Letters: Aug. 16, 1963

• Share

The Queen Bee

Sir: Our policy in Asia for years has been to lose the country but keep its leader. Your [Aug. 9] cover story may convince the foggy minds in Foggy Bottom that the only sensible course is to lose Mme. Ngo Dinh Nhu and try to keep South Viet Nam.

JACK WAMSLEY Lieutenant Commander. U.S.N. Brooklyn

Sir: That was a very objective and perceptive report on the Nhu-est proof that we are living in a woman's world. Realizing that we must fully understand our hostile friends in order to survive, TIME has once again distinguished itself through its expert delving into the character and motivations of this Viet-eran intriguer and power behind the power.

ROBERT MONIZ

Fall River, Mass.

Sir: After reading your article on Mme. Ngo Dinh Nhu, I find it hard to believe her statement that the sacraments are her "moral vitamins." Perhaps I am misjudging the lady, but anyone who has the apparent lack of respect for another person's religious convictions that she has, could use a bit of spiritual doctoring.

As a Catholic, I find her disregard for the sincerity of another's actions (the self-immolation of Quang Due) and her patronization of the late Holy Father John XXIII very hard to take.

It seems to me that a little Christian charity is in order here, war or no war.

S. P. MANNING Oceanside. N.Y.

Sir: It is true that Buddhism knows no sense of guilt [July 26] as in the Christian doctrine of original sin, but the doctrine of karma, with its stress on individual responsibility not only for deeds but also for thoughts, in a word, for attitudes and their results, whether for good or evil, would hardly allow one to make such a statement as the above. In short, Buddhism would have us transform the world by first transforming ourselves. This is accomplished, according to Buddhist dogmatics by practicing six perfections: charity, morality, zeal in spiritual progress, patience, concentration leading to control of mind, and insight.

ARTHUR E. LINK New York City The Treaty Debate Sir: The signing of this "nonaggression" pact with the U.S.S.R. reminds me of one signed in the '20s—the Kellogg-Briand Pact. It did not deter the Japanese from building a fleet—and we sold them the scrap iron for it!

ESTHER CARLSTROM Mankato, Minn.

Sir: The only reason Khrushchev is agreeable is that he finds himself in an untenable position regarding Red China. There he is, with a big, ugly neighbor on one side and a flock of satellite countries he can never be quite sure of on the other. So everybody's thinking what a humanitarian he is, when all the while he's only feathering his own nest.

NORMAN L. MILLER Ojus, Fla.

Sir: And now to ensure against a surprise attack, let us consider an exchange of important hostages.

Let us send Russia the Kennedy clan and have Russia send us the Khrushchevs.

SAMUEL S. SHERWIN Los Angeles

Sir: In 1556, Ivan IV (the Terrible) sent a certain Ambassador Ossip Nepea to the court of Elizabeth I for trade and diplomatic negotiations.

This first-known Russian mission to English-speaking people was in its first year when Elizabeth's chief negotiator issued the following directive to all officials dealing with the "Rus":