Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
September 13, 2000
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
October 16, 1970
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP74B00415R000500140014-3.pdf2.32 MB
- '- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 THE EVENING STAR A D iP --1c) Laird Eases Release Of Technical Papers The Pentagon is stripping se- curity classifications from thou- sands of technical documents in an effort to make more informa- tion available to the general public and the technical commu- nity. Defense Secretary Melvin R. Laird announced what was de- scribed as a "major policy change" yesterday. Under the new policy, security classifica- tions such as secret and top se- cret will be assigned to docu- ments only after study of two considerations, Laird said. In the past, his announcement said, the major consideration for restricting data has been the possible benefit of the informa- tion to potential enemies. Now, major consideration in favor of disclosure will be given to the possible benefits to the United States and it allies through the use of the informa- tion. The new policy will sharply cut back on the number of both classified and unclassified docu- ments whose distribution is lim- ited. Each year about 45,000 de- fense technical documents are prepared. Of these, about 17 per- cent are withheld from public distribution for security reasons. Another 39 percent are limited in their distribution. In the past, documents could be marked "no foreign," "U.S. Government only," or "Depart- ment of Defense only," and marked for use of certain indi- viduals. Now, the only such restriction will be "U.S. government only." This will be used to protect in- formation given to this govern- ment by other countries or by private businesses with some re- striction on its distribution. Although the new rules have been ordered by Laird, the re- strictions previously pleaded on documents will be allowed to ex- pire normally. They usually run three years. In addition, there will be a review of documents classified for security reasons, to be completed by Jan. 1, 1972. As an example of the change in policy, a report of the Na- tional Materials Advisory Board on "Hot Corrosion in Gas Tur- bines" has long been restricted and could not be given to for- eign governments or foreign nationals. This morning, an advisory board official called the Penta- gon and ,asked if the document now can be made available for unlimited distribution. It was, within a few minutes, and a sticker was pasted to the re- port: "This document has been approved for public release. It's distribution is unlimited." Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP741300415R000500140014-3 September 8, 1.970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE in full. This includes physician services, psychiatric services, hospital and other institutional care, dental services, medi- cines, therapeutic devices, appliances, and equipment, as well as needed sup- porting services. Furthermore, money will be provided to develop a more adequate supply and appropriate distribution of health pro- fessionals and supporting personnel. The program will actively encourage more efficient organization of existing health manpower, provide funds for special training of physicians, dentists, and other health workers needed for this program, and apply financial incentives to stimulate the movement of health manpower to medically deprived areas. We have heard talk all during this Congress that there were "new" pro- posals forthcoming from the adminis- tration, that we should wait and see. Mr. President, I have been urged for months to wait and see, that the admin- istration will have a bill. And I have been waiting. But it is late in the session. The time for waiting is now past. We can no longer wait for a band-aid ap- proach for our disintegrating health system that needs major surgery. While the bill I introduce today is not the com- plete answer, it is the best answer we have yet come up with. Mr. President, I have been on the Health Subcommittee of the Senate for nearly 13 years, up until last year under the great Lister Hill as chairman. I have listened to the evidence for 13 years. We have talked to the experts, and we have studied this question for years. Last Jan- uary, when I became chairman of the subcommittee, I expressed a desire to in- troduce such a comprehensive health care bill. This, I repeat, is the best we have been able to come up with after hearing testimony from the people who have worked in this field over in the pri- vate structure of the economy, made a study of the problem, and come in with their recommendations. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the RECORD. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BELLMON). The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without ob- jection, the bill will be printed in the RECORD in accordance with the Senator's request. The bill (S. 4323) to create a health security program, introduced by Mr. YARBOROUGH (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. COOPER, and Mr. SAXBE), was re- ceived, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Labor and Public Wel- fare, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: [The bill will be printed in a subse- quent edition of the RECORD.] the return of such matter at the expense of the sender. ADDITIONAL COSPONSOR OF A BILL S. 3220 At the request of the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) the Senator from Nevada (Mr. CANNON) was added as a cosponsor of S. 3220, to protect a person's right of privacy by providing for the designation of obscene or offen- sive mail matter by the sender and for CORRECTION OF ANNOUNCEMENT ON VOTE Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, on be- half of the Senator from Colorado (Mr. ALLOTT) , I ask that the permanent REC- ORD be corrected to show that on vote No. 283, the passage of the Treasury- Post Office appropriation bill for 1971, the Senator from Colorado, if present and voting, would have voted "yea." PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION RELATING TO DI- RECT POPULAR ELECTION OF THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESI- DENT?AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NO. 878 ? Mr. GRIFFIN submitted amendments, intended to lit proposed by him, to the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 1) proposing an amendment to the Constitution to provide for the direct popular election of the President and Vice President of the United States, which were ordered be printed. to lie on the table a ANNOUNCEMENT OF EARINGS: FEDERAL DATA BANKS AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, in recent months, with the discovery of each new Federal data bank and data system, pub- lic concern has increased that some of the Federal Government's-collection, storage, and use of information about citizens may raise serious questions of individual privacy and constitutional rights. The Constitutional Rights Subcom- mittee has received countless letters and telegrams from Members of Congress and from interested persons all over the United States, urging that hearings be scheduled to consider the total impact of some of these data programs on preser- vation of individual rights. I wish to announce that, in response to these demands, the subcommittee has scheduled a new series of hearings on "Federal data banks and systems and the bill of rights." The first stage of the hearings will be held October 6, 7, and 8. The subcommittee has already under- taken a survey Of Federal data banks and automated data systems to deter- mine what statutory and administrative controls are governing their growth and? what rights and remedies are provided for the citizen. The analysis of the ex- ecutive branch replies to that subcom- mittee questionnaire, together with the hearings held in the last session on "pri- vacy and Federal questionnaires," and the hearings which begin in October, will assist Congress in determining the need for a new independent agency to control Federal data banks on behalf of the pri- vacy and due process rights of citizens. It has been my conviction that such an agency is needed, along with new reme- dies in the courts and other corrective actions. I detailed the reasons for my S 14935 belief in a Senate speech in November 1969. The purpose of the hearings is: First, to learn what Government data banks have been developed; second, how far they are already computerized or auto- mated; third, what constitutional rights, if any, are affected by them; and, fourth, what overall legislative controls, if any, are required. Witnesses familiar with the constitu- tional and legal issues, as well as the practical problems raised by some cur- rent and proposed data programs will document these for the record. The Sec- retary of the Army and other representa- tives of the Defense Department have already been invited to attend the Oc- tober hearings to describe how and why the Army and other armed services have collected and stored information on ci- vilians, and to what extent the records have been automated for easy access and retrieval. Prof. Arthur R. Miller of the Univer- sity of Michigan Law School, author of a forthcoming book, "The Dossier So- ciety: Personal Privacy in the Computer Age," has been invited to describe the state of the law governing information flow in our society and its relationship to legal rights. Another witness will be Christopher Pyle, an attorney and former Army intelligence officer, who has in- vestigated the Army's civil disturbance data programs, and has written widely on the subject. In later hearings, other representatives of the executive departments and agen- cies will be invited to respond to the complaints and fears which have been expressed by the public. They will be af- forded the opportunity to explain ex- actly what their data programs on peo- ple involve, and how, if at all, the privacy, confidentiality and due process rights of the individual are respected. ? The subcommittee has received en- thusiastic support from specialists in the computer sciences, in both the computer industry and in the academic commu- nity. We hope to receive the benefit of their expertise for our hearing record. Mr. President, our Nation is predicated on the fundamental proposition that citizens have a right to express their views on the wisdom and course of gov- ernmental policies. This involves more than the currently popular notion of a so-called right to dissent. Our system cannot survive if citizen participation is limited merely to registering disagree- ment with official policy; the policies themselves must be the product of the people's views. The protection and en- couragement of such participation is a principal purpose of the first amend- ment. More than at any other time in our historY, People are actively expressing themselves on public questions and seek- ing to participate more directly in the formulation of policy. Mass media have made it easy for large numbers of people to organize and express their views in written and oral fashion. Rapid means of transiCortation have aided our mobile population to move easily to sites of cen- tral and local authority for the purpose Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 S .11.946 (T,)NGRESSIONA E, RECORD SENATE Sf(- 4ember 2, f970 of expressing t.rejr views mere puleiche The freedom of our form of ecivernment and the richness of our econemy have made it possible for individuals to move Phalli-, freely and to seek their best inter -- eats tit; they in vocations arid awoce- ions ot their choice. or indeed, to pur- sue none at all for a time, lf that is what they wish, If modern teehnoloev snresicied citizens with more efficient timans tor recording their dissent, or for reiiiiitermg their politicel, ee.osiomin. er eseial views, it has also oliteed in the _]aiirlri .f executive branch officials new methods of taitine note of that expression ,)i v.exisi; and that political activity Fee- tnese ne-isons, those individuals who work !tett-vele for public causes are more visible thee ever before. These new sciences have octiord.ed those who control government increased power io discover and record immutably the actMties. thoughts and philosophy of an individual at any given morne at of his life. That picture of the persirn. is re- r orded Ate:ever. no matter now the person flay cleinge as time goes on. Eiery pen,' sores past thus becomes an inicapiable eart of ins present -and futere. The corn- tatter never forgets., To be Kure, recordkeeping is nothing' slew in he history of government; nor indeed, is the habit all governments and ill societies have of surveillance, black- listing and subtle reprisal For leapopular iiolitical or social views. Men has always had to contend with the memories of tithei men. In the United States, .however, we are messed with a Constitution which provides; for due process of law. This an. rues to the arbitrary use of the 'record- keeping and information power of gov- ernment against the individual. Deepitfi these guarantees. the new tech- nology has been nuietly, but steadily, en, towing .officials with the unprecedented iailitieal power which accompanies coni- titers and data banks and ecientifie Lechniques of managing information Tt ilas et:yen Government the power to take irote of anything, whether it be right or ivrones relevant to any purpose or not, and to retain it forever. Unfortunately, Lhis revelution is coming about under reitdated laws and executive orders gov- erning the recordkeeping and the con- cepts of -privacy and confidentiality rele- vant to an earlier time. These developments are particularly significant in their effect on the first amendment to our Constitution. No longer can a man march with a eign down Pennsylvania Avenue and (hen return to his hometown, his identity tiegottere if not his cause. No ioneer does the memory of the au- thorship of a political article fads as the tiages of his rhetoric yellow and iTurnble with time. No louver are the flambovane words eiechanged in debate allowed to echo into 'he past and lose their relevanee with he issue of the moment which prompted them. Na loner can a man be assured of his eojoyraent of the harvest of wisdom and maturity which comes with -age, when the indiscretions of youth if noticed at all, are spread about in forgoteen file cabinets in basement archives, Instead, today, his activities are re corded in computers or data banks, or 1. not, they may well be a part of a grea investigative index. Some examples come readily to mind from the subcommittee survey. The Civil Service Commission maize. tains a "security file" in electrical: 5. powered rotary cabinets containing 120,000 index cards. These bear lead inn formation relating to possible questions of suitability involving loyalty and sut versive activity. The lead information contained in these files has been de- veloped-from published hearings of' con r- gressional comm ttees, State legislative committees, public investigative bodien, reports of investigation, Publications cf subversive organizations, and various other newspapers and periodicals. This file is not new, but has been growing since World War U. The Cornmission has found it a reasonable, economical and invaluable tool in meeting. its investiga- tive responsibilities. It is useful to all Federal agencies as an important source of information. The Commession chairman reports: mvuestigative ane intelligence officials ol the various departments and agencies of the Federal Government make extensive official use of the file through their requests fa' searches relating to investigations they are oonducting. Tn. its "security investigations index," the Commission maintains 10,250,000 ine dex cards filed alphabetically covering' Personnel Invesigations made by the Civi. Service Commission and other agencies. since 1939.. Records in this index relatc- to incumbents of Federal positions former employees, and applicants on, whom investigations were made or are in process of being made. The Commission's "investigative file" consists of approximately 625,000 file folders containing reports of investiga- tion on cases investigated by the Com- mission. In addition, about 2,100,000 earlier investigative files are maintained at the Washington National Records Center in security storage. These are kept to avoid duplication of investiga- tions or for updating previous investiga- tions. For authorization for these data banks, the Commission cites Executive Order 10450, an order promulgated in 1953. - ing the armed services from subversion, f the Department of the Army and other t military departments have been collect- ing information about civilians who have no dealing with the military services. The Secret Service has created a com- puterized data bank in the pursuit of its ? programs to protec., high Government of- ficials from harm and Federal buildings from damage. Their guidelines for inclu- sion of citizens in this data bank refer to "information on professional gate crashers; information regarding civil dis- turbances; information. regarding anti- American or anti-U.S. Government, demonstrations in the United States or overseas; infoienation on persons who insist upon personally contact- ing high Government officials for the purpose of redress of imaginary griev- ances, and so forth.- In the area of law enforcement, the Bureau of .Customs has installed a cen- tral automated dina processing intelli- gence network which is a comprehensive data bank of suspect information avail- able on a 24-hour- a-day basis to Cus- toms. The initial data base, according to the Secretary of the Treasury, IS a "modest" one compeising some 3,000 sus- pect records: He states: These records include current information from our informer, fugitive and suspect lists that have been maintained throughout the Bureau's history as an enforcement tool and which have been avatable at all major ports of entry, though in much less accessible and usable form, With the coordinated efforts of the Agency Service's intelligence activities, steady growth of the suspect files is expected. This data bank, which is used by the Bureau to identify :suspect persons and vehicles entering. the United States, is an "essential tool" in Performance of Customs officers' search and seizure, au- thority, Secretary Kennedy has stated. The Department of Justice is estab- lishing comprehensive law enforcement data systems in coeperation with State governments, and is funding State data programs for law enforcement, civil dis- turbance and other surveillance pur- posehse. The National Science Foundation has created a data bank of scientists. - The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has established a data bank on migrant children to facilitate the transfer of school records. During our subcommittee hearings last year, case after case was documented of the vast programs to coerce citizens into supplying personal Liformation for sta- tistical data banks ii- the Census Bureau and throughout other Federal agencies. These are only a few of the data pro- grams which have raised due process of law questions from Congress and the public. HOW do these things come about? It would be unfair, perhaps, to attribute suspicious political motives, or lack of ethics to those responsible for any one program or for any group of programs for collecting and ssoring personal in- formation about citizens. Frequently, they just grow over the years. Sometimes, exeeutive department data banks are ei- ther merely good faith efforts at fulfill- ment of specific mandates from Con- gress; or they are based on what some of- Another department, the Housing and -Urban Development Department, is con- sidering automation of a departmental - procedure. According to the report made to the subcommittee: The data base would integrate records now included in FRA's Sponsor Identifica- tion File, Department of Justice's Organized Crime and Rackets Pile, and HUD's Adverse Information File, A data bank consistiru, of approximately 325,090 3x5 index cards has been prepared covering any Individual or nem which was the subject of, or mentioned prominently in any investigations dating from 1954 to the present. This includes all FBI investigations of housing mati,ers as well, In addition, HUD maintains an index file on all Department employees which re- flects dates and types of personnel security investigations conducted under the provi- sions of Executive Order 10450. In the Interest of preparing for pos- sible civil disturbances and for protect- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 SePember 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE S 14937 ficials think to be implied mandates to acquire information necessary for Con- gress to legislate. If so, then Congress has no one to blame but itself when such pro- grams unnecessarily threaten privacy or other rights. But it then has an even greater responsibility for acting, once its own negligence is discovered. Perhaps the most such officials can be charged with is overzealousness in do- ing their job within narrow confines, to the exclusion of all other considerations. Sometimes the issue of threats to indi- vidual rights is presented only after a data system has developed, and only after practical problems are raised which were not envisioned on paper. At times, due process may be threat- ened by the failure of the computer spe- cialists to consider only the information on a person absolutely essential for their programing. There are political reasons also. One is the failure of heads of executive depart- ments and agencies to mind .their own stores and stay out of the business of other agencies. Each department does not not need to seize the total man when it administers a program; only those por- tions of him necessary for the job. An- other reason is the tendency of executive branch officials in the interest of politi- cal expediency and shortcuts to law and order goals, to seize upon the techniques of data banks, intelligence gathering, and surveillance activities as a substitute for hard-hitting, practical law enforcement work by the proper agencies, and for creative administration of the laws. All of these excuses will not help the law-abiding citizen who, at the whim of some official, is put into an intelligence- type data bank which is part of a net- work of inquiry for all manner of gov- ernmental purposes. No one would deny that the Govern- ment of such a populous and farflung country should not avail itself of the efficiency offered by computers and sci- entific data management techniques. Clearly, Government agencies must, as Congress has charged them, acquire, store, and process economically the in- formation it obtains from citizens for administrative purposes. There is an ever-increasing need for information of all kinds to enable the Congress to legis- late effectively and the executive branch to administer the laws properly. Furthermore, there is an obvious need in such a complex mobile society for recording and documenting amply the official relationship between the individ- ual and his government. More and more frequently, misguided individuals are resorting to violence and violation of the law. Communities are faced with rising crime rates. Local, State, and Federal Government have a right and a duty to know when a per- son has a legal record of violation of the law which, under the law, would deny him certain rights or benefits. They should be able to ascertain these matters quickly. There are always some problems of ac- curacy and confidentiality with such records, especially when automated. It is not the carefully designed individual law enforcement data, banks which con- cern the public. Rather, the subcommit- tee study is revealing that data programs which have aroused the most apprehen- sion recently are those? Which bear on the quality of first amendment freedoms by prying into those protected areas of an individual's personality, life, habits, beliefs, and legal activities which should be none of the business of Government even in good causes; Which are unauthorized, or unwar- ranted for the legitimate purpose of the agency; Which keep the information they ac- quire too long, and which by the very retention of unknown data may intimi- date the individual subject; Which are part of a network of data systems; Which make little, if any provision for assuring due process for the individ- ual in terms of accuracy, fairness, review, and proper use of data, and thereby may operate to deny the individual rights, benefits, privileges, reputation, which are within the power of government to in- fluence, grant or deny. There is growing concern that the zeal of computer technicians, of the systems planners, and of the political administra- tors in charge of the data systems threat- ens to curtail the forces of society which have operated throughout our history to cool political passions and to make our form of government viable by allowing a free exchange in the marketplace of ideas. The new technology has made it lit- erally impossible for a man to start again in our society. It has removed the quality of mercy from our institutions by making it impossible to forget, to forgive, to un- derstand, to tolerate. When it is used to intimidate and to inhibit the individual in his freedom of movement, associa- tions, or expression of ideas within the law, the new technology provides the means for the worst sort of tyranny. Those who so misuse it to augment their own power break faith with those found- ers of our Constitution who, like Thomas Jefferson, swore upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. Mr. President, it has become danger- ously clear in recent times that unless new controls are enacted, new legal remedies are provided, and unless Fed- eral officials can be persuaded to exer- cise more political self-control, this coun- try will not reap the blessings of man's creative spirit which is reflected in com- puted technology. Rather, if the sur- veilliance it encourages is allowed to con- tinue without strict controls and safe- guards, we stand to lose the spiritual and intellectual liberty of the individual which have been so carefully nourished and so valianty defended, and which our Founding Fathers so meticulously en- shrined in the Constitution. I say this out of my conviction that the undisputed and unlimited possession of the resources to build and operate data banks on individuals, and to make deci- sions about people with the aid of com- puters and electronic data systems, is fast securing to executive branch officials a political power which the authors of the Constitution never meant any one group of men to have over all others. It threatens to unsettle forever the balance of power established by our Federal Con- stitution. Our form of government is the fruition of an ideal of political, economic, and spiritual freedom which is firmly rooted in our historical experience. Basic to its fulfillment has always been the monu- mental truth that such freedom is truly secure only when power is divided, lim- ited, and called to account by the peo- ple. For this reason the central Govern- ment was divided into three separate and equal branches. a For this reason, the bill of rights was added to secure certain areas of liberty against incursion by Government and the exercise of Federal power was limited to certain purposes. For this reason, we cherish and pro- tect the legal freedom of each citizen to develop his mind and personality and to express them free of unwarranted gov- ernmental control. I differ with those who say that there are no existing checks on this develop- ing power of computer technology, for I believe they already exist in our form of Government. The guarantees are estab- lished in our Constitution. The forthcoming hearings will help Congress determine how these guaran- tees may best be implemented to meet the demands of the computer age. In the interest of responding to the many inquiries from scholars, reporters and members of the public who are work- ing on this subject, I should like to refer to other sources of materials which pro- vide useful background information. The subject of how Government man- ages its information systems, and its paperwork, how and when it uses com- puters and automation to assist in this effort, has been a continuing subject of concern by a number of congressional committees and their efforts should in- terest those working on this subject. The Senate Administrative Practice and Procedures Subcommittee has con- tributed valuable hearings, reports and studies on the subject of computers, pri- vacy, and Government dossiers. Particu- larly informative is their 1967 report "Government Dossier: Survey of Infor- mation on Individuals Contained in Government Files." The Senate Government Operations Committee has, in other years, con- ducted comprehensive hearings and is- sued reports on Government information systems and management uses of com- puters. In the House of Representatives, the Committee on Science and Astronautics has held a provocative and stimulating series of hearings and panel discussions on the impact of technology, especially on the management of Government in- formation. The House Government Activities Sub- committee of the Government Opera- tions Committee, chaired by Represen- tative JACK Bloom, has produced valu- able hearings, reports and legislation on "Date. Processing Management in the Federal Government." More than anyone else, Representa- tive CORNELIUS GALLAGHER has continu- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 149:!8 coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE September 8, 1970 LIly hob ited out the dangers to individual zeelits end privacy of the establishment ef a rl'aional data center, and his Spe- cial Suacommittee on Invasion of Pri- vacy, -a ter stimulating hearings, -pro- duced. a classic and concise :report en- alec The Data Bank Concept," The recox di t his hearings contains testimony. :rorii iny expert witnesses on the phi- losophy of privacy and comnueer tech- The elensus and Statistics Subcom- el;ttee the House Post Office end Civh ;eervice Committee produced a thought- provoking and influential repont in the deth Cengress entitIed The Fed era paperwork jungle." Scholars will find most ieformative that subcommittee's iiiearinge and renorts dealing .with the papenverk requirements placed upon businese, industry, and the public by the feedeeal departments. I commend the publications of ad of these teanmittees and the thoughtful epeechee of the cliairrnen and tee mem- bers .34' these committees to persons in- terested in this subject. It is :ire/ hope that the hearings ann etudy by the Constitutional Rights Sub- comnntlee will add a unioue arid valu- able dimension to the public and con- ereseeortel dialog on the role of data banks, information systems, aid com- puters in our constitutional form 01 government. Ben le Franklin, in an excellent ar- ticle ,Lri he New -York Times on June 28, 1970, has described some of the current data banks and computers in the Federal (iovernment and their possible effect on indiv,dual rights and privacy. I ask unaneneus consent that his most per- ceptive article be printed in the RECORD at tins eoint together with the following ttiouehtint articles and editarikts. These ere aely a few of the excellent editerials end articles on this subject which have tome to my attention, and they suggest nationwide interest. Editmials from the Greensboro, N.C., Daily News, July 1, 1970; Asheville, N.C., Times, :June 18, 1970; Omaha, Nebr., World Herald, January 15, 1971); Sioux Falls, S. Dak., Argus, Jamiary 1.6, 1970; New York Post, June 30, 1970; Washing- ton, D.C., Post, April 24, 1970 Asheville, N.C., Cidzen, July 2, 1970; New York Times, July 4, 1970: Computerworld, 'Marcia 4, 1970. and August 27, 1969; Huntsville, Ala.. Times, July 12, 1970; Washineton, D.C.. Evening Stan March 16, 1970; and Houston. Tex., Pose, March 1.6, 1970. An article by Tom Wicker, entitled "In lie Nation: A Right Not To Be Data- Banked from the New York Times, i.fuly ')70, and an article from the Bois- i?on, Maas., Herald Traveler by John S. 7,ang, eetitled "Big Brother, U.S., Is Watching You," April 19, 1970, an article From the Morning Call, Allentown, Pa., entitled "Guardian of Freedom," June 30, 1570, "Mitchell Defends Justice De- eartreen 'Big Brother' Role," by Jared Stout Staten Island, N.Y., Advance, July 19, 1970., and "Justice Department Keens e7iles on Activists," by Morton Kon- dracke, Roanoke, Va., World News. .1\larch 1 I, 1970. There being no objection, the edito rials and articles were ordered to bii printed in the RanORD, as follows: !Freer the New York Times, June Sit, 19701 Peneeer Coeirprirsais AMASS FILES ON SUSPEC!!! OTTIZENS--MANY AMONG HUNT/RI:MI Ola THOUSANDS LISTED RAVE No CRIMINAL MEC, ORDS---CKETICS SEE INVASION OF PRIVACY : (By Ben A. Franklin) WASHINGTON, June 27.?The police, semi; rity and military intelligence agencies of tlai Federal Government are quietly comniiing ii mass 01 computerieed, and microfilmed files acre on hundreds at thousands of law abid- ing yet suspect Americans. With the justification that a revolutionar[e erre nf assassination, violent political dissena, and civil disorder requires it. The Govern.; merit is building en artily of instantly re- trievable information on "persons of in.. terest.- The phrase is an agent's term for thosei citizens, many with no criminal records whom tne Government wards to keep tracl; of in an effort to avert subversion, rioting, and violence or harm to the nation's leaders.' Celtics of this surveillance, so far few in number, believe that the collection and dia.; semination of such information on re:merlin- inala?for whatever purpose?is unauthora ized by law and raises the most serious con.; stitu Lionel questions. The foremost among them, Senator Sam J, Ditrvin, Jr., Democrat of North Carolina, hat seici 'het computerized files already in exist.; ence here are leading the country toward "police state." Discussions with officials, an exammatiore of some known data hies and informatiorn supplied by the Senator show that the file: often contain seemingly localized and mun- dane information, reflecting events that to.: tlay aro virtually conimonplam. - The leader of a Negro protest against wel- fare regulations in :at. Louis, for example. Is? the subiect of a teletyped "spot renort" tc Washington shared by as many as half a , dozen Government intelligence gathering groups. The name oi a college professor who finds: himself unwittingly, even innocently, ar- rested for disorderly conduct in a police, roundup at a peace rally in San Francisco: goes into the data file. A student light in an Alabama high school: is recoreed--if it Is interracial. Government officials insist that the inter- author , is needed and is handled discreetly to protect the innocent, the minor offender and. the repenta:at. The critics--incl ading the Washington chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and Representative Cornelius E. Gallagher, Democrat of New .Jersey?charge that the - system is an invasion_ of privacy and a po..n tential infringement of First Amendment: lights of free speech and assembly. MASS SURVEMLANCE SYSTEMS Senator Ervin, a conservative, a student of ale constitution, a former judge of the North Carolina Superior Court, and the ehairman of the Smate Subcommittee on. Constitutional Rights, says that the advent of computer technology in Government file keeping is pushing the country toward "a mass surveillance system unprecedented in. American history." In a recent series of Senate speeches, Mr. , Ervin said that the (Langer was being masked by a failure of Amer: cans to understand "the computer mystique' and by the undoubted sincerity and desire for "efficiency" of the data bank Operation s and planners. The Government is gathering information on its citizens at the following places A Secret Service computer, one of the newest and most sophisticated in Govern- ment. In its Memory the names and dossiers of activists, "maicontents," persistent seekers of redress, and those who would "embarrass" the President or other Government leaders are filed with those of potential assassins and persons corivieted of "threats against the President." A data hank comp ted by the Justice De- partment's civil distiirbance group It pro- duces a weekly printeut of national tension points on racial, class and political issues and use individuals :Ind groups involved in them. Intelligence oil peace rallies, welfare pretests and the like provide the "data base" againet which the c.unputer measures the mood of the nation and the militancy of its ditieens. Judgments ere made; subjects are listed as "radical" or -moderate." A huge file of inicr ifilmed intelligence re- ports, clippings and other materials on civil- ian activity maintained by -the Army's Counterintelligence Analysis Division in Aleatandria, Va. Its purpose is to help prepare deployment estimatee for troop commands on alert to response co civil disturbances in 25 American cities, Army intelligence was ordered earlier this year to destroy a larger data bank and to stip assigning agents to "penetrate:- peace gioups and civil rights , organizations. But eemplaints persist that both are being continued. Civilian officials of the Army say they "assume" they are not. Computer flies intended to catch criminal suspects?the oldest and most advanced type with the longest success record--maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Na- tional Crime Information Center and re- cently installed by tha Customs Bureau. The airline information center's computer pro- vides 40,000 instant, automatic teletype printouts each day on wanted persons and stolen property to 49 states and Canada and it also "talks" to 24 other computers oper- ated by state and local police departments for themselves and a total of 2,500 police jurisdictions. The centers says lie informa- tion is all "from the public record," based on local and Federal warrants and com- plaints, but the sum product is available only to the police. A growing number rif data banks on other kinds of human behavior, including, for ex- ample, a cumulative computer file on 300,- 000 children of migraii t farm Workers kept by the Department of Stealth, Education, and Welfare. The object is to speed the distribu- tion of their scholastic records, including such teacher judgments as "negative atti- tude," to school distriets with large itinerant student enrollments. There is no statutory control over distribution of the data by its local recipients?to prospective employers, for example. WARNINC BY ERVIN Senator Ervin luta warned: "Regardless of the purpose, regardless of the confidential- ity, regardless of the harm to any one indi- vidual [that might occur if there were no computer files], the eery existence of Gov- ernment files on how people exercise First Amendment rights, how they think, speak, assemble and act in lawful pursuits, is a form of official pisychoiogical coercion to keep silent and to refrain ram acting." But despite his sounding of such alarms, Senator Ervin has no ed that there is "un- usual public and congressional compel- cency.?When he speaks on the Senate floor of "techniques for monitoring our opinions" and of "grave threats to our freedoms," the chamber is more often, than not nearly empty. He has gained little Congressional support and scant attention outside the Congress. Meanwhile, various official and high-level pressures on Government agencies to acquire computers and to advance their surveillance are producing results. The pressures include a stern recommen- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 September 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14939 dation for the broadest possible surveillance of "malcontents'' and potential assassins by the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination of President Kennedy. The commission's mandate is widely cited in the Government as the authority for citizen surveillance. The commission, headed by former Chief Justice Earl Warren, disapproved as too nar- row, the criteria for persons to be bought under "protective" surveillance proposed in 1964 by the Secret Service. The guidelines were "unduly restrictive," the commission declared, because they required evidence of "some manifestation of animus" by disgruntled and activist citizens before those persons could be brought under Secret Serv- ice surveillance as poential "threats to the President." EVERY AVAILABLE RESOURCE "It will require every available resource of the Goverrunent to devise a practical system which has any reasonable possibility of re- vealing such malcontents," the commission said. The guideline was broadened. A computer was installed by the Secret Service last Jan- uary. The commission's edict became a sur- veillance bench mark. For surveillance of persons who may be involved in civil disturbances, the riots of 1967 and 1968 served the same purpose. "The Warren Commission and the riots legitimized procedures which, I grant you, would have been unthinkable and, frankly, unattainable from Congress in a different climate," one official said. "There are obvious questions and dangers in what we are doing but I think events have shown it is legit- imate," the official declined to be quoted by name. Senator Ervin contends that in the "total recall," the permanence, the speed and the interconnection of Government data files there "rests a potential for control and in- timidation that is alien to our form of Gov- ernment and foreign to a society of free men." The integration of data banks, mixing criminal with noncriminal files, is already underway, according to his subcommittee. INTEGRATION OF FILES The subcommittee has been advised by the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment, for example, that its data systems planners have proposed to integrate on com- puter tape files concerning thern following: the identities of 325,000 Federal Housing Ad- ministration loan applicants; the agency's own "adverse information file," the Justice Department's organized crime and rackets file, and F.B.I. computer data on "investiga- tions of housing matters." The object, the Department said, is a unified data bank list- ing persons who may be ineligible to do busi- ness with H.U.D. As another example of how computer data proliferates, the subcommittee cites a report it received from the Internal Revenue Service. The I.R.S., with millions of tax returns to process, was one of the earliest agencies to computerize. It has also had a reputation as a bastion of discretion. The privacy of indi- vidual tax returns has been widely regarded as inviolate, to be overcome only by order of the President. But the subcommittee has been told that the I.R.S. has "for many years" been selling to state tax departments?for $75 a reel? copies of magnetic tapes containing encoded personal income tax information. It is used to catch non-filers and evaders of state taxes. The District of Columbia and 30 states bought copies of the I.R.S. computer/cover- ing returns from their jurisdictions in 1969, the service has told the subcommittee. Each local jurisdiction was merely "requested" to alert its employes that the unauthorized dis- closure of Federal tax data was punish- able by a 61,000 fine. FIREARMS DATA FOR SALE The I.R.S. also sells at cost?apparently to anyone who asks?the copies of its data files of registrants under the various Federal firearms laws it enforces. The Secret Service computer file is capable of instant, highly sophisticated sorting and retrieval of individuals by name, alias, locale, method of operation, affiliation, and even by physical appearance. The agency's Honeywell 2200, with random access capability, makes it possible to detect, investigate and detain in advance "persons of interest" who might intend?or officials concede "they might? not but we don't take chances"?to harass, harm or "embarrass" officials under its protection. Unknown to most Americans, the names, movements, organizations and "characteris- tics" of tens of thousands of them?crimi- nals and noncriminals?are being encoded in the Secret Service data center here. The names of other thousands have been inserted in less specialized computers oper- ated by the Justice Department and the F.B.I. Although the agencies insist that they do not, the computers can?and senator Ervin stresses that no law says they may not ?"talk" to each other, trading and com- paring in seconds data that may then spread further across the nation. The Secret Service can now query its com- puter and quickly be forewarned that, say, three of the 100 invited guests at a Presiden- tial gathering in the White House Rose Garden are "persons of protective interest." Under current Secret Service criteria, they may have been regarded by someone as the authors of reportedly angry or threatening or "embarrassing" statements about the President or the Government. The action taken by the Secret Service may range from special observation during "proximity to the President" to withdrawal of the invitation. What constitutes a computer-worthy "threat" thus becomes important. The Se- cret Service asserts that it applies relatively easy-going and "sophisticated" standards in deciding who is to be encoded. But the critics point out that the vast capacity of a computer for names and dossiers?unlike that of a paper filing system, which has self-limiting ceiling based on the ability to retrieve?is an encouragement to growth: The information or "data base" for a Se- cret Service computer name check flows into the protective intelligence division from many sources?abusive or threatening let- ters or telephone calls received at the White House, F.B.I. reports, military intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, local police departments, the Internal Revenue Service, Federal building guards, individual inform- ants. Much of it that may be "of interest" to the Federal monitors of civil disturbance data is screened out, Secret Service spokesmen say, or is merely name-indexed by the com- puter with a reference to data reproducible elsewhere. According to guidelines distributed by the Secret Service last August, the types of in- formation solicited for insertion in the com- puter?broadened at the insistence of the Warren Commission?included items about: Those who would "physically harm or em- barrass" the President or other high Gov- ernment officials. Anyone who "insists upon personally con- tacting high Government officials for the purpose of redress of imaginary grievances, etc." Those who may qualify as "professional gate crashers." Participants in "anti-American or anti- U.S. Government demonstrations in the United States or overseas." In an interview, Thomas J. Kelley, assist- ant director of the Secret Service for pro- tective intelligence, said the computer name insertions already totaled more than 50,000. The Secret Service is extremely careful, he said, both in evaluating the encoded subjects and in checking to determine that those who receive a printout are entitled to it. But there apparently is no formal guide- line or list of criteria for dissemination, as there is for insertion. And direct, automatic, teletype access to the computer from dis- tant Secret Service bureaus?the system used by the airlines and the National Crime In- formation Center?may be the next step, Mr. Kelley said. Nothing demonstrates how remote access multiplies the output of a computer better than the crime information center's system, staged by the F.B.I. in 1966. With direct-access teletype terminals in 21 state capitals and large cities, the informa- tion center computer here can be queried directly by local police departments on the names, aliases, Social Security numbers, li- cense tag numbers and a broad array of stolen goods (including boats) that come hourly before the police. An officer in a patrol car tailing a suspici- ous car can radio his dispatcher, ask for a check of a license number, and be told by teletype and radio in less than a minute that the automobile is stolen anti that its oc- cupants may be "armed and dangerous." With one of the newest and most sophisti- cated random access computers in Federal service the Secret Service data center can also perform some wizardry that no other equipment here can master. It can be or- dered, for example, to print out a list of all potential trouble makers?"persons of pro- tective interest"?at the site of a forthcom- ing Presidential visit, The random access scanning can be geographical. Photographs and descriptions can be as- sembled for the traveling White House de- tail. Investigations, even detentions, can be arranged at the site. "You take a waiter in a hotel dining room where the boss is going to speak," a Secret Service spokesman explained. "Let's say the computer turns up his name and we investi- gate and decide it would be better for him to be assigned to some other duties. No one has a constitutional right to wait on the Presi- dent, you know. That's how it works." Cued by another more elegant electronic program, the same computer can also produce all the information it contains on the "char- acteristics" of subjects encoded on its tapes? all the short, fat, long-haired, young white campus activists in Knoxville, Tenn., for ex- ample. Only the Secret Service computer can do that. The American Civil Liberties Union of- fice here protested last October that the Con- stitution protects such acts as an effort mere- ly to "embarrass" a Government official, the persistence of citizens in seeking redress even of "imaginary" grievances, and their partici- pation in "anti-U.S. Government demonstra- tions." The Secret Service, however, has de- clined to withdrew or amend its intelligence reporting guidelines. "They seem satisfactory to us," Mr. Kelley said. "If we weren't getting the information we want, we'd change them." Under the heading, "Protective Informa- tion," the guidelines read as follows: "A. Information pertaining to a threat, plan or attempt by an individual, a group, or an organization to physically harm or em- barrass the persons protected by the U.S. Secret Service, or any other high U.S. Gov- ernment official at home or abroad. "B. Information pertaining to individuals, groups, or organizations who have plotted, attempted, or carried out assassinations of senior officials of domestic or foreign govern- ments. "C. Information concerning the use of bod- ily harm or assassination as a political weap- on. This should include training and tech- niques Used to carry out the act. Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 '8 14.9 i0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE D.Illeormation on persons who nqili upon personally contacting Meth Govern- ment oeicials for the purpoee ef redress of imaginery grievances. etc. -'Si. Information on any person who makes =wed or Ivritten statements about high Gov- ert .111 eat officials in the follc>wine eategorlee: (1) threatening stetesments: (2) irrational eaterriente, and (ii) abusive statements. ea, tiforinatitett on profeseional trete :re eh ere G. Le:formation pertainhatr to 'terrorist' "A le formation pertaining in the owner- :Olio Dr concealment by individuals or groups iii eaohee of tirearms, explosives, OT other im- oleinenin of war. Ineemation regardine eine -American e? aritieu S. Government demorietratione in ihe United States or overseas. J. Information regarding ,evie disturb- ances." eniater Ervin, who is noted for a piquant .4211se or humor, said in a speech a few months age: "Although I em not a 'profes- sional gate crasher.' I am a 'malcontent.' on many isenes. heee written the Persidene end other high officials complaining of grieve/ices that one ITH,11tV consider 'imaginary.' And on on- I may also have 'embeeeeesed high etovemment officials," oaned on the emidelines. the Senator as- eerted, ice himself is qualified for the eorn- pu ter. [Ettore toe Greensboro (N C.) DE ily News, .eme I, 1970i PERS01.4 OF fierrease Are ?het a "person of interest" to this United States government? You may be whether you know it or not, anti regardless of whether you have a criminal record or eet.t in irrest record. elem are if you: e re t ? ? erofessionai" gate crasher. I ttempted or plan to attempt, either Jiittivieluelly or as a member of a group or aree,nizeieon, to "ohysIcally harm or ember- the persons protected by the U.S. Secret !ervice, ,er any other high U.S. gcvernment official Si. home or abroad." lccci'ohe any oral or written seatements oeoul high government officials that might jn-eerereted as ?threateninee' "it ration al," ,er -abusive." Occasionally or regularly "insist opon per- eonall y contacting high governmert officials eor the purpose of redress of imaginary griev- ances ee.e." eause are some of the guidelines certain :federal agencies are using as they quietly ;oiled up information (some of it almoet oar- tainly false information based on rumors! tbaniers in hundreds of thousands of taw- ;mining, but for one reason or ancther sus- lea-. American citizens. ft aim- Lhe federal agencies engaged in this oirt of information gathering are the Secret cice, he Federal Bureau of investigation_ eattire Department, Internal Revenue Serv- ice and. the Army's Colintertn.telIlF.,T1CP, ioehysis Division, These agencies swap in- Formal:101i freely and make their Mee avail- onto to eertain other federal agences. Tee eetencies involved cite as the source ii their authority the recominendatione of I ccNeinreo Commission. The commission recommended the broadest possible surveil- lance of emalcontents" and potential asses- et11,1.. ...tieugh toe COITIEM SRI() T1 'f. reV - meedations have riot been enacted into law, the fedentie agencies now in the surveillance emess are going far beyond therm Par- oaeioe in an ante-war cietnoestratien is oloegh In get on the list. This is taking place epparenely with the tacit coneent of a majority of American cite- :ens, posethly because most of them are un- tare of ;lie extent of the inforrnet.on gath- ening anti its implications, The broad language of the guidelines the agencies use Is dangerous in itself. So is the practice of integrating the files on ell:inn-tall with the files on law-abiding citivens. To. gether with certain provisions of the Nixon administration's omnibus crime bill such as the preventive detention and "no-knock. search clauses, they lay the ground work for a police state of a sort Americans have never known except by hearsay. Few public critics of this developing sur. vetIllanee system have emerged. The only two in Congress are Senator Sam J. ErvM Jr, or North Carolina and Rep. Cornelius Gall.aehet of New Jersey. Mr Ervin charges that thi system is a threat to the right of privaer and a potential irfringement of the First Amendment rights of free speech and astern. lily, Senetor Ervin, chairman of the Senato Subcommittee on Conetitutional Rights, tee-es the view the the government's in, formation gathering about the lives and habits of its citizens is pushing the croun, try toward a mass surveillance system un precedented in American history." 'rhe fed. end gumshoes are setting by with it hecausi Amerienns fail to understand the compute! mystique and its implications, Mr. Ervin says. Briefly, the computer mystique Is thd doetrine that the cDmouter is foolproof_ Mil per cent objective, .mci naturally superior tu the human brain that created it. Emotion clearly does not enter into a compute/et iecisions. And a computer can perform a; routine task much faster than a man. But thousends of Americans on computer billing lists know the computer can make the samit eft'OrS eclat men mare. The difference is that when a compute'. makes a mistake it is almost impossible to get it to correct itself without the inter- ;cotton of the humans who guide it. But ie is liot La the self-interest of those who pro- gram end operate the computer to catch ri iii too many mIstuees. That would tend tO undermine the computer mystique upon' which their Jobs and power depend. Senator :Ervin contends, and we agree.. that within the government data files them exibee "a potential ior control and intimate- teen that is alien to our form of goverzunene end ioeeign to a society of free men."' Based on the guidelines, the Senator told re- porters, he is himself qualified for the com- puter a, es. "I have written the President and oehei high officials complaining of grievancei: that tome may consider 'imaginary.' And on occasion may also have 'embarrassed high government oilicials," he said. how do you breaa up the snoopers' nay- house in Foggy Bottom? The quickest way is to let your congressman and senators know you don't like it. Congress can put the na- tional data bank oat of business. Congress will put it out of business when the public' uemands it, but not before. IFrom the Asheville (N.C.) Times, June 18 1910I BIG BY:OTHER WINS ANOTHER (Tete Overriding a lower court, the New Jersee Ptnnrerae Court has decreed that pollee aeon- Mae in that state may indeed compile ex- haustive dossiers on persons who bike panO In demonstrations---whether or not the de- monstrations Involved disorder and whether or not the person investigated committed eny illegal act. The range of this Big Brotherism is dan- gernueey wide. It permits the compiling of information on the individual's family em- ployment, finances, personal habits end past activities. The danger is that it makes people who may have been only innocent bystanders subject to the most intensive kind of official prying. The mere gathering of the informa- tion, which involves police questioning of friends, employers and others, can all too So?ptember 8, 13,170 often arouse unjustified suspicion among acquaintances. This prying trend is by no meant con- fined to New Jersey, It has been revealed recently that Army Intelligence has dossiers on millions Of Arnerleans with the only ex- case that such persons might sonic day be Investigated for sensitive posts in the mili- tary establishment ,.eust recently the White House instigated a check into the personal backgrounds of 250 State Department em- ployees who protested the Cambodian In- vasion. The FBI or course has voluminous files It would seem that the point is right here at which to draw the line on this ever- increasing snooping into the private lives of presently uninvolved citizens. The line shoold be at the point where an individual has actually applied for a sensitive position, or has actually been involved in illegal dis- ordees. Mere partielpetion in an orderly de- monstration should ie no authorization to open a file. Werth Carolina's aenator Sam J. Ervin has been the leader 171 Congress in defending federal employees from the often outrageous lengths to which security checks go. Ht could well lift his sights end take in the Whole range of official prying into private lives. Enforcement agencies have the right and duty to learn all they can about individuals who seek sensitive posts or who are sue- pentad of eommittine illegal acts. Investiga- tion before the act IsTndefensible. Hopefully, the New Jersey ruling will be taken into the federal courts and there over- turned_ Big Brother has too much power o? alreedv. [From the Omaha World-Herald, Jan. 15, 1970] ERVIN ON GUARD The trouble with le ..ting government agen- cies have all those data processing machines is that It helps creitee a demand for more data to be processed. This can lead to the government's having much more informal-ion than it needs or than is good for it or the country, especially when the information consists of files on in- dividual citizens. Sen. Sam. J. Ervin, D-N.C., chairman of a subcommittee on constitutional rights, thinks he detects an instance in which the government Is trying to collect too much about too many people, and for insufficient reason. Perrin has questioned the Secret Service's attempt to enlist (Alex' government agen- cies in the compiling of computer dossiers on persons who make threatening, irraoional or abusive statements about high govern- ment officials; professional gate crashers; persons who insist or personally contacting high government officials for the purpose of redress of grievances, or people who take part in demonstrations. This sort, of inforreation gathering Ervin characterised as "COIVIliellie to a mass sur- opillence imprecederr ed in American his- tory." He wrote a concerned letter about it to Treasury ?Secretary David M. Kennedy, whose department in(ludes the Secret Serv- ice. Kennedy replied ti at the Secret Service limited such activiteee to its mission of pro- tecting the President and others for whose safety it is responsible. Ere said the infolenation Ervin referred to was being sought only from law enforce- ment agencies, not from "run of the mill" government workers. He also said that the information relating to people who had taken part in dernonstratiOns was required only in connection with the safety of the President while traveling. Ervin also que,stior ed whether the in- formation the Secret Service was gathering would be in safe hands_ He said he was con- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP741300415R0_0_0500140014-3 September 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14941 corned over who would have access to the files. Kennedy replied that all computer person- nel have, top secret clearances and that no other persons or agencies had direct access to the files. That, perhaps, is the key to maintaining continued freedom from mass surveillance by the government. If the information on individuals obtained by one branch or de- partment is kept in its own files and used only for its own necessary purposes, the like- lihood of untoward government surveillance is reduced. However, if all the agencies of government started comparing notes and collecting indi- vidual files into master dossiers, Washington could end up with a frightening array of weapons that coulld be used, at the whim of a bureaucrat, for any number of unsanctified purposes. Sen. Ervin has suggested several ap- proaches to computer control and legislative safeguards, including prohibitions on trans- fer or use of data collected for one purpose only. Perhaps, in the case of tffe Secret Service, nothing particularly ominous is involved in the gathering of Information. At least Sec- retary Kennedy's reassurances to Sen. Ervin sound convincing. But this assuredly will not be the last time when the government's use of informa- tion gathering and storing techniques will be called into question. The best way to keep 1984 from getting here before it is due on the calendar is to be alert to the dangers, and we hope Sen. Ervin and others will con- tinue to be. [From the Sioux Falls (S. Dak.) Argus Leader, Jan. 16, 19701 A HINT OF BIG BROTHER Sen. Sam J. Ervin of North Carolina, chair- man of a Senate subcommittee on constitu- tional rights, has expressed concern about what he sees as a new threat to First Amend- ment freedoms. The threat, he fears, is embodied in new Secret Service guidelines for gathering and storing information about many citizens. Ervin has performed a valuable public serv- ice by calling attention to this matter. It is the old story: Little exception could be taken to what the Secret Service is doing if there were firm guarantees against mis- use of the data, but there are no guarantees. Congress had better get busy and provide for some. Ervin thinks "the criteria for filing Information about individuals are question- able from a due process standpoint, are im- practical and are conducive to a mass sur- veillance unprecedented in American his- tory." That is something to worry about. [From the New York Post, June 30, 1970] BIG BROTHER'S NEW TOYS There has been little response on Capitol Hill to disclosures about the government's growing industry in recording the names and activities of "malcontents" on its computer- ized and milcrofilmed tapes. But the Senate's leading lecturer on Constitutional law, Sam Ervin (D-N.C.); has suggested that under the government's criteria, he could well be suspect. According to Secret Service guidelines, among the dissidents the computer should know about are: ?Those who would "physically harm or embarrass" the President or other high officials. ?Those who seek personal contact with high officials "for the purpose of redress of imaginary grievances." Obviously there's room there for more than just one Senator. Consider the phrase "imaginary grievance." To whom is a grievance imaginary?the law- maker who brings it or the official who re- jects it? The answer, of course, is the official; he's also the guy with the computer. That section, then, nets all of Sen. Ervin's colleagues in Congress. The only remaining Capitol Hill figure unaccounted for is the president of the Senate, Vice President Agnew, and he could fit the composite for section one. That he feels to embarrass the Presi- dent has been adequately proven. That he might physically harm 'him would seem im- plausible. But it should be noted that he has had to look elsewhere than the White House for his golfing companions and tennis partners. [From the Washington Post, Apr. 24, 1970] IN THE NAME OF SECURITY A fear of unorthodoxy is the first symp- tom of insecurity. It marks national admin- istrations that have no clear sense of pur- pose or direction. Such administrations quite naturally, like a stream seeking its own level, tend to seek in their personnel mediocrity, conformity, conventionality. Innovation frightens them; dissent dismays them. And so they bar from employment anyone who has ever displayed any signs of eccentricity or independence. It is all the more disquiet- ing that such a system of selection is always undertaken in the name of national security. It operates, manifestly, to diminish security rather than enhance it. Sen. Sam 3. Ervin Jr., chairman of the Senate's Constitutional Rights Subcommit- tee wrote to the chairman of the U.S. Civil Service Commission last week to inquire about report "new rules governing qualifica- tions for federal employment which would exclude persons who have engaged in dem- onstrations and protests." The CSC says that no new rules have been adopted; the old rules are simply being applied with a bit more stringency. In this connection it is alarming indeed?although by no means surprising?to learn that the Civil Service Commission maintains a blacklist contain- ing the names of at least 1.5 million Ameri- cans who might, at some time, have been involved in "subversive activity." The black- list is largely compiled, without any fixed standards, from references to individuals in the publications of so-called radical student movements. Shades of Titus Oates and Joe McCarthy! These scraps of information squirreled away in the files of the CSC are like so many pellets of deadly poison. Although they are not supposed to be taken in themselves as proof of subversive activity or intent, they operate inevitably, nonetheless, as flags disqualifying their subjects for federal employment. The Injustice of this system to the individuals damaged by it is the least of the problem. The worst of it is the impact on the public service. As Senator Ervin observed, it is es- sential to assure that any denial of a se- curity clearance or of a federal job is rend- ered on equitable, just and timely standards of social behavior. Otherwise we face danger- ous conformity in our national life and a bleak future of mediocrity in the federal service. [From the Asheville (N.C.) Citizen, July 2, 1970] You CAN BE A PERSON OF INTEREST Despite the fact that a few voices are raised in opposition?notably that of Senator Sam J. Ervin?intelligence agencies of the Fed- eral government are still quietly compiling Informational files on hundreds of thousands of law-abiding?though presumably sus- pect?Americans. Declaring that violent political dissent and civil disorder require the policy, the govern- raent is building a mass of computerized in- formation on "persons of interest." The phrase is a term for those citizens, many with no criminal records, whom the government wants to keep track of, just in case trouble breaks out. The files often contain seemingly unim- portant data, which can be shared?almost instantaneously?by half-a-dozen intelli- gence gathering groups. The operation does not disturb us particu- larly, though it is unauthorized by law and raises serious constitutional questions. Critics claim the computerized "who's who" is leading the country toward a police state. Possibly so, and much of the action seems senseless. But think what a convenient tool the flies would be if the country?God for- bid?ever drifts toward dictatorship. [From the New York Times, July 4, 1970] OUR ALIENATED RIGHTS One hundred and ninety-four years ago the Founding Fathers asserted their inde- pendence with a ringing Declaration of man's "unalienable rights." Today, as too often before, those rights are once more threatened. They are threatened not by some tyrannical foreign monarch, but by domestic governmental agencies whose ac- tions and proposed actions against crime and dissent endanger constitutional guarantees designed to safeguard the rights of Ameri- cans to "life, liberty and the pursuit of hap- piness." Typical of these new dangers is the spread- ing web of Federal prying into the private lives of citizens. Utilizing modern computer technology, Federal police, security, military Intelligence and other agencies are accumu- lating vast stores of data on the activities of hundreds of thousands of unsuspecting "sus- pect" Americans. There is nothing wrong with the use of the computer to help make more efficient and effective the legitimate work of law-enforce- ment and other agencies. A modern society must use modern techniques to help enforce and administer its laws and to protect itself from those who would do violence to its leaders and institutions. But a subcommittee headed by the highly respected Senator Sam J. Ervin Jr., Democrat of North Carolina, has unearthed alarming evidence that Federal agencies have been em- ploying the new technology to amass data that has little or no direct relation to criminal or other activities of legitimate Federal con- cern. Particularly disturbing are persistent reports that the Army's Counterintelligence Analysis Division is disregarding orders to stop collecting information on peace and civil rights organizations. Furthermore, the sub- committee reports that restrictions on the dissemination of "intelligence" accumulated by some agencies is woefully inadequate. Among the "persons of interest" on whom the Secret Service collects data are individu- als who have merely threatened to "embar- rass" a high Government official, who "in- sist upon personally contacting high Gov- ernment officials for the purpose of redress of imaginary grievances, etc.," and who par- ticipate in anti-American or anti-United States Government demonstrations. Senator Ervin, a conservative and a student of the Constitution, has observed: "I am a 'malcontent' on many issues. I have written the President and other high officials com- plaining of grievances that some may con- sider 'imaginary' and on occasion I may also have 'embarrassed' high Government offi- cials." Senator Ervin is obviously a "person of in- terest" by Secret Service definition and therefore grist for a Federal computer. In- deed, any American today who vociferously ? articulates unpopular or unorthodox views is in danger of being digested by a Federal com- puter, along with common criminals, and of being exposed to potential harassment and humiliation. If Americans still cherish the Declaration of Independence and the rights we celebrate Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 194: ciNGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE thee will insist that their represen- e.tites in support Senator Ervin's toerta to mace street legal limite or Federal yilect en and disseinination (If irlformation the aetivities of nrivate citizens S' am, citniniter world, Aug. 27, 19691 Jam, r,r!t LOSr? in bill to implemerit Preside-it Nixon's "ionel aerie:untamed lob bank program as give lee secret.' ury of labor the 'sower to mescribe "rules and regulatione to assure c I ty ni Information brail ted otoldeeme" to one of the bank,. eet noweere is tnere any mentioe of the toint made by President Nixon during eleotem campaign. At that, time, he rsstsj WA; only lobs would be stared. Ap- aecarits tveuld not have to mount their e.,..tees, seid, only their quallaceitons. This weuid ass era privacy and eliminate .my pos- e/14111w tan additio:nal personal records gethered and stored. While tie absence of this precriction from iteebit.. dees not mean this safeguard will not leicluderi in the time program. tte would miurli eappier it it were enellet. out in bill. 17TRVSSITRE. NEE. FD posits, the Individual has no protec- e agaidar the use or misuse of personal in- 1,51,1:rilat OD Ft data banks, and it now appears leatt it be several years before adequate motective e!gislation can be formeleted, eiut the most imeortant data leanks are 'ming set 13p now, and there is a need for im- mediate !.a.otection. Several congressmen hrwe suggested that a person or group be named as a data bank ombudsman, with the eewer anti responsibi env to protect the Mei- eltimel age mat the misuse of informnion in Mata banks_ Medi ae ombudsman provide, an im- mediate sotution to an immediate problem. And he would also help to find a loag-term solution, because he would be able tc use els experieoce to help formulate laws regulating data banks. rmibudsucen shoule be appointed en both tht: stale and federal level. But the appoint- t1 -t tt, n such ombunemen OehlIT only it meesueu 'la brought on legislators new. This is an election year and consumer protection Is un ler per tent issue?con geessmen a ad state teieslators wni be more responsive this year than at any other time. tee propose that undividuats and local ehapters m professional societies irnmellately nein a campaign for data bank ombodsmere etich a campaign shouid be primarily edu- eationaa at erst: informing local newepapers. seeete legisietors, and congressmee of the lengers posed by computerized date banks -uod propeemeg the appointment of ombuds- men as an inunediate solution. Ane we moat keen the messure on. :t!ata bark ombudsmen offer the aim hone erotectine, the riches of the individual in te near future. Concerted action by corn- er rame,sionais could make slich pre- tostion a reality. iFrom the Washington Evening i";sr, Mar. le. 1970i mem 500 THE COMPTITER '"lie cliche about people having skeletons -their closets is woefully out of date,. These ,eise, the seeietons are in, computerized data melte. Whet a worse, the figurative seeletons ;AL7 be it; stabeled with the wronir owners' lames, or they may be the figment of a corn- eitterls nriagination. The dangers of the mysterious, bard-to- elide data banks have been much discuesed 'la the litet few years. The discussion is about to accelerate aizain, and it's a good heiftr, because eventually something may ee etme about the problem. The National Academy of Sciences has a $149,500 Russell Sane Fartindatlon grant to conduct a broad study of how to preserve privacy and civil liberties against the on- eleeght of the commuter age. The study will be conducted by toiumbia Professor Alan Westin. an expert on the subject, and will focus on how to protect the rights of persons ( everybody O on whom information IS collected and stored for a variety of uses. Westin will be backed by a panel including Ralph Nader, James garmer, former Attorney General. Katzenbach end Representative Cor- iltAiLLS Gallagher of New York, who heads the House subcommittee on invasion of pri- vitcy. On aaother front, House committee hear- ings are to start tomorrow on the proposed Fair Credit Reporteig Act, which already has Senate approval The bill aims at giving consumers a way to counter erroneous or malicious information on file against them in credit data bank'.. Included in the bill's moyisions are rules to limit disclosure of htformation, to let the consumer know what's in his own fie and to give hin the right to dispute the . nformation. Still dormant is the 5-year-old proposal for a National Data Bank, a menacing cen- I ralization of the information collected by iraleral agencies. The plan raised congres- sional howls in 1960 and was quickly put down as an Orwellian step toward Big Broth- erism. :But don't c' tent it out?it makes too much computer-type sense to have one Mg control panel able to spill the beans on all our Future studies are likely to add to the growing pile of horrer stories abotit people whose lives were marred because a computer Indeed up some embarrassing fact from the sooner-forgotten past?or from nowhere. It's too bad the comprehensive National Academy -If Science investigati en, which could lead to important reforms, 15 scheduled to take 2ea years. Became that will bring us 21t, years closer to 1.984. !Preen the Houston (Tex.) Post, Mar, 16, 1,701 DATA BANK IDEA ALIVE the proposal advar red a few years ago to eetablish a national "data bank" in which informaidon collected by federal agencies would he stored and made available at the push of a computer button appears to be from dead.. it is being talked sip again, at least suf- aciently for Sen. Sam J. Ervin of North Carolina, chairman or the Senate's subcom- mittee en constitutional rights, to say that he will reopen the herrings this year. Despite assurances that there would be ell kinds of safeguards to protect the privacy Isi incliatetual citizens, the mere thought of the pooling of all the information gathered by government agencies was enough to ,'.use la the minds of a great many people Orwellian nightmares of a "Big Brother" watching theit every move constantly. :aver' though it was promised that the -toted information would be impersonal and ,uot linked with any individual, being of the 6:mere' leme collected by the Census Bureau, there we're fears that once the information hank should be established, this could be heneed It would be a relatively simple mat- ter to compile and file away a fairly com- plete dossier on every citizen, containing all kinds of highly personal information. This information might or might not be accurate. The great fear was that any concentration of data could be abs ted and the informa- tion misused, perhaps not immediately but at some time in the futtne. The instinctive reaction of most peeple that it would be much safer, so far as the privacy and per- haps the freedom of the individual citizen is concerned, not to permit the proposed -bank" to be created. Sen/ember 8, /970 Potentially, there could be a great con- centration of power in the hands of who- ever assembled and &enrolled the informa- tion, and it IS elementary that the diffusion of power is the bee t protection against tyrannical government. Federal agencies eras collect a great deal of information about a great many people In the course of their uormal operations, but the data Collected by one in most cases is not available to the others. For the "data bank" idea to be acceptable to most people, It Would be necessary that there be strong restrictions upon the information that is pooled, on how it is to be used and to whom le is to be made available. It remains for advocates of the idea to prove that adequate, foolproof safeguards against misuse and abuse are possible. Although efforts to establish a national "data bank" have been blocked thus far, vast quantities of highly personal information already are stored in computers about prac- tically every American citizen, and if the data ever .should be brought together, it would make fairly complete dossier on him and all of his personal effairs. The tremendous exransion of this coun- try's credit system has made neceeeary the compilation of informittion about everybody who buys anything on credit. It is necessary for those who extend credit to know a great many facts, much of it very personal, about those seeking credit to determine how good credit risks they are. This has given rise to many private agencies that collect this in- formation. Many of these co-operate and exchange information. It is estimated that one credit agency alone has data on millions of American. on file in its computers. Every time a citizen draws a paycheck or answer's a census ques- tion, the information is recorded on some- body's computer somewhere. There is relatively little reason for alarm in this because the information is frag- mentary and widely scattered, What arouses concern ere contimerm efforts to bring all these bite said pieces of information together in one vast computer hank, with the possi- bility that the data might fall into the wrong hands and/or be misused, [From the New York Times, July 7, 107a] IN THE NATION: A :armee No To tBit DATA-BANNED? (By Tom Wicker) WASHINGTON.?Do yea have a right not to be stored in a computer, where you can be called up for instant Mvestigation by any bureaucrat or law officer who considers you a "person of interest" oe who may want to provide someone else?maybe your em- ployer?with "facts" shout you? If you haven't thought about that, it's high time you did. Ben A. Franklin detailed in The New York Times of June 28, for example, how Govern- ment "data banks" are mushrooming out of computer wizardry. Literally hundreds of thousands of individual dossiers now are being Stared on -tape by various agencies. The tape can be fed to computers with instant reetep end the computers and tapes can be interconnected from one agency or region to another in an ominots national network. Numerous state agencies have easy access to the ineterial in this computer network, arid ere under little or DO pressure to keep it confidential. At the very least, therefore, some guide- lutes on the compilation of these banks and some safeguards on disseminating the mate- rial appear in order. An interesting case rending in Federal court here (Menard at Mitchell and Hoover) may help provide them. A Maryland man was arrested in Cali- fornia in 1955 on susolcion of burglary, held for two days, then released when police found no basis for charging him with a Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 September .8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14943 crime. Subsequently, a brief record of the While the machine is enabling heretofore have ben keeping tabs onou. Some agents e y detention, together with the Maryland man's impossible analysis of the activities of or- have seized garbage in hunting incrimi- fingerprints, appeared in F.B.I. criminal files. ganized criminals, it is also raising new ques- nating evidence.) Maintaining that the record is misleading tions about computers in law enforcement WasmNarow.?Behind the closed door of and incomplete and that it is not properly and invasion of individual privacy. Room 2439, a handful of government clerks a "criminal record," the Maryland man Within the computer's memory, the de- search through radical newspapers, method- moved in Federal District Court here to have partment is storing histories of the major ically snipping out names. They are hunting d minor figures in confederated crime, Americans favorably mentioned by the publi- how and where they travel, even details on cations of dissent. their eating habits. Found, snipped, checked, reviewed, the But the department is also computerizing names are conveyed down a wide clean cor- the names of those legitimate individuals ridor to be fed into a "subversive activities" with whom the Mafiosi often deal, persons data bank already bulging with names of 1.5 against whom no charges have been brought million citizens. or proved. The name-hunters in Room 2439 are low- Thus while members of the Organized level servants of the Civil Service Commis- Crime and Racketeering section are highly sion, the agency set -up to oversee federal pleased with the workings of their still em- employment. bryonic system, they are deeply troubled by The commission's security dossier?not to the privacy issue. be confused with its separate files on the 10 "I feel like I'm walking around with a million persons who have sought federal jobs bomb in my hands," said one official who since 1939?are indicative of the watch the has worked on the project and who declined government keeps on Americans in this age to be quoted by name. "Some of this in- of dissent and social turmoil. formation is really dynamite." An Associated Press study showed: "The fact is the privacy issue is one of Military intelligence agents have spied on paramount importance and we haven't yet civilian political activities and kept secret figured out a way to balance the law en- computerized files on thousands of individ- forcement needs with the constitutional uals And organizations although Pentagon safeguards for privacy," the official said. counsel cannot cite any law authorizing this For the moment, however, the privacy surveillance. question is being put to one side as the The Army has kept a so-called blacklist department fine-tunes the computer and ex- which included the names, descriptions and plores its use in analysis of what's going pictures of civilians "who might be involved on within the organized- crime community, in civil disturbance situations." Individuals now included within its mem- A second list has been circulated by the ory against whom there may be no more than a suspicion?a person who, for ex- ample, is frequently seen in the company of a known hoodlum?are protected by tight security. According to the department, only law enforcement, agencies with a need to know are given information drawn from the com- puter, and they insist that individuals listed because of unverified suspicions are made known to none outside the federal investi- gative family. The basic data for the computer has come from reports given the organized crime sec- tion by 26 other federal agencies, principally the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service and others that regularly join the section in co- operative investigations. The information is, however, keyed into portions of the 400,000 file cards containing 250,000 names of Mafia or Mafia-related individuals. Until six weeks ago, the file cards were , the major source of section information, a system that prevented recall of the data they contained without spending days, perhaps weeks, of manual sorting. The computer makes possible high-speed searches of the records the section has in- corporated within its memory, yielding up in minutes, for example, a list of all those Mafia figures nicknamed "Sonny." it purged from the F.B.I. files. COURT CONCERN INDICATED The Court denied this motion, and the man appealed. On June 19, the Court of Ap- peals for the District of Columbia, while finding no fault with the district court's rul- ing on the motion, ordered the case remand- ed for trial and "more complete factual de- velopment. The supporting opinion, al- though limited to the case, suggests the cir- cuit court's concern about what ought to go into Government files, under what rules, and whether proper safeguards surround its dis- semination. The judges (Bazelon. McGowan and Rob- inson) pointed out that the fact that the police had been "unable to connect" the Maryland man with a crime did not neces- sarily acquit him of having committed one, and they conceded that certain arrests not followed by a charge or a conviction might be a proper part of someone's criminal record. But, they asked, did the mere fact that a man had been picked up and held for two days justify the F.B.I. in retaining the record in its criminal identification files? An arrest record (the distinction between a "detention" and an "arrest is considerably less than a difference) can be terribly damag- ing to one's opportunities for schooling, em- ployment, advancement, professional licens- ing; it may lead to subsequent arrests on suspicion, damage the credibility of wit- nesses and defendants, or be used by judges in determining how severely to sentence. Moreover, thousands of arrests are made every year without any further action against the arrested person, usually for lack of evidence. DISSEMINATION ISSUE Thus, the court asked, if a person is arrested, even properly, but no probable cause for charging him is developed, should he "but subject to continuing punishment by adverse use of his 'criminal' record?" This has particular point because of the lack of established safeguards on dissemi- nation. The Maryland man's record, for in- stance, could be made available by statutory authority to "authorized officials of the Federal Government, the states, cities, and penal and other institutions" and also, by an Attorney General's regulation, to govern- ment agencies in general, most banks, in- surance companies, and railroad police. When New York recently passed a law requiring employes of securities firms to be fingerprinted, several hundred were dis- missed for "criminal records," but about half of them had only arrests, not convictions, on their records. The Appeals Court, noting this, reasoned that F.B.I. records had been passed directly to the securities firms in- volved. As data banks proliferate, so will the in- discriminate use of the material they con- tain. And that raises the question whether an American citizen has a constitutional or legal right not to be data-banked, comput- erized, stored exchanged and possibly dam- aged?materially or in reputation?by the process. [From the Huntsville (Ala.) Times, July 12, 19701 "MAFIA MACHINE" GOES To WORK (By Jared Stout) WASHINGTON.?A computer nicknamed the Mafia Machine has gone to work in the Jus- tice Department, giving organized crime fighters their most powerful weapon to date. But it may be a mixed blessing. Such information becomes useful because the operators of big crime often speak of one another only in nickname references. Gerald Shur, the man-in-charge of the computer program, said in a recent inter- billion times in federal records. This means, view "the kinds of questions we can ask are the panel said, that the statistical odds are limited only by the data we can feed into that a dozen different agencies have files on the computer." the typical law-abiding citizen. Shur said ultimately the department hopes Much of this data is held in strictest con- to store enough information to enable pre- fidence, Census questionnaires, for example, dictions about the impact of investigations can be inspected only by Census Bureau em- or develop economic theories to estimate ployes?and they're sworn to secrecy. what kinds of business situations organized Federal income tax returns also are con- crime may be heading toward. sidered confidential by the IRS. But they ? may be seen by the heads of federal agen- [From the Boston Herald Traveler] cies, some congressional committees, the gov- BIG BROTHER (U.S.) IS WATCHING You ernors of every state and by a special coun- (By John S. Lang) sal to President Nixon. (NOTE?The government knows far more A proposal three years ago to gather files about you than you may suspect. And if of all agencies into a National Data Bank you've ever taken part in protest marches or and use them for statistical purposes kicked the like, even the military services probably up such a furor in Congress that, according Pentagon's counter-Intelligence Analysis Di- vision as a two-volume, yellow covered, loose- leaf publication entitled "Organizations and Cities of Interest and Individuals of In- terest"?according to a court suit. The FBI, with the most extensive security files and 194 million sets of fingerprints, has infiltrated the leadership of virtually every radical organization in the United States. Agents of the FBI, Naval Intelligence and local police have seized citizens' garbage in hunts for incriminating evidence. In one case Navy agents examined garbage from an en- tire apartment house to find information about one tenant. The Secret Service has set up a computer with 100,000 names and 50,000 investigative dossiers on persons who it says could be dan- gerous to top government officials. A Senate subcommittee found that fed- eral investigators have access to 264 million police records, 323 million medical histories and 279 million psychiatric dossiers. In each category, that's more numbers than there are people in the United States. And the massive files of investigative and intelligence agencies contain but a small por- tion of the information the government col- lects on its citizens. Millions of scraps of information go into federal files routinely when citizens pay their taxes, answer the census, contribute for Social Security, serve in the military, or apply for a passport. In fact, a Senate subcommittee calculated that the names of U.S. citizens appear 2.8 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 S 149 It cONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE Lo 0"-te iliciaj, "now that issue is dead as coda;' tut I ie AP etude ehowed that in:testier-1th; and ..ntelitgence agencies cam---and do?share the information they gather. For es-ample, investigative attendee of the executive branch have access to the "sub,. 7erSiVe activities" data bank in the Civi ;Service Commission 'a down tow ft Wash in e. it heatiquarters. Acs3ording to an official corn:re:Aston pulelt. eetion. roe data barer "at nreeent . enn- lams approximately 2.5 nellion Index (sleds ;simmer:1MS information relating to Commil. nab on.other subversive esedvities." eurnent adds: "No information shoed to this file until it 'has been deters mined atter careful review by it reep01,01111,7 filial Who is experienced in this fielij. that en melee question of eubversive Activity 1,3 in volved. . ." A quiele thumbing t.hrottell the file die- iioarea. neenes like: (ha ties Garry a white San Erancisce at- ,aney eviter represents the Bleck Panthers, Robert eshelton, a leader of the Ku Rine Man. ..o?,..a,ton Lyme a professor and radical ltoter- llesPuele head of the Minutemen The ales are kept as index cards in treaeb- anized retary egibinets. There are thick bun- dles of cards for some individeeise only one an Ct ibr others. The cards ?do not state any- thing, ithent a person: they are more like a innfaiioai-r citing publications which seen- too Lint (Mtn evaluated, ti-ne el-innings are .:Lbnsiberett i'raw data" and are kept in other F,iine; cabinets. One -ithine in the raw data. s that of Wil- 1 am. Kees tier, civil rights a.tior ley who renre,sent:ad the defenriante in the: "Chicago conspiracy trial and who feces a jail term ler contempt of court. Kimball Johnson. direator of the commie. reati of Personnel en yea eeeteene? !aye the security file is kept 111) to date by 17 "m inerts in the field," who read Coin- 'no ,ttsl elications, the Black Panther the free presses, unite:ground e'nears :bee other publications stick, ets The termer-bap Workers World,. The eseeeant Le:en-item News Service. We reiet these anti clip the name; of pen- ci euppocled by them," Jobnson. says. "rt's et in the nubile domain. ft's Renner -5hait fass you rho it and title it ebere's no one -mind thee can comerehend it." -aviation tester Pieree waives a hero' toward. ;,tank ri mblicatione on a table hi his of- eine tr:tys: "That's what we chsck. !it's teI :atteiersive material. Note the Com- mie are emassio and others ell tied in to 3.earanterevrree t, Cite a statute or reputation an- itiorizinF the security file, Johnson replied. here ii no StleCIfie hhii, But, he atiee he filt is an es,ential teef the erten- e"ssion'e leieal function of investieeeing tee satiess I aeple for sed.eral eit:pleernent 'or ority pieetions. And there le which i3hifted ramonsibility sor naskiee ;ter:a:11nel investigations from, the Ear to the il Servire Commission." cOn,hission tt;, vs its seccritc eitig person,-el investigation vsh eh trite "the 6ons 31e LC,S111701100 that all eersen3 preet.- tesee ts es, emplochri. , "internment ttlietWOrthy, of rood cOnditet charartr, and or complete end unswerr- eit loyalty to the United States, " a FFIT. Director J. Edgar Hoover told Congre last year his agermy had placed leformarr e and sources "at all levels including the tc echelon" of such groups ea the Student Nor_ violent Coordinating Committee, the K Klux Klan, the Black Panther Party, the Ri. public of New Africa, the Nation of Ulan l the Revolutionary Action Movement, th Minutemen and the Third Nationat Confer ence tan Black Power. Hoover also gave a hint of the scope c FPI re-runty flies when he outlined holt agents keep tabs ors sympathizers who core; tribute money for radical causes. "Included among these," he testified, a Cleveland industrialist who has long beei3 a Soviet apologist, the wife of an attorney In Chicago who is a millionaire, an heires3 In the New Englani area who is married to an individual prominent in the academie community who ha:; been active in New Left activities, and a wealthy New York lecture' and writer -who for years had been linked to more than a score of Communist-front ore ganizations and has contributed liberally to many of them. "These individuals alone have contributee more than $100,000 in support of New Left ectivities." Hoover also said agents have identified most of the writers of antiwar newspapers? which he termed "Use work of the dedicated revolutionaries who are against ROTC and against our war effetit in Vietnam"?and had referred that information to the Justice De- partment for possible prosecution. Don Edwards, a member of the subcom- mittee which oversees FBI budget requests, complains that Congress does not exert pro- per authority over the FBI. He believes one reason for this is fear stemming. from long standing rumors that the FBI, among its many dossiers, has illes on each member of ('ongress. "There are lots of congressmen who think that probably they do have files," Edwards told an interviewer. But the rumors have never been proven and there have been few complains from congressmen. There was, howevai, much alarm expressed in Congress with the recent disclosure that, for the past several years, military intelli- gence agents have canducted surveillance of civilian political ace vista and have fed in- formation on individuals and organizations into date books. In reeponee to BO congressional inquiries, the Army admitted sat it: Kept a so-called acklist which ircluded -the names and descriptions and pictures of civilians "wee': might be involved in ciiil dis- turbance situations." Operated a computer data bank for ster- age and retrieval of civil disturbance in- formation. Used its intelligersie agents in some in- stances for direct observation and lailltra- tion of civilian orgaeizations and political meetings. But ir making these admissions, the Army said that during the past year it has sbarply curtailed such activities after realizing they weren't needed to ?repare for any civil clisturbannes. The Army said the blacklist?a term to which it objected?had been ordered with- drawn and destroyed. It said the computer data bank had been discontinued and that its agents have conducted no overt opera- tions in the civilian area during the past year. Extensive details of the military's do- ineetic intelligence activities were desclosed In January in an article written by a termer intelligence officer, Cmistopher H. Pile of New York, for the tlagazine Washingtoa Monthly. Pyle wrete that the Army's Intelligence Command, headquartered at Pt. Holaleird, was in a position to develop one of the Sio-)tember 8, 1970 E largest domestic intelligence operations out- side the Communist world. p A fete weeks later, the Pentagon an- - flounced that Ft. Holabird would be closed in ti an economy move and the Army Intern- - gence School there would be moved to Ari- l'e mlAna. Army spokesman said the domestic s surveillance operations were expanded in 1967 after the outbreak of serious chill dis- f orders. "There was a teeing we had to be in in. position to predict when federal troops would be used again. We need more information to inform tactical commanders on the streets and to guide them. This led to widespread collection efforts," las- said. The information gathered by the military was funneled into Ft. Holabird, summarized and eent out on the Army's Teletype system. One weekly summeey, marked "Pass to DIA Elements," was distributed to Army com- mands throughout the world. It contained this dispatch: "The Philadelphia ihapter of the Women's Strike for Peace ep.msored an anti-draft meeting at the First Unitarian Church which attracted an audience of about 200 persons. Coined Lynn, an author of draft evasion literature, replaced Yale chaplain William Sloan Coffin as the peincipal speaker at the meeting." Lynn, the Women's Strike for Peace and a dozen other inclividuels and groups identi- fied in the summary have filed suit through the American Civil Liberties Union. claim- ing the Army has violated their constitu- tional rights of free speech and association. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, contends that in addition to the surveillance and computer operations the Army admits conducting, it is concealing from Congress the existence of: A large microfilm data bank on civilian political activity indexed by computer and maintained by the Counterintelligence Anal- ysis Division. A second computerized domestic intelli- gence data bank maintained by the Con- tinental Army Command at Ft. Monroe, Va., as well as extensive regional files at other locations. The "two volume, :sellow-covered, loose- leaf publication entitled Counterintelligence Research Projects Organizations and Cities of Interest and Individeals of Interest, which describes numerous individuals and organi- zations unassociated with either the Armed Forces or with domestic disturbances." The Army said it would not comment on the lawsuit's charges. But, in an interview, a spokesman for the office of the Army's chef counsel could cite no legal basis for surveillance of civilian ac- tivities. "In' the civilian sphere the FBI has juris- diction," the spokesman. said. "We must get approval for what We do from the PEI. Terre is no specific law on domestic intelligence as such applying to the Army." To determine the rile ige of domestic inn- itary surveillance, The essociated Press sub- mitted a list of 20 questions to each branch of the service. Army se okesmen declined to answer the questions specifically, preferring to speak generally ahont the program. The Air Force said it does not have any domestic -program. The Navy never responded. ! But Navy intelligence operations slipped !into public view 12,st August when the ACLU complained that agents were sifting through garbage from the apartment house of Sea- man Roger Lee Priest accused by the Navy of soliciting members el' military forces to desert in an underground newspaper lie published. A spokesman for the District of Columbia government acknowledged garbage from all apartments in the building where Priest lived Was searched bectuse it couldn't he u1S) t',.Cc that when. :try sill-ear:eve le- eirmiltiOn '-'sin the security fiie in. identified selie a persen ender investigation the seise is referred re: the Eisi for s fun field loyalty 'tabs, The VET, has overall reartottsthillty !.rtd pawereasharsed on Istesiiiehil,1 (tree_ aves datine batik to 1989---for ineestigating :attars reeiting to espionage, sabotage and iiiceatlers el- neutrality laws. Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 ? CIA-RD_P_74130,.Q414.11W0500140014-3 SepUmber 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? separated from the seaman's prior to collec- tion. "We ended up with an ONI agent posing as a sanitation worker and picking up trash and bagging the garbage," he said. "Then the Civil Liberties union got in, raising hell." Searching citizen's garbage apparently is not uncommon for government security agencies. Last summer a D.C. Sanitation De- partment official disclosed that the city, on request of investigators, makes up to a dozen special garbage collections yearly 'fin the interests of law and order." Besides garbage, private mail also is often watched by government law enforcement agents. The most commonly used means is the "mail cover," recording from a letter the name and address of the sender, the place and date of postmarking and the class of mail. The Post Office declines to say haw many mail covers are in effect. A Senate committee asked for a list of several years ago, but the agency objected. "The list you have requested would con- tain the names of about 24,000 persons, a large percentage of whom are innocent of any crimes," a postal official said. More recently, the Post Office confirmed a new regulation allows federal agents to open all mail coming into this country frim vir- tually every nation in the world. "However," a spokesman said, "it's not in- tended to be used on personal mail." When threatening letters are received by the President or other high government offi- cials, the Secret Service moves into action. Operating under guidelines adopted after President John F. Kennedy's assassination, the agency collects "protective information" which is fed into its computers. One of the 1963 guidelines asked other federal agencies to relay information on citi- zens who make abusive statements or at- tempt to "harm or embarrass' high govern- ment officials. Civil libertarians objected that this guide- line means that any, citizen: who writes a strongly worded letter of complaint to a government official might come under the agency's scrutiny. A Secret Service spokesman responded: "At the time the guidelines were passed emo- tions were high. Everyone was saying, 'Let's protect the President.' Now people are ap- parently forgetting the tragedy of that year .. ." Several years ago when Congress was con- sidering proposals to establish a National Data Bank to gather files from all agencies and use them for statistical purposes, author and sociologist Vance Packard raised the spectre of Big Brother, the symbolic total- itarian government in George Orwell's book "1984." Noting that the year 1984 would come in the next decade, Packard told a-congressional committee: "My own hunch is that Big Brother, if he ever comes to the United States, may turn out to be not a greedy seeker, but rather a relentless bureaucrat obsessed with effi- ciency." [From the Morning Call, (Pa.) June 30, 1970] GUARDIAN OF FREEDOM Sen. Sam J. Ervin Jr. is a conservative Democrat from North Carolina. But he is also a guardian of constltutionlly guaran- teed freedoms. Sen. Ervin is currently worried about the massive record-keeping which has come into vogue in government agencies. And press re- ports concerning the type of records being kept give substance to his fears. It is all very well for the FBI to utilize computers to process information on crimi- nals and persons sought in connection with crimes. This type of 'service has been cred- ited with speeding the apprehension of sus- pects. But it is a different matter when the Jus- tice Department, the government's prosecu- tor; maintains dossiers on participants in peace rallies and welfare protests. Moreover, Justice takes it upon itself to categorize such persons as "radical" or "moderate" although it is unclear upon what criteria it bases this distinction. The Secret Service, which says it is trying to spot potential assassins, also has recourse to the computers: It keeps files on miscon- tents, persistent seekers of redress and those who would "embarrass" the President or other high-ranking government officials. These are just a few of the agencies which maintain voluminous files on the activities of citizens in a wide variety of fields. The reasoning behind this extensive bookkeep- ing is valid. Agencies believe that to be fore- warned is to be forearmed. In brief, it is a continuing hunt for potential trouble- makers. But when the government gets into the business of gathering intelligence about its own citizens, it can easily go too far. And there is evidence that it has already done so. For what reason should an agency keep notes on persons who are doing nothing more than exercising their right to freedom of speech, assembly and petition? Since when has it become a crime to persistently seek redress of grievances? When It gets into these areas, government is dangerously close to trampling on consti- tutional freedoms and on the individual's right to privacy. It is easy to see how Sen. Ervin reached the conclusion that such methods have "the potential for control and intimidation that is alien to our form of government and foreign to a society of free men." [From the Advance, July 19, 1970] MITCHELL DEFENDS JUSTICE DEPT.'S "BIG BROTHER" ROLE (By Jared Stout) Wssnincron.?The Justice Department has asserted a virtually unchecked right? not subject to the Constitution?to keep rec- ords on persons who are "violence prone" in their protests of government policies. The right, Atty. Gen. John N. Mitchell said through a spokesman, arises from the inherent powers of the federal government. "to protect the internal security of the na- tion. We feel that's our job." It was the first time Mitchell had out- lined the legal basis for the collection and computerization of dossiers on protesters within the department's special Civil Dis- turbance Unit. The assertion matches in breadth the claim made June 13, 1969 when the government said it had unlimited powers to eavesdrop on those the Justice Department thinks are seeking to "attack and subvert the government by unlawful means." The eavesdropping claim was made in de- fense of electronic eavesdropping against some defendants in Chicago Seven riot conspiracy trial. The extension of this doctrine to the de- partment's domestic intelligence operation came in response to questions arising from Mitchell's news conference last Tuesday. Mitchell declined to give the legal founda- tion for the intelligence operation last Tues- day. He said only "there are no court de- cisions that would restrain us from compil- ing this type of information." Later, however, he acknowledged through the department's spokesman that the legal argument used to justify the Chicago Seven eavesdropping also applied to the intelli- gence operation. In the Chicago case, the department said nothing in the Constitution's ban on un- reasonable searches and seizures limits the S 14945 powers of the President?and the Attorney General?to eavesdrop, and now keep records on, those who try to "foment violent dis- orders." This position has been sharply attacked by critics including Sen. Sam Ervin Jr. (D- N.C.) as a step toward "a police state" and a potential violation of First Amendment rights to free speech and association. Earlier this past week, it was disclosed that Treasury Department agents had been seek- ing the names of those who had checked out books on bombs and explosives from public libraries in Atlanta and other cities. Ervin attacked this step as he has other intelligence efforts, including those of the Secret Service which lists in computer files all those who may pose a threat to the President. Throughout his opposition to such activi- ties, Ervin has stressed the lack of standards in deciding who shall be listed within such files, and how once a person is catalogued, he may learn of the step and question his inclusion. The Justice Department spokesman said the definition of "violence prone" persons for its purposes included those who either acted violently, counselled violence or ap- peared in the ranks of violent confrontations. He said the dossiers were not kept on "as broad a range as those compiled by the Army," a reference to the watch military intelligence agents have kept on civilian protesters. No notice is given to those whose names have been recorded. According to the spokesman, this means those individuals listed in department records at least had to be present or in the leader- ship of violent events. Army records included, for example, those who subscribed to New Left publications. It was learned, however, that the justice intelligence unit still has access to the records compiled by the Army, which said in Febru- ary It had discontinued its record-keeping but has hung on to those it made in four years from 1966. [From the World News, Roanoke, Va., Mar. 11, 1970] JUSTICE DEPARTMENT KEEPS FILES ON ACTIVISTS (Note.?In the last few weeks members of Congress have responded with cries of out- rage to a magazine article that reported on how the Army was maintaining a computer- ized data bank on perSons it considered po- litically dangerous. As a result, the Army announced it was closing down the data bank and that it only began it because the Justice Department, which is responsible for political Intelligence functions, was unable to handle them. Now the Justice Depanntent says it is ready to take over. Morton Kondracke, who reported the government's political intelli- gence activities-in this article.) (By Morton Kondracke) WASHINGTON.?While the Army has closed down its political computer, the Justice De- partment maintains an even bigger one in its "war room" containing data on thousands of individuals, including many whose activi- ties are entirely nonviolent. Political computers were part of the fed- eral government's response to the problem of controlling ghetto riots. Now that the riots have subsided, the government is more and more devoted to gathering intelligence on campus disorder, antiwar activity and militant left and right-wing groups. The government's justification for such surveillance is its need to be aware of po- tential violence, but thousands of persons are drawn in whose activities are peaceful and lawful. For example, the Army continues to main- tain a microfilm file that reportedly contains information on such persons as Mrs. Mar- tin Luther King Jr., Georgia State Rep. Ju- Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3 14946 CONGRESS] ONA L RECORD-- SENATE iinn Reed and retired Adm. Arno3d E, True, :A. oii iiot the Vies mini war. rrhe Army file is primarily, made up of reports, and FBI reports ars also the ehiel source or data feeding the Justice De- partment's computer. The FBI makes it a sino keep is information in "raw" etrmeetnevaluated as to truth or :faleite. Those who process the FBI data at Justice 'tee 1, e; impossible to tell whetncr or not any tt chines from wiretaps, Atte, Gen. John antenell has declared that taps may be used without court permission on domestic or- i,,ann;ations believed seeking to "ittack and ,eibvert. as government." Beetles input from the FBI Justice's -,.olitiiuter contains information supplied by ee IT S. attorneys around the country anti by ,,thei? government agencies, such as the Treandy department's Alcohol and Tobacco Tax bieision. which enforces federal ere- erms laws, ttcree, information comes also from the ,71.ceret Servie,e, which has lately begun as- eemeline a data bank of its own. The vera- Ice's primary concern is with threats to the 'resident, but its data bank will also con- join iniroxnation on demonstrations, "atm- 'ave etatements" and plans to embarrass goy- emir gmt officials. Faele week, the ,Iustice Departsient com- ,mtee nesgorges its intelligence onto print- out aper. The product Is four books, cacti ;thout two inches thick and enclosed in erown cardboard covers, Eaeti book refers to a region of the ecren- try. :=t centains a city-by-city assessment of the potential for civil disorder. indicating ,,vhal marches, rallies or meetings are oc- etirring, the orgenizations and individuala ,moniori them and the city's disturbance eisecry. the books are combed by officials of the depaetni cot's interclivisional ir orm stem unit, winch sends pertinent clam to the attorney genera,' and the various divisions ef the department. The community relations service gets in- Zone:Ilion, for example, on potential racial eroblerne for it to try to conciliate. The civil eights division gets reports on possible vio- iations el the laws it enforces. The criminal eivision gets data on such violattens as in- terstate movement to incite riots. iteiddes city 'print-nuts, the computer can oroduee a run-down on a specific upcoming ettajor event, listing all stored information on the ritlividuals end organizatione who are laiiin On', it, This was done, for example, nrior to the ;tog. 15 antiwar march on Washington or- ? i7ed he the New Mobilization. Committee to Er.d the War in Vietnam and ths T\loraterlum Committee, Sneciei print-out reports have also been ,ione on et least one oreanivation, the Black Pantner Party. Wieteer special. reports have eeen pre- oar-et or, individuals is not known, although nu eritivisional int urination lin it director ,lines I'. Devine said it could be done if )frri also chief of the tlenartm ent 's civil iisttinemee group, declined to identify any ea-liven:lel whose name is on computer tape. however, that it is "iMpoSsible not ei have information on nonviolent indiviclu- Ms." He added, "I think it's realistic to ex- that what would normally ie in the of the Justice department would reflect ,?tc.i.t in the computer. You CAM make your ,W11 as&H711ptions I about who is istedl. eioulci. unit be difficulit.." A n other Justice department 'if trial said at, a seecific unmet report on an individual. eight tell "he made a speech On such-and- men a night at such-and-such a place. This wh LI, lie said, This was the result." Geeernment officials differ on whether ,omputerizeci storage of political informa- .4011 is dangerous to the civil linerties of emereans. Devine contended that it is not. Ile sad it is "a ghost" to see danger. "The information is here anyway, in -Us, records of the department. Putting it on e computer is just a matter of systematizir it and making it Icore retrievable," he said. He added: "Hay ng your' name on a com- puter does not involve the question of guilt or innocence." This is not the attitude of the two chid congressional cleneiders of the right to privacy, Sen. Sam Ervin, (D-N.C.) and Rel Cornelius Ciallagte r, D-N.J. The two were responsible, along with 18 other congressmen who wrote letters, for forcing the Army to abandon its political computer at Fort Holabird in Baltimors. Ervin snd Gallagher are continuing inquiriet Into other Army political files. Neither has commented about the Justice Depaetment computer. It is not known whether they are even aware of its exist once, for no specific authorization Era sought from Congress to set it up. Justine does not believe le rislation was necessary to computerize files already maintained in the department. .VaiDITIONAL STATEMENTS OF SENATORS 1iitISONERS OF WAR STILL A MATTER OF PRIORITY . Mi. BAKER. Mr. President, as we re- turn to do the work of the people after the Labor Day reoess I would call atten- tion once again lo one of the great un- solved problems of the year?the plight of the Americans held prisoner by th? North Vietnamese. Commui List regime remain3 adamant against abiding by the Geneva Convention on Plisoners to which it is ;t signatory power. Those agreements pro- vide the bare minimum of guarantees foe the captured men. They are entitled to health care, an adequate diet, propel shelter, and at least minimal communil cations with their families. In addition the government is required to notify one Government of their capture, listing their names and condition when cap.. tured. The North Vietnamese have abided lo,/. .? none of these agreements. It must 'remain is matter of top priority with the Government of the United States to ease the lot of these men and to continue every possible avenue of nei; aotiardon for ther safe return to thei! waiting families. VERY DAY THE STAKES GROW HIGHER FOL HUMAN RIGHTS! '1'11E LEGACY OF ROBERT F ; KENN VlI)Y Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the Past few days have been fraught with senseiess violence and bloodshed, both here and abroad. The tragic bombing a; the University. of Wisconsin and the ter-. rorism so prevalent in the Middle Flag; made me think back to a speech of the late Senator Kennedy that is memorable In its insight and compassion. In his; speech at Fordham University and also to students in South Africa in 1967, Sen.. ator Kennedy spoke poignantly of wham; must come close to being his persona. philosophy: Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve tie lot of others, or strikee SPAtPmber R, 14.471) out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and dar- ing, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the miehtiest walls of oppres- sion and resistance,. Mr. President, it little more than 3 years ago, Robert ICennedv spoke of po- litics] courage in the quest for human rights. It was his firm conviction, both in his words and his acts, that "only those Irlio dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." I ask unanimous consent that this stir- ring and provocative statement by one of the most gifted leaders of our time be printed In the RECORD. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: THE WOLK i Ornt HANDS If you fly in a plane over Europe, -toward Africa or Asia, in a few hours you will cross over oceans and countries that have been a tamable of human history. In minutes you will trace the rolgrar ion of men over thou- sands of years; seconds, the briefest glimpse, and you will pass battlefields on which mil- lions of men once seruggled and died. You will see no national boundaries, no vast gulfs or high walls dividing people from people; only nature and the works of man?homes and factories and farms?everywbere reflect- ing man's common effort to enrich his life. Everywhere new technology and communica- tions bring men and nations closer together, the concerns or one more and more becom- ing the concerns of all. And our new close- ness is stripping away the false masks, the illusion of difference that is at the root of injustice and hate and War. Only earthbound man still clings to the dark and poisoning superstition that his world is bounded by the nearest hill, his universe ended at river shore, his common hUmanitty enclosed in the tight circle of those who Share his town and views and the color of his skin. Each nation has different obstacles and different goals, shaped by the vagaries of history and experienca. Yet as I talk to young people around the werld I am impressed not by the diversity but by the closeness of their goals, their desires and concerns and hope for the futUre. There is discrimination in New York, apartheid in South Africa and serfdom in the mountains of Peru. People starve in the streets of India; Intellectuals go to jail in Russia: thousands are slaugh- tered in Indonesia; wealth is lavished on armaments everywhere. There are differing evils, bUt they are she e0frimon works of man. They reflect the ireperfection of human justice, the inadequacy of human compas- sion, the defectiveness of our sensibility to- ward the sufferings of our fellows; they mark the limit of our abilli y to use knowledge for the well-being of others. And therefore, they call upon common qualities of conscience and of indignation, a shared determination to wipe away the unnecessary sufferings of our fellow humall beings at home and around the world. TO ELIA ON lintrrx Our answer is die world's hope; it is to rely on youth?not a time of life but it, state of Minci,a temper hi' the will, a quality of the imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, Of the appetite for adventure over the, love of ease The cruelties and ob- stacles of this swiftly changing planet will not yield to obsolete dogmas and outworn slogans. It cannot be moved by those -who cling to a present that Is already' dying, who prefer the illusion of security to the excite- ment and danger that come with even the most peaceful progress. It is a revolutionary world we live in; and this generation, at home and around the world, has had thrust upon it Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3