GOOD AND BAD READING

3) The brief and excellent letter by Jane Orient, M.D. in reply to the claims by the Intl. Physicians f. Prevention of Nuclear War, published in the Wall St. J. (12/10/85) is available from her for a SASE at 1601 N. Tucson Blvd/#9, Tucson, AZ 85716.

4) Andrei Sakharov's relatives in Boston have now confirmed that earlier this year Sakharov went on a hunger strike for more than six, months and lost 40 lbs despite force-feeding by Soviet "medical" personnel who held his nose and rammed food down his throat when he gasped for air. Newsweek (12/16) has the effrontery to compare the case of the ailing, Nobel-Prize winning physicist to that of S. African terrorist Nelson Mandela. Is Sakharov a convicted criminal? Has he organized armed attacks and sabotage on the lifelines of his country? Has he refused to renounce violence? Has he been offered freedom if he does? Did he get a trial as fair as Mandela's, or for that matter, any trial at all?

5) It is gratifying to see Accuracy in Academia (join for $15/year, 1275 K St. NW/#1150, Wash., DC 20005) provoking hysterical howls by the campus stormtroopers who have time and again trampled academic freedom underfoot. AIA has no powers other than to challenge the brainwashers to public debate, an intolerable threat to those who need to hide what they teach in their classes. It is less pleasant to see others taken in by the leftist propaganda. An article on the deteriorating (and rebuttal-proof) editorial page of the Wall St. J. (12/12) misrepresents AIA's aims, and more particularly the case of Arizona S.U.'s Prof. M. Reader. He is not, as the author implies, targeted for being a Marxist or voicing Marxist opinions. What is held against him is deception (he does not teach what he claims in the college catalog) and inaccuracy such as teaching falsehoods about the health hazards of nuclear power. His list of required reading dictates writings by Caldicott, Sternglass, Johnson, Ehrlich, and the like, with its demonstrable falsehoods; it conceals even the existence of literature refuting them.