CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE ARTICLE CHARGES U.S. AGENCIES PENETRATED BY REDS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00149R000100170022-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 23, 1998
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: March 3, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

+nril.i, 'J 1UQ'14
Sanitized - Appr For-Releastn : CIA-RDP75=0
_
4112 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
operating the way it was operating in the old be forthcoming to compensate community
or culrent premises should make up the sell- he leaves for loss of payroll, etc."
tog price allowable to the person who has to What about damages to areas not immedi-
move to make way for any civic improve- ately adjacent to area of construction?
ment-freeway, redevelopment, etc." Sometimes blasting, etc., alters rock forma-
Another: "I do think the Government tions even miles from area, causing settling
should be realistic in all appraisals and that otherwise would not have occurred.
watch out for the deceit and fraud practiced Many other factors, such as traffic flow, are
by persons with insider information on proj- also altered far from project. Some relief
ect locations, whereby some people make a should accrue.
lot of money." To sum up our findings in this survey, they
Another: "The compensation for reestab- show:
lishing a business should have a reasonable 1. Relocation is a very costly process for
relationship to the comparable costs for the many independents. Many experience losses
business establishment in the original loca- for which they are not adequately compen-
tion, based on prior, records of the business sated.
concerned." 2. While compensation Is judged inade-
Another: "I think the Government should quate, a majority of those who have moved
compensate the businessman if he is forced report that it was not a factor in compelling
to move from an established location. If the business retrenchment.
law is too liberal, however, a great number 3. There is support for liberalized compen-
of businessmen are going to take advantage sation, however it extends only into the areas
of a given situation, and try to make money of tangibles-items like machinery, equip-
by chaiging the Government with all sorts went, fixtures, moving costs, at cetera, which
of costs and bosses. Compensation, and other are readily verifiable, and not into the area
adjustments due to Government projects of intangibles-items like living costs, lost in-
should be based on Federal Income tax re- come, et cetera, which are not so easily veri-
ports prior to the project and after the proj- fiable.
ect went into effect. This. is the only true 4. While there is support for liberalized
yardstick whether the move by a business to compensation, there is also strong insistence
another location was detrimental or perhaps that this be provided with strict safeguards
quite beneficial to the business. A situation for the public purse.
f 11
i
o
s nature will occur to a great many of
the businesses along U.S. Highways 36-40 in
Denver, Colo., after interstate 70 will by-
pass the main business arteries in Denver in
approximately 15 months. We have formed
a merchants group, just to work out plans
how to minimize the loss of business due to
the new highway. These projects naturally
affect small businesses to a much larger ex-
tent than heavy industry, or large com-
panies."
Another: "This [compensation] should be
open negotiation and handled on a business-
like basis. Naturally, there will be differ-
ences and there will be those on both sides
trying to take unfair advantage. Some
form of arbitration can be Worked out on
these few. I believe 99 percent can fairly
negotiate so that small business will not be
hurt,"
Another: "This is a very touchy problem
and about every project has a different
effect on business. I think every locality
should have a locally appointed seven mem-
ber board of independent businessmen to
judge what to do about these situations,
then approved by ,jhe U.S. Government."
Another: "Fair market value should be
paid for properties taken over, based on
value prior to the determination that, such
properties need to be purchased for the Gov-
ernment project. The period for determin-
ing fair market value should be at least 6
months prior to final determination of the
project."
Another: "Actual losses should be paid in
full, Intangibles should be onsidered, but
weighed carefully. A system of impartial,
knowledgeable referees to arbitrate these
matters might be useful."
Another: "No blanket .law should. cover
all cases. Real estate boards. or arbitration
boards should be used to determine losses.
Provisions should be built in to protect the
Government (taxpayers) against oppor-
tunists."
Another: "What is just compensation?
Man owns plant and has for many years.
Plant has been }maintained and modernized.
He should -be compensated not on assessed
value or even appraised value but on actual
cost of equal facilities. If the Government
did not require his moving, he could go on
for many years without such expenditure.
Why must he be put to added costs without
compensation. However, if he moves to an-
other city or State which furnishesplant
free and even tax free, some penalty should
March 3
2-2
It has become quite clear that unless
beef imports from these two countries,
plus the tons of beef products coming
to Florida ports from Latin America are
curtailed, our domestic cattle industry
faces a multimillion dollar loss.
While we are standing here today a
flotilla of ships is approaching the United
States from Australia loaded down with
more than 30 million pounds of beef.
This is equal to 72,545 head of cattle.
This means American producers must
retain this number of cattle on their
ranches, resulting in increased costs, in
the loss of labor for hdndling, slaughter-
ing, and butchering. In short, it means
a multimillion dollar loss to the Nation's
economy.
Today, I have introduced a bill to limit
beef imports to half of the 5-year aver-
age prior to December 31, 1963.
This will offer prompt relief to our
domestic producers while still maintain-
ing the United States as a fair market
for foreign producers.
We are well aware of the value of the
favorable balance of trade, but we
stand - -A 4--U
n
b
5. Despite the difficulties encountered bye can
cattl
em n
go down the d aTin. n-
those who had completed thei
r moves and
those left in fringe areas, and despite the
difficulties anticipated by those facing the
need to move:
ov(a) A significant number (60 percent) of
gories reported having to close down their
operations-a._e because of seemingly poor
redevelopment planning, one because of di-
version of a highway necessary to his trade,
and one for rea,ins that are not clearly indi-
cated.
6. There is, see..,Ingly, a great need for im-
proved informatiu ial procedures for the
benefit of firms affecuel9 by these programs.
7. While there is some triticism of the con-
cepts-chiefly urban redevelopment and ARA,
chief criticism is over the need for improve-
ment in the laws and the procedures in-
volved in them.
DOMESTIC BEEF SITUATION
GROWS STEADILY WORSE
(Mr. GURNEY (at the request of Mr.
NELSEN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, for the
past four months, while the domestic
beef situation has grown steadily worse
as a tremendous volume of foreign beef
products flowed into this country, the
administration has been asking us to
avoid the introduction of legislation to
establish limitations. Furthermore, we
have been asked not even to talk publicly
about the matter lest we upset our bal-
ance of trade with Australia, or endan-
ger our negotiating position with the
Common Market.
We were assured the voluntary nego-
tiations then being conducted with Aus-
tralia and New Zealand would produce
a remedy for the problem. The rZiegotia-
tions have concluded, but the results are
a long way from the cure. Moreover,
they are a slap in the face of the Ameri-
happen.
The time for action is now. Every
day we delay costs our cattle producers
PENETRATED BY REDS
The SPEAKER. Under previous or-
der of the House, the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. ASHEROOK] is recognized for
15 minutes.
Mr. ASHBROOK. Mr. Speaker, ear-
lier today I addressed the House, and
commented on the article which ap-
peared in the Monday, March 3, 1964,
New York Journal-American. It points
out charges which certainly should be
investigated so the American people can
know the truth in this important matter.
It is no secret that the State Department
has been working hard to conjure up the
picture of Soviet Communists as "ma-
turing" and "responsible" world leaders
who are gradually shaking off their
rough ways. Our foreign policy is based
on an unreal appraisal of our sworn ad-
versaries and as a part of this effort
the
,
American people have been deluged with
propaganda. The Journal-American ar-
ticle presents a direct contrast to the
pie-in-the-sky approach of the State
Department and it should be thoroughly
aired by a congressional committee
which would be. free of the builtin re-
straint of alibiing on its own failures.
The Journal-American article con-
cerns one Michal Goleniewski, a defector
from the Soviet secret police, who has
proven a valuable informer in the past
but, according to the story written by
Guy Richards, has many further stories
to tell concerning Red penetration of
our State Department and even the Cen-
tral Intelligence Agency. Mr. Goleniew-
ski received the following endorsement
last year when the Congress passed a
private bill providing for his naturaliza-
Sanitized -Approved For. Release : CIA-RDP75-00149.R000100170022-2
 Approvedd FFQQr RR ~~ee~~ ~e~pp ~~ppP7r~r--~00001149R000100170022-2
CONGRESS 8RR? ~%t- 3- AffiE 4111
per_said "(Only) to maintain-equivalent op-
erations as before, but policed to prevent ex-
cess gains." A-second commented: "If they
don't try to set up on a much larger scale
than before." A third commented: "It is
,only fair to'expect help in relocating, that i7,
in difference in cost of land, increase in cost
of building. Salvage value should be taken
into consideration." A fourth said: "Only on
the basis of equipment equal to the old loca-
tion-not a new, more expensive setup." On
the other hand, one commented: "It is rarely
possible to replace comparable facilities with-
out paying much more for them than is
received for the old."
As to the question of moving costs, one
member commented` "The Government
should pay only for removing. Such things
as advertising, good will, loss of potential
profits are nebulous and open the door for
graft as well as Government control. Many
areas are degenerating and some would go
broke anyway. Depreciation is liberal
enough for replacing equipment."
A second significant pattern emerges from
the votes on these questions: support for
-changes was weakest among firms which had
completed their moves. One might speculate
that this was due to the fact they might
feel: "We've made our way through reloca-
tion under current allowances. Others
should be able to do so." This might be true
but for one fact: They did support some of
the changes,. and in some of the changes
they opposed, the other groups joined them.
This emphasizes a matter which we men-
tioned earlier, the need for adequate infor-
mation for all affected by development
-programs.
III
And now, let's take a further look at some
of the relocation problems, experienced and
hypothecated, by those who answered the
questionnaire.
. One businessman speculated (commenting
on compensation for renters and owners)
."We can only make statements in the light
of how the loss of our building might affect
us, In our own situation, for instance: We
'own our own building and conduct a small
garment manufacturing business which
could be operated. in any location which
might be centrally located and easy for our
help to reach. However, we are (my wife
and I run this business as a team) at retire-
ment age now but will continue to operate
the business as long as our health permits.
However, we plan on this building, which is
on an arterial street, to become our prime
source of income when, we retire If this
building were taken from us and we were not
adequately recompensed we could suffer con-
siderable hardship. There must be other
cases similar."
Another who had already moved and was
experiencing some difficulty, commented:
p situation was -due to urban renewal
project-21/2 years have passed and still no
"?U
real progressin redevelopment of that area.
Why must premature moves be necessary?
Our business was only 11/2 years old at the
time and it worked a real hardship on us.
Under normal conditions our move was im-
prudent and premature, but we had no
ch ice."
Another who had already moved (a renter)
said: "Prior to remodeling of the office in-
teriar, inquiry was made to the landlord
whether or not our office will be forced to
move in the near future. The reply was that
he didn't think so. With the go-ahead
statement our company invested about $3,000
in remodeling of the interior. All the ex-
penses involved in this improvement were
lost clue to eviction. Nothing could be
recovered."
Another who had already moved stated:
"Relocation has caused me to purchase and
use two additional pieces of transportation
dueto the fact that my business is a service
that must be performed on the customer's
premises. This is additional overhead that
had not been considered by the Government
and so far since relocating (2 years ago) I
haven't been able to increase my volume of
business to compensate for this added over-
head and I have suffered a decrease in
volume."
A businessman facing prospects of having
to move said "We are in an old structure
with rentals included (apartments). We
were in the right of way of a proposed free-
way, which we favored, but whose location
has been shifted, but now we may be in-
volved in a new underpass project, or street
reconstruction, possibly both, both of which
we are for. But, our location is very im-
portant, as an extremely potent competitor
is ideally situated to take nearly all of our
dropin trade if we move more than a block
or two. Dropin trade used to be a very small
part of our business, but it is now over one-
half of it and increasing. This is a very
difficult business to develop in a new location.
Our outside business over the phone would
tolerate a fairly long move without loss-
the amount depending on whether we change
phone numbers, and to which exchange if
to a new exchange. Our "purchase of prop-
erty" arrangements are a family affair and
quite involved as far as compensation would
be involved. (This location of 31 years and
we are known by our location.) We would
`be unable to obtain property or rental of a
store within our "zone" at anywhere near the
"overhead" we have at our present location,
therefore, a complete change in our mode
of operation may be required. We believe
any business should be helped to recover
from losses caused by construction, helped
even if there is an improvement of status,
but we are against cash payment in the form
of a "dole" as this principle of compensation
can be too easily abused by a "smart wise-
guy" businessman and his lawyer. In addi-
tion to compensation for direct losses there
needs to be help at finding a suitable loca-
tion and in getting low cost financing for
any improvements that may be needed to
reestablish the business at a level at least as
good as the original operation was."
Another facing prospects of having to
move, commented: "There is a tendency on
a Federal and State level to appraise prop-
erty considerably lower than going rate, thus
forcing condemnation. Aside from being
costly to owners, Government usually winds
up paying considerably more than owners
would have accepted through negotiation.
Some officials have frankly admitted that
condemnation takes them off the hook."
A businessman in a fringe area had this
to say: "Apparently most of the problem is
caused by failure to require Government
officials (employees, actually, regardless of
grade) to consider the rights of all citizens
and negotiate with them in good faith be-
fore completing a design of construction.
Further, in dealing with these people, city,
State, or Federal, I find most of them in-
experienced or lacking in ordinary logic,
common law, and understanding of what
makes this country go. To give an example,
as a recession measure in 1958, the Federal
Government supplied the funds to build a
four-lane freeway 2 miles long in front of
my place of business. As they excavated the
whole 2 miles 5-feet deep and then filled back
about 3 feet, I couldn't tell what was going
on until it was a 'fait accompli,' I had a nice
front (auto parts business), I ended with no
access from the front. A 6-foot bank in front
of my parking area. The roadbed on a 20-
week. My property value ruined after an
original $40,000 Investment and 8 years of
hardest labor."
Another in a fringe area said: "We are
located in the center of the block directly
across the street from the new Federal court-
house and office building. Our additional
cost is due to demolition of the private ga-
rage and parking space where we kept our
trucks and maintained customer parking.
We were forced to rent additional property
for parking at $100 a month and probably
will be forced to move because of the in-
creased value of property in the area and in-
crease in rent when our lease expires."
One businessman comments, interestingly:
"We expect to be benefited by the flood
control project. Certain areas of our city
are flooded every year, but the location of
our business only when there is a major flood.
The deepest water stood from 27 to 40
inches in lower floor. There is where we
have most and heaviest equipment and mill
supplies, etc. We would in no way be en-
titled to compensation on account of the
project, but feel many will. It is a great
undertaking to move, even though it entails
no real financial loss."
Another businessman speculated: "If the
factors controlling income received in a
business change, naturally it is usually over
a period of time, and the businessmen should
be able to take these factors into considera-
tion either to adjust them in his present lo-
cation or to plan to move to another location.
However, when the Government redevelops
it is usually a total upheaval in the vicinity
having immediate and total consequences,
and the businessman has absolutely no con-
trol over what happens. He is at the mercy
of a Government edict, and for this reason I
think that the Government must pay com-
pensation for their actions. The small busi-
nessman is usually in an older district be-
cause he doesn't have the financial resources
to locate in the newer, more modern, and
more profitable locations. When the older
districts are redeveloped and new apartments
and stores are built in these areas the small
businessmen located in these areas must
stand by and see financier-backed businesses
take over because he, himself, cannot afford
to open up these high rent locations. He
also cannot always move into another older,
low cost business district because they
usually have their own established firms. So
it comes down to this: His place of business
is taken over, he cannot get a job because
of his age, he has no unemployment com-
pensation, or sufficient funds to keep him for
any length of time, so he ends up as an un-
employment statistic and eventually on relief
rolls."
Iv
What further suggestions did our members
have? Let's take a look at a few of these:
One said: "There should be some considera-
tion given business as to first choice on rent-
ing or buying property in a redeveloped area
that is still suitable for the same type of
business at the same price they were bought
out at. Many businesses simply move com-
pletely out of the area and are lost for tax
purposes."
Another said: "Since residents of property
are offered comparable living facilities, or
the refusal, other occupants (nonresidential
such as businesses uses) should have the
same offer. Costs of relocating, loss of
productive time, wiring, and other installa-
tions that cannot be moved, as well as down-
time and actual moving expenses should be
part of the appraisal of the value of the mov-
degree angle whereas it had been level; a long ing, as well as the actual value of the prem-
island in the freeway which compels people ises. 'If the benefit to the people as a whole
coming from one direction to make a cir- is established, then the property owner
cuito},zs two-block drive to get in and I was occupant should not be forced to sacrifice
virtually out of business for 5 months in more than any other citizen to make the
1959. What has this cost me? I don't improvement possible. A fair market value
know. I made $40,000 net in 1962 but it for the property plus. a fair evaluation of the
was the hard way-70, 80, and 90 hours a moving and reestablishing of the business
Sar iti: ed, Approved For Release CIA-RD P75-00149 R000100170022-2
 1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --HOUSE 4113
His services to the United States rate/as
truly significant. * * * He has collaborated
with the Government in an Outstanding
manner and under. circumstances which
have involved grave personal risk.
I Include at this point in the RECORD
the co4ilnittee report and the public law
which, accomplished Mr. Goleniewski's
naturalization:
SENATE REPORT No, 437, CALENDAR No. 417,
88TH CONORI~SS, 1ST SESSION
(Mr.'JohNson, from the Committee on the
Judiciary (to accompany H.R. 5507).)
The Committee on the Judiciary, to which
was referred the bill.(H.R. 5507) for the re-
lief of Michal Goleniewski, having consid-
ered the same, reports favorably thereon
without amendment and recommends that
the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of the bill is to enable the
beneficiary to file a petition for naturaliza-
tion, and to exempt him from the provisions
of section 313 of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The beneficiary of the bill is a 40-year-old
native and citizen of Poland, who has been
admitted to the United States for permanent
residence and is employed by the U.S. Gov-
ernment. He was a member of the Com-
munist Party in Poland before his defection
in April 1958.. His services to the United
States are rated as truly significant.
A letter, with attached memorandum,
dated May 15, 1963, to the chairman of the
Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives from the Commissioner of
Immigration and Naturalization with ref-
erence to the case, reads as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, IMMIGRA-
TION AND NATURALIZATION SERV-
ICE,
Washington, D.C., May 15, 1963.
Hon, EMANUEL CELLER,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In response to your
request fora report relative to the bill (H.R.
5507) for the relief of Michal Goleniewski,
there is attached a memorandum of infor-
mation concerning the beneficiary. This
memorandum has been prepared from the
Immigration and Naturalization Service files
relating to the beneficiary.
The bill would waive the. provision of the
Immigration and Nationality Act which pro-
hibits the naturalization of aliens who were
within the subversive classes during a period
of 10 years immediately preceding the filing
of a petition for naturalization. The bill
would also grant the beneficiary sufficient
residence and physical presence in the
'United States for naturalization and permit
him to file a petition in any court having
naturalization jurisdiction. The committee
may desire to amend line 3 to reflect the
beneficiary's correct given name as Michal.
Sincerely,
RAYMOND F. FARRELL,
Commissioner.
"MEMORANDUM OF INFORMATION FROM IMMI-,
GRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE FILES
"The beneficiary, Michal Goleniewski, a
native and citizen of Poland, was born Au-
gust 16, 1922, in Nieswiez. His wife, Irmgard,
1s a "native of Berlin and a citizen of Ger'-
tntny. They are now living in the 'United
States. The beneficiary's education was all
in Poland: in 1939 he graduated from the
Gymnasium; he completed 3 years of law at
the University of Poznan, and in 1956 he re-
ceived a master's degree in political science
from tlse,U'piverssty of Warsaw. He enlisted
in the,Polish,Axmy in 1945,=d was comms-
stoned a lieutenant colonel in 1955, which
rank he held until coming to the United
States in 1961. He is now employed as a con-
sultant by the U.S. Government.
"The beneficiary's one prior marriage ter-
minated in divorce in Poland in 1957. He
married Irmgard Kampf in 1961, Both the
beneficiary, and his present wife are perma-
nent residents of the United States, having
been lawfully admitted as of January 12,
1961.
"Mr. Goleniewski was a member of the
Communist Party of Poland from January
1946 until April 1958, when he defected.
Without the enactment of H.R. 5507 the
beneficiary will not be eligible for natural-
ization prior to 1968.
"The Immigration and Naturalization
Service has been advised that the contribu-
tions made by Mr. Goleniewski to the security
of the United States are rated by the U.S.
Government as truly significant. He has col-
laborated with the Government in an out-
standing. manner and under circumstances
which have involved grave personal risk. He
continues to make major contributions to
the national security of the United States.
* * * His primary motivation in offering, to
work with the Government has been and re-
mains his desire to counter the menace of
Soviet communism. * * *"
The committee, after consideration of all
the facts in the case, is of the opinion that
the bill (H.R. 5507) should be enacted.
[Private Law 88-59, 88th Cong., H.R. 5507,
Aug.28, 19631
AN ACT FOR THE RELIEF OF MICHAL GOLE-
N IE WSHI
Be it enacted by the Senate and House
of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That Michal
Goleniewski, lawfully admitted for perma-
nent residence in the United States, shall be
held to be included in the class of appli-
cants for naturalization exempted from the
provisions of section 313(a) of the Immigra-
tion and Nationality Act, as such class is
specified in section 313(c) of the said Act,
and that Michal Goleniewski shall be con-
sidered to have met the residence and physi-
cal presence requirements of section 316(a)
of the said Act, and his petition for nat-
uralization may be filed with any court hav-
ing naturalization jurisdiction.
Approved August 28, 1963.
Mr. Speaker, in viewing our foreign
policy operations and internal security
we can only appraise that part of the ice-
berg that appears above the surface.
Even a cursory examination of what we
know has transpired casts doubt on the
wisdom of State Department policies.
At a time when we are told we can "do
business" with the Communists-even
extend them credit on wheat sales-
what does the record disclose? Have
they stopped their subversion here and
abroad? Of course not. Consider only
a few of the 1963 subversion highlights
that come to mind:
July 1: The State Department ordered
Gennadi G. Sevastyanov,-a Soviet Embassy
cultural attache in Washington to leave
the United States for attempting to recruit
a Russian-born employee of the U.S. Central
Intelligence Agency as a Russian spy.
July 2: The Federal Bureau of Investiga-
tion arrested four persons and charged them
with conspiring to spy for the Soviet Union.
Ivan D. Egorov, a personnel officer at the
United Nations, and his wife, Aleksandra,
were arrested in New York and later sent
back to the Soviet Union in return for two
Americans held by the Russians. Also ar-
San,i..ized Approved For Release :CIA-RQP75 Q0149R000100;170022-2
rested were a Washington couple using the
names of Robert and Joy Ann Baltch.
July 19: A Federal court jury in New York
convicted Navy Yeoman Nelson C. Drum-
mond of conspiracy to commit espionage for
the Soviet Union. He received life impris-
onment.
October 10: The Defense Department dis-
closed that SFC Jack E. Dunlap, a former
clerk-messenger for the National Security
Agency, had sold secrets to the Soviet Union
over a 2-year period before committing
suicide last July.
October 29: The FBI arrested an American
electronics engineer and a chauffeur for a
Russian trading agency on spy conspiracy
charges. Two Soviet diplomats were arrested
and then released because they had diplo-
matic immunity. A third Soviet diplomat
was named in charges filed by the FBI but
he was not apprehended.
No wonder the public is concerned
about the double standard of the State
Department and the laxity in our inter-
nal security. Testimony of Michal
Goleniewski is the part of the iceberg
that is below the surface and judging
by how bad the exposed part is it is high
time that we delve into the recesses and
see what is going on.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
to include the Monday, March 2 article
entitled "U.S. Secret Agencies Pene-
trated by Reds," and the Tuesday, March
3 article entitled "Probe Four U.S. Envoys
in Red Spy Sex Net." It is interesting
to note that the official line will prob-
ably be that Michal Goleniewski is emo-
tionally unstable and irrational., This
was what they said about Paul Bang-
Jensen.
[From the New York (N.Y.) Journal-Ameri-
can, Mar. 2, 1964]
U.S. SECRET AGENCIES PENETRATED BY REDS
(By Guy Richards)
A.defector from the Soviet Secret Police'
has informed U.S. officials that Moscow has
placed active cells in the Central Intelligence
Agency and the State Department in Wash-
ington and overseas.
The Red defector, a high-ranking opera-
tive in Russia's KGB, is sure that the cells
are still operative in the two highly sensitive
Government agencies.
He and his wife have been living in a
modest apartment not more than 30 minutes
from Times Square. He has been given a
new name and identity especially fabricated
to blot out his past and help him blend into
the American scenery.
He has named names. He has provided
Washington with details of what looms as a
greater scandal than the famous Alger Hiss
case. Here are some of his shattering dis-
closures:
Approximately $1.2 million of CIA funds
in Vienna recently was passed secretly along'
to the Communists-one-third to KGB (the
Soviet Secret Police), one-third to the
Italian Communist Party and one-third to
the American Communist Party.
Three American scientists with access to
defense secrets are working for the KGB.
They have ties to others in the same category
whose identities are unknown to him. But
he has clues to a number of them.
KGB has been able to infiltrate all Ameri-
can embassies in important cities abroad and
"every U.S. agency except the FBI."
Little, if anything, has been done to run
down or clean out the KGB men on American
payrolls though he fed the facts and ex-
posures on them to the CIA, starting as far
back as 1960.
 4114 1,..Ui'~113ICLJ.71'JIV21L i~.L'VV1