weighs
each action with one eye Cor