University of Virginia Library

Dear Sir:

We would like to complement
Mr. Giltinan for his recent comments
deprecating the strike and his
astute perception in recognizing the
fact that both liberals and reactionaries
share in the antiintellectualism
that seemingly pervades the
Grounds. However, not wishing for
Mr. Giltinan to remain oblivious to
his own naive hypocrisy, we must
call the attention of the crusading
journalist to his own
anti-intellectualism, as demonstrated
by his atrocious reporting of
events at the Young Republican
table on activities night.

Unable to address himself to the
subject with fairness and cogency
of thought, Mr. Giltinan resorted to
fairy-tale rhetoric by creating an
ogre which he dubbed "Croaky."

"Croaky," (we'll use this term
for sake of simplicity) reportedly
said that the Geneva convention
established a "free and independent
and sovereign state of South Vietnam."
This was not what was said
at all.

What "Croaky" did say, however,
was that the Geneva convention
established a line of military
demarcation which was to be abolished
following elections in 1956.
The elections were not held and the
fault for this is still debatable; but
all this is history and the mistakes
have been made, as regrettable as
they are. Further attempts to place
blame are fruitless and reassemble
something akin to Monday morning
quarter-backing.

Thus, in reality, there are two
Vietnams and we have, rightly or
wrongly, chosen to involve ourselves
in defending the integrity of
the South. There we are and there
we must stay until Vietnamization
is completed or risk political chaos
there by precipitate withdrawal. Nixon's
policy is the only reasonable
course of action. This, we feel, is a
considerably more accurate account
of the dialogue at the Y.R. table
than Mr. Giltinan's simplistic report
so characteristic of anti-intellectual
thought.

Furthermore, it was charged
that the Young Republicans were
"intimidating first-yearmen" during
activities night. This contention is
wholly false and unworthy of any
journalist. In response to Mr. Giltinan's
smear, we, the undersigned
demand an immediate and public
apology from the C.D

Benjamin F. Shaw III

William M. Shaw II

William H. Hurd

It is not the policy of this
newspaper to endorse or oppose the
views expressed in columns appearing
on these pages. They are those
of the writers themselves.

Ed.