Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date: 
June 21, 2005
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
February 14, 1966
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0.pdf16.97 MB
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX February 22, 1966 rary journalism, but has always been, and probably still. is, a hawk in the Vietnamese debate. He tells us that "the Nation's armed services have almost exhausted their trained and ready military units, with all available forces spread. dangerously thin in Vietnam and elsewhere. * * * The commitment of more than 2(10,000 men to Vietnam, supported by strong air and naval forces, and the :maintenance of two divisions in Korea, more Chan five in l urope, and of smaller units else- rrhere, including the Dominican Republic, save reduced the forces in the United States to a training establishment." This report poses for the President the enormously diflicult question of how much longer he can overrule the Joint Chiefs of ;'.i,aff on a limited mobilization of Reserve forces. It also poses the question of whether ecretary kiosk realizes what he is saying when he tells us we have some 40 unilateral military commitments and that we must be prepared to fulfill them all. How can the, American people have confidence in an ad- ministration which expands its commitments, to the extent that Secretary Rusk expands them in the face of the condition of the military foreest' Mr. Baldwin'.-, article raises the question, too, whether Secretary Rusk realizes what lie Is saying when he keeps telling us that the credibility of all our alliances all over the world is at stake in South Vietnam. Can he really believe that our value as an ally in Ilurope rises when we have to draw more anti. more trained men out of our Armed Forces In. Europe and replace them with untrained mnen'? Mr. Rusk has entangled himself in Lite error of failing to realize that it is not what the United States is willing to do but what in fact it is willing and able to do which determines the credibility of any one of its alliances. PEECH N . HALE BGGGS iii, LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1Vlorada?l, February 14, 1966 Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker: U' S. Policy in the Vietnam war appears to be definitely settled for the time being- The Tirnes-Picayune of New Orleans declares. It is one of building up military and cce- rnondc strength in South Vietnam and hoLigh it may take years, to exterminate or banish the Vietcong- The newspaper states. And it adds: President Johnson has now indicated the definitive shape of the policy by saying that lie had the overwhelming backing of the country of Congress for the course the ;l,dniinistra tit iii is pursuing. ')'he editorial declared: Why we are in Vietnam, it seems to us, is becoming better understood. The short rea- son: To stop aggression. But it is not merely to :atop the attempted take-over of the Viet- natnese. It is even more to raise a barrier to the almost limitless plans of the Peiping Reds to spread their wars of liberation as fast as they can find opportunities * * *. A long war in Vietnam carries with it some hazards. But the hazards of failing to meet the chal- lenge now are probably much more grave. Isere is a thought-provoking article on an issue of national concern and I am making it available for the REcono, where others can study it in depth: [From New Orleans (La.) Times-Picayune, Feb. 14, 1966] U.S. VIET POLICY SEr.SIS SETT: :D U.S. policy in the Vietnam war appears to be definitely settled for the time ;icing. It is one of building up miiitary and economic strength in South Vietnam and, liough it may take years, to exterminate cur banish the Vietcong. President Johnson has now rods. ated the definitive shape of the policy by sr_?,ing that he had the overwhelmin; backin?; of the country and of Congress for the course the administration is pursuing. He avers that there is little or no difference bet'xeen that policy and what main witnesses ., said before the Senate Foreign Relations Commit- tee. "No one wants to escalate the war no ;nc wants to surrender and pull out," he said. Ac we read it at the moment th:: outlook is this: A long gruelling war with radually rising pressure on the Communist; but also restrictions on escalation that mi;.lit result in a bigger war; intensified efforts to elimi- nate the guerrillas combined with economic improvement projects to lift the spirit of the Vietnamese in the villages and strengthen their will to thrust out the Vietcong infil- trators. The economic-morale problem won't be solved. in a, month or a year but it has to be a part of a winning war (and ; tar war) strategy. Experts believe that th.+ job can be clone if it is pursued with the c 'termina- tion that should mark all aspects of the war effort. This country will pursue its drive for nego- tiations to end the hostilities. Nothing promising has yet developed. Un, it it does, there is no alternative to gcttini; on with the war business. The "quit Vietnam" element in ,no United ht,.i ces hoc; been having its say. From here out it probably will be looked on with in- creasing disapproval whirrever it is shown to interfere with the deadly se:ions war effort. Why we are in Vietnam, it sears to us, is becoming better understood. 't'he short reason: To stop aggression. But it is not merely to stop the attempted t; umcover of the Vietnamese. It is even more to raise a barrier to the almost limitless plains of the Peiping R,,ds to spread their wars of libera- tion as fast as they can find opportunities. There is nothing secret about thee; Chinese sponsored national liberation front:. as stand- ing policy with the Mao regime and its satel- lites. Any success with i; in Viet: am would probably open up a bag of troubles in areas outreaching southeast Asia. A long war in Vietnam carries wi;,ti it some hazards. But the hazards of faili !r, to meet the challenge now are probably much more grave. CHANGE OF RESIDEN('; Senator;;, Representatives, and Delegates who have changed their residences will please give information 'thereof to the Covernment Printing Oflice, that their addres:;Cs may be correctly given in the RECORD. LAWS RELATIVE TO THE PRINTING OF DOCUMENTS Either House may order the 'printing of a document not already provided for by law. but only when the same shall be accompa- nied by an estimate from the Public Printer as to the probable cost thereof. Any execu- tive department, bureau, board or independ- ent office of the Government submitting :re- ports or documents in response to inquiries from Congress shall submit therewith an estimate of the probable cost of printing the usual number. Nothing in this section re- lating to estimates shall apply to reports or documents not exceeding 50 pages (U.S. Code, title 44, sec. 140, p. 1938). Resolutions for printing extra copies, when presented to either House, shall be referred immediately to the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representa- tives or the Committee on Rules and Admin- istration of the Senate, who, in makiiiig their report, shall give the probable cost of the proposed printing upon the estimate of the Public Printer, and no extra copies shall be printed before such committee has reported (U.S. Code, title 44, sec. 133, p. 1937) . GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS FOR SALE Additional copies of Government publica- tions are offered for sale to the public by the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402, at cost thereof as determined by the Public Printer plus 50 percent: Provided, That a dis- count of not to exceed 25 percent may be al- lowed to authorized bookdealers and quantity purchasers, but such printing shall not inter- fere with the prompt execution of work for the Government. The Superintendent of Documents shall prescribe the terms and conditions under which he may authorise the resale of Government publications by hookdealers, and he may designate any Gov- ernment officer his agent for the sale of Gov- ernment publications under such regulations as shall be agreed upon by the Superintend- ent of Documents and the head of the re- spective department or establishment of the Government (U.S. Code, title 44, sec. 72a. Supp. 2). RECORD OFFICE AT THE CAPITOL An office for the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD with Mr. Raymond F. Noyes in charge, is lo- cated in room H--112, House w:,ng, where or- ders will be :received for subscriptions to the RECORD at $1.50 per month or for single copies at 1 cent for eight pages (minimum charge of 3 cents). Also, orders from Mem- bers of Congress to purchase reprints f:ron-, the RacoRD should be processed through bile office. CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTORY The Public Printer, under the direction o? the Joint Committee on Printing, may prior, for sale, at a price sufficient to reimburse the expenses of such printing, the current Cori. gressional Directory. No sale shall be made on credit (U.S. Code, title 44, sec. 150, p. 1930). PRINTING OF CONGRESSIONAL RECORD EXTRACTS It ::hall be lawful for the Public Print,,-,* to print and deliver upon the order of any Senator, Representative, or Delegate, extract; from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, the person ordering the same paying the cost thereof (U.S. Code, title 44, sec. 185, p. 1942). Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE addressed a letter to the President of the District Board of Commissioners, in which he transmitted a draft of a bill which had been prepared by the Board of Optometry in cooperation with the Dis- trict of Columbia Department of Occupa- tions and Professions, the Optometric Society of the District of Columbia, and the American Optometric Association. It was designed to improve the District law as it pertains to the practice of optom- etry. The bill I have proposed contains all of the essential provisions of the Board's draft. As pointed out in Dr. Ephraim's letter, there is nothing in it that is not now contained in the laws of one or more of the States. The purpose of the revision is to bring the standards of practice in the city of Washington up to a level which exists in most of our States and will provide adequate protec- tion for the visual needs of persons seek- ing vision care within the District of Co- lumbia. As the Nation's Capital, we have visi- tors from all over the world and from every part of our country. They are en- titled to the same high standards for the practice of optometry which prevail in their home communities. Mr. Speaker, that is the purpose of the bill which I have introduced. I hope that it will re- ceive prompt and favorable action by the House District Committee and the THOSE WHO COUNT (Mr. HULL asked and was given per- mission to address the House for 1 min- ute and to revise and extend his remarks and include an editorial.) Mr. HULL. Mr. Speaker- America has the courage, the will, and the resources to defend the frontlines of freedom against the tide of Communist ag- gression. These words appeared recently in an editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer, which properly believes that America's purpose and commitment in Vietnam were made a matter of formal public record in the historic Hawaii meeting. Meanwhile, the -newspaper states: With Vice President HUMPHREY accom- panying the South Vietnamese leaders back to Saigon on the first leg of an extensive diplomatic mission to rally the forces of free- dom in Asia, the implementation of policies agreed upon at Honolulu is underway. Even as the war goes on, the Inquirer believes : There will be an acceleration of coopera- tive programs by American and South Viet- namese officials to improve the economy of South Vietnam, raise the living standards, fight hunger and disease and build the foundations of a democratic, self-governing society. The Inquirer is convinced that: The United States, in alliance with South Vietnam, holds the trump cards-in mili- tary power, in economic resources, and in the moral issue of self-determination versus Communist enslavement. This is an impressive, forthright sum- mation of the situation and I would like to make it available to others by having it printed in the RECORD. THE DECLARATION OF HONOLULU America's purpose in Vietnam, and Amer- ica's commitment to the South Vietnamese Government and people, have been made a matter of formal public record in the historic conference at Honolulu. With the return of President Johnson and his advisers to Washington, and with Vice President HUMPHREY accompanying the South Vietnamese leaders back to Saigon on the first leg of an extensive diplomatic mis- sion to rally the forces of freedom in Asia, the implementation of policies agreed upon at Honolulu is underway. What, precisely, are these policies pro- claimed jointly by the United States and South Vietnam? Essentially, they are a mutual resolve to frustrate Communist attempts to conquer the territory and people of South Vietnam by armed aggression and terrorism. The Red assaults will be counterd by de- fensive military action, of whatever intensity is required and for as long as necessary. Tireless efforts to achieve a negotiated peace will continue. Meanwhile, even as the war goes on, there will be an acceleration of cooperative pro- grams by American and South Vietnamese officials to improve the economy of South Vietnam, raise the living standards, fight hunger and disease, and build the founda- tions of a democratic, self-governing society. How, it is being asked in some quarters, are these noble goals of freedom and peace and democracy-so solemnly proclaimed in the Declaration of Honolulu-to be achieved when the Communist North Vietnamese re- fuse to negotiate and when the South Viet- namese vow never to recognize the Red Vietcong? There is no clear answer because, in our judgment, it is the wrong question. The wailing voices of woe, who call constantly for an American surrender in Vietnam, manage always and very conventiently to overlook the problems confronting the Communists. The United States, in alliance with South Vietnam, holds the trump cards-in military power, in economic resources, and in the moral issue of self-determination versus Communist enslavement. We believe that He Chi Minh and his com- rades in Hanoi are the ones who ought to be worrying the most about escalation of the war-and we suspect they are. America has the courage, the will, and the resources to defend the front lines of free- dom against the tide of Communist aggres- sion. Let this be the message Vice President HUMPHREY conveys. ALLOWANCE OF TAX DEDUCTIONS FOR MOVING EXPENSES (Mr. RONCALIO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. RONCALIO. Mr. Speaker, to- day it is my pleasure to introduce a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to avoid tax discrimination against the construction worker. These builders of America have been truly the forgotten and neglected people of our generation. Too often their needs have been given a back seat to the less meritorious demands of more en- trenched groups. Specifically, the inequity which I hope to correct is in the allowance of deduc- tions for moving expenses for workers of the trades and crafts of the construction industry. The Internal Revenue Code provides a general rule that: There shall be allowed as a deduction moving expenses * * * in connection with the commencement of work by the taxpay- er as an employee at a new principal place of work. (Internal Revenue Code 217.) This is a good principle, Mr. Speaker, and it has general application for almost everyone except those who need it most-the construction worker. The code goes on, in its conditions for allowance of the deduction, to provide time limitations and other requirements which virtually eliminate the construc- tion worker. In short, the effect is that the worse a construction worker needs this deduction, and the more he really deserves it-the less his actual chances are of obtaining it-Internal Revenue Code, section 217 (c) (2). This, Mr. Speaker, is the inequity my bill is designed to correct and it is my sincere hope that my colleagues will see its merit and offer their active support for this amendment. FOOD FOR FREEDOM (Mr. TODD asked and was given per- mission to address the House for 1 min- ute and to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. TODD. Mr. Speaker, President Johnson said in his food-for-freedom message: A balance between agricultural produc- tivity and population is necessary to prevent the shadow of hunger from becoming a nightmare of famine. This last week, at the gracious invita- tion of Chairman COOLEY of the House Committee on Agriculture, I was privi- leged to hear 10 distinguished experts submit their predictions and then offer their recommendations as to how this "nightmare of famine" might be avoided. Their recommendations fell into two broad categories, as I understood them: First. Make every effort to reduce rates of population growth. Second. Make every effort to increase agricultural productivity in these same lands faced with the blight of famine closing in over them. Every witness emphasized that there was no apparent means of providing adequate food for those who have joined the banquet of life while the population explosion becomes more violent. The last witness, Prof. Theodore Schultz, of the University of Chicago, urged that adequate American agricultural re- sources be devoted to providing food for those now starving; that we follow the recommendations of the President in assisting our friends to modernize their agriculture; and that we allocate a por- tion of the funds received from the sale of food for freedom to family planning and birth control activities. I offered this last idea to the House in a speech made following the President's message. Since then, I have explored it more fully, and considered it in the light of the remarks of these outstanding ex- perts which have appeared before the distinguished Committee on Agriculture. I should like to offer it in more detail Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February 21, 1966 today, so that it may be further dis- cussed and improved. On February 14, the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. COOLEY] introduced the food--for'-freedom bill, H.R. 127135. Section 103(b) of title I includes a pro- vi.;ion that the President may determine that foreign currencies may be received as payment for food for freedom in order to implement certain purposes defined by subsections (a), (b), (c), and (e) of section 304. I suggest that section 103 (ii) he extended to include a new sub- section t i i of section 304. I suggest that to section 304 be added a new suosection (i), which might read as follows : E'er financing programs emphasizing ma- Cereal, child health and nutrition, and family planning services, and research activities re- lai;ed to the problems of population growth, for which purpose not less than fifteen per centum of the currencies received pursuant to title I shall be available, through and un- der the procedures established by the P resi- dent upon request of the country with which the agreernent is made: Provided, That the t're:adent is authorized to carry out the fore- going provisions of this subsection through any agency of the United States, or any i.n- te' r,ational agency and/or organization of which the United States is a member, and which he determines is qualified to a.dnainis- Lee such activities. This would mean that food for freedom would be used twice: one, to help fill empty stomachs now; and twice, to avoid empty stomachs in the future. This is the basic merit of the idea. Now let us explore the idea in some- what more detail. It suggests providing a total family service-to the mother, to her children, and to the entire family group. it is directed to the health, well- being, and happiness of all of them. And if the program were implemented as a unit-directed to the mother, father, and the children, it would achieve its greatest effectiveness at the least cost. Dr. W. H. Sebrell, Jr., director of the School of Nutrition Sciences at Coluni- bia University, testified before the coin- mittee: i'roteirl calorie malnutrition is actur.lly one of the largest causes of the death of children. It is estimated that 70 per- cent of the children in developing areas suf- fer from malnutrition and upward of 3 million children die annually from malnutri- Lion, largely of this type. This fact is hid- den because these deaths often are recorded being from diarrhea, parasites, and in- fectious diseases. If these children were well nourished, they would not die of the inter- current diseases. In those millions it does not kill, nelnu.trition permanently impairs their growth and probably causes irreversi- ble meulul and emotional damage. 'l'ate mother's ignorance is of the greatest irn- purta.nce to the nutrition of the small child 1i that she does not recognize that the child is suiferiug irons malnutrition. My provision would look to this child health and nutrition problem. It wo'ald look to the health of the mother. And it would provide her, if she wished, in- formation on family planning and birth control, so that she and her husband nri,ht space and number their family in the manner in which they feel they could best support it. Therefore, this provision would assist the parents, and offer them personal help. It would assist the children, now be- ing., and those unborn, to better realize their potentials, and it would move to eliminate the social and political in- stability which accompanies hunger and frustration. What of the other part of the prob- lem-providing more food for the total increases in population which will occur, even if family planning programs are given a great push. In hi, message, President Johnson said: Many of the developing countries urgently need to give a higher priority to improving and modernizing their own production and distribution of food. Section 103 of title I of the bill intro- duced by Chairman COOLEY says "take into account efforts of countries to help themselves toward a greater degree of s1-1f-reliance, especially in providing enough food to meet the needs of their peope, and the resources required to at- tain that objective." The bill ;s intended to help increase the agriculture pro- ductivity of nations as rapidly as pos- sible-which is the other side of the coin. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I believe the addition of the section I have suggested would round out this important legisla- tion, s id make it a total attack on hunger, deprivation, and the terror of famine. Today, unlimited population growth is on a collision course with limited food supply. Only total attack will ave t disaster. OUR FRIENDS, THE 1'EDS (Mr. WELTNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. WELTNER. Mr. Speaker, my friend Opie L. Shelton, executive vice president and general manager of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, has long since established hirnseif as a man of unusual clarity and vision. One of his many services to Atlanta and the State of Georgia is his continuing attempt to effect a realistic attitude toward the Fed- eral Government. I laud his most re- cent effort, an article in the February is sue of Atlanta magazine. It is a force- ful presentation, and I include it at this point in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: [From the Atlanta Magazine, February 1966] One FRIEND:, THE FED'; (By Opie L. Shelton) The reason Atlanta has becooie partners with the Federal Government in so many projects is that Georgia's State government has failed to enter the world of reality where her cities are concerned. The old county ilni system, one of the greatest calamities any State ever experi- enced, was the prime villain. I. placed the absolute control of State government in the bands of people who were openly antagonistic to the cities. Atlanta was their favorite whipping boy. Today Atlanta receives less financial as- sistance from the state than any of the largest 25 cities of the Nation. l(ven though the county unit has been abol;shed (cour- tesy of the Federal Government) many of the people who run the State still think in county unit fashion. They still don't under- stand the problem, nor do many of them seem to want to understand. Georgia has moved from a rural to an urban society, but so far as the State govern- ment's reaction to urban needs, are con- cerned one might think we were still living in a cotton-dominated economy. The State highway department is a good example. If it had not been for the Federal Government we wouldn't have even the piti- fully few major thoroughfares we have today. That department's philosophy has been so politically-oriented that the cities have been systematically shunted aside when the high- way tax dollar has been divided. State government that isn't responsive to the needs of its cities is soon going to find itself * * * useless * * * America will double its population by the year 2000, we are told, and better than 90 percent of that growth is going to be in urban areas. The Federal Government appears to un- derstand these simple facts of life. And that is why Atlanta and every other growing city is forced to beat a path to Washington. A city that is treated as an unwanted child must, of necessity, seek a foster parent. Most of the people who yell loudest about States' rights and cry havoc about big Fed- eral Government are those who have done the least to exercise the responsibilities that go along with States' rights. They are phonies and frauds to the core. If State governments arc to survive they had better take inventory and begin to ex- ercise better judgment in their treatment of their cities. SUBCOMMITTEE ON REGULATORY AGENCIES OF THE SELECT COM- MITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS Mr. DINGEI-L. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommit- tee on Regulatory Agencies of the Select Committee on Small Business have per- mission to sit this afternoon during gen- eral debate; and I make the same re- quest for Wednesday and Thursday of this week. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. There was no objection. WATCH THE TROJAN HORSE (Mr. MONAGAN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Speaker, Sena- tor KENNEDY and others would have us welcome the Vietcong into the process of settling the fighting in Vietnam by in- viting them to be a part of any future government there. History indicates that this course would be full of danger. In this connection, it is appropriate to quote the words of the distinguished historian, Samuel Eliot Morison, in his recently published "Oxford History of the American. People." Writing about the Iron Curtain and the diplomatic mistakes which the Allies made at the close of the war, he says: The final mistake was the assumption that a joint regime, Communist and non-?Cori- munist, would work in defeated or liberated countries, like the "popular front" govern- ments before the war. Later, he says: The' event proved that no popular front with Communists could have any other re- sult but a Communist Party takeover. It is clear that we must proceed care- fully in this respect. This does not mean Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE Kabriel said Belton shouted out, "It's your duty to get up to the captain," crawled over to the reluctant radioman, grabbed the apparatus and moved up under fire to his captain. Spriggs has used him as his radioman ever since. "Belton in his conduct and bearing has been above average as a soldier and a valu- able asset," Sprigg said. "He has worked in very well socially and he has got along with the men. "I am personally satisfied that he now honestly believes his actions in the past have not been consistent with being a soldier or a man. "I personally wrote to the commanding general recommending that he be promoted and his sentence remitted. Belton has seen men fight and die for his country, and he has felt the honor that comes when you do fight." Spriggs tried to promote Belton 2 months ago, but the Army wanted to wait longer. Spriggs was told he must be absolutely sure Belton had changed his ways. "I told Belton he deserved to be pro- moted," Spriggs said. I knew he was happy. SHRDLU (Mr. HOSMER asked and was given permission to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include ex- traneous matter.) Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Speaker, many Federal Government employees availed themselves of the retirement benefits which were theirs provided they retired by the end of December 1965. Perhaps it is the loss of well-trained oldtimers in the printing business which is causing the Government Printing Office diffi- culties in preparing the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Whatever the problem, I call attention to the garbled form in which my exten- sion of remarks appeared in the RECORD on February 7, 1966, page A545, entitled "Nuclear Nonproliferation Resolution," and on February 8, 1966, page A613, en- titled "Special Report on Vietnam." I ask unanimous consent that these two statements be reprinted correctly at this point in the RECORD and the perma- nent bound RECORD be corrected accord- ingly: From: Representative CRAIG HOSMER, chair- man, Committee on Nuclear Affairs. To: House GOP Conference. Subject: Senate Resolution 179 urging nego- tiation of a nonproliferation treaty. Tomorrow the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy will take testimony from Secretary of State Dean Rusk on Senate Resolution 179 and companion bills in both Houses which urge the negotiation of a treaty banning the spread of nuclear weapons. Negotiations toward this end currently are going on in Geneva at the 17-Nation Disarmament Conference. Present members of the nuclear club in order of seniority are the United States, United Kingdom, U.S.S.R., France, and Red China. Sidewalk estimators claim 10 to 20 more countries could achieve nuclear weap- ons if they want to spend the money to do, so. The most frequently mentioned candidates for membership are India, Israel, and the United Arab Republic. The Russians also talk much about their dread of West Ger- many getting the bomb even though it does not appear to be doing anything about it. Senate Resolution 179 undoubtedly will pass, It is doubtful the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy can find any persuasive wit- nesses favoring the spread of A-bombs and H-bombs. Politically being proproliferation is about the same as being pro-sin and anti- motherhood. Therefore passing the resolu- tion will be something of a pious platitude. It could achieve significance, however, if it is amended as follows: 1. To recommend that the nonprolifera- tion agreement be accomplished by amend- ment of the existing limited test ban treaty; and 2. To recommend that the limited test ban treaty be further amended at the same time to permit the peaceful use of nuclear explosives. Present terms of the limited test ban treaty make these uses practically impossible. The United States has a real need to dig a second Panama Canal and using nuclear excavating techniques will make the second canal eco- nomically feasible. We will have other proj- ects requiring these techniques, so will many other countries even including the U.S.S.R. For mankind's benefit it is time the peace- ful nuclear explosives' locker be unlocked. This is a way to do it. SPECIAL REPORT ON VIETNAM (By Congressman CRAIG HOSMER) "Vietniks" demand we get out of Vietnam. Mothers wonder why their sons are sent there. The President wants to negotiate. Military leaders want a victory. Most Ameri- cans believe we should see it through. There are many questionp about the war. What is the country like? Half the size, but similar in shape, population, and coast- line to California. It's rugged-mostly thick tropical forests, dense mangrove swamps, and concealing rice paddies. Vietnam is more a collection of small villages and hamlets than a strong nation to which the people give allegiance as we do to our country. The people are very poor. Until recently their only contacts with their Government were visits from the tax collector with no benefits in return. Along with Laos, Cambodia, and North Vietnam, South Vietnam was created from French Indochina after France's 1953 defeat in Dienbienphu. Who are the Vietcong? The Vietcong are strong Communist forces seeking to seize South Vietnam with the same war of libera- tion strategy used successfully in Cuba. Fol- lowing 1953, the North Vietnamese Commu- nist dictatorship of He Chi Minh saw the south as ripe for takeover by this means. The war now is in its 12th year. Red China, just to the north, encourages the aggression by supplying great amounts of munitions. How do the VC fight war of liberation? Strictly according to Communist doctrine. Cadres of VC political organizers and disci- plined military units infiltrated South Viet- nam. Glittering Red promises of a better life recruited thousands of South Vietnamese into VC. ranks. Where promises failed, threats were used. Systematic terrorism be- gan. Village chiefs, school teachers and offi- cials were murdered wholesale.' Kill-and-hide tactics-so effective in Vietnam's concealing terrain-were used by VC military units to capture much of the country. Final victory was to be capped by consolidating guerrilla bands back into regular military regiments for the last battles. Why haven't the VC won? For two rea- sons: First, millions of South Vietnamese would rather be dead than Red. They've fought back desperately and valiantly. Sec- ond, the United States has helped them fight. To begin with, by supplies and military ad- visers and now directly with over 160,000 men and more coming every day. Early this summer the tide of battle began to change. Now it's the VC who suffer setbacks. Why Is the United States fighting? For at least three strong reasons: (1) Born in free- dom, our country cares for the freedom of others. (2) Should South Vietnam fall, so will Laos and Cambodia-then Thailand, Malaysia, Burma, and Indonesia. Ultimately all of Asia-the Philippines, Formosa, Korea, Japan, and New Guinea-could pass behind the Bambo Curtain. We fought World War II to keep the Far East from domination by a single, determined aggressor who would force our first line of defense back to the Pacific coast. We fight in Vietnam for the same reason. (3) Castro got away with his war of liberation.. If we don't defeat this one; the Communists surely will start more of them all over Latin America, Africa and elsewhere in the world. U.S. troubles will be endless. What we are doing in Vietnam is morally right, militarily sound and geopolitically correct. How do U.S. forces fight? At sea Navy Task Force 77's carrier aircraft share with the U.S. Air Force an around-the-clock harassment of North Vietnam, bombing and strafing anything that moves on roads, rails, or trails. In South Vietnam they blitz sus- pected Vietcong concentrations. They are on immediate radio call to aid friendly units engaged on the ground. The Navy also hunts and sinks Vietcong shipping in South Vietnam's inland waterways and along the coastline. Its guns fire at enemy units ashore. A U.S. naval officer assists the captain of each Vietnamese Navy ship. On land the Vietcong enemy wears no uni- form and assumes many disguises. He may be anywhere-a laborer or farmer by day, a guerrilla at. night. There are no front lines. One is seldom out of range of the fighting anywhere in South Vietnam. The U.S. Army and marines fight independently and in co- operation with Vietnamese forces to search out and destroy the enemy. Often the Viet- cong cannot be identified until he fires at you. How is U.S, morale In Vietnam? It's tops-ashore, afloat, and in the air. A fight- ing day may last 16 to 20 hours-our men are glad to take it. They know their job and its importance. They want to win and are determined to do so. I talked with many wounded in field hospitals. They want to recover quickly and get back to their fighting units. They feel the demonstrators at home stab them in the back as they face the enemy and are as hostile to them as the Vietcong. Do planners in Washington try too much to run the war? Most probably. The volume of instructions to generals and admirals on the spot is tremendous. They know as much about fighting this kind of war without let- ting it get out of hand 'as Washington does. They know the circumstances at hand much better. It would seem wiser to give them more authority while still reserving top policy decisions to the Pentagon. What would happen if we pulled out of Vietnam? Our resolve and action is the key- stone of free world resistance to Communist aggression all over the world. Pull out that keystone and everything collapses. Red China and the U.S.S.R. get a green light to take over most of the world. Why not declare war, bomb Hanoi, block- ade the north, etc.? Wisdom of these actions must be kept under constant review. For the present we do a good job destroying sup- plies from Red China and reinforcements from North Vietnam. Also, supplies from the U.S.S.R. and other bloc countries are coming in less quantity than might be ex- pected. Should we escalate in North Viet- nam, it would give Ho Chi Minh cause to call on his allies for more effective help. Thus, these are two sides to the coin when con- templating these possible actions. We want the best one up. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February 2 1, 1966 Should we use atomic weapons? In ray judgment this amount of force is not needed against targets in North Vietnam and the Ideation of friendly forces and people in Louth Vietnam is too close for their safe use. slow about using nonlethal gases? These agents, such as tear gas and nausea gas, could be uued very effectively. Example: clean out enemy caves and tunnels with non- lethal gas Instead of lethal explosives. A let of killing could be avoided and the work of our forces made easier. The gas here sug- gusted for use does not kill and does not icave lasting aftereffects. It is unlike World War I's deadly gases which created so much Ii rrrnr. tan we !lght cold war along with the hot? faaeed we do. Realizing this is the key to understanding why military victory over the Vietcong is only part of the job in Vietnam. To win final. victory and get out we must create a, strong nation there--stable and able to t;,ke care of itself militarily and in other ways. This means convincing the peo- ple that Communist promises are hollow- that the better life comes from their own free government and alliance with the United S cites. I: low do we fight. cold war? In addition to lightin every one of our servicemen does something to make the people's lives better. As they liberate a village they bring in food grad medical supplies; they help rebuild schools, roads and other public services. This is clone through and in cooperation with Vietnamese Government officials. It t+-aches the latter how government should serve the people. It demonstrates to the hviple tl;at real benefits--riot just hollow promises---foitow allegiance to their own government. It also demonstrates to the Vietcong they have chosen the wrong side- ivany are defecting from the Communist Salo. WW V,, also have in Vietnam many hundreds of d?ciicated U.S. civilians in the U.S. Inlor- tro-tion Service and AID mission. They risk their live; daily to carry the war for men's minds to the rice roots-right inside enemy strongholds. They also help build up the country's economy to make it self-sustain- ing. They often fly through heavy barrages of antiaircraft fire to drop millions of lc:i.ilets urging surrender o1 the Vietcong and rallying the people to their government. An irnoortanc part of their ammunition is re- 110 supplies for the people bought by con- tiibutiont; Iron Americans. W, When wilt we win in Vietnam? No one f.-in predwt when or how the military war will end. Right now it looks like the Vietcong .fort will intensify for a while, then it could liter our; niter some months-hut terror tactics will continue much longer. Final victory will take a long time. We must vin the cold war too. That will. be when Viet- eafn not only is peaceful, but when a strong lin.l;ion is welded together-able to care for lf,ael' against the enemy and to provide a decent lice for its people. What ci.n we at home do to help the cause? (I ) Use this document and other data to convince doubters of the importance of j'-tnerica'r: stake in Vietnam. (2) If you know a ;;erviceman there. write him your appreciation for his bravery and sacrifice- :;aty the rime thing to his family here at borne. 1 i) 111 addition to your regular do- fia.uion to Lnited Crusade, consider a con- tribution earmarked for "Vietnamese relief" h) ail rrriraniratlon such an CARE or Catho- lic laelief. #JIOUNT VERNON (Mr. SAYLOR asked and was given permissi:,n to extend tis remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include ex- tiail eons matter.) Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, with the celebration of George Washington's birthday, I must call the attention of the Congress to a series of recent editorials emphasizing the imminent danger to the view from Mount Vernon if Congress does not act during this session. These excellent editorials testify to the efforts of my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland, HERVEY MACI1EN, to prod the administration and the Congress into fulfilling the commitment niade in the early 1960's with the passat" of Public Law 87-362, to save the view horn Mount Vernon. This law was introduced by Senator CLINTON ANDERSON lil the Sen- ate and by the gentleman from Colorado, Chairman WAYNE ASPINALL, and myself in the House. `Kith the passage of that law--without a dissenting vote--the Accokc,,k Founda- tion under the presidency of our beloved colleague, the gentlewoman rom Ohio, FRANCES BOLTON, along with the Alice Fer>,uson Foundation, agreed to donate to the Federal Goverfunent, without cost, about half the land needed to protect the view. l3eyond that, over 130 private landown- ers have, without cost, donated scenic easements to the Department, of the In- terior to further this effort to save the view from Mount Vernon. The State of Maryland has Passed pio- neering tax reform legislation recogniz- Lig the public purpose of these donations, and the Prince Georges County has passed the first local scenic space laws in the land, giving tax credits to the donors. This is the greatest joining together of private, foundation, county, State, and Federal efforts to preserve our heritage for the people of this Nation. Here is the one shining example of a project where everyone has done his part-except the Federal Government. Unless the Federal Government acts now-at this session of Colgress-this great pilot project will dismally fail. Other States, counties, organizations, and Lidividuals throughout the Nation, who have watched the development of this unique project, may well be discouraged in their efforts. ]Fortunately, my colleague, the gentle- man from Maryland, HERVE?Y MACHEN, who took office in January 1965. and who represents the area in Marlland oppo- site Mount Vernon, has placed before us a, bill to get the Federal Government moving again. This bill provides for the hlcreases in land prices due to the Gov- es'nment procrastination in purchasing the remaining acreage needed. We have been constantly reminding the Congress and the executive that fur- ther delays and procrastination will be the death knell of this project to which so many have devoted so much. Con- gressmal'1 MACHEN deserves our full sup- port in this campaign to complete this task so well begun.. 'T'o lose all that has been accomplished would be a real tragedy. They loss would he not only of the millions of dollars worth of lands and rights in lands being patriotically donated without cost, but also the loss of the pilot project in which Federal funds are outweighed by foun- dation and private donations, and the protection of natural beauty of a large area is accomplished without increased expense, dislocation of families, and at- tendant problems. Congressman MACHEN has thought- fully said: If we can show the country how we can carry out an experiment in cooperative and coordinated scenic protection such as this program at Piscataway Park opposite Mount Vernon, we are setting the stage for a great movement, across the country. 11 the Congress does not act on Con- gressman MACHEN's bill this session, we will have failed. We cannot wait loner for the Department of the Interior to make up its mind whether or not to sup- port the President's year-old program to make the Potomac a "model river of scenic and recreation values for the country." Let us move quickly to do our part, as indicated in these recent editorials: [From the Washington (D.C.) Evening Star, Dec. 15, 1965 [ TIIREAT AT PISCATAWAY Back in 1961 Congress leaped at a rare opportunity to preserve forever, at moderate Federal cost, more than 1,100 acres of choice shoreline property along the Potomac near Maryland's Piscataway Creek-directly across the river from historic Mount Vernon. fn brief, this remarkable deal provided that the Federal Government need buy only about half the newly authorized Piscataway Park. The remainder, it was understood, would be acquired entirely by private dona- tion. And the 1961 law also authorized the Park Service to seek scenic easements--also free-restricting obtrusive development in a vast area of an additional 2,596 acres con- tiguous to the park. Well, the private part of the bargain has progressed. with phenomenal success. Thus far, private foundations have actually do- nated or committed themselves to donate some 499 acres for the park. Scenic case- m.euts have been contributed by more than 1.20 landowners, involving about 900 acres of land. These generous donations are con- ditioned, however, as might be expected, on the firm understanding that the Government meet its obligation. And the sad fact is that the time when these donations may begin to revert from Federal control is rapidly approaching. For the Government has not held up its end. Thus far, only 97 acres have been bought-largely because the figure author- ized for expenditure by Congress in the 1961 act has proved to be grossly inadequate. Be- fore further funds will be appropriated, i,he authorization needs to be increased some $2.5 million. Representative Ilmnmy MAC, 11 EN is leading the sensible legislative fight for the increase, and seems to have rmet a :done Wall. The latest frustration surprisingly came from the conservation-minded Interior De- partment itself, which the other day recom- mended to Congress that the Machen bill be "deferred"' pending the outcome of "a broad study" of all of Interior's land-acquisit,on programs. The presumption is tlu:it the study will wind up early next year. But there is no assurance of that, and, even if there were, any loss of time at this stage of the Piscata- way project constitutes a threat. 11; is a needless threat. Instead of his wishy- washy approach, Secretary Udall should be boating the drums for the Machen bill. With assurance that the Federal Government in- tends to carry out its agreement, there is every reason to believe that other donations of land, and many more donations of ease- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February 21, 1966 ing war threatened this Nation, the Coast Guard found it necessary to expand as rapidly as possible, and thus the Coast Guard Reserve came into being. With the outbreak of war in Europe in September 1939, Coast Guard ships,, planes, and stations were ordered to car- ry out extensive patrols to insure that merchant ships in our waters did not vio- late the neutrality proclaimed by Presi- dent Roosevelt. The next summer the Coast Guard began its port security oper- ations under the revised Espionage Act of 1917 and the newly enacted Dangerous Cargo Act. On November 1, 1941, the Coast Guard was ordered to operate as part of the Navy. The next month Pearl Harbor was bombed, and we were in the war. As in World War I, a big part of the Coast Guard's task was antisubmarine warfare. Coast Guard cruising cutters and convoy escorts helped with the battle of the At- lantic as they sank 11 U-boats. At the same time, more than 4,000 survivors of torpedoings and other enemy action were rescued from the Atlantic and Mediter- ranean by Coast Guardsmen. But there were losses too. The cutter Hamilton went down while in tow after being torpedoed off Iceland. The Aca- cia was sunk in the Caribbean; Escanaba, Leopold, Muskeget, and Natsek in the Atlantic; Serpens in the Pacific. Only two of the crew survived Escanaba-no one, on board Muskeget, Serpens, or Nat- sek. More than 90 percent of those who went down with these vessels were mem- bers of the newly established Reserve component of the Coast Guard. When she was desperately needed for convoy duty in the North Atlantic and was thrown into the breach to help stem the mounting losses to German subma- rines, the Escanaba was based at Grand Haven, Mich. The members of her crew and their families were a valued and highly respected part of that small com- munity. The tragic loss of the Escanaba with all but two of her crew was a deep and personal tragedy to that entire re- gion. Today, those men are still mourned in Grand Haven. Each year, memorial exercises are conducted there, in memory of the Escanaba and the gal- lant men who perished when that ves- sel went down. now retired under the Reserve Retire- ment Act. Through its intensive and well-or- ganized training program the Coast Guard Reserve is today a highly trained and efficient organization which, I am confident, that if called to the, defense of this Nation, would prove to be both ready and reliable and once again would serve with honor and distinction. I am extremely proud to be a member of this organization and honor it here on it$ 25th anniversary. BOYCOTTING SHIPS OF NATIONS SUPPLYING NORTH VIETNAM (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, the action taken on February 18, 1966, by the Maritime Trades Department of the AFL-CIO in proposing a boycott of ships of nations which permit any of its flag vessels to carry or supply goods to North Vietnam clearly reflects a deep concern about this intolerable situation. It is indeed tragic that the administra- tion has remained so indifferent that it has become necessary that individual efforts be undertaken to pressure our Government into halting this aid and comfort to our enemy. The recent administration action pro- hibiting vessels which engage in trade with the Hanoi regime from carrying U.S. Government financed cargoes, while certainly necessary, is clearly insufficient to bring about an end to free world traffic into the harbor of Haiphong. If the administration is not sufficiently concerned to stop this trade then it is clearly the responsibility of the Congress to do so. Legislation to close our ports to those helping to supply North Viet- nam is now pending before the Congress and should receive our early and favor- able consideration. Mr. Speaker, this is a simple issue, and I predict that if the administration con- tinues to abdicate its responsibility of leadership it will continue to be shoved into doing whatever necessary to stop this trade. Many more reservists manned landing craft that hit the invasion beaches with assault troops at Guadalcanal, Anzio, Tarawa, Attu, north Africa, Salerno, Ma- kin, Kwajalein, Eniwetok, Normandy, southern France, Luzon, Guam, Saipan, Iwo Jima, Okinawa-the Coast Guard Reserve made all those stops and a lot in between. At the conclusion of the war the Coast Guard had 802 vessels of its own and in addition was manning 351 Navy and 288 Army craft. Total personnel had reached a peak of approximately 174,000 and of that num- ber more than 150,000 were Coast Guard reservists who had entered the service for wartime duty. Many of that num- ber formed the nucleus for the establish- ment of our regular peacetime Reserve and are still serving with Reserve com- ponents. Others have completed their 20 or more years of satisfactory service and, having reached the age of 60, are POSTSCRIPT ON A SOLDIER (Mr. CALLAWAY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his re- marks and include extraneous matter.) Mr. CALLAWAY. Mr. Speaker, on October 6 of last year I rose on the floor of this House to express my regret and deep concern over a soldier from the 1st Cavalry Division-Airmobile,-who had gone on a self-imposed hunger strike protesting his assignment to Vietnam on the grounds that he disagreed with our policy there. On that day, Mr. Speaker, the world had heard a great deal about this soldier, Pvt. Winstel Belton, and Sp5c. Larry Kabriel of Summerfield, Kans., relatively little about the newly formed recalls that the company was under heavy 1st Air Cavalry. But how things have fire near Trung Lap and an urgent call came changed since October 6. Over the past over the radio for Captain Spriggs. months the world has learned about the The radioman shouted back: "The cap- 1st Cavalry. Its victories, its bravery, tain's not here. He's up front. There's and its sacrifices are well known and are heavy fire, I can't reach him." Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 now a matter of record; while the story of Private Belton has been out of the news entirely. But, Mr. Speaker, while he has been out of the news, a great change has come over this soldier. He has distinguished himself in the service of his country, he has won honor on the battlefield, and has earned a promotion to private, first class. Therefore, I think it only fitting that I insert in the RECORD the very gratifying postscript to the story of Winstel Belton, as reported last week in an article from the Atlanta Journal: SOLDIER WHO WENT ON STRIKE WINS HONOR ON BATTLEFIELD (By Peter Arnett) BEN CAT, SOUTH VIETNAM.-SiX months ago a university graduate named Winstel R. Belton staged a 7-day hunger strike at Fort Benning, Ga., to dramatize his distaste for being drafted and his refusal to fight in Vietnam. Thursday a big, proud smile flashed across Belton's face as he was promoted to private, first class, on a battlefield in South Vietnam. Looking just as proud was his company commander, Capt. R. E. Spriggs of Mexico, N.Y., a professional soldier who hated every- thing Belton's hunger strike had stood for. Spriggs was furious last November when he returned to his unit after recovering from a bullet wound to find Belton assigned there. Spriggs said Thursday he would take the 26-year-old Winslow, Ariz., soldier into com- bat with him anytime, anywhere. Belton arrived in Vietnam with a 12- month suspended jail sentence hanging over his head because of his hunger strike in mid-August. A court-martial had given him a bad conduct discharge, total forefeiture of pay and the jail sentence. But he was also given a chance. Belton, a Negro, was told that if he went to Vietnam and proved himself, he would not have to serve his jail sentence. If he failed, he would serve it. His old unit, the U.S. Army's 1st Cavalry Airmobile Division, wouldn't take him back. The 1st Infantry Division accepted him. Spriggs was the only man in A company of the 2d Battalion, 28th Regiment, who knew that the new radio-telephone operator was the hunger striker Belton. Lt. Gus Berzines, a weapons platoon-com- mander from Kalamazoo, _ Mich., recalled talking with Belton one day about various things and finally saying, "You mean you're that Belton?" More and more men in the unit began realizing that Belton had publicly protested what they themselves had accepted as a patriotic duty. None of them brought up the subject with him except the company commander, and few ever discussed it among themselves. "That was his business," said Sgt. Fred- erick Range of Dallas, Tex. "We treated him like any other soldier." Belton, holder of a bachelor of science de- gree in education, was initially cold and reserved with his buddies. But the heat of battles in December and January melted his attitude and forged ever-tightening bonds with Spriggs and the other men in the company. Initially given the job of laying wires be- tween the company headquarters and the platoons, he began carrying Spriggs' radio, Early in January, he proved he had what Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE that Vietcong, as individual South Viet- nainese, would not be listened to along with Buddhists, Catholics, Montag- nards, North Vietnamese exiles, and others. It would mean, however, that they would not be given an opportunity to move into sensitive government de- partments and take over by indirection as was done in Eastern Europe. It is also erucational to recall Presi- dent Kennedy's statement in Berlin, in 1963, when he said: I am not impressed by the opportunities open to popular fronts throughout the world. I do not believe that any democrat can suc- cessfully ride that tiger. Recent dispatches from Peiping and Hanoi have suggested growing doubts about the conduct of their military effort, the strain on the economy, and the re- sulting emergence of a peace element. Now is the time to emphasize firmness rather then vacillation. '1'bLEVISING OF HOUSE 1''IGOCEEDINGS (Mr. ICHORD asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his re- marks.) Mr. ICHORD. Mr. Speaker and Mem- bers of the House, the eyes of the Na- tion last week were focused on the South Vietnam hearings conducted by the Sen- ate Foreign Relations Committee. Most of the appraisals of the hearings that I have heard on this side of the Congress have been very unfavorable, but I submit to the Speaker-and I speak primarily to the House majority floor leader and the Speaker of the House--that there is one thing we should have learned from these hearings: Under no circumstances should we ever permit House proceedings to be televised. The televising of House proceedings, Mr. Speaker, is the most ef- fective way I know to convert serious de- liberative proceedings into a first-class comedy. RAE:[O FREE ASIA (Mr. ROONEY of Pennsylvania asked and was given. permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and ex- tend his remarks.) Mr. ROONEY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have this morning sent a let- ter to Mr. Crawford H. Greenewalt, chairman of the board of directors of Radio Free Europe, urging that his orga- nization investigate the feasibility of es- tablishing a Radio Free Asia in an effort to counteract the relentless barrage of hate propaganda now being dissemi- nated by the Communist Chinese throughout southeast Asia. My admiration and respect for Radio Free Europe is boundless. It has been, and continues to be, one of the most ef- fective private means of disseminating truth to the captive nations of Eastern Europe ever devised in modern society. It is my hope that a similar effort can and will be made in the strife-ridden areas of Asia. With your permission I should like to read the text of my letter to Mr. Greene- 1walt and urge my distinguished col- leagues to associate themselves with it if they share my belief that a Radio Free Asia can be an important ally in our struggle for the minds of Asia's peoples: DEAR Ma. GRSENEWALT: It is imperative that our Nation, through its private citizens as well as through its Government, do every- thing possible to offset the fantastic volume of vicious propaganda now being drummed into the minds of the Asian peoples i?y the Red Chinese. Since World War II, few organization::: have done a more effective job of presenting the truth to captive nations and their people than Radio Free :Europe. Most of the time the only access the peoples of Eastern Europe have to the truth. is through our own Gov- ernment's agency? the Voice of America and through Radio Free Europe. It becomes increasingly apparent, in these perilous times In Asia, that there is a grave and pressing need for an operation similar to Radio Free Europe in this part of the world. Communist propagandists are expending mil- lions of dollars and thousands of hours of air time in an unceasing barrage of hatred against America and the free world. We must counteract this relentless cam- paign through every effective channel avail- able to us as a free country. I therefore strongly urge that you and the members of the board of your organisation give serious consideration to the formation of a Radio Free Asia. Such action, I an). con- vinced, will assist the official agencies of our own Government and those of other free na- iions in. this world in their effort to was the minds of millions away from the seductive and totalitarian influence of Red China. The bulk of the world's population lives in this troubled and terror-stricken region. '['here is no doubt, whatever, that the Chinese Communist regime recognizes the pivot:ei role the commitment of these millions of human heigns will play in their quest for world domination. Our American Government and its people stand firmly against the encroachment of communism in southeast Asia. We have made our stand known through economic assistance and through the commitment of iron and arms to aid South Vietnam in its heroic fight against aggression from the North. We must sees to win the propaganda war is well. And in that war there is no greater weapon than truth. The American people should be given the opportunity to enlist in that struggle through voluntary, nonprofit, nongovernmental agency in addition to all the official effort new being made. Radio Free Asia can be- come a reality. I pray that you, the miembers of your board and the expert advisers you have working with you may be able to make It so. "LOVE-INS" (Mr. GROSS asked and was giver. per- mission to address the House for i min- ute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, according to U.S. News & World Report of Feb- ruary 28, 1968, the Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles County has ordered an inquiry into what one of the supervisors terms "love-ins," permitted under the welfare progam :in Los Angeles. At issue is a rule which permits aid to a family with dependent children, even though the elan. who lives in the house is neither married to the mother nor is the father of the children. Said Supervisor Frank G. Bonelli: We have had sit-ins and lie-ins, and now we have love-ins. This places a stigma and Indictment upon supervisors unless we actively challenge this phase of the welfare program. Taxpayers must not be forced to subsidize any welfare program that has the inherent danger of promoting illegitimacy, to say nothing about apparent outright Immorality. RESOLUTION TO BAR DISCRIMINA- TION AGAINST U.S. EMPLOYEES (Mr. SCHWEIKER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SCHWEIKER. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing a concurrent resolu- tion calling for an end to discrimination in the assignment of U.S. employees to overseas posts. The administration has been practic- ing religious discrimination in its as- signment of employees abroad, thereby preventing assignment of qualified Jew- ish employees to U.S. posts in Arab-bloc countries. The resolution which 1 am introduc- ing today expresses the sense of the Congress that the President should take such steps as may be necessary to as- sure that the assignment of U.S. em- ployees in the United States and at posts abroad shall be made without re- gard to race, religion, color, or national origin. By its demonstrated willingness to go along with the anti-Semitism practiced by these Arab.-bloc countries when, as- signing U.S. personnel abroad, the ad- ministration is guilty of following a double standard, properly outlawing discrimination by private employers at home, but improperly discriminating in assigning its own employees abroad. Mr. Speaker, I would welcome the sup- port of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for this important measure. A TRIBUTE TO THE U.S. COAST GUARD RESERVE ON ITS 125TH BIRTHDAY (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD.) Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, 25 years ago, on February 19, 1941, a new Reserve component of our Aimed Forces was born, and it is with great pleasure that I take this opportunity to pay trib- ute to this fine organization, the U.S. Coast Guard Reserve. From my personal experience and long association with the Coast Guard Re- serve, both as a commissioned officer and a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I can state with a great deal of conviction that its members, whatever their individual backgrounds may be. re- flect one thing in common-devotion, extreme pride, and an intense feeling of national responsibility. Prior to the outbreak of World War II, the Coast Guard had no organized re- serve, and its entire strength numbered less than 20,000 officers and men. With ever-increasing duties as the approach- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CI /DP67B00446R000400030005-0 3334 CONGRESSIONA ECORD - HOUSE February 21, 1966 G THE PEACE Vietnam is sapped and in need of help as The United states holds title to the WAN Europe was after 4 years. Moreover, if we minerals of the El Ranchito grant and (Mr. KING of Utah asked and was were to wash our hands of Vietnam after since this site is part of the grant it is given permission to extend his remarks having won victory on the battlefield or at not proposed to convey mineral rights of at this point in the RECORD and to in- the conference table, it might not be long the said parcel to the tribe. elude an article.) before war flared up again there just as it did Santa Ana Pueblo has a relatively Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the after the Geneva Conference supposedly set- small population of 366 and badly needs Deseret News of Salt Lake city puts it tled Nor is things in there 1954. any good reason the United a community center of its own with ade- quite plainly when it says: States should be expected to shoulder the gnat' sanitary facilities under present As we go about winning the war in Viet- burden alone. Even those who oppose what planning programs. This need would be Dam, let's make sure we lay the groundwork we are currently doing in Vietnam cannot served by the pueblo acquisition of this for winning the peace, too. reasonably object to making sure it does not otential tinderbox for site. It hails the President's pledge to help long persist as a p The fourth and last pueblo is that of world conflict. Zia which has an administrative site of achieve political and economic reforms As we go about winning the war in Viet- ,, South Vietnam. stating that "the na let's make sure we lav the groundworly rant, which was purchased by the SouthVVietnam a greater voice in their United States in the submarginal land government, the more incentive they will purchase project. There is a bit of legis- have to make the sacrifices necessary to FOR BETTER LIFE lative and administrative history involved win the war." (Mr. KING of Utah asked and was in the case of the Borrego grant. Speaking of the woes which the people given permission to extend his remarks tion transferred Jurierred to to ed of the the Department of grant the In- was there are suffering, the paper says: at this point in the RECORD and include terior from the Department of Agricul- Simple common sense dictates that every- an editorial.) ture by Executive Order No. '7792, dated thing possible be done to alleviate such suf- Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the fering, not only for humanitarian reasons Honolulu Declaration, the Salt Lake 18, 1938. 11 later January the act of A of AugustThen 13, some 1949 (63 Statyears but also to expedite the war effort. Tribune points out, stressed "a resolve to Stat. 604), all of the Borrego grant, excluding we all know that we are now facing win the war against the Vietcong through minerals and excepting this administra- conflict on two fronts, and because this both counterinsurgency tactics and civic tive site of 428 acres became trust land article sheds light on the subject I am reform programs. of the Zia Pueblo. Since the entire Bor- offering it to the RECORD, where others only way to defeat then- the ended that in sego grant was originally purchased by may want to read it. the Federal Government for $68,239.40, or [From the Salt Lake City (Utah) Deseret surggeency~is to attack defects the s ci helped, om- at an average per acre cost of $3, this News, Feb. 10, 1966] ic, ate the insurgency, while the military THE PEACE, Too tfv s tive sit e e $1, $1,284. the cost of the administra- Since an end WIN to the war ar in Vietnam seems struggle against the guerrillas con- There are no improvements on the ad- to be nowhere near in sight, President John- tinues." ministrative site. The Borrego grant is son's pledge to help achieve political and The paper believes that "from a long- used by the pueblo of Zia for livestock economic reforms in South Vietnam might rto improve 's ange standpVntnaU S bac ed ltureprogram and grazing purposes and the administrative livestock On the contrary, the more that is done to education is of paramount importance." site would likewise used for give the people of South Vietnam a greater As I read the editorial I thought : here grazing. The present t estimate fair ir mar- - voice in their government, the more incen- Is a summary of the task which lies ket value of this administrative site is tive they will have to make the sacrifices ahead, and in the belief that others might $2,568 and the site is not currently being necessary to win the war. used by the Government nor does it have One of the major problems in South Viet- find the article illuminating I request any plans for its future use. The interior nam has been the rapid turnover in the that it be made available in the REC- of the Borrego grant which includes an governments at Saigon. aWh le telecmore [FORD. rom the Salt Lake Tribune, Feb. 10, 19661 administrative site does not have a s sec- that have been promised are no automatic BETTER LIFE PLUS VICTORY? tional s hence no present nt d s s guarantee of stability, particularly in a coun- tion i s posossib ble. The United States holds with virtually no experience with demos- The greatest immediate achievement of title to the minerals in the remainder try racy, they at least represent a chance for the Honolulu talks of President Johnson improvement. with Prime Minister Nguyen Cao Ky and of the Borrego grant and is proposed sit. the minerals in the e administra- that Then there Is the drag on the war Is being exerted by the 1 million effort ref- first face-to-face confrontation of chiefs of to retain tive site. I pof the racticalw terms, the greatest longer Plans to develop the economy of Zia for wh cin South Vitnam and b the h America's presen e is at least parity sta n Pueblo would d expedited e the abyuih responsible: Simple commonsense dictates term direct benefit may be action to curb Icon of the administrative site by the that everything possible be done to alleviate ruinous Inflation which i sweeping the arndians. such suffering, not only for humanitarian close little the country. The pledged " communique further at con- to In summary, all of the lands relating reasons but also to expedite the war effort. to the four pueblos involved in this bill, Moreover, once the war is over, peace with crete steps" e in n this to direction. These might con- are in excess of the needs of the Depart- freedom will be insecure as long as people are inclu en from creating pressures U.S. military on the ment of the Interior and it is considered hungry, homeless, and jobless. of Vietnamese ilabor gor and commoditee that the pueblos involved can make effec- As a case in point, remember how tired, supply ieof tab monetary odit es x tive use of these lands for community disillusioned, and skeptical we all were after a and nte forof American military personnel. centers or for agricultural and grazing World War II, particularly the people of war-r purposes. Through this transfer the ravaged Europe? Remember how close an The "declaration of Honolulu" stressed a economically as well as spiritually sick West- resolve to win the war against the Vietcong Government will be relieved of further ern Europe came to succumbing to cominu- through both counterinsurgency tactics and Diem. civic reform programs. Experts have long responsibility no t n longer for needed and the he e the I build- v Trigs no longer What saved the day was, of course, the contended that the only way to defeat the will receive trust title and assume re- Marshall plan. It got the recipients on their Communist inurgency is to attack the social, as well as defects and hel w sponsi hich for lands, and buildings find won the Uis lailies and markets we might treat nth' insurgency, even whiles the milfa which can be used o their own eco- otherwise have lost. tary struggle against the guerrillas contin- The b billend w as ordered ordBerred t to badvantage. be read a third The situations in South Vietnam and in ues. It is surprising that it has taken so Th postwar Europe are not, of course, parallel. long to give real meaning to this part of the time, was read the third time and passed, Europe was already highly industrialized; program. and a motion to reconsider was laid on Vietnam is not. Europe had plenty of highly From a long-range standpoint a U.S.- the table. skilled workers and businessmen; Vietnam backed program to improve Vietnam's agri- A similar House bill (H.R. 12265) was does not. culture and education is of paramount im- laid on the table. But after a decade or more of war, South portance. Agriculture Secretary Freeman is Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA, RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 ?ebruary 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE the beneficial interest in certain feder- administration of Indian Affairs, the :1ecre- map. The total acreage of tribal land is ally owned lands heretofore set aside for tary of the Interior is authorized to declare, 245,801 arid there are 370 acres of allotted school or administrative purposes. by publication of a notice in the Federal land but most of this is nonagricultural The SPEAKIR pro tempor?e. Is there g"'~'gisterl that the title of the United States objection to th present consideration of to such lands and improvem :its shall there- grazing land. after be held in trust for the Indians of the Turning now to the Sandia Pueblo we the bill? Pueblos of Acoma, Sandia, Santa Ana, and have a day school site comprising 0.63 Mr. JOHNSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Zia as follows: acre, more or less, which was acquired Speaker, reserving the right to object, (1) Acomita day school s,.te comp,?iaing by the United States in 1930 at a cost of again I would like to interrogate one of three and five-tenths acres, more or less, to $126 through condemnation proceedings. tile chief handlers of this bill. I notice tl:re Indians of the Pueblo of [:coma; The tract was acquired as a site on which liiat this bill is a little different from (2) Sandia school site comprising aixty- to erect Government buildings for the the others which would give title to In- tlirce one-hundredths of an acre, more or l-'s, to the Indians of the Pueblo of Saudia; use and training of the Indians attend- Man lands in that the Secretary of the (3) Santa Aria school site comprisin; two ing the day school at the Sandia Pueblo. Interior would at some future time de- and eighty-one one-hundredths acres, more On July 1, 1960, the operation of an tide when, as, and if he wants to place or less, excluding mineral interests thwrei.n, Indian day school at this pueblo was the title in tru to these tribes. located within ',tie in Ranchit, grant, t., the discontinued and the Sandia children hi other worth;, other bills that we Indians of the Pueblo of Sant.:, Ana; ar:el now attend public school. have passed pl ccd the title in trust in (4) Administrative site in the $ .rrego The present estimated value of this the United States, or, as you said, give g''Lrit, carnprising four hundred and twenty. tract at Sandia Pueblo, including im- title in fee to #1' e indian. Here is a little e ?ere acres, more or less, excludi e mn orals 4,227 therein, to the Indians of the Pueblo o:' Zia. prOVemme estimated of $1 one s The different situation where we might be Sac. 2. The Indian Claims Commission is improvements consist of one school establishing a precedent, in that we are directed to determine in accordance wit', the building and teacher's quarters, purnp- leposing the power to vest title in trust provisions of section 2 of the Act of Au- house, storage building, warehouse, in the Secretary of the Interior. Have gust 13, 1946 (60 Stat. 1050), the extei,t to building for bathhouse, garage, dispcn- you noticed that in this bill? which the value of lands and improver, ents sary, plus sewer and water system. Mr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, will the placed in it trust status under the auth.xi?ity Under a revocable permit the Sandia gentleman yield? of this Act should or should not be sci. off Pueblo Indians use the buildings on this against any claim against the United S;,:ties es Mr. JOHNSON of Pennsylvania. I determined by the Commission. site as a meeting place for the tr?'.bal yield to the gen! lcman from Colorado. council and for other community gath- li/ir. A,SPTNALL. I have not noticed (fdr. MORRIS (at the request of Mr, erings as the need arises. A portion of any major difference. As far as this leg- At -Plivnrr) was granted permission to ax- the school site is used for a health clinic islation is concerned, the transfer is tend his remarks at this point in the and as a school for U.S. Public Health surely an administrative act, and inas- Recorh.) Indian sanitarian aids. No conveyance Much as we give to the Secretary this Mr. MORRIS. Mr. Speaker, a bi 1 to of land or buildings used for health pun- -authority to transfer these lands to the authorize the Secretary of the Interior to poses will be made to the tribe without Indians themselves, in trust, then the give to the Indians of the Pueblo;; of the approval of the U.S. Public Health 'ecrctary will do it as soon as he under- Acoma, Sandia., Santa Aria, and Zia the Service. Lands that the Indians are ready to go beneficial interest in certain federally The Sandia Pueblo has a small popu- ahead and take over the administration owned lands heretofore set aside for lation of 124 people and presently plans of this additional area. schools or administrative purposes. to develop a community center provid- Mr. JOHNSON of Pennsylvania. Then 'i?he purpose of H.R. 12265 is to author- ing facilities for library study and youth the gentleman feels that the Secretary ize the Secretary of the Interior to give in recreation by securing necessary funds of the Interior can repose a trust in lands trust to the pueblos of Acoma. Sandia, through the Community Facilities Act over and above the right of Congress? Santa Ana, and Zia in New Mexico the or other appropriations at an estimated Mr. ASPINAL]',_ No. As I understand beneficial interest in certain federally cost of $75,000. The area in question it, in. this resixet this is an action of owned lands and improvements when would be well adapted to serve the P1117- Congress which t:rlaces these lands in the they are no longer needed. The b ids pose of a Sandia Pueblo Community ?wnershin of the Indians in trust. The total 435 acres and were set aside for Center. trust--estate is still the same in this school or administrative use. The value instance as in the other. The presence of the lands and their irnprovemena.;c 'IS parcel The of third .s pueblo was Santa Ana and the of mineral rights may make a minor app,roximateIy 531,000. United States in acres 1920 w at a acquired cost of of $1 tEach one of the four pueblos has its ags. ;iiiference. It is a riuestion of procedure, through condemnation proceedindings, f I understand what my friend is talk- cwn distinctive needs for economic 'r.ct- iiig about. ferment which, through the acquisition The purpose of its acquisition was to Mr. JOHNSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. of these lands, will be rriet in part, at provide a site for the construction of a school Sneaker, I believe the gentleman is least, though present planning of the for Santa Ana Pueblo. right, and I withdraw my reservation, pueblos themselves. The first to be con_ Since July 1, 1960, when the Santa fool SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there sidered is the Acon a Pueblo. Ana Day School was discontinued, the objection to the r,resent consideration of The Acomita day school site comprl~;es Indian children have been attenctii .. '.he bill? a tract of 3.5 acres located within the public school. `l'lsi re was no obiection. Acoma Pueblo grant. It was acquired by The present estimated value of tt,is Mr. ASPTNAT,T,, Mr. Sneaker, T ask the Federal Government through core- land, with improvements is $13,747 unanimous consent that a similar Sell- clern.nation proceedings in the U.S. Di,;- the improvements consist, of a school Le bill, S. 1904, be considered in lieu of tried; Court for the District of New Mei?:ico and quarters building, storage bu.ildi i,T, House bill. in ]t 9210. at a, cost of $350 for the construe_ bath and storage building, a pumphouse, Mr. SPEAKET?., Ts there objection to tion of a school building.. The tract, a water and sewer system. the request of the gentleman from Colo- however, was never used for school pe!r- Under a revocable permit covering the ra?do? poses, and a revocable per:mi?. was given use of all buildings and facilities at the There being no objection, the Clerk to the pueblo of Acoma, which author- site issued on August 28, 1960, the pucl;`;o road the Senate bill, as follows: ized the pueblo to use the tract for a. i- Santa Ana plans to use the school site as ul tural purposes. The present value of a meeting place for the tribal council ;; 1904 c the Land is $560. and for community gatherings as the ric it enacted hu the Senate and House of As the development of agricultural re- need arises. A portion of the site is 'MeRriltatives ol the United States of i;,r,rri.ea in Congrr:,s assembled, That when sources and irrl:;able land is part of file being used by the U.S. Public Health c following identified lands (other than Acoma Pueblo present plans of econoreic Service as a location for an Indian clinic lie mineral interests specifically excluded in betterment the acquisition of this rote and no conveyance of land or clinic ,ho identification), which were set aside for will be beneficial to the pueblo--popula- buildings will be made to the tribe with- school or administrative aurposes, are no tion 1,674 in 1952. The loca:;ion of the out the approval of the U.S. Public longer needed by the United States for the tract is shown on the accompanying Health Service. No. 29-ii Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE taking 20 specialists to Vietnam to look at the Mekong Delta area, one of the great rice bowls of southeast Asia. Freeman is one of several high-level officials accompanying Vice President HuMPHaEY to southeast Asia. `The purpose of the Humphrey trip is believed mainly-physchological-"to continue the momentum" of the Honolulu talks. If communications between Washington and Saigon are improved and social and po- litical improvement are given real meaning and impetus, then the spectacular conference at Hawaii will prove useful. This is, after all, the first time that a South Vietnamese government has definitely promised to create a better life for its people. IMPORTANCE OF THE OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT (Mr. GRAY asked and was given per- mission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GRAY. Mr. Speaker, the im- portance of the office of the Vice Presi- dent has been increasing steadily over the past several years. At the present time, the United States does not own or maintain a permanent residence for the Vice President. Such a residence is badly needed. The Vice President is called upon to entertain diplomats, vari- ous officials from' this country and abroad very frequently. Accordingly, I have introduced today, a bill authorizing the General Services Administration to plan, design, and con- struct an official residence for the Vice President of I the United States on a 10-acre site at the U.S. Naval Observ- atory on Massachusetts Avenue NW. We propose a three-story brick and stone structure, three-car garage, grounds to be properly landscaped and fenced. The bill calls for a maximum of $750,000, including the furnishings. The Senate passed a bill last year pro- viding for an authorization of $1 million. Public hearings have been scheduled for 10 a.m., on Thursday, February 24 in the Full Public Works Committee Hear- ing Room 2167, the Rayburn Building. Congressman GEORGE FALLON, Full Committee Chairman on Public Works and I, invite all interested colleagues or their constituents to appear before the committee or submit a written state- ment concerning this important matter. We also welcome cosponsorship of the bill. CONGRATULATIONS TO THE GAM- BIA ON ITS INDEPENDENCE DAY ANNIVERSARY (Mr. MATSUNAGA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, The Gambia, which achieved independence on February 18, 1965, as a constitutional monarchy within the British Common- wealth, has just completed its first year of independence. My warmest congratulations are ex- tended to Prime Minister Dawda Kairaba Jawara and the people of this young but important member of the family of Afri- can independent nations. The estimated 325,000 population of The Gambia live on a stretch of land, from 7 to 20 miles wide, that extends from the west coast of Africa to a point 200 miles inland. The country's econ- omy is almost entirely agricultural, with peanuts normally comprising about 95 percent of the total value of annual ex- ports. This young African nation became a member of the Organization of African Unity in March 1965 and was admitted to the United Nations as that organiza- tion's 115th member in September of the same year. Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere wish, as The Gambia enters upon its second year of independence, that the friendly ties existing between the United States and this young African nation will be ex- panded and strengthened. LINCOLN, OF SPRINGFIELD (Mr. FINDLEY (at the request of Mr. HUTCHINSON) was granted permission to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include extraneous mat- ter.), Mr. FINDLEY. Mr. Speaker, on Feb- ruary 12, the 157th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, the Governor of Pennsylvania, the Honorable William W. Scranton, spoke at a dinner in Springfield, Ill., sponsored by the Abra- ham Lincoln Association. It was my privilege to hear this ex- cellent address. I was struck by the parallel drawn by the speaker between present-day national circumstances and those. that prevailed during the period when Lincoln was a citizen of Spring- field. In my view, the speech points the way of opportunity for the Republican Party, and for our country. Here is the text: I do not possess profound scholarly knowl- edge of the life of Abraham Lincoln, but, as apparently with you, the example of his life among all Americans has always held first place for me. In one critical moment of my own life, I found myself asking, "What would Lincoln have done?" And Lincoln's answer led me to the right decision. Lincoln's life is probably more familiar to the average person than that of any other American-more familiar even than those of Washington or Jefferson. We know of him as a young man in the small village of New Salem. The tales of the early life of Abe Lincoln,- the railsplitter, still inspire and entertain each succeeding generation of Americans. And we know him of course for his un- matched accomplishments in the Presidency from 1861 to 1865-the Saviour ofthe Union, the Great Emancipator, the first successful national leader and virtual founder of the Republican Party. But it is about neither of these Lincolns that I will talk tonight-neither the New Salem Lincoln, the struggling and humorous youth; nor the Civil War Lincoln, the leader who "belongs to the ages." Rather it is about the Lincoln who dwelt in this very city of Springfield from the time that he began a law practice in 1837 until he left for Washington in February of 1861- a period of almost 25 years. These were the prime years of Lincoln's own life. During this time he married, raised children, bought a home, entered politics as a Whig-formed the views and confirmed the character to which he later was to give such magnificent expression. They are the least well-known years of Lincoln's career. Nevertheless, they should have particular interest and significance for us today. It was in many ways a time very like our own. During most of this period, the Nation was governed by a Democratic combination bent on achieving consensus that offered some- thing to everybody-something to farmers, something to bankers, something to south- ern slaveowners, something to northern factory hands-and something, of course, to the politicians themselves. The minority party, the Whigs, were chiefly negative in outlook and captured the Presidency only when led by a military hero. An extremist group broke and for a time seemed about to take over the minority party. Discrimina- tion was debated as a great national issue. The country became involved in an interna- tional war which was severely criticized by many of the leading intellectuals of the day. And while all this was happening, un- precedented economic growth and expansion were taking place. All of these factors find echoes in our own time. At first glance, there does seem to be one major difference between the two periods. During the era that culminated in the Civil War, the great moral issue of slavery infected and colored and finally overwhelmed every other subject of political debate. Look where you will at the issues of the time- national expansion, monetary policy, States rights, the tariff, even construction of a transcontinental railroad. In the end each of them comes down to one question: What effect will it have on slavery? Slavery was indeed the irrepressible issue. Beside it, all other questions sank into at least momentary inconsequence. There is nothing quite like it today. And yet there is a moral issue that today con- fronts every one of us and pervades the en- time political and intellectual firmament. That is the question of peace or war. We can no longer define war simply as a more forceful extension of diplomacy. Either war is going to cease or the human race will. It is the issue that comes back to us, either in a whisper or a roar, from every discussion of politics or economics or culture or indeed existence itself. So even in this respect our own time is not so very different from those critical decades of the forties and, the fifties in which Abra- ham Lincoln passed most of his mature years. Consider some of the problems of political principle and national morality with which Lincoln dealt in those years. This is of interest for what they tell us of Lincoln, the man. Of interest, too, for what they tell us of ourselves, and of the problems that now confront us. There was first of all the issue of the Mexican War. President Polk and his administration de- fended the invasion of Mexican territory, on the ground of national interest-then known as manifest destiny. Our presence in Mexico, they claimed, was dictated by our national interest. To leave would be to imperil our strategic position in the Western Hemisphere. Most of the intellectuals of the day left little doubt as to what they thought of that argument. Henry David Thoreau, in his customary outspoken way, declared. "The people must cease to make war on Mexico, though it cost them their existence as a people." If. Thoreau had been living today, he probably would have burned his draft card. As it was, he simply refused to pay taxes. Lincoln did not support this position. As a Whig Member of Congress, he questioned Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE February 21, 1,G'6 the wisdom and even the constitutionality of the war. But once it had begun, he sup-, ported its vigorous prosecution. He did not, however, believe that the minority party in time of war should abdi-? cate its responsibility to criticize. Again and again, he questioned the as-. surnpt.ions on which the war was being car- ried on. He rejected the doctrine of na- tional interest, at least: in its simple form. He insisted that the Nation's aims be de- Fined in moral as well as in military terms. During his own Presidency, Lincoln said it was not so important that God be on our side, as that we be on God's side. This con.. viction found its roots in his observation of the confused maneuvering of the Polk ad-? ministration during the Mexican War. Second, there was the issue of extremism on Lincoln's own side of the political spec- trum. The Whig Party never really got off the ground as an instrument of government in the United States. Although it elected two Presidents, it never captured the imagina- tion of the American people and was unable to achieve a record off stable continuity in office. By the 1850's, it was evident that some.. thing new was needed. The people were crying out for change, and the Whigs were unable to offer attractive or exciting change. For it few years, it seemed that know-noth- ingism might provide the answer. The know-nothings were formed as a re- sponse to the growing tide of immigration from non-Anglo-Saxon countries to the United States. They had a very simple creed: If you are not like us in race and religion and national origin, we don't want you here. They fed on fear-the fear of those who had achieved some measure of security to- ward those who were still struggling upward from the bottom of the ladder. They of- (erect deceptively simple and brutal solu- tions, to difficult social and economic prob- lems. They were, as we would now say, extrem- lets. Know-nothingism was a particularly dif- ficult problem for Lincoln. He found many of his closest friends and political allies in the know-nothing movement. When he ran for the State legislature in 1854, he was offered the know-nothing endorsement. At first he hesitated to make his views known. tint he could not hesitate long. He was, after all, Lincoln. The know-nothing party, he said, was "wrong in principle." He wrote to his friend, Josh Speed: "I am not a know-nothing; that is certain, flow could I be? How can anyone who ab-? hors the oppression of Negroes be in favor of degrading classes of white people? * * * When it comes to this, I shall prefer emi-? grating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty-to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy." Lincoln dealt forthrightly with extremism. He said that it had no legitimate connection with true conservatism. He warned that conservatives who lent it a sympathetic ear would do ultimate damage to their cause. Lincoln was proven right. Within a few years, the lever of know-nothingism had passed. If it had not been stubbornly op-? posed by men like Lincoln, the birth of the new if publican Party might have been long; delayed or might never have taken place. Slavery would have dug itself ever more deeply into the national fabric. Conserva-. tism would have been discredited, and would have been unable to play its necessary role in the development of our country. The final great national problem with, which Lincoln had to deal during his Spring- field yearn was the formation of a new politi- cal combination to take the place of the Democrats as the governing party. The Democratic Party was wrecked by the issue of slavery. Constructed on the twin pillars of patronage and compromise, it failed to evade the moral issue. Slavery would have to go, or the Nation would be torn asunder. The Democrats were unable to accept either alternative, and therefore collapsed. The question remained: Who would take their place? During the long period of Democratic su- premacy, the minority party had Iwo great leaders: Daniel Webster, of Massachusetts, and Henry Clay, of Kentucky. Both had an overpowering itch r.e become President, but neither ever made it. Both made many valuable contributions to our na- tional development, but neither provided a satisfactory response to the fundamental moral issue of the time. These two great leaders held different views on haw the minority party should be con- verted into a stable governing combination. Webster believed that his party should ad- here to the business interest, and that it would eventually come to power a:. surely as day follows night. He is reputed to have said: "Let Congress take care of the rich, and the rich will take care of the poor." The United States, he reasoned was in- evitably becoming a business civilization, and the party of business was sure to be the gov- erning party within a very short time. Henry Clay did not share his colleague's certainty on this point. Clay believed in the art of political maneuver. "All. legislation, all government:, all so- ciety," he declared, "are founded upon the principle of mutual concession." In short: If you want to get along, go along. Lincoln, although he admired both of the old Whig leaders, particularly Cla v, in the end could agree with neither. To Webster's contention that the conserva- tive party should rest its cause on the busi- ness interest, Lincoln replied, "Republicans are for both the man and the dollar, but in case of conflict the man before the dollar." Clay's argument he found more compelling. Henry Clay had been Lincoln's parti ular hero since the time of his first entrance into poli- tics. Lincoln himself had spent hit: share of time in the political back rooms, and he knew that it man who is unwilling at the proper time to compromise is unable to govern. But Lincoln did not believe that compro- mise alone could be made the b::sis for a political party. In 1.859, Lincoln said, "If we shall adopt a platform that fails to recognize or express our purpose * * * we not only take nothing by our success, but we tacitly admit that we act upon no other principle than a desire to have 'the loaves and fishes.' " Lincoln knew that no successfu' political leader can afford to neglect "the loaves and fishes." In a democracy, they supply the in- dispensable motivation to command the loyalty of the party shock. troops on election day. At the same time he knew that a party that relies on, tangible rewards alone may win an election or two, but it will never win a generation. With Emerson, Lincoln saw that the con- servative party of his time "contained the best men." But with Emerson, too, he real- ized that the conservative party could never become the governing party so long as it was merely defensive, merely negative, untrans- formed by any overriding spirit of idealism. It was just this act of transformation which Lincoln achieved within the new Republican Party. For the first time since the days of the Founding Fathers, it was the conservative party that looked confidently toward the fu- ture. It was the conservative party that spoke up for the rights of man. It was the conservative party that offered land to the dispossessed, liberty to those who were in chains, and the prospect of economic ful- fillment to all. The result of course is history. A new political party came to power and. for the next 70 years remained the principal insti u- ment of government in the United States. It is entirely in the spirit of Lincoln that I conclude tonight with the suggestion that once again our country is in need of such an act of transformation. The party that Lincoln helped to create is. now as then, the only available substitute Jor the current majority party. I cannot, in all candor, tell you that an act of transformation has as yet taken photo within the Republican Party. But I believe that it will. It will because it must. The problems are too grave-the issues ton serious-the prospect too glorious- Jar merely partisan maneuvering in 1966. The minority will become the majority when it has seized the spirit of idealism that is latent within our people-when it has di- vested itself of any association with extrem- ism-when it has offered real solutions to the real problems of our country. I am a Republican-and I believe that is going to happen. But more than that I am an American and I believe that it has got to happen And if it does not, we will not have America. WHO WILL HE SACRIFICE? (Mr. GURNEY (at the request of Air. HUTCHINSON) was granted permission. to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include extraneous 1110,t- ter.) Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, the re cent administration announcement that $190.6 million would be cut from the aid to schools in federally impacted areas is a severe blow to education. The Presi- dent tells us in one breath that he will spread our high standards of education to the world by the new worldwide sear on poverty. Then with the next breath he says that he will cut a vitally ho - portant educational program here at home in half. There was concern expressed for cc4 ;-- cational excellence in the state of the Union message, and grand new pro-, rarnri promised. But actions speak louder than all the speeches and the ringing;- phrase::. I recall one phrase vividly-the Presi- dent asked of those of us who believe in fiscal responsibility "Who v! ill they sacrifice?" I think it, has become very clear who the President will sacrifice. He is askin?g us to sacrifice the schoolchildren who seek a good education to prepare them for a complex world. He is aski; g u^ to sacrifice education standards of the ma'T,v towns and counties of this Nation where Federal installations have brought in a great influx of workers and their faru- ilies. These people work, and often Eve, on tax-exernpt land, for which the local government receives none of the taxes; that other citizens must pay. The Federal Government has a clear and well-established responsibility here for they are the cause of both the in- crease in schoolchildren and the loss of tax sources. Two of the counties I represent in Florida are good examples of the pro- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3342 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February 21, 1966 ground-for automobile drivers and pas- sengers, as well as trucks and buses. Our colleague, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. MACKAY], a member of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, has gone into this problem very thoroughly and has proposed legis- lation to establish a National Traffic Safety Agency to provide national lead- ership to reduce traffic accident losses. I am introducing a similar bill. The National Traffic Safety Agency, which would be headed by an Adminis- trator comparable to the Federal Avia- tion Administrator, would do the fol- lowing : Establish a National Safety Research and Testing Center. Provide leadership to achieve a more uniform traffic environment, including more uniform rules of the road, more adequate standards of safety in the man- ufacture of new vehicles and inspection of vehicles in use, better definition of fitness to drive, and a more uniform physical driving environment. The proposed new agency should not seek to supplant existing public and pri- vate agencies, but it should provide ag- gressive leadership to achieve a concert of action. It is my hope that the legislation will be enacted promptly so we can begin a real effort to reduce wanton destruction The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gen- tleman from Alabama [Mr. SELDEN] is recognized for 1 hour. (Mr. SELDEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his re- marks and include extraneous matter.) Mr. SELDEN. Mn Speaker, the Na- tion in recent weeks has watched with great interest and concern the hearings conducted by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in regard to our policy in southeast Asia. Last week both Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Gen. Maxwell Taylor presented excellent arguments for a policy of firmness in dealing with the threat of communism in Vietnam. In view of the persistent carping of foreign policy soft liners, who would have this country retreat in the face of Communist aggression, it was most refreshing to hear the statements of experienced and knowledgeable spokesmen such as Sec- retary Rusk and General Taylor. With regard to the recent Senate Foreign Relations hearings, I read with interest the accounts of testimony given to the committee by Mr. George Kennan. Mr. Kennan seems to argue that the U.S. commitment to South Vietnam has as- sumed exaggerated proportions and that this country should therefore limit or curb our efforts there. Mr. Kennan, as we know, is credited as the creator of the original policy of con- tainment which this country followed in its dealings with Soviet communism in Europe during the period immediately following World War II. Now it would appear that Mr. Kennan has evolved a latter-day policy of containment regard- ing the U.S. commitment to defend southeast Asia from the threat of aggres- sive communism. But, unlike his first containment policy, the general thrust of his current advice is that in 1966 we should contain our own efforts in meet- ing Communist expansionism in south- east Asia. Needless to say, Mr. Kennan's remarks received wide attention in the press and on television. It is unfortunate that the American public has not been given as great exposure to the facts, circum- stances, and results of a meeting held in Havana last month-the so-called Tri- Continent Conference-which spelled out the future course of Communist aggres- sion in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The recommendations and policy statements coming out of this Havana Conference represents a veritable "Mein Kampf" of international Communist de- signs and aims throughout the world in the 1960's and 1970's. And although the Soviet Union was represented by a 40- member delegation, it is well to note that the chief result of the January Havana Conference was to implement and foster the Chinese Communist thesis for event- ual Communist seizure of power in coun- tries alined to the free world. Critics of present U.S. policy in South Vietnam, such as Mr. Kennan, make much of the ideological split between the Soviet Union and China. It is, in fact, currently fashionable in some U.S. for- eign policy circles to accuse those of us who speak of the threat of communism as being simplistic in our approach. We are told that we should differentiate be- tween the so-called various forms of communism-whether we refer to Soviet or Chinese or even North Vietnamese communism. Yet the unanimity which the delegates of the Havana Tri-Continent Conference demonstrated on the matter of waging Chinese-style wars of liberation through- out the world points up the futility-if not the real danger-of this polemic fragmentizing of communism in the world today. It may be true that communism is no longer monolithic as it was in the im- mediate post-World War II era. But the threat of Communist expansion-and the Communist design for subversion and domination of countries of the free world-is monolithic and universal in every Communist capital. Thus it was that the basic theme of the so-called Tri-Continent Conference in Havana-a theme repeated by Soviet and Chinese Communist spokesmen alike-was a strident call for war on all fronts against the free world. As the Soviet delegate to the Confer- ence, Sharif P. Rashidor, stated: We are participating in a major event in the history of the national-liberation strug- gle of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The anti-imperialist struggle, with its demands for the unshakable unity of its fighting forces, has brought the peoples of our continents to a realization of the urgent necessity for an even greater consolidation, and an even greater coordination, of our struggle against our common enemy-im- perialism and, first and foremost, U.S. imperialism. The Soviet delegation. earnestly appeals to all the national organizations and their movements represented at this Conference to unite in the struggle for this great goal. Let our Conference be a new stage on this road. Let it multiply and strengthen the unity of our ranks, and impart new force to the liberation struggle throughout the world. The resolutions approved by the Con- ference are in the same aggressive and militaristic vein. They call for an in- tensified campaign of subversion and po- litical warfare against democratic re- gimes of the free world. But the larger significance of the Tri- Continent Conference in Havana does not lie in the unified pronouncement of revolutionary aims among Communist nations. For only a fatuous self-delu- sion has ever persuaded the soft-line Kremlinologists of the free world that the Soviets and the Chinese alike seek Communist world domination, and by violent revolutionary means. They are as one, differing only on tactics, and timetable, and those who doubt this fact should be furnished the record of the Havana Conference as required reading. No, the truly alarming significance of the Havana Conference last month stems from the scope and nature of par- ticipation by nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America-many of which, while purporting to be "neutralist" as between Communist and the free world, in fact are providing political and other support to the revolutionary and subversive aims of Communist bloc nations. Indeed, all the speeches, resolutions, and actions of the delegates of the 82 nations represented at the Conference were geared to the propaganda needs and aims of agressive international commu- nism. In fact, the Tri-Continent Con- ference went much further than any similar meeting in recent years in spell- ing out the aggressive designs of world Communist leadership toward nations of the free world. As chairman of the House Subcommit- tee on Inter-American Affairs I am es- pecially concerned with the serious im- plications of the Conference as regards our vital national interests and commit- ments to the defense of the hemisphere. The Organization of American States expressed its alarm regarding the Ha- vana Conference in a resolution of con- demnation, approved February 2, 18-0, with Mexico and Chile abstaining. The OAS resolution reflects hemi- spheric concern regarding the possibil- ity of new attempts of Communist take- overs in a number of countries, including Venezuela, Guatemala, Colombia, and Uruguay. And the Tri-Continent Con- ference itself serves to reemphasize the appropriateness of House Resolution 560, which only last year expressed the sense of the House regarding the need for firm U.S. policy to meet the threat of Com- munist intervention in the Western Hemisphere. In the light of last month's meeting in Havana, that resolution is even more pertinent today than when it was passed by an overwhelming majority of the House in September 1965. So-called neutral, unalined countries, with delegates participating at the Ha- vana meeting, would do well to ponder the significance of this House resolu- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 +'ebruary 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE I'm sure is in the files you mention as being before the Supreme Court was a cartoon which appeared tit page 1. It showed a num- ber of civic officials and others holding up a :;beet. and the caption said that somebody was hiding something. The top of the head of a man snowed above the shEet and it cer- tainly looked to nie like the top of Dr. Sam's head. "At about this time the Cleveland police were, called into the case. They worked care- b:lily and energetically but apparently too ate and I don't recall that they turned up any really clinching evidence. "finally, the city attorney at Bay Village, ":lie son of an Ohio Supreme Court justice, agncd the charge himself and Dr. Sam was arrested and taken to jail in Cleveland. ,'olive there were unable to question him at toy great length because his attorney kept ?nyuesting to see him, hinting third degree. "fn the end the Jury found Dr. Sam guilty of second degree murder. "Certainly, the trial was a Roman holi- day." '1he book of clippings wort a reversal and freedom for Dr. Sam last year, but the re- ersal was itself reversed by the U.S. Court ,if Appeals in Ohio when it said: "Our jury ,ystem cannot survive if it is now proper to presume that jurors selected with the care i.aken in this case, are without intelligence, courage, and integrity necessary to their ,bedience to the law's command that they ignore the kind of publicity here involved." Four Supreme Court Judges believe that a constitutional question is involved--and this may intensify the press-bar conflict par- ticularly if it disturbs the status quo on contempt. 'I'ho landmark cases protecting both in- dividual and press. from punishment for contempt, have thus far concerned prejudic- ial publication as it, concerned judges only. The Pennekamp, Bridges, Los Angeles Times- Mrrror cases fir id others brought about the "clear and present danger" concept--that a constructive contempt, away from the imme- d.iate presence of the court, would not be punished unless it could be shown that a clear and present danger existed to the ad- ministration of justice. The theory is that udges would not be so endangered because, Forsooth, they are judges. Yet, judges hive been throwing news- papermen in jail for generations. Ralph Conley is a 53-year-old reporter for the Wheeling, W. Va., Intelligencer. He is a Ill-year veteran with that paper, and a 25- .,ear senior in newspaper work. He was as- zdgoed to cover the New Martinsville area. On Saturday, January 15 of this year he wrote a story listing five civil actions which ho.d been set for trial on Tuesday, January 13 in the Wetzel County Circuit Court by Judge Lloyd Arnold. After listing them he wrote this: Probably the most interesting case is that of Mrs. Fr;uiccs Ripley versus the city P laden City. "Mrs. Ripley, a resident of Paden City, and wife of Leo Ripley, fell into an open side- walk grating on January 22, 1965, and seeks recovery of damages for $24,000. In her petition, she claims permanent in- jury and that the fall resulted in a com- pound fracture of her left leg, and other injuries. "The city carries a $100,000 liability in- :;urance policy and the city council acknowl- ^dged fault and recommended in a letter to the insurance carrier that the claim be paid. However, no payment has been re- ceived and the suit followed. "Attorney Jack. Hawkins represents the plaintiff, and Hassig & Sndyer are attor- neys for the defendant." On Monday, January 17 Judge Arnold sent an. officer to ask Conley to come to his office. At. the conclusion of the interview and after Conley left, the judge prepared a rule of contempt directed to Conley. It was served on. Conley that morning. A courtroom hearing before Judge Arnold was scheduled at 2 p.m. the same day. Judge Arnold concluded the hearing by finding that publication of the news story obstructed and impeded the operation of his court and that accordingly Conley was In contempt. The judge sentenced him to 5 days in jail, fined him $10 and ordered the sheriff to place him in jail immediately. Attorneys for Conley appeared before Judge Arnold the next morning and orally moved that the judgment of contempt be set aside, that a new hearing be awarded, and that Conley be discharged from jail. Argu- ments on these motions were heard at 1 p.m. Tuesday. The attorneys submitted four grounds for the motion, including the first amendment, and the judge overruled the mo- lions. Thereon the attorneys for Conley moved for a stay of the proceedings in order that they might appeal the judge's dec':sion to the Supreme Court of Appeals. The judge granted a 60-day stay, setting bond in the amount of' $50. Conley was subsequently released after 24 hours in jail, and went back to work. The case is pending. The city council action was a matter of record. 'hen there was the 1964 case of Will l3ar- rison, a 50-year-old columnist for the New Me rican, :14,000 circulation, published at Santa Fe. He presumed to make an adverse coraparisorr of two drunk driving cases before a Santa Fe judge. In one case, a Mexican-American boy filled up on wine, had an. auto accident and killed -three persons. He was sentenced to the penitentiary for 1 to 5 years. In the other case, a former assi::tant district attorney wiped out a family of five while driving under the influence, but was given a $500 fine, the fine was suspended and the judge :announced that at the end of the year he would pronounce further sentence. Will Harrison cried "outrage" and was con- victed for contempt of court on the grounds that the lawyer defendant was :;till on proba- tion, thus the case was still before the court. Will Harrison died a couple of months ago, and he was, in my opinion, an unsung hero. Ho had been vindicated by the State Supreme Court October 4, 1965, on the grounds that no clear and present danger to the achnm- istration of justice had been shown. But when you study constructive con- te:mpt, think about this one: In December, 1965, in Montgomery, Ala., three Ku Klu Kinsmen were convicted of criminal con- spiracy changes in the death of a civil rights worker. She was Viola Liuzzo, a Detroit housewife. '1.'he judge held the jury in deliberation for 11 hours over the protest of the defense at- torney, and the defense attorney announced that an appeal would be filed and bond for three men was set at $10,000 cash. Whereupon the President of the United States said: "The whole Nation can take heart from. the fact that there are those in the South who believe in justice in racial matters and were determined not to stand for acts of violence." Many of us joined him in cheering that verdict in a great national example of ron- st:ructive contempt of court for commenting on a case still in the process of adjudication. Where was the voice of the bar when that transpired? And where was the self--restraint of the press? Both were lacking, and both must be sup- plied before we know whether we should be talking about fair trial and free press or fair trial versus free press. Wiggins said It in 1964: "Newspapers, judges, and lawyers alike ought to try to im- prove the reporting of criminal trials. What Is needed is more and better crime reporting, not less of it." Burch said it in 1955: "It is the newspa- per's duty to print the facts not to try them. That is the duty of the courts. We want every defendant to have the benefit of due process-the whole treatment, with all the trimmings. But we see too much of the un- due processes that help armies of dangerous malefactors to escape conviction, indictment, or even arrest." Vermont Royster said it in 1965: "Here the lesson experience, a thousand years of experi- ence, was that the judicial process mutt be open to inspection from its beginning to its end, to the purpose that all should lie under the public gaze so that if error could not he obviated it could at least not be hidden. One instrument for this was the open court with the accused and the accusers openly con- fronted. Another instrument was the open press, so that nothing could be hidden from the first accusation to final judgment. The lesson of the common law was that the two were not irreconcilable, they were mutually dependent." Today it is necessary to recognize that, the hunt for the uninformed juror is fruitless, and that our reliance on the integrity of our peers is not misplaced. That is the nub of the problem, and it will not be solved by speculation; rather by careful research. TRAFFIC SAFETY-ACTION NEEDED NOW (Mrs. BOLTON (at the request of Mr. HUTCHINSON) was granted permission to extend her remarks at this point in the RECORD and to include extraneous matter.) Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Speaker, the Na- tional Trial Lawyers Association pre- dicted recently that unless the Federal Government does something soon, deaths from motor vehicle accidents will reach 100,000 a year by 1975-double the pres- ent auto death :rate. The report of this same group of lawyers noted that while 605,000 Amer- cans have died in all wars from the Revo- lution to Vietnam, road deaths in the United States have totaled 1,500,000 in only 25 years. The study revealed that the number of persons injured in highway accidents in 1964 is the same number as the total beds in all hospitals in the United States--1,700,000. These corc shocking figures. I have thought for sometime that we should take steps at the national level to standardize highway signs, speettls, and so forth, in an effort to cut this need- less death, injury, and destruction on our highways. Although the Federal Government has spent millions building interstate highways, we have done little or nothing at the national level to pre- scribe and enforce safety standards. Sev- eral years ago, when we became alarmed at the increase in accidents involving air- liners, we established the Federal Avia- tion Agency to coordinate and improve safety in the air. Now we should estab- lish an agency to improve safety on the Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE tion. It must be made abundantly clear, not only to Communist nations, but to others which seek to advance their own interest by lending themselves to Com- munist aims, that the United States does not intend to remain inactive in the face of any external threat to the security of the Americas. While I am reasonably certain few, if any, nations will admit that participants at the Havana meeting were official dele- gates of their governments, the fact that some of the delegates even at this mo- ment hold official positions in their re- spective governments is shocking indeed. For example, the Syrian delegation included Mohammad All Al Khatib, Secretary General of that country's Min- istry of Information. Attending as an invited guest was Mohamed Fayed from the United Arab Republic who is Director of the African Affairs at the Presidency. African countries were well repre- sented by official members of their gov- ernments. Tanzania sent Salim Said Rasuld, the Deputy Finance Minister. The head of Guinea's delegation was Ab- doulaye Diallo, Director of Political Af- fairs in the Foreign Ministry, and also included the Guinean Ambassador to the United Arab Republic, Fade Cisse. Ghana was represented by Ofory Bah- Emmanuel, Director of that country's Bureau of African Affairs; and Pauline American defeat, withdrawal or aban- donment of Vietnam would not simply, as some have phrased it, roll back our Pacific front line to Wakiki. The roll- back would be to the Andes, and beyond, for Ho Chi Minh's battle plan in Viet- nam is a blueprint, approved both in Moscow and Peiping, for subversive wars of aggression in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Once again we have been warned by our enemy. The United States and the free world will overlook or dismiss the Communist "Mein Kampf," as spelled out at the recent Havana Tri-Continent Conference, at its peril and the peril of future generations. The following schedule shows in detail the delegates, observers, guests, and for- eign press from the various countries. The data was compiled by Cuban author- ities from the actual registration sheets. Delegates from 63 countries and 19 pro- tectorates, commonwealths or colonies were in attendance. List of accredited participants up to Jan. 10, 1966, "Year of Solidarity," 1st Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America Ghana. Lakhdar Brahimi, representing Algeria, is that country's Ambassador to the United Arab Republic. Since many of the nations which were represented at the Havana Conference have been and are now receiving hun- dreds of millions of dollars of U.S. aid, I have written to the Secretary of State with the request that he determine the status of the delegations to the Havana meeting. I also asked the Secretary to give consideration to the termination of U.S. assistance to those nations who par- ticipated with official or semi-official delegations in accordance with section 620(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act. This provision of that act prohibits as- sistance under this or any other act, in- cluding sales under the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, to any countries which the Presi- dent determines is engaging in or pre- paring for aggressive military efforts di- rected against the United States or to any countries receiving assistance from the United States. The proceedings at last month's Tri- Continent Conference made a prima facie case regarding preparations for such aggression. It would seem, therefore, that a State Department investigation is in order to determine, at the very least, whether U.S. economic aid should not be terminated to certain nations which were repre- sented at the Havana meeting. Immediately following my statement, I am attaching a full list of delegates in attendance at the January Havana meeting, as reported by the Cuban press. Mr. Speaker, the Tri-Continent Con- ference clearly established that what is occurring in Vietnam is not simply local- ized Communist aggression, but is merely one front in a worldwide campaign against the free world. Delegates: Africa-------------------- Asia---------------------- Latin America ____--_____- Observers: International organiza- tions------------------- Afro-Asiatic organiza- tions ________________ African organizations ----- Asiatic organizations_____ Socialist countries-______ Guests: Foreign------------------- Cubans------------------- Total------------------- Foreign press_________________ Total accredited par- ticipants ______________ Coun- trios, protec- torates, and colonies organi- zations Accred- ited Cdsar Augusto, Daniel Da Costa Garcia, Mario de Andrade. ALGERIA Algerian Committee for Afro-Asian Soli- darity (7) : Lakhdar Brahimi (President), Harold Ben- cherchali, Adda Benguettat, Mohamed Harieche, Ahmed Zemirline, Mohamed Megh- raoui, Abdelkrim Ghoralb. ARGENTINA National Committee for the Peoples Con- ference of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (7): John William Cooke (President), Alcira de la Pefia, Carlos Alberto Lafforgue, Jorge Ru- ben Queijo, Juan Antonio Sander, Abel Alexis Latendokf, Jose Gabdiel Vazeilles Ullua. BASUTOLAND Basutoland Congress Party (3) : Gerd Ramoreboli (President), Koenyama Chakela, Ramagele Tsinyana. BECHUANALAND Bechuanaland Peoples Party (2): Peter Dick Marciping (President), Bobby Mack. BOLIVIA National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (3) : Mario Miranda Pacheco (President), Gabriel Porcel Salazar, Mario Monje. BRAZIL National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (7) : Alvizio Palhano Pedreira Ferreira (President), Marcos Santos, Carlos Tavares, Celso Ridan Barcelos, Ivfzn Ramos Ribeiro, Francisco Santilli, Alexina Lins Crespo de Paula. BURUNDI 197 Burundi Workers Federation (1) : Nico- 165 deme Bigirama (President). DELEGATES TO THE FIRST SOLIDARITY CONFER- ENCE OF THE PEOPLES OF AFRICA, ASIA, AND LATIN AMERICA, JANUARY 1966 Rafil Roa Garcia, President. Youssef El Sebai, Secretary-General. John Kofitettegah, Vice President. Pedro Medina Silva, Vice President. Tien Nguyen Van, Vice President. SOUTH AFRICA South African National Congress (9) : Al- fred Diliza Kgokong (Presidente), Reginald September, Yusuf Mohamed Dadoo, Mzimku- lu Ambrose Makiwane (SP), Thomas Titus Nkobi, Robert Resha, Joyce Judith Mbonwa (S.F.), Marie Muthoo Pr6galathan Naicker, Meinrad Hsimang. SOUTH WEST AFRICA South West Africa National Union (2) : Jariretundu Kozonguizi (President), Moses K. Katjiuongua. ANGOLA Angolan Popular Liberation Movement (8) : Luiz Andrade de Acevedo (President), Mi- guel BayaAntonio (S.P.), Luis de Almeida, Paulo Teixeira Jorge, Spencer Nicolau, Jose CAMBODIA Cambodian Afro-Asian Solidarity (5) : Rout Sambath (President), Un Samuth, Vutthi Thoutch, Kiv Moeng, Suncheng Sunthor. COLOMBIA National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (6) : Diego Montafia Cuellar (President), Inds Pinto Escobar, Santiago Solarte, Camilo Losada Campos, Baltasar Fernandez Alvarez, Teodoslo Varela Acosta. - CONGO (BRAZZAVILLE) National Revolutionary Committee of the Congo (4): Julien Boukambou (President), Gustavo Aba Gandzion, Henrietta Yimbou, Dominique Ntamba. CONGO (LAOPOLDVILLE) Congo National Liberation Council (11) : Gabriel Yumbu (President), Nkumu Camile, Kaputula Bernabette, Kitungo Placide, Ramazani Sebastian, Malanda Henriette, Mongali Michel, Eduard Marcel Sambu, Buka Masaku, Martin Brobey, John Ali. KOREA Korean Committee for Afro-Asian Soli- darity (8) : Wal Lyong Kim (Presidente), Zi Sun Jon, Cheng Nam Kim, Ryon Yui Kim, Yu Yui Li, Yung Kun Kim, To Jion Chan, and Ryung Chul Jun. COSTA RICA National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (3) : Arnoldo Ferreto (President), Hernan. Monterrosa L6pez, and Luisa Gonzalez Gutidrrez. CUBA Communist Party of Cuba (41) : Osmany Cienfuegos (President), Raid Roa, Manuel Pifleiro, Carlos Rafael Rodriguez, Miguel Martin, Jose Alberto Naranjo, Leonel Soto, Hayde9 Santamarfa, Jesus Montane Oropesa, L&zaro Pefia, Jose Matar, Josd Ramirez, Carlos ? Leohuga, Pelegrin Torras, Arnol Rodriguez, Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3'44 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - HOUSE February 21, 1966 Juan Mier Febles, Melba Hernandez, Giraldo Mazola, Eugenio R. Balari, Joaquin. Mas, Lazaro Mora, Eduardo Delgado, Ramon San- chez Parocii, Carlos Alfara, Ricardo Alarcon, Fernando Alvarez Tabio, Mario Garcia In- chaustegui, Raul Valdes Vivo, Antonio Ca- rrillo, Jorge Serguera, Armando Entralgo, Luis Garcia Guitar, Oscar Oramas, Jose Venegas, Rafael Fernandez Moya, Luis Garcia Praza, Francisco Valdes, Arquimides Colurn- bie, Silvio Rivera, Roberto Valdes, and Al- fredo Guevara. C RILE CIIU,E (FRAP) Popular Action Front (9) : Salvador Allen- do (President), Waldo Atlas Martin, Clodo- miro Almdyda Medina, Elena Pedraza, Luis Figueroa, Manuel Rojas, Walterio Fierro, Jorge Monte Morago, Oscar Nunez Bravo. CHINA Chinese Committee for Afro-Asian Soli- darity (34): Wu Hsueh Tsien (President:), 'l'ien Min Kilo, Su Tien Yang, Ming Sin Tang, Chan An You, Yao Yao Ching Jung, So Yang (S.P.), Keng Liang (S.P.), Ta Nei Tsien, Rrai Jua Hsu, Wu Hasu Shang, Yi Cheng Jung, Ring Chnnn Tung, Tien Hui Chen, Yuan Hung Tao, Yang Pai Ping, Tsien Li Jen, Wuan Chen Sheng, Chen Tze Yin, Chang Chieh Ilsun, Chen Yu, Chen Chuan Liao, Chu Tim Chi, Run 110 Niem, Chang Lin Yu, Tang Hai Yeh, Yu Yinfr, Liu, Fei Yi Li, Chi Fan Wuan.g, Shen Yi, Chen Sheng Huang, Shou Pae Li, Yun Chun Li, Chen Lo Min. CYPRUS Cyprus Solidarity Committee (3) : Chris- toforos Christofides (President), Joseph Ya- makis, Georgios Savyides. ECUADOR National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (2) : Carlos Ramirez Ortiz (President), Teodule Aray. IL SALVADOR National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia., and Latin America (2) : Sergio Perez (Presi- dent), Pedro Martinez. (:IIANA Convention of the Peoples Party (15) : John Kotitettegah (President), Nathaniel Marco Welbeck, Winfre Asare Brown, Yan Mann, Kon Bondzie Brown, Pauline Miranda Clerk, George Awonor Williams, Ofory-Bah Emmanuel, Patrick Ofei Henaicu, Kefi Bata, Charles L- Patterson, Dr. Ekow Daniels, Kwamina Arku-Nelson (S.P.), Cecil Mc. Hardy, Anthony Korsah Dick. GUADALUPE National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (4) : Gerard Olivier (President), Guy Daninthe, Aude Daniel Rene, Michel Numa. GUATEMALA Kobel Armed Forces (5) : Luis Augusto Turcios Lima (President), Gustavo Solaces Ortiz, Rene Cordon, Orlando Fernandez Ruiz, Francisco Marroquih. CRITISH GUIANA Popular Progressive Party (3) : Cheddi Jagan (President), Lall Bahadur, Joseph l.todriguez. I'IL'INCH GUIANA Guianan Committee of Solidarity to the First Tri-Continental Conference (3) : Regine 1:'revot (President), Jean Marie Robo, Georges Giffard. GUINEA Democratic Party of Guinea (7) : Abdou- laye Diallo (President), Pod(, Cisse (S.P.), Mamady Mohamed Sakho, Mami Kouyate, Ibrahima Kourouma, Fanta Conde, Jean Baptiste Deen. PORTUGUESE GUINEA African Independence Party (5) : Amilcar Cabral (President), Vasco Cabral, Pedro Pires, Domingo Ramos, Joaquin Pedro Da Silva. I1A1.TI Unified Democratic Front of National Lib- eration (5) : Paul Lantimo (President), Jac- ques Lacour, Pigeon Volage, Leslie Jean, Ed- mond Pierre. National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (3) : Ricardo Moncada Zavala (President), Raul Parra, Longino Vidal Be- cerra. INDIA Indian Association for Afro-Asian Solidar- ity (14) : Aruna Asaf Ali (President), Nalam Narasinha Rao, Homi F. Daji Homi, Prab- hakar Menon, Jagannath Sharma, Ladli Saran Shinha, Sat Tandon, Harbans Singh, Balrat Mehta, Chatur Nadain Malviya (SP), Avioor Shiriniwas Chari, Mohammad Kelimullah, Noor Mohamed, Chandra Shekhar. INDONESIA Solidarity Association of the Afro-Asian Peoples (9): Ibrahim Isa (President) (SP), Francisca Fanggidaej, Willy Haririndia, Umar Said, Suhardjo, Soedhartono, Edy Soenardji, Sugiri, Margono. IRAN Iranian Committee for Afro-A:.ian Solidar- ity (2) : Amir Halamou Amir Dibadj Torke- stani (President), Rahaman Nader Zehtab. IRAQ Iraqi Committee for Afro-Asiaa Solidarity (1): Aboul Wahab Sallow (Pres)dent) (SP). MAURrrIuS Progressive Party of the Mauritian People (1) : Teckaram Sibsurun (President). ST. THOMAS AND PRINCE ISLANDS Committee for the Liberation of St. Thomas and Prince (1) : Antonio Barreto Pines Dos Santos (President). JAMAICA National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (2) : Dennis Daly (Presi- dent), Roy Jeffrey Adaiphus. JAPA N Japanese Committee for Afro-Asian Soli- darity (10) : Shizuma Kai (President), Hiroshi Ide, Toshio Tanaka, Mitsuhiro Ka- neko, Masae Kitazawa (SP), Susumu Ozaki, Shesaku Itai, Yoro Ohno, Akira Nishina, Yoko Kitazawa (SF). JORDAN Afro-Asian Solidarity Committee of Jordan (1) : Shafik Shafik (President). NORTH KALIMATAN Organization of North Kalimalan for the Solidarity of the People of Afro-Asian, Indo- nesia (5) : Ahmad Zaidi Adruce i President) , Muhammad Jais Abbas, Mohanlad Kasin, Dus Tan Chon, Ahrnad Mohtar. KENYA Kenya African National Union (3) : John Mobiyo Njonjo (President), James Robaro Heuwallan, Ernest Gitu Muni. LAOS New Lao Hak Sat (5) : Phoumi Vongvichit (President), Soulivong Phrasithideth, Phouthasack Khanleck, Thammavongsay Bonn Nhum, Khamphay Boupha. LEBANON Socialist Progressive Party (4): Farid Gebrane (President), George S;ilim Batal, Mouhamed Kechli, Georges Haoui. MALAYA People's Afro-Asian Solidarity Committee for Malaya (3): Lee Siew Choh (President), Abdul Rahim Karim, Chia Thye P;h. MARTINIQUE National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (2) : Edouard De Lepine (President), Marcel Manville. MOROCCO National Union of Popular Forces (3): Hamid Ba:rrada (President), Mohamed Habib Sinaceur, Mohamed Horma Bahl, National Liberation Movement (6) : Heber- to Castillo (President), Armando Castillejos Ortiz, Manuel Mesa Andraca, Maria Antonieta Rasc6n C6rdoba, Antonio Tenorio Adame, Salvador Bojorquez. MONGOLIA Mongolian Afro-Asiatic Committee for Solidarity (7) : Chadraval Lodoidamba (Pres- ident), Nauzad Bayarju, Damba. Dulamvn. Pountsag Berentsoodol, Narhoo Tsogtyn, Namsarain Sodnon, Badamtar B. Baldo. MOZAMBIQUE Mozambique Liberation Front (6) : Mscr- celino Dos Santos (President), Eugenio Ma- chado, Mariano Natsinha, Pascoal Nhapulo, Josina Abiatar Muthemba, Madalena Jingo Juvangire. NEPAL Afro-Asiatic Solidarity Committee (1) : Poorna Bahadur (President). NICARAGUA National Committee for the Solidarity Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America (3) : Pedro Ruiz (President), Jose Pedro Rivera, Jose Lopez Rivera. NIGER Sawaba Party (1) : Abdcul eye Maniami (President). NIGERIA Congress of Youth of Nigeria. Socialist Peasants and Workers Party of Nigeria (4) : Wahab Omorilewa Goodluck (President), Salomon Olaleye Fagbo, Elias Dupe Fadipe, Johnson Ebohom. OMAN Oficina de Oman (Oman Office) (1) : Faisal Faisal (President). PAKISTAN Committee for Solidarity of the Afro- Asian Peoples (7) : Maulana, Aboul Hamid Khan Bhasani (president), Itaz Husain, Arif Iftirhar, Qamaruz Saman Shah, Shaulsa Khan, A. T. M. Mustafa, Miraj IChalio. PALESTINE Organization for the Liberation of Palestine (5) : Ibrahim Abu Sitta (Presi- dent), Husni Khuffash Saleh, Zuhair Rayyis, Abdul Karim. Al Karmi, Sala Heddin Dabbagh. PANAMA National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (4) : Jorge Turner Morales (president), Francisco Gutierrez, Roberto Madariaga Montes, Floyd Britton. PARAGUAY National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (5); Carlos Valenzuela (presi- dent), Hector Gutierrez, Jacinto Correa, Joan Carlos Arza, Angel G6mez. ARABIAN PENINSULA Socialist Front for the Liberation. of tl e Arabian Peninsula (1): Ahmad Jamaludclin Abdulia (president). FAaU National Committee for the Solidarity Con- ference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, and Latin America (8) : Roberto Garcia Urrutia (president), Jesus Masa Paredes, Alberto Ramirez, Jaime Venegas Romero, Armanal Perez Carlo., Elizardo Sanchez Lomba, Freddy Eyzaguirre :Luque, Jorge Altoriaga Campos. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 3345 PUERTO RICO U.S.S.R. Bulgaria Pro-independence Movement (4) : Norman Soviet Committee for Afro-Asiatic Solidar- Committee of Afro-Asiatic Solidarity (2) : l Pietri Castellon (president), Ana Livia ity (40) : Sharaf Rashidov (President), ova. Zidravke Mitovski, Elena Gavri Cordero, Jose Luis Gonzalez Coiscoo, Narciso Anatoli Sofronov, Dimitri Gorbachev, Boris lf Czechoslovakia Rabell Martinez. o Gorbachev, Vladimir Judintsev, Rodo Ti ki i Czechoslovakian Committee of Solidarity UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC mur rs , Chliapnikov, Yans Vladim Mayevsky Alexe r jnaia li B N t With the People of Africa and Asia (2) : Youssef El Sebaf (SG OSPAA), Mohamed , y , e e a a a Gaidar, Latif Maksoudov (S.P.), Bahadur Abduzaza- Antonin Vavrus, Vladimir Simek. Kaml Bahaa Eddin (ASG OSPAA), Marsi Vladimir Chakhan Tiouleoubekov kov Hungary (ASO, OSPAA) ? Saad Eddin , , Yarovoi, Mirzo Tursun Zade, Zinaida Fed- Hungarian Solidarity Committee With All AFRO ASIAN erova, Rasul Gamsatov, Fikriat Tabeiv, the Peoples which Fight for Independence Solidarity Committee (Arab Socialist Dmitri Shevliagin, Mikhail Kossykh, Karan i T h (2) : Andras Tardos, Eva Koltai. Union) (21) : Khaled Mohiedlin (President), eng c s Gousseinov, Bijamai Ramazanova, Gri ori i Poland Sohair El Calamawy, Amina Ahmed El Said, g nova, Aitmatov, Zouleikha Gousse hev T h i Solidarity Committee With the People of tee With Ezz El Din Ali Moustafa, Rifaat El Mahgoub, ermyc , c Lovchine, Vladimir Kokkonta Siiwka, Josef Africa and Asia (2) : Africa Bahia Karam, Mohamed Diab, Sekina Sadat, Viatcheslav, Sima Panich, Nikolai Basanov, i h a. Ahmed Mukhtar Kobt, Ragua Rami El Kholy, c at Veniamin Midtsev, Spartak Tsissanov, R Domestic Republic German German Samiha Taller Mustafa, Ahmed Reda Mo- Koudachev, Jouri Bochkarev, Riourik Valeri ukharkov B Vi t Committee of the -A Afro-Asian hamed Khalif a, Shebl Hefez Mohame Shat- , or o c Beleroutchev, Mikhail Kovalev bki d D Republic Horse man Democratic Ger a) o aby, Mohamed Wafaey Shulkamy, Mo- , ne, o Soukhine, Arnol tr Nicolaev P h Rodner, Heinrich Edmund R dney( Max Brash, inrich a amed Owda, Hoda Tawfik, Louis Grace, Ants Mansour, Edward K. F. El Kharrat, . arev, e Valeri Jik URUGUAY Siglinde Joswig, Eggebman,ree s recht, l Heinz einz Jo Heinz Schmidt. Salah El Sayed, Hussain Rizk. Leftist Liberation Front (6) : Luis Pedro i R DOMINICAN REPUBLIC Bonavita Saiguero (President), Cesar Reyes uman a With the hi f F i d National Committee for the Solidarity Daglio, Blanca Silva Collazo Odriozola, Ed- s p r en Rumanian League o Peoples of Asia and Africa (1) : Mircea Conference of the Peoples of Africa, Asia, mundo Soares Netto, Rodney Arismendi, and Radulescu and Latin America (5) : Guido Rafael Gil Luis Echave Zas. . ASIAN ORGANIZATIONS AFRO Diaz (President), Asdrubal Dominguez Guer- VENEZUELA - rero, Euclides Gutierrez Felix, Ceyetano National Liberation Front (15) : Pedro Me- Conference of Afro-Asian Jurists (4) : A. Rodriguez del Prado, Carlos M. Amiama ding Silva (President), Gilberto L6pez, Ro- Shih Sheng Chao, Hsien Wang, Fadiala Martinez. .sendo Menendez Luz, Ciro Rodriguez, Atencio Keita, Wijanto. DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF NORTH VIETNAM Manrique, Jer6nimo Carrera, Jos6 Vicente Permanent Bureau of Afro-Asian Writers Karuna- th ala k h 2 Nih l L R Solidarity Committee for Afro Asiatic (10) : Abreu, Hector Marcano Coello, Hector Perez , s aman a ap ) : a a ( sena Jayalath Tuyen Tran Danh (President), Nguyen Duy Marcano, Omar Cardenas, Moises Moleiro, . Afro-Asian Journalists Conference (1) : Tuong Tran Cong, Le Nguyen Than, Tinh Oswaldo Barreto, Jorge Rubio, Ali Gonzalez, Dharmasena Manuweera , Conn Nguyen La, Bun Le Quang, Thang Dang Adolfo Gafiango. . Thi, Phan Truong Si, Doan Dinh Ca, Nguyen SOUTH VIETNAM AFRICAN ORGANIZATIONS Dinnh Bin. Afro-Asiatic Solidarity Committee (7) : South West Africa Peoples Organization RUANDA Tien Nguyen Van (President), Tran Van Tu, (4): Peter Mueshihange, Andreas Shipanga, National Union Ruanda Burundi (2) : Kin Nguyen H Dang, Van Sau Ly, Cao Le Thi, Ewald Katjivena, Emil Appolus. i i N i l U 3 Francois Rubeka (President), Nelson Rwga- Anh Trinn Van, Ba Nguyen Ngoc. n on ( Zimbabrine Afr can at ona ) : Vi t Mt - id M Si t sore YEMEN mpson c or am King Dav u asa, . banengwe, Agustine Monbeshora. Afro-Asiatic Solidarity Committee of Ye- African Syndical Federation (1) : Prosper African Independence Party (3) : Mama- men (1): Abdullah Al-Alawi (President). Akanni. do?z Keita (President), Thierno Amath Dan- ASIATIC ORGANIZATIONS N'Diongue Babacar soko SOUTH YEMEN (ADEN) . . , National Liberation Front of Occupied Council Against the Atomic and Hydrogen SYRIA South Yemen (2) : Salf A. S. Dhalee (Presi- Bombs (1) : Masahuru Hatanaka. Afro-Asiatic Solidarity Committee (8) dent), Jaffer All Awadh. Asian Economic Bureau (3) : Samuel Diaz Moudaf Haffar (President), Morris Salibi, Bandaranaike, Theja Gunawardhana, Packeer Mohammad Ali Al Khatib, Moustapha Amine, - ZIMBABWE Mohideen. Rifai Nourt Mohamed, Mohammad Zouhdi Zimbabwe African Peoples Union (9) : Ed- Peace Commission of Asia and the Pacific Nashashibi, Ali El Khalil, Joubran Majdal- ward Nodlovu (President), Ethan Allen Dube, (1) : Victor James. ani. David Mpongo, Charles Tarehwa Madondo, FRENCH SOMALILAND Amos Nguenya, Arthur Musuka, Charles THOSE INVITED TO THE CONFERENCE Nelson T. C. Nolada Moshe Noko Chikerema Popular Movement Party (1) : Ahmed Mobarak Mobarak. , , Samkange. Argentina: Miguel Angel Rubinich. Bolivia: Juan Carlos Lazcano. Total number of delegates from 82 coun- Brazil: Felix Athayde. SWAZILAND tries is 512. Cambodia: Helene Thoutch Vuttni. Swaziland Progressive Party (2) : Dingame Colombia: Marco Tulio Rodriguez Mar- Dominic Cain Nxumalo (President), Ephrain OBSERVERS TO CONFERENCE (ORGANIZATION AND tinez, Jorge Zalamea Borda.-. Mbhele. Congo (Brazzeville) : Auguste Mahoungou SUDAN NAMES OF OBSERVERS) , Democratic Peoples Party (5) : Aly Abdel INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Alice Mahoungou. Cuba: Antero Regalado Fallen, Zenen Rahman (President), Yousif Bushara, World Peace Council (9) : Enrique Lister, Buergo, Reinaldo Calviac, Pedro Montalvan, Billghies Ahmed, Ali Osman, Shazali Amin Alfredo M. P. Valera, Omprakash Pallwal, Asela de los Santos, Radames Mancebo, Shazali. Francis Boaten, Juan Marinello, Angel Aleida March, Juan Jose Le6n, Dora Calcafio, THAILAND Dominguez Santamaria, William Gollan, Francisco Dortic6s Baler, Orlando, Rosabal Thailand Patriotic Front (3) : Bhayome Oldrich Belic, Luclo Mario Luzzatto. Llanes, Oscar Domenoch, Lupe Veliz, Leopoldo Chulanond (President), Suchart Bhumi- International Federation of Democratic Ariza, Enrique Velazco L6pez, Felix Sautfe morirak, Sid Hichai Songkaraksa. Women (3) : Florence Mephoshe, Helga Mederos, Roberto Ogando Paz, Gloria Vilma Espin. Diclcell Calixto Morales, Alejo Carpentier, Aguilera TANZANIA , World Federation of Democratic Youth , Antonio Nunez Jimenez, Rolando Cubelas, Tanganyika African National Union (6) : Cit k Ctib Salvador Vilaseca Jaime Nicolas Quillen Amanas Swat Salim Rasuid (President) , or e (3) : Eulogio Rodriguez Millares, , , , Rodolfo Mecnini. Crombet, Justo Guerra, Agapito Figueroa. (S.P.), Muhammad Ali Foum, Lugo Taguaba, Czechoslovakia: Jiri Messner Ali Hahfudh Abdulla Said Netepe International Student Union (5) : Tran . , . Van An, Kwamena Ocran, Zbynek Vokrovh- Chile: Juliana Rojas, Luis Eduardo La- TRINIDAD-TOBAGO Felix Rodriguez, Candido Dominguez licky barca Goddard, Gonzalo Rojas Pizarr6n. National Committee for the Solidarity , Garcia. Dahomey: Codjo Azodogbehov. Conference of the Peoples of Africa Asia and United States of America: Robert Williams, , , Latin America (2) : George Weekes (Presi- World Syndacal Federation (4) : Satish Rick Rhoads. dent), George Bowrin. Chaterjeo, Mark Shope, Jose Bustos, Renato Bitossi France: Le6n Feix, Josephine Baker, Ives UGANDA . SOCIALIST COUNTRIES Fernand Moreau, Regis Jules Debray, Madam Voisin. Uganda Peoples Congress (5) : Yomasani Albania Guatemala: Aurora Benitez. Kanyomozi (President), Ally Muwabe Kir- Albanian Committee of Solidarity With England: Osmon Blackburn, Jack Woddis. unda Kivejinja, Haiti Omongin, Khahid Younis Kinene, Henry Nyakairu. the People of Africa and Asia (4) : Foto Cami, Sotir Kambori, Faik Zaneli, Sezat Shyti. Italy: Alberto Moravia, Dacia Marafni, Joyce Lussu. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3346 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE February 21, Mexico: Rafael Estrada Villa. Blanca M:ufioz Cota de Tenorie. Adalberto Pliego Galicia, Alberto Orduiia Culebro, Louis T. Cordova Alvelais, Gilberto Ramon Gallarde, Manuel Stephens Garcia, Manuel Marcue Pardihas, Arturo Orona, Manuel Terrazas Guerrero. 1'aragu::iy: Jose Asuncion Flores, Elvio 1.trmcro. 1'cru: Hilda Gadea Acosta, Mario Vargas Liosa, Patricia Llosa de Vargas. Puerto Rico: Halina Linger de Rabell. united Arab Republic: Mohamed Fayed, Nadia Sul>iear Salvi. Tanzania: Lidia Foun. U.S.S.R.: Jursand Rashidova. Uruguay: Aida De'Matteis Ventura, Maria Victoria I::;pinola Gabreta. Venezucia: Eleana Sanchez, Elizabeth Burgos. 1 ORiTtGN PRr.;S Publicity organs and names of journalists Alemania Federal l}as Andere Deutschland: Lenor Velfort. Argentina Diario El Mundo: Juan Lefcovich. Belgium Boletin Informativo de Cuba: Hugo Bency. 1,i) Drapeau Rouge: Hubert Jacob. Magazine Europeo: Gabriel F. Dannau. Marie Noelle Cloes, Alphonse A. Roosens. Bulgaria Agencies .tl'I'A: Todor Stoianov. Canada C znadian Tribune: Francis Williams Park. Libbio Campbell Park. Korea A. encia Central de Corea: Choun Tak Zi. Costa Rica Semanario Libertad: Francisco Gamboa Gurman. Czechoslovakia c icke and choose among immutable, Indeed, some of the lines of de- We will take ourrchan es onsthat the world. menu. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 those boundaries. We cannot defend Berlin marcation drawn after the Second World and yield Korea. We cannot recognize one War were explicity provisional and were to be commitment and repudiate another without finally determined in political settlements tearing and weakening the entire structure yet to come. This was true in Germany, in Korea, and South Vietnam as well. on which the world's security depends. Some thoughtful critics of our Vietnamese But those settlements have not yet been policy both in Europe and America challenge achieved, and we cannot permit their reso- this. They maintain that the West should lution to be pre-empted by force. This is not undertake to defend the integrity of all the issue in Vietnam. This is what we are lines of demarcation even though they may fighting for. This is why we are there. be underwritten in formal treaties. They We have no ambition to stay there any contend that many of these lines are un- longer than is necessary. We have made natural since they do not conform to the repeatedly clear that the United States seeks geopolitical realities as they see them. They no territory in southeast Asia. We wish no contend in particular that-since the pass- military bases. We do not desire to destroy ing of colonialism-the western powers have the regime in Hanoi or to remake it in a no business mixing in the affairs of the Asian Western pattern. The United States will not mainland. They imply that--regardless of retain American forces in South Vietnam our commitments-we should not try to pre- once peace is assured. vent Red China from establishing it:i hegem- The countries of southeast Asia can be ony over the east Asian. land mass south of nonalined or neutral, depending on the will the Soviet Union. of the people. We support free elections in South Vietnam as soon as violence has been INACCURATE PREMISE eliminated and the South Vietnamese people Proponents of this view advance two prin- can vote without intimidation. We look cipal arguments to support their thesis. forward to free elections-and we will accept They contend that the very weight of Chi- the result as a democratic people is accus- nese power, its vast population and its conse- tomed to do. Yet we have little doubt about quent ability to mobilize immense mass the outcome, for we are confident that the armies entitles it to recognition as the con- South Vietnamese who have fought hard for trolling force of southeast Asia. ~- their freedoms will not be the first people to __. __ __ a to n mmunism in a Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, so first This mission is taking us down into dan- True, we extended aid to the Greek of all, let me make clear that I shall gerouly deep and murky waters. Government, but we did not intervene hazard no miracle cures for Vietnam; Consistent with this view, Mr. Ball with combat troops. The Greeks put some omelets may prove indigestible, but makes three main points. First, that a down the revolt themselves. none can be unscrambled. President barrier has been fixed around the Com- Moreover, moving American forces in- Johnson's options there keep narrowing. munist world and that it has become the to European countries is not at all like He searches for the rudiments of an ac- responsibility of the United States to sending them to Asia. When our armies ceptable settlement, for the diplomatic hold it intact-alone if necessary. Sec- remained in Western Europe, following door that might lead to the conference ond, that the war in South Vietnam is World War II, it was to forge a vital link table, and for effective ways to wage the not a revolution but a disguised aggres- in a collective chain of defense that had war, while confining it within manage- sion from the north, the purpose of which real substance. We were welcomed by able limits. In these endeavors, he has is to extend international communism people with whom we shared a common my fullhearted support. beyond the fixed barrier. Third, that culture and '% Most of them, He will also have my support when it the concept of spheres of influence is having experienced our kind of freedom, comes time to vote the money necessary out of date, and that mainland China has willingly did their part in manning the to carry on the fight. Our men are no claim to any special influence in NATO line, drawn against the Soviets. fighting bravely and well. Whatever southeast Asia. Unfortunately, we seem to have been funds they need should be provided by Let us begin by considering Mr. Ball's mesmerized by the success of our post- the Congress. We are committed and we first point. The war in Vietnam, he con- war European policies, NATO and the must not make a difficult position worse tends, "is not a local conflict," but "a Marshall plan. With the emergence of by failing to support our fighting men, part of a vast and continuing struggle Red China in Asia, our diplomats reacted In voting the funds necessary to sup- in which we have been engaged for more like generals determined to fight the next port our soldiers, I do not mean to imply than two decades." The struggle is the war the same way they had fought the support for the policy which got them bitter harvest of World War II, out of last. Military alliances were hastily there, or endorse similar policies in the which the United States and the Soviet formed to "contain communism" in Asia, future. Senator RICHARD RUSSELL, chair- Union emerged as the two great powers. served up with American Foreign Aid on man of the Armed Services Committee, The Soviet Union, under Stalin, then a global platter, a Marshall plan writ made it quite clear that no endorsement "embarked on a reckless course of seek- large. Communist China, we determined, of policy was implied by voting for an ing to extend Communist power." In was to be stopped in Asia, as Russia had authorization or appropriation bill. He response, the United States and its allies been in Europe. said: in Western Europe formed NATO as a Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the I think it is important that the Senate "dam to hold back the further encroach- Senator from Idaho yield at that point, and the Nation clearly recognize this bill for ment of Communist ambition." But, or would he prefer to finish his speech what it is: an authorization of defense ap- with the coming to power of the Com-' first? propriations. It could not properly be con- munists in China in 1949, the world faced Mr. CHURCH. I am happy to yield to s.idered as determining foreign policy, as "a new threat of Communist expansion." the Senator from Pennsylvania at this ratifying decisions made in the past, or as To meet it, "we then built barriers around time. endorsing new commitments. the whole periphery of the Communist Mr. CLARK. I thank -my friend. Consequently, my purpose today is to world through a series of alliances and First, let me compliment him on the fine look both behind and beyond Vietnam; commitments." Through the SEATO speech he is in the process of making. behind it to the concepts on which our Treaty, we undertook to "guarantee He was courteous enough to give me a present policies rest, and beyond it to- existing boundaries including the line of copy of the speech before he began. I ward a future policy for Asia. I realize demarcation between North and South have had an opportunity to read it and this is not an easy time to take the long Vietnam." Our intervention in Vietnam I believe that it makes an excellent con- view, embroiled as we are in a hard is, therefore, but another battle in the tribution to the important debate which jungle war. Nations, like soldiers, seldom "continuing war to prevent one _Com- is presently going on. plan their futures from foxholes. munist power after another from violat- I am interested in the Senator's analy- And yet our present agony summons us ing internationally recognized boundary sis of George Ball's speech of some weeks to scrutinize the premises which led lines fixing the outer limits of Commu- ago, and in particular the point which American troops into Vietnam in the nist dominion." the Senator is_ now discussing-with first place. What role are we assuming Underlying Mr. Ball's analysis, and which I agree-that there is a vast dif- on the mainland of Asia? What does it administration policy as well, is the ference between the situation in Europe, assumption that the system of alliances particularly as it existed some time ago, portend foose future? which worked in Europe will also work in and the situation which now exists in Even tr p pose such questions these days the vast region which has just thrown southeast Asia. invites rejoinders se abuse -broadside off European rule-in Africa, the Middle The Senator will recall that the Secre- volleys o "appeasement, "neoisola- me East, and Asia. Yet, even in Europe, tary of State and other administration tion," or ju ust plain "Munich." So let t me NATO did not, strictly speaking, "stop spokesmen have made a great point of say, at the outset, that I regard myself the spread of communism." NATO held the alleged analogy between the Chinese as a very practical internationalist. I fast the Iron Curtain; it stopped the position and our response to it, and the believe the United States, as a great westward movement of Russian aggres- reaction of the Chamberlain government world power, has global responsibilities lion. It is true, of course, that the oc- to Hitler's expansionist actions before to discharge. Our present interests com- cupation of Eastern Europe by the Red World War II. I take it that the Senator pel us to shape a workable foreign policy Army led to the imposition of Com- is of the view that the analogy is not an which will first, contain Russia and munist regimes in these countries. But apt one. I wonder whether that is China, and second, discourage the fur- behind the NATO defense line, com- correct? ther spread of communism. It is not munism continues to exist. It still claims Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is correct. with these goals, but with our current the second largest political party in Italy, The threat which faced Europe, posed by approach to them in the underdeveloped and the fourth largest in France. To Hitler's Germany, was the threat of Ger- world, that I must register my dissent. repeat, NATO did not "contain com- man conquest-Hitler's vision of a Mr. Ball's speech underscores the basic munism," it prevented the Soviet Army Germany which would stretch from the flaw in our Asian strategy: he draws no from marching into Western Europe. Rhine to the Urals. In his "Mein distinction between the problem of Red Behind the NATO shield, we have not Kampf," written much earlier in his life, Chinese aggression and that of general faced violent Communist wars of na- he presented a blueprint for German Communist expansion. It is evident that tional liberation. The reason is that conquest. the State Department still views com- internal conditions of the NATO coun- China is both a bellicose and a dan- munism as one big octopus, and the tries gave no root to revolt. Only in gerous nation. I would place no confi- United States as the diver groping to cut Greece did the Communists try it, in a dence whatever in the present Peiping off its tentacles, whenever the monster guerrilla war which Mr. Ball compares regime. I believe that we must take stretches them beyond its present lair. with Vietnam. care to prevent any attempt by China Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE February 21, 1966 to conquer neighboring lands in Asia. son why we are told that most of the But, thus far, the Chinese have not em- people in Vietnam are uninterested; barked upon the naked conquest of Asia. they :find they have little choice. The much discussed treatise of Chinese Mr. CLARK. And actually neither is Marshal Lin Piao, for example, is not a a democratic government. "Mein Kampf," prescribing Chinese con-, Mr. CHURCH. That is true. There is quest of Asia, but, rather, as I later men- no democratic government in either part Lion in this address, a kind of "do it your of Vietnam today. self kit" which analyzes the Chinese revo- M:r, CLARK. There is none in south- by the Chinese effort to spread commu- uism through revolution, and that posed by frontal Chinese aggression. Our present policy tends to blend the two to- gether; it confuses the Asian situation with the European situation in the days preceding Hitler's attempt to conquer I?,urope. Mr. CLARK. I agree with the Sen- ator. I wonder whether he would be willing to pursue this alleged analogy a little further, because while there is a certain superficial resemblance between the European situation at the time before Hitler struck, and the situation in south- east Asia today, my own view is that the analogy is fundamentally unsound, that we should anproach the South Vietnam- ese-American-Chinese situation, really, almost "de novo," or on an "ad hoc" basis, without placing much reliance on alleged analogies at other times and in other places. I would ask my friend this. A good deal of emphasis has been placed by ad- ministration spokesmen on the fact that perhaps we are being confronted with another Munich and if we do not stand up and fight now, all of southeast Asia will fall and Chinese communism will prevail in all that part of the world. There is, of course, a surface similarity between nazism and fascism on the other other hand and Chinese communism on the other. They are all totalitarian doctrines. I wonder if the Senator would not agree with me that in each instance the ideology is merely a cloak of idealism thrown over a policy of expansionist nationalism. The trouble is that we Americans, with our democratic tradition, become so mesmerized with opposition to any form of totalitarianism, that we are not astute enough to recognize, as perhaps we should, that what we are dealing with in both cases is expansionist na- tionalism, but expansionist nationalism in vastly different areas and under vastly different conditions. Mr. CHURCH. First of all, let me say that I find Fascist and Communist to= talitarianism equally repugnant. Sec- ond, with respect to the present war in Vietnam, I think it cannot honestly be maintained that this is a struggle be- tween the forces of tyranny on the one hand and the forces of freedom on the other. Mr. CLARK. Can the Senator expand on that? Mr. CHURCH. I mean that neither the government in Hanoi nor the gov- ernment in Saigon is in truth a free government. It is just possibly the rea- lution and recommends Chinese methods east Asia, with the possible exception of to Communists in other Asian lands. the Philippines. It strikes me that this is a very impor- Mr. CHURCH. There are free govern- tant distinction, Mr. President. There meats in Asia today. India, Malaysia, is a difference between the problem posed the Philippines, and Japan are the best examples. I want to give them full credit. Particularly the Indians, I think, deserve credit for tremendous de- termination against odds-conditions of great adversity-in maintaining a dem- ocratic government. But most Asian and African governments are not free. They are not democratic governments. Certainly, this applies to the present re- gime in Saigon supported by the United States. So ][ think, if we are going to approach the war in Vietnam on a purely ideologi- cal basis, then we must be careful to recognize that the struggle there is pres- ently between two despotisms. I hope the Government in Saigon will one day become a true democracy, that it will find a wider basis of popular support, and that it will come to foster a broadening freedom. But that is not the case at the present time. If I may go to the third point the Senator from Pennsylvania raised, which was the point of expanding nationalism, I say again, relating the Senator's ques- tion to the situation in Vietnam, that the expanding nationalism we face there is not Chinese nationalism, but Vietnamese nationalism. Oftentimes the Secretary of State has referred to the war in Viet- nam jcs Ho Chi Minh's war. When he appeared before the Senate Foreign Re- lations Committee, I asked him if the aggression he kept referring to was not the aggression of North Vietnam rather than of China, and he admitted this was 60. I think, given the history of this struggle, the facts are that Ho Chi Minh was the original revolutionary leader who led the Vietnamese people successfully in their war for independence against the French, and that the division between North and South Vietnam which emerged from that war at Geneva, in 1954, was meant to be temporary, and that the elections on the question of unification for the entire country, which were sup- posed to have taken place 2 years later, in fact never occurred. Mr. CLARK. And why did they not occur in the south? Mr. CHURCH. The regime in South Vietnam at that time, Diem's regime, was opposed to the elections. President Eisenhower, in his book, makes the statement that the best opinion lie could marshal indicated that, had the elections occurred, perhaps as many as 80 percent of the people would have voted for Ho Chi Minh. Mr. CLARK. So we have either active- ly encouraged or acquiesced in prevent- ing a democratic solution of the overn- mental problems in South Vietnam. Mr. CHURCH. I may say to the Sen- ator that there were good reasons to ques- tion whether an election at that time- in the north. as well as the south--would have been a free expression of popular opinion, but that begs the point, I think, because part of the Geneva Pact of 1951 was the agreement that elections would be held, and. that agreement was broken. either side has kept the agreement, as the Senator well knows. But the ques- tion of determining whether or not the line of demarcation between north and south would remain as a common bound- ary, or would remain as it was, was never put to the test of ballots. So, 1.0 years later, it is being put to the test of bullets. If there is in this situation an element of nationalist expansion, it is Vietnamese in character. It is the attempt of Ho Chi Minh, the original revolutionary leader, to lay claim upon the whole coun- try, and it comes after a failure of the Geneva Pact to permit the elections which were to settle that issue 10 years ago. Mr. CLARK. Does it not also include a failure on the part of the Diem govern- ment and its successor to go to the peo- ple of South Vietnam in a democratic way to determine what they wanted to do with their own destiny? Mr. CHURCH. I can only say the elec- tions were never held. The reasons giv- en have been several. The most frequently heard has been that no meaningful elections could have occurred in North Vietnam because it was a closed Communist society and everyone would have had to vote way. Mr. CLARK. I agree with that state- ment. Mr. CHURCH. I agree, too. But, at the time the agreement was entered into in Geneva, it was known that North Vietnam was going to ]become a Communist country. Nevertheless, the elections were agreed to. But they were not held. 'Chen Ho Chi Minh began his effort to bring down the South Viet- nam regime by force. Mr. CLARK. If the Senator will yield further, I suggest that the principal rea- son for not holding an election in South Vietnam was that Diem's government would have gotten licked. I take it from something that was said earlier by the Senator that we still have a totalitarian government in South Viet- nam which we are supporting, so that unlike the situation with Hitler and his aggression against the democratic na- tions of Western Europe, we find our- selves intervening on the side of one dic- tatorship against another dictatorship. Would the Senator care to comment on that? Mr. CHURCH. In all honesty, this is the existing situation. We do it upon the grounds that the north is attempting to forcibly seize the south, and that we are committed to the Saigon regime to prevent the success of an aggression being perpetrated by Hanoi. I believe that there is much evidence to sustain the supposition that the Hanoi Government is in fact giving all possible help, encouragement, direction, and as- sistance to the Vietcong rebels in the Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE south. I have no quarrel with that fact. It must be recognized. The evidence makes it quite irrefutable. The distinction that I am trying to draw is one between North Vietnam and China. Here, it seems to me, is an ob- vious attempt by Ho Chi Minh to com- plete the revolutionary war in Vietnam, which began against the French, and which now continues against the Amer- icans. From the standpoint of Hanoi, this is one continuous effort to achieve Viet- namese independence by driving the Western nations out. We do not see our role as romotely corresponding to that of the French be- cause, as the Senator knows, the French purpose was to restore French control over Vietnam and reestablish the French colony there. Our purpose is quite different. We have no interest in establishing an American colony in South Vietnam. We know that our purpose is quite different. The important question is: How does it appear to the Vietnamese? After so long and bloody a struggle on their part to drive out the French, it must seem to many Vietnamese that this is but a continuation of that war, looking to the eventual 'establishment of Vietnamese independence after Western nations have been driven from the land. Mr. CLARK. The Senator is correct. This situation is fundamentally different from the Nazi aggression in World War II where, I take it, the Senator would agree with me unquestionably that free- dom and democracy were at stake. The Western democracies, which were of the same philosophical bent as our- selves, were fighting for their lives against totalitarian and nationalistic German aggression. We, in my opinion, justly, rightly, and necessarily, went to their assistance. But is that not an entirely different situation from the situation which con- fronts us in Asia today? Mr. CHURCH. Yes; the struggle in Vietnam is essentially a civil war be- tween groups of Vietnamese to determine which government they shall have, and whether the division line shall remain in effect. When I went to school that was a civil war. We keep asserting to the world that this is not a civil war in Vietnam. But, no matter how one divides the Viet- namese, north and south, Communist and non-Communist, they still remain Vietnamese. We are the only foreigners to have intervened, apart from the small numbers of Australians and New Zealanders, and the one combat division of Koreans that we have summoned there. So, to Asians this war does have a very different appearance. In no case is it comparable to the situation that con- fronted us when Hitler sent his armies across Europe in an attempt to con- quer the continent. If the Chinese were sending their armies south into Vietnam, Laos, Burma, and Malaysia; then we would have a comparable situation, with the Peiping government undertaking to conquer other Asian lands. That, in my opinion, would be a situation similar to that which we faced in Europe in the days of Hitler. Mr. CLARK. I would like to make one more distinction with respect to the al- leged analogy to Hitler and Munich, and then I will let the Senator return to his speech. There is no doubt in my mind-I won- der if the Senator agrees-that Hitler's Germany represented a military menace which, if not stopped, would have over- run not only Western Europe but also Great Britain and would in the end have posed a very real threat to both Russia and the United States. It possessed a military machine, the efficiency of which probably has not been equaled since the days of Napoleon. The Senator makes the point, and it is a good one, that this is a war of North Vietnam against South Vietnam. But we both know that North Vietnam is being enormously encouraged to main- la~id China. I ask the Senator if the administra- tion spokesmen who argue the Hitler- Mao Tse-tung analogy might not con- sider this distinction: China has no airpower. Hitler had enormous airpower. China has no sea- rower. Hitler had a great fleet of sub- marines and pocket battleships in the Atlantic. Hitler had enormous fire- power in terms of tanks and heavy ar- tillery and eventually in V-bombs and rockets. China has very little of that. China is a primitive nuclear power, a country having very little heavy artillery and, so far as I know, an insignificant rocket capability. In vast contradistinction to Hitler,-China's military might lies almost entirely in its large land army. Its capacity for offensive action is lim- ited to the perimeter of mainland China, although it might include North Vietnam, and even South Vietnam. The with- drawal of Chinese troops from India leads me to believe that the State De- partment has vastly overemphasized the threat arising from the offensive military capacity of mainland China. There can certainly be no comparison with the ag- gressive military capabilities of Nazi Germany. Mr. CHURCH. I would agree with the Senator from Pennsylvania that modern, highly industrialized Nazi Germany rep- resented a military threat of a different dimension than that presently posed by China. The important thing, however, is to recognize that-whatever may be the threat of Chinese aggression in Asia today-we are presently engaged in a war that concerns the Vietnamese. If we press that war far enough north toward the boundaries of China, a point will be reached-no one knows exactly where; but a point will be reached-a point where the Chinese will come down into Vietnam, just the way they came down into Korea. Then, of course, we would find ourselves engaged in a war of an en- tirely new character. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator further yield? Mr. CHURCH. I stress this point be- cause when we fail to distinguish between the problem of China, on the one hand, and the problem of North Vietnam, on the other, we get ourselves into a frame of mind which is all too prevalent: that is, in the name of defending Asia against China, we fight against North Vietnam. This, of course, leads us to confusion; and what we need is more clarity and less confusion if we are to fashion a workable policy in Asia. I now yield to the Senator from Pennsylvania. Mr. CLARK. In an effort to help to clarify that policy, I wonder if the Sena- tor from Idaho would agree with this observation: If we push mainland China to the point of coming in with her ground army in defense of North Viet- nam, and to assist the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong in their aggression; we have only two choices. The first is to pour hundreds of thousands of addi- tional American troops into that area to stop that ground warfare. The second is to use nuclear weapons to destroy China. I ask the Senator to comment briefly on what he believes Russia might well be expected to do under those cir- cumstances. Mr. CHURCH. If that tragic sequence of events were to occur, the danger of a general nuclear holocaust would be very grave. Mr. CLARK. There is no doubt about what that would mean to the people of the United States of America. Mr. CHURCH. No, indeed. The stakes are mortal. This is the reason the Committee on Foreign Relations came out from behind closed doors to examine the issue of Vietnam. The American people are entitled to know how grave might be the circumstances of a widening war in Asia. I believe the public hearings of the Committee on Foreign Relations have performed a vital service. The American people were in- vited to witness our deliberations. As a result, the people of the country are bet- ter apprised of the war in Vietnam, its present implications, and the possible consequences that might attend a widen- ing war in southeast Asia. I thank the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania for emphasizing the differences between the problem we faced in the days preceding the outbreak of the Second World War in Europe and the problem we now face in Asia. Un- less we understand these distinctions, we have no chance of fashioning a policy that is designed to deal with the realities in Asia today. The gulf that separates Europe from Asia is immense. Most of the newly inde- pendent Asian governments-like those in Africa-contend with internal up- heaval. Most are hard pressed to satisfy the demands of their suddenly unfettered peoples. Most lack democratic tradi- tions,"and have instead "strong man" re- gimes under one-party rule. Their people wretch in poverty, and often bear the yoke of ancient wrongs. "Capital- ism," not "communism," is the ugly word, conjuring up images of a hated colonial past. Socialism prevails by force of circumstances, since adequate private capital Is unavailable. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE February 21, .1966 With these countries, the United States enjoys no close communion, no cultural, political, economic, or ethnic bond. We are an alien in Asia, a suspect rich Western power, the only one that re- mains after the others have fled. In these circumstances, it is meaning- less to talk about military alliances which have raised a "barrier" against com- munism around the rim of Asia. If the SEATO and CENTO alliances bar com- munism, then a sieve bars water and plate-glass window bars light. SEATO has not responded to the Communist threat in Vietnam; the United States takes its stand there practically alone. Apart from the regime we sustain in Sai- gon, the only military allies we can hon- estly claim in Asia-South Korea, Tai- wan, and '.i'hailand--account for less than 5 percent of the Asian people. Rather than flaunting our meager alli- ances as evidence of a sound Asian policy, we should view them as shocking proof that we lack one. Given the grievances of most Asian peoples, future revolutions are inevitable. So, too, the Communist determination to Lake them over. In Eastern Europe, the Red army implanted Communist re- gimes; in Asia Chinese troops have not penetrated neighboring lands to thrust up Communist governments. Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CHURCH I yield. Mr. INOUYE. Would the Senator from Idaho describe the Chinese military occupation of Tibet? Mr. CHURCI-I. The occupation of Tibet was the laying of forcible control upon an area over which the Chinese have long asserted dominion, and which most of the rest of the world has also acknowledged as being within traditional Chinese claims. I do not, for a moment, condone the methods that were used by the Peiping government to assert that dominion, but I am fully aware that Chiang Kai-shek, who is, as the Senator from Hawaii well knows, the presiding head of the Chinese Government recognized by the United States, a government presently situated on the island of Taiwan, also claims Tibet as a part of the traditional land area over which the Chinese have as- serted dominion. I therefore believe that Tibet falls in a different category than other inde- pendent nations which lie beyond the traditional boundaries of China. I do not believe that Tibet can be compared, let us say, with Burma, Thailand, or Viet- nam. which are generally recognized as sovereign and independent nations. Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CHURCH. I yield. Mr. CLARK. I thought the comment of the Senator on Tibet was a very good answer to an extremely intelligent ques- tion. However, it was largely put on political and diplomatic grounds. I point out that, from a military point of view, the situation in Tibet was vastly different because there was no feasible possibility there of Indian forces or American forces or other forces opposed to the mainland Chinese Government de- livering a military counterpunch to drive the Chinese Communists out of Tibet. The situation existing there is very much like that which existed in Hungary in 1956. We had great sympathy for the people of Tibet. We had great sym- pathy for the freedom fighters of Hun- gary. However, we came to the reluc- tant, but I believe the correct, conclu- sion that that was not a place in which one could intervene. Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Presiden As I have stressed, a distinction must be drawn between the threat of Chinese ag- gression, on the one hand, and the prob- lem of communism, fostered by revolu- tion, on the other. American policy keeps blending the two together, presum- ably because the two threats were synon- ymous in Europe. This leads me to Mr. Ball's second point, that the Vietnamese war is not "an indigenous rebellion," but a case of "external aggression." The evidence shows clearly enough, Mr. Ball writes, "that the Communist regime in Hanoi never intended that South Vietnam should develop in freedom." From the start, we are told, the Vietcong rebels have been trained, directed, and supplied from the north in "a cynical and .ystem- atic aggression" which Secretary of State Dean Rusk describes as "lio Chi Minh's War." While citing the evidence, Mr. Ball might also have mentioned-but did not--that the line of demarcation, sep- arating North and South Vietnam, as agreed upon at Geneva in 1954, was not intended as a permanent boundary, and that the elections on the question of uni- fication which were scheduled for 1956, never occurred. The reason, widely ac- cepted at the time, was that "Uncle Ho," the revolutionary hero who had won in- dependence for both parts of Vietnam, would have garnered as much as 80 per- cent of the total vote. So what was not settled with ballots 10 years ago, is now being settled with bullets, in a civil war among the Viet- namese, northern and southern, Commu- nist and non-Communist. We can por- tray this war as a case of external ag- gression, but most Asians are not likely to see it that way. After all, we are the foreigners in Vietnam today. The North Vietnamese are not foreigners; they are Vietnamese. There are no Chinese troops fighting in South Vietnam. The only non-Vietnamese soldiers there are American, along with some of our Aus- tralian, New Zealand, and Korean allies. And race is a factor, on a continent whose people have so recently thrown off the domination of white, Western na- tions. We are engaged in a war in which we, a Western power, are fighting Vietnamese who are oriental, and we are fighting them in Vietnam. As Har- vard's John K. Fairbank, a noted Ameri- can authority on Far Eastern affairs, so graphically put it in a recent article: We are sleeping in the same bed as the French slept in even though we are dreaming very different dreams. They are dreams indeed if we think that by interjecting American troops into ex-colonial lands we shall stifle the spread of communism for long. No na- tion-not even our own-possesses a treasury so rich, or an arsenal so large, as to quench the smouldering fires of revolution throughout the whole of the emerging world. Violent convulsions are bound to oc- cur in many countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America, wherever injustice lacks a remedy and progress must spawn on force. Should suppression of revolt abroad become an American obsession, we will yield to the Communists the one prize they most covet, an uncontested claim upon every incipient revolution. If we do not attempt through our diplo- macy and by our example to guide these currents toward democratic ends, rather than trying in vain to stem them, the Communists will be left to ride their crest. Worse still, the importation into Asia of troops from the Western World, fur- nishes the Communists with an issue of great popular appeal; it invariably con- demns the challenged government to the contemptible charge of puppetry. We would do well to remember that, despite our massive intervention in South Vietnam, the war persists and intensifies. Far from being extinguished, it spreads now into Thailand. Yet the Burmese Government, without our intervention, snuffed out a Commu- nist insurrection. U.N. Secretary Gen- eral U Thant recently said about Burma: The Burmese Communist Party is still un- derground after 17 years and still illegal. Burma has over a thousand miles of land frontier with mainland China. If the Bur- mese Government had decided at some stage to seek outside military assistance, then I am sure that Burma would have experienced one of two alternatives: either the country would be divided in two parts or the whole country would. have become Communist long ago. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. CHURCH. I yield. Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I believe that the Burmese analogy is well worth stressing, and I hope that it will receive appropriate attention in the press :reports of the Senator's speech. To me, it is quite convincing. Is it not true that in another Asian country, Indonesia, an anti-Communist movement-with some overtones which I must say I am not very happy about- succeeded in. getting rid of the Chinese Communist Party and reestablishing control of Indonesia for the Indonesians? It was perhaps a totalitarian control, but I draw the tentative conclusion that we do better in the fight for freedom and against Chinese communism if we keep America out of it, than we do if America goes in. Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, the Communists are not doing very well in their effort to seize control of the under- developed world. Mr. CLARK. Except where we try to move in. Mr. CHURCH. On the whole, they are making very little progress. In Viet- nam they had the momentum of nation- alism to carry communism forward. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSJONAL RECORD - SENATE Unhappily, the revolutionary leader speech made by Under Secretary Ball at period. We perceived the forces of na- there who secured Vietnamese independ- Northwestern University 2 or 3 weeks tionalism and the aspirations for a bet- ence was a Communist. However, only ago. ter life being asserted. Asa consequence, in those cases where communism has Secretary Ball's statement, in my we urged our British friends to get out latched onto nationalism, has it become Judgment, is the best single statement of of India and Malaya. We told the Dutch a formidable force in the ex-colonial the administration's position on Viet- that in our judgment it was imperative regions of the world. nam that has come to my attention. Mr. that they withdraw from Indonesia, and We should take heart from that. We Ball, as the Senator knows, is one of the we exerted considerable pressure to see should be careful not to inject ourselves most able men ever to serve in our Gov- that that was done. We ourselves pulled in such a way that the Communists can ernment. out of the Philippines. then exploit our presence to make them- But I also think that the answer which The only area where we decided ' to selves the champions of the nationalist the Senator from Idaho is giving today, buck powerful historical forces was in cause. which follows roughly what he had to French Indochina; and we have been in I am afraid that this is what has hap- say in the Washington Post yesterday, is trouble ever since. Does the Senator pened in Vietnam. I believe this is the the finest critique of the administration agree basically with that analysis? reason that, despite the enormity of the position that I have heard. Mr. CHURCH. I agree completely with assistance which we have given to the Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator the distinguished Senator from South Saigon government and despite the tre- very much. Dakota. I am afraid that we have failed mendous superiority of the firepower Mr. McGOVERN. From now on to take our own advice. we possess in that country, the war per- when constituents write my office for a We understood and encouraged the na- sists and the Vietcong continue to grow clear statement of the pros and cons on tionalist aspirations of Asian peoples in number in South Vietnam. administration policy on Vietnam, I when they were directed against the Eu- Again I say we must differentiate be- shall send them the statement by Under ropean colonial powers. The one blind- tween the problem of containing China, Secretary Ball and the answer by the spot was Vietnam. When, for example, on the one hand, and the problem of dis- Senator from Idaho. the Indonesians pressed for independence couraging the spread of com.inunism Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is very against the Dutch, we encouraged the through revolution, on the other. There generous, particularly when one consid- Indonesians, and we discouraged the is just one great force that, in the long ers the very lucid and effective argu- Dutch; and in the end, the Dutch recog- run, can prevail against communism in ments he himself has made in construe- nized that there was no way they could the underdeveloped world. It is not the tive criticism of our Asian policy. enforce their dominion over the resist- primacy of American arms. It is indige- Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the Sena- ance of a 100 million people in Indonesia. nous nationalist resistance to commu- tor. During the celebrated debates be- We also stood with the Indians when nism; and if we are insensitive to that tween Vice President Nixon and the late they claimed their right to independence force, and intervene with mighty West- President Kennedy in the 1960 presiden- against the British. ern armies in a region of the world tial campaign, one of the news commen- Now the European powers have yielded which has just managed to throw off the tators asked each candidate to state what their empires. Independence has come colonial dominion of the Western na- he regarded as the most important quali- to all these Asian lands. The only west- tions, then I am afraid we will permit fication that he could bring to the Presi- ern nation that remains is the United the Communists to exploit nationalist dency. States, curiously enough the one power aspirations, and give them the one cause Vice President Nixon said he felt that that never seriously engaged in empire- that can rally popular support to their his most important asset was his expe- building during the previous 100 years. standards. We will thrust the nation- rience. Senator Kennedy replied that We know that our role has nothing alist banner into Communist hands. he felt the most important quality that whatever to do with colonialism; and I They could not ask for more. he brought to high office was his sense would be the last to question our mo- Mr. CLARK. I agree completely with of history. tives in Asia. We do hope to see an in- what the Senator has just stated. It I believe that the Senator from Idaho dependent South Vietnam created, and occurs to me there is another aspect of has indicated in all of his statements on certainly we have no colonial ambitions this case-I do not know whether the the problems that face us in southeast there. Senator will agree or not-and that is Asia a very clear understanding of his- But motives are one thing. The ap- that our best defense against commu- torical forces. pearance of war to other Asians is quite nism is the support of such programs as I believe that the greatest single mis- another. I am afraid that choosing President Kennedy's Alianza Para Pro- take we have made in southeast Asia, in Vietnam as a place to make a stand, and greso and other foreign aid programs the years after World War II, has been importing, from the opposite side of the which enable the people of the under- a tendency to see the revolution of that globe, a vast Western army to fight developed countries of the world to move area as another manifestation of Hitler- against the revolutionary leader who out of the condition of misery, of starva- ism. secured Vietnamese independence from tion, of inadequate shelter; because Mr. CHURCH. I agree with the Sena-. the French, reflects a failure to com- those conditions are breeders of com- tor. prehend the great historical forces which munism, and that is where, in my judg- Mr. McGOVERN. In other words, we have been at work in Asia. I am sorry ment, our major effort should be placed, learned the lesson of Hitler, as the Sen- that we failed to see for ourselves what Mr. CHURCH. I agree wholeheart- ator from Idaho has said, but we applied we so clearly saw where others were con- edly with the Senator, and I hope that it to the wrong situation; and, having cerned, in the years that preceded our we shall perfect a new policy in coping done that, we have offered the wrong involvement in Vietnam. with the problems posed by guerrilla medicine for the problems of that part Mr. NELSON: Mr. President, will the warfare. This is what we desperately of the world. Senator from Idaho yield? need in Asia, and our failure thus far to It is my own feeling that even if there Mr. CHURCH. I yield. devise such a policy, including some had never been a Soviet Russia, even if Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I have measure of discretion and restraint, is there had never been a Red China, we a brief comment to make. I am unable one of the reasons for the difficulties would have seen revolutions in Asia in to remain in the Chamber to listen to the that we now face in that part of the the years after World War. II. The remainder of the speech of the Senator world, Japanese shattered the old colonial em- from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH], but I read it I am now happy to yield to the dis- pires of southeast Asia, during World this morning and I wish to commend him tinguished Senator from South Dakota. War II. The people in southeast Asia, on it. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, first once freed from control by the coun- There is no one 'in Congress, in my of all I wish to commend the Senator tries of Western Europe, were not about opinion, who has made a more consistent from Idaho for the statement which he to submit placidly to imperial control and thoughtful contribution to this is making today, in following up an ar- again after the defeat of Japan in 1945. dialog in the field of foreign affairs than ticle he prepared for the Washington I think our policymakers, for the most has the Senator from Idaho. Post, published on yesterday, which I part, understood the historical forces The speech the Senator is making is a understand was an answer to a previous that were moving in the world at that most creative evaluation of our posture Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 in the world, particularly in the Far East. the New York Times magazine on No- what is our basic approach. It is done I wish to commend him for his excellent vember 28, 1965. He also delivered a without any caustic criticism. It is a contribution to the significant discussion very fine statement before the Economic constructive approach. I hope it will be which has been going on in the area of Club of :Detroit on February 22, 1965, en- taken seriously by those who are respon- foreign policy in the last few weeks. titled "Are We Too Deep in Africa and sible for our mistaken policies. Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator Asia?" I am glad to see the reference made to very much for his generous remarks. Because there is a certain continuity in the statement of Under Secretary Ball. Mr..MCGOVERN. Mr. President, will the Senator's thinking in his previous It so happens, in connection with the the Senator from Idaho yield? articles and the speech he is making to- statement made by Secretary Ball, that Mr. CHURCH. I yield. clay, I ask unanimous consent that at it has some serious flaws. He made the Mr. McGOVERN. To continue my the conclusion of the speech of the Sen- analogy between Vietnam and Greece. colloquy with the Senator from Idaho, ator from Idaho this afternoon the two In that connection, George C. Vou.rnas, having suggested that we do not have previous articles referred to may be who was in the U.S. service in the Middle It monopoly on virtue, it is somewhat printed in the RECORD. East during the difficulties there sub- encouraging to know that neither do we The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. mitted an article which I ask unani- have a monopoly on mistakes, particu- MORSE in the chair). Without objet- mous consent be included at the conclu- larly in the underdeveloped countries of tion, it is so ordered. sion of the remarks of the Senator from the world. (See exhibit 1.) Idaho along with some other material. As the Senator has stated so well in Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator. It is entitled "Is Vietnam Another his remarks on this subject, the Chinese Mr. McGOVERN. I might say that Greece?", which points out some errors have gotten into all kinds of trouble in that trilogy of articles should comprise and challenges the statements of Mr. those areas of the world where they have a very good textbook for any citizen who Ball. There are also several editorials intervened in a heavy-handed manner. is interested in reviewing not only the and articles bearing on this general sub- -'t'hey have been rebuffed in large parts problems and hazards we face in that ject from the New York Times and the of Africa. They have got into difficulties part of the world, but also the opportuni- Nation that I ask unanimous consent for in Cuba recently, and they have ter- ties that are open to us if we seize upon inclusion. tainly had setbacks for their cause in them with imagination and intelligence. Another point which I think should Indonesia; in fact, in every area where Before I yield the floor, I should also be emphasized in reference to the state- they have intervened in a clumsy and like to take this opportunity to commend ment made by Secretary Ball is that if heavy-handed manner, there has been a the junior Senator from New York [Mr. the Vietnam War is a civil war, an in- backfire. KENNEDY] for the statement he made digenous rebellion, we would have no The reason is clear: In those areas, over the weekend, calling upon our Gov- business being in there. That is an im- their interventions have run counter to ernment to be realistic in the negotiating portant admission to which I have al- strong nationalistic aspirations. It prospects that are ahead in Vietnam. I luded before. This review is also borne seems to me the one place they have had think we have to face up to the facts. We out by the statement of former President :notable success, as the Senator has stated must recognize that we are up against an Kennedy, who referred to it as a civil in his speech today, is in the area where indigenous guerrilla force in Vietnam, war. He was elected to the House in we have been most heavily involved; headed by the National Liberation 1946 and became a Member of the Senate namely, in Vietnam. 'T'here are no Chi- Front. To negotiate, we must be pre- in 1953. He called it a civil war. That nese soldiers fighting in Vietnam. The pared to talk with the people who are fact was also confirmed by the Senator foreign forces involved in that conflict doing the fighting and with the leaders from Ohio [Mr. YOUNG] who was there are from our country-not from China who are directing them in both North and received assurances from Generals or Russia. and South Vietnam. The Senator from Westmoreland, Stilwell and others, there We are involved in a constantly disap- New York emphasized that negotiations that it was essentially a civil war in pointing effort to impose an outside must include the guerrilla leaders. Sec- South Vietnam. Western solution on a problem which is ondly, he recognized that they must be I think one of the most important basically Vietnamese. It is clear that given some role in any provisional gov- aspects of this issue is the fact that the neither we nor the Communists can ernment that is established. We may information which has been emanating easily counter the tide of nationalism have complete confidence in the integrity from official sources is incorrect. without grave costs. of the government of Saigon, but the I ask that there also be printed at We have been the beneficiary of na- fact remains that when the Vietminh the conclusion of the speech of the Sena- tional aspirations when our policies have laid down their arms in 1.954, they did so tor from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH] an article been intelligent; likewise, we have had to with the understanding that an election by James Reston from the Sunday New pay for our mistakes where we have been would be held in 1956. For various rea- York Times of February 20, entitled too heavily involved as in Vietnam and sons that election was not held and they "Washington: The Rusk Doctrine," in the Dominican Republic. were frustrated in their hopes of winning which it is pointed out that the Rusk So I commend the Senator for his su- it. It is not hard for me to guess why doctrine will stretch us so thin that we perb address today on the challenge of they are skeptical about getting into will have nothing left. Asia. It is another of a series of bril- negotiations without reasonable as- I also ask that there be printed at the liant statements he has made in the field surance that they will have some part in end of the speech of the Senator from of foreign policy. setting the ground rules for future elec- Idaho a letter to the editor published Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, If the tions. in the New 'York Times of February 21 Senator will permit me, I might say to So I again commend the Senator from entitled "Error in Vietnam Policy," an the Senator that some time ago I wrote Idaho, as well as the Senator from New editorial published in the New York an article for the New York Times maga- York, for the contribution they have Times of February 21, entitled. "The tine on the very question the Senator made to this historic debate. Vietnam Commitment," and three con- has raised, that is, on the error of inter- Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will secutive editorials from the February 14 vening too much in countries that have the Senator yield? issue of the Nation, entitled "Everything just won independence. The Russians Mr. CHURCH. I yield to the Senator But Peace," "The Economics of It," and have made that error. The Chinese are from Alaska. "AID for Whom?" also making it. And, alas, we, too, have Mr. GRUENING. I can speak with The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without made it. enthusiasm of the really splendid con- objection, it is so ordered. Wherever this happens, the conse- tribution which the senior Senator from (See exhibit 2.) quences are predictable. The National- Idaho has made on this occasion and on Mr. GRUENING. I again wish to ist feeling reacts strongly against the several occasions in recent months which commend the Senator for the fine state- intervenor. I could cite examples in have been alluded to, and which I am ment he made and for his stimulating Africa, and I think in Asia, too, where glad to see are being placed into the and important contribution to this great this has happened. RECORD by the Senator from South debate which, at long last, is now being Mr. McGOVERN. The Senator has Dakota. had on the floor of the Senate. referred to his article that appeared in I think this is a profound analysis of Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE It was my privilege to have lunch with When we use force we are in violation our Secretary of State today, in the of article I, and we are using force now. course of which we went into the ramifi- Article IV, which was invoked, pro- cations of the Rusk doctrine, as Mr. vides: Reston described it in this morning's New ARTICLE IV York Times. My difficulty with the Sec- 1. Each Party recognizes that aggression retary's position is that he bases our by means of armed attack in the treaty area participation in the war in Vietnam upon against any of the Parties or against any the obligation that we assumed under the State or territory which the Parties by unan- SEATO Alliance. imous agreement may hereafter designate. It seems perfectly evident to. me that There has been no unanimous agree- the SEATO Alliance has not responded ment, as the Senator pointed out. The to the Communist threat in Vietnam. case of the administration grows weaker An alliance is a collective undertaking. and weaker. Every time U.S. spokesmen The purpose of an alliance is to secure come up with a justification. It falls to binding covenants of two, three, four, or the ground after one checks the perti- more governments, with the objective nent documents. that all will act in common concert if Mr. CHURCH. I thank the Senator. the aggression toward which the alliance We find ourselves in the position of justi- is directed should occur. fying the war on a higher plane, but It cannot be persuasively maintained that is unfortunate if it leads to doc- that the other signatories to the SEATO trines which are not tenable. Alliance have responded to the Commu- nist threat in Vietnam. I question the validity of a continu- Pakistan In is a a member of SEATO. ing obligation of the United States under treaty that is in France is a member of SEATO. Neither exactly y what has default. That Is of these countries has responded in any e happened to the o SEATO Treaty. It has failed to respond way. The Philippines is a member f embe to what we regard as Communist aggres- convert them into Soviet military bases. SEATO but we still aany SEATO tut Filipinos await i combat o trib troops Sion in Vietnam. Khrushchev made the mistake of trying it in Cuba. the war in 'Vietnam. As I have tried to stress, it is national- ultimatum . that at brought g him out with the In other words, the undertaking of the ism, not communism, which is the domi- brink the world to the SEATO Alliance has never been fulfilled, nant force in the ex-colonial regions of In the face facer war. The parties are in default. It is an ex- the world. Outraged nationalist indig- astonishing to arg these realities, it i- traordinary doctrine that, when other nation in Indonesia is putting the Com- flue one o out that spheres It Just parties to an alliance default upon their munists to the sword. We have no con- is not so. We gone nut h date. It just obligation, the alliance nonetheless re- spicuous presence there for the Com- current not American pretend otherwise, mains intact, and that commitments munists to exploit. Fortunately for us, Asia Ae policy in southeast undertaken by the United States remain Sukarno asked us out many months ago. claim to concede to China that obligatory. If we had a better sense of history, which hich we refuses c far ourselves in the West- obligatory. is no such doctrine in the ordi- would scoff at the notion that Vietnam ern Hemisphere the Russians Rue andssians in implicitly Europe. ary law of contracts. To my knowl- is some sort of test case- where nnedge t to Eastern Eupe. nists must be taught to abandon their resort to force Regardles of th fi outcome in Vietnam guerrilla wars will , continue to break out in the future when- n e na en i i _ _ s n any Country -`?`"?`" y ' The tragedy is that we resist the quest treaty which is otherwise in default. seed revolt. - We can draw no battle - line-in Vietnam the Domini R b , pu - lic, or any other foreign country- which will either put an end to future revolutions or cause the Comm i t t , un s s o quit trying to take charge of them . R h at er than rushing in with our -_J- ale'- The reasons go much deeper than the tones are simply not present in Vietnam. troops whenever a I -- n some Cit ommuns complexion of the Peiping Therefore, it seems extraordinary for the distant country takes a bad turn, we regime. Arnold Toynbee, the renowned Secretary of State to contend that our should begin to exercise prudent re- historian, reminds us: obligation under the treaty required us straint. The Communists are doing From 1840 to 1945, China was attacked, to intervene in Vietnam. It is a doctrine badly in the underdeveloped world. stamped on, humiliated, and fleeced by one quite without precedent to my knowledge Only where they have managed to seize warlike foreign country after another-first in the history of diplomacy. hold of nationalist aspirations, have they by Britain, then by France, and finally by Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will gained the upper hand. The lesson for Japan, a parvenu country which had bor- the Senator yield? us, in dealing with Communist rebellions rowed its civilization from China. A century Mr. CHURCH. I yield. in Asia, should be to hold our distance, of such treatment would be enough to make Mr. GRUENING. In my view we are extend our aid at arm's length, and a saint turn savage. in violation of the SEATO Treaty. In avoid implicating ourselves so openly as Recognizing the historic roots of the first place, article I provides: to convert these struggles,into American Chinas defection does not, of course, ARTICLE I wars. eliminate our need to deal with any con- The Parties undertake, as set forth in the This brings me to the third, and final, sequent threat of Chinese aggression. Charter of the United Nations, to settle any point in Mr. Ball's presentation, that We cannot permit Communist China to international disputes in which they may be southeast Asia does not lie within the conquer Asia, for this would indeed upset involved by peaceful means in such a man- Chinese sphere of influence. Further- the equilibrium of power upon which sta-ner and ju sticentare ernational not endangered an ndeto ray more, that the whole sphere-of-influence bility and peace depend. frain in their international relations from doctrine is "19th century geopolitics, a But we do not defend Asia against the threat or use of force in any manner in- dubious policy which would permit the China by fighting against North Viet- consistent with the purposes of the United accidents of geography to rationalize nam. Mr. Ball himself admits it: Nations. +w,. _---- - - . . s e nal . can e Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3429 prospects of developing and maintain- ing an equilibrium of power in the world." This is sheer sophistry. If anything should be clear, it is that the present equilibrium of power between the United States and the Soviet Union rests upon an implicit recognition of our respective spheres -of influence. We did not dis- patch an American Army into Hungary in 1956, not because we lacked sympathy for the freedom fighters, but because we calculated that our military penetration of the Iron Curtain would lead to war with Russia. The Soviet Government had reasserted a longstanding Russian influence in Eastern Europe, formerly ex- ercised by the czars. We may trade with these countries, and even encourage their governments to be more independ- ent, but we may not garrison our com- bat troops in them. Likewise, with the proclaiming of the Monroe Doctrine, we have long asserted an American sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere. The Russians are permitted normal dealings with Latin American countries, but they may not Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3430 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE February 21, 1966 He assures us- terest requires a showdown with China ablest speeches which has been made in have, over the centuries, shown an obstinate anyhow, and that now is a better time this continuing debate of Vietnam insistence on shaping their own destiny to fight than later, would do well to The Senator has penetrated the weak- which the Chinese have not been able to ponder the words of our former ArmY nesses of the State Department policy as overcome. Chief of Staff, Gen. Matthew B. Ridg- expounded by Under Secretary Ball. It is not communism in Hanoi, but the way. In his memoirs, he writes: I am particularly impressed with that unremitting pressure of the war itself, But I challenge any thesis that destroying part of his speech in which the Sen- which makes North Vietnam increasingly the military might of Red China would be ator speaks of a sound Asian policy for to our own long-range interest. We could America. I entirely concur with hipi dependent on China, thus eroding away create there, by military means, a great that the Vietnamese war in which we are her hard-won independence. power vacuum. Then we would have to go caught fast is a poor starting place for Neither is China contained in Asia by in there with hundreds of thousands of men a sound Asian policy. an American buildup of the military to fill that vacuum-which would bring us In the judgment of the Senator, what forces of South Vietnam. It would make face to face with Russia along a 7,000-mile as much sense to argue that the United frontier. If we failed to go in, then Russia effect with further unilateral American States could be contained in the Western herself would fill it, and the threw: to our escalation of the war in Vietnam, wheth- own security would not have been abated er by land, sea, or air, have on a sound Hemisphere by a Communist Chinese by one iota. American-Asian policy? buildup of the military forces of, say, It is not likely that China will Fortunately, the equilibrium of power Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, to the Guatemala. bring such a hideous war upon herself. extent that the war in southeast Asia in Asia that can effectively contribute to Peiping speaks fiercely but acts with e widens, it becomes less manageable. I au- eve it is tin our interest to the containment of mainland China is tion. Chinese troops are neither sta- believe ttherefore h can to confine not a matter of exclusive concern to the tioned nor engaged outside her borders. do all that h limits. Fortunfine the within of our limits F Fort the Saigon govf pledge to ul- United States. The chess-playing Rus- Her volunteers have long since been its present sians, with greater reason than we to fear withdrawn from North Korea. Chinese fillmr Chinese expansion, practice containment troops marched across the disputed ernment can. only be achieved in South in the king's row, by strengthening at boundary line into India, but quickly Vietnam. It is there that the war is be- . With the exception of in the India pawn's and withdrew yet, again. American troops still remain in ing Mr. fought. Pahkentthe play the game between Pakistan; b row by innocently waging in Vietnam South Korea, and engage, in ever larger our bombing of North Vietnam. Mr. CHURCH. The Senator is cor- what; appears to Asians to be a neo- numbers, in the war in Vietnam. How- colonial war. Is it any wonder that ever difficult it may be to achieve a satis- and the war is to overthrow the Saigon ,Japan flinches; that the Philippines factory settlement in southeast Asia, we and This erthrowy e igon balk: that India lectures; or that Mao must not permit South Vietnam to be- eth war be accomplished This usl can itoel Tse-tung gloats. come another Asian garrison for Ameri Therefore, I should hope that we would I totally disagree with the Department can forces. Our country has no need for not permit our frustration over the con- of State: to view Ho Chi Minh's war as fixed footholds on the Asian mainland tinuing struggle in the south to lead us no more than an extension of Stalin's so close to China. These enclaves mire toward striking ever outward, upon t?us postwar aggressions in Europe-to re- us down, inhibit our mobility, and ex- bombing Hanoi or Hai- web--is communism still as a seamless acerbate against whatever prospect there theory hheory ory that by by eliminating the cities - web--is not. "the beginning of wisdom." may be for an eventual accommodation Indust, or b North Vietnam, i will tn insurrection It is the denial of wisdom. It is a view with Peiping. somehow put an end to the of the world as rigid and doctrinaire as The American interest calls for a somehow Vietnam. that of the most credulous Marxist. It modus vivendi with China which is as I think is well to remember that agrarian remember that is a myopia reminiscent of the Bourbon viable as the one we have found with North Vietnam iris is well to Kings of whom it was said: the Soviet Union. To search for it is the Only 10 percent of its economy is indus- They have learned nothing, and forgotten task of statesmanship. trial. We can destroy the industries nothing. A. sound Asian policy would pledge there and level the cities and inflict great American assistance to countries threat- casualties. But I d not think this will The beginning of wisdom for Amer- ened by Chinese attack, taking full ad- North o Vietnamese k give will icon diplomacy in Asia is to stop con.- vantage of the mobility of our sea, air, cause more than the namese of No fusing the problem of Communist guer- and island-based military deterrent in any the ever caused the robin Koreans No to rilla wars with the problem of Commu- Asia. More important still, any endur- Korea ever lip. nist China. The two may be related, but ing containment of China must rest upon bombing there still remains a fundamental differ- the resistance of stable Asian govern- It me more harden ikely the that such resolve bo ing o ence between aggression and revolution. ments, which command sufficient will is in- Hanoi relyrn rde to ersist in the vv the ar, Chinese Marshal Lin Plato's militant ternal support, regardless of the ideology thus making it more difficult to reach a treatise is not a "Mein Kempf," ib- they profess, to form a counterbalance negotiated settlement. ing a blueprint for Chinese conqquestuest use to Chinese power. I hope that we will concentrate our Asia, but a do-it-yourself kit for the use: A sound Asian policy would also distin- military effort in the south where the in where, Communist revolutionaries in other guish between the prevention of Chinese military must bee south wand where. Asian lands. aggression and the repression of Com- keep the pledges we have Likewise, there is a difference between munist insurrection in other Asian lands. alone, to we the can Saigon Government. preventing China from invading neigh" In dealing with guerrilla warfare, we made Mr. CLARK. I takthat the Sena boring lands, and attempting to impose must develop a sense of discretion and tor r. CLARK. with take it that, under the a quarantine on Chinese influence. With restraint, if we are to encourage, rather circumstances, and fvery good our arms, if need be, we can accomplish than impede, indigenous resistance present , reasons, we cannot afford for withdraw the former, but not the latter. As long which alone can prevent the banner of our troops from South Vietnam. as China looms above the little countries nationalism from falling into Communist Mr. CHURCH. I am in complete bordering her in the Balkans of Asia, her hands. agreement with the Senator. As the shad- ow If will fall over them like a ines Toward such goals, the Vietnamese Senator knows, I have never advocated influence this historic ble sphere the Chinese cited war, in which we are caught fast, is a a precipitate unilateral withdrawal (States, is unacceptable to tUnited poor starting place. But we have no American troops. But I hope that we States, we can deny it-not by stabbing other. And the hour is late. can reach a satisfactory settlement at the shadow in Vietnam-but only by Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the which will permit an eventual, orderly striking down, and then dismembering,,, Senator yield? American disengagement. The China ftricfv . war with CHURCH. I yield. The President has himself emphasized ed, would be e higher other nations have discovered, would Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, Icon- that we desire no permanent foothold in than any we have ever paid before. gratulate the Senator on what in my South Vietnam, that we ask for no al- Those who think that our national in- judgment is one of the soundest and liance with the South Vietnamese Gov- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE ernment, that we are willing to recognize the neutrality of that government-and, indeed, that entire region-and that we want no military bases there. In all of these respects, I am in full agreement with the President. However, I am troubled that, 13 years after the end of the fighting in Korea and 10 years after the Chinese have withdrawn all of their troops from North Korea, and with- out any kind of guerrilla war to justify our continued presence in South Korea, we nonetheless keep an army of not less than 50,000 American troops stationed in that country. We must not permit the same thing to happen to us in South Vietnam. The American interest is not served by such military toeholds in southeast Asia. They are unnecessary from the stand- point of our own security. They tend to mire us down and to impede our mobility. I hope that we avoid in South Vietnam what we failed to avoid in Korea. Mr. CLARK. I take it that the Sena- tor would also agree with me, that if the Hanoi government were to commit the remainder of its well-trained army-and I take it that he would also agree that there is a substantial part of its well- trained army which has not yet been committed to South Vietnam-and par- ticularly if the Chinese should come into the war with "volunteers," we might then of necessity be required, in order to stay where we are and not be driven out by force, to further increase our ground forces in South Vietnam, this being coun- terescalation on the other side. Mr. CHURCH. I agree with the Sen- ator. We shall have to take the neces- sary military steps to prevent the Hanoi government from forcing us out of South Vietnam. Whether we ought to have gone there in the first place, or whether it was in the American interest to make pledges to Saigon in the aftermath of the French defeat is quite another ques- tion. We did so, and having made those pledges, we must honor them. We can- not permit the Hanoi government to force us out of South Vietnam. I think it should be evident that there is no disagreement on this score. None of us who have criticized American policy in southeast Asia, no member of the Committee on Foreign Relations, to my knowledge, no Member of the Senate, has advocated an American withdrawal from South Vietnam in repudiation of the pledges we have made to Saigon. Mr. CLARK. I say to the Senator that I am in complete agreement with that statement, and further, that I intend to address myself, on the floor of the Sen- ate, to the broad questions of our policy in Vietnam later this week. I will make an observation, and ask the Senator to comment on it: Assuming that the forces ranged against us ' in South Vietnam are not drastically in- creased by either the commitment of ad- ditional regular North Vietnamese troops or the commitment of Chinese volun- teers, does the Senator agree with me that it would be a tragic mistake to fur- ther increase substantially the American forces in South Vietnam, to make an ef- fort to conquer the real estate which we have lost, and pursue a policy of search and destroy in areas which have not been held by ourselves or our allies for months if not years, with the result that the American casualty rolls will nec- essarily increase? Does the Senator agree that the wiser policy would be to follow the advice of General Gavin and former Ambassador Kerman, to make do with what we have, to encourage our South Vietnamese allies to press with their troops to recover the ground which they have lost, remembering the injunc- tion of President Kennedy, given only a couple of months before his assassina- tion, that this is their war, that they must win it or they will lose it, that we can help them with arms and with ad- vice, but that in the end if there is not the will to win by the South Vietnamese, to pacify their own country, we should not attempt to do the job for them? Mr. CHURCH. I say to the Senator that if we had remembered the Kennedy injunction, we would not have 200,000 troops in Vietnam today. We have gone beyond that point. We decided, when it became evident that the South Vietnamese were unable to overcome the rebellion, that we would move in our own combat forces and un- dertake to do so ourselves. To be sure, we fight alongside the South Vietnamese. They have suffered heavy casualties: I do not mean to make light of their gal- lantry. But increasingly, the burden falls upon American troops, as the size of our army there grows. We are told now that perhaps there may be 300,000, 400,000, half a million, or 600,000 Ameri- can troops in South Vietnam by the end of this year. I do not know. I do not wish to leave the impression, however, that I believe in the enclave theory. I think that under the present circumstances, we cannot afford to hole up in fixed position along the seacoast, and still retain much chance of secur- ing a satisfactory settlement. We are there. We have converted this struggle into an American war effort; and' now I think we must pursue a dy- namic strategy in South Vietnam. I am not a military man; I cannot pass upon the requirements of that strategy, but I think that we must look for guidance to our officers in command, who are on the ground, know the condition and the situation, and have to deal with it there. I do wish to stress, however, that I think the American military effort must be concentrated in South Vietnam, and that whatever the difficulties are, what- ever the strategy we pursue in the south, we must not let the frustrations of this war lead us toward widening the battle ever northward toward the boundaries of China. I think that there will come a place, if we do, where the Chinese will come in, as they did in Korea. Mr. CLARK. One final question-and in advance of asking it I again thank the Senator for indulging me in this colloquy, and also express again my admiration for the splendid speech he has made. It is still official State Department and Defense Department doctrine that the major burden of this war is being carried by the South Vietnamese. We are told again and again that four out of every five military incidents in the South are South Vietnamese initiatives, and not American initiatives. We are told of the upward of a half million South Viet- namese men under arms, fighting, we are told, for the defense of freedom in their country. I refer again to the Kennedy statement of 2 or 3 years ago. If that is the fact, as the State Department and the Defense Department continue to insist it is the fact, why do we not let the South Viet- namese win this war, with the support which we can give them with the 200,000 troops and with the untold treasure we are pressing in there; why do we have. to make this an American war? Mr. CHURCH. I say to the Senator, the question is a poignant one, but it is no longer a timely one. The war has become an American struggle. Ameri- can troops are now committed to it in such numbers that I think this reality must be faced. I believe, however, that the distin- guished Senator from Pennsylvania underscores the fact that guerrilla war- fare, in the last analysis, depends upon the internal situation within the coun- try victimized by Communist insurrec- tion. In the long run, the Government challenged will prevail, or will be toppled, depending upon the willingness of the people of the country to rally behind it. The Greek Government was able to put down a Communist rebellion, one that the State Department itself likens to the war in .Vietnam. The Greek Gov- ernment had aid from the United States, to be sure, but not American combat troops. The Greeks put down the rebel- lion with their own troops. The Philippine Government put down a somewhat comparable insurrection, in- volving Communist elements, without the intervention of foreign troops. It was done by Filipinos. The Burmese were able to snuff out a Communist-led insurrection in their country, despite a thousand miles of common frontier between Burma and mainland China. On the other hand, the Batista govern- ment in Cuba was unable to put down a Communist-led rebellion. I think, Mr. President, that we must get used to the fact that we live in a generation of revolution; that many governments are going to be challenged, in many countries in the underdeveloped world, from Asia to Africa to Latin America, and that the United States simply cannot intervene in all of these situations for the purpose of imposing American solutions. If we try to do this, our country will soon be regarded as the sentinel of the status quo, as the self- appointed defender of governments despised by their own people. Thus, we will give to Communists everywhere the banner they most want to uphold; namely, an unchallenged claim upon every incipient revolution, the compel- ling assertion that they alone are the champions of change. Mr. President, it will not work. It cannot work. I hope and pray that we will find the wisdom to avoid any policy so foredoomed. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 From the lessons of the present and the past, we must begin to find the guide- lines for a new policy much better suited to the problem of revolutionary wars in the underdeveloped world. If we summon a sense of restraint, I do not despair for the future because, unlike many others, I am not afraid of communism. I have been in Communist lands. The system has little to com- Iriend it. It is inefficient. It is tyran- nical. It is bureaucratic. It is not pos- sessed of any dynamic attraction that is likely to ensnare and subdue the world. Mr. President, the great quest of men everywhere is for freedom. Not many countries have achieved it in full meas- ure, but people everywhere yearn for it. It is the very force working within the Communist world to change the Commu- nist system itself. It is the force work- ing outside the Communist world, the very force which produces revolutions. In the long run, the ancient yearning of mankind for freedom will prevail. Communism will never inherit the world. EXHIBIT 1 ARE WE Too DEEP IN AFRICA AND ASIA? (Py the Honorable FRANK CHURCH, U.S. Sen- ator from Idaho, before the Economic Club of Detroit, Feb. 22, 1965 ) In 1957, his first year in the Senate, it was CnuacH who modified the jury trial amend- ment to the civil rights bill, to assure Negroes the right to serve on Federal juries, a pro- cedural safeguard which opened the way for the first Senate action on civil right in nearly a century. FRANK CIIrscros has not been content to assess the international situation from his Senate office In Washington, but has traveled extensively throughout the world. He was a delegate to the economic conference of the Organization of American State in Argentina in 1957, and to the International Parliamen- tary Union at Warsaw, Poland in 1959. He led a delegation on a 5-week factfinding tour of Africa in 1960, and then made a personal inspection of American bases and trouble spots in the Pacific area late in 1962. The senior Senator from Idaho has been outspoken in his belief that our key to Asia is a satisfactory settlement of the political war in Vietnam. It is a pleasure for me to present to you. the Honorable FRANK CHURCH, U.S. Senator from Idaho, who will discuss "Are We In Too Deep in Africa and Asia?" Senator CHURCH. [Applause.] Hon. FRANK CHURCH. Thank you very much, Joe Hudson, for an extremely nice in- troduction, Mayor Cavanagh, General Bork, and gentlemen of the Economics Club of Detroit. Our time is limited but let me just say in the way of amenities that I am very proud to be here. I know your two fine Senators, PAT McNAMARA and PHIL HART, very well. They -ire good friends of mine and I respect them highly. It is a special privilege to come and address so distinguished an audience in the great State they represent in the Senate of the United States. PART I. FROM ONE EXTREME TO ANOTHER "We can never again stand aside prideful in isolation," so spoke Lyndon B. Johnson at his inauguration. All Americans should agree with the Presi- dent. Head.-in-the-sand isolationism died a generation ago. It isn't likely to be re- surrected. As a confirmed internationalist, I favor strong American support for the United Na- tions, and I believe in a sensible foreign aid ;program. But the pendulum of our foreign policy can swing from one extreme to the other. Once we thought that anything which hap- pened abroad was none of our business; now we evidently thing that everything which happens abroad has become our business. In the span of 30 years, an excess of isolationism has been transformed into an excess of inter- ventionism. Since the days of the Marshall plan, the United States has constantly expanded the scope of its commitment to foreign govern- ments. From Western Europe, we have moved into Africa, the Middle East, and the Far East, until the dimension of our involve- ment has become global. Our troops are now stationed in no less than 30 countries, we are pledged. to defend 42, and we are extending aid, in one form or another, to nearly 100 nations. Why have we spread ourselves so thinly? What compulsion draws us, ever deeper, into the internal affairs of so many countries in Africa and Asia, having so remote a connec- tion with the vital interests of the United States? The answer, I think, stems from our in- tensely ideological view of the cold war. We fancy ourselves as guardian of the "free" world, though most of it isn't free, and never has been. We seek to immunize this world against further Communist infection through massive injections of American aid, and, wherever necessary, through direct American intervention. Such a vast undertaking has at least two defects: first, it exceeds, our na- tional capability; second, among the newly emerging nations, where the specter of West- ern imperialism is dreaded more than com- munism, such a policy can be self-defeating. As a seasoned, friendly :foreign diplomat re- cently put it: "The United States is getting involved in situations where no one-not even it nation of saints-would be welcome." This is not to say that we should write off Africa or Asia. It is to say that a foreign policy of intervention, which was right for Western Europe, is apt to be wrong for those continents which have just thrown off European rule. We were welcomed back to war-devastated Europe in 1945 to be a nuclear sentinel against further Russian aggression. It was the expansion of hostile Russian power which summoned us, not the color of the red ban- ner, or our distaste for the way of life inside the Soviet Union. There was no confusion among the NATO allies as to the identity of the enemy. As long as the Russian threat remained imminent, we all faced in the same direction, united by a single will. There was still another reason for the suc- cess of our intervention in Europe-- a condi- tion so obvious that it is often overlooked, and yet so fundamental that its absence in Africa and Asia accounts for most of our set- backs on those continents. In Europe, we stood among people with whom we shared a common ancestry, whose political and eco- nomic systems were similar to our own, and whose traditional values derived from the same mainstream of historical experience that we call Western civilization. This cultural bond meant that most European generally shared our aims and our point of view. But if the inhabitants of Western Europe tend to see the world as we do, as a global arena in which free people are arrayed against Communists, it does not follow that Africans and Asians share this view. They have been participants in a different revolution, more potent and widespread than the Communist brand-a revolution foreshadowed two centuries ago, by the American War for Independence, and whip- ped into flame by Woodrow Wilson's ringing reaffirmation of the right of self-determina- tion. Neither Marx nor Lenin fathered the revolt against colonialism, and we needn't permit their successors, in Moscow or Peiping, to exploit the colonial issue to Communist advantage. To avoid this, we must understaand that, for most Africans and Asians, our concept of self-government and individual freedom is totally unreal, having never been experi- enced. In many, if not most, of these emer- gent lands, it is colonialism, not communism which is the ugly word. Because these facts are so well known, It puzzles me that American foreign policy in Africa and Asia has not been tied to them. We have plunged into these former colonial regions as though we had been designated on high to act as trustee in bankruptcy for the broken empires. First of all, we strained relations by try- ing to induce governments to line up with us in the cold war, a struggle in which few felt any real interest. Forgetting that we ourselves had insisted upon our right to stay neutral for most of our history, we assailed neutralism as a kind of Communist trick. Later, having painfully learned that cold war neutrality always served as a badge of independence and sometimes even as an um- brella for it, we changed tune, but, even then, we kept on administering our aid programs in ways designed to freeze out the Russians and Chinese. In regions craving aid from any source, our freezeout policy was bound to give rise to cries of undue interference. Soon, African and Asian governments were demanding aid without strings attached, while accusing the United States of practicing neocolonial- ism. Worse still, sensing that we feared competition from Communist sources, many a government craftily raised the ante on us, threatening to go to the Reds for help if we failed to meet some new demand. Worst of all, we have permitted ourselves to be drawn into the internal political affairs of so many African and Asian countries that anti-American feeling is rising at an alarm- ing rate. Our Embassies are being subjected to increasingly frequent attacks, our in- formation libraries are being sacked, and demagog from Cairo to Djakarta court popular favor by rebuking us. Afro-Asian delegates at the U.N. castigate us with words of extraordinary violence. Clearly, the pol- icy of intervening too much in the volatile ex-colonial regions of Africa and Asia, is backfiring on the United States. PART II. MISTAKES IN AFRICA Much of this could have been avoided. I visited Africa in 1960, immediately after John F. Kennedy's election, in company with two of my colleagues and the President's young- est brother, Ten. Wherever our presence be- came known, eager crowds would gather to shout, "Kennedy, Kennedy." The word had spread through Africa that the newly elected President of the United States had, as a Sen- ator in 1957, spoken up for Algeria in her war for independence against France. For the first time our country was being identified, by Arab and black alike, with legitimate Afri- can aspirations. Opportunity was beckon- ing our way. If we had continued to champion Africa. natidnalism, the cause that counts with the people; if we had declared ourselves strongly in favor of rightful independence for the Portuguese territories, the flaming issue in Africa today; if we had held ourselves at arm's length from the shifti,ag factional fights for power within the seething young African countries, regardless of the labels chosen to solicit outside support, I have no doubt that our influence in Africa would have kept on growing. But we haven't yet managed to harness our zeal. Rational restraints give way to emo- tional involvement, which, in turn, leads to more intervention. Fortunately, the Rus- sians have made the same mistake in Africa, and now the Chinese seem eager to repeat it. Here are two examples, one Russian, one American, which constitute, in my judgment, showcase illustrations of how not to conduct a winning foreign policy in Africa: Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE Six years ago, Nikita Khrushchev scurried only people who will stand by you are the attack, that these governments might avoid to the rescue of Sekou Toure strongman of people of Pakistan." the need for developing nuclear shields of Guinea, after this little west African coun- That's past history now. Having used us their own, while we avoid the dangers of try had been stripped bare by the depart- for his purpose, Ayub Khan was the first to further nuclear proliferation. This kind of ing French. It seemed a perfect marriage, flirt with Red China, when India was at- guarantee, which would be a real deterrent since the Guinean leaders, raised in the tacked. The fervent courtship of Pakistan to Chinese military aggression, lies within radical tradition of the -French labor move- only lost us favor there. In the recent elec- our capability, and would preclude a power ment, were Marxists anyway, and anxious to tions, the main issue between the two press- vacuum in Asia, so feared by the architects establish a model Marxist state. dential candidates was who was the most of our present policy. When I arrived in Conakry, the country's anti-American; Ayub Khan won. To those who protest that such a course capital, in December of 1960, Guinea had PART IV. OUR DILEMMA IN VIETNAM would fail to protect against growing Chi- taken on all the appearances of a satellite. nese influence in such countries as Laos, Communist advisors sat beside every gov- To the case against excessive American in- ernment minister. Numerous Red-donated tervention in Africa and Asia, the State De- Cambodia, Burma, or Vietnam, brought on partment has a stock answer: the Commu- through intensified Communist activity projects were under construction, including within these countries, I submit that the a big printing plant, and the place swarmed nists won't let us quit. South Vietnam is pointed to as the proof of our dilemma. If scoreboard Communist reboard on our present policy of direct technicians, transplanted intervention in southeast Asia shows that we from countries behind the Iron Curtain. we permit the Vietcong to overthrow the are now losing this contest. Burma and Cam- Guinea had plainly been taken over. Saigon Government, then the gates are open, Into this captured country, President Ken- so the argument goes, to successful Com- bodia, though both non-Communist govern- Into sent a young Ambassador, Bill Atwood. munist subversion of all the other govern- merits, have been moving steadily closer to His instructions were to play it cool. He ments in southeast Asia. China. Laos is limbo, after an American was to But the hard fact is that there are limits involvement, at heavy cost, in that country's say it was their business, not ours, Internal affairs, turned sour. The war, in to choose the system they preferred; that we to what we can do in helping any govern- were interested only in helping them, in a ment surmount a Communist uprising. We tart' Vietnam, despite advantage, is going s o's from obad to smodest way, with some of their problems of can give arms, money, food and supplies, but This somber This s r truth n is underlined and bad ton worse. human suffering. Kennedy felt, if we didn't the outcome will depend, in the final analy- merlined in the press too hard, that Guinea would soon sis, upon the character of the government events of the past fortnight-the stepped-up discover the Russians weren't 9 feet tall. helped, and the extent to which the people Vietcong attacks upon American bases in And so it happened. It wasn't long be- are willing to rally behind it. South Vietnam, and the consequent loss of fore Guinea began to resent the heavy- The Saigon government is losing its war, more American lives. We must hope that handed interference of the Russians. Rela- not for lack of equipment, but for lack of art in North our senlNorthVietnam, bombings of intended rt id moa- tions became so strained that the Soviet Am- internal cohesion. The Vietcong grow tions the strength and purpose, bassador was declared persona non grata, and stronger, not because they are better sup- may y sHaof our will and purpose, ordered to leave the country. Meanwhile. plied than Saigon, but because they are United States m persuade Hanoi and Peiping that the Guinea began to reassume control over her united in their will to fight. This spirit ptiger. Having g and never have commit- own a own course. Today, hex` attitude toward the cannot be imported; it must come from merit paper ap to Saigon, not, made a solemn t. The United States is much improved, and her within. The weakness in South Vietnam , we intend to keep Ir The ties with the West are growing again. emanates from Saigon itself, where we, as military might we can bring to bear upon The mistake of too much intervention, foreigners, are powerless to unite the spoil- would North Vietnam behoove a Is formidable the Communists the Commu indeed, and so which the Rusians made in Guinea, we seem ing factions. A family fued is never settled wus the l explore determined to duplicate in the Congo. Afri- by outsiders. Only the Vietnamese them- with way to a peaceful solution in cans wonder why the United States, having selves can furnish the solution. All of southeast rec. no historic, economic, or security interest in As to the other governments in southeast cision which h our our P esi r heavy bears. ars. AAnd d pee the Congo, should so involve itself in that Asia, they are not so many dominoes in a wwell to remember we country's civil war. I also wonder why. row. They differ, one from another, in popu - his would o office an that lut sinl a I know, of course, that the State De art- lar support, eagle, o p pport, and in capacity to resist Com- bundle e of arrows s in in one one claw and nd an an olive ve ment regards the Congo rebels as a Com- munist subversion. The Malayans, with branch in the other. The judicious use of munist front, even though our own envoy in British help, because of their own deter- both the arrows and the olive branch repre- Stanleyville, whose long agony with the mined resistance to communism, successfully sents our best hope for avoiding a widening rebels was climaxed when they forced him to put down a long and bloody insurrection. war in Asia. eat an American flag, declared, after his Guerrilla wars-even when nourished from Those who would use the arrows alone are rescue, that be believed the rebellion to be without-can be won by sitting govern- actually calling for war. The systematic and purely African, not Communist, in character. merits, but only in countries where shelter sustained bombing of North Vietnam, un- His statement was meet with stony indiffer- for the rebels is not furnished by the people. attended by any proffered recourse to the ence by the American press. Our reason for being in the Orient isn't bargaining table, can only lead us into war. For the fact is that our embrace with that of fashioning Asian governments. It North Vietnam, lacking air and sea power, Moise Tshombe is popular in the United isn't communism, as such, which accounts must answer on the ground. Her response, in States. We see him as a vociferous anti- for our presence in the Par East, but rather the form of added military pressures against Communist. What most however, , how the containment of Peiping. This can ? be the south, Saigon can hardly be expected to is the Africans see African tmequivalent of them, Tom," best accomplished if China is ringed with withstand. As a consequence, the next step stable, independent governments, which re- will be to send American land forces into ists who a puppet ariesof to Imperi l his own onuses whi n fuse to be the pawns of Chinese ambition. battle, thus converting the struggle into an mercen yme As Yugoslavia has proved in Europe vis-a- American war on the Asian mainland. That I doubt that Tshombe will ever win African vas Russi e e ^ ro???,,,__,_ _. . v n t i ca op ion increasingly against us. It would be to our national advantage To those who say that we must not parley PART III. to seek an international agreement now, because we would bargain from a posi- . THE LESSON OF PAKISTAN for the neutralization of the whole great tion of weakness, I reply that they take too Regrettably, we are creating similar prob- region ' that used to be French Indochina. restricted a view of our strategic position in lems for ourselves in Asia by the same excess The transitional phase of such a settlement southeast Asia. They look only to the plight of interventionism. Pakistan is a classic ex- might be policed by the United Nations, or of the war in South Vietnam, forgetting that ample. At fantastic cost, we undertook to by a special high commission set up to pre- American power in southeast Asia rests not enlarge and modernize the armed forces of side over a cease-fire in South Vietnam, to upon the weakness of Saigon, but upon the Pakistan. Our theory was that this assist- supervise the withdrawal of all foreign strength of our own possession of the sea and ance would bolster the country's defenses troops, and to maintain order, while an in- air. Our recent retaliatory blows should aaginst Russia, but it was India, contesting dependent and unalined new government make it clear to Hanoi and Peiping that we with Pakistan over Kashmir, which felt is formed by the Vietnamese themselves. will not quit under fire, nor withdraw, nor threatened. The neutrality of the whole region could submit to Communist coercion. We can Still, we persisted. After all, hadn't Ayub be guaranteed by the signatories to the in- strike back with relative impunity, from Khan appeared before a joint session of the ternational agreement. Thus, the military floating bases which are beyond Communist Congress, and addressed us in the reassuring might of the United States would remain reach, and inflict heavy punishment upon accents of a British country squire. On the available as a deterrent against Chinese ag- them. Ours is not a position of weakness Communist Issue, the Indians seemed much gression from the north, which is-or ought from which to deal. too conciliatory, but we felt sure Ayub Khan to be--our governing national objective in PART V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION could be depended upon, come what may. southeast Asia anyway. Although it is natural for our attention to He himself said so. To the Congress, he in- In like manner, we may find it in our na- be fixed upon the gathering crisis in Viet- toned: "Let me tell you, that if there is real tional interest to pledge our armed might nam, I nonetheless commenced this address trouble, there is no other country in Asia behond the defense of India, or some other with the purpose of undertaking a general on whom you will be able to count. The Asian government, against a future Chinese review of American foreign policy through- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February -21, 1966 out the whole of the excolonial world. My society In the name of conformity of opin- With respect to South Vietnam, three thesis has been that we have allowed our- ion. Now we either run a free society or American Presidents have said: Our purpose :;elves to become overinvolved in both Africa We don't? and if we're all going to keep quiet is to help the Saigon government try to will a.nd Asia. In saying this, I fully recognize and march in step to whatever official tune is its war. But they have also been careful to ihot the United States cannot withdraw to played in Washington, then we have relin- say it's not our war and ultimately it's a leek refuge within some happy hunting quished the most precious preroga:ive we war that only they, themselves, can will. I ;round of our own choosing. have as Americans, and we have forsaken the agree. Most Communist guerrilla wars have Rut it is m nd:atory, in these former cold- processes of freedom, because of our fear of been successfully suppressed, like in Greece, idal areas, th,.L we establish foreign policy the consequences that flow from f?eedom. like in Malaya., like in the Philippines, but !,oats which ale not beyond our reach; that I would not accept that condition and remain we can't guarantee that result every time. If, every time the point is reached where we observe priorities which correspond with in the U.S. Senate. [Applause.] our real natioi._a1 interests; that we concern JosrpH L. HUDSON, Jic. (Reading question) : a guerrilla war may be lost, we're going to ourselves less with other peoples' ideologies, "Why should Peiping accept a neutralized convert it into an American war, and do as uid that we adopt techniques which are southeast Asia? What do you sugge t we do Mr. Baldwin of the New York Times said yess- scnsitive to, and compatible with, the pre- if Peiping will not accept truce terms :accept terday-sendtha cu out Goa d knows A ericang ito how l's vailing sentiment of the people in each great able to us?" fight g t a war region of the world. Measured by these Hon. FRANK CHURCH. If it's not pc:rible to going to last, or where it's going to end, or criteria, we are too deeply involved in the negotiate an acceptable settlement, then, of what settlement will follow that would be as internal affairs of the emerging nations in course, it follows that we do not se tie. In good as what we've got to work with today--- Aand Asia. Korea, negotiations preceded an end to the then we're going to turn this country into a Africa I believe that President Johnson intends, fighting by 2 years. But in the end we citadel of isolationists again. We've got to in a prudent and responsible way, to redress reached. a truce. I remember that- you all keep our wits about us and remember that the balance. His emphasis on attending to remember it., too. The elections of 1952, we servo our national interest-our national the neglected problems at home is sensible. when Dwight D. Eisenhower pledged to go to interest-by our commitments abroad. And The long-run iniluences we exert abroad will Korea to arrange a settlement of he war. when a situation develops as this one has, hinge, in large measure, upon the kind of Eventually, we will settle in southeac t Asia at we must access the cost in terms of our real society we build in our own land. the conference table. Now, I can't tell you national interest. In any reappraisal of American foreign when Hanoi or Peiping may be willins; to deal, I'm for fighting wars when our vital policy in the underdeveloped world, so re- or on what basis--but I'd like to fled out. interest is at stake and we've never flinched. cenily freed from colonial bondage, we Moreover, it is with Hanoi that we are now But I'm not for getting this country engaged would do well to recall the wise words of principally concerned. The Chinese are not in folly, in futile wars, way out on the other President Kennedy, spoken in November of occupying North Vietnam. Their armies side of the world, over questions to which we 1961. "We must face the fact," he said, are not there. In fact, Chinese physical cannot furnish any durable answer. That I "that the United States is neither omn.i- presence in North Vietnam is much less sub- think is what we're in danger of doing if we potent nor omniscient, that we cannot al- stantial than our own physical prc^ence in now embark upon the path to widening war ways impose our will on the other 94 percent South Vietnam.. This is today still a war in the jungles of southeast Asia. of mankind, that we cannot right every between the North Vietnamese and the Josilprr L. HuDsoN, Js. Two more questions. wrong or reverse every adversity, and that South Vietnamese and between tl e South (Reading question) : "Should we do away therefore, there cannot be an American so- Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese. with the United Nations and organize a group lotion to every world problem." [Ap- Hanoi has a great deal at stake in this. She of world powers based on populat c.n?" plause.l does not want to be occupied by China. Her Hon. FRANK: CHURCH. I'll make the answer very short No, I do not think we should do oaJch, L. HUDSON, J 'shank you very historic sense t Vien e, the popular away with the United Nations. The United uch Senator ilHUacia, for snot a complete resistance o of the Vietnamese toward the exposition of your opinion. We have a tra- Chinese, finds its roots over centuries of Nations has been an extremely useful in- e Suez, lition in the Economic Club to ask ques- past history. While this still remains essen- strument mother anylac places Itl kes served like and . Lions about various affairs relating to your tially a Vietnamese conflict, our prospects for Cyprus talk. The first one: settling it on a satisfactory basis are best. interests of peace. But there is no inter- (Reading question) : "What are the If it is transformed into a Chinese conflict, national organization, at this stage ofto bhp give y cure chances of ending the Vietnam war by pro- with a. Chinese occupation and possession of h of hat w ca wn hen the mn' or interests; posing a united neutral Vietnam Under U.N the area, then, of course, it will became more problems protection'?" difficult to find satisfactory answers. That the major powers are involved. This is too I interpret that to mean united of North is the company this stepped-up military ef- much to expect from the United Nations. So and South Vietnam under U.N. protection. fort--of which I approve with a. tandem I would say, let us strive to keep the United [ion. FRANK CHURCH. Well, I would say diplomatic effort so that both the arrows an Nations in as strong and healthy condition as that, in this area of the world, the U.N. the olive branch are used. That would possible, because it serves as a very useful cannot really give protection. Still the represent, in my opinion, our be;t chance instrument for the human race in the settle- ment of many peripheral wars that could be- ng play a very useful role in admirer for avoiding HUDSON, n Asia. U.N. istering whatever agreement the major JOSEPH L. ]:IuosoN Jr. JR. One more, ques- come extremely dangerous in the absence of a powers might reach that would underwrite tion on Vietnam and then we'll have a few Units Na i HUDSON, JR. Our last question the neutralization of this region, immediate- other suhjc:cts to cover. Jo L. n aid. ly to the south of China. 't'hat is why I (Reading question.) "How much more relates ri or'etgestion "American business: said, in my address, that I think such an prestige is there to lose if we pull o.rt of Viet- has (tea big g qiq e in the foreign aid program in agreement must be backed up by a commit- nam?" sta anent on the part of the signatory powers Hon. FRANK CHURCH. Well, gentlemen, I that 85 percent of aid-financed purchases to uphold, with the full military power than happen to be one who never thought we abroad must be made with American firms. the signatories possess, the integrity of the should have gone into Vietnam at the end Is this one of the freezeout features of the. region against any outside attack. This of that long, painful, and futile French war. foreign aid program you would like to repeal, would mean that the American military But we did. And it is true the t when a and how would this affect the chances of power would remain as a deterrent against; nation does make a conunitmen(, then, of passage of the foreign aid bill?" actual Chinese expansion into this region. course, it invests prestige with it I do not Hon. FRANK CHURCH. That's true. It is Gentlemen, as things are now going, the minimize the need to protect thit prestige running at between 80 and 85 percent. Is likelihood of Chinese expansion-actual Chi- in southeast Asia as much a,; possible. this one of the freezeout features of the mere intervention, possession, and occupation Therefore, I have never advocated: unilateral foreign aid program I Would like to repeal? No, no. I think that one of our most dan- of large parts of southeast A:;ia-is becoming withdrawal from South Vietnam, .)r quitting , gentlemen, is the ure on the problems American dollar the the ever more real. That would mean that we under Communist pressure, or bi.raking our gerous would ever:tually have to deal with a situa- pledge to give assistance to the aigon gov- pressress re of mDo you know, how e in-niu c tiou much worse than the one we are new ernment? wens spent. market. a the C Do yo? no spent $400 facing in outlieast Asia. On the other hand, the surest say I know million there. the ongo of that. .1osi pre 1~. hUDSON, JR. (Reading question) *. to turn this country back into a country of We've got to begin i exercise some di; - "Does not your public advocacy of negoti e- isol.,tioi xsts is to tell the American people i emotions. This einer:- tion weaken our bargaining position if nego- that wherever we go to assist a sitting gov- cih lioe upon outflow of our American money.. in all o ti:cLion doe; actuality occur?' er irnenf in this big world in some struggle ms, i- lLon. 1 n9ut CHURCH. Any kind of public to put down. a rebellion in which the Com- its cause, for althou and gh a p part t of f it it is of the foreign ma aid id bc- advocacy inv,iives certain risks. But gentle- munists are. engaged--that every time we do g per80 cent e money n net, men, when the stakes are so great, then I this, we have a guarantee the outcome of spent e , 2 of the a part of money n t, t Am does percent doll cent ttut think it 1:, incumbent upon all of us who that struggle with our own troop ?. as though and flow this here, hold public trust to open a discussion of the the very life of the United States depended alternatives, so that the American people, On it. then, believe me, we're in deep water, Our military installations abroad are an.- who will be asked to fight the war, will have and the American people, with their great other open gate for the outflow of American the some knowledge of what is basically involved. commonsense, are going to get very tired dolans. I think th paymentsat,, unlere we edre have What this question presumes is closing our of it very soon. of we' going Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE the American dollar devaluated in the course of time. The Federal Government and the President are determined to avoid that. But unless my knowledge of economics is very insufficient, it can't be avoided indefinitely unless we finally redress the balance-of- paymentsdeficit. Now, if' the dollar collapses-and I don't mean to suggest that there is any imminent danger of that today-but it's under pres- sure and we know the seriousness of the problem if the dollar were ever to collapse. The British pound collapsed in 1931 when that was the principal currency of the world, a,nd a devastating worldwide depression fol- lowed. We could see the great economic strength of the Western World weakened im- mensely if this were to happen. The only way we're going to see that it doesn't happen, in the long run, is to turn our adverse bal- ance of payments around. And that's got to be done, both through the adoption of the recommendations of the President, and through some curtailment of the outgo of American dollars in the programs we have undertaken abroad I hope that both actions will be responsibly pursued in Washington. [Applause.] L. S. BoaKE. Senator, we are indebted for this very informative explanation of your views, and to you, Joe Hudson, for handling the duties of presiding officer so capably. The meeting is adjourned. Adjournment. HOW MANY DOMINICAN REPUBLICS AND VIETNAMS CAN WE TAKE ON? (By FRANK CHURCH) Throughout the country there is uneasi- ness about our foreign policy, coming from such different quarters and expressed in such divergent ways that the underlying reason for the apprehension is often obscured. Americans are always prepared to fight when their country is threatened; no foreign power can intimidate us. The doubt and the dis- agreement relate to how deeply we should in- volve ourselves in civil wars of other coun- tries. Young idealists protest our efforts in behalf of so many tottering governments afflicted by decadence and despotism and frequently despised by their own peoples. Scholars warn that the United States must not function as the global sentinel of the status quo. These are merely different ways of ques- tioning American military intervention as a means for coping with guerrilla wars in foreign lands. People are wondering: Are we to be self-appointed firemen scurrying to quench every revolutionary blaze, no matter how repugnant the government that sounds the alarm? This, many suspect, is the mission we are embarked upon. Since it is an un- accustomed role that clashes with our own revolutionary origins and our natural re- luctance to furnish a shield for any kind of despotism, we seek refuge in soothing se- matics. We downgrade freedom by equating it with the absence of communism; we up- grade a host of dictatorial regimes by digni- fying them with membership in what we like to call the "free world." We tell oursolves that the remedy for their hungry and op- pressed is a ration of foreign aid, with which we seek to buy a little reform, some small measure of relief, as a substitute for revolu- tion. Finally, we suppress any lingering doubts with a heady dose of evangelical zeal. Thus we appear to have launched our- selves upon the most of far reaching Ameri- can crusade of this century. Dissenters are not apt to be forgiven for their heresy, but hotly branded as "appeasers" held up to scorn for being either "soft on communism" or sold on surrender. Plainly the course of prudence is to march in step. Nevertheless, there are dissenters who will not be silent. Among them are senior law- makers in the Senate who, for differing rea- sons, harbor misgivings about the apparent trend in American foreign policy. These men cannot be lumped together and dismissed as "neoisolationists" Seasoned Senators like FOLBRIGHT, of Arkansas, RUSSELL, of Georgia, AIKEN, of Vermont, and MANSFIELD, of Mon- tana are not escapists who yearn for the re- turn of bygone days when we behaved as though we could keep out of all foreign wars. Such an interpretation profoundly miscon- strues the nature of the current anxiety in the Senate, where even the most outspoken foreign policy critics-Oregon's WAYNE MORSE and laska's ERNEST GRUENING-are any- thing but a new breed of isolationists. Senators such as McGovEas, of South Da- kota, CLARK, of Pennsylvania, GORE, of Ten- nessee, and the author of this article are con- firmed internationalists-strong supporters of the United Nations, of sensible foreign aid programs, of the Peace Corps and of vigorous U.S. support for the NATO alliance. We have upheld the President's quest for a settlement in Vietnam and opposed any uni- lateral withdrawal of American forces. The skeptical mood in the Senate derives, not from nostalgia for the past, but from a searching examination of the present-this age of ferment in which we live. In a brief 20 years, rampant nationalism has swept like a tidal wave over the once-imposing colonial empires. Half a hundred newborn countries struggle for life, hard pressed to satisfy the demands of their suddenly unfettered peo- ples. Everywhere the remnants of the old order are being challenged. Instability is in- evitable. An erupting volcano cannot be capped. No nation-not even our own-pos- sesses an arsenal so large, or a treasury so rich, as to damp down the fires of smoldering revolution throughout the whole of the awakening world. Even our most militant interventionists concede that the United States alone cannot protect every tottering government from vio- lent overthrow. Our purpose, they say, should he to abstain from interfering with "good" revolutions, while suppressing the "bad." But since insurgencies these days usually include Communist elements, forecasting the end result becomes a very chancy business. When Batista was overthrown in Cuba, we gambled on Castro and lost; when the mil- itary junta in Santo Domingo faced rebel- lion in the streets, we decided not to gam- ble. Instead, we dispatched 20,000 troops to put down the revolt, and thus assumed the responsibility for an occupied country. How many Dominican Republics and Viet- nams can we take on? What if revolutions should now occur in Bolivia, Nigeria, and Iran? The question, we are told, will somehow find its answer in Vietnam. This is our trial-by-ordeal, the third and final test of our capacity to resist Communist aggression. Having taught the master plotters that out- right invasions will be beaten back (Korea), that nuclear intimidation will fail (Cuban missile crisis), the United States must now teach the Communists that managed up- risings from within, guerrilla "wars of na- tional liberation," are also in vain. Then the prospects for peace will brighten again. This is a form of self-delusion. Guerrilla wars, after all, are not the links of a single chain that can be broken in any one place. They can be better compared to a contagious disease, the germs of which are carried on the winds of change. The danger of infec- tion is universal with immunity confined only to countries enjoying good internal health. So we have seen guerrilla wars, often in- fected by the Communist virus, erupting in the Dominican Republic, on the opposite side of the world. At this very moment, there is serious danger of similar uprisings in a score of countries across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The causes of these impending revolutions are essentially indigenous, whatever the name of the ideology proclaimed or the colors of the banners unfurled. Regardless of the out- come in Vietnam, we shall have to live in a world beset with guerrilla wars for many years to come. In these circumstances, we should start to exercise a prudent restraint and develop a foreign policy more closely tied to a sober assessment of our own national interests. For too long we have tilted with windmills in world affairs. As President of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson can no more protect the world from insurrection than Woodrow Wilson could make it safe for democracy. Emphatically, this does not mean that we should ignore Communist-infested guerrilla wars in the future; rather, it means we should keep our intervention commensurate, in each case, with what we as a nation really have at stake. From our current involve- ments, we should learn some lessons, and apply them as guidelines in the future. . In the case of the Dominican Republic, for example, the potential threat of a Commu- nist takeover occurred in a region of prime strategic importance to the United States. The Cuban missile crisis of 1962, which brought us to the brink of nuclear war, decisively demonstrated how much is at stake for the American people in the Carib- bean. We will not abide another Castro- type regime so close to our southern shores. Although we can debate whether or not Communists had actually seized control of the uprising in Santo Domingo, the Presi- dent's decision to send in American troops sprang from his most fundamental respon- sibility as Commander in Chief-the defense of the country. In Vietnam, on the other hand, the se- curity of the United States is not the issue. Saigon doesn't stand guard over Seattle. By defeating Japan in the Second World War, we conquered the Pacific Ocean. We police it, patrol it and reign over it with un- challenged naval and aerial supremacy. There is no way for the land-locked forces of Asia to drive us from the Pacific. In all honesty, we are fighting in Vietnam, not to defend Honolulu or Seattle, but to defend our national reputation. We have promised much, and now we must make good or risk a loss of confidence in us. The Spector of a spreading desertion of the United States around the rim of Asia-not the threat posed by a Communist govern- ment in Vietnam-is the real fear thrusting us into the jungles of Indochina. The lesson to be learned from Vietnam is that when the outcome of a guerrilla war does not threaten the vital interests of this country, we had better deal with it at arm's length. If we decide to give money, food or guns, the aid should be rendered from afar. Every precaution should be taken to avoid implicating ourselves so deeply as to convert the conflict into an American war. Military intervention on our part, even where it cannot be avoided, is always an expensive and protracted adventure. Al- ready we are finding it mucl'j harder to get out of the Dominican Republic than it was to get in. In South Korea a dozen years after the truce, we still have more than 50,000 American troops on duty and the country is sustained by a yearly injection of a half-billion-dollar American dole. scattered, unconnected countries around Unless we can discover an acceptable way the globe, wherever infirmity within Invites to extricate ourselves from Vietnam, the revolt. Even as we struggled to end the in- price will go even higher there. Our in- surgency in Vietnam, rebellion broke out in nual bill, once $200 million, now exceeds Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 ' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 that figure tenfold. Next year, according cast Asia, any more than China can deny us new master. Nor should we want to be. to present, estimates, the total will surely ours in the Caribbean. The containment of What more dismal, self-defeating role can WE! pass $5 billion. Others in a position to China can best be accomplished, not by wars assume than that of voluntary protector of judge are forecasting an outlay closer to $12 pitting imported Western troops against every privileged potentate and potty tyrant btllion. If each guerrilla war which takes a orientals, but by the resistance of stable who happens to claim tenancy? had turn is to become an American responsi- Asian governments, which commarxt suf- Yet, in order to escape this trap, we must bility, there will be no end to the mounting :hcient popular support to maintain effective discard the prescription of "not another burden--in lost lives and spent treasure. internal order. inch," which places a premium value on all Accordingly, we must recognize the folly Unfortunately, the American frivol. ement real estate and fails utterly to take into ac- of trying to impose an American solution 4M a lengthy war in the "Balkans o Asia" count that there are areas where the assump- upon every insurgency abroad. The turmoil undermines this objective. As most Asians tion of governing responsibility is much more of our time will last for generations; some are inclined to see it, the United St.a Les has of a liability than an asset. Moreover, in the Communist-tinged guerrilla uprisings will intervened in a war that is primarily a Viet- former colonial regions of Africa and Asia, succeed, others will fail. Challenged gov- namese affair regardless of whether the where resentment of the white man still ernments may fortify themselves with weap- struggle is viewed as an insurrection in the festers, the application of too much Ameri- ons from abroad, and seek hell) in other south or a covert war by the north against can muscle could easily prove ruinous, ways, but the ultimate decision will depend the south. Either way, American tro- ps, not spreading Communist expansion instead of on the government's own character, and the Chinese, are engaged in the fight; American thwarting it. willingness of the people to rally behind it. planes, not Chinese, are doing the bs:mbing. Finally, as we grope with guerrilla wars Political, social, economic, ethnic, and re- So it is that the extended American par- in this age of revolution, let us understand ligious factors will weigh more heavily it' ticipation in the Vietnamese war works that there is no American breastwork that the balance than primacy of arms. The against our larger interests in Asi. The can successfully contain them. The NATO French Army never lost control of the war longer it lasts, the more convincing 'hina is defense line, on which we do sentry duty, in Algeria, but the Algerian people were so apt to appear as the self-styled champion of has held fast in Western Europe because alienated in the process that the colonial Asia for the Asians, and the faster Chinese stable governments, commanding strong in- government lust its capacity to govern. It influence in neighboring lands is likely to ternal support, joined together for a mutual was then that; De Gaulle bowed to the in- grow. purpose. Our intervention there, moreover, evitable. Even now. Burma and Cambodi t move was welcomed. by people with whom we Faced with the same sort of popular test, toward China. Sturdy friends of the United shared a common ancestry, culture, and non-Communist governments overcame States like the Philippines and Jap,n grow civilization. rebellion in Greece, the Philippines, Ma- increasingly restive. Worse still, Ir'aia and In the recent direction of our diplomacy. Jaya and Burina, while Communist-led rebels Pakistan, whose flank we thought we were we have made no mistake so fundamental as won out in Cuba. That some governments protecting against Communist envelopment, the assumption that American military inter- will fail the test should be no reason for us plung into war with one another. Behind vention, which. was right for Western Europe, to panic, or on that account to intervene our battleline in Indochina, Singapore would be right; also for those continents that with American troops. Nationalism, not separates from Malaysia, and Sukarno, de- have just thrown off European rule. communism, is the dominant influence of spite a Communist uprising in Indonesia, Violent convulsions are bound to occur in the age. Even when the two combine, com- still makes us his favorite whippaig boy. many of the emerging countries of Africa, inunism has become the servant of nation- Even as we hold on in Vietnam, the dominoes Asia, and Latin America, wherever injustice alist aspirations. wobble all about us. lacks a remedy and progress must spawn on As an international force under one direc- Peiping also gains in other wa;, 4. The force. Should suppression of revolt abroad Lorate, determined to take over the world, Vietnamese have historically opposed Chinese become an American obsession, we will yield communism is a bust. China and Russia domination, but prolonging the war makes to the Communists the one prize they most are bitter enemies, while the smaller Com- Hanoi increasingly dependent upon China covet, an uncontested claim upon every in- rnunist countries are proving surprisingly for support, compromising her hard-won in- cipient revolution. If we do not attempt independent, evolving their own national dependence. Within the divided Communist through our diplomacy and by our example versions of Marxism. The Communist world camp, the continuing war can be p,-dnted to to guide these currents toward democratic is unraveling;; it bears no resemblance to a as proof that the Russian doctrines of peace- ends, rather than trying in vain to stem them, monolithic mass. ful coexistence with the West are demon- the Communists will be left to ride the Therefore, we must escape the trap of be- strably false, while within China i i:.self the crest. coming so preoccupied with communism, as daily tongue lashings administered to the Why have we been so reluctant? As a such, that we dissipate our strength in a "American devils in Vietnam" furnish the people who proudly proclaimed our right to vain attempt to enforce a global quarantine Red Government with a convenient shib- revolution in the years of our infancy, why against it. Our first concern in foreign af- boleth to rally the people to greater labors do we so recoil, when others assert the same sairs is not the ideology adopted by other at home. right, in these years of our maturity and peopies, but the threat that other govern- Beyond southeast Asia, on the bra:cd global strength? The Communists haven't changed rnents may pose to the United States. front, a protracted struggle in Vietn::.m could the rules of revolutions by meddling in (n Asia, the potential threat is Peiping, yet lead to a shotgun marriage-Or Chinese them. Never have such wars been fought in not Hanoi. Ilad we stayed out, Ho Chi Minh terms--between the feuding titans of the splendid isolation, not even our own. There might have forced the reunion of South Viet- Communist world. The hopeful thaw in our were as many Frenchmen at Yorktown, when uam, but Hanoi will never conquer Asia or relations with the Soviet Union weded then George Washington accepted the surrender threaten the world beyond. When we took give way to a full-scale resumptic n of the of Cornwallis, as there were American Con- 'up the wreckage of empire left behind by the cold war, our adversaries welded together tinentals. departing French, we ensnared ourselves in a again by our own hand. This mat still be Senator FULBRIGHT, the distinguished Vietnamese war of secondary importance. part of the price we shall pay for toe corner chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Our involvement, however, has proved so into which we have painted ourselves in Committee, believes that our own attitude useful to Red China that the Peiping gov- Indochina. toward revolution has profoundly changed ernment, above all others, wants to see the None of this is written in cri icism of as our circumstances have improved. war prolonged. It is Mao Tse-tung, among Lyndon B. Johnson. Like Kennedy before not surprising," he writes, "'that the communist leaders, who most adamantly "It is him, Johnson inherited an American com- Americans are not drawn toward the hat opposes a settlement, exhorting Hanoi to mitment in Vietnam, and he intend, to honor we we re no of tnon- toward the on- keep up the light and taunting us to do like- it. At the same time, he is moving American lecouth ft. We are not, revolutionaries as we the like to claim in wise with "paper tiger" insults. policy in the right direction, toward the con- Fourth We are , eh most truly ev shrewd appraisal of the war in Indochina the war between India and Pakistan-, coupled olutionary contrary, much nation on earth; we are, nation to o being e, being the has proved a great misfortune. It has en-, with his immediate resort to the United Na- contra mcloser are abled him to use us as a tool to further tions, suggest that he s sees the need for sober and satisfied and comfortable and institutions are stable and old and Chinese ambitions in Asia. restraint in the use of Americo a forces. rich; venerable." .Just as lhe Communist leaders in the Once freed of the war in Vietnam---whether even enerable" Kremlin, following the defeat of Hitler, re- through a settlement or the suppression of imposed the Russian sphere of influence over further resistance by a massive American There is much truth in FuLnnmcu'r's ap- the Balkans which had existed earlier under military occupation--Johnson may endeavor praisal. In dealing with guerrilla wars of the czars, so the Reds in Peiping, after 1954, in the future to avoid dispatching American the future, the President will find it; hard to have sought to reestablish over Indochina the troops whenever it appears that a -evolution temper a fear-inspired passion for American e try. influence so long enjoyed by the Chinese in some distant place may not be going our iintervention, f he submits to shthe s ould hr n songs of the Bew emperors. This region, in fact, is not unlike way. the Balkans, consisting as it does of small, For the United States in the 20111 century crusaders, he may well forfeit the great bordering countries over which China looms is not, the replacement of 19th-century Great place in history he desires, for it will ill like a dragon over a handful of lizards. Brita:in. The colonial house of Western Em- serve our interest, as it lies beyond our [it the natural course of events, we cannot pire has been taken over by its former sub- power, to impose a Pax Americana upon an hope to deny China her influence in south- jects, and we shall not be welcomed in as a unwilling world. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE EXHIBIT 2 IS VIETNAM ANOTHER GREECE? (By George C. Voumas) The speech of the Honorable George W. Bali before the Northwestern University Alumni Association at Evanston, Ill., pub- lished in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of Janu- ary 31, 1966 (vol 112, No. 15), deserves some comment, if not elucidation. The writer concedes at the very outset that his knowledge of Asian affairs would hardly qualify him to either offer suggestions or ob- servations on Vietnam or the related ques- tion of Chinese containment. However, the analogy of U.S. intervention in Greece, if allowed to go unchallenged, may lead us to dangerous assumptions. Both premise and conclusions are based on error and do vio- lence to the truth, giving validity to the often repeated charge abroad that the United States has a "sense of mission but no sense of history," Mr. Ball states: "The Soviet Union under Stalin embarked on a reckless course of sseking to extend Communist power." And further: "But in terms of tactics on the ground, Greece is a closer analogy. For there, 20 years ago, as in South Vietnam today, the Communists sought to achieve their purpose by what is known in their lexicon as a war of national liberation. "They chose this method of aggression both in Greece and Vietnam because tactics of terror and sabotage, of stealth and subver- sion, give a great advantage to a disciplined and ruthless minority, particularly where, as in those two countries, the physical ter- rain made concealment easy and impeded the use of heavy weapons." The past 20 years have separated fact from fiction on this subject, and the facts are well established. First honors for dispelling the fog must go to Winston Churchill's "Triumph and Tragedy" (Houghton Mifflin Co., 1953); second, Vladmir Dedijer's "Tito" (Simon & Schuster, 1963); and last, but not least, Milovan Djilas' "Conversations With Stalin" (Harcourt, Brace & World, 1962). 1. There was not a question of war of na- tional liberation in Greece. The Greek war for national liberation was fought in 1821- 27, receiving acclaim and support from free- dom-loving persons the world over. During World War II the Greeks, after a magnificent resistance to the German- Italian occupation, followed closely on the heels of the retreating Germans, and occu- pied the entire Greek territory. Since the EAM (national liberation front) was in con- trol practically of the entire country, no question of liberation was involved. The issue over which tens of thousands lost their lives was the form of government to be es- tablished. The EAM, to which the overwhelming ma- jority of the Greek people belonged, was suspicious of English motives-particularly after Churchill's insistence upon the return of King George II. The resistance fighters opposed it. They knew that the Greek dynasty and its local retinue were the instru- ment and symbols of what the Chinese now call "neo-colonialism." It is an historic fact that the Greek dynasty was imposed upon Greece by British diplomacy. (King George I, a Danish prince and founder of the Glyks- burg dynasty in Greece, was in the pay of the British Exchequer from the day he first set foot on Greek soil in 1863 to the day he was assassinated in Salonica in 1913.) George II, after an exile of years, returned to Greece in the middle thirties. Soon there- after he sanctioned the Metaxas quasi- Fascist dictatorship-a regime that filled old Greek jails and forts with political prisoners and the waterless islands of the Aegean with exiles. 2. The issue which caused the clash in Athens in 1944 was settled by the Varzika Agreement, the King-then in London-hav- ing agreed to the appointment of a Regent. General Scobie, while ordaining Greek Cabi- net with a liberal facade, armed and counte- nanced rightist gants (known as "X"-ites) and otherwise promoted a reign of terror at the countryside, presenting all former par- ticipants in the EAM with the choice to either be slaughtered like Iambs or be shot like wolves. Under such provocation "even a saint would turn savage." The world did not know then what Mr. Churchill proudly records in his history ("Triumph and Tragedy," p. 227) that he and Stalin had agreed on the division of the Balkans on October 9, 1944: (Churchill) " * * Let us, settle about our affairs In the Balkans Your armies are in Rumania and Bulgaria. We have interests, missions, and agents there. Don't let us get at cross purposes in small ways. So far as Britain and Russia are concerned, how would it do for you to have 90 percent pre- dominance in Rumania, for us to have 90 percent of the say in Greece, and go 50-50 about Yugoslavia?' While this was being translated, I wrote out on a half sheet of paper: Rumania: Percent Russia---------------------------- The others------------------------ Greece : Great Britain (in accord with United States) ------------------ 90 Russia---------------------------- 10 Yugoslavia-------------------------- 50-50 Hungary----------------------------- 50-50 Bulgaria: Russia---------------------------- 75 The others----------------------- 25 I pushed this across to Stalin, who had by then heard the translation. There was a slight pause. Then he took his blue pencil and made a large tick upon it, and passed it back to us. It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down." Mr. Churchill was elated with this agree- ment. Referring to it years later, he de- clared: "I made an agreement with Stalin, and he kept it." Then we have Tito's biographer, Vladimir Dedijer, who, after enumerating the various acts and deeds of the British in Yugoslavia and the support given by Churchill to King Peter, etc., states (page 250) : "For those reasons Yugoslavia's early post- war attitude toward events in Greece was dictated by the danger which threatened its independence and free development from that quarter." Mr. Dedijer attributes the Tito-Stalin breach to the Greek revolution and Stalin's suspicion that Tito supported it. Then we have Milovan Djilas' (both Djilas and Dedijer have been jailed by Tito) "Con- versations With Stalin." He states (page 131) : "In Greece a civil war was being fought. Yugoslavia had been charged in the United Nations with giving it material aid and in- spiring it; while Yugoslav relations with the West, and especially with the United States, were strained to the breaking point. "When I think back, it seems to me that the Soviet Government not only looked with satisfaction at this sharpening of Yugoslav- Western relations, but even incited it, taking care, of course, not to go beyond the limits of its own interests and possibilities. Molo- tov. almost embraced Kardelj in Paris after the shooting down of two American planes in Yugoslavia, though he also cautioned him against shooting down a third. The Soviet Government took no direct action with re- spect to the uprising in Greece, practically leaving Yugoslavia to face the music alone in the United Nations, nor did it undertake anything decisive to bring about an armis- tice-not until Stalin found it to his in- terst." And on page 181: "Stalin then turned to the uprising in Greece. 'The uprising in Greece has to fold up.' (He used for this word 'svernut', which means literally to roll up.) 'Do you be- lieve'-he turned to Kardelj-'in the success- of the uprising in Greece?' "Kardelj replied, 'If foreign intervention does not grow and if serious and political and military errors are not made.' "Stalin went on, without paying attention to Kardelj's opinion: If, if. No, they have no prospect for success at all. What do you think, that Great Britain and the United States-the United States, the most power- ful state in the world-will permit you to break their line of communication. In the Mediterranean Sea. Nonsense. And we have no navy. The uprising in Greece must be stopped, as quickly as possible. 3. To say, "The Soviet Union under Stalin embarked on a reckless course of seeking to extend Communist power," on the basis of the Greek experience, is totally untenable. All the polemics, releases, and communiques by the White House and State Department at the time notwithstanding, the established fact remains that Stalin-as far as the Greek revolution was concerned-was on the side of Truman. (On this very point it would be pertinent to quote a paragraph from an article which appeared in the Nation maga- zine-issue of January 17, 1966, written by Howard Zinn under the title, "Setting the Moral Equation," p. 62, 2d col., 5th line: ("A political scientist doing strategic re- search for the Government told me recently with complete calm that his institute de- cided not too long ago that they had been completely wrong about the premise which underlay much of American ,policy in the postwar period-the premise that Russia hoped to take over Western Europe by force.") The United States did not intervene in Greece until after Great Britain threw in the sponge. In other words, the aim of the Greek fighters-elimination of British neo- colonialism-was realized. When the United States intervened, the conflict could be nego- tiated and amicably settled if political con- ditions in Washington permitted it. We must not forget that the reservoir of good- will in Greece is great, indeed, going back to 1821, the struggle for Greek independence from the Turks, and the aid America gave to the cause. The United States is looked upon not only by Greeks, but by the better-in- formed the world over as the fairest daughter of Greek classicism. In addition, present- day America is the host country to many hundreds of thousands of erstwhile Greek immigrants who are part of the American Commonwealth. (Every fifth family in Greece has a close relative living in the United States.) However, McCarthyism at home, growing daily into hurricane force, permitted no such ending. "Anticommu- nism" became a substitute for policy, with the result that soon thereafter U.S. presence was extended to Turkey, then Iran, etc., etc., around the periphery of the Soviet Union. That Is how and when the cold war was born. 4. U.S. Intervention, being free of neo- colonialism, succeeded where Great Britain failed. King George II was restored to the throne and Greece, thanks to American aid, recovered to an extent from the ravages of war, occupation, and civil strife. The past 20 years or so have been more or less tran- quil. The last elections-the first truly free since the pacification of the country-gave an overwhelming majority- to Papandreou's Center Union. This government was booted out of power on July 15, 1965-evil tongues Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE February 291, 1966 say with U.S. connivance-by the King, be- fore the expiration of its term, Greece being governed since by a coalition of minority parties with royal blessing. The fragile Greek economy, however, saddled as it has been with back-breaking financial burdens to maintain a military establishment under NATO, is tottering. As a result, inflation has raised its ugly head. This, in turn, has added to the hardships of the working people, with the result that strikes by work- ers In private industry, government employ- ees schoolteachers, etc., are on the daily menu. Unemployment and underemploy- ment is rampant. As a result, mass immi- gration (more than 400,000 workers have gone to West Germany) is denuding the country. There are those who already see foreboding clouds in the horizon. When the inevitable storm breaks out, whom are we going to blame? I do not pretend to know what the ultimate outcome will be in Greece or Vietnam- which, naturally enough, constitutes today the primary concern of the United States from the Commander in Chief to the most lowly private or citizen. The signs of the times point, however, that in the nuclear age U.S. security will best be served not through the reiteration of discredited past myths, which will h:srdly.contribute to keeping the Soviet Union and China apart, but if day-to- day policies of the United States are brought in harmony with American heritage as en- visaged by Jefferson and the Founding Fathers. U.S. policies have heretofore cham- pioned Kings, Pashas and Economic Poten- tates. The field of social justice for the peoples of the world have been left entirely too long to the Communist side to exploit. The Honolulu declaration of President John- son and the Vietnamese leaders issued on February 8, 1966 does not come one moment too soon. To paraphrase Mr. Ball: "After all, it should not be * * * the American purpose simply to preserve the status quo." (From the New York Times, Feb. 20, 19661 WASHINGTON: THE RUSK DOCTRINE f By James Reston) WASHINGTON, February 19.-Secretary of State Rusk has put a grim doctrine before the people of this country. He was a respon- sive and forthright witness before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and it is im- portarrt that we understand what he thinks our duties and responsibilities are in the world. First, in Vietnam, we are to commit to the battle whatever is necessary to end the ag-? gression and bring about the freedom and security of South Vietnam. What this means, he conceded, depends primarily on what the enemy commits (the Chinese committed 1 million men to the bat?? tie in Korea). He would not say there was no limit to the men and material the United States would send to Vietnam, but he stuck to his proposition that we would maintain military superiority there no matter how long it took to stop the fighting. RUSKS OBJECTIVE This objective, it should be noted, was not made conditional on what the South Viet- namese or any of the other allies contributed to the fighting. There is no longer much talk here of victory depending primarily on the South Vietnamese Army. Mr. Rusk dis- cussed the freedom of South Vietnam as a vital American interest, essential to our own security and critical to all the other security commitments we have taken to over 40 other countries. 'This is a formidable doctrine. Second, the Secretary of State gave an in- teresting interpretation of America's obli- gations as a member of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. In the event of armed. aggression against the territory covered by that treaty, he said, America's obligation to oppose the aggression did not depend on aal. the members agreeing to oppose it., but it was America's duty to do so regardless of what the others did (which in Vietnam is very little). THE AMERICAN COMMITMENI This did not mean, Secretary Rusk re- marked, that the United States was obligated to oppose Communist aggression everywhere in the world or that we were going around looking for fights to put down. For example, we did not oppose Communist China's ag- gression in Tibet or the Soviet Ur.on's ag- gression in Hungary, for we had not taken any commitment to do so, but this still leaves us with commitments the like of which no sovereign nation ever took in the history of the world. For the United States is committed to op- pose Communist aggresion all alone the pe- riphery of the Communist nations from the North Cape of Norway through the heart of Europe to Greece and Turkey (NATO)); along the southern frontier of the Soviet Union in the Near and Middle East (the Eisenhower resolution); and thence through southeast Asia (SEATO) to Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Japan, and Korea. And if you add our obligations under the Organization of American States and our obligations un- der the United Nations, you take in most of the rest of the world. The Rusk doctrine makes the Monroe Doc- trine or the Truman doctrine seem rather cheap. Monroe limited his commitments to the Western Hemisphere. Truma l wanted to oppose communism primarily by economic means. And even John Foster Dulles, who was not a timid man, thought eac%r alliance should stand on its own terms and depend to some degree on what the other members of the alliance did. But the Rusk doctrine draws si distinc- tion between powerful industrial democratic states in Europe and weak undemocratic states in Asia. His view seems to be that the United States must redeem the promises of every alliance it has signed regardless of what the other signatories do, and that fail- ure to keep everybody's promise in one alli- ance Will destroy the confidence of the world in all other alliances we have signed. THAT BLANK CHECK If this is true, it is odd that mr,st of our allies in Europe, the Middle East and even in Japan. are critical of our operation in Viet- nam, but this is the thesis Mr. Rusk placed before the Foreign Relations Committee. And the interesting thing is than the Sen- ators cannot really do much about it, which accounts for all the frustration they have demonstrated on the TV screens in the last few days. For in the moment of crisis dur- ing the Communist attack on our ships In the Gulf of Tonkin, President Johnson asked for a blank check to deal with aggression all over southeast Asia-including the right to use any force he deemed necessary-and once he had published that request, the Con- gress had no choice but to grant it to him or--what was unthinkable-repudiate him in the face of the enemy. '511:E SENATE'S DILEMMA NOT can the Senate do anything to take back this promise under present. circum- stances. If Senator MoasE presses his resolu- tion to withdraw the Tonkin Gulf resolution, obviously few if any Congressmen are going to vote with him and turn their backs on the 200,000 Americans now fighting in Viet- nam. But their helplessness merely emphasizes the transformation that has taken place in American and world politics. The President, if he chooses his time carefully, can obviously get almost any commitment he likes from the Congress in the moment of crisis, and under the Rusk doctrine, we are then obliged to redeem each commitment, regardless of what the other parties to the agreement do, or risk the destruction of the entire system of American alliances created since the last war. All this goes well beyond Vietnam in space and time. Mr. Rusk has asked the Senate to contain the expansion of communism all along the periphery of the Communist em- pire, by force of arms and without allies if necessary, and the Congress cannot oppose him in present circumstances without op- posing its own men in Vietnam, which it obviously will not do. [From the New York Times, Feb. 21, 1966( ERROR IN VIETNAM POLICY To the EDITOR: Perhaps the most significant remark made by George F. Kennan in his testimony be- fore the Senate Foreign Relations Commnit- tee on February 10 was that "From the long- term standpoint, therefore, and on principle, I think our military involvement in Vietnam has to be recognized as unfortunate, as something we would not choose deliberately if the choice were ours to make all over again today. This, in substance, agrees with Senator FRANK CHuecli's recent assertion that "In Vietnam, the security of the United States is not the issue. * * * In all honesty, we are fighting in Vietnam not to defend Honolulu or Seattle, but to defend our national repu- tation." Here we have the bare, blunt facts before us; that if we had the 'choice to make over again, we would not follow the course we did and involve ourselves in affairs in Viet- nam. Does anyone doubt that truth of this? We admittedly made a mistake in involving ourselves again in a land war on Asian soil, for which error in judgment American lives and resources have been and are now being paid, with no knowing what the future hclds in store in the way of continued sacrifices, and the possibility of an ensuing nuclear war with its catastrophic consequences. Under such circumstances, is it any wonder that there has been so much adverse criticism regarding our policy in Vietnam? I believe that what the President and the American people are going to have to decide is: Shall we be stubborn and remain in Viet- nam not for the sake of our national secu- rity but for the sake of our national security but for the sake of our national reputation? Or shall we swallow our pride, recognize the mistake we have made, and withdraaw? We have no other choice-it is one or the other. NO ADVERSE EFFECT I believe we are big enough and strong enough to withstand any adverse effect that a withdrawal. might engender. In fact, I be- lieve we would gain in stature in world opinion, rather than the reverse, by doing so, just as I believe Pope Paul VI and Sec- retary General U Thant would applaud and commend such action on our part. While it may be that there is a moral issue involved in a withdrawal from Viet- nam, is there not a far greater moral re- sponsibility on our part at stake, win. to remain can lead to a devastating nuclear war, entailing, as it would, the possibility of a virtual wiping-out of civilization? Cer- tainly, doing so will save American lives, and would leave the onus of war upon others The Soviet Union's relation with Corn- munist China would not be improved were the latter to become too aggressive in Asia The issue of war should be allowed to lie between them, not with us. EMERSON C. IVES. PAWLING, N.Y., February 12, 1966. [From the New York Times, Feb. 21, 106,6] THE VIETNAM COMMITMENT Secretary :Rusk's argument that the United States has an obligation to defend South Vietnam under the 1954 SEATO Treaty Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 3439 hinges on the claim that, prior to American tic politics but which is 11I suited for dealing Saigon. The bomb detonations drown out intervention, there was an armed attack with international problems. Mr. Johnson's promises. The gift that must from North Vietnam, rather than subversion. To appreciate the full absurdity of the precede all others is peace, and after Hono- Against subversion, the only American com- Hawaiian spectacular, one must read the en- lulu that seems further off than ever. mitment in the treaty is to consult the other tire text of +,,.' .oint it down," Secretary Dulles said at the time. gether occupyfhalf alnewspaperipage IcSuch p Every war has its economic aspect, but But this discussion before the Fulbright a farrago of pompous nonsense is rarely rarely is savagery so well matched ed with ra- committee is hardly worth nursing, since the achieved by official proclamation writers, who pacity as today in Vietnam. Last December, United States has committed itself to the generally manage to cloak duplicity in fewer Takashi Oka, a correspondent of the Chris- Saigon Government- unilaterally-without words. In this instance, obfuscation was tian Science Monitor, reported that for Amer- real support from many of its SEATO part- heightened by the pronouncements of the otism, "with the right combination of eatri- ners. The issue is not whether the United principals before and after the formal gath- , venturesomeness, hardheaded States is committed, but whether it is ering. Mr. Johnson prefaced the negotla- profit seeking," investment in Vietnam overcommitted. bons with a bellicose speech in which he could be most rewarding. The AID guar- The overcommitment has come in the described his domestic opponents, who are as American investors up to 100 percent Johnson administration's decision to bomb rapidly becoming a majority in the Senate, againgainst losses through war, expropriation, North Vietnam and send massive American as a "group that has always been blind to insurrection and current incontrovertibility, forces into South Vietnam to engage in of- experience and deaf to hope." For his part, and up to 75 percent against all other risks, Pensive combat. Until recently, the Amer- the self-appointed South Vietnamese Pre- including commercial risks. So far the boys ican obligation had been simply to provide mier, Nguyen Cao Ky, appealed at a post- Neew week (Ja s fine) Both report th20 e to Mon30 itor and economic aid, weapons and advice to a South confabulation press conference for an exten- sent annual sent annual returns on Investment n percent Vietnamese Government that was able and sion of the bombing to Haiphong, and de- si n South willing to defend itself and to make the main Glared that he would never negotiate or enter Vietnam. effort in so doing. a coalition with the National Liberation The Charlment on this Id received Idyllic tuatio An even more important issue now is Front. By the end of 1967 he expects to will a sour comment on this idyllic situation whether this commitment should be further the glorious victory that for 20 years has from a Charleston lawyer described as a mod-erate expanded by lifting the American presence eluded the French, the Americans, and his believer In the benefits of Republican and afirm from 200,000 to 400,000 or 600,000 troops, own Vietnamese. "If this n the economic Imperialism, free enterprise. That move would not only mean a quantum Ky's stand on negotiations raises a vital "If this isn't ethe lawyer. "Since what are jump in escalation, but would fundamen- point. In all his offers of unconditional dis- ex "exclaimed the lawyer. Snce when are tally alter the character of the war. Such cussions, President Johnson has never gone exploiters guaranteed against loss, entitled escalation would turn the conflict into an beyond suggestions that the National Libera- such to a retple io a rs or percent to more? Are American war with South Vietnamese auxil- tion Front would encounter no difficulty in Big well as small busin rusnss f?" iaries. It would implement an offensive having its views considered at a peace con- o as wtl as largest ess follows the strategy that, in effect, means the destruc- ference. This was widely construed as mean- flag. The two laseM nha banks, Bank of tion of the South Vietnamese countryside in ing that the NLF could attend as part of the America and Chase Manhattan, have asked an effort to annihilate Vietcong forces. It North Vietnamese delegation, thus conform- Fforirst tiens National oC Citt .bannd Ad A en Saigon; and would mean an end to the normal counter- ing to the American position that the con- y and Express insurgency approach, which hinges on de- flict in Vietnam was not a civil war but an ba ks are already a aheadady the operating ratingunitSo Fifteen fensive action to win over the population, war of aggression waged against South Viet- nam, uth mi- Viet- protect the villages and cut the guerrillas off nam by the Communists of North Vietnam with the French and BriSoas jin no he from their source of food and recruits so that and China. Vent positions. While doing a correcting job this t- they wither on the vine. It would mean a On February 6, however, Ambassador W. uation too? Henry shouldn't we H. Sperry, rati dal vastly increased number of American casual- Averell Harriman, presumably speaking for cit B too? Hen thin a should. ties in an overmilitarization and over- the administration, gave some ground with After Bank vice president, thinks we should. Americanization of what is essentially a the suggestion that the NLF could attend as Cabot Lodge visits with Ambassador Henry Vietnamese political conflict, Cabot Lodge and would "illogical" Sperry further massive build-up-which an independent group. The obvious idea declared that it would be "illogical" to per- A would was to make a peace conference possible mit the French and British to "monopolize" surely be matched by the other side-would without antagonizing the South Vietnamese the banking business, because South Viet- hinder the possibilities of a negotiated set- Government. Consistent with Harriman's nam's economy "is becoming more and more tlement. It would probably result in a new move toward a compromise on the question military stalemate at a higher level of com- of NLF representation, Walter Li U.Snd worientedith so mitment. pp) cx- And ma or bin more around it Meanwhile, with inflation, destruction of (New the hope Herald a that Tribune, President was The also becoming more and more inflationary. villages, hundreds of thousands of additional "talking turkey" to Premier Ky in Honolulu Newsweek stet refugees and American control of the war, and telling him to "get ready for the read- Uni ted uth V has been pouring vast that amoun in the Saigon Government and Its provincial justment of U.S. policy in accordance with foreign outh lone, or million a year i administration structure would lose author- the real military prospects in Vietnam" of that aid alone, or more gross national than one-fourth ity, coherence and sense of responsibility for Judging by the outcome, it was Ky who The current 00 million military ytruc- the Nation's future. talked turkey and, as far as Mr. Johnson is ti on is of being military organizations The question is whether South Vietnam Is Concerned, the United States is now com- like job is not being done by oizto be treated as a friendly country or, in mitted to conquering all of South Vietnam lie the Seabees se World War II-that f U.S. effect an enemy country to be bombed into for Ky or his successors. wasn't free enterprise. A consortium the job submission with the consent of its unrepre- What hypnotic power does the premier of construction companies is handling the joo sentative national government, and then re- South Vietnam, who came to power by a this time, with a payroll that will rise to constructed. Is the American commitment putsch, extends over the President of the 65,000. the limited one of helping a viable govern- United States? It cannot be the specter of a Of course if the Vietcong should win the ment or the unlimited one of taking over separate peace between the Communists and war and get back their own country, the the war to seek an American victory? And Ky's government that perturbs Mr. Johnson, boom would collapse. But the American will the vital flexibility needed to achieve a for Ky has ruled that out in the only bit of business community is confident that noth- compromise settlement by negotiation be hard news that emerged from the whole ing so calamitous will be allowed to take enhanced or destroyed by the strategy of affair. A reasonable inference is that Mr, place. As one big construction official said, escalation? Johnson feels Ky's Government must be "Johnson certainly wouldn't build all this shored up at all costs, since another putsch for the Communists." [From the Nation, Feb. 14, 19661 at this juncture would shatter the image of AID IOR WHOM? EVERYTHING BUT PEACE a selfless American defending the Vietnam- If nothing else, the Senate Foreign Rela- If President Johnson was trying to emulate ese against Communist enslavement. How tions Committee hearings on Vietnam are the Stephen Leohns cha was try who else explain why Mr. Johnson, who is so lion- making painfully clear how hard It is to get th a tephe and rode of r c directions, his hearted when telling Senators where they a sensible response from a bureaucrat. David on in get off lets the Vietnamese generals Honolulu conference could not have been the politics of a war in which Americans tare Bell, W. FULBRIGHT'stgroup that ithe $2.7 billion better conceived. Since his election in 1964, doing the decisive fighting and paying all the in economic aid pumped into Saigon's cor- Mr. Johnson has been improvising moves in bills? the Vietnam war for publicity effect, with Promises of a Great Society for Vietnam in "much b tter"e condition', withe"coi sid-rupt economy 1954 has left country apparently no concern that each policy con- are such stuff as dreams are made of. The erable agricultural'improvement"-although tradicts the preceding one. In perspective, Vietcong and the peasants among whom they in the next breath he had to admit that Viet- the Honolulu meeting will be seen as merely live may be harried from the air, but they nam, which used to be the rice bowl of south- another venture in diplomacy by showman- hold three-fourths of the country. The NLF east Asia and as such a great exporter of the ship, a technique which may work in domes- is more of a government than the cabal in commodity, now is in such terrible economic Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3440 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE February 21, 1966 PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1,066 Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Building, Washington, D.C.: The hopes of American honor and world survival rest upon you and your brave col- leagues. RALPH and PHOEBE: FRIEDMAN. shape that it must import $21 million worth of rice each year. To some extent, of course, this is because U.S. troops and airmen have burned their ricefields. Bell said he felt that the AID program had done a lot of good. For whom? For the Saigon crooks? For the North Vietnamese? Bell admitted that one of AID's very signifi- cant problems is the ease with which Viet- cong agents can go into stores in South Viet- d medicines and gro- li e supp riam, buy U.S-ceries, and, with a little cautious dodging, CHURCH in the chair). Without oojec- take them to North Vietnam or even China. tion, it is so ordered. The Saigon merchants, imbued with the Mr.. MORSE. Mr. President, I wish anyone, es pre hear tcialiy i sf mheuch is w about, g will we to pay gave to to highly commend the Senator from black-market prices for the goods ave. Idaho for the brilliant speech he has their transient rulers for nothing. Senator just made, in which I associate myself JOSEPH CLARK pointed out that more than not only in connection with his policy 10 years ago President Eisenhower insisted statement on foreign policy but also in connection with his legal analy is of the that economic aid to Vietnam be dependent on the reform of the Government. Had this situation. policy been followed? No, Bell conceded, it Later in the week, I shall supplement his speech with a further answer to Sec- Hadn't. pained d out- retary of State Rusk and Under Secre- billion-dollar Sometimes billion-dollollar the mistakes cheerful brought recitation cries from Senators who cannot understand tary of State Mr. Ball in connection such smug waste. "There is a $37 billion with their allegations that the SEATO backlog of unmet needs in communities in Treaty, in some way, somehow, is sup- 4f th unconstitutional and e t this year alone we will spend half of that in Vietnam." Yes, said Bell, and that's too bad; but he thought GORE might be overlooking: the brighter side, which is that Korea has sent a division of troops to the war. (Be said this in earnest, as if he did not mean to mislead, as if he could not see the shining irony of its-that we have two divisions of U.S. troops stationed in Korea, whence one division of their troops come to our assist- ance. ) It is not likely, with the administration staunchly resisting any conversation with the American people, that much informa- EUGENE. OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington,.D.C.: Thank God for this great service you are doing for us,. the American people. DORIS and WINDSOR CALKINS. ALBANY, OREG., February 18, 1966. Hon. WAYNE E. MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We wish to commend you for the courage With which you are pursuing your convic- tions regarding the situation in Vietnam. We are in complete agreement with you and. pray that you will be given the strength to pursue this vital service to your country. Mr. and Mrs. ELDRED T. COBB. MEDFORD, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Your outspoken opposition of our unfortu- nate Vietnam policy makes you one of the most important men in public life. Stay PORTLAND, OREG., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington., D.C.: While at variance with you on many occa- sions, i wholeheartedly support your attitude toward our position in Vietnam. Speaking only as a private citizen I feel compelled to make my views known. As a Marine Corps veteran of World War II and an off-arid-on member of the American Legion Illy attitude is undoubtedly unpopular with many former and current comrades and friends. However, I feel I must make my personal views known to the one person who in my estimation makes more sense and is doing more to try to bring about a reasonable solution, or en- lightment at least, in our current; situation. DALE JOSEPHSON. tion of consequence will come out of these hearings. indirectly, however, the adminis- Vietnam on the one hand and North tration's efforts to suppress news is already Vietnam on the other. It must be settled having the desired and expected reaction- with multilateral negotiations, with the It flurry of exposes by newsmen such as the noncombatant nations sitting at the head of the table, making clear to the com- Washington Star's Richard Critchfleld, four of whose articles from Saigon placed in the batants that negotiations will have to sion of the RECORD Foreign oregCLARK Relations gave Committee mm first i t t a s be arranged through third party in- only meaty information. "Though the tervention. United States has spent billions in Vietnam, I am satisfied that unless that course it has invested only $4 million in land reform of action is followed, the odds are in from 1954 to 1960, nothing from 1960 to 1965 favor of the United States going down in and is spending only $1 million this year," history as being more responsible than writes Critchfleld. "The United States gives any other nation in the world lOr leading goods, the goods are sold to people with mankind into a third world war. money to buy them and the money goes to support the war. But the effect is to Hour- Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- ish an urban economy in which the middle sent to have printed in the RECORD cer- and upper classes prosper but does almost tai.n communications which I have re- the life of 80 percent of ceived on the subject of the war in Viet- g to improve nothinthe peasant population." naln. I also ask unanimous consent to it would take FULBRIGHT'S group 3 hours have printed the article by Jean Facou- to drag that much information out of a man ture, which appeared in the New York like Bell, and then it would come forth Review of Books for March. NIT. FaCOU- wrapped in misleading excuses. Critchfield f is not the only reporter on the scent. Rich- tare is author o "Vietnam Between Two and Harwood of the Washington Post writes, Truces." He also wrote a biography of "Of the total AID package of more than Ho Chi Minh f a1954. nd a book He was the the staff Chao million for the current fiscal year, and of Conference General Leclerc in 1945 and was a than $2 million is earmarked for schools and school supplies in the villages, only $1.1 correspondent in Vietnam for Le Monde. million for rural water systems, $1.8 million He is now a fellow of the Center for Near for 6,000 rural self-help projects, $12.8 iriil- lion for public health, and $5.8 million for Eastern Studies at Harvard. agricultural development. The total for There being no objection, the material these projects-about $24 million-is less was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, than the $27 million AID will invest this as follows: OREG., year in a desperate effort by the national PORTLAND, February 18, 1966. police force to curb the misuse of U.S. aid Senator WAYNE MORSE, and to stop the flow of contraband to the Washington, D.C.: Vietcong. Suggest imposing economic blockade on This kind of tough honesty, which is seen countries supplying North Victnam. Keep with encouraging frequency in the American up the good work. ful dodging of administration witnesses GEORGIA LEE HARDY, press these days, is going to make the art- C dorm an, HOW Housewives Opposing sound ail the sillier. EIIGF.NE, OREG., February 18,1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Complete support for your view. Please send copies of recent Foreign Relations Com- mittee hearings. Thanks. Mr. and Mrs. ALBERT B. CULVER. PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1966- Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You spoke well our sentiments exactly to the general today. Great going. Keep it up. AL and Lois BALTEAIU, PORTLAND, DREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I am very proud of you. MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE of Oregon, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR Sin: As a fellow teacher I admire your courage on behalf of labor and your opposi- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I sug- gest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. ..- e Y posed to jus illegal war in southeast Asia. I Shall also make that speech for the benefit of the delegates of the American Bar Association. Mr. President, I also wish to say that I enthusiastically support the general policy expressed by the junior Senator from New York [Mr. KENNEDY1 in his proposals for seeking to obtain a nego- tiated settlement of the war. For a long time, I have stated that it cannot be settled on any bilateral negotiation basis Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE I would like to be. Fraternally, PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Support your stand on Vietnam 100 per- cent. Mr. and Mrs. C. R. MOE. JUNCTION CITY, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: Congratulations on your stand on Vietnam. CLARENCE M. MORE. PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Fully support your fight to bring peace to PORTLAND, OREG., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You are doing a superb job. We endorse you completely. Dr. and Mrs. ROBET D. GOLDMAN. EUGENE, OREG., February 17,1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Behind you. Insist on McNamara in PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: As an Oregon Republican I support you now and in the future. Mrs. WILLIAM B. GRUBER. PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, Senator WAYNE MORSE,. Washington, D.C.: Ten thousand percent support Vietnam WALTER FRANCIS, TINA MICHAEL, PETER SIMCICH. PORTLAND OREG., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Room 417, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Respectfully urge you have at Friday's Senate hearings the 11 interim reports issued by the International Control Commission be- tween 1954 and 1960. Bless you. Mr. MASON DRUKMAN. CORVALLIS, OREG., February 18,1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Ask Rusk how many North Vietnamese have been killed or captured in the current PORTLAND, OREG., February 17,1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: After reading the Journal "Viet War Raw Boils in Senate" continue the fight and get this question for debate onto the floor of the Senate. Keep up the good work. FREDERICK G. RILL. MEDFORD, OREG., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand against the Vietnam war. SAUSALITO, CALIF., February 21, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Applaud your courageous forthright stand on Vietnam. Please continue your noble effort. Many people support you. ROBERT FRICK. MOUNT VERNON, N.Y., February 21, 1966. Senators MORSE and FULBRIGHT, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We admire you, support you, love you. Please continue your valiant peace efforts. ELAINE and RICHARD KUNTZ. PRINCETON, N.J., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Rusk stated this morning that we are not fighting communism. I thought we were. Can that be explained to the public more TOLEDO, OHIO, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Hearings Committee, Washington, D.C.: Ask Rusk why, if Hanoi is a motivation power behind the Vietcong, why don't we bomb it and stop that power. Also ask him if free elections are held in South Vietnam and it goes Communist then what do we do? I agree with you completely and hope you can convince enough of Congress to vote the pending appropriation bill down. DENNIS HEFNER. PASCAGOULA, MISS., February 18, 1966. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations for your courageous stand toward public review of our Vietnam fiasco. It would be more desirable for us to fight pinks and fiscal irresponsibility in Washing- ton. PITTSBURGH, PA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE L. MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You are voicing the sentiments of millions. More power to you, Senator, and thank God PORTLAND, OREG., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You have my vote of confidence on Viet- nam. Keep up your knowledgeable convic- tion. Opposition is using emotionally charged language that is Johnson programed. D. MEEKER, Encyclopaedia Britannica Films. FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We back you 100 percent in Vietnam. Mr. and Mrs. ROBERT L. BOWMAN. 3441 NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are 1,000 percent behind you. Please continue to fight for freedom for Vietnam. You are truly the voice of the liberal in the United States. Gratefully yours, Dr. and Mrs. GERALD SCHREIBER. SEATTLE, WASH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: . Congratulations on your foreign relations hearings. The spectacle of the most powerful Nation waging undeclared war on a little one is absolutely disgusting. GEORGE P. HILL. JAMAICA, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Caucus Room, Washington, D.C.: The gratitude and admiration for your courage, sincerity, and frankness. Carry on. ANNE M. CORBITT. NEW ORLEANS, LA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Caucus Room, Washington, D.C.: Ask Secretary Rusk why didn't we inspect Cuba as we said we would. Why haven't we gone into Cuba as we have gone into Viet- nam? I think Cuba is just as important or more so. I will be listening to TV for you to ask these questions. I think they. are L. G. SHEARON. DETROIT, MICH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Building, Washington, D.O. DEAR SENATQR:I listened on TV to the Sen- ate committee investigating Vietnam and I believe that you among all those who spoke met the issue squarely. The President, I believe, has usurped the powers of the Con- gress in sending American troops to Viet- nam and commiting American resources to Vietnam in other countries with congres- SCARSDALE, N.Y., February 18,196-6. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We support your cry. What can we do? Mrs. B. A. FELDMAN. MIAMI, FLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D:C.: Watched you yesterday, today. Plod bless you. Don't stop. Six and one-half years Army, 15 years police sergeant., Love Amer- NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your criticism of John- son administration war hawks. Vietnam war is a disgraceful chapter of American history, should be stopped immediately. Most Americans support your position. Keep up good work. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESS [ONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Wa.shington. D.C.: We fully support your efforts to stop the brutalizing and dehumanizing Vietnam war. May you succeed in these efforts. Dr. and ERIC Rlss. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. senator WAYNE; MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Keep up your fight against our commit- rn.etits to 40 countries, HARRY 'I'. MORRISSEY. :''AN DIEGO, CALIF. February 18. 1966. :Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I believe in your philosophy. Thank you very much from the 50 people at Gue Ranch.. .JOCELYN GUE. NORTir HAVEN, CONN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: This is our first fan message though we have all along supported your position on Vietnam. Your televised presentation was great. You have our support 100 percent. JAMES and HAZEL MCNEAL. Selrator MORSE, Washington? D.C. CLEVELAND, 01110, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: CALAIS, MAINE, February 18, 1966. You are certainly correct in your sta.le- ment that the American people do not want war, but they feel helpless. Eight to ten percent of our people who are abnormal mentally may crave any kind of escitemen':, but power Is extremely dangerous to put ill the hands of a neuveau riche. Ie is often abused. Our country has not learned to use its power correctly and there are those per- sons in Washington in that category. The tremendous power of one of our lobbies de- termined on war with China is another factor which will push the way. This war makes just as much sense as does the queen in Alice I. Wonderland when she screams "olf with her head." Keep up your good work for the sake of America and its people. They re a worth it. L. M Rcsi it, ToDo. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: HERSHEY, PA., February 18, 1966. Just back from Philippines, Agree with with you. Militarists selfishly motivated. Need hearings. JOHN M. HUMS, DENVER, Coi,o., YOUR Honor: You are the best man. in Washington, D.C., to protect us but where is my son now? He joined the Army at 17. C 'US GRUZIS. RIVERTON, N.J? February 18, 1966. Senators MORSE and FULBRIGHT, Congressional Investigating Committee, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your Vietnam. policy investigation. I also agree completely with your reservations about this conflict. Go to it. ATLANTA, GA? February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Care of Senator FULBRIGHT, Washington, D.C.: Many Georgians are proud of you both. God save America. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: BROOKLYN, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Thank you for expressing views of millions of patriotic Americans about Viet- nam and exposing shameless falsehoods we have been told. F. D. 1, 1LLIAMS. SAN MATEO, C,1 ],IF., February 18, 1966. Senate OJ/icc Building,, Washington, D.C.: Utmost thanks and respect to yo .i for help- ing shed light on this ridiculous situation. Mr. and Mrs. Louis BELKrN. SAN FRANCISCO, CA Ids'., Senator WAYNE MORSE., Washington, D.C.: l?hdture generations of America will thank you for opposing our misguided action in Vietnam. Li [ETON J. I"OLISSAR. OGDEN, I? "All, February 8, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We are behind you all the way in our struggle in Vietnam. Js,STIN F. GROVER, K. M. GROCER, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Bulling, Washington, D.C.: CHICAGO, I I.L., February .1 ,8, 1966. Please don't end hearings. Find more wit- nesses. Don't abandon us now. Keep going. Mrs. STUART HORNE. NEW YORK, N.Y. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Chambers, Washington, D.C.: Strongly support Senate hearing and urge continued efforts to end this morally and militarily indefensible war. 1)r. and Mrs. ABRAHAM WHITE. SAN FRANCCISCO, CALIF,., Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Bravo to you. Please keep opposing this undeclared war. E1.::ZABETH, February 18, 1966. Senator WAY11TE MoRSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Best wishes on your efforts for peace in Vietnam. BENJAMIN CELSAND. Hawks flying scared. Hurray. MORSE for President in 1968. Only regret are not my Senator. ORLEANS, MASS., February 18, 1966. Son i for WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Ask Dean Rusk, Oxford classmate, whether administraticn policy consistent with Chri;tianit;y, in God we trust. We are not marching unchristian soldiers as to wax and not to peace. Quote Jesus: "If your enemy hungers feed him, if he thirsts give him to drink, then you will be heaping coals of lire on his head." Am all for you. Senator MORSE keep up the good work. Axsi. 13. GRAVEM. MADISON, Tirv N? February is. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committ-e. Washington. D.C.: Your fearless voice gratefully ?ieard by many. Please continue fight. GENE STALEY. MARY VILLE, Tsn u., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate O fee Building, Washington, D,C.: You are a valuable man. I congratulate you on your courage and good judgment. HUGH Y.1AKUM. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Bravo. Continue the good fight on Viet. Siam. You have my wholehearted support. The hope of this Nation rests with you. WILLIAM HANNAH. TOLEDO, 01110, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator from Oregon, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: I support your recently expressed eight. man policy differences with General Taylor and the administration. Congratulations. J. MCLEOD LITTLE. OAK PARK, ILL., February 18, 1966, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your brave and en- lightened attack on the war mongers your dumb opposition again demonstrates the old proverb that a fool defends his mistakes while a wise man corrects his errors. Mr. and Mrs. J. A. HENRICKS. MIDLAND. MICA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thanks for defending the Constitution and for your antiwar efforts. Please keep it up. COMMITTEE FOR PEACE. TOPEKA, KANS. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are with you all the way. LESTEII. SILK. KINGMAN, ARIA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Hearing, Washington, D.C.: Please ask Secretary Rusk if the adminis- tration is willing to have NFL-Vietcong as Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE well as Hanoi representatives sit at Vietnam conference table. Thank you. JOHN F. MACPHERSON. KINGSTON, PA., February 18, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Greatly admire your attitude committee hearings as covered by NBC-TV. Major yet untouched subject U.S. billion-dollar tactical nuclear weapons arsenal. Tactical nuclear artillery ammunition is available according to past Executive reports. Why could not this type of nuclear power be used at once until North Vietnam sees futility of con- tinuing conflict? American lives are worth saving now. Respectfully, OWENSBORO, KY., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: SENATOR: I have been very concerned about our assisting Britain in defeating the Rhodesian Government and at the same moment the British are shipping supplies to North Vietnam. Why do we spend so much money, men, and material in South Vietnam under the pretext of trying to free one small nation while enslaving even a smaller one. Would you please ask Secretary Rusk about this. I'll be watching. I have, do, and will continue to support you 100 percent. OWEN HEMBREE. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We stand behind you. Vietnam hearings beneficial. Youth must be saved. War must stop. DETROIT, MICH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations for expressing the view- point of most American people. We need more Senators like you. Mrs. HELEN HAMMOND. DETROIT, MICH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Hundreds of thousands of us are sleeping better because of your courage and that of Senator FULBRIGHT. Please prevail. F. BUTLER. LINCOLN PARK, MICH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: God bless you, Senator MORSE, for the wonderful words you are speaking out for us American people. We are praying for you every day and night. God give you strength to go on and others like you. Mrs. JOSEPHINE SALLIOTTE. YONKERS, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: DEAR SIR: More power to you in your fight against the Johnson war and Taylor, et al. The only way we will ever win this war in Vietnam is by losing it. CHARLES G. MEYER, Sr. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: All people who support the values of free- dom and humanity applaud your noble spirit. RICHARD R. HOLT. J.F.K. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Bravo and congratulations. Support your views, keep up the good work. D. M. TUCKER, Pilot, Trans Caribbean Airways. WEST PALM BEACH, FLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Please ask supporters of Vietnam killing how they relate this to their Church going. ANNETTE ROBERTS. TUCSON, ARIZ., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We wholeheartedly support your coura- geous stand in current Senate Foreign Rela- tions Committee hearing all truly patriotic Americans should be grateful for your ra- tional analysis of our foreign policy. Roy M. EMRICH, ROBERT M. KALPACH, HORMOZ M. MAHMOUD, CARL T. POMIZUKA, Department of Physics, University of Arizona. ENGLEWOOD, N.J., February 18, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: You are America's hero and savior, re- markable man. BERKELEY, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I support your stand on Vietnam if neither North, South Vietnam are sovereign states, how can any nation claim treaty obligations to either of them? Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: SAN JOSE, CALIF., February 18, 1966. We welcome your frank and persistent questioning of the administration South Vietnam policies. We wish California had a Senator of your courage and patriotism. RAUL PIMENTEL. NEW YORK, N.Y,, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Why isn't McNamara on as a witness and why hasn't a committee gone to Peiping? Mao Tse-tung is not a despicable character. Having lived in Peiping for 25 years and knowing the Premier of China, we know that he and Chou en Lai are not despicable char- acters but are interested in the National Peo- ple's Republic of China and are not inter- ested in war with the United States. Miss DELIGHT SALTER. ASBURY PARK, N.J., February 18,1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.. Millions of Americans are grateful and bless you for your valiant efforts for peace in Vietnam. L. & H. MANUFACTURING, Lours RUBEL, President. OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Deeply appreciate your views on Vietnam, you have greatful support here. Mrs. FRANCES PIERCE. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: You have stated your views this morning in an articulate and lucid manner. It is my hope that you gain more support for your position as you have gained mine. ELIZABETH L. PACKER, Mother, Houswife, Teacher. ST. PAUL, MINN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.. Though not of your constituency we feel compelled to express our gratitude for your persistent attempts to arouse the conscience of all Americans, we regret that there are not more Senators Who are willing to speak so honestly, nevertheless we want you to know there are other Americans who share your concern. GEORGE BOWEN and PAUL SONTAG. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: It was encouraging to know you intend to do what you can to place a reluctant Senate on record in regard to the war in Vietnam, EDWARD M. COLLINS. FRAMINGHAM, MASS., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Ask Secretary Rusk what Hanoi's escalat- ing was that in turn makes us escalate. Good luck, NEW YORK., N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Your courage in seeking peace and chal- lenging military cant is deeply appreciated. Thank you, RIVERSIDE, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Investigating Committee, Washington, D.C.: Ask investigating committee why they go 3,000 miles away to fight the Communist when they won't fight them when they are all around us here. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February .21, 1966 ~11CR.SMENTO. CALIF., IAS ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, .D.C.: Washington, D.C.: Don't weaken. Stress Vietnam one coun- We want you to know that we are behind you in your opposition against the senseless try we're outsiders. Start negotiations in- eluding Vietcong now. and useless war in Vietnam. JERRY SCHNITZER AND FAMILY. Mr. and Mrs. E. J. RUNKLE. U'?.I.USI-I ING. MR I1., BIRMINGHAM, MICA., February J,. 1966. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator WAYNE MORSE. Senate Hearing Committee. Washington, D.C.: Washington, D.C. My congratulations to you on your stand HONORABLE SENATOR MORSE: I enjoy hear- yesterday with General Taylor. Ask Taylor ing your comments on Vietnam and I agree where our peace and freedom of choice is with you. I only have one fault with you drafting our childless fathers to tight this that you are not the Senator of Michigan. Stupid war. Mrs. WILLIAM M.S GARRE. BAKERSFIELD. CAI IF., CAM PBELL, CALIF., February is, 1966. SE M W S t Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: February 18. 1966. ,, AYNE OR ena or Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, 1).C.: Why not try prayer to almighty God in your sessions. R,eV. HAROLD BEESON. LA HONDA, CALIF.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington. D.C.: Admire your courageous stand re Viet- nam involvement. Sincere best wishes, Mr. and Mrs. ED MCCLANAHAN. 1 )ALI.AS, TEX., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Com.initteee on Foreign Relations, Washington. D.C.: Suggest asking Dean Rusk what effect Red, China admittance to the United Nations would have on ending Vietnam war. CARL BRANNIN. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Please get into hearing record OKA arti?? cle, Christian Science Monitor, January 26, denying consensus behind Ky. JOHN W. DARR, Jr. GAlNrsvILLE. FLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: Congratulations and our heartfelt thanks for your courageous stand in the hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. L-RENT WALLIS. FIRLEN WALLIS. .LAMES SAJOVIC MICHAEL GEISEN. WILLIAM GREENHOOD. I 'ATRICIA MCGANN. GREAT FALLS, MONT.. February 18. 1966. Senator WA-N1`. MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Your voice is needed. Thank you for mil- lions of Am ericans. Los ANGELES, CALIF.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington. D.C.: Thanks for being America's conscience. You express our hopes and needs to stop war. Mr. and Mrs. S. A. MYERSON. Public has your backing. Dem,uld why Nationalist China not allowed to fight. JACK M. WHITE. LA JOLLA, CAI IF., February I8. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Please push idea United Nations not United States, must become policing agenc:, of world. Congratulations. CLEVELAND, OiIIO, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR: I have four ques:,ons that I would like Mr. Rusk to confirm. 1. How weak could this war in Vietnam make our country over a period of 1 or 2 years? 2. How many thousands of our ',oys lives would. be taken? 3. How could we possibly excavate a war of this kind with no allies? 4. Is it true that a President cr:n make a mistake? WOODBURY. CONN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Congressional Hearings, Washington, D.C.: Please ask. under what conditions the North Vietnam are now living. What is their status? EAST LANSING, MI: nI., February i i, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Call Donald Duncan, ex-master sergeant, U.S. Special forces, to testify before foreign relations. I support you entirely. MICHAEL Ros: NSTEIN. Al,nuquERQUr, N.s . , 14 February 'S, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I completely support your courageous, ethical stand on Vietnam.. SHEBOYGAN FALLS, WIS., February ,.Y, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Chambers, Washington, D.C.: E:eep tayloring. We pray that more forth- right men like you and FULBRIGHT ii, ay awake to help us recover from our misguided polit- ical accident. If gives us hope that our Sen- ate :has not yet reached the baseness of Rome that Cicero opposed for two decades before the end of the Roman empire. Rydberg and Healy clans who had hun- dreds in uniform in World War I and II and whose sons and grandsons are now being uniformed to free the Asian swamps from everything, with respect and best wishes. DOUGLAS MOTT. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966 Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You are the greatest American. We're very proud of your stand on Vietnam. Mr. and Mrs. GEORGE WITTNER, NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your forthright position on Vietnam trib- utes to highest American values and tradi- tion. Congratulations. Mr. and Mrs. RONALD S. CLEMENS. NAPA, CALIF.. February .18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We are supporting your policy. GAINESVILI.E, H'I.A.. February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: In complete accord with you and Senator FULBRIGHT and your intelligent, patriotic, and courageous efforts. Mrs. JENNIE BRATLEY AND FAMILY. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18'. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You are the greatest American, I'm very proud of your stand on Vietnam. HARRIET WASSERMAN. HOUSTON, TI;-,c., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: My congratulations to you on your clear and concise report to the Nation via tele- vision media. Although I am not one of your constituents? I congratulate you. FLORENCE GERINGER. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your courageous stand yesterday repre- Bents the voice of the people. Keel) up the good work. CAMBRIDGE, MASS., February IN, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I strongly support your criticism Vietnam policy. Extricate us from colassa. misguided blunder. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE TUCSON, ARIZ., February 18, 1966. CENTRAL VALLEY, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Thank God for you and Senator FULBRIGHT In this present critical point in mankind's history. FRANCES and JOHN ADLER. Dr. and Mrs. ALAN CLARKE. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator MORSE, Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Senate Office Building, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Washington, D.C.: Washington, D.C.: We express full support for your stand on Your eloquent statement this afternoon Hope you will continue important probe of United States Vietnam policy and congratu- has our full support and sympathy. dangerous Vietnam policy. Are you inviting late you on your performance in the face of Dr. and Mrs. JOSEPH CARY. Walter Lippmann? strong opposition. Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH E. CADDEN. Byrd Schweitzer, Mr. and Mrs. George SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., Papcun, Mr. and Mrs. Nathan Perlman, February 18, 1966. Los GATOS, CALIF., Mr. and Mrs. William Goldblatt, Mr. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, February 19, 1966. and Mrs. George Maxwell, Doris Stan U.S. Senate, Senator WAYNE MORSE, islauski, Dr. and Mrs. James McDonald, Washington, D.C.: Senate Office Buidling, Marian Martin, Susan Hibbs, Mr. and Please keep up your excellent efforts on be- Washington, D.C.: Mrs. Walter Smith, Dr. and Mrs. Cor- half of our long-range best interests. You are one of the most courageous men relius Steelink. A. J. HORN BURLINGAME. in the-world today. Thank you, Senator. WILTON, CONN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your role in the Foreign Re- lations Committee hearings. I support your views unconditionally. Mrs. HENRY H. NEWELL. TACOMA, WASH.,- February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I have watched your outstanding state- ments on television concerning the Vietnam war. My husband is a seasoned military of- ficer now serving in Vietnam. He is in com- plete agreement with your views and 100 percent behind you. We read your Senate speech and lawyers committee report and it is very much to the point. Please keep up the good work. There are thousands of lives depending on the outcome of what is decided at these hearings. Our major oil companies are paying the Vietcong to leave their trucks and storage areas alone. It may be added that none of these oil facilities have ever been attacked or damaged. I am remaining anonymous on the advice of our attorney, Mr. Rex Roudebush. How- ever, if you wish, I would be delighted to talk to you personally and privately. Bravo, Senator MORSE, you are most re- spected for your efforts. By REX S. ROUDEBUSH. METHUEN, MASS., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank God and thank you. We believe you are right and sincere. Please don't give up your effort. MAXINE WALLACE, JOAN SEGLIN. SAN MATEO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Applauding your efforts to reveal the truth about United States Vietnam involvement. Keep it up. ANNE and GEORGE CARTER. NEW YORK, N.Y., .February 18, 1966. SENATOR WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank God for Wayne Morse. You are on the moral side. We are with you in your un- remitting efforts to contain the mad men in Washington. We don't want our children sent to Vietnam to be slaughtered. ROSALIND DANN, ETHEL LEVENSON, ROBERT LEVENSON. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your brave and patriotic fight against war hawks Johnson, General Taylor, and Rusk. GEO. PERMAN. ORINDA, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR: I've always taken a dim view of you. I apologize. You were mag- nificent during the hearings representing the minority with great dignity and restraint, though I don't necessarily agree with you. Sincerely, Mrs. WOODBURK LAMB. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: STORRS, CONN., February 18, 1966, We endorse your inquiry into our country's involvement in Vietnam. Keep punching. JOHN DUGGAN. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WILLIAM FULBRIGHT, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on hearings, especially your comments on final one today. Hope administration policy takes heed. Rev. HOWARD G. MATSON. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I support and encourage your opposition to our action in Vietnam. - Mrs. ADA RAE WALTON. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Applaud and concur in your statements on Vietnam this afternoon. Please continue your magnificent resistance. Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH PASSEN AND SON. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Please continue in your courageous stand. Knowing you are in Washington gives me some hope. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: NEW YORK, N.Y., February 19, 1966. SEATTLE, WASH., February 19, 1966. Watched you on TV and behind you 100 percent on your stand. Don't give up your fight for constitutional government. MARGUERITE ENGH. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We endorse your inquiry into our country's involvement in Vietnam. Keep punching. JOSEPH RHINE. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: PALO ALTO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Thanks for fearless and patriotic stand in challenging the administration's Vietnam policy. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 19, 1966. Senator MORSE, The Senate, Washington, D.C.: We thank you for your courageous and wise stand. LIPMAN and MARY BEES. VENTURA, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulate you on your firm stand against war in Vietnam and support you wholeheartedly in your efforts against appro- priation for escalation. Thank you for alert- ing the American people to the grave danger facing them. Mr. and. Mrs. EARL LOUGHBORO. SANTA MONICA, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: To a wonderful Jeffersonian. We are back of you 100 percent. Stop the war in Vietnam. BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., February 19, 1966, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thanks to your courage on opposition to military commitment in Vietnam. You speak for millions. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We endorse right of inquiry into our posi- tion in Vietnam, Endorse views also please continue. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R0004000QQ05-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 1 e ruary 21, 1966 SAUSALITO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thanks. Keep going. Urge calling Donald Duncan. Expose faults analysis. Urge ,,round nuclear armed planes. MARGAREr B. PORTER. PHILADELPHIA, PA., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNEE MORSE., Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C. I)aAR SIR: Our gratitude for your criticism of policy in Vietnam. Prot. HOWARD HOLTZER. !AN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I fully support your position on. deplorable Vietnam situation. ISAAC ZAFRANI. `iYRACUSE, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand. It's about time somebody stood up to President John- son on the Vietnam stand. 1'IIILIP Rizzo. `',AN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the fine work. We are behind you. Mr and Mrs. WALTER J. STACK. CO[?rAWA, ONTARIO, CANADA, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, United States Senate Washington, D.C.: Just watched you on 'I'V Canadian Broad- casting Co. Congratulations on your magnificent sand on Vietnam. We are right behind you. Expecting large demonstrations in Ottawa first week of March with Staugh- ton Lynd and many others. 1411 :s. WALTER JOSEPHY, Canadian Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. i'IIILADELPHIA. PENN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE. Washington, D.C.: We are with you a hundred percent. Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH E. MCGEE. OAKLAND, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: lain on your side. MADISON, N.J., February 18, 1966. SAN DIEGO, CALIF, February 18, 1966. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I support you 150 percent. You are a courageous man, performing outstanding service for the overwhelming majority of Americans, who don't want this horrible Vietnam mess continued another dos. Your comments to General Taylor--gutter devasta- tion. Let me repeat you're an out; i,anding man. WIIITTIER, CALIF., February 18, 1966. :Senator WAY NE MORSE. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you, Sir, for all your effort ;:rid may God give you the strength and the courage to continue. I support you and I am be- hind you and I believe as you do that all Americans are equal to any task if we under- stand it. I urge you to continue in your endeavors because I trust you implicitly and may God give you the strength rnd the breath to speak for us, as long as one Ameri- can speaks, all is not lost. Thank you again, sincerely. FLORENCE C. INOWI'['r, A Soldier's Mother. Senator WAYNE: MORSE, Washington, D.C.: My hope is with your grave and forthright stand on Vietnam. You are a patriot and the forest example of American courage. I am telegraphing Senator KENNEDY to sup- port you. GREALNECK, N.Y., February 18 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Whole heartedly with you on Vietnam. Please continue your courageous fight. JEAN CF RISTIE. SPOKANE, WAS I[_ February 18 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Hundreds of us agree with you. Good luck to you, keep up the good worst. AGNES CHRISTOPIiERSON. 'i'R I.NTON, N,?1., Fe:bruary.,1, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: Your policy regarding Vietnam has our complete support. THOMAS and JANICE KUMMER. PHILADELPHIA, PA., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank God for your courage and intel- ligence. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: 't'hank you i or IV hearing. We support you fully reIr, and Mrs. EEEE QUINLAND. DETROIT, MICH., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank you, Senator. MORSE for logically de- fending our country's welfare against ad- ministrative dangers foreign policy. Mr. and Mrs. CLARENCE WRIGHT. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February I8, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You give great joy--great relief. A fine statesman speaking out for peace. FRANK LANSDOWN. BROOKLYN, N.Y., February 18, 1966, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR: Our wholehearted support for your position on committee hearings. MARSTONS MILLS, ]WASS., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You have given us back our faith in demo- cratic government. Your questions were brilliant and we are proud you are a fellow American. Liberations fronts cannot be built anywhere unless there is justified dis- content. One cannot eradicate discontent with napalm bombs and impose reactionary generals to preserve the status quo. Our re-? apects and admiration for being a spokesman for a thinking American people. Lours and RUTH DEVOLDER. SAN LEANDRO, CALIF.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the good work. GEORGINA SEI LERS. SAN ANTONIO, TEx., February 18. 1966. The Honorable WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Although warmongers and speculators capture headlines, majority of intelligent, compassionate Americans are horrified and dismayed at prospects of feeding the cream of our youth and breeding stock of America into the maw of the most senseless war in our history, which, apart from indescribable misery, suffering and anguish, strengthens the gleeful Chinese and Russians and weak- ens us. You are the champion of millions of silent supporters in a just and righteous cause. CANTON, OHIO. February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: For your courageous stand on the Viet- namese issue we extend to you our support, our admiration, and our heartfelt gratitude. We should be ashamed of being Americans these days if it were not for statesmen like you. EDMOND and DORIS FRANKLIN. STAMFORD, CONN., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Truly American mothers are thanking God for one truly American Senator. Plcasc per- severe. OGDEN, UTAEI, February 18, 1966, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. Beautiful Job. If help needed, let me know. CORONADO, CALIF.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your splendid tribute to Senator FuL- BRIGHT expressed my own appreciation of his. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE remarks, and the importance they have to our future. Your own contribution is of gigantic value and my gratitude is unlimited. Be assured of my support. HEDWIG THOMPSON. HARTSDALE, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your courageous stand opposing the totally unwarranted remarks of General Taylor yesterday. They were all too reminiscent of certain remarks made by Ger- man military figures after World War I. Keep up the good work for peace. Prof. ERWIN SINGER. SAN JOSE, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your great courage, we are with you word for word. BERNIE and LISA KALVELAGE. BERKELEY, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Keep up good work. Vietnam war increas- ingly unpopular here. WALTER PACKARD. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. We greatly respect your courage and integ- rity in the Vietnam debate. This family wholeheartedly supports you. Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH SARGENT, and CHILDREN. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Ninety percent of people we talked to strongly commend your courageous stand against Vietnam war. Mr. and Mrs. CARL M. LEVIN. WILMETTE, ILL., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Your exposition and analysis on this after- noon's hearings deserve highest gratitude and praise. HARRY, RUTH, and DAVID BARNARD. ATLANTA, GA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. Thank you, Senator, for your view on Viet- nam. You're the real guardian of world peace. WESTMINSTER, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee Washington, D.C. Informed Americans with you all the way. Do not waiver. Country's survival depends on it. DREXEL HILL, PA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: My congratulations and gratitude. Mrs. DONNA Lucci. SANTA ANA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: All hope for peace depends on people like you and Senator FULBRIGHT. Our hum- ble thanks. OVERLAND PARK, KANS., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Support your position on Vietnam, like hundreds more in Kansas City. Admire your courage. JOHN and BETTY PELOT. CLARENCE,. N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator MoRSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Have followed all Foreign Relations Com- SACRAMENTO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the good fight. We need you to help us stop this fight in Vietnam. Mrs. ANGLED MELIN. WARREN, OHIO, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: My full support to a man who does not confuse morality with patriotism. Many are with you in your struggle to restore civilian control of the Military Establishment from Commander in Chief to the impassioned "gentleman" from Louisiana. WILLIAM KLOSS. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are grateful for your courage. Please keep opposing the war in Vietnam. ANNA NACKE. ROCKAWAY BEACH, N.Y., February 18, 1966. mittee hearings. We agree with all your statements. Mr. and Mrs. H. R. LENZ. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You have already earned a place in history NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. as the American spokesman for sanity. You were brilliant today against wooden Rusk. it l ti a NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. nue your n ease con For sake of hum y p efforts toward negotiations and elections. Otherwise our bombs on nuclear sites in Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Building Sinkiang within few months. THE STUDENT MECHANICAL ENGINEERING. , Washington, D.C.: PALO ALTO, CALIF., If democracy survives in this country it February 18, 1966. will be due to courageous men like you. Dr. and Mrs. MARC VOSK. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: DALLAS, TEX., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Please continue wisdom and rationality and reinstate Congress arbiter American welfare. Washington, D.C.: Certainly appreciate your firm stand on BROOKLYN, N.Y. our policy in the Foreign Relations Com- mittee. February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: JANESVILLE, WIS., Bravo. Keep up the fight you must make February 18 1966. them see the light of day. We admire and , Senator WAYNE MORSE, respect you. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your viewpoint and HAVERFORD, PA., discussion with Rusk. Stand fast to your February 19, 1966. convictions. We are all with you. Senator MORSE, Mrs. CHARLENE KLEIFOTH. U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: As one of the many who share your doubts EAU GALLIE, FLA., about the wisdom and morality of postwar February 18, 1966. U.S. foreign policy I wish to thank you for Senator WAYNE MORSE, superbly representing the United States with Washington, D.C.: courage and determination All good Americans support you in your . DAVID BRESLER courageous efforts in exposing the evil that , Psychology Department Bryn Mawr permeates our Government today with re- , College spect to our foreign policy and In particular . to the debacle in Vietnam. BALTIMORE MD THODORE G DELL , ., . . February 19, 1966. SANTA MONICA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We want peace. Support you all the way. Keep fighting. Our prayers are with you. THE STRANGER FAMILY. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: God bless you and give you strength to help lead the American people out of the misguided wilderness. We must somehow find a civilized way to live with all people. WILLIAM and ESTHER CYLUS. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 2.1, 1966 .SANTA BARBARA, CALIF.. February 19. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate. Washington, D.C.: We have watched the Senate hearings shown on television. Thank you for your forthright statements against administra- tion policy in Vietnam. Keep up the good work. We need more men like you. Mr. and Mrs. MELVIN BooTJER. ['(>MONA, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Capitol Building, Washington, D C. DEAR SENATOR: I have seen you on tele- l ision in the last 2 days and I heartily en- the position you are supporting. T'ATRICK O'REILLY. NEw YoRK, N.Y., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Watching committee hearings on televi- sion. Have been impressed with your elo- quence. convictions, and faith in the Ameri- can people. Please continue the good fight. MARTIN ROSSOFF. f' i.EASANT RIDGE:, MICII., February 19, 1966. Senator WAY NE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: As members of the Presidents Club we congratulate you for your courage and wis- dom as seen in the Senate hearings on Viet- nam. We are proud of you and support your position fully. DO r. and Mrs. MAX J. PINCUS. Ins ANGELES, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations; a great contribution. Almost singlehanded you and Senator FuI.- BRIGHT redeemed integrity of our country. Mrs. J. H. STEWART. i.IN ANGELI'S, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Appreciate your firm logical statement. We Californians appreciate you, our third itenator. BEVERLY BILLS, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I still agree with you. Keep up the good work. CUPERTINO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. to continue my affection. for President John- son, I would like to continue to think of President Johnson as a Roosevelt-type Presi- dent, therefore, I would like to have you urge him to discontinue this war in Vietnam, I do not wish to see our men killed in this war. Sincerely, NEW YORK, N.Y , February 19, 1966. [ton. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Dear Senator, our deep ,,ppreciati ,n and thanks for the integrity and intelligence you have shown in the televised hearings. We are in fullest agreement with you. Sincerely. Mr. and Mrs. J. M. DOPES. J. B. DoDBS, PrrrSBURGH, PA, February 18, 1966. Honorable WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senator from Oregon, Senate Office Building. Washington, D.C.: Please accept my sincere thanks for your courageous fight in opposition to further escalation of the war in Vietnam. J. CU I'LRII ANDREW:-. Professor of History, Chatham College. EL CAJON, CALIF, February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Don't let the pressure boy:: of the executive branch squelch your voice for balance of pow- ers and constitutional government. If the United States is wrong let us admit it and get on the right course. We don't have to keep tip a wrong to save face, we aren't that foolish. RICHARD J. PETERSO^'. Attorney at Law. LoursvrLLE, KY , February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on excellent expose of mis- guided heads of present administration for United States to stumble into major war with China. Only serves Russian purpose and shows U.S. leadership as uneducated fools. Thirty years ago United States was major friend of China, sending aid of food during famines of 1930. Korea and South Vietnam situations not comparable. JOHN h.n'PEL. ERnt, Pn.. F"ebruary 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington. D.C.: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. 't'hank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. 't'hank you. ROBERT M. FINNELL. SPOKANE, WASn., February 19. 1966, asking whether the truth helps Hanoi end? Whether any disagreement with administra- tive policy and thus alledgedly helplul to Hanoi doesn't leave congressional discretion to the military and executive contrary to the Constitution? Best wishes. BERNARD REICH. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: It is my belief the great majority of peo- pie detest administration's policy in Vietnam. JEANNETTE PAGE. SPRINGFIELD, ILL., February 21, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up your good work. Get us out of Vietnam. ADALIN BORMAN. MODESTO, CALIF.. February 21, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your efforts on Vietnam appreciated. Keep discussion going deescalation, cease fire, negotiations, elections. Mr. and Mrs. GLEN BOOTH. ST. Lours, Mo., February 21, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your speech in Wisconsin absolutely right. Only chaos will result from present gun.- crazy policy. Vote against the draft and the war. ANN ARBOR, MICH., February 21, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Please continue your fight for a sane for- eign policy. Wish I could vote for you. WILLIAM L. RICHARDS. PASADENA, CALIF.. February 17. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Three cheers for your superiority, your knowledge and your brilliance in represent- ing the U.S. people. MARY MEYERS. ST. PAUL, MINN.. February 11, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: A thousand congratulations. Please con- tinue to fight for us. ELIZABETH B. DE:.AUX. NORTH CANTON, OHIO. February 17. 1966. Senator MORSE, Old Senate Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am behind you 100 percent on the congressional hearing. Sincerely, lonatar WAYNE MORSE, fl.S. Senate, Washington. D.C.: Senator, I wish you success and back your views in Vietnaun 100 percent. l';1iIC NELSON. I ':1f,o:i Vi.:aLE:S PENINSULA, CALIF., February 19, 1966. 3cnator WAYNE: MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington., D.C.: Senator Morse, will you please use your of- fices to relay this night letter to President Johnson. I have no question about support- ing our troops in Vietnam, I just do not want t,i see our troops used there. I would like Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Please get Hubert home before we r;o broke. Wait, he might give 'exas and Johnson to them.. BEVERLY HILLS. CALIF'.. .February 19, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Trust that in your Vietnam speech next week you will answer militaristic shear by LA GRANGE, II.L., February 17. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: We are with you all the way in your views on treaty and Vietnamese conflict. We re- pudiate Johnson's policy in southeast Asia. RUDY and IRENE 1VIEIER. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE NORTH BEND, OREG., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Please investigate any American companies who pay money to Communist Vietcong and take necessary action against said companies. LAVONNIE BRIMHALL. HIGHLAND PARK, N.J., February 17, 1966. Senator W. MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We are 100 percent, especially your stand on Vietnam. OAKHURST, N.J., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your courageous fight. You are earning the respect and support of every decent American. SUFFERN, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on questions today re Ge- neva agreement denial free elections 1956 suggestions for role U.N. Mrs. ROBERT GRANT. DECATUR, ALA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: DEAR SIR: Have been watching the commit- tee meeting today and thoroughly convinced you are 100-percent correct. Please, for the good of all true Americans pursue your pres- ent course. Very truly yours. Mr. and Mrs. M. D. RICH AND SONS, OAK PARK, MICH., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE and Senator FULBRIGHT, Senate Foreign Committee Investigation, Washington, D.C.: You are the only ones that can stop Big Brother from making 1984 a reality for mine and all children. There must be checks and balances. SACRAMENTO, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your courage. Twenty-five people who agree. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: What would the Northwest, the Nation do without you. WILLIAM HUNT. PACIFICA, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, - Care of U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Please accept my deepest gratitude for your courageous action during these most dif- ficult times. As a father who is raising three sons, who prays that they may live In, a world of peace and realizes that we are draining our precious resources, I ask that you continue your great work. MARVIN SCHNEIDER. JAMESTOWN, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office, Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thanks be to God for forthright men like you. Support you. Thanks. DALLAS, TEX., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Hearing Room, Washington, D.C.: Taylor claims Vietcong losing 16,000 per month. Since strength of Cong is set at 200,000, is Taylor predicting Cong defeat within year? If not, why not? Since ad- ministration spokesmen refer to North Viet- namese fighters as foreign aggressors, why does northerner Ky govern South Vietnam? Keep up good work. Mr. and Mrs. L. E. KLAR. PITTSBURGH, PA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Room, Washington, D.C.: Thank God for you and men like you. Good luck. Mrs. HETTY SCHU. VENTURA, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We salute and support your strong stand in the. committee. We are 100 percent be- hind you. DAISY and WALTER HASSALL. NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Our fullest support for your courageous stand on Vietnam. Please continue your efforts. NORMAN LEVINE GEORGE MORRIS, M.D. SANTA ANA, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your leadership in expos- ing governmental halftruths and double- talk on Vietnam. DONNA and NEAL NEWBY. CROTON ON HUDSON, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your courageous voice on behalf of sanity and humanity is deeply appreciated. SOPHIA and RICHARD BOYER. SAN BRUNO, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations to you, sir, and to your distinguished colleagues who are courageous enough to dissent. SEATTLE, WASH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Regarding today's hearing. Also your other positions. Hooray for you. Mr. and Mrs. JOHN HEDRICK. HOLLYWOOD, FLA., February 17, 1966. Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Caucus Room, Washington, D.C. Honorable Senator WAYNE MORSE, Sir: I have noticed none of the Senators have asked why the great armies of Chiang Kai- shek have not been used in place of our boys; after all we are fighting her war. Keep up the good work. Sincerely, Mrs. THOMAS J. BREENAN. PLATTSBURGH, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You were magnificent today and we, sup- port you. ROANOKE, VA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Am with you all the way. God bless you. Mrs. KENNETH KEOUGH. BROOKLINE, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. Your voice is heard. More Senators should have the courage of you and Senator FULBRIGHT. W. FITZPATRICK. VANCOUVER, WASH., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, U.S. Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulation to the voice of the Ameri- can people, keep up the great and coura- geous work. FRESNO, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Applauding course of your questioning of General Taylor. PORTLAND, OREG., February 18, 1966. Senator MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Regarding your interview with General Taylor and your efforts in general bravo my little pressure group a wife 6 children and myself thank you for earnestly representing us in the Asian matter. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Hearings, Washington, D.C.: ALLENTOWN, PA., February 18, 1966. "Congratulations." You truly are a man in the eyes of God, and the world. Keep up the good work. May God bless, guide, protect; and direct your paths; and all others there; and elsewhere, who are fighting for truth and righteousness. 'Please read: Job, 40th chapter; 10th to 14th verses. Please read this to the Assembly. Prophetess ADELINE G. SMITH. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ---SENATE February 21, 1966 ME; MPHIS, TE;NN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Please do not any of you get angry and blow up leave that for our poor boys on the battlefield to do for you. By all means be cultured and refined. Mrs. RUBY HASSELL. IIADDONFIELD, N.J., February 17. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: May you survive all the vicious attacks against your loyalty and be vindicated in your faith in the American peoples distrust of administrations war in Vietnam at the polls, ELISABETH FARn. NEWPORT NEWS, VA., February 17. 1966. man, "The degree of cooperation given to the Commission by the two parties has not been the same while the Commission has ex- perienced difficulties in North Vietnam. The major part of its difficulties has arisen in South Vietnam." DETROrT, MICH February 18, 1966. :Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Bravo. You are wrong. The American people is a people have already repudiated this meddling murder of American and Asian people but have had no representation to express their feelings heretofore, and why don't you expose the interests who are per- petrating this war? Copy to Senator PAT MCNAMARA. BERKELEY, CALIV., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Important technical difference between undeclared war in Vietnam and action in Korea not so far mentioned. in hearigs; let- ter action under U.N. mandate not unilateral action by United States. Insistence on dec- laration considered unfortunate since pos- sibly affirmative, thus shilling dissent., More and more dissent needed. OoRoTHY L. THOMAS. SAN JOSE. CALIF., February 18, 1966. senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: My name, Howard L. Jackson, Army 5 years lacking 12 days. Senator, sir, ask one ques- tion would you sacrifice one just one Amer- ican for all Vietnam ask that one question to General. Respectfully yours, HOWARD L. JACKSON. CENTERPORT, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: What. about, Geopolitiks, Maj. Gen. Hanse llaushofer, the father of Geopolitik south- east. Asia. For more call RL 7-0749. VICTOR MAHNKEN. CONCORD, CALIF., February 10, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: I hope this letter reaches you personally, a l t,hough I have never met you I have heard much about you all my life mostly from my grandfather, Russell W. Harrison of Portland Ore., and more recently from my husband, Sgt. R. M. Omalley, USMC with whom you had dinner on 't'hanksgiving Day, 1965, at USNH at Yokuska, Japan, he was there re- covering from wounds received in Vietnam. Until my husband was wounded I had not paid much attention to our U.S. foreign pol- icies, since that time I want to learn the reasons my husband has to fight and risk his life, l: have now read and listened about the war as much as possible during the Foreign Relations Committee hearings. I am in full :,greement with you and the other Senators who are against our foreign policy in Viet- nam. I also feel that the U.S. Government ins no right to give our money and aid to Communist nations which in turn support the governments which are killing our men. I feel that U.S. policies need a good looking at, what can I do to express my opinion and Delp change our policies. My husband is also against this military action. Requested rile to get informaton on the Senate debate and forward them to him. Can you help me to do this again. I want to say I am 100 per- cent behind you and thank you for the ;stand you are taking. Someday I hope to have tile pleasure of meeting you. Mrs. VIRGINIA OMALLEY. KENT, OHIO, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Call your attention to 1956 report by In- ternational Control Commission as quoted, page 172, in Vietnam edited Marvin Gettle- Senator WAYNE. MORSE, U.S. Senate Office Building. Washington, D.C.: You. are the conscience of our foreign policy. PALO ALTO, CALLS"., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: Regarding today's testimony and limited war. Taylor understandably refused to spe- cify limitation of means. Why not question him or Rusk on limited objectives. It will accept legally elected coalition govern- ment in return for protection of minorities. Compare our 14 points with Vietcong pro- gram printed as appendix to Bernard Falls' "Two Vietnams." STANFORD COMMITrE:E EOR PEACE IN VIET- NAM, STANFORD UNIVERSITY. DAYTONA BEACH, Fm A., February 17, 1966. Sena for WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: I never heard Mutual Broadcasting radio mention you once today whilst giving long coverage to Maxwell Taylor. None of NBC. Same coverage to Maxwell Taylor, no men- tion of Senator MoRSE, of ABC. Every half hour, long arguments by Maxwell Taylor, Senator MORSE mentioned feebly once and once fairly. J Applause from gallery. Alex Dreier tonight was very fair to you This is honorable broadcasting, is it? It is a nation- al disgrace. Whilst our "patriots" were tak- ing Over a thousand million dollars (I can say billion) of German alien property in 1919, the American free press printed German atrocity stories, to confuse the American people so they would not protest the theft of the German properties. GEORGE EDWIN ENGLISH. HOLLYWOOD, CALIF.. February 13. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE:, U.S. Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Well done. The Senate and Houso are the legislative, the President executive. Generals are under Senators in the United States. Congratulations. LA JOLLA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I honor your efforts to bring sanity into Vietnam madness. We must put rational .~ limits to our objectives. ELLIOTT. ROBERT C. ESHERMAN OAKS, CALIF.. February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MoRsE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are firmly behind you in your stand against the war in Vietnam, and we wish to congratulate you upon your magnificent tes- timony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday. Keep up with it. ROBERT T. WILKERSON, MARIAN SULTAN. SEATTLE, WASH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Once Building, Washington, D.C.: Applaud your patriotic, courageous, far- sighted role in Thursday hearing. Please ask Rusk Friday, Does he support novel Maxwell Taylor doctrines that we map unilaterally intervene when legitimacy of government is unclear (as in Saigon succes- sive coup d'etats), because our connrlitment is to people? If so, would he apply elsewhere? Particl]- larly China Government not recognized by us? SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Bravo. SAN RAFAEL, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Senator MORSE: Congratulations on your stand regarding Vietnam. Practically speak- ing, we stand, with General Gavin, and moral- ly, with the World Council of Churches. You, however, are our spokesman. Further, it is perhaps time that the President be re- minded of his moral responsibilities to the world as well as his legal restrictions under the U.S. Constitution. A war Is a war is a war. Time was when aggressive military es- ercise was legislated not executed. A twist of semantics seems to have taken this legality right out of the laps of Congress and placed it in the hands of a paranoic megalomaniac I only pray that you, Senator FULBRIGHT, and men such as Mr. Kennan, and General Gavin can persuade your colleagues of your own honest concern and to show up intellectual bigotry and political blackmail wherever it may occur. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. R. BARRET MINEAN. WILLIAMSTOWN, W. VA., February 17; 1966. 1-1011. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. : You render our Nation a tremendous serv- ice exposing tragedy of Vietnam to public scrutiny. Why are we sending boys 8,000 miles to die in Vietnam jungles and swamp; after betraying Cubans at Bay of Pigs? Have McNamara testify open hearings. You know Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 . Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 of course he heretofore. has been shockingly wrong GERALD W. TRANER. BUFFALO, N.Y., February 18, 1966 Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Washington., D.C.: Watching hearings on TV we both believe you are right. Please continue as represen- tative of sanity and honor. Mr. and Mrs. It. GOLDSMITH. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Sentaor WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Building, Washington, D.C.: We the people love and thank you for your outspoken, humane, and courageous defense of truth. BLOOMINGTON, IND., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep it up. Congratulations on good job by you and Senator FIJLBRIGHT in Senate hearings. Mrs. RAY HEFFNER. BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: being in Vietnam. Certainly I do. I trust you will continue to oppose such action, especially our becoming more and more in- volved in our ultimate questionable goal. Sincerely, EAST LANSING, MICH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Our admiration, respect, and gratitude for your long continued reasoning in the Vietnam debate. Dr. and Mrs. THEODORE GUINN. SPRINGFIELD, ILL., February 17, 1966. Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We admire you for stating your honest opinion and the true reflection of opinions of many people who are taxpayers and loyal Americans in this country. With reference to daily headlines, why not suggest at the present hearing a provision for security, the safety and welfare of the citizens of this country, who paid Federal taxes and deplore the waste of lives and goods in a foreign issue which cannot be resolved by the ex- penditure of either. 'STOCKTON, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand on Viet- nam. LOS ANGELES, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: My husband and I are in complete ac- cord with your position on Vietnam. I would like to add that most of friends have the same viewpoint and so do many of our acquaintances. It seems to be a prevailing fear to oppose any viewpoints of our Presi- dent's position, probably due to the usual smear tactics. NEw YORK., N.Y. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. MORSE: I thank you very much. It's a courageous battle you're fighting, I thank you very much. CORTLAND, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thanks and congratulations for the service you have rendered the country in airing the Vietnam mess in committee hearings made public on television. In my opinion there are millions of Americans who are very con- cerned about our Viet policy past and pres- ent and who are apprehensive about the future. Let the good work go on and let the will of the people prevail through Con- gress to resolve this issue in a sensible Christian manner. H. B. BURNHAM. COLUMBIA, S.C., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I believe the bulk of America supports your stand in questioning the legality of our CLEVELAND, OHIO, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Greatly appreciate and strongly endorse your efforts for peace Vietnam. Please con- tinue. Dr. VONEIDA. YPSILANTI, MICH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I highly commend your efforts in the For- eign Relations Committee. WILLIAM A. HARJU. BOULDER, COLO., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Bravo. These hearings make us proud that we have thinking men of your high caliber representing us. It also makes us aware that a good democracy must be constantly watched and tended. Your comments and committee activity were outstanding. Keep up the ex- cellent work. GLENN D. ALBERG, 0. WILLIAM ALBERG. WASHINGTON, CONN., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: The courage and tenacity displayed by you and Senator FULDRIGHT to regain control of our Government has the profound gratitude of thinking Americans. Cut off the draft and stop authorizing blank checks for the joy boys to use and waste as they desire. All over-told shipping American boys to the in Asian fever-ridden swamps without declara- tion of war illustrates need for Congress to stand on its own feet. L. H. McMAHON. BRIDGEPORT, CONN., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on Vietnam stand taken with Taylor today. I applaud your great courage. STEVEN JONAS, M.D. LAFAYETTE, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I deeply appreciate your clarity and courage in today's hearings on Vietnam. DON SANFORD. WOODS HOLE, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We back your statements in committee to- day and your stand on Vietnam completely. Mr. and Mrs. J. OSTERGARD. OSSINING, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Strongly support your Vietnam stand and efforts to inform Senate and public. Mr. and Mrs. E. J. WALKER. EDINBURG, TEX., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: The Nation as well as the gallery ap- plauded your forthright and firm reply to General Taylor's implied smear "that you were giving comfort to Hanoi" in asserting that millions are opposed to the administra- tion's Vietnam war policy. Congratulations for putting a moral stance above a sham patriotism, keep pitching. Respectfully, NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Glad of your incorruptible good sense, grateful for your courage. Mr. and Mrs. WILL TURNER. RIVERTON, N.J., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Office Building, Washington, D.C.: . We appreciate your efforts and the open hearings on Vietnam. Keep up good work. Mr. and Mrs. LYLE TATUM. LOXLEY, ALA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Great work you doing up there. Hold it to them, big boy. JOHN W. FINCH. CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I have always considered you the greatest political figure in the world. Your devastat- ing rebuke to the military mouthpiece of the Pentagon gutter pipeline will be an im- mortal tribute to you. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 2.1, 1966 BALTIMORE, MD., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We support your stand on Vietnam. JOHN and SUSANN MITCHELL. MIDDLETOWN, CONN., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senator Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thousands of its here in Connecticut are with you on the Vietnam mess. Keep up the good work. GLENDALE, CALIF., February 17, 1966. lion. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR MoRsE: Thanks for yes- terday and today. With you all the way. Respectfully, Mrs. DOROTHY REID. ROYAL OAK, MICH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Part-time Consultant Taylor had few def- inite, specific, unqualified answers. Please tabulate ratio of unhedged answers to total questions and read into RECORD. Ask Rusk exactly, definitely, specifically total tonnage and men coming over trail. Pentagon wants specific amount of money to do a job not specific at all. CAMBRIDGE, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington. 1).C.: Continue to represent the truth, sir. 1968. I.ZOBF:RT P. DE ANGELIS. CLEVELAND, OHIO, February .17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand against General Taylor's outrageous tactics. Keep up the fight for democracy. Dr. E. W. PFEIFFER. NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We support your belief as expressed at the hearing today GREAT NECK, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your sharp question- ing or Gen. Maxwell Taylor. We consider you a fine American patriot and a great Sen- ator. HARTFORD. CONN., February 17, 1966. lion. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: III my opinion you are one of the most respected men to have tried to give the American people the facts on the Vietnam situation, etc., Taylor, Gavin, sing the same song, and they are all out of tune. I want you to keep me personally informed. Please confirm. WILLIAM DELOREY SULL(VAN. HICKORY, N.C. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. Keep up the good work, We are with you 100 percent. Mr. and Mrs. CLAUDE REED. SANTA BARBARA, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, 'Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on magnificent presenta- ,ion at Vietnam war debate in committee hearings. Mr. and Mrs. ROBERT H. SOLLEN. YD MA, ARIL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank goodness Senator MORSE we have an interested citizen as well as an honest statesman in Washington. Even though there are problems concerned with Vietnam :1 think you are pursuing the right course. Having served on Senator Keagle's publicity committee I feel secure in saying that. Amer- ica in general is with you. Certainly China has too many people unless we explode our nuclear weapons over their land. Therefore, let's seek to settle it at the conference table as you suggest. Permission granted to use as is. WOODSTOCK, VI.. February 17. 1966. Senator WAYNE. MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your splendid stand. What can we do to help'? Mr. and Mrs. R. E. MER.rENS. BERKELEY, CALIF., February?17.1966. Senator WAYNF MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Continue fight against Pentagon, State De- partment idiocy. MORSE for President, '68. Need Democratic foreign policy. ANTONY FAINBERG. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 17. (966. lion. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You and Chairman FULDRIGHT were mag- nificent today. SKOKIE, ILL, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We applaud your efforts at the Senate For- eign Relations Committee hearings. You speak for all loyal Americans. :HUGH EDWARDS AND FAMILY. LIVINGSTON, N.J., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep fighting with the same courage and intelligence for a course of reason and sanity. OGDEN, UTAH, February .17, 1966. Senator WAYNE :MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the good fight. We are behind. ROSEWELL, N.:MEX. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We are gratified by your wisdom and cour- age. Reference Foreign Relations Committee and heartily concur with your opposition to present governmental policies regarding Viet- nam. Please express our thanks to your many colleagues. Mr. and Mrs. A. LEO MUELLER. SIERRA MADRE, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your voice on the television hearings. Your concern for truth comes through. MILL VALLEY, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Vigorously agree with your courageous stand on Vietnam and determination to let CHAMPAIGN, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I thoroughly agree with your stand not to escalate the year in Vietnam. The Asian problems seem to be mainly concerned with food. I don't see how a larger war will solve these problems. RIVER EDGE, N.J.,. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: You have my full support In opposition to this Government policy on Vietnam. LEO UMAN. GREAT NECK, N.Y. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up your valiant campaign for peace and no escalation Vietnam, despite all smears. We believe your actions in best tra- ditions of American democracy. RICHARD PACK AND FAMILY. FREEPORT, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: On behalf of my two grandsons thank you for your efforts for peace. Mr. and Mrs. SAMUEL HARRIS. MERIDIAN, MISS, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: As a citizen of the United States, a mother and a voter, I thank you for trying to end the war in Vietnam. I am in complete agree- ment with the stand you have taken. Mrs. HICKMAN PARR. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE MILTON, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations for excellent retort to Taylor. Continue battle against forces which resort to massive falsehoods. L. H. RASMUSSEN. BROOKLINE, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: All honor to you, Senator MORSE. I agree with you to repudiate present Government course in Vietnam. Urge stopping bombing and negotiate end of war with Vietcong. Roy BROWN. CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: My gratitude for your courageous stand and hopes it will prevail. AUGUSTA, GA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: You are right. COLUMBUS, OHIO, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. America is behind you all the way. There is no substitute for total victory. CHARLES and EVELYN JONES. CROTON ON HUDSON, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on showing great courage which is much needed in your encounter with Maxwell Taylor. Our country needs more men who are sensible. DAVID and ELAIN DISICK. CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. The only red-blooded American left in this country. Keep up the good work. ROY RIECK. STATE COLLEGE, PA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I, too, am frightened. Through your lead- ership and courage may you block every move of my Government of escalating this war. I wish tomorrow was election day 1968. Mrs. LEON FRANKSTON. BERKELEY, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the persistent work in Foreign Relations Committee debate. Televise con- gressional sessions as well. VARTKES YEGHIAYAN. BLOOMINGTON, IND., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand against illegal war. An immediate national referen- dum should be taken to determine what the American people want. ROSE NASH FREEDMAN. WELLESLEY, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building: Strongly support your position regarding Vietnam war. COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D:C.: Thank you. We have three sons. We don't care to have our thre sons die to pro- tect the political issues of the Government of Vietnam. Please continue to help keep our American children for America. We will watch for your guidance to lead us in 1968. DAVID and BETTY POLHEMUS. CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We support your Vietnam views, and ad- mire your courage. HELEN KARANIKAS. WEST HEMPSTEAD, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate, Washington, D.C.: War is monstrous in a civilized society. We must find a saner way to settle our dif- ferences. Continue your good work. Thank you. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: As parents of draft age son, we thank you for your fight for peace in Vietnam. We say support our troops by bringing them home alive. We back your resolution rescinding President's blank check. Mr. and Mrs. DAVID WEIXEL. SEATTLE, WASH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: God bless you. Keep up the good work. C. E. JOHNSON. RICHMOND, VA., February 17, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Please continue to oppose the war in Viet- nam. I served 42 months in World War II, serial No. 02047477. HAROLD P. ROSE. ROOSEVELT, N.J., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Our sincerest thanks for your outspoken efforts In defending the cause of morally and democracy. ROBERT and DIANA MUELLER. 3453 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: In full accord with your stand on Viet- nam. Public hearings must continue. JAMES CUMMINS. JACKSON, MISS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep up opposition to Vietnam war. You are wonderful. Sincerely, CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your vigorous and ef- fective criticism of the administration's pol- icies regarding Vietnam. Keep up the good work. - CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for the service to our coun- try. Mrs. H. W. SHIELDS. PUEBLO, COLO., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. I would be proud to be a resident of Oregon. ARTHUR L. LEWIS. CLEVELAND, OHIO, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for expressing our views. May God bless you and stop this war. ARLENE SMITH. ANN ARBOR, MICH., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: To one who may bring peace, bravo. JODI PERLMAN. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: God bless you, a true disciple of God, for peace and humanity. GRACE LOCKE. Los ALTOS, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I am deeply grateful to you, as are millions of Americans in growing numbers, for your patriotic, nationalistic stand on our Vietnam involvement and your concern about asking our American youth to die fighting in a coun- try that has done us no harm, nor could. IT. B. HERRON. SAN JACINTO, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Caucus Room, Washington, D.C.. Senator WAYNE MORSE, I love you. Tell Maxwell that the American Indians are still around and that they are not in favor of Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE February 21, 1966 planting any more corn outside the stockade. We question the legality of the war in Viet- train and we don't wish any more boys sent over there. SAN JOSE, CALIF . February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: port your declaration of from We su MASS LMOUTH F p Good work the President or out of Vietnam , ., A February 17, 1966. , . Senator.. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Speaking for myself only as a woman, I appreciate our Nation's dilemma confronted sEWICKLEY, PA February 18 1966. with this complex situation. Can only say Senator WAYNE MORSE, that I support your committee's delibera- U.S. Senate, tions completely. Only hope that God will Washington, D.C.: ,rive you and the committee members good Keep after them with your questions. .Judgment for our many sons, husbands, and Right or wrong, it always keeps people on relations in the Armed Forces confronted their toes. Good luck. with this dilemma. R. B doe. PORT WAYNE, IND., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Building, Washington, D.C.: You are the kind of American we need to hear from. Congratulations for your cour- age and honesty. Keep on with the investi- gations. 'l'(oRONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA, February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations. Keep that mustache bristling. We hope that you will continue to make the facts available to the American people. MOIRA ARMOUR, FIONA ST. JOHN. $AST NORWALK, CONN., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE: MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We and all our friends are solidly behind you. BATON ROUGE, LA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: C pray that you are deluged by messages from the people of the United States praising you for your sensible and undaunting stand in your Vietnam policy. God bless you and your colleagues who voice your sentiment. Respectfully, ROWAYTON, CONN.. February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Support your view Vietnam. Emphatically, l os ANGELES. CALIF., February 18. 1966, senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building. Washington, D.C.: Bravo for your honesty, courage, and deter- ruination. We pray for a return to truth, sanity, and peace. You have the support of Iny family and many friends. We are listen- ing to the hearings with renewed hope for peace. CECELIA REIF. Sew YORK, N.'Y' . February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: We gratefully support your patriotic stand for peace in Vietnam. Mr. and Mrs. MORRIS DoRSKY. NEWYORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate. Washington, D.C.: You have our total support in pres,'nt con- gressional debate. Dr. and Mrs. GEORGE FELoMAN. Mr. and Mrs. LESTER TRi NOBLE. FRED WILHELM. LOUISA HARRIS. DETrtOTT. MIC If., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your stand. Will you ask this question for me? Is not the Vietcong poration on the enclave theory and thus being so successful? Mrs. DAVID WELLS-. T,AWNDALE, CALI:?., February 11, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Myself and all true Americans applaud and s-rpport your patriotic and statesmanlike stand regarding America's involvement; in Vietnam. History will accord you the true status you deserve and we feel much better being Americans knowing there are Ameri- cans like yourself protecting the honor of our country. THAn S. SHIRLI',', Real Estate itroker. SOUTH GATE, CALIF.. February 15. 1966. senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington. D.C.: I support your statements befog' Senate hearings today. You are giving inc good tight, KENNETH W. R' 'TI'GER. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 15. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.. Just a little old housewife OSU graduate who knows what's keeping it on. I'in a reg- istered Republican. Keep diggin'. keep it Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: You were beautiful. They must see the truth for all of mankind. Please continue. RICHARD LEVIN. CHICAGO, ILL.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Our deepest gratitude for your unflinching courage. We fully support your efforts to end our cruel involvement in South Vietnam. You are perfectly correct in predicting popu- lar refutation of this doomed national pol- icy. Please continued your leadership. QUENTIN D. YOUNG, M.D., and FAMILY. LOS ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Sir you have rendered a great service to your country in these televised committee hearings and by your attitude one doubts if you care you're the one who will be re- pudiated by the people of the great State of Oregon. ALDUQUERQUE, N. Mix.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are deeply indebted for your cou- rageous exposure not only of the illegality but of the futile butchery of the Vietnam war. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your courageous stand. Many silent Americans pray your prodigious efforts will bear fruits. Mr. and Mrs. KENNETH O. MILLER. GROSSE POINTE PARK, .MICH.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You are correct in predicating our Nation repudiates the Viet war. Please be assured millions of Americans are with you. Mr. and Mrs. C. E. BRADLEY. Los ANGELES, CALIF. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your enacity and intcgrit.y-you truly are our voice. We are grateful. The NICOL FAMILY. AKRON, OHIO., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Supporting you on your stand about Viet- nam. Tell the chairman and the rest of the committee if you like. DETROIT, MICH., February 18, 1966, Senator WAYErE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We whole heartedly support and appre- ciate your stand in the current Senate hear- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ings on our Vietnam policy. We also regret that we are unable to directly support you with our votes. Mr. and Mrs. ORIAN WORDEN. LINCOLN PARK, MICH., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations to you, GRUENINC, and FULDRIGHT. Don't lose courage. ANNE P. WOOLERY. NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: You are thwarting executive usurpation of congressional prerogative, and spiking the guns on unbridled militarism. I am proud to be your countryman. GEORGE DREXLER. Los ANGELES, CALIF., Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You are really getting people thinking about injustice and folly of our Vietnam war bravo. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I strongly support your position on foreign policy in Vietnam and Dominican Republic. Thank you for your conscience and courage you can help us regain our self respect. ROBERT G. PUTNAM, M.D. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Admire your great courage and dedication to best interests of United States know that we earnestly support you. Mr. and Mrs. MONROE RUDE. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We fully support your courageous fight against the war in Vietnam. To you and your colleagues we may owe our lives. We urge you to run for President next election. We believe there are millions who feel as we do about this issue. CARL and NELL RANTA. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Entire family united in support of your position opposing President's war in Viet- nam. Give 'em heck; we will mobilize sup- port for your position. RUTH and HOWARD GOTTSTEIN. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D,C. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. SEATTLE, WASH., February 18, 1966. DEAR SENATOR: Support for your policy is growing. Keep up the good work. Keep fighting for the constitutional government and speaking for the little people. CHARLES DEAN. AMARILLO, TEX., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Never has so much been owed by so many to so few. I humbly thank you for your stand. You cannot count the cost but only the reason, and reason is the only sense that separates us from animals. For us who weep for the loss of freedom you are a small quiet voice that ethos the thoughts of tomorrow- a tomorrow of God and country-they must live. Your obedient servant, Ron SMITH. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We support your efforts in the Vietnam tragedy and urge you to intensify all endeav- ors for an immediate peaceful settlement. IRVING and MARIAN TILIN. NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Bravo. We support your position on Viet- nam completely. ISRAEL and CAROLINE BAKER. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: DENVER, COLO., February 18, 1966. Keep up debate and with dissent on Viet- nam. Dialog necessary for clarification our Nation. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: God bless you for your stand on Vietnam. Keep up the battle. Mrs. ROSEMARY DOLGIN. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: You are absolutely right on Vietnam and other stands you have taken. You are one of the very few true statesmen of this century. G. H. SLACK. NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. U.S. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for representing our hope for peace and rational open conduct of govern- ment. Please continue telling the truth. Mr. and Mrs. HOWARD ALK. NEW YORK, N.Y., MY DEAR SENATOR: I uphold your stand with regard to U.S. policy in Vietnam. I have thought very highly of you as a Sena- tor and wish I could vote for you. if you run for President. I will. Yours sincerely, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. We want to express our admiration for your strong stand today questioning retired Gen. Maxwell Taylor. We watched the Sen- ate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on television and we admire you courage. Pres- ident Johnson has bypassed Congress, United Nations, and the opinions of the peo- ple of this country. We want you to know that you are not alone in upholding the ideals and belief in freedom of choice for all people whatever their circumstances. June Lathrop, Tad Lathrop, Kevin La- throp, Ross Coates, Agnes Coates, Meghan Coates, Arwyn Coates. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for speaking so eloquently the thoughts of so many of us. Mrs. DAVID SOLOMON. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are proud of you, keep up the good work. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Today you distinguished yourself as one in the American tradition of free debate. , In contrast General Taylor appeared as Madison Avenue propagandist, we are with you. HAROLD and SUSAN HILL. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations, commend your courageous stand Foreign Relations Committee. Keep working for peaceful solution Vietnam. Mr. and Mrs. LEON OLSON. PROVIDENCE, R.I., Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We are with you. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: BUFFALO, N.Y., February 18, 1966. You are right, keep fighting. Thank you. Mr. and Mrs. DONALD 'LANGERLE. Mr. and Mrs. JOHN MARZIANO. SUNNYVALE, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: We wish to add our wholehearted support re your courageous position in opposing the administration's policy in Vietnam. It is a sorry situation when Americans' right to dis- agree is called unpatriotic. With men like you there is still hope. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. LEWIS DucKoa. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: SEATTLE, WASH., February 18, 1966. Keep up the good work, WAYNE. And help the salvation of us boobs sitting in the side- lines who can't be heard, were not able to express our voices on the meat of the subject; namely why are we in Vietnam. And stick by your stand of our constitutional govern- ment. ALLEN PETERS, Democratic Precinct Committeeman. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE February 21, 1966 OAKLAND, CALIF., February 18, 1966, `senator WAYNE: MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your courage, dedication, and true patriotism. And mostly for having stood alone. 1.'rof. ARNOLD MECHANICS. PROVIDENCE, R.I., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I thank you. I do not propose to be governed by generals. ILSI: PULITZER. CLEVELAND, OHIO, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE and Senator FuL- RRIGIIT, Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D.C.: Thank you for asking the questions that concern all Americans. Why do we allow e;onimumsm In Cuba and we fight it thou- sands of miles from home. It's wonderful that we have these sessions to inform us. Mr. and Mrs. ERNEST KOENIG. SAUSALITO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE B. MORSE, Washington. D.C.: You speak for humanity. We support you fully against the war esculation. The MOSTLLER FAMILY. SANTA BARBARA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington,.O.C.: We fully support and agree with your stand on Vietnam situation. Letter follows. Mr. and Mrs. JOSEPH L. McENULTY. 1-'I.USHING, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: I support your position on Vietnam whole- heartedly. Mrs. VIRGINIA ROBINSON. t"REEPORT, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Deeply appreciate your forthright position (hiring hearings. Your views reflect our pro- found hope for peace. Mr. and Mrs. MARTIN HARRIS. BOSTON, MASS., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Clod and truth are on your side. RICHARD METAFORA. GARY, IND., February 17, 1966. Senator WAY >fE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: bless you. Keep up the good work. EI.SIE WENDT. WASHINGTON, D.C.. February 17, 1966, S enator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: (:ward your health, human race needs you [or its survival. Mr. and Mrs. GEOnc.E M. PIKSER. FARMINGDALE, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Saw TV channel 7 in Farmingdale. L.I., Assistant Professor of Mathematics, State University. MORGANHILL, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: I agree with you wholeheartedly Wish there were more like you. Mrs. LOUISA FLAT I ERTY. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Standing alone in support of unpopular causes is not new to you. I join. many others who thank God each day you are a Member of the Senate. SANTA M.ONICA, CALIF., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Don't lose heart.. Continue the fight. Grassroots are with you and growing. Mrs. JEAN HARRISON. ANN ARBOR, MICA., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: Keep talking, people are starting i.o listen. Your courage and your conviction- on Viet- nam gives a new definition to American patriotism whereas the militarist would suf- focate decency and reason under the weight of blind allegiance to a bad policy. Your voice rings clear where opinions are Truth will prevail. WILLIAM V. 11ANEY. MORGAN HILL, CALIF., February it, 1966. senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington. D.C.: I am one of the millions you spoi..e about. Keep up the good work. BERKELEY, CALIF.. February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: We want to compliment you and to thank you for your service to this democracy and to the cause of world peace in the present hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Please keep up your good work and let us know if we can. help in any way. Mr, and Mrs. GEORGE A. SAGE. NEw YORK, N.Y., 1i'ebr Lary 1 +'. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: With other writers I want to express my gratitude for your courage and wisdom. H. KONINGSCERGER. SANTA MONICA, CAI.I F., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Don't lose heart. Continue the fight. Grassroots are with you and growing,. H. N. BRODERSON, M.D. PHILADELPHIA, PA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We support your Vietnam policies. Keep punching. You represent the hopes of many people outside Oregon. Mr. and Mrs. IRVIN SEGALL. NAPA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Saw you on TV tonight; agree with you 100 percent. Keep up the good work. John- son war is unconstitutional. Was once in Saigon for 10 days. Telegramed Johnson last June: "Your foregin policy bringing on world war No. 3. When they drop the first atom bomb on America may you be among the toll." GUSTAD F. JACOBSEN, Merchant Marine Radio Officer. SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.. February .18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thanks for your magnificant position in hearing today. Keep up the good fight for SUNNYSIDE, N.Y.. February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your remarks in the hearings today. Please continue to light for NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C. Applaude wholeheartedly your dealing with General Taylor. My heart is with you and efforts for Vietnam peace. BOSTON, MASS., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. We are grateful to you and the committee for the vital importance of Vietnam hear- ings. Mr, and Mrs. CHARLES NACKEY. OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Deeply appreciate your courage as a states- man and your stand on Vietnam. I ain from a family that had relatives in the Revolu- tionary War with England; not a recent arrival. The United States needs more statesmen like you. LAVERNE, CALIF.. February 18. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Give 'em hell, old buddy. Millions of us believe we should go all out or get out. Please get with Curtis LeMay, even the guts of all Eisenhower bluff would end it.. You'll re- member our horrible grassroots attempt to get bombers 15 years ago. Someway or III- other, that worked. Step up to it. boy. We all love a 16-caliber man and you're still Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE not too old to be President. Believe it or not, still kicking hard. Formerly from Medford, Oreg., and never waved a flag since. JOE R. NEIL. COSTA MESA, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. As longstanding admirers of your forth- rightness and honesty we support your stand on Vietnam. MONTEREY, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MoRSE, Washington, D.C.: We support your effort to defend American people against the conduct of an illegal war. Mr. and Mrs. HUGH TUSMAN. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Care Senate Building, Washington, D.C.: ST. LOUIS, Mo., February 18, 1966. Bravo, all thinking humane Americans are indebted to you for your courage and honesty. MORRIS S. WORTMAN. STANFORD UNIVERSITY, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Please press Rusk on whether we now will accept Geneva agreement. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Give 'em hell, Senator. We're with you. F. S. and E. J. McFARLAND. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are grateful to you for your efforts for peace. Please continue. Thank you. Mr. and Mrs. ARTHUR D. MILLER. CHICAGO, ILL., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your challenge to General Taylor magnifi- cent, keep up the good work. Congratu- lations. Mr. and Mrs. PEARSON B. SELK. Los GATOS, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the good work. Do not let them intimidate you. Millions pray for you. Mr. and Mrs. ALAN CLARKE. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are very proud of you. Keep up the good work in the Senate hearings. FRANCES W. SHIPPEY. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: EVANSTON, ILL., February 18, 1966. Enthusiastically support your efforts to bring the war in Vietnam to the conference table. Your courage and candor are in the best tradition of American patriotism. Sincerely, Dr. and Mrs. WALTER MASUR. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building. February 18, 1966. God bless you. This men like you. We support you. Keep it up. LEWIS J. SILVERS. HERBERT KENNEDY. WILLIAM WALKER. FRANK DUNN. ANTHONY KRAPS. BURBANK, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C,: Congratulations for your courageous fight to inform people of Vietnam situation. MERRILL and CAROL JACKSON. PALTO ALTO, CALIF., Senator MORSE, Senate Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MORSE; Heartfelt thanks for your courageous stand on current issues. We are with you, you millions strong and the polls will so record sincerely. S. WILLIAMS. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: country needs more L. H. WHEELER. CHICAGO, ILL., February 17, 1966. We are in full support of the hearings you are conducting into the Vietnamese war. The spirit that you are carrying on is in the in- terest of all humanity. The bombing and the napalming of women and children must be stopped. GADSDEN, ALA., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Agree with you 100 percent in your Vietnam stand. Never thought we would ever agree with you on anything. Suggest we abide by Geneva accord of 1954. Dr. and Mrs. JOE ROGERS. Los ANGELES, CALIF., Senator WAYNE MORSE, February 18,1966. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Good work. You're wonderful. A great demonstration of moral courage. Please keep it up. Admiringly, Although a Republican businessman, I am 100 percent for de-escalation, the United Na- tions, and WAYNE MORSE. ROBERT V. BROWN. WINNETKA, ILL., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Thank God for men like you in the United States. Dr. and Mrs. RICHARD MARCUS. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: NEW YORK, N.Y., February 18, 1966. You speak for the majority of people we know. We admire your integrity. ROBERT and PEARL PORTERFIELD. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Stand pat where you are-definitely on the right side of the Vietnam debate. ANN SANCHEZ. Hon. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: STAMFORD, CONN., February 18, 1966. Saw on TV your exchange with General Taylor. We support you 100 percent. Con- gratulations for your courage. Mr. and Mrs. MORRIS ROTHENBERG. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Senator Morse you are a great man. JOSEPH PROCTOR. DOUGLAS HALL. ROBERT GARDNER. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: EVANSTON, ILL., February 18, 1966. Please continue speaking out against our policy in Vietnam. Applaud and concur your stand. Dr. and Mrs. H. HIRSHFIELD. PROVIDENCE, R.I., Senator WAYNE MORRIS, February 18,1966. Washington, D.C.: I watched you on TV today. Practically all the M.D.'s I talk with daily are all for you. You are our spokesman; keep it up. RAYMOND H. TROTT, M.D. WEST HYATTSVILLE, MD., February 17, 1966. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Your comments to Taylor reflect the feel- ings of many silenced Americans. Please continue speaking out. NATHA and PAMELA WOODRUFF. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Tomorrow when Rusk testifies you will be openly fighting a dictatorial President whose' disregard for international law, the United Nations and his people's constitutional rights has disgraced my country throughout the world. Most of all you will be fighting the cynicism and despair now overtaking ideal- istic youth everywhere. EDWARD BERNSTEIN. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We support you stand for sanity in Viet- nam; keep up the tight for peace. Dr. and Mrs, ROBERT J. DUMMEL. TROTWOOD, OHIO, February 18, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Keep speaking up. God, humanity, and SAN JOSE, CALIF., February 17, 1966. ilenator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: As an ordinary citizen we support you fully in your stand on Vietnam. 'CHYRON and JUANITA HOOD. Los ANGELES, CALIF., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, U.C.: I kmi the majority of people who agree with you have no way of expressing our opinion. Thank you for doing it for us. J. F. GRANT. VERNON, N.Y., February 17, 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We applaud your courageous and honest conviction on our policy in Vietnam. Louis and KATIE SEIDEN. POMONA. CALIF., Senator WAYNE MORSE, February 17. 1966. Senate Office Building, Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Senate Office Building, Thank you. We are very fortunate to have Washington, D.C.: a gentleman of your intellect and integrity Senator MORSE, I love you. casing words instead of arms to seek peace. deeply greatful personally and am sure years to come entire country will honor your great work. ROBERT L. ZIMLER. CHICAGO, ILL. February 17, 1966. lion. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, 1).C.: Thank God in this modern world there is still a voice like yours crying out in this vast wilderness searching for the truth to help mankind. God bless you and give you MENLO PARK, CALIF, February 17, 1966. .lion. WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Keep up the good work. You're doing our T. I. STI?'..NSIG. LOUISVILLE, KY February 17. 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Foreign Affairs Investigation Com- mittee, Washington. D.C.: We are behind you 100 percent. Against escalation of war. Mr. and Mrs. SOL ABOFF. FAIRLAWN, N.J., February 17 . 1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We are forever indebted to you for your courageous battle against the generals. JENNY 1CARTE. BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF.. February 17. 1966. PALO ALTO. CALIF., MOUNT KISCO, N.Y., February 17, 1966. February IT, 1966. von. WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Have Husk clarified position on Geneva Agreements. Acceptance or just basis for .f,ANSING, MICH., February 17, 1966. denaror WAYNE MORSE, O.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: We are greatful for your heroic efforts. All nmerica will be someday. Please continue. iO)IIaRT AND MARGARET WASSERMAN. WAKEFIELD, R.I., February 17, 1966. IMon. WAYNE MORSE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.: Congratulations on your patriotic and in- telligent stand in the Foreign Relations (;oriimittee hearing. E. H. and W. H. TowNSEND. IIOSLYN HEIGHTS, N.Y., February 17, 1966. '';enutor WAYNE MORSE, Washington, D.C.: Your interrogation of General Taylor today was a brilliant service to the country expos- ing inconsistencies and reckless attitude of administration and its military advisers your work beginning to have telling effect and Senator WAYNE MORSE, Washington. D.C.: Pour it on. You speak not only fur Oregon but for sane men everywhere. HERBERT G. BONNERT. Los ANGELES, CALIF'., February 1,'.1966. Senator WAYNE MORSE, Senate office Building, Washington, D.C.: Please keep up your good work. We need EVAN WI NFIELD. BERKELEY. CALIF., February 1 r', 1966. so are the beds and the dreamers themselves. Let us compare them and see when the end of the night may come. Nothing could be more valuable for Ameri- can leaders at the moment than a close ex- amination of the disastrous errors made by the French in Indochina from 1945 to 1956. To know the faults of a friend may not cure one's own, but from France's experience America might well learn something of what has gone so dreadfully wrong in Vietnam today. The French had three great dreams for Indochina and each led them into a different and more ugly phase of the war. At first, in 1946, they clung briefly to the dream of re- establishing their prewar empire in Indo- china. Indeed, for one hopeful moment they seemed to be on the verge of a promising new colonial policy: General Leclerc, sent out to reconquer the territory, decided instead to negotiate with the Vietnam revolutionary leader, Ho Chi Minh. Leclerc recognized Ho's. Vietnam as a "freestate," connected with France, but controlling its own diplomacy. army, and finances. This was the first agree- ment made between a European colonial power and the Asian revolution--and one of the shortest lived and saddest in retrospect. For within weeks the intrigues of colonialists in Saigon and Paris and extremists among the Vietminh and its nationalist allies suc- ceeded in scrapping it. The way was now open for France to plunge into full-scale colonial war. But it soon became clear to everybody that this would have been a hope- less venture, doomed from the start by the half-ruined state of France, the lack of an air force and navy, and the disapproval of the Russians and Americans. At this point the French conceived their second Indochinese dream which led them into a second 'war, lasting from 1948 to 1951. Now they would transform their colonial struggle into a civil war. Against Ho's Viet- minh they would set in opposition the "inde- pendent" Emperor Bao Dai, encouraging him to cultivate his own anti-Communist but na- tionalist leadership-a policy described by the distinguished Scholar Paul Mus as "na- tionalist counterfire." Perhaps it might have succeeded if the nationalists had been given a chance to make it work. But their power and prestige and autonomy were always limited. While Vietnamese and French troops died cou- rageous. Bao Dai preoccupied himself with tiger hunting, his ministers with profiteer- ing. The Vietminh methodically liquidated Bao Dai's officials, dominated the country- side, and organized its soldiers into clivision:. soon after the Chinese Communists arrived on the northern frontier in 1950. After this decisive event and the outbreak: of the Korean war, France dreamed once again of transforming the nature of the war in Vietnam, this time into an interim. tional conflict with communism. In Sep tember 1951 General de Lattre arrived in Washington to argue that France, faced with Vietminh subversion supported by Corn - munist China, now needed and deserved to have its risks shared. He was given both credits and weapons. But later, in 1954, on the eve of Dienbienphu, the French Gov- ernment demanded far more: It requested that several hundred American bombers b,- ordered to attack the enemy from Manila. To these requests Washington finally re- sponded that "Indochina does not tall within the perimeter of the area vital to the de- fense of the United States." We can now admire the wisdom which led President Eisenhower to reject both the agitated appeals of the French and the advice of Admiral Radford and Vice Presi dent Nixon, both of whom recommended in- tervention. But we may well ask why a country not considered of vital importance Senator MORSE, Washington, D.C.: We fully support yours and Senator FUL- BRIGHT'S endeavor for a rational foreign pol- icy. Mr. and Mrs. ROBERT L. CANFIELD. I From the New York Review of Books. Mar. 3, 19661 "VIETNAM: THE LESSONS OF WAR" (By Jean Lacouture) "On the long thin coast of Vietnam," wrote John K. Fairbank in the last issue of this paper, "we are sleeping in the same bed the French slept in even though we dream dif- ferent dreams." The dreams of course are very different but Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 3459 to American interests in 1954 became so in itself far more adept at this political game ly concrete motives; e.g., to prove to certain 1965. The Communist camp, after all, is no than Saigon. nations that it is faithful to its alliances; to longer a monolithic force able to exert uni- Could the French have resolved this Viet- show the underdeveloped peoples of the fied global pressures as had been the case in nam problem? In fact, they were confronted Southern Hemisphere how costly it can be to 1954. In Korea, moreover, Chinese had by two immensely volatile forces whose de- chose Marxism-Leninism. There would recently been fighting American soldiers, mands would have shaken any Western gov- seem to be sufficient elements of calculated something they have since refrained from ernments, as they are shaking the United self-interest here to make realistic bargain- doing; and missile strategy has meanwhile States today. First, the demands of a peo- ing possible-on the basis of spheres of in- diminished the importance of local air force ple thirsting to overthrow colonialism and to fluence, for example. bases. One can only conclude that the recover their national identity, their free- A second difference concerns the size and diplomatic views of American leaders have dom of maneuver, and their unity. But also power of the forces involved. General West- hardened during these years. In the light the demands of a revolutionary group, sup- moreland not only commands a good many of Mr. Rusk's performance the diplomacy of ported by one of the great power blocs, which more troops than General Navarre (750,000 John Foster Dulles must be reconsidered claims the right to impose its authority on as compared with 500,000) but he is also and credited with an admirable flexibility, the entire nation in the name of a Com- relatively free from the financial, logistical, Thus France launched three wars in Indo- munist doctrine highly suspect to the ma- and transport problems that plagued the china and lost them all. - Its allies having jority: a group, nonetheless, whose heroism, French. A far greater advantage, however, refused to provoke a brutal extension of the discipline, and ruthlessly effective methods lies in America's enormous firepower as well war in order to avoid a local defeat. France's seem to assure its success. as its Air Force and complete mastery of the dream of an international anti-Communist it is the deep and constant intermingling sea. It is no exaggeration to say that the crusade collapsed at Dienbienphu in the of these two forces which have made the United States and South Vietnamese forces spring of 1954. General Gfap destroyed Vietnam problem seem so hopeless and de- are now 20 times more powerful than the France's main combat force; the Vietminh feating to the West. How can a Western army of General Navarre (which had no more controlled two-thirds of Vietnam; and government successfully sponsor an inde- than 80 combat planes at its disposal during neither Hanoi nor Saigon were protected pendent "nationalist counterfire" when the the battle of Dienbienphu). The small from attack. strongest feelings of many Vietnamese have size of the present theater c` operations in Ho Chi Minh had offered negotiations 6 been invested for many years in the local civil South Vietnam thus becomes a favorable fac- months before this debacle and had been ig- war; and when one finds among those who tor of great importance: The French forces nored. New Moscow and Peiping were agree- have rallied to the Vietminh, and then the were charged with the defense of all Indo- able to an international detente and Wash- Lao Dong and the NLF, a great many patriots, china, a territory four times the present size ington seemed prepared to accept the conse- drawn to the organization because they be- of South Vietnam. quences of its failure to intervene. Thus lieve it to be the hope of Vietnamese na- But given these advantages can it be said at the Geneva Conference table in 1954 the tionalism, capable of defeating colonialism that the United States is now succeeding Western Powers benefited from a certain and Western domination. to Of complicity on the part of Molotov and Chou Perhaps it might have been possible for the where France e answer was fasted yes, In the the - En-lai: The West succeeded in wresting from French to disassociate the nationalist in- ited course, one sense ne that ha itmustos yes, to the victors half the territory and the larger spiration in Vietnam from the Communist the United States s suffering impossible imagine fapart of the material wealth of Vietnam. Ho organization. But to do this would have the present circumstances. suffering major defeat agreed to fall back to the north in exchange been very difficult. For to past year President Johnshas been ab the for a promise that elections preparing the fidence of the nationalists gain believe, that ast ychAJohnson has been able m way for unification would be held in 1956- French aid to Vietnam would have had to to avoid enough American troops but ietnam less Dienbithpnu, pubeyond elections that he had no doubt of winning, meet three extremely demanding conditions: this the situation another A great deal of confusion surrounds this that the donor of the aid would have no right arrival over 100,000 than, has hopeful. o Theo Geneva settlement. It must be emphasized to intervene directly in the government; that more than ze a troops has done that the only texts signed at Geneva were the aid would be given to the most worthy more than stabilize a result, in trinratsharp situation; swing French and the Vietminh. No one at all creation of oligarchies of profiteers and as military advantage had expected. the Western e The side, signed the "final declaration" of the Con- climate of corruption. a as observere had expected. The mihe ference-both the United States and South By all these standards the French failed. Nary map published January 30 in the Times Vietnam had reservations about it-and it If they ever had a chance to survive the South New York under V der V showi ng four-fifths of must carried only the force of suggestion. But Asian revolution, they lost it, basically, be- ietcong influence"must n- apart from the North Vietnamese, the French cause they were unwilling to alter their regarded as accurate, notwithstanding cons were the only nation that formally guaran- patronizing colonialist attitudes and deal m tr. aep prclaims by offi l titar harts thelly, n h this teed to carry out the Geneva accords that with Asians with some sense of mutual re- pr did the dare to c sh 1 the French provided both for partition at the 17th spect or cooperation. For the most part they press me not dare c publish tl years get- parallel and for elections, preferred instead to appoint h far The American public has recently been gem And now France committed a new error trol the manageable, the Incompetent, and question more the press, the Senate (its last?), dreaming this time that it might the operators, many of whom made fortunes afrom the press, television, Senate finally leave Vietnam and forget it alto- out of the corrupt French aid program. hearings, etc., than was ever 'available in gether. Diem, now Installed as dictator in O France.) the South, wanted the French to quit his princip ed, i and Vietnam, i placable were ionart The fact is that American policy by very Viet- country as soon as possible. This was not movement of militants organized in the vii- dam, although intentions, originally now inspired all too only because certain French interests were lages-the country's fundamental social and different interitr now resembles all too cl of intriguing against him-something that economic unit-inspired by an evident na- The U the States as also e the French. helped strengthen his position as a national- tionalism and posing as defenders of stern problem The problem of er States has providing also failed to sgen the ist leader-but also because the French Army justice and equality; on the other hand, a support t t genuine was the only force that could compel him to regime obviously supported leaders without excessive inaervensiod hold elections in 1956. In the event, the by foreign Powers . Ip, it can be said French uickl , partly rcy composed omandposed of former In controlled that the the Preteen-perhaps country Itself. hypocritically-easant French yielded and the last of their colonial of galsocial order s, disdainful of pe the infiu ns, did nevertheless succeed in transferring some army departed in April 1956. The consequences of this final French er- tial and successful were frantically engaged were quite res a feep to ones the in m n mnameye: These ror were, and remain, enormous. Diem was in profiteerin mo ailitary and nearly matters, now free to declare himself free of all the the inevitable g catastrophe. -rfor The the only arrival nos- Of total total in such important administrative w velworork k as and tax col- Geneva colol- - Geneva obligations and soon did so with sible result was a catastrophe on the scale lecting. By contrast, we are now seeing the American encouragement. The south could of Dienbienphu. now be reorganized as an anti-Communist How relevant is the French experience to and theicounty itself: The influence of the ericaniztion of both the war bastion, from r'hich a reconquest of the Vietnam today? Certainly the American local military headquarters grows weaker; north could eventually be launched. The situation is different in important respects, the efficiency of the government in Saigon Diem government in fact soon created a but really how, different? For example, the continues to decay; American experts have Committee for the Liberation of North Viet- United States has no colonial past in Viet- taken over a great many local functions. Of nam, which, beginning in 1958, parachuted nam, no strictly imperialist drive for deco- course one understands the concern for effi- agents into the north, notably into areas nomic gain. But its objectives are, curiously, ciency, but the psychological effects are such as Vinh, where He's agrarian reform both more altruistic and more imperious hardly calculated to encourage the emergence had provoked violent peasant uprisings. But than those of its predecessor. After all a of authentic nationalist leaders at the pres- meanwhile the north, considering itself country seeking colonial profits is quite ca- ent time, as Roger Hilsman forcefully pointed cheated by Saigon and Washington (with pable of making a compromise to preserve at out in his recent testimony before the House France's cooperation), began preparation to least some of its endangered wealth. But Committee on Foreign Affairs. exploit the political and social discontent what of a country that supposes itself to be Certainly the Americans have done no bet- in the south to establish a base for sub- defending a selfless principle? In fact, the ter than the French in finding worthy non- versive operations, And Hanoi was to show United States does seem to have several fair- Communist leadership. There is no need to Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3460 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1966 search for nderta a Va ietnam, and red- are to reexamine now the tragic liquidation of insisted that a solution must be negotiated ibleIf we Diemism, an event made inevitable by the with Hanoi, and only Hanoi. sectarian religious isolation and the oligar- A false historical analysis has led to a take account of this diversity of the southern chic obstinacy of the Ngo family. But since political impasse. For a careful study of resistance; we must recognize that it is in, then, what decadence. Sad mandarins from the history of South Vietnam over the last fact a federation of maquis of different ages certain conservative milieu in Saigon-corn- 10 years will show that from 1956 onward, and different inspiration, and that it is not rageous and outdated men-are followed in strong resistance groups, the surviving mem- as yet completely unified. office by juntas composed of young generals- hers of political-religious sects crushed by There is not much geogrp is and pical the of-fortune who add a new star to their shoul- Diem, were in active opposition to the re- chological southern military titaarn chief band Ho Chi Minh al tiers after each defeat in battle. gime in the south; they were in fact alread .As for the moral climate in Saigon, one called Vietcong by the Diem regime at that there is between Ho Chi Minh and Mr. Kosy- can only say that the corruption which dom- time. Furthermore, this essentially nation- gin. But to be effective now in Vietnam mated the life of the city's elite in 1953 has alist dissident movement gained added sup- diplomacy must certainly take account of now been democratized. Shady dealings hav- 'port as a result of the rural discontent. which the maquisard and his part in the war. It Led Diern to suppress the elected municipal must also attempt to understand the role fng to do witn v aid and military programs are councils in 1957; it spread further after the of the Central Committee of the NLF, where but t oinol to people in high business. promulgation of the terrible law of 1959 Maoist influence is strong but where all ten- Testifying seem to lore tSenate kind on February business 4, . which prescribed the death penalty for all dencies coexist; of the Lao Doug party in estifyi d before the haccomplices of Communists-and commu- Hanoi, with its pro-Chinese and pro-Russian black foreign market aid, in nism comes cheap in South Vietnam. factions; and the Political Bureau in Peiping, no o of haidDavi that d he knew Bell, the of director said At this time the resistance was composed with its cast of performers, both civilian and Saigon-which only shows that a brilliant of nothing more than southern groups or- military. And finally we must comprehend and l along the ;work streets of has a had town time r where ganized in self-defense against Diem Hanoi the very complex position of the Soviet stroll to break the law at had made no connection with them. The Union, which is quite unwilling to sacrifice somme along begs you b every North Vietnamese did not begin to exploit either its policy of peaceful coexistence or step. this situation and infiltrate agents until its commanding position as leader of the It would be wrong to predict a priori that 1959; and it was only after pressure from a Communist world. If the diversity of gov- President Johnson's new counterinsurgency southern congress of "former Vietminh re- ernmental levels, alliances, and forces in- and pacification programs, based on plans for sistants" in March of 1960 that they prepared volved in the war presents difficulties., it also economic and social development in the to intervene. At the Northern Communist offers many more chances for an alert di- southern villages, will fail as totally as did Party Congress in. September of the same plomacy than. were available during the the quite similar plans sponsored by the year the Hanoi government gave direct en- monolithic conflict of the cold war. French and later by the Diem regime. Can couragement to the revolutionary activities It is true that American leaders now ar- they produce a qualitative change fn Viet- in the South. Still, it was not until Novem- gue that to recognize the Vietcong is to ad- namese attitudes toward the present govern- her 11, 1960, following an attempted military mit defeat. A curious intellectual position ment and the United States? What can be putsch against Diem, that the Vietcong- indeed--to refuse to recognize your adver- said is that any efforts by political and army feeling the pressure of competition from mil- sary for what he is. Perhaps it is worth re- leaders in the south, however doubtful their itary nationalists-gave itself formal identity calling that in December 1953, after Ho Chi results, will surely be more effective than the and established a political headquarters by Minh had first announced himself ready to Current bombings of the north. I will not creating the National Liberation Front. negotiate, the French Socialist, Alain Savory, take up the moral aspects of these attacks. Today it is clear that the NLF leaders are suggested to Georges Bidault (then Foreign It should be sufficient to examine their diplo- closely linked to Hanoi, on which they de- Minister, now living in Brazil) that he seek matic and military results thus far. Accord- pend for much of their supplies and arms. Ho out for talks. "You only make them big ing to predictions made in January 1965, But anyone concerned with a peaceful settle- ger by talking to them," said Bidanilt -who several weeks of daily raids would bring the meat in Vietnam should be aware of both did finally talk with Ho's delegate at Geneva, north to its knees and thence to the nego- the local origins of the front and its strong but after the fall of Dienbienpliu. hating table. In fact, Messrs. Ho and Dong persisting regionalism-its attachments to Recognizing the Vietcong certainly will have since toughened their demands, pass- the milieu, traditions, economy, and coon- not solve the problem of peacemaking in ing from the relatively flexible "four points" tryside of the South which give it a funda- Vietnam at a stroke. It would nevertheless of March 8 to the recent letter of January 31, mental autonomy. be an extremely constructive idea to focus which refers to the NLF as the "only repre- And yet, notwithstanding the fact that the diplomatic attention firmly on the South at sentative of South Vietnam"; until then, Ho southern origins of the Vietcong insurrection the present time-without meanwhile ceasin 7 had mentioned only the NLF "program:' have been carefully confirmed, no element of efforts both to make contact with Hanoi and As for military results, we must realize the Vietnam problem has been so neglected, to assess Communist Chinese intentions. he _--- whelming impact on a people who only re- may be astonished, for example, -- cently emerged from it resistance movement mense, spectacular, and probably sincere ef- and are now being trained to return to one: forts of recent American diplomacy to per- for the most, part their lives are not greatly suade Hanoi to negotiate finally produced, affected by the destruction of a bridge or it after 30 days of pause in bombing, a single here de lin i i truck depot. On the other hand, in Janu- ary 1965 there were two northern regiments in the south, while now in February 1966 there are eight. Furthermore, the combat reserve forces in the north are numerous enough to permit the dispatch of more northern troops to General Giap in the south every time the United States escalates the bonxbing. The American public has been told that the north is being bombed to save American lives. But, on the contrary, it seems clear that the bombing in the north only increases the pressure on General West?- rnoreland's troops: The American footsoldier must pay for the destruction caused by the American Air Force. And if Hanoi itself is bombed, we may be sure that the Vietcong forces have well-laid plans to take atrocious revenge on Saigon, a city they have both in- 1ll;re.ted and surrounded. The adversaries have now sunk their claws into each other nd so long as the ground fighting continues, a we may expect that each blow will be fcl- lag an alliance with Laos and Cambodia only. Lowed by damaging reprisals. Thus it seems most unlikely that. the front political solution becomes all the would consider itself adequately represented o - -- - -__ more urgent .-a__ '----' - ' -' While the NLF is the largest of 1954, it wili not be preceded by a military may be a purely practical reason. om a conferences. disaster. But here American diplomacy is conditions in the south are such that it is force in the South it recognizes that it is t; a the victim of its own myths. Because the by no means certain that a decision or an force in not the only force, re that U.S. Government has decreed from the first agreement even if approved by the NLF obviously seats that the war in the south was originally would be supported by all the fighters in the clarge fraction ommittee for g th who do ono its central provoked by invasion from the north, it has field. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 g s ca defiant letter. Yet Amer with a small and poorly armed country; its allies are reluctant to give it aid to openly, fearing a crushing American response. Cer- tainly it is a Communist government, but one presided over by a min who in 1946 and 1954 was able to prove to the Frenc It his will- ingness to accept compromise. And of the four points posed as conditions by 13anoi last year, Washington now accepts three. Why then doesn't Ho play Lyndon Johnson's' game? In a conference the North Vietnamese would hold so many trumps that heir pres- ent position is hard to understand. But perhaps they were not in a position to negotiate at all. If we look ba+-k over the history of the NLF we find support for the view that Hanoi is not able to speak for the front. First for psychological reaons: The published program of the NLF expressly mentions the possibility of an independent powerful revolutionary organization sup- ported by the North and already in control of the largest part of the national territory. More important is the task of reestablishing the constitutional legitimacy which Diem embodied for a brief period-reactionary as he was-and which has since vanished. The NLF is an essential element of this lei*Ititnacy because it is the heir to the revolt against. Diem's totalitarianism as well as the princi- ple force of resistance to foreign interven- tion. But there are others who make up tho social and political society as well--Lute. Buddhists, the Catholics, and also the Army, a bourgeoisie in uniform. An effective policy to bring about, a peace- ful settlement should begin by making it possible for each of these groups to return tar an active political role. While General Ri, after having won his sole victory of the war at Honolulu, occupies the stage, we may be sure that the other groups are ready in the wings, waiting for the protection and en- coura.gemen.t the United States could still supply. And from such a revived political life we could expect an authoritative leader- ship to emerge whose lot it would be to (LC- bate with the NLF on the future of the Sou fit Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE the NLF. The democratization of power in South Vietnam Is not a fantasy. The de- struction of the small democratic movements struggling to survive under Diem was among the factors that led to the civil war. French colonial policy was only too familiar with these very diverse political factions and brilliantly played them off, one against the other. But to divide and rule became a pathetic policy as France's control became more feeble. An American policy which seeks a peaceful settlement must take ac- count of both the sociopolitical pluralism of South Vietnam and its extraordinary capac- ity for finding original-and local-solutions to its problems. Surely it is time for Ameri- can leaders at last to confront the people with whom they have become so inextricably involved. ADJOURNMENT Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, in ac- cordance with the order previously en- tered, I move that the Senate stand in adjournment until 12 o'clock tomorrow noon. The motion was agreed to; and (at 5 o'clock and 20 minutes p.m.), the Sen- ate adjourned, under the previous order until tomorrow, Tuesday, February 22, 1966, at 12 o'clock meridian. NOMINATIONS Executive nominations received by the Senate February 21, 1966: U.S. ATTORNEY John M. Imel, of Oklahoma, to be U.S. attorney for the northern district of Okla- homa for the term of 4 years. (Reappoint- ment.) IN THE ARMY The following-named officers for promo- tion in the Regular Army of the United States, under the provisions of title 10, United States Code, sections 3284 and 3299: To be lieutenant colonel, Women's Army Corps Bouton, Irma V., L195. Brinegar, Maurine 0., L531. Deady, Virginia R., L167. - Howes, Alice N., L146. Stout, Ariel E., L126. Thompson, Ruth D., L121. - IN THE NAVY The following-named Officers of the U.S. Navy for temporary promotion to the grade of captain in the staff corps, as indicated, subject to qualification therefor as provided by law: - - 3461 SUPPLY CORPS Averyt, Howell D. Brooks, Walter A. *Aitken, Douglas G. Harbaugh, Norman R. *Axthelm, Charles E. *Broomhead, Marvin *Balcom, Vaughnn O. Haslett, Robert H. Ayres, James H. S. Baird, Richard S. Holbert, Kelley V. *Babine, Arthur L., Jr. Brown, Bobby J. *Batterson, Robert E. Josselyn, Allan H., Jr. *Bachtold, James R. *Brown, Bruce W. *B1and, Herbert L. Larson, Leslie O., Jr. Backman, Fred M. Brown, Charles H. *Blandin, Sherman Lewis, Raymond O. Bacon, James A. Brown, Gideon L., Jr. W., Jr. McHenry, Wendell, Jr. Badgett, John J. *Brown, Peter G. Doucette, Forrest H. *O'Loughlin, Richard *Baggett, Talmadge S. Brown, Robert L. Duncan, Henry C. C. Balllie, Richard H. *Bryan, Gordon R., Jr. *Dunn, George G. *Patton, Gerald J. *Bain, Robert Bryant, William R. Elmore, John W. Peffley, John F. *Baker, James E., Jr. - *Buck, John A. *Ericson, James B. Renfro, Edward E., III Baker, James G. Bucklin, Jerald W. Forrest, James E. Rodgers, Wallace F. *Bakke, Harlan J. *Buffkin, John W, Jr. * Grinstead, Eugene A., Tongren, Hale N. Balchunas, Robert C. Burkemper, Raymond Jr. *Williams, William C. Baldridge, Louis D., Jr. G. CHAPLAIN CORPS Baldwin, Robert A. *Burkhalter, Edward *Capers, Keene H. Lavin, Henry T. *Barbee, Delbert F. A., Jr. *Doyle, William F. *Morton, Frank R. Barker, Harold D. Burnett, James A. *Hutcheson, Richard Parham, Thomas D.Jr. Barker, Merle M. *Burnham, Rowland Keeley, John A. Trower, Ross H. CIVIL ENGINEER CORPS Cunning, David P. Miller, Charles G., Jr. F orquer, Charles J. More, David C. Francy, William J. Patrick, Donald A. Gault, Alan C. *Rogers, William'R. *Grahl, Ralph B., Jr. Saunders, Edward M. Hansen, Bernard L. Souder, Charles L. Iselin, Donald G. Spangler, William S. Jones, Whitney B. - Van Leer, Blake W. Kaloupek, William E. Walton, Albion W. Jr Barnes, James P. *Bush, Charles L. Barnett, Gerald P. Butler, Charles A.. Barney, Glenn P, *Butts, John L. Barrett, Gardner S. *Buzzell, Carlisle W., Barrow, Robert W. Jr. *Barunas, George A., *Byrd, Paul R. Jr. Cahill, William A., Jr. Batten, Charles G. *Calhoun, William P. *Bauer, Edward C. Calif Toxey H. *Bauman, Charles J., Callahan, Earle R. Jr * . Campbell, Neil V. Lalande, Albert M., Jr. Yount, George R. *Beasley, James W. Campbell, Ronald A. DENTAL CORPS *Beates, James K. - *Campbell, William E. *Bassett, Donald R. *Rogers, William J., Jr, Beatty, Lloyd D. Jr. Stuart Beall, Frank P., Jr. Samuels, Homer S. Beech, Wayne eck, Wayn M. Campion, Robert F., Chap, Bernard Scribner, James H. L. Jr, *Green, George H. *Sobieski, Edward . Beecher, John D. *Carlson, Bee m, George R. Burford A. Holmes, Corey H. Stephenson, Thomas m, Jack M. *Carlson, George R. Mahoney, Jack D. D. *Belk, Reece G., Jr. *Carraway, Terry F. *Marmarose, Frank A. *Bell, Gerald R. *Carter, Edward W., *Bennett, Robert W. III MEDICAL SERVICE CORPS Benton, Hugh A. Case, Richard W. Baldridge, Henry D., *Keener, Mary F. Berg, Frederick H. Caskey, Donald L. Jr. *Lester, William F. *Bergman, Daniel Cassani, Henry L. *Bing, John H. McLellan, David J. Bibby, Lowe H., III Caswell, Frederic C., Boyd, Thomas A., Jr. Miller, Lloyd W. *Bickel, William B. Jr. Burr, Leonard W. Rasmussen, John E. *Bigenho, Roy M. Caudill, William E. * Curtis, Ned B, Ray, Jewel P. Bills, Robert G. Cecil, Durward C. Eastman, Robert W. *Rigg, Robert F. *Bippus, Henry Chambers, Lawrence *Goldenrath, Walter Sabbag, George J., Bird, Charles S. C. L. Shepherd, William H. Blades, Lawrence T. Chandler, Albert N., NURSE CORPS Blair, Closkey L., Jr. Jr. Blaska, Burdette M. Blake, Harry R., Jr. Charbonneau, George Bulshefski, Veronica M. *Blasi, Richard R. L. _ Reilly, Alice R. *Blough, Arthur K., Jr.Chasse, Robert L. The following-named officers of the U.S, Doles, Lee Rllliam H. C Batham, Augustus Navy for temporary promotion to the grade Boles, Richard L. Cherrier, Herbert A. of commander In the line and staff corps, *Borgstrom, CharlesChertavian, Armen as indicated, subject to qualification there- 0., Jr. Chesser, Samuel L. for as provided by law: *Abelein, Herman C. Jr. *"Owen, Jack W. *Christensen, Donald Ackerm Ri h an, c ard F. Anderson, Paul L. Bowen, William J. A. Bass, Robert E, *Linehan, Francis J., *Ackerman, Warren J. *Anderson, Stanley J. *BowersoxhEarl CL Jr. *CAhristenson, Donald Beer, David C. Jr. Adams, Robert L., Jr. *Anderson, William J., *Bernard, Donald P. *Lonergan, Walter M. Addis, Robert W. III *BOwling, William H. Christie, Francis J. *Chandler, Deck E. *Long, James A. *Adler, Robert E. Angler, Donald L. *Braddy, Don L., Jr. *Church, George A. *Cummings, Ronald *Martin, Stuart H. Akagi, Joe L. *Anglim, Daniel F., Jr. Bradford, Gerald R. Clare, James S. *A. *Milnes, Rog F. Aldern, Donald D. aw, . Clark, Andrew Thomas B. Neptune, E gar M., Jr. Alexander, Adam G., A H., Jr rth, Samuel *Brady, asAlleniC. L *Clarke, ohn R. *Dempsey, John J. *Pascoe, Delmar J. Jr. * Argiro, Vincent J. *Brainard, Donald R. *Clausner, Edward, Jr. *Dinsmore, Harry H. Richardson, Fred W. Alexander, Marvin G. Arn, Robert W. Brandel, William J., Jr,Clermont, William J.. Downey, John J. Rosenwinkel, Norbert Alexich, Milton P. *Arnold, Henry C., Jr. *Brantley, William J. Jr. *Dykhuizen, Robert F. E. Allen, Douglas A. Arnold, John E. *Bres, John H. *Clubb, Reginald D. *Ebersole, John H. *Sparks, Henry A. *Allen, James A. *Arp, Phillip S. Gress, Allyn V. *Coale, William A. *Fox, Lay M. *Speaker, Richard B. Allen, John B. *Ashmore, Jackie K. Brewer, Glenn M. *Cobern, Ernest L. Gallagher, William Steen, Frank G. - Allen, Richard C. Bridge, Daniel T. Coffman, Charles L. J., Jr. *Sweeney,. Francis J. *Allender, Gene T. *Asmust PauberA. J, Bridges, Roger G. *Trummer, Max J. *Alley, Lester L. *Aston, William J. , Bridgham, Russell uKenneth K. Coiner, John A. *Klein, Chester L. *Watten, Raymond H. Altwegg, David M. Atherton, Robert F. "Briggs, Douglas W. *Collins, har Charles Kramer, Scott G. *Webb, Martin G., Jr. Anderle, Charles K. *Ausbrooks, Erskine Briggs, Edward F. Collins, Frank C., Jr. *Laning, Robert C, *White, Neil V. *Anderson, Charles L. P., Jr. Broadwell, Edward A. Collins, Harold E. *Lehman, Ross M., Jr. Wilber, Martin C. R. A., -.. -.. _ Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 3462 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 21, 1 966 *Compton, Bryan W., *Elfelt, James S. *Green, Richard W. Hume, Robert ,1. Lancaster, Robert W *McKellar, Edward D., Jr. *Ellingha.usen, Walter *Green, Robert E. *Humphries, George Langton, Charles E., Jr. Condon, Edward J. A., Jr. *Greene, John L. P. Jr. *McLaughlin, Robert *Conlon, Frank S. Elliott, Charles L. Greenleaf, Wilbur E. Hunt. Albert M. Larocque, George N. F. Connally, Robert F., *Ellis, James L. Greff, Clarence II., Jr. *Hurd, Russell E. *Larry, Walter C. *McLemore, Albert ii. III *Ellison, David J. *Griffnn, Jack R. Ingley, Edmund W. Lasowski, Donald T. *McLoughlin, James Connell, Lewis E. *Englehart, Harry J. *Guffey, Elton E. Inman, Bobby R. *Latimer, Samuel E.,McMillan, Donald G. Connelly, Robert B. Engquist, Gordon W. *Guion, Joseph E. *Ismay, Arthur P. Jr. *McNally, John H. Connors, Eugene 1'. Enos, Ralph L. Gurney, Charles E., III Jaburg, Conrad J. *Lautermilch, Paul A., McNeely, James S. Conrad, Peter C. *Erkelens, Clarence Gustaff, Vito J. V. Jackson, Thomas L. Jr. *McNerney, James F. "'cook, Carroll T. Eshman, John R. *Haff, William B. -Jameson, James N. Layman, Lawrence *McQueston, Jack E. Gooney, David M. * Estabrook, Robert K. Hahnert, William F., Janulis, George *Leach, Everett N. *McQuillin, John P. "Cooper, Carleton R. -Estes, Dana, II Jr. Jarvies, John E. *Leach, Ralph. W., Jr.McWey, Russell B. Corbett, William J., III* Estes, Leland F. Haight, Gardiner M. Jarvis, Donald H. Leahy, John P. McWilliams, Frederick -Cornelius, Winston WEtchison, Frank L., Jr. Hale, William T. Jayne, Gordon H. *Leibold, William R. F. Cornwell, James W. Evans, Daniel H., Jr. Hall, Harrell W. *Jenkins, Paul J. *Leibowitz, Martin M. Mead, Theodore E. ?'Cornwell, Robert it. Evans, Laverne E. *Hall, Timothy K. *Jenkins, Ralph A. *Leis, Alfred C. Meader, Bruce I. Corsepius, Everett D. Farley, James W. *Hallett, Edward R. -Jennings, John S. Lenox, Glen W. Meadows, Okey I. Coski, Bernard J. Farris, George K. Hamilton, John W. *Jermann, Donald R. *Lentz, Charles M. Meek, Kenneth L. Costigan, Robert A. Federico, Charles D. Hamilton, Leo L. "Jesse, Harold W. *Leppin, William F., "`Meeks, Robert B., Jr. -Crawley, Don E. *Felt, Harry H., Jr. *Hampton, Charles T. *Jett, William S., III Jr. Meeks, Thomas L. *Criner, James E. *Fenton, Robert E. Hansen, Merle C. Jewell, Thomas A. *Lewallen, John D. - Mehl, James P. Croft. Alfred J., Jr. Finn, Gerard P., Jr. Hansen, Ronald R. *Jimmerson, Thomas Lewis, Charles G. Meltzer, Melvin Cromwell, John P., Jr. Fitzpatrick, Joseph A. *Hanson, Elighue G., J., Jr. *Lewis, James R. *Mench, Leland E. "Crosby, Russell U. -Fletcher, Charles D. Jr. *Johns, Arthur J. Lewis, James T. *Merchant, Paul G. "' Cross, Daniel F. Fontaine, Richard K. Harbick, Donald L. Johns, Forrest, R. *Libey, John D. Merrill, Forest J. Cross, William F. Ford, James M., Jr. Hardisty, Huntington *Johnson, Dale C. Lidel, Carl J. *Merrill, Warren H. .Crowder, James P., Jr."Forrester, James H. Harnden, Charles G. Johnson, Donald L. Lighter, Elbert D. -Merritt, Glen C. Cullins, Peter K. "Forsyth, Robert J. *Harper, Lorren G. Johnson, Guy D. *Lindsay, John D. Meserve, Charles L. Cunningham. Melville *Forsythe, Forrest Hart, Donald F.. *Johnson, Joseph J. Liston, John M. Messina, Sylvester C. l), Foster, John F. Hart, Richard I,. -Johnson, Richard C. *Little, James G. *Metcalf, Joseph, III Cunningham, Richard *Foster, Ralph W., Jr. *Hart, Stephen L. *Johnson, Richard D. Loberger, James C. *Metz, Forrest E. B. -Foster, William F. *Hart, William D. *Johnston, Frederick Lockhart, Glenn S. Mhoon, Fred M. Cunningham, Alan If. Fowler, John W. *Hartell, Ronald D. B Lofton, Freeman L. Michaels, Robert J. Dagg, Robert M. -Fox, Kenneth *Hartigan, Richard B. Johnston, M.i urice M., Logner, Robert L. *Mikkelsen, Richard E. Dallaire, Richard P. Fox, Raymond G., Jr. Hartnett, Bernard E., Jr. *Longhi, William J. Milius, Paul L. Dallamura, Richard A. Frame, Edward L. Jr. * Johnstone, Richard Looney, Francis L. Miller, Donald A. 'Daly, Norman F. -Francis, John P. *Hassman, Andrew U., Loposer, Avery K., Jr.Miller, Floyd 1 .. Jr. 'Danis, Anthony L., Jr Francis, Thomas A. Jr, Jones, Carol W. Lounsberry, Jack A. *Miller James P. "Danner, William P. *Franke, Richard D. *Hausler, Carl O. Jones, John E. *Loyd, Rupert H. Miller, James L. Darodda, Aldo J. Franklin, Billy D. -Hawk, James T. Jones, Samuel O., Jr. Luckett, Thomas W. Miller, Kenneth R. Darrell, Charles G. Fremd, Harry L. Hawkins, Phil R. Kaczmarek, Carl C. Ludwick, Louis L. Miller, Robert L. Darwin, William C. -French, Jack T. -Hayden, Glenn M. Karvala, Curtis A. Lukas, Thomas E. Miner, Duane A. Davis, Henry J., Jr. -Frost, William L. Hayys, Morris L. Kasehagen, Arthur Lunt, Vernon. S. *Minnigerode. John. H. Davis, Davis. Jay K. Michael C. L L Jr. Fr., Jr. man, Richard Ha Head, rnan, John L. Robert B. T. *Luskin, Arthur G. B. *Ka,tz, Martin *MacFie, Richard B. Mischke, Gayland J. Davis, Paul II Jr. 'Fuller, Robert B. Healy, Richard. H. Kaulback, Russell D. MacKercher, John C. Mitchell, Edgar D. -Davis, ilpec V. *Gaddy, James K. Hedges, Ralph R. Keach, Donald L. Madden, Raymond A. *Mitchell, Joe C. -Davis, W William J. Gahafer, Joseph G. Heenan, Richard D. Keane, James P. *Madeo, Joseph F., Jr. Mitchell, John R. C. Deaden, Paul Gair, Bruce O. Heffernan, George A. -Keathley, Charles C. *Maice, Lee, Jr. *Mitchell, "T" Wallace *Debook, David W. Galing, Searcy G. Heigl, John T., Jr. Kehoe, James W., Jr. Mains, Homer O., Jr. Mitchell, Leland G. Demu ice, Edward A. -Gallagher, Lawrence Henson, Otis A. Kelley, Frederick W. Malone, Roy W. Moffitt, Russell L. DeVieWDem.un,, Joseph K. E. Heon, Robert 13. y' - Manara, Vincent J., Jr. "Montgomery, Gradcn h R. *Gamber, Harold W. -Herbert, Thomas J. Kelln, Albert L. L DeWitt, Dunne D. Garcia, Jaime *Herk>ig, Henry F. Kelsey, Robert L. Mann, Robert E. Manrin Charles D. Moody, Thomas J. "Diers, Charles E. *Gardner, Richard C. "Herndon, William J Kexnble, John R. g' Kennedy, Nevin, III Marbott, Henry W. Moore, Charles J. -Dietrich, Henry `I Jr.-Gardner, Richmond - Jr. Ronald W. Marnn, William T. Moore, Ernest; M. Jr. Dietz, Richard C. "Garrett, Everett C. Herrin, Holden R. Kennedy, *Martin, William K. Moore, Loren I. -Dittmar, Louis C. Gatje, George C. Hessian, James M. Kennedy, Robert C. Martin , William R. Moore, Mallie B. "Dobbins, John B., Jr. Gearhart, Norman If. Hetu, Herbert E. Kennedy, Walter J. MarMartin, RF. Moore, T a ie y Dodd, Charles A. *Geiger, Eugene D. *Hibson, Leo A., Jr. *Kersch, Roger N. Massimi, Robert Richard Moore, Virgil W., Jr. .Dodd, Robert L. *Gerlach, Richard E.. Hicks, Harold F., Jr. Kilmer, Donald A. MaMatherso Blasco Moore, Virgil Peter M. Doering, Eugene If. Gibbins, Gareth W. Hiehle, Frank G., Jr. -King, William R. Mau, Geo, arty, rge W., Jr. *Morin, Richard J. Doggett, William K. -Gilbertson, John E. *Higginbotham, Kingery, Samuel G. -Maxwell, Daryl O. -Morn, Howard L. Dorso, James N. Gilchrist, John F., II Leonard H. Kinnebrew, Thomas May, Porter Daryl Morris, Robert Bas tin Drews, Sheldon Gillcrist, Paul T. Higgins, Clinton K., it. Ma nard, Donald J. Morris, Robert Elliott *Duke, Marvin L. *Gillespie, Charles R., Jr. *Kinsley, Donald T. * yMazzolini,John A. 'Morrow, Charles D. `Dukes, Warren C. Jr. *Hill, Howard A. -Kirchner, David P. Jack L. .Dunaway, Gene '1'. *Gire, Howard A. *Hill, James C. Kirschke, Ernest J. *McAdams, John W.,Moss,Morse, J,Jack C., Jr. Dunbar, John P. Glancy,'1'homas J., Jr. *Hines, Gulmer A., Jr. "K.labo, Richard T. J * rAllcxlt David J, Moss, il i Edward J. 'Dungan. John D. *Goebel, Herman E., *H`nsen, Kenneth L. *Klett, George J. McAii It Maz7oIlMeBurney, J. w, Donald F. *Dunn, Theodore Y., Goetschius, Forrest D. *Hodnett, Robert A. Knutson, Donald W. Macorrrth ,Daniel G.. *Mu *Moyer, George , eller, 1-. Jr. Gordon, David E. Hoffman, Merle L. Knutson, Wilbert D. III ick, Mullin, James Dwyer, Laurence A. *Goslow, Paul "Hoganson, John H. *Koch, Richard A. Edwin L.Muncy, William E. Bakle, Burlue L. ""Gottschalk, Art W., "Holland, James S. Koehler, Walter C., Jr. McCutcheonMcDaniel, Clarence larence L.Muncy Douglas Earl, William C. Jr. -Holler, Edward R. Kollinann, (Slenn E. McDaniel, L.Murphy, Doug C. Jr. Easterling, Crawford. ,*Goulds, Ralph J. Rollick, Frederick B. *Kollmorgen, Leland g i r Eastman, Alfred C., III'" Govan, George W. Holmberg, Lennart G. S. D., Jr. Murphy, Ray l'lbbert, Edwin 1. *Grady, Edward L., Holt., Neil G. Kosar, William S., Jr. McFadden, Grafton R. " Murray, Douglas V. ;'Eckert, Richard H. Jr. *Holt, Robert E. Kovarick, Frank L. McGaughy, Richard * Muto, Charles J. ." lilckhout, Wilmont S. *Graf, Harry If. *Hoover, Richard M. Kraft, Leroy M. W. Myers, Carroll E. 'Eckstein, John If. Grandfield, Francis J., *Hopf, Elwood J. "Kramer, Robert P. McGeachy, Francis L.Myers, William S. "Edmonds, Hobart J., Jr. Hopper, Richard S. Kuehner, Karl E. "McGlohn, Robin H.,Nation, William C. Jr. Grant, Richard T. Horne, Charles F., III Kuhn, Edwin A. Jr. Naugle, James O. Edmunds, Philip H. -Grant, Thaddeus R. Hovater, James D. K'.illy. Sheldon D. McGrath, Harold A. Naylor, Charles K. Edris, Richard J. Granum, Bradford S. Howe, Richard B. *Kunkle, Floyd S., Jr. McGrath *Neff, , Richmond I3., Edwards, Chester C. Grappi, Robert L. *Hubbs, Donald R. *Lacy, James E. *McGuire, Eugene McIntyre, John J. Jr. *Ehleringer, Henry G. *Grayson, William R. Hughes, Peter F. H. La.ighton, Robert H. -McKee, Kinnaird R. Negron, Delis, Jr. P:kman, Roger E. :'Greathouse, David M. Hughes, Wayne P., Jr. Lake, Charles M., Jr. Elder, James C. *Green, John N. Hull, George T. Lamb, Derwin T. "McKee, Samuel T. Nelson, Eric A., Jr. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 A848 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX February 21. 1966 unut oxgarertes probably caused cancer, heart disease, and chronic coreopsis. An alarmed Congress, concerned with our welfare above all, took the momentous step of ordering warnings printed on all cigarette packages that the coffin nails therein might be bad for us. It then voted continued sub- sidies to the farmers to go on growing more cigarette tobacco. But many a smoker, on viewing the warn- ing, cried: "Good heavens. Cigarettes may be bad for me. I never would have thought it." And, naturally, the cigarette industry was gravely concerned. The dilemma seemed insoluble. But the Department of Agriculture has now stepped into the breech. It's spending $210,000 on a filmed commercial entitled "The World of Pleasure." It's designed to stimulate more cigarette smoking. But that's OK, because we're only going to show it abroad. The Department says the film will be shown in Japan, Thailand, and Austria as part of a " promotion program to help buffer any dam- age to American tobacco sales" caused by the cancer scare at home. The Department did American policy. And it was and is is a fair not say what the rest of the program con- statement of this country's intentions over sisted of. decades. It said: Actually, I'm in receipt of another chatty "The United States regards as vital to its letter from the noted CIA agent, Homer T. national interest and to world peace the Pettibone, Yale 1907, which may shed fur- maintenance of international peace and ther light on this interesting new concept: security in southeast Asia. Consonant with "I've been in Japan these past few months the Constitution of the United States and on loan to our new supersecret EOP Service, the Charter of the United Nations and in old bean," he writes. "That stands for Ex- accordance with its obligations under the port Our Problems and I don't mind telling Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, you it's been pretty dreary work-hanging the United States is, therefore, prepared as around schoolyards offering these Japanese the President determines, to take all neces- kids fags. sary steps, including the use of armed force, "Frankly, I didn't care much for it. 'Pssst, to assist any member or protocol state of kid.' I'd say, 'Want a new thrill? Not a the Southeast Asia Collective Defense cough in a carload.' And while I realized i Treaty requesting assistance in defense of was serving my country in the finest tradi- its freedom." tions of the EOP Service, I never could Senators are right to say that Congress stand all that coughing and spluttering. did not thereby forfeit its responsibility, but "So when the Chief called me in to offer they are not right to attack the Government me a new assignment, I was ready. 'We're for not abandoning the policy approved on giving you a bigger job, Pettibone,' he said. August 10, 1964. This remains the policy 'Pushing marihuana.' of the United States until, under the terms "'Marijuana, sir?' says I. of the resolution, the President declares the "'Right, Pettibone,' he says. 'After all, the peace of the area secured or the Congress world supply of marihuana is limited. The terminates the policy by concurrent resolu- more we can get smoked up over here, the tion. less there will be for those beatniks at home. The appropriate path has been made clear So get out there, for the glory of your coun- for those who now wish the policy changed. try, and hook those kids.' The policy has had an adequate review in "Well, I can't tell you what a joy it is to the hearings before the committee. Those see the way these kids' eyes light up. It who dissent from it ought to embrace the shows you the value of sharing, doesn't it? invitation of Secretary Rusk to vote. Such But I must say, I do hope the Chief doesn't a vote could be had by the introduction of take me off marihuana and put me on the a concurrent resolution to terminate the heroin detail. authority which the Congress gave the Presi- "To tell the truth, the motto of us dedi- dent la months ago. cated agents in the marihuana branch a - It will be a grave choice as Secretor R 1 Vietnam was affirmed in August 1964, Con- gress has the power to reaffirm or to change the general policy or the application of that policy In South Vietnam. It should do so, at the end of the Senate hearings, in a man- ner that eliminates all uncertainty as to the national purpose. Rural America Must Not Be Shortchanged EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. GLENN CUNNINGHAM OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, Congress should give serious considera- tion to a statement issued by the Na- tional Farmers Union Executive Com- mittee. Rural America must not be shortchanged, as such neglect would .have grave consequences so far as our national welfare is concerned. The statement referred to follows: STATEMENT OF NATIONAL FARMERS UNION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING IN DEN- VER, COLO., FEBRUARY 8, 1966 The Johnson administration's new budg- et, if put into effect, would be a slap in the face for America's hard working and already disadvantaged farm and ranch families. We fail to see any reasonable justification for the heavy cutbacks in funds for soil conser- vation, the commodity programs, farm and home loans, rural electrification, vocational agriculture and the land grant college and extension education when a hungry world is crying for food. The slashing of school milk funds is a tragic oversight. Few people realize most of these moneys, except for agricultural education, are on matching funds or reimbursable lending basis and contribute importantly to the gross national production in addition to adding strength to rural living. Yet these vital functions are being seriously weakened while there has been no such cutback in Federal aid to the big bankers, as the budget shows this interest item for the Federal debt has been set at the astounding level of near- ly $13 billion annually. We call upon Members of Congress to re- move these gross deficiencies in the Johnson budget that adversely affect agriculture and: peals to me most: 'For the good of Ameri a, has pointed out. But the Senate has the 1. Provide sufficient matching funds to help the world go to pot. duty to make such grave choices. It cannot step up the valuable conservation of soil 1A.10 properly neglect or abdicate its responsibili- which concerns the future of the Nation. ties and then reproach the executive depart- 2. Increase the authorizaion for Farmers ment for disregarding the Senate's constit Home Administration permittin tl t of HON. DEL CLAWSON VOTE ON VIETNAM Policies that the United States is pur- suing in South Vietnam have emerged out of convictions matured over a generation. They are based on the settled policies of one government after another. They rest legally and constitutionally on the resolu- tions and appropriations and actions of Con- gress. The hearings before the Senate Commit- tee on Foreign Relations, especially in the testimony of Secretary of State Dean Rusk, have reminded the country of how we ar- rived at these convictions. They have focused attention on the premises upon which we have acted. They have made clear- er the continuity of American policy. They have reminded Congress and the country of the legal and constitutional framework of our policy. The southeast Asia resolution of August 10, 1964, was inspired by a particular crisis but it did not initiate a new doctrine, de- part from precedent, discard any prior com- mitments or introduce an thin tional dut to agency to 9 fa y give its advice and consent Y go on with the job of making on foreign policy. The country will have a low-cost credit available to undercapitalized right to regard the failure of the committee rural areas. to now recommend any amendment of the 3. Put sufficient funds into the price sup- concurrent resolution of August 10 as a port programs with an upper limit on loans solemn reaffirmation of policy. and payments so that larger-than-family In broad principle, Congress and the ex- farms and city-oriented agribusiness will no OF CALIFORNIA ecutive spokesmen may not be as far apart longer have an undue advantage over fain- as they imagined whe fl th t n y- e hearings com- ype farmers and ranchers and enable IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES menced. Resistance to aggression has been the latter to overcome the deficiency of their Monday, February 2i, 1966 a central element of national policy for a 77-cent dollar. long time. As far back as 1946, Senator 4. Appropriate at least $680 million for Mr. DEL CLAWSON. Mr. Speaker, FULBRIGHT himself pointed out that "a basic desperately needed rural electric loans and Saturday's Washington Post contained principle of our foreign policy must be that establish a revolving REA loan program per- an editorial which presents a clearcut there is a point beyond which we cannot, mitting the repeated use of the millions of statement of the alternatives facing us in justice to ourselves and to the civiliza- dollars in advance repayments diligent farm in Vietnam. I the alte like es commend tion of which we are the heir, permit any associations are making on their obligations, should to the following editorial to theattention of nation to expand without offering resistance and to maintain the 2 percent REA interest my colleagues under leave to extend my by force." rate. my colt in the A The general policy has been in effect since 5. Make available further public invest- ppendix of the the Truman doctrine was proclaimed. Its ment for agricultural education and re- RECORD: application to the particular crisis in South search commensurate with the growing con- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 [1'eFiruar'll 1, 19G6 CONGRJESSIONAL RECORD-APPENDIX ecoilonric development programs rc rch them. The needs of (bias are basic needs. The people need desks and blackboards for their lieu and rural schools; medicines and in- :;Lruments for their health posts and clinics; and pumps and pipe for community wells. Chey have supplied the labor and materials and have done 'IS or 80 or 90 percent of a job but need a boost to complete a job. Since i.lieir finances are meager, they can't raise locally the funds to make up the difference between a completed and usable o'dt and an :iban.doned project. For $100, $200, or $300, ;roups and organizations in Wyoming can ~ivc the .LSSistani.i, required to help progress. When Wyoming private funds arc earmarked or an impact-type project, the people of Goias will know that it is the people of Carper or Laramie ur Cody who have reached I,hrtii. he Partners proitrain is a Lwo-way street, allowing private groups in Latin America to participate with dignity in true partnership. We expect and are receiving a flow back of benefits from Lalin America. We have much to learn from oar neighbors in this hemi- .;pliere. Costa Will, sent 12 educators to Oregon to help upgrade high school Spanish classes and serve as resource people in social studies. Oregon has gained most. from this partnership activity in reverse. An art col- loetion from Venezuela is now Louring the galleries in their Partner State of 'T'ennessee. A Brazilian instructor conducted a course in Portuguese in Ohio for Spanieti teachers which resulted in new interest in the language in college curriculums. Mach U.S. Partner State is looking to its own Partner in Lntin. America for areas in which they can be assisted in a real sense with this reverse flow of culture and re- sources. We were pleased with the chairman mid the Iowa Partners Committee when he an- nounced recently that Iowa was "happy to join the trailic" in their two-way street p:irtnersliip with a i area in Mexico. I rom the rep,riise experienced here in Wyoming these ji' I Jew cli' S, ii e feel con- fident that the people of your State desire k, move forward io this program. We sense that they want to reach out to the grass- rnois of Goias and make te!li''I; impact in those rural areas to let their Brazilian part- ners know that a ground swell of interest and concern has begun here. The people have shown is coniniendabte responsibility in wanting to share their know-how and re- sources with Lbon' who are exhibiting much wall'-help. 'Cho Newspapers of Wyominf> were paid a Ruse compliment by an editorial in the Casper Star-'l'imes yesterday. it said that 111,' papers of this State "became permanent; partners in the growth of the areas they r-r'rved." We know that this is true. It is our hope that your great press will join in r.upporting the partnership bitvaeell Wyo- rtllilf :gild (Rohl.: Congress and (nailed out copies so that my constituents could have a convenient method of checking my record. As voters in the 18th Congressional District lis _ Ye, No Yrs.-_.. 1'cs they have the right to know how their Congressman represented them in Wash- ington and how I voted on the major issues. The record follows: I I,1' it u.h, ui lei l ton,ll I), vi log.. it Act aut.hoi fu 'ai'l to rev iv., ecou- unfi if 'ppa1 uhi n rin' ,on I'ahh Woks amid l cm nuu ''in' I ipnicrit All .ul Il ,f vc s and 51 iris ill tcuncluu, lay cpc I alas. CuI r iilii of "furl ,wol lhvcl I nut and''f ifnm* 1:I fat years l;h'osnl ay and S,coal uv I .,,'Sion &ct. of iifa aulhuri,. 1I,HIO, (loll dill i, iiiilplcv' clen, nl 11i old ocofid rv c dac iti"^ 11 ~h,f Lrluc,i on Act cl 191,. .i Lh n,nng gr tnh for c()1101(- slildeots w.i `i rvcrpt ion d fuf:iiic.l.l) n, ,1, fellowships lot W_aclu f,, au,l x Na- inn;il 'I'c;ir h,'i''i 1'',r1)". 8oduciioe ofli ,. ?S r i'I 5c,'urila .c a,nrndus, c1 10 aiil,horiz, au?dicnr, anti , pcroent l,a ward l,V u't)cv I pw nLAct: o[1965ivtf udin>put Lch,nsing, ,n t an rcacw al, a d c, uniu i r fa dies laws and aril li. rizaig I. ru uu nuuifivs f, w:il i and a'wi.t famlities. I? sl it li=I, a l'; lanrt Irv-, I Pill I mint of housing and Urban ll,?volop- inislit. 1 of lug Rights Act of to (1111 rye. the 15th amenano Ill 1n Ball natinnil or;-ill, lu,la ,soli in iin,nirf iluoi .--- Ilwllolize Ai,fUll.Iloo,Ollo for i'O il 191ii for loll s i.ivrrl; prIf;raui under + irnit v 1 t 1914 I) ` . ppo conolnlc P G, decal Avah'r I ollSlioa Control Act to strengthou control over wafer Jon ud lc: +.mnuninity sew lee Jiro?cIs ag lilt fi l l h . Hill L l pa _I 1;::1 a lh h a N itiollit f'oun fat ,u for the Arts mild Ilaniuiiti --- l'rc vide zivfir 1 e It t b ii1l p iy 'acre ise for uniformed li,ilil rv pe rsonnl l I'ro'Uhi 3.ii lily ia,roasi' for t l;,iflc,l, postal, Slid odor Eifcral cal I,layc Incri i velrrm (lisah,lity i 1)easition Rai ign aid bill pri vicliug t col ra,uc lid u,ilit u y 15515111111' I{rsolution propmnig coniLitiaria" arueudrnrnt for 1 rc 'ido Will coif tinnily. ist. ihhsh e'111, 11ve 'olitr,ils for tapressaiit avid stinni 1111 drugs 11,1,1 vv,v GI hilt. EXTENSION OF R1.MARK OF HON. E. Y. BERRY of SOUTH DAKOTA IN Trlli. uOUBE OF REPRESENTAT VES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I have asked unanimous consent to insert n the RECORD a poem which I think goes a long way toward expressing in rhythm what many think in prose. The poem ?a as follows: SAFE SURRENDER Is i. true, must we surrender; Are we better "zed than dead?" What of those who've gone before its, Who hoped and fought and bled Was idiot inventive genius, And the courage of the W'ree; That built this mighyt Notion. Case it then to you and me? our lenders Ialk of war, in years; Cif' containment, so then say. Colrtain but not to conqu?r giro, Just keep the foe at bay. How niusl our young men reel tiday, In Lie intirky jungle deep? Our bombers not allowed to strike, The erierny we keep. Wily ciho:,vie this distant Asian lane To blood-wash this disease; While Iicsr our shore this enemy. !r.)e crxl(1le and appease':' Disa,. m. L)isarm. appease appease Chi' great planners do insist. The enemy will not attach, ci We cannot resist. So remove defensive missiles. Take the bombers front the air; Yes, limit every phase of war, To not arouse the Bear? V oting Record cf Congressman Wayne L. Hays on Major Legislation `~'1'T:PitPoN OF REMP.ILKS [SON. WAYNE L. PAYS oi, 0I:io OE' REPRE`t,ill' lN'1'A'11VEll JVlondi if, February 21. 1966 NTi'. HAYS. Mr. Speaker. under leave !.n extend my remarks in the RECORD, I include my Voting record on major bills Li come before the House o-i. iIhpresenta- tives during the 89th Congress to date. I have done Lhis since i [7ise been in h:aactcd. Cuacted. R nactr,i. 1?llrclell. ISnac9ed. I" naclcd. Cnictcd. Err if 1.0d. i?nac.tcc.l. fin irio:l. An iclcd. Vdoptcd. C meted. Approved by C ongri-';. I' 15 (d l lease. Let the cream of this great country. Waste and fight and die betrayed, With weapons of the ancient fast, Because we are afraid'? Afraid. to use the might that's oiu-s, Win and end this futile strife. And stop this cancer at its source, Before it takes our life. Will our sovereignty surrendered, And our banner tightly furled.; Loose shackles, foolish cartels placed, On men throughout the world? --JACK 1L:. 'Si". Got Problems? Learn To Share EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. ARTHUR YOUNGER OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REI'RESENTA'l'T'.5:5i Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. YOUNGER. Mr. Speaker, the master satirist, Mr. Arthur it )i)l-l', had a very good column in the Fel;rual'y 15 San Francisco Chronicle, relative t ) this Government's Positioll On smoking. The column follows: Go,' PROBLEMS? LEARN To SH ,` 4 (By Arthur Hoppe) The smooth interworkings of our Go,'crii- ment agencies have never been better dem- onstrated than in the great smoking Ill li,'. No informed citizen can deny that in their constant efforts to protect us all the cies are holding their own. For years, as you know, the Dep:u,:rant 1). Agriculture has been subsidizing fainiurs t.,i encourage their to grow more cigar c t t to- bacco. Which was fine until another the Department of Public Health axui-;unc:.t Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-' APPENDIX by Russian Boyars, Poland tried to form a union with Russia, but this did not bring positive results. In this period (1566-1632) the Polish Armies under the leadership of Hetmari Stanislaw Zolkiewski, occasionally occupied Moscow and the Kremlin. In 1920, Poland, with future federation in mind, helped Ataman Semen Petlura to form an independent Ukraine, and in a battle with Soviet armies, the Polish forces liberated the capital of the Ukraine, Kiev. FIRST REPUBLIC As for internal constitutional forms, from the year 1573 the Polish nobility began to elect its kings, and thus Poland became the first republic, although only nobiliary. Political freedom flourished, manifested by such outgrowths as "Pacta Conventa," or argeements made by the nobility with the elected kings which imposed various polit- ical and financial obligations on them, and "Liberum Veto," which made it possible for only one deputy to parliament (the Sejm) to dissolve the parliament and annul it's resolutions. (In a sense the veto in the United Nations Security Council can trace its ancestry to Poland in the 17th century.) This led to an anarchy in political life and the collapse of the inner strength of the nation and contributed to the partitions of Poland. Nevertheless, it was an expression of the spirit of freedom. Finally, the modern con- stitution of May 3, 1791, did away with this anarchy, restoring hereditary monarchy and a strong government and canceling the "Liberum Veto." Three years later, on May 7, 1794. Gen. Tadeusz Kosciuszko issued the Polaniecki Manifesto which served to partially free the peasants from serfdom while during the 1863 uprising against Russia the National Government freed them from these duties completely. COUNTRY OF FREEDOM During the course of history Poland be- came the country of religious freedom and tolerance, insured by the Warsaw Confedera- tion of 1573 which guaranteed the free wor- ship of any religion. Arians, Lutherans and Calvinists, Poles and foreigners, enjoyed this freedom. From the 11th century Jews settled in Poland in their flight from perse- cution in other European countries. Before the Second World War more than 3 million Jews, enjoying full rights, lived in Poland. Jewish religious life flourished. The most important Hebrew universities and pub- lications were to be found in Poland (Jeszybot in Lublin), The Hitlerite occupa- tion put an end to this--at this time the Polish Jews were exterminated, except for 300,00 hidden by the Polish people, al- though they were threatened with the death penalty for helping them. In present-day Poland there is no room for religious tolerance, but nevertheless the Catholic Church and the Polish people suc- cessfully oppose the religious persecution by the Communist regime. POLISH MILLENNIUM-CONCLUSION SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTION Poland's contribution to the scientific achievement of the world is considerable. Here may be mentioned the Jagiellonian University founded in 1364, which celebrated of distilling oil and the founder of the world's first oil mine near Krosno, Ludwik Zamenhoff, the inventor of the language of esperanto (1887) and Maria Curie-Sklodow- ska (1867-1934) Nobel Laureate for the dis- covery of radium. In the field of literature the following writers gained recognition: Wladyalaw Rey_ wont (1867-1925), who received the Nobel Prize mostly for his novel "The Peasants"; Henryk Sienkiewicz (1846-1916), who also received this prize mostly for his epic "Quo Vadis," and Jozef Conrad-Korzeniowski, a Pole writing in English, an author of world fame. In music Fryderyk Chopin (1810-49) is one of the world's best renowned composers; besides him there are Stanislaw Moniuszko (1819-72), Ignacy Paderdwski (1860-1941), and Karol Szymanowski (1882-1937). In the theater and cinema Helena Modrzejew- ska-Modjeska (1840-1909), Pola Negri, born 1897, gained world fame. POLES IN UNITED STATES At the time of the Polish partitions, Polish life also began to develop outside of Poland, particularly in the United States, where thousands of people emigrated. Poles took part in the American Revolution. The first five Poles arrived in America on the English ship Mary and Margaret land- ing in Jamestown on October 1, 1608. General Tadeusz Kosciuszko came to America in August 1776, and General Kazi- mierz Pulaski in 1777, and both of them took part in the Revolutionary War under the leadership of George Washington. At the end of the war Kosciuszko was called "the father of American artillery," and Pulaski, who fell in the battle of Savan- nah, was called "the father of American cavalry." The American people honor them to this day. Statues of Kosciuszko may be found in the square before the White House, in West Point, and Pulaski's on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, and in many other places. Many towns, bridges and highways in the United States bear the names of these American heroes. During the Civil War 168 officers and about 4,000 men of Polish extraction served in the Union Army, among them Generals Wlodzi- mierz Krzyzanowski, Jozef Karge and Albin Schoepf, and in the Confederate Army there were 17 officers and about 1,000 men of Polish extraction, among them General Kacper Tochman. Approximately 900,000 Polish-Americans served in the American Army in World War II. In 1860 the Polonia in the United States numbered 30,000; at present it numbers more than 10,000,000 Americans of Polish descent, and the capital of Polish-American organi- zations comes to approximately $500,000,000. There are more than 50,000 members of the Polish-American intelligentsia (professors, attorneys, judges, doctors, engineers, jour- nalists, etc.). In the present U.S. Congress there is 1 Senator of Polish extraction, ED- MUND MUSKIE, and 11 Congressmen. From the perspective of the thousand-year existence of Poland as a Western Christian country, 31,500,000 Poles at home and 10,- 000,000 Poles abroad living all over the world can view proudly Poland's role in the history of the world and its part in the progress and achievement of mankind. The indomitable spirit of Polish history is a guarantee that this country, halted in its progress through the Communist regime, imposed on it by force by Russia, in time will throw off its shackles and will regain its freedom and To Build Up EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT N. C. NIX OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. NIX. Mr. Speaker, the Commu- nists have let loose an idea in southeast A851 Asia which cannot be stopped by bul- lets-but only by another idea, more appealing and more meaningful to the hearts and minds of the people. Because of this, it was wise of this ad- ministration to realize that the Vietnam war is a war on two fronts, and both must be waged at the same time. The Philadelphia Evening Bulletin of February 8 had a thoughtful editorial along these lines the other day, and it pointed out that: The task has always been understood. The difficulty was and remains a related problem, how to protect the civilian aids in areas still open to Vietcong attack. Yet, the editorial continued- Protection and progress must go hand in ,hand. That will require a massive effort, in which the Saigon government seems dis- posed to try to play a more effective role, with greater resources, than it was ever able to play before. The need for, and the problems of re- construction and a general building up of Domes and schools and crops in this land of agony is one which concerns us all, and because of this, the editorial-so en- lightening on the subject-is offered for the RECORD. RECONSTRUCT{ON IN VIETNAM As Premier Ky has expressed it, the cen- tral problem for the Vietnamese Government is "not only to root out the Vietcong from the rural areas, but also to root ourselves in." This means, as it has for the past 10 years, the training of thousands of young Viet- namese to go out in teams to isolated villages after the army, with American assistance, has cleared the area. Their purpose will be to replace the sinister and shadowy domina- tion of the Vietcong with something visibly better in the way of health and sanitation, school construction, police, crop manage- ment, land reform, and local self-government. The task has always been understood. The difficulty was and remains a related problem, how to protect the civilian aids in areas still open to Vietcong attack. Over the years, the Communists have relied on a cold- blooded campaign of assassination, which has bled South Vietnam of thousands of trained young workers. Combined *ith sab- otage, it has effectively terrorized the villagers. Not until they know that participation in Government reconstruction will not bring savage reprisals from the Vietcong will the farmers of South Vietnam and their families be able to join wholeheartedly in rebuilding their community life in peace. Protection and progress must go hand in hand. That will require a massive effort, in which the Saigon Government seems disposed to try to play a more effective role, with greater re- sources, than it was ever able to play before. School Lunch Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. E. Y. BERRY OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, in this problem of poverty that the President would have the people of America believe he is desperately fighting, the one group of people that need help the most are the youngsters of America, and yet in his budget message the first group of people Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - APPENDIX February 21, V,'73 whom. he proposes to cut are the young- sters who are getting a warm school lunch at noon and who are getting a glass of milk. Of all the worthwhile, established programs, Mr. Speaker, the school lunch program is the best, and does the most good and, of course, this is a ripe plum to be picked by the welfare state in order that they may substitute some fancy newfangled political program, not with a view of aiding the poor, but with a view of aiding some poor politician who may get himself it real nice salary out of it. I have a letter from a superintendent of schools in my State who has described this cut in the school lunch program much more eloquently than I. The letter with the name and the school district stricken is as follows: On behalf of our school patrons and board of education l: am writing to ask that you use all of your influence to obtain reinstate- ment of the funds which have been taken from the school lunch program. This program has long since proven itself to be highly worthwhile and valuable to schools in South Dakota. We have kept the costs to a remarkably low level of 25 cents per pupil in order to keep it within the reach of nearly all families. For those who cannot afford even this low charge we glad- ly furnish lunches entirely free while still others are given some sort of minor work detail whereby they can earn their lunches. Surely no one can question the value of a hot lunch which supplies all the nutritional needs, to every child. We cannot possibly maintain this program without an increased charge or through gen- eral fund subsidy which would increase the school tax that is already at or near the legal limit in most of our schools. If we increase the per pupil cost we will shut out some who cannot afford it and are too proud (thank God we still have some such) to take a "dole" or "handout." It was a nip-and-tuck battle to make ends meet at the 5 cents per meal and 4 cents per one-half pint of milk reimbursement plus the commodities which we once re- ceived. With a cutback in the latter, from 5 to 4 cents per meal and a 10-percent reduc- tion in the milk program we cannot continue the program without one or the other of the above-mentioned policies. Why have these cuts been made in the face of the liberal appropriation under 89-10 for title I and others? How can one justify cut- ting back programs which are tried, tested, and proven valuable on the one hand and then turn around and offer the money for something new which must still be tested? I take the liberty of enclosing a bit of my own thinking on the whole Federal aid con- cept. Frankly, I am sick to death of the "giveaway" program and scared to death of the controls which most assuredly will follow in due time. I don't care to hand my chil- dren and grandchildren an inheritance of Federal controls and socialism which seems to be the direction in which we are heading ,ill too fast. The 37th Anniversary of League of United Latin American Citizens EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BARRATT O'HARA OF ILLINOIS INTHE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monda?i, February 21, 1966 Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, with a warm appreciation of the good works of the League of United Latin American Citizens, popularly known as LULAC, I join in the laudatory com- ments of my colleague from Texas [Mr. WHITEI, in this Chamber on Thursday last, the 37th anniversary of the found- ing of the organization, that as Con- gressman WHITE says has become one of the outstanding groups of our Na- tion for the fostering of good citizen- ship. It has been my privilege and pleasure to participate with the members of the league in the patriotic observances that annually are a vibrant feature of the Fourth of July holiday in the district that I am honored to represent in this body. American citizens of Latin blood are a numerous and proud part of our com- munity, and they hold. a high and digni- fied place of eminence in all the activi- ties of our people. The brilliant record of one of the leaders of LULAC, the Hon- orable David Cerda, as a judge in the courts of Cook County, has been a source of great satisfaction. National Security and the Merchant Marine EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACK EDWARDS OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. EDWARDS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, an effective statement of what the U.S. merchant marine means to our national security was delivered recently by Capt. J. W. Clark, president of the Delta Steamship Lines, and chairman of the Committee of American Steamship Lines. Speaking on February 8, to the Mis- sissippi Valley Association here in Wash- ington, Captain Clark highlighted in ex- cellent fashion the need for action to bring our merchant shipping capability to the level required by the national security. His remarks serve to reinforce state- ments made by several members of the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Commit- tee of the House recently, including mine of February 113. I am inserting Captain Clark's state- ment in the Appendix of the RECORD: THE AMERICAN MERCHANT MARINE'- KEY TO NATIONAL SECURITY (An address by Capt. J. W. Clark, president, Delta Steamship Lines, Inc. (New Orleans), (chairman, Committee of American Steam- ship Lines), Mississippi Valley Associa- tion's 47th annual meeting, War?hington, D.C., February 8, 1966) American-flag shipping is a key to our na- tional security, and our national security involves not only the defense aspect. but also the commercial aspect-the ability of our manufacturers to effectively compete in in- ternational commerce with foreign products. American-flag shipping is today, however, only a. "skeleton" key to national security (although we can still. open many foreign trade doors), and I say this because our maritime authorities have permitted this im- portant key to national security to be re- duced from its former proud position of first merchant fleet in the world to the status to- day of a poor sixth-we rank far behind Great Britain, Norway, Japan, Russia, and Liberia. Most of you, no doubt, are aware of the controversy currently boiling around pro- posals to revise our national maritime policies and to restructure the so-caned subsidy programs. On October 7, 1965, there was issued a report entitled the "Interagency Maritime Task Force Report." This is fre- quently referred to as the "Boyd report," after my fellow panelist, Under Secretary of Com- merce for Transportation, Alan S. Boyd. The interagency report was followed promptly by a report prepared by the President's Maritime Advisory Committee. The interagency report was prepared by Government personnel: the principal architects were the Maritime Ad- ministrator and his planning staff. Maritime Administrator Nicholas Johnson is a brilliant young law professor, with con- siderable charm, who has the oratorical de- livery to sway almost any lay audience to his point of view--and in this case his selected mission has been to "sell" the interagency report. The MAC report was prepared by profes- sionals, drawing heavily on the maritime in- dustry for advice, including shipowners, mari- time labor, and shipbuilders. Secretary of Commerce Connor publicly stated on January 25, that "if the Govern- ment had been fulfilling its obligations to- ward building up the merchant marine over the years, the balance-of-payments problem would be resolved because there would be adequate American-flag tonnage to haul American commerce." Secretary Connor serves as chairman of the President's Mari- time Advisory Committee, and has been it consistent supporter of American-flag ship- ping. Under Secretary Boyd, on the other hand, in a recent article in the U.S. News & World Report, stated that only intuition causes him to feel that we need an American merchant marine. He further stated that ships built today in foreign shipyards cannot be regis- tered under the American flag. This is not so; they can be "imported"-and without duty. 'there are practical problems which discourage such practices. Under Secretary Boyd has also made the statement that the only valid reason for financial assistance to American-flag ships is for reasons related to national defense. In all fairness to Mr. Boyd, I must say that we suspect that the interagency report was probably completed before he assumed his present position of responsibility. In assem- bling the information presented in the con- troversial interagency report, the MARAD- planning group conferred with Government experts in various departments and agencies Professional shipping men view these largely theoretical recommendations of these experts, as impracticable, and we draw the conclusion that this is primarily due to lack of experi- ence and practical knowledge. Thinking of these "experts," I am reminded of the story about the fellow who was appear- ing on the television show, $64,000 Ques- tion." After going through all of the preliminary questions and reaching the final $64,000 ques- tion, the gentleman was advised that he could have the services of an expert to assist him with the final question. As the question in- volved was one with three parts, dealing with. the subject of love, our friend thought long and hard and finally decided that he would obtain the services of a Frenchman well known for his romantic expertise. Came the big night and our contestant faced the master of ceremonies. The first part of the question was given to him as, "if you were walking in a forest and came up a clearing, and you saw it beautiful chalet in a most romantic setting, and a lovely, blossomy young lady appeared in the doorway, completely in the nude, what would you do?" Our friend, without any hesitation whatsoever, promptly responded, Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX February 21, 1966 been given no explanation whatsoever for coincide with the national interests of the the projected doubling of the rate differen- United States. tials applying to cargo preference cargoes. Secretary McNamara has recently reit- Recent analyses and reports on merchant erated the Department of Defense's 1962 po- marine policy have unanimously agreed that sition that "the reserve fleet plus the vessels the current tramp ship program is ineffective in service plus the construction program that and that, with provision for cost differential has previously been outlined (1962) as a ten- subsidy payments, a modern and competi- tative program appear adequate." On Jan- tive bulk fleet can be developed and rate dif- uary 28, Secretary McNamara was quoted as ferentials paid to tramps can be phased out. saying that "the national defense reserve Further, there are no known plans for an fleet is adequately serving the purpose for increase in foreign aid tonnage. Just last which it was planned and, in conjunction week, in fact, President Johnson strongly em- with our active merchant fleet, it is doing a phasized self-help as a basis for administer- fine job." Further, he is quoted as saying ing our foreign aid programs. Although the "the responsible reaction of the merchant United States has emphasized self-help for fleet together with reserve fleet reactivations years in administering aid, no President has in the current Southeast Asia emergency stressed it as strongly as President Johnson. confirms the adequacy of our sealift." The President indicated a change in for- While we appreciate the kind remarks of eign aid policy primarily in the direction of Secretary McNamara as to the effectiveness of making it harder for aid beneficiaries to qual- American-flag shipping cooperation in the ify. When you add to this reports that our southeast Asia area, I am sure that the De- surplus grain stores have been greatly reduced partment of Defense must now be well aware in the Last few years, it is clear that foreign of the poor condition of our reserve fleet. aid cargoes may decrease rather than in- A great many of the ships which have been crease. If you take the projected savings broken out of the reserve fleets, mostly World away from the interagency report calcula- War II Victory type vessels, have incurred ex- tions, then there is little merit to any claim cessive reactivation costs averaging $400,000 for economy on the part of the interagency each, and the frequent breakdowns exper- task group report, as compared to the MAC ienced, indicate that these vessels report. Add to this the fact that American- cannot be considered reliable. flag shipping wage support subsidy per ship The Department of Defense has hailed the should be drastically reduced through auto- development of the giant cargo aircraft, the matron in the next 10 years, and the relative C5-A-scheduled to be placed in operation cost projections, and results, are highly sometime in the early 1970's-as a great ad- debatable. vance in logistical support. This aircraft is NATIONAL SECURITY DEFENSE ASPECTS being developed at a cost of approximately f As to the importance of merchant shipping to our national security, several eminent naval officers in recent months have spoken out in favor of the tremendous contributions of the American merchant marine to the de- fense effort in Vietnam, and to the outstand- ing qualities of our modern vessels which participated in the "steel pike" landing exer- cises off the Spanish coast. Let us, for a moment, reflect on World War II and the fleet of American-flag merchant ships which supplied the logistical support for our major campaigns in Europe and in the Pacific areas. American-flag ships played a major role in the Korean conflict and, as usual, the mer- chant marine is heavily involved in the Viet- nam conflict. It is disturbing to note the lack of cooperation received from our NATO allies in the Vietnam war and, just as in the case of Cuba many of our fair-weather friends are serving Communist masters contrary to U.S. interests. On checking through recent issues of Lloyd's "Shipping Index Voyage Supplement;" I learned that ships flying the flags of Great Britain, Norway, Greece, and other European countries have been calling at Haiphong and at Chinese and Russian ports. A typical example of one of these voy- ages involves the Norwegian ship Herborg, as listed in the January 21, 1966, Issue of Lloyds. $2 billion-paid for by the Department o Defense-and predictions have been made that this 360-top flying "Holland Tunnel" will promote a tremendous increase in future air-cargo services. Strangely enough, the principal commercial airlines of the United States who are usually the beneficiaries of heavy subsidization in plane design and de- velopment through Defense Department con- tracts, are reported to be lukewarm on the project. The C5-A could be another "Great Republic"-the oversized and ill-fated clipper ship of a century ago. According to a No- vember article in Fortune magazine, the C5-A "will liberate the Army from dependence on sea transportation except for low cost bulk items such as fuel." There are certain prac- ticable considerations which immediately come to my mind. In the first place, these planes are expected to land on relatively short runways in remote areas under adverse circumstances, and such runways are subject to damage or destruction by enemy action. These planes would also make a nice fat target for enemy aircraft and missiles. By comparison, seaborne transports provide highly flexible logistical support-with naval support-ships can be moved from one port to another and are not necessarily dependent on fixed facilities for delivery of war material. As troop carriers, giant planes such as the C5-A could carry 600 to 700 fully equipped on October 12, and remained in Haiphong this relatively slow aircraft would be a great until October 18, then proceeded to Nakhoda risk. As a skipper of cargo and troop ships (Russia), then back to Hong Kong on Decem- during the last war, I participated in landing ber 22, and thence to Port Said, Egypt. It operations, I saw ships go down-including is recalled that in the Cuban crisis our NATO one of my own. Sea rescue operations, how- allies flagrantly violated our embargo, and ever tragic and dangerous, afford a much some still do. At one time, the Norwegian greater probability of recovery than do air- Prime Minister publicly stated that Cuba was craft disasters. an "American affair." At the present time, sealift is supplying 98 It was the U.S. merchant marine which was percent of all logistical support to the Viet- promptly called into service to supply vessels nam theater and a high percentage of per- for the Vietnam emergency, just as we have sonnel. The First Cavalry Division, of which been the first to go to war during so many you hear so much about these days carrying previous emergencies, and it is a pathetic on operations in Vietnam, was transported circumstance thatforeign crews have refused to Vietnam entirely by ship along with all of to carry U.S. military cargoes to Vietnam. its equipment, including 400 helicopters. This bears out the good advice of high-rank- The U.S. shipping industry is affording full ing naval spokesmen who have repeatedly cooperation to our military people in the warned that the interest of foreign-flag ship- Vietnam conflict. Our seamen have offered ping during periods of emergency might not to assist in unloading operations, and labor leaders have visited the area and suggested ways and means of overcoming labor bottle- necks in the ports. Our Committee of Amer- ican Steamship Lines has offered to supply fully qualified professionals, at our own ex- pense, to assist in overcoming port and harbor problems related to ship and cargo operations. The role of American shipping as a key to our national security, both as to the com- mercial and defense aspects, will greatly de- pend upon the administration's program and the consideration which will be given by the second session of the 89th Congress. As pro- fessionals, we sincerely believe that American- flag shipping can play an increasingly im- portant part in the Nation's best interest. The Committee of American Steamship Lines supports the President's Maritime Ad- visory Committee report. We trust that ad- ministration and congressional leaders will give us an opportunity to participate in con- structive maritime policy planning. Editorial by William Mathews EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN J. RHODES OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. RHODES of Arizona. Mr. Speak- er, William R. Mathews, editor and pub- lisher of the Arizona Daily Star, of Tucson, has traveled widely in the Far East. He has studied its people, its gov- ernments, and has well-formed ideas concerning the appropriateness. of our actions in that part of the world. In the Arizona Daily Star, of Janu- ary 30, 1966, Mr. Mathews published an editorial which is so well considered that I am sure it should be read by every Member of the House and Senate. The editorial follows: MAKE THE BEST OF A TRAGIC MESS (By William R. Mathews) Rather than shed more tears about the President and Vietnam, the time has come when our Nation should unite to make the best of what unmistakably is a tragic mess. The President's peace campaign, unreal- istic as it has proven to be in bettering things in Vietnam, has produced the positive results of improving the image of the President throughout the world, as well as at home. It'has damaged seriously the image of the Peiping Communists and North Vietnam by making themselves appear to be rigidly un- reasonable. Johnson has neutralized those wso posed as negotiators, conferencemakers, peacemakers, and so on by seriously trying to do what they pleaded he do. The uncompro:aising attitude of North Vietnam leaves no other alternative than to wage war in traditional American manner. That it amounts to sheer stupidity on the part of North Vietnam, becomes more apparent. If, for instance, North Vietnam had re- sponded to the President's pleas, it could have caught him out on a limb. He prom- ised over and over again unconditional sur- render. Yet when he was pinned down by his fellow countrymen and others, he insisted on imposing the original conditions of American policy. This seems to have gone over the heads of most of the people of the United States and other countries, too. If the Vietnamese had stolen the ball from him by offering to negotiate unconditionally, Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX "I would say 'hello.'" The master of cere- monies said, "You're absolutely right." The second part of the question was, "and then what would you do?" Our lad, again without hesitation, answered, "I would introduce my- a,e1J'." "Absolutely right," said the questioner. Then he went up to say that in view of the :ritical importance of the final part of the question, the contestant should think long and hard: and should seriously consider seek- the advice of his "expert" before answer- ingg. The last pairs of the question for $64,000 ,vas--"and then what would you do?" So, our contestant, realizing the situation, con- ierred with his noted adviser. The Frenchman, with face somewhat red, :idvised: "You har.f better answer for yourself, f. was wrong on the first two questions." I would like to make it clear that I cer- 1..i.inly mean no d.urespect to Under Secretary of Commerce Boyd, or to his expert advisers, Cut at the same time I cannot agree that they have been right about even the first two questions concerning the maritime industry. .lrrreric:in-flag Hripping contributes almost :l billion yearly to our balance of payments. idur Casa Lines alone contribute in excess of 500 million a ye:;r in favorable payments. in. ;udriition to this, as, I have already ;:pirated out, our C. sl members are engaged s extensive trade promotional activities, ;iw u.lirrg $1'7 rndlion a year of their own resources to incrrnse the foreign trade of the United States. fly comparison, we regret to say that the i`da>ritinne Administration, which is charged necificaliy by the Merchant Marine Act of i93fr to promote the foreign commerce of the ifni.ted States and the American Merchant 1.1nritie, has publicly displayed little interest iii this mandate of Congress. To the con- hairy, the public statements of the Maritime Administrator, however well intentioned, have resulted in considerable confusion not only among indnsi,ry members, but also truing international traders and the public. ft has been .llcn.ed that American-flag :.tripping is excesa;ively subsidized, and that .ruerican-flag operators display little initia- i, in advancing technological development. ^All of this simply is not true, and I only wish that. I could take enough of your time o rcluto each and every criticism of Ameri- iatn-flag shippiufr. L'ut, briefly, let me answer loud and clear a. few of these inferences. Liu-A, Americanflag shipowners do not re- "eive One penny of subsidy. Costs ashore, arch its overhead (including my salary), rr;o-lion dling expenses, and the vast mill it- :,tide of expenditures incurred in macrating atcamahip lines, and representing Ili percent C all, of our costs. are for the sole account of American shipowners. 7, i,camsiiip operators merely channel Gov- .rnmeut wage diilerential subsidy payments A.tneri'-an seamen to offset lower wages ,aid on foreign ships. America.n plants nroad can use ton-ost local labor--we can- :ol,---our "plants" mast, compete in the world rarket while eniploying high-standard-of- iiviu * American personnel. 'she same applies to the construction-dif- r;ubsiciv. which is paid. directly to ,... . shipyards to make them competitive wii,u loreign shipyards, and to assure their 1-railaiuili;.y for consiructiorr of ships 'u times i;c a.ri;iona.l omer.e,^ncv. Vic have no guar oitee of profit wi'rtsoever, r.1 we moist actively compete with Core' gn- rornpe tstoror every dollar of revenue we receive 'Mr profit are moriest and to :a y rvera, e Iiia than 5 percent, Our coitributi trs to the national economy, -,1- icially when ?.or consider the usual eco- mnitiplier of three, are overwhelm- n;-ly on the plus sine in comparison to the nerurneat warg' nitferential subsidy paid American labor. We are required by stat- a. to and regulations to build and repair our slops and to pure rase all of our supplies and equipment, in the 'United States. These ex- penditures, along with the salaries paid to our American citizen employees, constitute it major contribution to the Nation's economy and security. Conversely, when foreign-flag shippi,+III is used, 73 cents of every freight revenue dol- lar is taken away from the United States. It night interest you to know that we re- cently made a study of the purch.asinrr: and repair practices of one of our Scandinavian competitors. We found that this line regu- larly obtains the greater part of its sul plies from .foreign sources, even foodstuffs. When m:r.jurr repairs and drydocking are required, tic r shins are gent back to Europe on a voy- age charter. Most of their seamen's low wages are sent back to the old country isr the form of family allotments. In other words, these people spud as little dollar exchange in this country as they possibly can, and drain away "Invisible" payments idoller ex- change) in the form of freight revenur. Arnerican-flag lines have displayed real initiative in developing and programing loch- nica.l advances such as multihatch ;: nips, aut_;omated machinery, barge ships, cor:t.ain- erships, and many other design features which are now being copied by our for.eign- flag competitors. This has been accom- plished by American-flag steamship lines with negligible Government assistance. We have used our own money in the dev.alop- ment of these now design features. What has the Maritime Adminisstrtion dome to help technological development? As 1 un- derstand it, the Maritime Administrai join's Ural red research and development funds have grate principally into the Savannah program, initiated 10 years ago, but a substantial amount has gone into such exotic dev -'.op- ments as the hydrofoil and air-cushion ves- sel projects, which primarily involve :.mall craft and are related to national defer :e or short-range passenger transportation I personally know of no sirngle major pr:;ect involving: large ocean-going vessels to which the present Maritime Administration has made any significant contribution. c. lei rresLRENCFI F ur year's our foreign-flag competitors have cl ai,ored long :and loud in protest against our cargo preference laws wbic.e require that 50 percent of all Government aid or Go,, c ru- mcist financed cargoes be transported by Air.crican-flag vessels. The in.teragenc~' re- port recommends elimination of these cargo proferersce statutes, and it does so wil.h a very naive approach. I was amazed to .earn that few of our high Government oll.cials realize that there are two considerations, a.f- fct:ting cargo preference--(1) routing (u'ef- crance and (2) rate preference. The irrter- agcricy report eecornmendation that cargo preference ba eliminated is confusing and is based on the false philosophy that el,ini- nation oil cargo preference and payment of "ic.centhe" subsidy would enable a row bulk carrier fleet to successfully con Pete with foreign flag competition. This is ab- surd. There is no objection to the phr.nng our, of *'rate" di:lferentials as new bulk :ear- rrr ; are placed in operation, ,ut it is . !)so- lutely imperative that preferential "routing" be retained or there will be little opport: City for the tr-?naportation of any bulk U.S aid eaesyues. It is a well-knovr_r fact that foreign go-c'nmeat: ',i' 1 divert aid cargoes to ..lair nw'a vessels for 'political" r. axons. Fun, tier, the trade rn swan. and foreign freight l,rok- eri appointed by foreign Government ; to handle these sh;pmer_ts are highly susc,alrti- ble to nationalistic control. With bulk im- ports large 1 r dint't 'rolled by industrial e' oats who favor their own "flags of con .venie.rrae" fleets, and. the complete lack of any a,cur- ances that American-flag hulk carriers would participrai,e in U.S. aid cargoes, it can hardly be expected that amt responsible owner will venture the necessary risk cal-;ital. The proposed elimination of cargo rA?ef- erence, including PR 17, would leave us to the tender mercies of foreign Governments and there would remain no effective instru- ment for leverage in assuring fair and equi- table treatment for U.S.-flag vessels. There is ample evidence that the elimination of many discriminations against U.S.-flag ves- sels has only been accomplished through cargo preference leverage. To the contrery, the routing aspects of cargo preference leg- islation should be made more effective. If U.S.-flag vessels do not carry such car- goes then obviously they will be carried by foreign-flag vessels to the detriment of the U.S. economy through adverse balance of payments and national income. Our cargo preference laws and mar it tree policies have been adequately defended in the past by the U.S. Government. The de- fense of our present statutes is a matter of international record. There is a further misconception that cargo preferences result in higher freight rates. This is basically incorrect with re- gard to all cargoes which move in the liner trades. Freight conference rules and rates apply equally to American- and foreign-flag vessels, and freight conferences are strictly controlled by the U.S. Federal Maritime Commission. As to the proposed Russian grain doil, there is no assurance that Russia or any of the Communist satellite countries would reg- ularly purchase large quantities of U.S. ,wheat when and if the Government restric- tion imposed for the use of American-flag vessels is eliminated. It is my opinion that Russia has seized upon the 50 percent shin American policy as a propaganda tool to stir up further trouble with our NATO allies. It should be recalled that several of these European countries, notably Germany, have recently protested against the aggressive use of Russian-controlled vessels to break pre- vailing freight rate structures. Russia is building up a large merchant marine aml, by her own admission, intcrnls to utilize her shipping as an instrument of foreign policy without regard to cost. If the Russian objective is achieved in building up a huge merchant marine and utilising same to force down international freight rates, the maritime nations of the world would soon find their respective fleets with- out cargoes and facing virtual bankruptcy. Therefore, only through an effective and active U S. merchant marine, operating with minimum Government restraint, yet with adequate C:overnment protection in the di- rection of cargo routing, and with Govern- ment backing to eliminate foreign govern- ment discriminations, can we avoid. put!.uug ourselves completely at the mercy of Corn- munist-dominated shipping. In view of the affinity of our NATO ::ales to serve the Communist trades in Cuba, the Middle East, Communist China, North Viet- ram and Russia itself, it follows that In con- sideration of charters and the concession of participation of Communist trades, foreign- flag shipping could be influenced to assist the Communist program to dominate Amer- ican foreign trade. DO".LARS AND CENTS ECONOMY As to commercial justification for sire American merchant marine, the adrnieistr:s- tion will undoubtedly be greatly irifluer'eed by the dollars-and-cents costs of Arne flag shipping operations. While we drti l 'se with many of the interagency projectii :s, I would like to spotlight one glaring ques" ion mark on the part of the people who pre- pared the interagency report. The proieste.d hcigh savings frequently r.- fered to by interagency report advocate: i? highly questionable. This is largely on a projected increase in Government 'tid cargoes and a doubling of the rate differa'n- tials, amounting to a projected savior;s through 1985 of almost $2 billion ($1011 mil- lion a year l , In the first place, we l: aye Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 February 21, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX they would have driven him into a corner. But such an attitude on the Communists' part seemed to defy the centuries-old tradi- tion of the Chinese and most Orientals, to take their time and make haste slowly. Time would have been on their side, if they had restrained the Vietcong and themselves to the point that would have made American military forces no longer necessary. Within a few years the odds would be greatly on their side. In a few years they could win by subversion, which would have allowed them to make communism appear to be a peaceful political philosophy. That they abandoned their basic political philosophy of confidence in time, apparently has been caused by the corrupting of Marxism of the West, which calls for glorify- ing violence and actual war. The world, not just America, should take note of this change. It confirms how un- compromising and unreasonable Communists are. It confirms how undependable their word is. Their violation of their own pro- posed cease-fire amounted only to a trap to bring in more supplies and regroup their forces. That Lenin himself made a peace in 1918 with Germany, in order to give time to consolidate the Russian revolution, these oriental Communists seem to forget. As to the role of China, it appears more and more as a great big bluff. It is worth noting how she withdrew from her invasion of India, when India showed her will to fight. We have to do the same thing. If President Johnson limits the bombing of targets in North Vietnam, we are confessing our fear of China. If the President extends bombing to strategic targets like electric gen- erating plants, oil storage tanks, and various industrial complexes, we are definitely calling the Chinese bluff. We will be shortening the war, not prolonging it. Of course, tactical bombing against railroads, bridges, and other military targets must continue with an in- creased tempo. China does have vast manpower, but she can supply North Vietnam, and the Vietcong, with only a part of the weapons they use. The latter have to depend upon supplies from Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union. At the present time, China has only a few atomic bombs. If she dares make use of them, we must retaliate until we break her power to make nuclear and other weapons. It is hard to believe that China would run the risk of being completely destroyed now, when she knows that by keeping at peace she will grow stronger daily and yearly. She will keep on bluffing as long as we evade calling her bluff by strategic bombing in North Viet- nam. EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CHARLES L. WELTNER OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. WELTNER. Mr. Speaker, my con- stituent, Elise Boylston, is a charming lady now in her 80th year. She was art director of the Atlanta public schools before her retirement and has written several textbooks. She is still an active member of the Atlanta Pen Women. Among the. many lasting contributions she has made are her lyrics to the song, "Georgia Land Is Mine." Mrs. Lynda Moore wrote the music for this song. I insert this in the RECORD in the hopes that many more will enjoy it as I have. GEORGIA LAND IS MINE (Lyrics by Elise Boylston, music by Mrs. Lynda Moore) If I were a poet with a magic loom, I'd weave a banner of gold; And I'd tuck a wish and a loving thought In the midst of each shining fold; I'd snare me a sunbeam and fasten it tight In the threads of the silken band; And I'd weave a legend for all to read- Georgia, by cherished land I CHORUS I'm weaving a song of Georgia land- The land that I adore; Her smiles and tears throughout the years Make rainbows evermore. My shuttle hums a merry tune As heart and loom combine To weave a prayer of thankfulness That Georgia land is mine. 2 I'd catch the spark of a baby's smile; The joy of a love devine; The rippling sound of a singing brook; The scent of a jasmine vine. I'd match the carmine of the soil With the blue of a distant hill; I'd capture a wild bird's melody, And the sing of the whippoorwill. Ho Chi Kennedy EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EDWARD J. DERWINSKI OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. DERWINSKI. Mr. Speaker, one of the latest developments in the mass confusion over our foreign policy is the dangerous advice being given by the rad- ical left Members of the U.S. Senate. The Chicago Tribune commented edi- torially on this situation in this morn- ing's issue, and I am inserting their edi- torial in the RECORD: Ho CHI KENNEDY Senator BOBBY KENNEDY has reached a level of irresponsibility without parallel even for him in suggesting that the way out of the war in Vietnam is for the United States to accept a coalition government in South Viet- nam which would admit the Communist Vietcong as a ruling element. Mr. KENNEDY could only advance an idea of this sort if he was entirely ignorant of history and experience. We conclude that he is utterly deficient in both. The record of coalitions with communism demonstrates that any coalescence of this sort leads inevitably to a surrender to com- munism. Czechoslovakia, after World War II, tried the experiment. It led to a com- plete Communist takeover. Gen. George C. Marshall was dispatched to China after the end of the same war with instructions written by State Department appeasers to force the Nationalist China of Chiang Kai-shek into a coalition with the Communists who had been fighting his gov- ernment for 20 years. When Chiang refused this suicidal deal, the United States cut off all supplies to his forces for a year and a half. Meanwhile, the Communists, armed with weapons taken from the Japanese army which had surrendered to the Russian Com- munist forces in Manchuria, were gathering the strength to conquer the country, as they did. Most recently the coalition formula was invoked in Laos, which, like Vietnam, is a splinter state out of the former French pos- session of Indochina. In that country an uneasy combination was attempted among disparate elements of the pro-Western and anti-Communist monarchy, a neutralist ele- ment of the military, and the Communist Pathet Lao. The Comunists have taken over great areas of the country and intend to take it all. The idea that such antago- nistic forces will or can cooperate is a myth- the myth promulgated by the Kremlin that "peaceful coexistence" is a means of recon- ciling sheep and wolves. Mr. KENNEDY might be dismissed as the demagog that he is If he were ignorant of this' history, but he may not be excused for his ignorance of the origins of the war in South Vietnam. If he had read the state- ment of Secretary of State Dean Rusk last Friday, he would know that the Communist Vietcong, and its political sponsor, the so- called National Liberation Front, are not indigenous elements of a civil war in South Vietnam, but are the deliberately contrived "fronts" of the Communist government of North Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh. The third conference of the North Viet- namese Communist party in Hanoi decreed, in 1901, that South Vietnam was to be abolished as an Independent state and ren- dered subject to the Communists. For this purpose, a dummy political arm, designated as the National Liberation Front, was estab- lished as a pretender to authority in opposi- tion to the noncommunist regime in Saigon. The Vietcong became the mjlitary extension of this invented political cat's-paw of Hanoi. It has no more standing as an authentic element in the political or social organiza- tion of South Vietnam than the Hebrides Islands in relation to the United States. Senator KENNEDY, out of his ignorance and political ambition, has compromised his loyalty to the United States when it is at war by subscribing to Communist myths and adopting them as his own, in opposition to a national policy, which is supported by an overwhelming majority of American citizens. He is not the junior Senator from New York. He is the senior senator from Communist North Vietnam--Ho Chi Minh's Trojan horse in the U.S. Senate. Dickson County Doctors Are Patriots EXTENSION'OF REMARKS OF HON. WILLIAM R. ANDERSON OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. ANDERSON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, the Vietnam conflict has in- spired many acts of patriotism by civil- ian groups. One of the finest and most selfless acts that has been brought to my attention is described in the following article from the Dickson County Herald, "Medical Association To Offer Free Medi- cal Care to Outpatients of Vietnam Soldiers." By offering free out patient medical care to the wives and children of soldiers now fighting in Vietnam, the members of the Dickson County Medical Society have set an example that all Americans could do well to ponder and follow. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - -APPENDIX P ebruary 21; 1966 XlEiIICAL ASSOCIATION To OFFER FREE MEDICAL CARE To OUTPATIENTS OF VIETNAM SOLDIERS '34he Dickson County Medical Association, in an unprccedented move, has agreed to ex- trod outpatient medical care to the wife and. children al servicemen engaged in this country's struggle in Vietnam, it was an.- nun need touay by D. W. A. Crosby and Dr. .1. T. Jackson. who drafted a resolution to this effect at the request of the association, Ilse Dickson County Medical Association is , uml:oscd of all practicing physicians of the county. The resolution reads as follows: "f?c it r( solved by the naensbers of the Dickson Connl y Medical Association, That we are in comalete sympathy with the foreign policy of tire Government of the United States of America in its effort to promote lasting peace throughout the world, and we are proud of our fellow Tennesseans who are now serving and who will serve our country in Vietnam. in trying to bring to an early end the fightins; which has already cost the lives of many of the fine brave youth of this great State; be it further "Resolved, That we here at home realize the hardships and the inconveniences that our servicemen are going through in being separated from their loved ones while on ac-- Live duty in Vietnam: be it further "Resolved, That we want to express our appreciation for the great effort and sacrifice being made by our fellow Tennesseans by offering our services in the following man- ner: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved. If any man who has ever been a patient of any of the members of the Dick- son County Medical Association is called to serve his country in the struggle in Vietnam, then we willingly agree to extend outpatient medical care to his wife and children free of charge so long; as he remains on active duty in that theater of operations; be it further lfesolve&!, 'that a copy of this resolution ho forwarded to the proper authorities of 1 he 'l'ennessre State Medical A sociation, the American Medical Association, and to the War Department of the United States of America. Signed: "MEMBERS of DICKson COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY." OF GEORGIA fN '[HE 111)0 SE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monctny, February 21, 1966 Mr. Wiih'INER. Mr. Speaker, in 1965 Atlanta entered into major league sports Wilttihh the franchise of the Atlanta Braves, and most recently with the newly formed National League football team, the A~,-- lonta Falcons. 1,;Tst week. Atlanta, always a cultural center, scored another "big league" feat, with the Atlanta Arts Alliance announce-- Inc:ant that the distinguished Robert Shaw has been named music director of the Atlanta i-aamphony Orchestra. Mr. Shaw will resign his post as as- :;uci:ite conductor of the Cleveland Or- ch mtra and will assume his duties in At- lanta, in 1967. line of the world's most renowned choral directors, his famous Robert Shaw Chorale has made musical history in its tours of 41: Skates, and its celebrated Rus- Si?1n tour in 1962. Conductor Henry Sopkin, retiring after 21 years o selfless and able service to his art and his city, leaves Mr. Show a care- fully assembled aggregation of 80 excel- lent musicians-a solid founda,ion from which to launch further mu ,ieal tri- urnphs. The Atlanta Arts Alliance, ierider the able leadership of Chairman Richard H. Rich, and Vice Chairman Luci+n Oliver, Charles L. Tower, symphony president, and Charles R. Yates, chairman of the symphony executive committc;a: are to be commended for their painstaking search of over 100 applicants from the United States and Europe-tile search which culminated in the selection of Mr. Shaw. The late Arturo Toscanini said of Rob- ert. Shaw: "I have at last found the Maestro I have been looking for." As Atlanta Constitution Columnist Bruce Galphin noted, "So has Atlanta.." The Schools of Compton, Calif. EXTENSION OF REMAi'1KS OF HON. DEL CLAWSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESEN'TATIVES Monday, February 21, PAX Mr. DEL CLAWSON. Mn Speaker, a singular honor has come to a section of miy constituency, the city of Compton, Calif., and I am pleased to .hare the recognition with my colleague,,. In. a way, this honor synthesizes a number of interrelated issues which have had our attention for a i Ong time. We speak of poverty, of racial tensions, of law violation. There is general agreement that the heart of the matter is education and understanding-and the heart of education, we have been told many times, is "money"-as if "money" alone could buy the skill to inspire children to learn, prevent drop- outs, and give to a community ii deep and penetrating interest in raising, the edu- cational level of its citizens. Ti'hhe fullest measure of money means little without the zeal to do, the imagina- tion to conceive, the willingness to dare, and genuine dedications to a cause. In this city of Compton, there are peo- ple with all these qualities-and their dedication is to education-although their wealth is modest. These are the people who administer its school sys- tem under the able leadership of Mr. Leonard C. Erickson, superintndent of the Compton city schools. More than 17,000 pupils crowd its classes. We are advised the cc,t of edu- cating each student is the lov est in all of Los Angeles County-and under- standably so-as Comoton is a. city with a number of poverty areas-and no Fed- eral funds are allocated for building new sel loot structures. Yet; this community voted is increase its property tax, to increase it so that new schools could be built. 'i he entire community voted this sacrifice. An en- tire multiracial community 'voting in favor of the future. This, however, is not unusual It was decided to build the first of these schools in the area of the city where the need was the greatest. This, too, is not unusual. But rather than merely decide to build a school that would house a specific num- ber of pupils, the goal was more ambi- tious. It was decided to build a school that would be beautiful, one in which the community would take pride, one that would provide a welcome atmos- phere, one that the people would cherish, one that would motivate students to learn, an oasis of knowledge-a center of learning worthy of any city-anywhere. And all this they hoped to achieve on the slimmest of budgets. Long, tedious hours went into the search for the answers. It would have been easy to merely press a button or two and have a school much like all other schools-and no one would complain, for they would be getting what they would naturally expect. But the city of Compton can be proud. This school., designed by the architectural firm of Carmichael-Kemp, ALA, to be built in a section designated by Los An- geles County as a hard-core poverty area, has just received a national award for its excellence in architecture--its beauty, its warmth, its color--and its functional use in education, from the American Association of School Admin- istrators' Architectural Jury of the Na- tional Education Association. This ar- chitectural jury is composed of three of the Nation's leading architects selected by the American Institute of Architects, and three of the Nation's most eminent educators. This is no small school. It is 2 stories with more than 30 classrooms, and gen- tlemen, the cost of building this school will be well within the budget set; by the State of California as the average cost for similar size structures. It is fit- ting, too, that this institution of learn- ing will be named the Clarence A. Dicki- son Elementary School, honoring a pio- neer of the city of Compton, who was not only its first mayor, but who also made his contribution to education as a teacher, vice principal, principal, and a member and president of the Compton City Elementary School Board. And as if Compton needed further honor, the California State Department of Schoolhouse Planning is considering using this award-winning school for a pilot study relative to the savings effected by its type of structure in heavily popu- lated areas. This coveted award, naturally, means a great deal to Mr. Erickson, the Board of Education and to the architects, D.a Z Carmichael and Dick Kemp, but it means immeasurably more to the people of the area. A school worthy of the wealthiest city anywhere is theirs. EXTENSION OF REMAZ;:.KS or, HON. EDNA F. KELLY OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESEN': ATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker. :last year, during the 1st session of the current Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 A866 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX February y1, 1966 pie of the State of Hawaii and the cit- izens of the city of Bruyeres in far-off France. Perhaps some of my colleagues will recall that Bruyeres is one of the French towns which were liberated by the men of Hawaii's 442d Infantry Regi- ment and the 100th Infantry Battalion in World War H. Having been a mem- ber of the 1030th Infantry Battalion, I am greatly pleased that out of the fierce struggle for Bruyeres among the forested foothills of the Vosges Mountains has come about a lasting friendship between two peoples. Many of our brave fighting men were felled in Bruyeres, and they too would rejoice that they did not die in vain. Although the relationship between the people of Hawaii and the citizens of Bruyeres had a dramatic beginning. I am sure that "Bruyeres" would today be a mere memory of a battle, had it not been for dedicated individuals who have devoted much time and effort in the in- tervening years to keep this friendship alive. I stand before you today to pay tribute to a man who has done so much to foster this friendship. He is a French citizen and a councilman in the city of Bruyeres M. Gerard Deschaseaux. The unselfish devotion of Councilman Deschaseaux has been movingly re- counted in a recent letter I received from Mr. Wilbert S. Holck, deputy clerk of the city and county of Honolulu. As one who also has been instrumental in pro- moting this friendship and the sister city affiliation between Honolulu and Bru- yeres, Mr. Holck points out that the Hawaii State Senate and House jointly, the City Council of Honolulu, and the 442d and 100th Infantry Clubs in Hawaii intend to pay tribute to Council- man Deschaseaux. Mr. Speaker, at this point I am Insert- ing in the RECORD the inspiring story of Mr. Deschaseaux's accomplishments as related by Mr. Holck: "Councilman Deschaseaux is one of the many who are instrumental in creating the congenial pro-American attitude among the citizens of France, particularly within the Vosges area. His newspaper articles describ- ing our citizens of the mainland United States and Hawaii during a visit in 1963 was most revealing. His articles provided the French citizens with a most intimate under- standing of the people of our Nation. He has established close contact with the U.S. officials in the people-to-people program. Today there are three cities in France par- ticipating and cooperating with the United States people-to-people program. These are Marseille, Strasbourg, and Bruyeres. Indi- viduals in charge in each of the three cities arrange for our young U.S. students to live in the privates homes of their cities for a few days. Mr. Deschaseaux, who is responsible for Bruyeres, also takes in two U.S. students each year. In addition to the above, Mr. Deschaseaux has been unselfish in giving his time, energy, and money in providing for visitors from Hawaii. He personally entertains all Hawai- ians and arranges for all 442d and 100th veterans to tour former battle areas and meet old wartime friends. Any Hawaiian visiting Bruyeres is immeditaely made to feel at home by many citizens of that town until Mr. Deschaseaux arrives to take over. Hawaiian servicemen and women and their families in Europe are welcomed by the people there because of Mr. Deschaseaux's untiring efforts to maintain good will and his sincere beliefs in the Honolulu, Hawaii-Bruyeres, France sis- ter city relations. The people of Bruyeres honor the men of the 100th and 442d Infantry killed in the battle to liberate their town on the third Sunday of every October. Since October of 1961 they also celebrate the anniversary of their sister city affiliation with Honolulu, Hawaii. The celebrations really commence on the day before and terminate on the eve- ning of the third Sunday. Mr. Deschaseaux, being the chairman of the Bruyeres, France- Honolulu, Hawaii, sister city committee of Bruyeres, is also program chairman. He arranges for hotel and private home accom- modations for all visitors (primarily from Hawaii) and coordinates the celebration activities. Since 1961 Mr. Deschaseaux has made ar- rangements for all students of Bruyeres to have a pen pal in Hawaii. This pen pal asso- elation continues till this day with high school students from Farrington Castle, and the Catholic schools. His goal is to educate the young people of France and other nations through correspondence so that better under- standing and good will can be developed. He long-range plan is to have an exchange of young students such as that undertaken in the U.S. people-to-people program. Mr. Deschaseaux is of high moral char- acter and a well-respected man in the Vosges area. Although he could be elected in higher political offices, he has refused only because of devotion to his ocupation. He is an engi- neer of natural resources (forestry, water, and game) in the Vosges area. Mr. Speaker, the world would be a much better place in which to live if we had more men like M. Gerard Deschase- aux, I take great pleasure and deem it an nor to pay tribute to this great F,ra i hman and world citizen. L.B.J.'s Big Week Left the World Gasping EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. RICHARD BOLLING OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, Presi- dent Johnson's untiring efforts to make this a world of stability and peace were hailed by the Kansas City Times, which noted that he "made the 7 days of Feb- ruary 6-12, 1966, a, week to remember. The President was positively dazzling in the pace and breadth of his personal per- formance." The paper noted that in Honolulu: The military campaign was played down. The greater emphasis was on the struggle against poverty, disease, and illiteracy in South Vietnam. The Saigon government was represented as pushing social-economic betterment programs with the enthusiastic support of the Johnson administration. As a summary of efforts to attain peace the "big week" as reviewed by the Times is noteworthy, and I am including it in the RECORD: L.B.J.'s BIG WEEK LEFT THE WORLD GASPING Lyndon B. Johnson made the 7 days of February 6-12, 1966, a week to remember. The President was positively dazzling in the pace and breadth of his personal perform- ance. On very short notice he flew into Hono- lulu for a whirlwind conference that re- focused the picture of the U.S. efforts in Vietnam. The military campaign was played down. The greater emphasis was on the struggle against poverty, disease, and illit- eracy in South Vietnam. The Saigon gov- ernment was represented as pushing social- economic betterment programs with the enthusiastic support of the Johnson ad- ministration. The Johnson style demands more than words, however. The President summoned Vice President HUBERT HUMPHREY to meet him at the Los Angeles airport for a run- down on the Honolulu conference. Then Mr. HUMPHREY was whisked off across the Pacific to dramatize the administration's peaceful intentions in Vietnam. Orville Freeman, the Secretary of Agriculture, was also dispatched to Vietnam on a food-coun- seling and inspection trip that had been scheduled earlier but fitted perfectly into the Johnsonian timetable. Upon returning to Washington, President Johnson scarcely paused before sending Con- gress a message outlining a 5-year American food-for-freedom program, with the promise of expanded foreign food assistance based on a requirement that hungry areas help them- selves. Late Friday President Johnson called a press conference to discuss, other matters, the U.S. military operations in Viet- nam. He placed his own interpretation on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings, which some people thought the President wanted to consign to the shadows by the drama of his newsmaking trip to Hawaii. Mr. Johnson commented that the two chief witnesses, retired Army Gen. James Gavin, and George Kennan, a former diplo- mat, both said that they did not want "to escalate or get out" and "that's how we feel." But he also said that American troops would be sent to Vietnam as needed by the field commanders. Still full of spizzerinctum, Mr. Johnson announced that he has picked a new man to be his press secretary, a new Chairman of the Federal Power Commission, and a new Comptroller General-all highly important posts. The average American must have felt, worn out from just trying to keep up with Presi- dent Johnson's performance last week. As for L.B.J. himself, he gave the impression of not even being winded. Nevertheless, even for him, this man of such amazing energy and inventiveness surely made it a memorable 7 days. EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. RICHARD T. HANNA OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. HANNA. Mr. Speaker, in the other body, Senators question the judgment of military policymakers in an active con- frontation with North Vietnam, and they criticized the advice and direction of the State Department in defining and pursuing a national policy in regard to that conflict. They are carrying out a basic responsibility of the Senate in foreign affairs. We in the House have the fundamental power of the purse. it is well that we should carry on a dia- log over the judgment of the Federal Reserve and criticize the advice and di- rectives of the Treasury. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 +'ehruar?; '1, 1966 CONGRESSIONA]L RECORD - APPENDIX A865 '1' :at trip was made in open defiance of a law which prohibits travel to Hanoi without approval by our Government. While other laws were probably violated, there appears to be no doubt about guilt in failure to obtain approval of the jour- hey IV: r. Speaker, millions of Americans are asking: Why has nothing thus far been done about prosecuting these characters? The editorial follows: JUSTICE lUN TRIAL ,I'.icre must be no jusLice, in the minds of Noise two UI's who sold their uniforms to some East Germans woo wanted to go over the wall. The Army has scheduled a court- martial where the two could draw as much as 2 years and 4 months in jail and dishon- orable discharges. 1ne soldiers broke the law. So did the three East Germans a'ho bought and wore urilorms against Western Allied regulations. 11111 what of some other recent lawbreaking incidents? f.t,eniember those three "factfinders" who dropped in on North Vietnam not long ago? Well, they're back home now. One, a pro- Leass)r, has been all over the newspapers and television with his inside tips on how to get out, of Vietnam: Give up and throw ourselves on the mercy of the Communists. The "factfinders" have Communist and other leftist affiliations that fill several type- written pages. They blatantly defied a State Department ban on travel to North Vietnam a.nd are subject to 5-year prison sentences :anti lines of up to $5000. So far, no prose- cution or reprimand. And what of the 't'ransit Workers Union which violated two State laws with an illegal striae that cost New York City at least a bil- lion dollars? The charges were dropped when the strike was settled, and the law- breakers, instead of drawing stiff fines, got fat pay raises. Yet the Army is preparing to punish two young men for helping a small group of Communist captives flee to freedom. Is it justice? The answer lies in the Western concept of law and order. Under our system, laws are trade to be enforced, and agencies are set up to handle enforcement. Police depart- ments fall into this category, and so, in a larger sense, do the Armed Forces. Law enforcement should begin with those who enforce the law. Thus it is that police- men are suspended and soldiers court- niactialed for breaking laws and regulations. Itecause enforcers of the law should set an impeccable example of law and order, the Army's course of action is just. Hopefully it win: be contagious. HON. ROBERT H. MICHEL OF III,INOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I wish to include the following editorial from the February 9, 1966, issue of the Peoria Journal Star: AN IN'rERESTINC UNION PROPOSAL A group of Peoria in!un chiefs are spear- heading a plan which, if the details can be ironed out, looks like one of the most pro- r*rrssive programs to come down the road in Iang time. It is a bold, imaginative, pioneering effort that might make central Illinois a national model for peace in the construction indus- try-a condition that should do a great deal to further stimulate economic development here and make construction work plentiful. The idea is simple. The details are terribly complex. Construction is complicated on the one hand by the extremely flexible sys':em of it general contractor and a series of subcon- tractors, brought together on the basis of the specializations needed on each given job. On the other hand, construction worker,; are organized into a variety of specialities, each with its own union and its o;cn juris- diction One of the problems for all concerned has been the fact that often when a dispute over which union jurisdiction is appropriate rears Its head the contractor, the unions directly involved, and all the other union worker groups employed on the job are apt to suffer as the job lies idle for all concerned while the dispute is ironed out. Most of those injured are innocent by- standers-the unions not a part of the dis- pute who would otherwise be working, the contractor, and the preson who is counting on the factory, dwelling, or commercial building he is paying for and has contracted for but which isn't getting built. Yet, for a union to yield jurisdiction in such a dispute means not only the loss of work involved in the one case but might prejudice all such jobs in the future. Indeed, in a craft union, if jurisdiction is chipped away the union is out of business and ceases to existand its members are without work. With the variety of unions involved and the variety of contractors and subcontrac- Lo?s involved, .5 variety of such problems have arisen and the overall problem has be- come very serious. So serious that a great deal of sober and responsible effort has gone into the problem of how to fairly decide and consistently re- solve such disputes---and establish fixed and known and stable jurisdictions. These efforts were climaxed in the estab- lishment of a national joint board and an appeals board for the specific settlement of jurisdic`ional disputes in the building and construction industry. Further, basic agreements and decisions that have been made are compiled in what the trade calls "the green book" for the guidance of all concerned so as to avoid the same dispute erupting twice. This structure was hammered out by the Building and Construction Trades Depart- ment of the AFL-CIO and the two major contractor associations with the President of the United States as witness. It is a significant step forward, but far too often this machinery doesn't come into play until it job is underway and the job itself is held up until the procedures for settle- ment are completed. What is now proposed, at the initiative of local leaders in the construction unions, is a general meeting of all interested parties, contractors, union representatives, and oth- ers---such as bank finance people. The purpose would be to iron out a further step, providing for procedures wh,reby the plans and work outline of any job, once contracted, would be made available in ad- vance in a "plan room" or by some other arra ngc ment. Within 1 week of this availability, the various unions would be required to formally claim which work fell into their jurisdic- tions. If claims overlapped, creating the conditions for a dispute, a hearing would bc scheduled in an attempt to iron it out, and when all the hearing evidence was in regard- ing past agreements, past decisions in like cases, and if need be, lacking such case his- tories, reference to past local practice, the contractor would make his decision as to which of the disputing unions he believes has the best claim of jurisdiction. The union in contention may then, it it chooses, appeal that decision to the already established and presently functioning na - tional joint board. In the meantime, the contractor's decision stands and the work must go forward without disruption or it work stoppage. If the na- tional joint hoard agrees with the contractor, he goes forward as is. If it reverses him, he must shift the work over to the designstenn. union. In either case, there is a pledge of no work stoppage because of the dispute. In short, the local leaders propose to take a further step on present procedures designed (1) to detect it jurisdictional dispute or prob- lem in advance, (2) to settle it by orderly and recognized processes, and (3) to get this done before the work commences so it will not interfere with the work, and in any case to outlaw a work stoppage during the pro- cedural steps if the matter does go to appeal at the present national joint board level. Such a purpose, and such initiative among union leaders in this area, can only be ap- plauded. The complex details of an effective "plan room," of signatories to such an agree- ment, and of the rights of appeal---all involv- ing in some way both many unions and many contractors may pose problems, and differ- ences of approach. But it is certainly worth while to attack those details and try to work them out fairly. Success in such a conference would produce it labor landmark of national significance. It would be a leadership step here in this area that would focus the attention of the entire industry, and a climate that would en- courage development in this area to the joint benefit of contractors and construction unions-as well as the community as a whole. It could also be a classic example of -now people engaged in the same basic activity in different ways can make much more progress by finding those areas where pulling together provides a mutual advantage, rather than fostering differences to mutual disadvantage. And it is significant for the potential future of this area that the initiative, the energy. and the responsible study bringing forth this effort has come from the ranks of labor. -C. L. DANCEY. M. Gerard Deschaseaux, Promoter of French-American Friendship EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. SPARK M. MATSUNAGA Or HAWAII IN THE HOUSE OF :REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 21, 1966 Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, be- cause much has been made of recent differences between our Government and the Government of France, I take partic- ular pleasure today in unfolding to you and to my esteemed colleagues a heart- warming story of friendship between the United States and France. Although this friendship is probably not one that would lead to world-shaking decisions, it should serve as an inspiration for those of us who are continually striving to promote good will among the different peoples of the world. For, after all, are not Gov- ernments made up of people? I refer, Mr. Speaker, to the steadfast friendship that exists between the peo- Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0 A870 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD - APPENDIX February 21, 1966 scendant's of the stalwart men who What is the man in all history to be set in I request unanimous consent to insert fought in the Canadian expedition of competition with him? 1690. a letter which I received recently from The names of Starr, converse, and If Washington could have visited Ash- Army Sgt. Thomas E. Wilcox. He says burnham any time last year he would not several important things in a simple but Rolfe alo figure prominently among these early grants which were given by a have been surprised by the looks of some poignant way. grateful Massachusetts way colony in residents of the town because the bicen- TNY HOA, VIETNAM, recognition of the gallant Bay and great tennial celebration prompted many to February 13, 1966. contributi cognit onns of thgal families in eat wear the wigs and garments of colonial DEAR SIR: My name is Thomas E. Wilcox. America. Even the parades would have I reside at 1817 Lincoln Avenue in Seaside, building of a new land. seemed familiar to him, featuring as they calif It was in 1650 that young Dr, I have been in this country since the of Thomas Starr gave his life in a struggle did, oxen, , various hue carriages and my January, 1966. Thus far I have se en many ny of with the fearsome Pequot Indians, wagons, vfife and and drum corps, and my buddies killed and wounded. waving behind a young wife and eight bagpipe units. He certainly would have This is a dirty, stinking war. I am willing small children. It is the later descend- been impressed with the October 10 fire_ to pay the supreme sacrifice for freedom here ants of this family who benefited from Dr. Starr's heroism when they were given 400 acres of land in his memory. A similar grant is named after Maj. James Converse whose heirs benefited from his distinguished service to the colony. The son and two daughters of the Reverend Benjamin Rolfe were given 600 acres after escaping an Indian raid in 1,708, in which the parents and another sister lost their lives. It is from these heroic deeds and sac- rifices of the pioneer settlers that Ash- burnham got its start, and it is from the spiritual strength, resourcefulness and determination of these early forebears that our Nation got its strength and pur- pose to become the great country it is today-truly a giant among the nations of the world, the most powerful, richest, and most advanced with the highest standards of living the world has ever known. Among the great names still echoing from that rugged and glorious period of growth and progress in golden history of Ashburnham is that of Cushing, which is with us today in the living memorial of presented in the area, and the cannon firing, and the "Gentlemen of the Brush" would not have surprised him. I think, Mr. Speaker, that on the whole George Washington would have been well pleased with the birthday year of Ashburnham and all the wonderful events which went into making it the .great memorable celebration that it was-the Boy and Girl Scout participa- tion, the helicopters and antique auto- mobiles, the lovely and gracious bicen- tennial queen, the time capsule with its ballpoint pen and modern razor among its contents, the parties and balls. I think also that George Washington would have been convinced that Ash- burnham has not stood still, but has kept pace with the times and the de- mands of the age in which we live. He would draw inspiration, as we all can, from the great and glorious history of our past, as reflected all over America by the growth and prosperity of hun- dreds upon hundreds of thriving com- munities like Ashburnham. Let us all be thankful with hearts Cushing Academy, named after the Rev- overflowing with everlasting gratitude, erend Thomas Cushing, and one of the for the blessings of the Creator and the great secondary schools of the Nation, epochal work and achievements of those It was my great privilege to participate who have preceded us and whose blessed last year in the 100th anniversary cele- memory we honor on days of remem- bration- of Cushing Academy, which is brance. today, more than ever, a model of aca- Let me again express the hope and the demic excellence, prayer that the next 200 years will bring The Reverend Thomas Cushing was to Ashburnham and all its loyal people the first minister for the Ashburnham that greatness in the spirit and the ways settlement. On the occasion of his half- of independence, liberty, and peace century sermon, delivered on November which will insure prosperity and happi- 3, 1818, he reflected on past events in ness, not only in the material sense, but the history of the town, describing the in the spiritual graces that have always perilous days when "soldiers were sta- been s much a part of this splendid tioned in these parts to range the wil- Americkn community, A erness and protect the scattered inhab- itants which numbered under 50." After recounting the births, deaths, ill- nesses, and marriages which took place during his years of ministry, he con- cluded with this description of the Revolutionary War, which is particu- larly noteworthy at this time of homage to the memory of George Washington: The' oppositionto the acts of the British Parliament, the war that ensued, * * * can- not be fully conceived of by the present gen- eration. It cost the States immense blood and treasure. What people have been more highly favoured? God raised up Washington to lead our armies to victory and independence; and when the new Constitution was estab- lished, he was, by a unanimous vote of the people, placed twice at the head of the Gov- ernment, where he shone with as distin- guished lustre as at the head of our armies. the Supreme Sacrifice EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BURT L. TALCOTT OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 9, 1966 Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, too often we hear the voices of defeat and despair from those who know little' of the trials and tribulations of the battles being waged in Vietnam. The views and feelings of the soldier in the thick of battle may be interesting and enlightening to those safely at home. in Vietnam to stop Communist aggression in southeast Asia. I trust you are a backer of the administra- tion's Vietnam Policies. This country and its people must not be betrayed and aban- doned into Communist hands. In South Vietnam the United States must stand firm. If you must deal with people who insist that the Vietcong are our brothers and only want peace, you can ask them to come to South Vietnam and take note of the Viet- cong's "brotherly, peaceful" politics. I guarantee these Vietniks would change their tune after. taking note of the Vietcong's ritual of murder and violence in South Viet- nam. I hope that peace will come to this land before too long. Yours with respect, TOM WILCOX. Sergeant Wilcox is a patriot, con- vinced by firsthand experience of the meaning of our national commitment and our grave responsibility in South Vietnam. We all join in his hope for that foreign land which is nevertheless inhabitated by human beings who would cherish liberty and freedom above phys- ical peace. School Lunch Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. J. WILLIAM STANTON OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES - Thursday, January 27, 1966 Mr. STANTON. Mr. Speaker, I am not in the habit of inserting into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD letters from constitutents in my district; in fact, I have never done so until now. How- ever, when I received a letter from Mr. John C. Friese, director of food services at Kent State University, I was thor- oughly impressed with his eminent knowledge of the school lunch program. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent to insert Mr. Friese's letter into the RECORD. KENT STATE UNIVERSITY,, Kent, Ohio, February 16, 1966. Hon. J. WILLIAM STANTON, 1625 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN STANTON: May I also add my thanks for your help in procuring the excellent colored film on the astronaut flights that we showed to two local Boy Scout troop last month. It was amazing to me to listen to the intelligent comments of these 12- and 13-year-old boys after watch- ing the pictures. My prime reason for writing to you is be- cause part of my responsibility here at Kent State University is that of directing the. Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400030005-0