EDITORIAL

We can all be grateful to Miss Christine Keeler, in some ways at least. Her dalliance with John Profumo, British Secretary of State for War, with Soviet naval attache Evgeny Ivanov, with assorted West Indian bongo players, and, it is alleged, with a number of American military men, has put the whole "security question" back into proper perspective.

For years now, security risks and homosexuals have been considered as practically synonymous. Unnumbered persons have suffered humiliating improprieties at the hands of U. S. military, State Department, CIA, FBI and other governmental agencies, all in the name of security. Under the same guise, others have been discharged from positions they had been filling with ability and honor.

Now, thanks to Miss Keeler, as in a whiff of perfume, the validity of all such inquiries has gone pouf! Her amorous conquests have irrefutably demonstrated what many have long known: that a homosexual is no more a security risk than is a heterosexual and that intelligent determination of the question does not hinge on such factors.

Were it to be argued otherwise, the conclusion is inescapable that the great preponderance of violators are and always have been heterosexual, from the days when Delilah subverted Samson with her shears. Unscrupulous men and women have long recognized that sex is a powerful weapon for undoing some persons, but the claim that it has an all-purpose effectiveness or that homosexuals are particularly susceptible is of too childlike simplicity to be very convincing to a thinking individual.

one

4