CIA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00149R000400310013-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 15, 1998
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: March 26, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

FOIAb3b FF ~~qq~~33bb
- Approved F Reease : CIAORDP75-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
panics of America and, as a matter of
fact, Projact Gasoline was initially begun
by one of the major coal producers of
America. So there is a great deal of re-
search, a lot of which has been encour-
aged by the Federal Government. May I
say to the gentleman that in addition to
the research projects, coal mined by
automation has attempted to make itself
more competitive. The price of coal to-
day is less per ton than it was in 1947.
All of the factors along the line economi-
cally with respect to coal have been
rather stable, but when we continually,
lose great market areas such as Now Eng-
land-and I for one would not for 1 min-
ute say that we have to turn all of New
England back to the private domain of
coal; I do not suggest that at all but sim-
ply say in my remarks we ought to have
a level which this should not go beyond.
In other words, the continual raiding of
markets, no matter how swift our re-
search might be or how vastly improved
automation in the mining of coal be-
comes, makes it hard for us to keep pace
when they take the markets away from
us in such an unfair competitive situa-
tion.
Mr. WHARTON, Then, the gentle-
man would say these programs are defi-
nitely worthwhile in making the state-
ment from your own personal ex-
perience?
Mr. MOORE. With respect to re-
search, I hold out great hope for the fact
that the programs which are now under-
taken and the various contracts that the
Office of Coal Research has engaged in,
will make a major contribution which
would encourage a greater use of coal in
many areas of the country.
Mr. WHARTON. I. thank the gentle-
man.
Mr. MOORE. I yield back the balance
of my time, Mr. Speaker.
CIA
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
PRIcE). Under previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
AnENDS] is recognized for 20 minutes.
(Mr. ARENDS asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, one of
the most important agencies of our Gov-
ernment, particularly during this period
of international uncertainties and anx-
ieties, is our Central Intelligence Agency.
The time has long since arrived when
someone should take cognizance of the
baseless criticism that has been and con-
tinues to be heaped ? upon it. That is
my purpose here today, as a member of
the CIA Subcommittee of the Commit-
tee on Armed Services since its establish-
ment. I do not purport to speak as an
authority on all the functions and activi-
ties of the CIA. But I do presume to
speak with some factual knowledge about
the CIA as an organization and how it
functions.
I do not mean to imply that the CIA
should be above criticism. No agency
of Government should be above criticism.
Constructive criticism makes for im-
provement, and there Is always room for
improvement.
But much of the criticism directed at
the CIA is not constructive. It cannot
possible be, as it is not based on facts.
It is based on half-truths and distortions.
Indeed, some of it constitutes complete
untruths, with no foundation'whatever
in fact or in reason.- This is what con-
cerns me. Something once said, how-
ever false, is readily oft-repeated and in
time Is accepted as a fact although an
outright falsehood. And we know there .
are those who would, if they could, dis-
credit the CIA. Others of us, having no
such intention, unwittingly become their
victims.
Let me present one illustration. I re-
fer to the much publicized, much dis-
cussed. case of the Polish defector,
Michal Goleniewski. I refer to the ir-
responsible series of articles concerning
the CIA that has been recently pub-
lished in the New York Journal Amer-
ican.
Among these wild accusations is that
the CIA has attempted to prevent Michal
Goleniewski from appearing before the
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.
They go so far as to charge that the
CIA has quashed subpenas. That sim-,
ply is not true. A simple telephone call
to the chairman of that subcommittee
would have brought forth the informa-
tion that going back to last August,
when' the first subpena was served on
this man, the executive branch of the
Government has been cooperative with
the Senate subcommittee throughout.
Contrary to what has been reported -
'in the press, the postponements of
Michal Goleniewski's appearance before
the Senate subcommittee were at the
request of the' man himself. And the
subcommittee agreed to his request.
I might add that the CIA subcom-
mittee, of which I am a member, went
into every aspect of this case. I am
personally satisfied that the publicized'
statements purported to come from
Michal Goleniewski are not correct.
The information as reported in the press
is not in agreement with the information.
Michal Goleniewski has made available
to many departments of ?Government.
Stories such as have been circulated
on this case display a reckless regard of
the truth. They can be harmful, and'
those who circulate them do a great dis-
service to maintaining public confidence
in the CIA.
Before commenting further with re-
spect to the CIA and unfounded criti-
cisms of it, perhaps I should first take
cognizance of the criticism of the CIA
Subcommittee, of which I am a member.
It is quite understandable that some
Members of Congress might feel we are
not as well' acquainted with the opera-
tions of the CIA as we should be. No
one, except members of the subcommit-
tee itself, has any knowledge of just how
extensively and intensively we inquire
Into the activities of this intelligence
agency. We hold no public hearings.
We issue no reports. We cannot do
otherwise and preserve the effectiveness
of the CIA as a secret fact-gathering
agency on an international scale. We
can only hope that the House has suffi-
cient confidence in our subcommittee, as
Individuals and as a committee, to accept
our assurances that we are kept well in-
formed and we have no. hesitancy of
keeping a close eye and ear on CIA
operations.
I was very much distressed to read an
article in Esquire magazine, written by
a distinguished Member of Congress-
one of the best and one of my good
friends-in which he says:
The members of four subcommittees them-
selves, by definition, have relatively low
status.
Not because I am a member of one of
those subcommittees, but for the other
members of our Armed Services Subcom-
mittee on CIA, I must take exception to
the implication of that statement as to
their status.
The membership of our subcommittee
is comprised of the distinguished chair-
man of the House Armed Services Com-
mittee, the gentleman from Georgia
[Mr. VINSON] ; the distinguished ranking
majority member, the gentleman from
South Carolina [Mr. RIVERS] ; and an-
other distinguished ranking member, the
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. HEBERT].
Serving with them are the other very
distinguished members: The gentleman
from Illinois [Mr. PRIcE], the gentleman
from Indiana [Mr. BRAY], the gentleman
from Florida [Mr. BENNETT], the gentle-
man from California [Mr. WILSON], the
gentleman from Alabama [Mr. HUDDLE-
STON], and the gentleman from New Jer-
sey [Mr.OsMERS].
I am not at liberty to announce the
members of the other subcommittees in
the Congress dealing with CIA matters;
but I can assure the House they are not
"by definition, of relatively low -status."
The article to which I refer goes on
to state:,
But even had those subconinattees both
status and time, the difficulties involved in
dividing jurisdiction among the four would,
I think, be insuperable.
This point deserves analysis. Since
the proposed solution to the matter of
low status and little time would be to
establish a Joint Committee on Foreign
Information and Intelligence, several
questions arise.
In addition to CIA, there are other
intelligence activities which are compo-
nent parts of the Department of De-
fense, the Department of State and the
Atomic Energy Commission. I do not
believe that the House Foreign Affairs
Committee, the Armed Services Commit-
tee or the Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy would be likely to relinquish their
responsibilities for legislative oversight
of the components of those departments
which are presently under their jurisdic-
tion. We would thus be establishing a
Joint Committee on Foreign Intelligence
that would, in fact, be superimposed on
the existing committees and subcommit-
tees. This brief analysis does not begin
to delve Into the jurisdictional problems
that would thus be raised within the
congressional committee structure and
the Congress itself.
In the same Esquire article it is as-
serted in connection with the Bay of
Pigs situation, and I now quote, "Not
only was CIA shaping policy-perhaps
understandable because of the absence
Sanitized - Approved For Release., CIA-RDP75-00149R000400310013-3
 Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-RDP75-00149R000400310013-3
FOIAb3b
Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-RDP75-00149R000400310013-3