The Megaphone (Georgetown, Tex.), Vol. 67, No. 6, Ed. 1 Monday, October 15, 1973 Page: 3 of 9
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: The Megaphone and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Southwestern University.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE MEGAPHONE
Monday, October 15, 1973
Page 3
Window On Georgetown from page 2
significance when opponents
arguments are considered.
There are many reasons for
opposition- to Sanguine but the
principal ones are environmental
concerns and the efficacy of the
project itself.
The system would be a gigantic
underground radio transmitter
covering about 3200 square miles.
Experts have testified that it will
be dangerous to animals and
humans, fences will be electrified,
the magnetic field created might
affect the migratory habits of
birds, and it may have an adverse
effect on the food cycles of
organisms found in water and soil.
In addition, laying the miles of
cable and establishing various
monitoring stations will despoil the
landscape.
Other testimony indicates that a
two-or three-word message will
take over two hours to transmit at
the very low broadcast frequencies
the system would use. That makes
Sanguine seem like a very useless
system to defend against nuclear
attack.
There are other considerations:
What effect will its twenty to thirty
million watts of power have on
other broadcast systems in the
area? Is it true, as some experts
have testified, that the system can
be knocked out by thunderstorms
or nuclear attack? Where will all
the electrical power to operate the
system come from? Will the Navy
have to build nuclear power
plants? How many? Where will
they be located? How safe are
they? Wouldn’t such a project
make the area the number one
target in a nuclear war? What
would happen to tourist trade in the
area? And the questions continue.
To date, Sanguine has cost over
$58 million for feasibility studies
and research. The cost of the total
project probably will exceed the
Navy’s estimate of $750 million.
Some experts believe that it will
take 100 times more power to
operate the system than the Navy
estimates. This would drive the
cost of the project into the billions
and billions of dollars.
It is interesting to note that
planning for Project Sanguine
started in 1958. Most students
might not remember what this
period of the cold war was like. The
most common attitude of that era
was “better dead than red.” The
country approached mass hysteria
about the need for underground
nuclear fall-out shelters. A serious
ethical question was posed during
this period: What would you do if a
nuclear attack started, your family
is safely in its fall-out shelter, and
a neighbor pounds on your door
wanting to be let in? If you let him
in your shelter, your family would
be overcrowded and short on food
and water. The usual answer \yas
to have a shotgun ready to repel
such a person.
This writer hopes we are past
such cold war hysteria. What
seemed like a good idea fifteen
years ago needs to be carefully re-
examined in the light of world
changes. At the very least, all of us
deserve complete, honest answers
to the questions asked of the Navy.
If you want to ask some questions
about Sanguine or express your
opinion on the matter, the key
person to write is Representative
George Mahon (DD—Lubbock).
He is Chairman of both the House
Appropriations Committee and its
subcommittee on Defense. The
Navy presses for more money each
year to continue research and
development on the project. Now is
the time to stop Sanguine before
billions of taxpayers dollars are
wasted.
MUK-
RAKING
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
BY NED DISMUKES
A couple of days ago I had the
chance to visit with an out-of-state
friend who I hadn’t seen in a while.
I enjoyed the conversation very
much because he too had gotten
into college journalism. Thus we
had something in common. In fact,
he was managing editor of the
newspaper at the small school he
attended.
At the time of the conversation it
struck me that maybe what we had
to say to each other had some
bearing on the situation here at
Southwestern. Included is part of
the conversation as best I can
remember it.
He told me about the editor of the
paper whose tenure he had
followed. It seems that the fellow
had been real energetic and
idealistic when he started his
tenure in the editors hot seat. The
student in question it seems had
little journalistic background. He
had worked on the college paper
for a couple of years, but that was
it. He lacked any substantial
journalistic training. He was to put
it mildly “green between the
ears”.
Seems that the school which
hired him could have given him
some training by making readily
accessible some on the job
training, some in classroom in-
struction, or at least an advisor
who could help him out. Well, all
three fell through in one way or the
other. Anyway, that isn’t all that
important to the story except that
the previous editor knew that the
poor boy was being thrown to the
dogs with his hands empty. But
back to the story.
Like a white knight going off to
battle, the kid, as he was called, set
out to right wrong and insure
justice and quality education for
his fellow students. Alas, my friend
stopped at this point to sip his
coffee.
Getting back to the story, my
friend began to describe the kids
first semester as editor. It seems it
was his goal to become con-
troversial, and he did. In fact, he
blundered his way into con-
troversey. The job of being editor,
he discovered, was a little much.
For one thing, he had little or no
staff. There were few paid
positions. Thus he depended on
voluntary help from his fellow
students. Well, anyone who knows
anything about college students,
and probably people in general,
knows that they aren’t dependable
when doing something voluntarily.
The consequences of this was that
the kid usually had to depend on
himself for a paper. Anyone who
knows anything about a newspaper
knows that they aren’t put out by
one person, especially when that
person is trying to stay in school.
Another problem the kid faced
was a lack of guidance or jour-
nalistic knowledge. He didn’t know
all the ins and outs of running a
paper. That compounded by the
lack of staff had two effects. One,
the editor wore himself down to the
point that instead of trying to
produce a newspaper, he en-
deavored to put out eight sheets of
black and white. The other result
was that he continued to ride high
on his white horse.
He still thought that the people
on campus wanted to hear the
truth. For example, he wrote an
editorial trying to constructively
criticize one of the most powerful
Please See Mukraking
Page 7 Col. 1
THE
MEGAPHONE
S. U. Station, Box 48
Georgetown, Texas 78626
Published by the Students
Association of Southwestern
Universitv. Georgetown, Texas
78626. Issued weekly during the
school year except for official
recess. Entered at the post office at
Georgetown, Texas 78626 as second
class mail matter September 26,
1906, under special provision of Act
of March 3, 1879, and accepted for
mailing at special rate of August
20, 1918.
Editor—Ned Dismukes
Features Editor—Dawn Miller
Sports Editor—Lewis Sessions
Lay-out Editor—Eric Clarke
Photographers—Owen McCall,
Suzanne McDaniel, Paul
Lowery
Artist—Erik Harpst
Persons interested in submitting
stories, calendar events, or other
material to the Megaphone should
do so before Wednesday noon prior
to the Monday paper in which it is
to be published. Any change in this
deadline should be discussed with
the editor. The Megaphone office is
in Mood East.
Material should be submitted by
mail or by bringing it to the office.
Persons interested in working
for the paper should contact the
editor.
October 9,1973
Editor,
I wish to thank Miss Cordell for
' her coverage of the “International
Club crisis”. Hopefully, her two
articles made our American
students and some of our foreign
students aware of the two main
reasons for the club’s existence:
1. to include foreign students in
campus activities, and 2. to
preserve their individualism as
foreign students. No other group,
no housing project can fill these
needs if we want to preserve
freedom of choice.
Dean Swift was delighted with
Dr. Jacob’s suggestion that foreign
students who so desire be assigned
a “family” selected among
volunteers, eithei from our own
faculty or from the Georgetown
community. A list of families eager
to invite foreign students in their
homes during the school year and
during holidays will be compiled
by the Dean of Students’ office as
of this year.
Credit must be given to Angela
Kemmer, a freshman student from
Houston, for her excellent
suggestion that a volunteer
“brother” or “sister” from the
student body help each new student
from a foreign country im-
mediately upon his or her arrival
on campus.
Many of our members and of-
ficers have worked very hard in
the past four years to make our
foreign students feel at home, and
if we have not always succeeded,
we must keep in mind that we
started from absolutely nothing
and that a great deal has been
accomplished. With the help of,
these two new programs, and
hopefully through meetings in
which the relationships between
human beings will rank above
planned activities and personal
interests, the International Club
will accomplish the aims for which
it was created.
Sincerely,
Regine Reynolds, Sponsor,
International Club.
VIGILANCE VIEW
Dear Editor,
Last Tuesday, at 1:30 in the morning, the “Pi KA giant” was
burned to the ground. I can in all sincerity, say that I was not
greatly angered by the act itself. I am, however, greatly angered
by the potential of the act. The “giant” was burned within five feet
of the Pike house, where 23 men were asleep. This irresponsible act
of arson could have caused the serious injury or deaths of 23 men by
setting the entire house on fire.
College pranks are acceptable as long as they do not cause
physical harm to others nor have the obvious potential to do so.
This act of arson was in no way acceptable as it carries full im-
plications of actual and severe physical harm to these men and
their area of residence. In my opinion, the parties who committed
this act were certainly unthinking of the full contempt of their
fellow men.
Several weeks ago, there appeared on our campus a mysterious
river, that some people claimed was an underground spring,
bubbling forth its sweet waters. In reality, it was a broken water
main.
This prompted the Vigilance Committee of Southwestern to erect
a make-shift bridge, that we entitled the Floyd Lackey Memorial
Bridge. The very next day, the school took action, and the “river
was stopped. The Vigilance Committee stands for action. Very
prompt action.
At this time, the Vigilance Committee would like to strongly
protest the “prank” played on the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity last
Monday night. (The Vigilance Committee is comprised of in-
dependents only). A prank of this caliber is not really a prank, but a
serious act of vandalism, in which setting afire their statue en-
dangered the lives of many people. The chapter’s house could have
gone up like a tinder box. Apart from that is the fact that a
Georgetown Civil Ordinance was violated, of which a two hundred
dollar fine is applicable. Also, the yard in front of the house is a
mess.
The Vigilance Committee would like to see that some sort of
action be taken against the people responsible for this act, and that
preventive action be taken to prevent any further of such
“pranks.”
The Vigilance Committee is going to set up a Complaint Bulletin
Board in which any person having a complaint against someone, or
something, can come and let us know of their complaint, so that we
can take the proper actions, either through the proper channels, or
through channels we consider to be the most effective. And if you
don’t believe us, why was there a public telephone booth standing in
the front yard of Mood Building? Mainly to protest trash pickup in
the dorms. So, we are able, if you’re not willing, to do it our way.
Sincerely,
The Vigilance Committee
Southwestern University
Sincerely,
Joe Taylor
For More Letters Please See Page 5
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
The Megaphone (Georgetown, Tex.), Vol. 67, No. 6, Ed. 1 Monday, October 15, 1973, newspaper, October 15, 1973; Georgetown, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634880/m1/3/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Southwestern University.