| OCR Text |
Show s CBW conference open in Union i s r "v.-.-tv-'" v:' ' t i - ...... -. X .'. , - y '-'r i "'i pi1 , - philosophy dangers By Sylvia Kronstadt Staff Writer U.S. Senator Frank E. Moss said Thursday evening that "There is nothing immoral in experimenting with and having available chemical and biological agents as long as we have no agreement to the contrary with other nations." The panel discussion of "The people's right to know" marked the conclusion of the first day in a 2-day st u d e n t -sp o ns ored conference on chemical and biological warfare. (CBW) Senator Moss discussed the tendency of the military to over-classify information pertaining to CBW. "They make a serious mistake in not permitting the public to know how much research is going on, where it is going on, and for what purpose," the Senator said. Author Seymour Hersh charged the Salt Lake newspapers with the I responsibility to improve coverage of such issues. "Information on incidents such as the Dugway sheep-kill should not be on back pages and section BB.s when in every other paper in the country it . is first page news," he said. Mr. Hersh asserts that much of the military secrecy is aimed, not at the Russians or the Chinese, but at the American people. "It's one big public relations campaign,"he said. Professor of Law William J. Lockhart enumerated the legal difficulties which obstruct the people's right to know. Legal restraints such as Espionage Laws, classification, and the provisions of the Industrial Security Manual involve risks to military personnel who have broad interpretive powers, but whose neck rests on Dr. J. B. Neilands from Berkely discussed use of CBW in Vietnam. Sandra Caruthers, assist, professor of history, discussed historical attitudes toward CBW. their decision for disclosure or non-disclosure. "I believe, however, that if we ask the right questions with a measure of sophistication and knowledge that we will find we have access to large amounts of information," he contended. "Asking the right questions is not enough," leftist author Michael Klare countered. "You've got to ask them with a great deal of skepticism." Mr. Klare decried the "mistification" of information coming out of the Pentagon. The so-called "defoliants" actually constitute anti-food warfare, he said. "It is genocide, just like in Biafra." In addition, the Pentagon claims to be using no chemical agents in Vietnam that are not used in this country. "But the gas DM is for use only when deaths are not unacceptable, and has never been used in this country, " he said In the opening address of the Chemical and Biological Warfare conference, Associate Professor of Philosophy Fred Hagen suggested the moral implications of the use and development of chemical and biological agents. "It is as men in a community that we must come to grips with moral issues," he said, " (Continued on Page 15) CBW confab opens maker. "And it is not the policy maker," he contended. "Decisions in appropriation of funds, made by a representative Congress, determine the existence of chemical and biological research," he said. "And the fact that only 150 students are here to protest such research would seem to indicate that their estimation of public opinion is valid." Governor Rampton emphasized that "The Army is not a great, faceless, sinister group devoted to the destruction of the human race. They are genuinely concerned with the survival of this country." As far as the shipment and storage of agents, the danger is not great, the Governor said. "My concern is with their testing," he remarked. The conference will continue fc, Friday from 10:30 a.m. until 6:30 p.m. (Continued from Page 1) not as experts or technicians." Dr. Ha gen asserted that we are deceiving ourselves if we think there is some happy moral solution to the problem. "This is a tragic moral dilemma," he said. In response to the argument that CBW is humane, Dr. Hagen retorted that death by starvation or disease is no more humane than death by a shotgun. In a panel discussion on the impact of CBW on Foreign Policy, Assistant Professor of History, Sandra Caruthers traced the historical response of Americans to CBW. Beginning with its large-scale use in World War I by the Germans and the resultant Geneva Protocol, Americans have traditionally been unwilling to be bound by international law,' Mrs. Caruthers said. Michael Klare, New York journalist,' continued with a discussion of the changing goals and priorities of foreign policy in relation to CBW. Nuclear weapons are not the ultimate offense against agricultural, Third World countries, he said; their optimum effectiveness is in industrialized, urbanized countries where populations and warmaking facilities are somewhat concentrated. "We are going to fight one Vietnam after another," he contended, "and the development of CBW munitions is to suppress Asians who are rising against U.S. economic exploitation of their countries." Speaking on the nature of CBW, Washington journalist Seymour Hersh remarked, "I'm delighted that CBW research is so gruesome-it makes more people sit up and take notice." Commenting on the government's misordering of priorities, Mr. Hersh noted that twice as much money is devoted to CBW development as to cancer research. He also discussed the use of conscientious objectors as human subjects in the testing of agents. Berkeley Professor of Biochemistry, Dr. J.B. Neilands spoke on the use of chemical agents by the U.S. in Vietnam. Two categories are presently employed, herbicides and anti-personnel weapons. "We have no way of knowing the ultimate effects on the biosphere of spraying chemical agents," he said. But the massive use of defoliants can lead to permanent, irreversible destruction of the land. Anti-personnel tear gases, pumped into bunkers and tunnels, have killed many civilians. "And it is the weak, the aged and the young that are most severely affected," he said. Mortality rates are 10 among adults and 90 among children. Dr. Neilands urged active lobbying for ratification of the Geneva Protocol by this country land a push for the abolition of CBW research. "Science should be life-oriented," he said. In a panel discussion on CBW and public information, Dr. H. Peter Metzger, Colorado biochemist contended that there is no public information on CBW except in the instance of a slip-up by the military. He denounced the Army's tacit claim to infallibility. "They say they have information to prove that serious accidents are impossible, but this information : secret," he said. Dr. Metzger has been a participant in several similar panel discussions, and the military has always declined to appear. National policy on CBW has changed drastically, but the policy is secret, according to Dr. Michael McLintock, Colorado physicist. "The people in a properly functioning democracy make the decisions on questions of policy. Drs. McLintock and Metzger spearheaded the movement in Denver to have large quantities of nerve gas removed from the Rocky Mountain Arsenal. Massive amounts of the lethal agent had been stored above ground, near an airport and directly over a fault line, at a time when earthquakes in the area were becoming increasingly common. The professors, in conjunction with their Committee on Environmental Information, drafted a document decrying presence of the gas 10 miles from Denver. In 6 days it was placed in railroad cars and transported to the Tooele Army Depot, 30 miles from Salt Lake City. Also participating m the discussion was Governor Calvin Rampton, who agreed that the military should not be the policy |
