SECRETARY UDALL AND CUBA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 29, 2004
• Sequence Number: 18
• Publication Date: January 1, 1961
• Content Type: OPEN

1961 Approved feo?g /J1O RDP $1&( 346R000200160018-8 6225
the oft rejected multiple price system points the following conferees: Messrs.
long resisted by the Corn Belt and by POWELL, ROOSEVELT, DENT, KEARNS, and
small, family-sized farmers of the East AYRES.
operating under the 15-acre exemption.
The Kennedy-Freeman-Cochrane pro-
posal would bypass the Congress in two
major respects. Whatever 1962 wheat
program the Secretary may devise would
be put into effect without any review or
opportunity for amendment by the Con-
gress. The overall fantastic control
scheme envisaged by this bill would
allow the Congress only 60 days to look
at its "basic features." And, second,
the proposal would allow all this to be
carried out through the back door of the
Treasury without the prior approval of
the Appropriations Committee.
That in substance is this new frontier
for agriculture. What is it? Certainly
not the land of freedom and plenty.
This new agriculture frontier for all of
us-farmers and consumers-is an and
desert of Government dependency, eco-
nomic disaster, and individual despair.
Mr. BECK WORTH. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. ARENDS. I yield to the gentle-
man from Texas.
Mr. BECKWORTH. The gentleman
intimated as I recall in the debate that
took place in connection with the grain
sorghums program bill that probably
what he has described here today
could occur. I also remember that in
one of the original statements concern-
ing the legislation it was said that some
8 million people have departed from the
farms of our Nation in the last several
years.
Does the gentleman feel as a result of
the new program possibly additional
farmers will be added to those who have
not been able to remain on farms?
Mr. ARENDS. It is possible that trend
SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4884) to
amend title IV of the Social Security
Act to authorize Federal financial par-
ticipation in aid for dependent children
of unemployed parents, and for other
purposes, with a Senate amendment
ment, and agree to the conference asked
by the Senate
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York?
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right to object, I assume this has
been cleared with the leadership on this
side of the aisle?
Mr. KEOGH. I am sure of it.
Mr. GROSS. Well, is the gentleman
so stating?
Mr. KEOGH. I am stating it. I just
left our committee, and it was at the
direction of the chairman of the com-
mittee, with the members of the minor-
ity, who will be on the committee of
conference, present.
Mr. GROSS. I withdraw my reserva-
tion of objection, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New York? The Chair hears none,
and appoints the following conferees:
Messrs. MILLS, KING of California,
O'BRIEN of Illinois, MASON, and BYRNES
oL Wisconsin.
will continue, but far and above that is (Mr. LAIRD asked and was given per-
the pattern as we visualize it here today, mission to address the House for 1 min-
the complete regimentation of every seg- ute and to revise and extend his re-
ment of agriculture. We cannot get marks and to include extraneous matter
away from that. We are automatically and tables.)
going into controls on livestock as well Mr. LAIRD. Mr. Speaker, yesterday,
as other things. I during a television interview, Interior
Mr. BECKWORTH. If the gentleman Secretary Stewart Udall made an ap-
will yield further, I want to make this palling remark about the Cuban crisis.
comment, that controls have been most At a time when President Kennedy is
rigid in connection with the cotton pro- striving to insure bipartisan unity in this
gram for 20 years. In my opinion this deepening crisis, Mr. Udall saw fit to
has caused many small farmers to be drive a wedge between our parties by at-
compelled to leave farms. tempting to place the blame for the Cu-
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OF
1938
Mr. POWELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3935) to
amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938, as amended, to provide coverage
for employees of large enterprises en-
gaged in retail trade or service and of
other employers engaged in commerce or
in the production of goods for commerce,
to increase the minimum wage under the
act to $1.25 an hour, and for other pur-
poses, with Senate amendments thereto,
disagree to the Senate amendments, and
request a conference with the Senate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from New
York? The Chair hears none, and ap-
ban debacle upon the shoulders of former
President Eisenhower and Mr. Nixon.
Mr. Udall had the remarkable bad
taste to say that the anti-Castro Cuban
invasion was conceived by General Ei-
senhower and Mr. Nixon a year ago and
that "they started it and handed it over
to Mr. Kennedy. Eisenhower directed
it. Another administration carried it
out."
Mr. Speaker, as a member of the De-
fense Appropriations Subcommittee of
the House I have had the benefit of
background briefings on this evolving
situation. Therefore I can say with con-
viction that Mr. Udall's statements are
pure and unadulterated hogwash.
If Mr. Udall is seeking to place the
responsibility for a grave situation on
other shoulders than those of the ad-
ministration he represents let him look
elsewhere for his scapegoat.
The Secretary did refer to the picture
of American unity that the eyes of the
world must behold if we are to be effec-
tive in this, and other, crises. The meet-
ings President Kennedy has been having
with Republican leaders such as Mr.
Eisenhower and Mr. Nixon, and his
forthcoming meeting with Governor
Rockefeller will contribute substantially
to.such unity. I submit that this is the
way in which the administration can as-
sure bipartisan support, not in the
shoddy manner Mr. Udall has seen fit
It is my sincere hope that the Ken-
nedy administration will see fit to brief
its cabinet officers in such a way that
they will be properly informed before
making appearances in which they are
sure to be asked to comment on issues
of the day.
In the meantime, I would suggest that
the Interior Secretary undertake to
smooth the waters of bipartisanship
which he has so greatly troubled by his
rash and Inaccurate statement.
Mr. Speaker, because of its background
information and commentary in this
entire matter, I would like to include at
this time for insertion in the RECORD a
column by Mr. Stewart Alsop entitled,
"Matter of Fact", from this morning's
Washington Post and Times Herald:
Is' YOU STRIKE AT A KING
(By Stewart Alsop)
Sometimes it is useful to state the obvious.
After the events of the last tragic week, and
especially after what President Kennedy said
in his speech to the editors, Fidel Castro
cannot Indefinitely be permitted to survive
in triumph. The prestige and even the
honor of the United States are now obviously
and wholly committed to Castro's ultimate
downfall.
There is hardly anybody in the higher
reaches of the Kennedy administration who
does not agree that this commitment to
Castro's destruction now in fact exists. And
yet President Kennedy and his advisers cer-
tainly did not plan the commitment. On
the contrary, the President's key decision in
regard to the Cuban operation were specifi-
cally designed to avoid such a commitment.
There were two key decisions made by the
President after he decided to give the opera-
tion a green light. The plan for the opera-
tion which the President inherited from
President Eisenhower involved the use of
American armed force-for example, naval
airpower-if necessary to assure the success
of the operation. President Kennedy's first
key decision was to rule out the use of any
American forces whatever, under any con-
ditions whatever. His second decision was to
announce the first decision, just as the op-
eration began.
The public announcement that American
forces would under no circumstances be in-
volved was reiterated twice by the Presi-
dent himself and four times with even more
emphasis by Secretary of State Dean Rusk.
The announcement obviously greatly re-
duced the likelihood of a general uprising in
Cuba, which was the main purpose of the
Cuban operation. It also quite unneces-
sarily tied the President's hands in advance.
After the operation began to go bad, at an
all-day meeting at the White House on
Wednesday, certain of the President's mili-
tary and civilian advisers favored active
American intervention. They argued that
the operation simply could not be allowed to
fail, if only because the United States would
in that event become In the eyes of the world
the most papery of paper tigers. The Presi-
dent might well have favored this course
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R0002010160018-8
6226 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
himself, if he had not so publicly tied his cal judicial staff, under the auspices of
own hands in advance. Why did he do so? the Americanism committee, made its
This reporter has tried hard to find the selection of the 1961 oratorical win.-
answer to that question, and must confess net's speech for the first division council
a en mething failure. The fact r a that there has contest, entitled, "America and the Con.. about the been President's soesident's role oddly in uncharacteristic
stitution: Past, Present and Future," by
the C Cuban n aTo To
e affair. ff
be sure, since the operation failed, his ac- Thomas L. Brejcha, Jr., of Mount Car?-
tions have been wholly characteristic of the wel High School, Chicago, Ill.
man--he has taken the whole responsibility The American Legion has fostered and
for the failure on himself and he has passed promoted many patriotic movements
the word down the line that there will be no among our youth, such as girls' and boys'
recriminations and no scapegoat hunt. The states, poor boys' camps, and welfare
uncharacteristic phase came earlier, and charitable programs, but none are as
Throughout his career-as for example in
his decision to enter the key Wisconsin and far reaching as the oratorical and essay
West Virginia primaries last year-Mr. Ken- contests.
nedy has always looked before he leaped. The thousands of youngsters through-
He had looked very hard, carefully weigh- out the public and parochial primary
ing every conceivable factor likely to affect and high school grades in Illinois, com-
the outcome. And then he has leaped very pete for this high honor.
hard, using every conceivable means to as- The hours spent in research of patri-
sure success. otic subjects and historical works stimu-
m late patriotic thoughts and knowledge
the Cuban victim vim
tlonIn, Mrthr. looking Kennedy phase was certainly the Cuban
of bad intelligence. But intelligence is and of both our patriotic leaders and their
always has been two-thirds guesswork, and concept of our Constitution in its use and
it is hard to believe that the President ade- control of our Government.
quately weighed the consequences of failure. Thus, we give our youth an opportu.-
This is further borne out by the fact that nity to study our Government and the in.-
the leaping phase of the operation was, by tricacies of its constitutional operation.
isticapastlly Kennedy tentative. The standards, so idea uncharacter-
that Cat o This training is of tremendous value in
Castro
could be brought down without any risk at molding our future citizens for their civic
all of using American men or arms recalls responsibilities in the future,
the old rhyme of dubious origin: Mr. Frank C. Bottigliero, State direc-
"Mother, may I go out to swim? tor of rehabilitation, manager of the
"Yes, my darling daughter; Chicago once, and formerly chairman of
"Hang your clothes on a hickory limb the State Americanism committee, who
"And don't go near the water." trained under my deceased brother, El-
At least part of the explanation for the liodor Libonati, chairman of the Ameri-
markedly un-Kennedylike quality of the canism committee for many years before
President's role in the first phase of the his death, and who was responsible for
Cuban operation lies with United Nations many of the American Legion's Ameri-
Ambassador Adlai Stevenson, whose voice is canism programs, sent me the following
listened to with respect in the Kennedy letter:
administration. THE AMERICAN LEGION,
From his own point of view it was quite Chicago, Ill., April 20,1961.
natural that Stevenson would strongly favor Chicago
Hon. ROLAND V. LIBONATI,
a. categorical promise that American forces U.S. Congressman,
would not be used in Cuba. The peculiar Seventh District,
holier-than-thou public stance which suc-
r.eeding American delegations to the UN
have always thought it necessary to assume
was difficult to sustain in any case, in view
of the obvious American complicity in the
Cuban operation. Without the Kennedy
promise, it would have been impossible to
sustain.
Kennedy has spoken of "the lessons we
have learned" from the tragic Cuban epi-
sode. One lesson, surely, is that what pleases
the majority of the strangely assorted gaggle
of more or less sovereign nations which now
constitute the UN General Assembly does
not necessarily serve the national interest
of the United States. Another lesson is
summed up in the old adage, "If you strike
at a king, you must strike to kilt"
Some day, one way or another, the Ameri-
can commitment to bring Castro down will
have to be honored. The commitment can
only be honored if the American Govern-
ment is willing, if necessary, to strike to
kill, even if that risks the shedding of
American blood.
WINNER OF COOK COUNTY, ILL.,
AMERICAN LEGION ORATORICAL
CONTEST
The SPEAKER. Under previous order
of the House, the gentleman from Illi-
nois [Mr. LIBONATII is recognized for 10
minutes.
Mr. LIBONATI. Mr. Speaker, the
American Legion, Department of Illinois,
has recently, through its official oratori-
April 24
the drearos that no mere man has ever dared
dream be:ore * * * and see those dreams be-
come reality before our very eyes. All these
things we may choose to do because we are
freemen, each and every one of us, and this
is America.
But many years ago, this blessed and
prosperous land that we know today as the
United States was but a hapless conglom-
eration o t political factions, guided by selfish
interest, bitterly opposed to any notion of
union. However, soon were the advocates
of the Articles of Confederation to realize
that a house of dissension offered no secu-
rity to it fledging America, that the best
guarantee of individual liberty and freedom
was H, Constitution that was also a ligament
of national unity.
And so it was that a group of eminent
statermea, representing some of the best
talents in the land, gathered in Philadel-
phia in 1787 to rescue a nation from the cru-
cible of political chaos. During the many
days and weeks that followed, the red brick
walls of the Pennsylvania State House were
to rdsound with the clash of harsh voices and
strained tempers. There was Jefferson, young
and impetuous, who opposed any modifica-
tion of a pure AtheIian democracy; there
was Hamilton, arrogant and aristocratic, who
scorned any attempt at Government by mere
"common men"; and there was Washington,
august and determined, whose only concern
was to preserve a hard-won independence
from internal dissolution. There were many
others-the Gouverneur Morrises, the Frank-
lins' the Madisons-and almost as many dif-
fererrt points of view. But within that turbu-
lent chamber an even greater spirit would
prevail--a spirit that could not be dispelled
by faction. From Hamilton's Federalism and
Jefferson's Localism came an equitable dis-
tribrtio:i of power between national and
State government; from the interaction of
aristocracy and democracy came the ideal
middle ground of a popular Republic; by
concilia;ion and compromise both the radi-
cal and the conservative idea were synthe-
sized to form the foundations of the Amer-
ican. society which we enjoy to this day.
But as the signatories pressed their seal
upon the newly formed Constitution of the
United States, they realized that only the
Chicago, 111. first obstacle had been hurdled. The docu-
DEAR Lm: Enclosed please find the oration meet that British Prime Minister Gladstone
of the 1961 oratorical winner for the first had once described as "the most wonderful
division council contest which I talked to work eY er struck off at a given moment by
you about and you said that if we would the brain and purpose of man" was, never-
send a copy to you you would have it entered theless, only a mere document * * * a piece
in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. of parchment. The only true test for a sys-
Sincerely, term of government is the test of time.
FRANK C. BOTTIGLIERO, The Founding Fathers envisioned for
State Director of Rehabilitation, Man- their young Nation a long and glorious his-
ager of the Chicago Office. tory. And under our Constitution we have
had th, .t long and glorious history, but only
AMERL",'A AND THE CONSTITUTION: PAST, through the devotion, sweat, and blood of
PRESENT, AND FUTURE our predecessors in their unswerving resolu-
(By Thomas L. Brejcha, Jr., Mount Carmel tiogi to protect and cherish our way of life
High School, Chicago, Ill.) and its vital institutions. During the nearly
The scene is State and Madison Streets;- two ce:ituries that have elapsed since the
the "crossroads of the world"-in Chicago, ship of American statehood was launched
Ill., my hometown. It is any hour of the toward its ultimate destiny, men have had
working clay, almost any day in the year. to strive to overcome the evil that hates
Everywhere there are people here, all the freedom-not only on the battlefield, but
different types and sorts of people imag- in their everyday lives. In face of economic
inable-Protestants, Catholics, and Jews- and. military crises alike, the Federalist, the
whites, Negroes, and orientals-shoppers, anti-Federalist, the Democrat, the Whig,
executives;, and plumbers-all moving and and the Republican have together rallied
pushing in a ceaseless surge, each going his around their common Americanism. And
own way and minding his own business. only once throughout all these many years
And yet, all those different people, all those hat= the Constitution ever failed us, and that
different races, religions, and occupations was during the time of the Civil War-when
have something very much in common: all we failed it.
are freemen; all are Americans. And now, in this very day, Americans face
Yes, here in America we are all freemen, a greater time of trial than ever-before. A
regardless, of origin, race, or creed. We are short, squat man has thrust a pudgy finger
free to ply our trades, enjoy our leisure, and in our direction with the foreboding mes-
accept the challenge of a New Frontier. We sage: "We will bury you." The communistic
are free to scale the tallest mountain--to evil which he embodies threatens not only
write poetry to raise our families as we see the economic superiority of our enlightened
fit. In America you and I are free to dream capitalism, but our very existence as free
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R00020':0160018-8
 1961 ! Approved GRE SIVNAL RECORD' CIP4B00346R000200160018-86201
There are philosophers and historians
-who, while they may dispute the Com-
munist interpretation of the outcome of
inevitable forces, nonetheless believe
that the decisions of men are determined
by the operation of vast forces beyond
their control.
But we who uphold freedom believe
that men determine events; that men
can, by the exercise of their reason, by
their free choice, change themselves,
change their community, change their
country, and change the course of the
world struggle.
We must believe, therefore, that suf-
ficient foresight and proper reading of
clear Communist intentions by Western
statesmen could have saved Eastern
Europe; that proper evaluation and de-
termined action could have saved China;
that boldness at the critical hour could
have saved Indochina; that a determined
will to win could have saved North
Korea; that simple commonsense could
have saved us from the present Cuban
Ilasco.
Wrong decisions result in defeat;
right decisions result in victory. We of
the free world have consistently lost
because we have made a whole series
Df wrong decisions, based on faulty
philosophy and poor information. That
is our trouble.
It is senseless to say, in a spirit of
misplaced sportsmanship or in a gush
Df superficial unity, "Let's not look
back; let's not be Monday morning
quarterbacks; let's not blame individuals
for what has happened. Let's hope that
the future will be better and move for-
ward with the same philosophy, the
same policies, the same team."
I believe that only new policies and
new attitudes can reverse the decline
Df the West. Unless, after such a fiasco
as our 3-year Cuban policy, we find out
and nail down which recommendations,
which misinformation, which decisions,
which attitudes, which particular men
Wrought us down to defeat, we will gain
nothing from our reverses and will only
proceed to newer and greater disasters.
It is in this spirit that I wish to exam-
ine certain aspects of the American
policy failure that brought Fidel Castro
to power in Cuba.
It has become customary to blame
^astro's emergence on the poverty of the
Cuban peasant masses, on the abuses of
the Batista dictatorship, on American
identification with the Batista dictator-
ship, on everything but our own lack of
understanding and our own miscon-
zeived policy.
I agree that there was poverty in Cuba,
that there was a need for social reform,
that the Batista dictatorship was re-
pressive and unpopular, that until near
the end we did not take the necessary
measures to indicate that we did not ap-
prove of its excesses. But all this still
foes not explain Castro's rise to power.
I am convinced that the situation
could have been saved had we embarked
upon an intelligent and energetic pol-
icy as late as 1958 or even 1959. An ex-
amination of our policy during this last
period will reveal, at the very least, a con-
sistent wrongheadedness which is noth-
ing short of frightening.
If Batista had fallen and had been re-
placed by a democratic, and therefore
pro-Western, government, there would
have been every reason to rejoice. But
the fact is that when Batista fell, his
regime was replaced by an infinitely more
evil dictatorship, and a dictatorship, to
boot, controlled from the Kremlin and
dedicated to the subversion of Latin
America.
I say that there was nothing inevitable
about this.
There was opposition to the Batista
dictatorship, especially in the cities.
But this did not mean that the Cuban
people were pro-Castro. At no time did
Castro have more than 2,000 men under
him in the Sierra Maestra mountains.
Although they engaged in sabotage, Cas-
tro's "barbudos" fought no important
engagements and had not serious mili-
tary significance.
The real opposition to Batista was
based on the middle class and the stu-
dent body and the Catholic. Church in
the cities. This opposition was pro-
democratic, overwhelmingly anti-Com-
munist, and only vaguely sympathetic to
Castro because he appeared to be mov-
ing in the same direction. It has been
estimated that the urban opposition to
Batista suffered 11.000 casualties com-
pared with the 1,000 casualties suffered
by Castro's forces from the beginning to
the end of their insurrection. But this
urban opposition movement lacked lead-
ership, lacked unity, lacked publicity
and, above all, it lacked American en-
couragement.
If the State Department was really
convinced that the Batista regime had
so lost the support of the people that its
downfall had to be accelerated, why was
no effort made to encourage the forma-
tion of a democratic middle of the road
movement as an alternative to Castro?
Surely it would have required very little
encouragement to foster such a move-
ment.
Why did we not take the initiative in
urging elections under the supervision of
the OAS? And why did we turn a deaf
ear to Batista in 1958 when he seemed
disposed to consider such elections?
Why was there no alert to the danger
that if Batista were toppled while Castro,
with his scattering of followers, com-
manded the only united and cohesive op-
position movement, the consequence,
the clearly inevitable consequence, would
be the emergence of a Communist dic-
tatorship in the heart of the Caribbean?
Why did we close our eyes to the op-
eration of Castro agents on American
soil, to the shipments of arms that went
out from Florida to Castro and to the
constant departure of reinforcements for
the Sierra Maestra guerrillas?
These are questions that require an-
swers. I think the answer to this is that
our State Department was inclined to
look upon the Castro movement as an
agrarian reform movement, as it was
once inclined to look upon the Chinese
Communists as agrarian reformers. And
so we decided to put all of our eggs in
the Castro basket, to force Batista out
so that Castro could take over, and to
hope for the best.
The Subcommittee on Internal Se-
curity has taken testimony indicating
that this was so from three former U.S.
Ambassadors: Ambassador Arthur Gard-
ner, Ambassador Earl E. T. Smith, and
Ambassador William Pawley. Accord-
ing to them, the State Department either
ignored or appeared not disposed to be-
lieve their repeated warnings that most
of Castro's chief lieutenants, and prob-
ably Fidel Castro himself, were Moscow
Communists.
Raul Castro, Che Guevara, and some
of Castro's other top henchmen had re-
ceived training in Moscow; this was com-
monly known. Fidel himself had played
a leading role in the Bogota riots of 1949,
which cost the lives of 1,000 people, and
he had been publicly denounced at the
time by the Colombia radio as a foreign
Communist agitator.
For a long time there was a lot of
wishful thinking to the effect that Fidel
Castro was probably not a Communist
because there was no proof that he car-
ried a Communist membership card and
the Communists sometimes appeared to
have differences with him. What a ten-
uous assumption on which to base Amer-
lean foreign policy.
Fidel Castro may not carry a Com-
munist membership card to this day.
But for all practical purposes he is a
Communist. No one, I think, would now
challenge this statement.
This was as true of Fidel Castro yes-
terday as it is today. He was known to
be pro-Soviet, and anti-American. His
own brother and others of his chief lieu-
tenants were graduates of Moscow. And
finally, there was his role in the Bogota
riots. Latin American students, by tra-
dition, have a penchant for joining rev-
olutionary movements in their own
countries. But it is not part of their
national tradition to travel to other
countries for the purpose of instigating
murderous riots. The pattern here is
almost conclusively suggestive of Com-
munist affiliation. Certainly, the Co-
lombian police had no doubt on this
score.
The question must be asked: Why
was the information about the Com-
munist direction of the Castro movement
not given to the people of the United
States and of Cuba before Castro seized
power? Why were the American people
permitted, if not encouraged, to believe,
for a period of more than a year, that the
Castro movement, although it might
contain certain Communists, was es-
sentially an agrarian reform movement?
I am certain that Secretary Herter
did not willfully suppress information of
such critical importance. But if the
State Department had this information
and it was not passed on to the Secre-
tary of State, or if it was passed on in a
diluted manner, or if Secretary Herter
was "protected" from his ambassadors,
then it is important to know who in the
Department was responsible for this de-
linquency.
I have said that our Cuban policy dis-
aster may be traced back to the same
fallacious political policy that has led us
to disaster after disaster in the postwar
period.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
6202 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -? SENATE
We have suffered from an almost ob-
sessional attitude toward all the failings
on our side, toward every aberration
from simonpure democracy in our. own
society and on the part of our allies.
I believe that this exaggerated,ultra-
liberal preoccupation with the failings
on our side, has induced a tendency to
minimize the failings and evils that exist
on the other side. The proponents of
this philosophy have felt that there exists
on both sides good and evil, the same
human frailty, the same capacity for
human failing, the same desire for peace
and understanding. Coexistence, there-
fore, is possible and it must be sought
after even at the cost of further com-
promises.
This tendency to believe the best of
communism while believing the worst
about ourselves and the free world has
wrought massive and irreparable damage
since the close of World War II.
In the case of China, there were our
desk-position policymakers who hated
Chiang Kai-shek so much that they were
happy to see him defeated and to help
precipitate his defeat, even though the
obvious consequence was the establish-
ment of a Communist regime in China.
In the case of Korea, American influ-
ence only last year exerted itself to force
Syngman Rhee out of power, ostensibly
because his regime was autocratic and
inefficient. In doing so, we did not stop
to ask what the consequence of this
would be. In my opinion, the successor
governments had suffered from the same
characteristic Asian autocracy and in-
efficiency, but they have lacked Syngman
Rhee's iron determination to stand up
against communism.
In the case of Cuba, as I had pointed
out, we were guilty of the same error,
when we accelerated Batista's downfall
at a time when no democratic alterna-
tive had been prepared, and when his
downfall could only lead to a Castro
government.
What I find particularly perplexing
is that many of those who protest against
the autocratic features of the Syngman
Rhee regime, of the Chiang Kai-shek
regime, are prepared to swallow autoc-
racy and dictatorship wholesale if they
have a "progressive" label pinned on
them.
The regime of Kwame Nkrumah in
Ghana is infinitely more dictatorial and
oppressive, for example, than the Syng-
man Rhee regime was at its worst. But
it is not criticized, presumably because
it speaks in the name of "social reform"
and "anti-imperialism." The Toure re-
gime in Guinea has already assumed
many of the trappings of Soviet totali-
tarianism. But we are urged to avoid
abuse in dealing with Guinea and to seek
to win Toure over to our side.
It is time to take inventory of our
position. We can no longer afford the
luxury of toppling friendly anti-Com-
munist regimes simply because they do
not adhere to the norms of democracy
that civilized society has taken centuries
to evolve.
In World War II, to save ourselves
from the evils of Nazism, we entered
into a military alliance with Soviet to-
talitarianism, which was equally as
evil. As Churchill put the matter: "If
a lion were about to devour me, and a
crocodile came along and started biting
off the lion's foot, I should welcome this
assistance, even though I have no par-
ticular fondness for crocodiles."
It is time that we start building our
alliances as best as we can, never en-
dorsing dictatorship, using our influence
and example in the interest of greater
freedom, but seeking military agreements
as frank arrangements of convenience,
as we did in World War II.
The President of the United States
has spoken and in words not easily mis-
understood. The Nation is with him,
indeed the entire free world will rally
to his support. He has come forward
with the kind of leadership the West has
demanded-strong and forceful. He has
approached the Cuban crisis with a, vigor,
a clarity, and a determination calculat-
ed to crystallize in the minds of national
leaders everywhere the true nature of
aggressive, imperialistic communism.
President Kennedy is generating a unity
among nations not previously experi-
enced-a unity that will thwart the Com-
munist threat while it is consumed by its
own evil.
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS
AND HOUSING
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, this
past week it was my privilege to join
with the junior Senator from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. CLARK] in cosponsoring a bill
to establish a Department of Urban Af-
fairs and Housing.
Because of the importance of this pro-
posal and the widespread interest in it,
I ask unanimous consent that the letter
from the President submitting to the
Congress a draft of the proposed leg-
islation, the bill itself, along with a sec-
tional analysis, and a letter from the
Director of the Budget describing the
measure in detail, be printed at this
point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the material
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
ApzzL 1E, 1961.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT, and DEAR MR.
SpEAxER: I am transmitting for considera-
tion by the Congress draft legislation to
carry out the recommendation in my March
9 message on housing and community de-
velopment calling for the creation of a new
Cabinet Department of Urban Affairs and
Housing.
Two problems standing near the top of
our national priority list are first, preventing
the appalling deterioration of many of our
country's urban areas and rehabilitating the
cities of our Nation which currently con-
tain 70 percent of our people-a figure that
is constantly growing-and second, insuring
the availability of adequate housing for all
segments of our population. Since the Na-
tional Housing Agency was established in
1942, the activities of the Federal Govern-
ment in housing and in working with States
and local communities in the rebuilding of
our urban areas and in preventing their
deterioration has increased steadily. The
importance of this area of Federal activity
merits recognition by the establishment of
the Department of Urban Affairs and Hous-
ing. Thus, the new Secretary of Urban Af-
fairs and Housing will be in a position to
present the Nation's housing and metropoli-
'.April 24,
tar: development needs to the Cabinet and
will by virtue of his position provide the
necessary leadership in coordinating the
many Federal programs in these fields.
In addition to the draft bill, I am en-?
closing a letter from the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget describing the legis..
latton in detail. A letter identical to this
on,3 is being sent to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives.
I hope that prompt action can he sched-
ul(d on this important legislation and that
the Congress will act favorably on the
proposal.
Sincerely,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., April 17, 1961.
MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: There is enclosed.
herewith a draft of a bill, "To establish a
De )artment of Urban Affairs and Housing,
and for other purposes."
;'he bill carries out your recommendations
for the creation within the executive
bri:.nch of a new Cabinet-rank department
to administer Federal programs for com-
mr;:nity development and housing contained
in the state of the Union message dated
January 30, 1961, and the message on our
Nation's housing dated March 9, 1961.
The purpose of this legislation is to pro-.
vide for full recognition and consideration
of the problems resulting from the rapid
growth in the United States of our urban
and metropolitan areas and needs. Estab-
lishment of the Department of Urban Af-
fairs and Housing will help in achieving
consistent and flexible administration of the
Government's community development and
hosing programs, give more effective leader-
ship within the executive branch to the co-
ordination of Federal activities affecting
urban and metropolitan growth and develop-
ment, and foster consultation among Fed-
eral, State, and local officials to contribute
to the solution of urban and metropolitan
development problems.
The bill sets forth a new declaration of
national urban affairs and housing policy,
which states that the welfare and security
of the Nation requires the sound and orderly
growth and development of the Nation's
urban communities. It is declared that the
na ,ional policy shall be to assist communi-
ties in developing and carrying out local
programs to meet the problems resulting;
from growth and change. Included would be
ap:?ropriate Federal concern with and leader-
ship in comprehensive community planning,
eliminating slums and blighted areas and
providing decent homes in a suitable living
en?rironment for the Nation's population,
providing adequate industrial and commer-
cial locations, developing effective urban
mass transportation, and providing public
ant recreational facilities and open spaces
around our major population centers.
'Co help achieve this national policy, the
bill establishes a new executive department:
the Department of Urban Affairs and Hous-
ing, to be headed. by a Secretary appointed
by the President with Senate confirmation
Tb a Department would be under the super.
vision and direction of the Secretary. Ar:
Under Secretary, three Assistant Secretaries,
a General Counsel and an Administrative
Assistant Secretary are also provided for and
would perform duties prescribed by the Sec-
retary. Responsibility would be vested ir
the Secretary for all functions currently per.
formed by the Housing and Home Finance
Administrator.
The proposed legislation directs the Sec.
rei:ary to conduct and make available con-
tinuing comprehensive studies of urban de-
ve:.opment and housing. He would advise
the President with respect to Federal pro-
grams contributing to the achievement of
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R00020,0160018-8
 6200
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R00020016001>-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 24
equal, that all men are endowed by their
Creator with certain inalienable rights.
Down through their history, the
American people have always sympa-
thized with the aspirations of other peo-
ple for freedom. Nor have-we hesitated
to intervene on the side of freedom. It
was for freedom that we intervened in
Cuba in 1898, and in Korea in 1950.
And this is why we are intervening in
Laos and Berlin today.
If we had seriously intervened on be-
half of the Cuban freedom fighters, this,
as I see it, would be nothing to apologize
for. What we should apologize for is
the fact that our intervention was nig-
gardly and halfhearted.
If American arms had intervened in
last week's battle of the Cochinos beach-
head on the same scale as Soviet arms
intervened, the outcome of this battle,
I am sure, would have been different, and
the Castro dictatorship would now have
become an evil memory of the past.
Had we intervened effectively, there
would today be every reason for rejoicing.
The trouble was that our intervention
was deficient in planning and determi-
nation and scope. This, I believe, was
our error; this was the lesson to be
learned.
I do not suggest that we should have
sent in the Marines to put down the
Castro dictatorship. This would have
been completely unnecessary. The ma-
jority of the Cuban people have come to
realize that the Castro regime is not an
indigenous reform movement, but a quis-
ling tyranny created by the Kremlin as a
base for the subversion of Latin America.
The 100,000 Cuban refugees who have
escaped to American soil attest to the
intense hatred of the Cuban people for
this regime of oppression and misery and
national treason. The thousands of
Cuban patriots who are fighting in the
mountains, in open defiance of Castro's
firing squads, also attest to this.
No regimes in history have created as
much popular hatred and revulsion as
have the Communist regimes in every
country where they have been installed.
The press has made much of the fact
that no popular uprising occurred to
greet the invasion by the brave band of
600 or 800 patriots that went ashore on
the beach at Cochinas. Many news-
papers have concluded from this that the
estimates of popular discontent in Cuba
were greatly exaggerated. '
In my own opinion, it proves no such
thing. In the first place, we have now
learned that, the instant the invasion be-
gan, the Castro regime instituted a reign
of terror without parallel in this hemi-
sphere. According to newspaper ac-
counts, within a matter of 48 hours, 50,-
000 people had been rounded up. Think
of it. Fifty thousand people in a coun-
try of 6 million. This was as though a
Communist dictatorship had rounded up
1,500,000 people in the United States and
placed them in concentration camps.
In the second place, I believe it is only
natural for people living under so cruel
a dictatorship to wait for 2 or 3 days, to
see how things are going before they de-
cide to risk their own lives.
From the many contacts I have had
with Cuban exiles, I am convinced that,
had the battle of the beachhead been
decided against Castro, a national upris-
ing would have taken place despite the
mass terror and mass executions.
In short, I disagree with the pessi-
mistic, defeatist attitude of those who
now say that the invasion was prema-
ture. True, it lacked coordination.
True, there was bungling. True, more
could have been done to soften up the
Castro regime in advance. But the
chief weakness, as I see it, was the fact
that on the eve of the invasion we had
not yet faced up to the problem that
President Kennedy, in his speech of last
Thursday, posed and answered so reso-
lutely.
The first battle was bound to be of
critical importance. Yet we had not
decided what we were prepared to do
and just how far we were prepared to
help if the freedom fighters ran into
difficulty.
According to the accounts which have
reached the press, the battle of the
Cochinos beachhead was really decided
when Castro threw into the fight Soviet
tanks and let fighter planes. About the
presence of Soviet jet aircraft over the
beachhead there is still some doubt.
But there is not doubt about the role
played by Soviet tanks and other Soviet
weapons. Nor is there any doubt about
the fact that Cuban Communist pilots
are in Czechoslovakia today, receiving
training in Soviet fighter aircraft.
In my opinion, had we equalized the
position on the Cochinos beachhead by
providing the freedom fighters with close
air support, there might be a different
story to tell today.
I say that we should have done so, and
that we should be prepared to do so.
We can no longer tolerate a situation
in which a quisling totalitarian regime,
directed at the subversion of the entire
Western Hemisphere, is able to maintain
its hold over the Cuban people because
of the massive quantities of arms placed
in its hands by the Kremlin.
The time is long past due for a firm
announcement that we will tolerate no
further shipments of Soviet arms to the
Western Hemisphere. I believe we
should advise both Mr. Khrushchev and
Mr. Castro that we will tolerate no So-
viet military aircraft in Caribbean skies.
I believe that if in the next round of
battle we are prepared to give the Cuban
freedom fighters the air support neces-
sary to obliterate Communist air power
in Cuba, the Cuban freedom fighters will
take care of the rest.
In saying these things, I do not mean
to ignore or underestimate the bungling
which unquestionably took place on our
side. The point I wish to make is that
this bungling was of secondary impor-
ance. The first attempt to liberate Cuba
from the Castro tyranny failed for the
simple reason that we had yet to make
the stern resolve that this fight must not
be permitted to fail.
I feel that the entire episode should
be subjected to careful review, in execu-
tive session, by a committee of Congress.
I am opposed to public discussion be-
cause I believe that too much has al-
ready been said publicly, on the basis of
fragmentary or inaccurate information,
about CIA involvement and d A bun-
gling. Indeed, I feel that the press of
our country, in its desire to present all
the news, or everything that passes for
news, sometimes does a disservice to our
national security. Simply by reading
the American press, Castro could have
learned about the preparations for the
invasion, in the most exquisite detail-
where the camps were located, how
many men were in training, what equip-
ment they had, what their plans were.
Castro could truly boast in his first tele-
vision broadcast that all he had to do to
find out about rebel intentions was to
read the American press. There is
something wrong with such a situation.
In the New York Times for April 22,
Mr. Cyrus Sulzberger made the point
that CIA's operations have been much
too public, that it has not taken sufficient
camouflage precautions.
Compare the "Made in U.S.A." label on the
Powers case-
Said Mr. Sulzberger-
with the anonymity of Britain's Commander
Crabbe or Russia's Colonel Abel, who still
denies he worked for Moscow. We must ob-
scure our methods of cold warfare and get
the CIA -right out of public life. Democra-
cies can sometimes be too curious.
I concur with Mr. Sulzberger. At the
same time, I believe that it would help
to reassure Congress and reassure the
country if CIA's very great powers and
its massive operations were placed under
the surveillance of a small, tight, joint
committee of Congress. I plan to submit
such a proposal formally within the next
several days.
Some months ago, one of our ablest
political analysts said to me that the only
thing that can save the United States is
a serious but nonfatal defeat. I believe
that we have suffered precisely such a
defeat in Cuba. But this defeat can only
save us if we draw all the hard and bitter
lessons from it.
It can only save us if we are prepared
to face up to the fact that the installa-
tion of the Castro regime in Cuba was
the consequence of the same fallacious
political philosophy that has led to dis-
aster after disaster in the postwar
period.
There is an enormous paradox inher-
ent in the superiority of the free world
over the Communist world in the essen-
tial elements of strength, and the con-
sistent record of defeat of the free world
by communism.
The material resources of the free
world in skilled manpower, wealth, arms
and machinery are unquestionably
greater; our political system demonstra-
bly better; our intellectual resources in-
contestably superior; our moral and
ethical values incomparably higher.
Why, then, do we consistently lose?
Are these defeats due to uncontrollable
forces with which the statesmen of the
West cannot cope and for which they
cannot be held responsible? Or are they
the result of specific, recognizable fail-
ures-failure of this policy or that source
of information, failures of particular
men and particular agencies?
The Communists believe that inevit-
able forces of history are determining
the cold war in their favor.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
 .1961
Approved
For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R0002010160018-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
During this period of political half
sleep, the whole of central Europe,
China, North Korea, North Vietnam,
Cuba, and now large portions of Laos
and the Congo, have fallen under Com-
munist sway.
There were periods when we seemed
to be escaping from our bewitchment.
But after each apparent awakening,
there was an apparent relapse. After
our successes in Greece and Iran, there
came the Louis Johnson defense budget.
After the Korean war, there came the
Korean armistice and the spirit of Ge-
neva. After our shocked reaction to the
suppression of the Hungarian revolution,
there came the test ban moratorium.
After our defiance of Khrushchev's Ber-
lin ultimatum, there came the Khru-
sh.chev visit and the spirit of Camp
David.
While we have sought after coexist-
ence and grasped eagerly at each new
Soviet blandishment, the Communists
have been able to take over one position
after another in the free world. Today,
we stand with our backs to the wall.
There is no room for further retreat, be-
cause further retreat will threaten us
with final disaster.
Now the President of the United
States has warned the American people
that we face a relentless struggle in
every corner of the globe that goes far
beyond the clash of armies or even nu-
clear armaments. He has warned them
that conventional and nuclear arms are
only a shield, behind which the Com-
munists operate by means of subversion,
infiltration, and other underhand tac-
tics; that in this way they occupy vul-
nerable areas, one by one, in a manner
which makes armed intervention diffi-
cult or impossible for the free world.
He has warned that our national se-
curity may be lost piece by piece, coun-
try by country, without the firing of
missiles or the clash of arms.
In response to the challenge, the
President has called for an intensifica-
tion of our efforts in every field, and in
many ways more difficult than war. He
has accepted the struggle in which we
are engaged as a struggle for the very
survival of our way of life; and he has
told the American people that we must
take up the challenge, regardless of the
cost and regardless of the peril.
If we as a nation are now prepared to
stand, it is obvious that the first place
where we must stand is Cuba. We can-
not tolerate, 90 miles from our shores,
a Soviet Socialist Republic, modeled
slavishly after the Kremlin's own brand
of tyranny, armed by the Kremlin, com-
nran.ded by the Kremlin, and openly
dedicated to the establishment of a
SovietLatin America. We cannot tole-
rate it; neither can our Latin American
neighbors tolerate it.
I find it difficult to understand the
strange paralysis of understanding and
of will that seems to have infected so
many of our good friends in Latin
America. The word "intervention"
seems to have befuddled their senses, so
that they stand hypnotized and inactive
in the face of imminent destruction.
I do not think there is in the English
vocabulary a single word that has gen-
erated more confusion that the word
"intervention."
Thus, the United Statesnow finds it-
self accused of intervention by the So-
viet Union, which pretended that it was
simply helping the popular willto assert
itself when it sent 5,000 Red army tanks
into Budapest, to crush the Hungarian
revolution.
The United States finds itself accused
of intervention by Prime Minister Nehru,
who apparently could not make up his
mind that the massacre of 50,000 Hun-
garians by the Red army constituted in-
tervention.
Our country finds itself accused of in-
tervention by liberal European newspa-
pers, some of which have charged that
the United States has-unsuccessfully-
tried to do in Cuba what the Soviet
Union was-successfully-able to do in
Hungary.
Our country finds itself accused ofni-
tervention, at the United Nations, by
the delegations of many of the recently
created African and Asian nations, who
have been led to believe that the United
States is endeavoring to establish some
kind of imperialist empire in Latin
America, and who equate all interven-
tion with imperialism.
Our country finds itself accused of
"intervention" by Latin American polit-
ical leaders, whose heads would be the
first to roll if Castro succeeded in export-
ing revolution to their own countries.
And even in our own country, there
has been much confused talk about the
American "intervention" in Cuba, as
though we had done something wicked,
something of which we should be
ashamed, something that we could not
possibly explain to our friends in the
United Nations.
World opinion, in general, outside the
Communist bloc, has been so bemused by
the word "intervention," in relation to
the Cuban situation, that it has lost all
sight of the basic moral and human
issues.
The word "intervention" by itself is
intrinsically neither good nor evil. In-
tervention can serve the cause of evil;
and it can also serve the cause of good
and the cause of justice. The entire
structure of civilized law is, in fact,
based on the concept that when an indi-
vidual engages in wrongdoing, it is es-
sential, in the interest of moral order,
that society intervene against him,
sometimes to restrain, sometimes to set
right, sometimes to punish.
The Communists have intervened, are
intervening today, and will continue to
intervene in every situation where they
can serve their own evil ends.
Sometimes they have intervened by
direct and massive military action, as
in Korea, Hungary, and Tibet.
Sometimes they have intervened
through quisling minorities, operating
under the protection of Red army bayo-
nets. That was how they seized power
in Poland. Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and
Hungary.
Sometimes they have intervened by
fostering, training, equipping, and di-
recting guerrilla and terrorist move-
ments.
6199
In that way, they almost succeeded in
seizing power in Greece; they threatened
and. seriously retarded the postwar re-
covery of the Philippines, Burma, and
Malaya; they conquered the greater part
of Vietnam; and they are now threaten-
ing the democratic republic of South
Vietnam. And it is in that way, and
with logistic support from the Soviet
Union, that today they have occupied
large parts of the Kingdom of Laos, and
now threaten its total subjugation.
Sometimes the Communists have in-
terrened by stealth and fraud, posing as
anything but Communists, so that they
could seize the leadership of reform
movements and could install themselves
in power before dropping their masks.
That was the pattern in Guatemala, and
That was the pattern in Quatemala,
and-again-it is the pattern in Cuba.
The Communists have never apolo-
gized for intervening. Indeed, they
openly use threats of intervention as an
instrument of foreign policy.
At tie time of the Suez crisis, they
threatened to raise an international
brigade to fight at the side of Nasser;
and in repeated public statements Khru-
shchev brandished his nuclear weapons.
In the case of Cuba, he has again vocif-
erously and arrogantly brandished his
nuclear missiles.
When, therefore, Nikita Khrushchev
talks about intervention as some heinous
crime, committed only by depraved
capitalistic nations, this should be
enough to make the "cows of Kazakh-
stan" laugh.
But it is what Soviet intervention
stands for, rather than intervention per
se, tha1, makes their intervention, what-
ever farm it may take, a crime against
mankind and against freedom.
The installation of a Communist
regime in any country, whether by revo-
lutionary action, or by stealth, or by
military occupation, is a crime against
humanity for the simple reason that
communism is inherently evil. It is evil
because in those countries where it has
taken power, it has cost the lives of
scores of millions of people; because it
is militantly opposed to belief in God;
because its totalitarian government vio-
lates all of man's God-given rights;
because it subjects man to the cruelest
slavery in history; because, while tradi-
tional autocracies can be overthrown by
popular revolt, communism has per-
fected the techniques 'of repression to
the point where successful popular re-
volt is virtually impossible.
Some of our critics say that, by our
intervention in Cuba, we have violated
our own principles. Those who make
this charge cannot have thought very
deeply about it. After all, what are our
own principles?
If this country stands for anything, it
stands for freedom. It stands for free-
doni nct merely for the American people,
but freedom for men and nations every-
where.
The Declaration of Independence did
not confine its opening argument to the
God.-given rights of Americans. On the
contrary, this immortal document
argued for the universal rights of man-
kind; it said that all men are created
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R00020'',0160018-8'
 1961 Approved 04/10/12: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
AL RECORD - SENATE X197
available directly to sectarian schools The section of the brief on higher edu- hamper its citizens in the free exemrcise
"are the clear case of what is proscribed cation gives away the essentially pre- of their own religion. Consequently; it
by the Constitution." With respect to conceived character of the whole docu- cannot exclude individual Catholics,
long-term low-interest loans the brief ment. Plans have been proposed for Lutherans, Mohammedans, Baptists,
states "this proposal is no less a form grants, loans, and other aid to higher Jews, Methodists, Nonbelievers, Presby-
of support than grants and is equally education. Of course they are consti- terians, or the members of any other
prohibited by the Constitution." Spe- tutional. It has been nr claime a +,
f
vaiiaity on "the extent to which the
specific objectives being advanced are
unrelated to the religious aspects of sec-
tarian education." Not too much hope
is suggested for programs which go be-
yond those which happend to be in effect
now.
These conclusions follow logically
enough from the negative considerations
advocated earlier in the memorandum.
They are no stronger, however, than the
premises on which they are based. Both
the premises and conclusion reveal a
basically hostile attitude toward non-
discriminatory Federal grant-in-aid pro-
grams. The absence of any attempt at
reconciliation is apparent from the whole
tone of the brief. Lipservice is given
to the dual principles of nondiscrimina-
tion and disestablishment, but isolation
of nonpublic education is the dominant
motive of the memorandum.
__? --,mg inc oenents of public
be unconstitutional, and the brief sets welfare legislation."
out to prove that such is the case. I do Fourth. Measured by these standards
not doubt that the administration is en- we cannot say that the first amendment
titled to ask for a brief supporting its prohibits-a State-from spending tax-
predetermined position. But the result- raised funds to pay the bus fares of
ing document must be evaluated for what parochial school pupils as a part of a
it is, namely, an advocate's defense of an general program under which it pays
already prescribed point of view No th
brief is entitled to the weight of a court
decision, but least of all a brief written
to justify a position reached before the
research was even begun.
other schools. -
Fifth. The fact that such support
"helped" children to get to parochial
schools or encouraged them to remain
in such schools does not violate the first
amendment.
Sixth. The first amendment requires
the state to be a neutral in its relations
with groups of religious believers and
nonbelievers; it does not require the
state to be their adversary. State pow-
er is no more to be used so as to handi-
cap religions than it is to favor them.
I have taken the time to quote from
the Everson opinion because of the
widespread misinterpretation to which
it has lately been subjected. How dif-
VI. JUDICIAL REVIEW
This section of the brief is the most
constructive, since it outlines a method
for providing judicial review of Federal
expenditures for aid to education. I
agree that the method outlined is feasi-
ble and would be valid, and I would ex-
pect that any aid-to-education bill would
contain provisions along the lines sug-
gested
V. HIGHER EDUCATION
me
. Now A sharp distinction is drawn in the views as I would like to what theo discuss briefly
proper criteria a are
brief between elementary and college for judging the constitutionality of spe-
education largely on the basic that e,
ment
d
ary e
ucation is compuisor
Y while my opinion will inevitably be substan- the inflexible unaccommodating tone of
higher education is voluntary. The col- tiated any more than I would concede the Government's brief. The essence of
lege student who chooses an institution that the administration's views will find the Court's approach is neutrality as be-
where religious instruction is mandatory ultimate vindication. This is a difficult tween religious and public schools. The
"is merely asserting his constitutional subject about which to make any fore- essence of the Government's approach is
right to the `free exercise' thereof," it casts with confidence and the best thing isolation of the non-public schools.
is said in the brief. all of us could do is recognize this diffi- The Everson case is the law tod
Moreover, the brief points out, at the culty and not try to act like Supreme must be accepted ay and
college and graduate levels, public in- Court Justices. Therefore, all I intend as such until the gives
stitutions alone could not begin to cope by my analysis is to show that there is scant is overturned support to to the or hostile modified. and It anta tag-
with the -
problems involved. Accord- another side to the argument and that onistic approach in the Government's
ingly it concludes that to the extent the views of the administration are by brief to nondiscriminatory aid-to-edu-
that Congress finds it appropriate to en- no means conclusive. cation proposals.
courage the expansion of our university The standards for judging any pro- Another critically important decision
and college facilities, Congress must be posals must be based on the opinion in on this subject is Pierce V. Society of
free to build upon what we have, the the Everson case. As I have already Sisters-268 U.S. 510. In that case, the
private as well as the public institutions. noted, the holding of this case was that Supreme Court held unconstitutional an
On this basis the brief justifies scholar- Government reimbursement out of tax enactment in Oregon compelling the at-
ships for sectarian schools, and both di- funds to parents for money expended tendance at public schools of children
rect assistance and loans to such col- by them for the bus transportation of up to the 8th grade. The Court noted
leges, all of which happen to be provided their children to Catholic parochial in its opinion that the Constitution "ex-
for in the administration's bill. The schools was constitutional. cludes any general power of a State to
readiness of the brief to record unqual- The majority opinion of the Court by standardize its children by forcing them
fled recognition to grant-in-aid programs Mr. Justice Black makes these points, to accept instruction from public teach-
to sectarian universities sharply con- among nthpnq'
==caG -lulua scnoois give their The case of Cochran v. Board of Edu-
sectarian elementary schools. The dis- students, in addition to secular educa- cation-281 U.S. 370-is similar in im-
tinctions outlined in the brief are rele- tion, regular religious instruction con- port. It was contended in that case that
vant, but they would hardly be consid- forming to the religious tenets and modes a State enactment providing tax funds
ered decisive by any objective observer. Of workship of the Catholic faith.
Compulsory education laws are satis- for the purchase of schoolbooks oseiaw n s to was ri-
fled by attendance at either sectarian or Second. Due process is not violated lawful since its, se purctarpose was to aid
nonsectarian institutions. The grant of because the children are sent to these vate, religious and other
her
both would not make attendance of church schools "to satisfy the personal schools not embraced in the public edu-
aid etthbo type of institution any more desires of their parents, rather than the cational system of the State. A unani-
r less compulsory. And one public's interest in the general educa- mous Supreme Court rejected this con-
orstinctio compulsory. the practical ion of all children. The fact that a tention. The opinion of the Court by
dis ntiod that roe than 5 milh when chii- State law, passed to satisfy a public Mr. Chief Justice Hughes accepted the
re need, coincides with "school-
dren now attend sectarian schools. It of the individuals most the directly a affected, children and the State" ratherethan the
is about as unrealistic to plan a compre- is certainly an inadequate reason for us schools, were the beneficiaries of the ap-
hensive aid-to-education bill at the ele- to say that a legislature has erroneously propriations for books. The State court
mentary school level which isolates this appraised the public need."
con-
huge group of children as it would be to Third. The State cannot "contribute templated was th ththe same books that
plan an aid to higher education which tax-raised funds to the support of an are furnished children attending public
ignored these students attending sec- institution which teaches the tenets and schools shall be furnished children at-
tarian colleges. faith of any church, nor can a State tending private schools" and that
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R0002001.60018-8
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R0 0 00160018-8 A24
6198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April
"an)ang these books, naturally, none is Investment in education is one activi- policy considerations which should shape
been to offer,sas a law--
in trucexected, [sic] adapted to religious ty. tion" The Supreme Court con- shod giwhich the Federal ve every encouragement. Busi- only purpo a haslegislative
cluded that "the legislation does not nesses are now permitted to deduct pro.- yer,some understanding of the highly
segregate private schools, or their pupils, motional expenses on the ground that important legal problems which this sub-
as its beneficiaries, or attempt to inter- these expenses generate further business ject poses. I submit these observations
fere with any matters of exclusively pri- and in the long run additional revenues.. in all modesty, but I hope I have suc-
vate concern. Its interest is education, The same is certainly true of investment ceeded in clarifying, in some measure,
broadly; its method, comprehensive. In- in education. The difference in income these difficult questions.
dividual interests are added only as the levels among those with high school, col- Mr. I)ODD. Mr. President, will the
common interest is safeguarded." lege and graduate degrees is a well- Senator from New York yield?
These cases offer the guidelines for a known fact. And in a larger sense, the Mr. KEATING. I am happy to yield.
proper. approach to the constitutional whole country is enriched by a better ato r. DO New In my opinion, tha e Sen-
problems involved in a comprehensive educated populace. from York most
and to education legislation. They re- One final word and I shall conclude. scholarly, highly intelligent, and highly
fute any notion that all forms of non- Recently a separate bill was introduced informational speech on a very critical
discriminatory Federal assistance appli- to authorize loans to private nonprofit subject. I know the Senator from New r the construction
has
have cable to public and n the contrary, srhey Lary andQsecondary s hool facilities. :it anYork d other Senators, the purpose of which
was suggested at that time that this is to af.:ord relief to parents in the form
strongly unconstitutional. On that ahe atethey
strly suggest that deliberate policy measure should be acted upon separately of-a tax deduction. It seems to me that
of excluding from the benefits of general from bills for public school aid in order this is one way in which assistance
welfare legislation, schools with religious toavoid any church-state controversy in might 'oe given to parents who wish to
substantial affiliations may raise he Sup rem con Court our consideration of Federal aid-to-edu- send their children to private schools.
rational questions. The Sup to the his- s-cation legislation. Has the Senator considered this pro-
clear to l.its gfacn that a have a dual system f Personally, I do not believe that sep- posal?
educ riot that this a dual syste- aration of these two school aid bills Mr. KEATING. Yes; and I have
educaton in ths country at the el et avoids the constitutional questions which never heard anyone raise an issue re-
mentar as has b ey as wallins s the point out that level. this have been raised. What separation gardin g the constitutionality of that an-n dual at pa t un out ied really does is initially to determine the proact. to the subject. I myself like
nmenttioally protected constitutional issue adversely to the po- that approach. I am glad to know of
agi system is
against govental action which sition of the church-supported schools, the support for that proposal from the
would destre rnmoy church-supported ell- for it implies a rejection of the prin- dl tint-uished Senator from Connecticut,
rrlentou efforts o s. ciple that both systems of education and I am happy to hear that he appar-
In our to eadhere to ndm en t, limita- not t should be treated in a nondiscriminatory ently =shares my view that it is the most
forge of the 1st amendment, let a nmanner by the Federal Government. If constructive way to approach this prob-
and in Congress goes too far in this direction, len!i, which is a difficult one, and raises
the 5th the and 1 h amendments, m od due, process
the and 1 ch exercise the it may impair the freedom of choice prin- emotional issues.
Fairness aciple declared by the Supreme Court in Mr. DODD. Yes, indeed.
ofaoui or voos b beliefs. free
balance of uc r in our us . to the and n the Pierce case. There is no doubt that Mr. KEATING. I am sure there is no
of Federal ou hir approach to may the Supreme Court said in that case that possible question about the constitution-
legal as a aid-to-education may be a governmental action which forced all allty of that approach.
legal th well as Constitution obligation. children to accept instruction from pub- Mr. DODD. I quite agree; and I be-
er the Nei ng it tell us what nor the cases lie schoolteachers only, would be uncon- lieve that the Senator from New York
must devise stitutional. has made a real contribution by intro-
educations bill to enact. what kind of
a program bill c swll meet the practical devise Moreover, provision for Federal aid ducin;; the bill. I assure him that I
a program which will meet rtonly to church-supported schools places support him in its introduction.
as well ns the legal have blwaeobllways believed such aid in its most difficult constitu- Mr. KEATING. I am very grateful
Personally, I houvtional posture. It has never been con- to the Senator from Connecticut.
that a ngreat g tax deal could bi individuals tended that the Federal Government 4^ "~
their tax allief eo onividuals for could aid church schools as a separate MSONS TO BE LEARNED FROM
Choir educational expenses. Under the proposition. Rather, the argument for- THE CUBAN SETBACK
vidu fi for such aid has been that it is justified to
this purpose e a bill I have introduced
this 7x2) , i be avoid iscrimination against the non-1 Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I believe
Federal al income-tax returns would rind g be public school system. This rationale is that President Kennedy's speech before
and deduct from their gross substantially blurred by the separation the National Press Club, last Thursday,
per u, mitted fees to
to educational institutions up to $300 paid of the two systems of education in our marked a turning point in our history
to es and their ofor them- legislative deliberations. and a turning point in the course of
snclu and would be outlays or dnrecog- - Accordingly, I believe that such sepa- world affairs. It signifies that the hu-
nized ed waned al institution, any n including ration would raise unintended additional miliating period of retreats and defeats
ol educational institution, including hazards to the fair treatment of both is now at an end. We accept the fact
colle leges, universities, graduate schools, types of education by the Federal Gov- that we are locked in mortal combat with
hool, parochial schools, tech- ernment. A separate bill for church- an implacable adversary. We are pre-
nrcvate ra ining schools
as supported schools, actually would serve Pared to stand and fight wherever it may
schools. Such a, and service
schools. ant t a program could serve e to buttress the arguments against sup- be necessary. We are prepared to fight
a so direct Federal assistance port of such schools by favoring them together with our allies; but, if neces-
ta public lscht schools, and the he two two programs solely as religious institutions, rather spry, we will go it alone.
together would s well cation. to foster than as coordinate members of the edu- Ever since the close of World War II,
our dual tyrnem of education. cational community. This would raise under both Democratic and Republican
formed The I me that al the annual lrvhas in- egrettable, practical consequences, and administrations, we have been beguiled
fwould be lost the permitting annual revenue v such a that tax t it would be inconsistent with the sanc- and bedeviled and pushed around and
woulo l would about 00 tion the Supreme Court has given to defeated by the forces of international
deduction ubsta tibum but reasonably nondiscriminatory treatment communism. We had overwhelming
This is a substantal sum but h is leer of all educational institutions. military and political power in our
The he tax other
aid-x de- In conclusion, I wish to emphasize hands, but we had neither the under-
on proposals. of the
aid-to-education proposed
duction approach has the great merit of again that what I have discussed in this standing nor the will to use it. Our good
not interfering with the free choice of statement are the constitutional criteria faith was absolute; our innocence was
schools by the families and children in- pertinent to the aid-to-education issue. boundless; our blunders were seemingly
volved. I have not attempted to analyze the endless.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R00020',0160018-8
 Approved Fo elease 2004/10/12: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
CO GRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 24
is economic help to remove poverty and
illiteracy.
Something sinister has been introduced
which must be faced squarely if the holo-
caust is to be averted.
The simple fact is that the Soviet Union,
which spends billions of dollars annually on
the cold war, is convinced that the free
world will not fight-that its alliances are
weak and that it is disunited. That's what
Hitler, too, believed, especially after the
summit conference at Munich in 1938.
Every day there are signs that the Munich
philosophy of appeasement pervades many
of the free governments. Why should Mos-
cow change its policy if it can make headway
toward complete conquest by peacefully
taking over government after government?
Nikita Khrushchev rants against colonial-
ism, but hypocritically maintains a system
of tyranny that has made colonies for the
Soviets out of several countries in Eastern
Europe which once enjoyed independence.
What shall the free world do about all
this? Shall it continue to hand out hun-
dreds of millions of dollars every year and
have no real voice in what happens to those
funds? The propaganda against making
grants with "strings" attached is of Soviet
origin. So is the much-vaunted "neutral-
ism," the whole object of which has been
to put strings on America's policies and to
prevent us from making our funds effective.
The time has come to stop fooling our-
selves.
Not a dollar of "foreign aid" ought to be
appropriated for use by any government
which tolerates Communist agents or in-
trigue or a political party with affiliations
in Moscow or Peiping.
If the countries which we are to help will
rid themselves of Communist influence, we
can support them to a certain extent, but
we must not be expected to do that job
alone. The nations aided must show some
signs of a capacity to establish and main-
tain their own independence and self-gov-
erning system.
A showdown in Latin America is due.
The Monroe Doctrine warned European
governments in 1823 to stay out of this
hemisphere. It is still a valid doctrine today.
The Soviets have established a base in
Cuba and are invading other Latin-Amer-
lean countries.
A warning should be issued to the Soviet
Government to get its agents, spy rings, and
munitions depots out of Latin America.
If necessary, an armed blockade must be
imposed-as was done recently along the
coasts of Nicaragua and Guatemala-to en-
force our position. Unless we show we are
ready to fight, there will be no peace in the
world.
The Soviets can't afford a war in the Carib-
bean. They are bluffing. It Is time to call
their bluff, or soon we will face a tragic
climax-the big war.
PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL
CLUB FOR FOREIGN DIPLOMATS
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, the
Washington Post and Times-Herald of
this morning, April 24, 1961, has pub-
lished an article to the effect that the
Office of Protocol of the Department of
State is planning to come before Con-
gress and give strong support to - a pro-
posal to establish in Washington an in-
ternational social club for foreign diplo-
mats.
I think it would be a blemish on our
history for Congress even to consider
such a ridiculous means of wasting tax-
payers' money. A great number of
people do not belong to exclusive clubs,
but we do not propose legislation to ex-
propriate taxpayers' money to satisfy the
social needs of those citizens. I think it
is ridiculous to spend money to build a
private club for foreign diplomats simply
because they have not been invited to
private clubs in the Washington area.
If the United States were to construct
such a social center for foreign diplo-
mats, we know that it would be nothing
more than a 24-hour nightclub. Natur-
ally, we would have to operate the cen-
ter and probably would be forced to un-
derwrite the giving away of free liquor,
food, and forms of entertainment. The
backers of this plan says they will need
about $2 million to construct the center.
I wonder how many hungry children
in depressed areas of the United States
could be provided with a bottle of milk
with this $2 million. I wonder how much
closer to outer space the United States
could be with this $2 million. The pro-
posal is one of wanton waste.
We recently saw pictures of the exclu-
sive dining rooms, club rooms, and other
lavishly furnished quarters of the State
Department as published in newspapers
and magazines. I should think this
would be club enough for visiting digni-
taries that have business with our Gov-
ernment. It is not our responsibility to
construct private entertainment facili-
ties for visiting diplomats.
In my opinion, it would be a slap in the
face to millions of American taxpayers,
as well as an act of immorality, for the
United States to spend $2 million on
building such a monumental interna-
tional country club.
We are engaged in a life-and-death
struggle for the survival of freedom in
this world, and we are also engaged in a
struggle to free our own Nation of pov-
erty, disease, and depression.
With all these very real problems fac-
ing us, it would be the act of an idiot to
waste money on such a project. I hope
Congress will dismiss this plan.
NATIONAL POLICY FOR WILDER-
NESS PRESERVATION
Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. President, 3
years ago this spring I recall an occasion
when one of the great conservationists
this body has known, the late Senator
Richard L. Neuberger, had a copy of a
national magazine placed on the desk of
each of his colleagues because it had
devoted its entire issue to the beauty
and wonders of natural America. That
was the July 1958 Holiday magazine.
On Friday it was my privilege through
the courtesy of the publishers of Life
magazine to have a copy of the April 21,
1961, issue of that magazine delivered to
the desk of each of my colleagues, be-
cause that magazine features a 10-page
picture-and-text essay on wilderness, a
matter of important concern to the
Senate.
The beautiful and impressive photo-
graphs presented by Life magazine in
this feature and the earnest and urgent
comments that accompany the illustra-
tions encourage us to move forward with
the legislation now before us for estab-
lishing a national policy and program
for wilderness preservation.
As the sponsor of the wilderness bill,
S. 174, as the chairman also of the Com-
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs, to
which the legislation has been referred,
I am glad to call attention to this new
demonstration of the widespread interest
in our remaining areas of wilderness.
This public interest has grown remark-
ably in recent years and is now a con-
stant evidence of the national concern
with wilderness preservation.
Dick Neuberger, speaking in this
Chamber on June 18, 1958, said:
I can remember the time-not too long
ago-when the wilderness was considered a
matter of interest only to a minority.
Yet today widespread recognition of the
fundamental values which wilderness offers
to all Americans has been evidenced by pub-
lic expressions of interest from individuals
and by the press in all parts of the country.
In the nearly 3 years since then these
expressions have continued to increase
both in number and urgency.
The Holiday magazine of 1958 devoted
exclusively to natural America empha-
sized editorially the special importance
of wilderness.
Americans-
Said its editors-
tend to love natural nature best, wild for-
ests and big mountains and nonirrigated
deserts and unpopulated stretches of the
coastline.
We prefer the untended, the fresh, the
unmanhandled.
Americans-
Holiday declared- - -
,admire most in nature a primal force which
has not been subdued by man.
Senator Neuberger quoting these senti-
ments nearly 3 years ago called attention
to the earlier version of the wilderness
bill then introduced by Senator HuM-
PHREY, himself, and others, and declared :
It is the purpose of the wilderness bill to
see that we shall always have some areas in
America where these primitive forces have
not, been subdued.
To the warning of Holiday's editors
that the ever-growing mechanistic as-
pects of our civilization could lead to our
becoming more and more out of touch
with the great flows of meaning which
nature sends out to her creatures, Dick
Neuberger replied:
The wilderness bill can help prevent such
an occurrence by perpetuating the oppor-
tunity to come in contact with nature in
unspoiled wild country.
Mr. President, these exciting pictures
in this issue of Life magazine inspire us
anew with the pride we know in the great
frontiers where unspoiled wild country
still stretches beyond the end of the
road:
"Haven for Seaside Birds, Bird Bank
in Cape Romain National Wildlife Ref-
uge, S.C."
"Moss Laden Trees Form a 'Hall of
Mosses,' Olympic National Forest in
Washington's Olympic Peninsula."
"Wading Buck on Olympic Shore."
"Alligator in Georgia's Okefenokee
Swamp."
"Purple Lupine and Arnica in a Gla-
cial Meadow, Cascade Pass, Wash."
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160018-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
salmon "thrice a week" in order to get em-
ployment.
For some peculiar reason salmon also was
once associated with insobriety. According
to Charles Dickens, when Mr. Augustus Snod-
grass, a charter member of the Pickwick
Club, returned from an annual cricket
match, his was a condition to alarm the
ladies.
"'Is anything the matter with Mr. Snod-
grass, sir?' inquired Emily (the host's daugh-
ter) with great anxiety.
"'Nothing the matter, ma'am,' replied the
stranger. 'Cricket dinner-glorious party-
capital songs-old port-claret-good--very
good-wine, ma'am-wine.'
"'It wasn't the wine,' murmured Mr. Snod-
grass, in a broken voice. 'It was the sal-
mon.'"
'I' here are several bodies of water that are
famous for this prince of fishes. Probably
the most notable is the Loire River of France.
In America, salmon comes from the oceans
and--in season--from the rivers of both the
east and west coasts. The peak of the season
will be reached within the next few weeks.
Tinned salmon is available, of course, the
year round and it is a creditable ingredient
in many cooked dishes.
SALMON NEPTUNE
One 1-pound can of salmon, drained, boned
and flaked.
Two cups fresh breadcrumbs.
One-third cup sliced pitted ripe olives.
One cup grated sharp Cheddar cheese.
One-half cup finely chopped parsley.
One cup milk.
Three eggs.
One-fourth cup minced onion.
One teaspoon salt.
One-fourth teaspoon freshly ground black
pepper.
One-fourth cup lemon juice.
Additional sliced pitted ripe olives for
garnish.
1. Preheat the oven to 375?.
2. In a large mixing bowl combine the
flaked salmon with the breadcrumbs, sliced
ripe olives, grated cheese and parsley.
3. In a small mixing bowl mix lightly with
a fork the milk, eggs, minced onion, salt,
and pepper.
4. Add the milk mixture and the lemon
juice to the salmon-breadcrumb mixture
and mix thoroughly.
5. Pack into a well-greased 1i/2 -quart mold
or a 9-by-4-by-2-inch loaf pan.
6: Place the mold or loaf pan in a larger
pan containing water 1-inch deep. Bake
until set, about 1 hour.
7. Let the mold stand 5 minutes. Then
turn it out onto a serving dish and serve
garnished with additional sliced olives.
Yield: Six servings.
SALMON EGGS MONTAUK
Six hard-cooked eggs.
One 73/4-ounce can of salmon, drained,
boned, and flaked.
One teaspoon minced onion.
One pimento, chopped.
One-fourth cup mayonnaise.
One tablespoon lemon juice.
One teaspoon salt.
One-fourth teaspoon cayenne pepper.
1.. Slice the eggs in half and remove the
yolks.
2. Mash the yolks and mix in the salmon,
onion, pimento, mayonnaise, lemon juice,
salt, and cayenne.
3. Fill the egg whites with the salmon
filling and garnish with lemon wedges if
desired.
COMBAT COMMUNISM
Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, the mili-
Laos; the firmer entrenchment of the
Red-tinged Castro regime in Cuba; the
unceasing troublemaking of Mr. Khru-
shchev and his cohorts in the Congo; the
tension in Berlin.
These, and other Red-agitated trouble
spots in the world reflect the diverse,
multipronged way in which the Com-
munists are attempting to expand their
influence.
Since World War II, the Reds have
gained control over nearly a billion peo-
ple and vast land, military, industrial,
agricultural, scientific, and manpower
resources.
Overall, there are an estimated 36
million Communists operating in about
86 countries.
The free world, in my judgment, must
soon develop more effective ways for
combating Red expansionism-if we are
to survive.
The balance of power-and of world
opinion-for example, once was largely
on the side of the Western nations.
Now, this balance is teetering precari-
ously. If we are to defeat the Commu-
nists' aim of world conquest, then we
need to adopt a stronger, nonmilitary
offensive against the Communists.
Among other things, this, in my judg-
ment, should include :
First. Strengthening our informa-
tion-spreading program to beat-not be
beaten by-the Communist propaganda
machine.
Second. Adopt more effective ma-
chinery against infiltrative penetra-
tions-the fruits of which are being
witnessed in Cuba and Laos. Today
there are an estimated 26 million Com-
munists operating in 86 nations around
the globe. Time and events-and the
global Red strategy-will determine the
next explosion.
Third. A sharper counteroffensive to
penetrate the Iron and Bamboo Cur-
tains-not leave this as untouchable
territory for the Reds.
Fourth, Better tailored U.S. pro-
grams, such as the Latin-American plan,
to meet special needs in Asia, Africa and
elsewhere in the world; and
Fifth. Finally, undertake a more dy-
namic effort to present the efforts and
objectives of U.S. policies to the people
of the world.
In summary, the U.S. needs to adopt a
stronger polictical, economic, social, and
ideological counteroffensive against the
Communists. By experience, we know
that a so-called containment policy is
obsolete and unworkable. For the most
part, the result has been loss of more
and more land and people until the Reds
now control nearly a billion people and
vast natural, manpower, industrial, sci-
entific, and military resources.
6167
port of May 1, 1961. The editorial was
first printed in U.S. News & World
Report for January 9, 1961, and at that
time w;s entitled "The Coming Climax."
It is so absolutely applicable to our
present condition that everyone should
read it. Mr. Lawrence has covered the
Soviet threat against this country in a
nutshell. He has compressed into a
single package of words the intolerable
position which the United States now
suffers as a result of Soviet plotting and
planning for world revolution.
As :t ;r. Lawrence says, "The Climax
Is Here!" and this is an hour of decision
for the United States. We cannot be
pushed back any farther. We cannot al-
low ourselves to be heeled under by the
Soviet boot in our own hemisphere.
Pussyf