UNTITLED

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 8
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 4, 2003
• Sequence Number: 17
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2003/12/02 CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
14602 ? CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
His distinguished career has been marked
by exceptional competence, judgment, ob-
jectivity and ability to inspire his associates
to their highest capabilities.
CITATION FOR BROMLEY X. SMITH
A skilled and dedicated advisor in the na-
tional security field, he has revolutionized
the communications system supporting Pres-
idential decisionmaking and action in for-
eign affairs.
Through rare judgment, energy, and tact,
he has generated a steady enlargement of a
sense of common purpose among the execu-
tive agencies in national security affairs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
further morning business? If not,
morning business is closed.
rOURNALISM IN THE UNITED
STATES.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, because
of the nature of my remarks, which will
be partly a matter of personal privilege,
I ask unanimous consent that the rule of
germaneness be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, in the
Washington Star for last night, the edi-
tor, who has demonstrated in many edi-
torials that I am not one of his favorite
Senators, paid his disrespects to me
again. I ask unanimous consent that the
editorial be printed in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
MORSE'S LATEST
It must be that Senator WAYNE MORSE
stands on his head when he looks at the
international situation. How else explain
his persistently upside-down evaluation of
what's going on? And how else account for
his curiously shallow but vitriolic attacks
on American foreign policy?
The latest of these attacks accuses Presi-
dent Johnson of carrying out an illegal and
immoral Asian policy "making the United
States the world's leading threat to world
peace." This is an outrageously irresponsible
statement. It does violence to the realities,
and it certainly lends more than a little aid
and comfort to the Communist enemy in
southeast Asia.
It is that enemy, of course, and not the
United States, which threatens the peace.
Inspired and supported by Red China, the
Communists of North Vietnam and Laos are
systematically violating solemn interna-'
tional agreements. They are doing so with a
merciless campaign of terror and aggression
against peoples who want to be free. The
ultimate objective is to bring all of south-
east Asia under Peiping's totalitarian con-
trol.
In helping the free Asians to cope with this
threat, our country is serving high principle
and its own security interests. Senator
MORSE owes an apology to the President and
the American people. He has done a gravely
obnoxious thing in falsely accusing them, be-
fore the whole world, of ' endangering the
peace.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I feel
that it is so important that the editorial
receive a wider circulation that I am
putting it in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
The American people ought to know the
kind of press that is so prevalent in our
country, the Washington Star being a
good example of the failure of the
American press as a whole to live up to
the obligations and responsibilities of a
free press. -
I have said before, and repeat today,
that the Washington Star is a news-
paper of great irresponsibility. It does
not need to come out in yellow paper,
although if it were published on yellow
paper, it would be a physical picturing
of the nature of the journalism of the
Washington Star, for it is one of the
most vicious newspapers in the country.
But there are others. It is always a
compliment to me when the editor of
the Washington Star writes an insulting
editorial about me.
I would know there was something
wrong with me if the Washington Star
ever found anything about which it
could agree with me.
The editorial of last'night is going to
be answered by the senior Senator from
Oregon at this time. It is titled
"MORSE's Latest." It criticizes me, of
course, for my refusal to go along with
the unjustifiable killing of American
boys in South Vietnam and refusing to
go along with the outlawry of the United
States in South Vietnam and my refusal
to approve of my country's violating one
international law obligation after an-
other. That is the great offense the sen-
ior Senator from Oregon has committed
in the eyes of this yellow journalist who
is the editor of the Washington Star.
The editorial reads:
The latest of these attacks accuses Presi-
dent Johnson of carrying out an illegal and
immoral Asian policy "making the United
States the world's leading threat to world
peace." This is an outrageously irresponsi-
ble statement. It does violence to the reali-
ties, and it certainly lends more than a little
aid and comfort to the Communist enemy
in southeast Asia.
That is an interesting little twist one
gets from the McCarthyite editors, Mr.
President. If one raises a question of
the soundness of the foreign policy of
the United States, those editors leave
the innuendo and impression that,
somewhere, somehow, the one making
the statement may be a Red. They do
not have the guts to say so directly.
That is not the way of the smear artists.
They are not honest enough to be direct.
It is always called "aid and comfort to
the enemy." It is interesting to note
that a few weeks ago, the Secretary of
State also tried to silence criticism of his
Asian policy with the same phrase.
This is not the first time this smear
has been hurled at me. In my last cam-
paign in 1962 a libelous book against me
was published. It cost $650,000. It was
distributed free to thousands and.thou-
sands of voters in the State. It, too,
sought to leave the impression that, be-
cause the Senator from Oregon does not
June 25
believe one pays respect to the flag be-
hind the Presiding Officer's chair by
waving it into tatters, his patriotism is
suspect.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. MORSE. I yield.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Does not the
Senator believe that this is somewhat
comparable to the treatment some of
us have received in the past when we
have tried to cut the foreign aid budget
or correct ineffectual programs? Some-
one has said, "You help the Communist
cause when you are trying to get a more
effective program."
Mr. MORSE. Of course, that is the
outlet of the ignorant. They do not let
facts stand in their way. That is the
outlet of the ignorance of the editor
of the-I was about to say the Wash-
ington Post or the New York Times; they
are no better. I happen to be replying
to the Washington Star today. They do
not want any fact to stand in their way.
They want to get on a throne of oracle-
ism and pontificate, and we are all sup-
posed to bow down and say, "Allah, Al-
lah, Allah."
I was speaking about the libelous book
that this type of smear artist published
against me in 1962, giving it free to
every voter in the State. Its publish-
ers woke up too late, at long last, to
discover that they had performed a great
service for me, because I was elected
by the same percentage of votes that
I received in 1956. In 1956 they had fol-
lowed similar tactics. They never
learn. They published a book at that
time known as the "Red Book." That
was another smear book. The people
answered them again. The people of my
State are answering them now.
The American policy in Asia cannot be
justified on the facts. Its mouthpieces
are reduced to justifying it by smear.' I
say from the floor of the Senate today
that the only way it is going to be stopped
is by American public opinion. It is too
bad we cannot get the facts before the
American people. If the American press
were not doing a "Pravda" job, if the
American press were not, by and large, a
kept press, if the American press were
not concealing from the American people
the facts about American foreign policy,
this administration would be hearing
more than it is already hearing from the
American public, because it is beginning
to hear plenty, as I shall show before I
am through with this speech.
I have placed in the RECORD on a cou-
ple- of occasions a large number of letters,
telegrams, and other communications I
have received from across the country,
representing a cross section of the Amer-
ican citizenry, who are as shocked and
as much aghast as I am about the illegal
war of the United States in southeast
Asia.
We do not hear any comment from the
editor of the Washington Star about the
facts. He talks about my making an out-
rageously irresponsible statement. He
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE .
collect calls were placed. Telephone opera-
tors stayed with the calls until they located
each party including those who had moved
to other areas and towns. The operators
maintained their superb efficiency through-
out the entire period even though several of
them could be heard sympathetically sobbing
along with the grateful parties on the line.
When K7CHG was informed that KL70PA,
an amateur at Good News Bay, Alaska, had
burned out his Johnson transmitter power
transformer, Harris called Gordon L. Flaten
(WOEYM), service manager of the E. F. John-
son Co. in Waseca, Minn., who quickly air-
mailed a transformer to Seattle (no charge).
Capt. Tony Gomez, pilot for the Pacific
Northern Airlines, personally delivered the
transformer to Anchorage where he trans-
ferred it to the Northern Consolidated Air-
line for delivery.
K7CHG's station consists of a Johnson
Viking 500 transmitter, Hallicrafters SX-101
receiver and Telrex TM-30 beam which is lo-
cated 62 feet in the air. The first 3 days of
operations were conducted between 14.230
megacycles and 14.233 megacycles. On the
fourth day, the "Yawn Patrol" net was fully
operational and they honored Harris with a
spot frequency of 14.235 megacycles on a full-
time basis. Some use was also made of the
75 meter phone band during the late hours
in order to maintain continuous service.
It is also important to make mention of
the numerous local ham neighbors who vol-
untarily shut down their stations and shared
shifts at the Hug household performing all
manner of tasks in the interest of "keeping
K7CHG on the air." Microphone relief was
supplied by Randy Davidson, K7UOE, John
Marcinko, W7FHZ, (Mr.) Marion Mety,
W7BJG, Bill McCullough, K7OZN, Walt Pan-
chyshyn, K7SNH and Gene Smith, K7HFF.
Sandwiches, coffee, babysitting and all the
other chores so essential to a successful op-
eration became a neighborhood project of
tremendous magnitude. Harris was not alone
but his was the fuel which kept the beacon
fire of communicmations lit. Television and
radio stations were phone patched into the
amateur station and the actual proceedings
were rebroadcast to the entire Seattle area.
When. propagation conditions permtited, he
continued to relay messages and phone patch
conversations on a nightly basis for several
weeks after the first crisis had been weath-
ered. The good will gained through the
unselfish efforts of Harris C. Hug will benefit
the amateur radio community for years to
come.
I should like to recommend the K7CHG be
considered for the Edison or other appropri-
ate amateur award of national Stature.
Most sincerely,
JEREMY K. SCHLOSS,
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Air Force (Re-
-tired), K7ULB.
PRESENTATION OF DISTINGUISHED
FEDERAL CIVILIAN AWARDS
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, it
was my pleasure to be at the White
House on Monday, to witness the presen-
tation by President Johnson of distin-
guished Federal civilian awards to four
outstanding American civil servants.
Since then, I have received a copy of the
remarks which President Johnson de-
livered on this occasion, in the flower
garden of the White House, and also
copies of the citations delivered by Presi-
No. 128---19
dent Johnson to John Doar, Herbert
Friedman, Lyman B. Kirkpatrick, Jr.,
and Bromley K. Smith.
I ask unanimous consent to have
President Johnson's address and the four
citations printed in the body of the
RECORD, together with my remarks,
There being no objection, the remarks
and the citations were ordered to be
printed in the RECORD, as follows:
REMARKS OF LYNDON B. JOHNSON, PRESIDENT
OF THE UNITED STATES, UPON PRESENTATION
OF THE DISTINGUISHED FEDERAL CIVILIAN
AWARDS, IN THE FLOWER GARDEN, THE WHITE
HOUSE
Mr. Ball, ladies and gentlemen, this is a
very proud moment for those that we have
come to honor, and for their families and co-
workers as well. It is also a very proud mo-
ment for their country. Freedom is much
more than merely security against aggression
from other countries. Freedom, as our fore-
fathers conceived it, meant the liberation
of the individual from oppression by his own
government.
Today, after nearly two centuries, the last-
ing contribution of the American Revolution
remains the concept that law is rule, that
the people shall govern, that officials of gov-
ernment shall neither rule nor govern, but
that officials shall only serve.
Thus, we are honoring the oldest and the
noblest tradition of our system, as we honor
these four able men for being in every sense
faithful servants of our people. In the higher
sense, we do much more today than honor
fidelity alone. Faithfulness, honesty, and
loyalty have so long been the rule of public
service in our land that the indirect and
isolated exceptions receive and deserve the
harshest and strictest censure.
The true purpose of these awards is to chal-
lenge the career service to meet the new and
highest standards required for this new and
changing age. Man's knowledge, man's ca-
pabilities, have never advanced so rapidly
as in these times. If government does not
serve, government becomes only a costly and
intolerable disservice unless its departments,
its agencies, and its responsible officials strive
without ceasing to adopt that advancing
knowledge and capacity to the peoples' serv-
ice. The new standard, the new goal of gov-
ernment, and within government, must,
therefore, be thestandardgoal of excellence.
Eachof the public servants that we honor
today has in his field contributed a measure
of excellence. In so doing, they each epitom-
ize what I believe is a new generation and
a new breed of public servant. The day has
passed when Government jobs are the easy
jobs of our society, or when the public service
is the refuge of those inadequate for the
demands of private competition. Many of
our society's most challenging and most de-
manding and most difficult and most impor-
tant posts today are in the public sector. We
need for those posts our best minds, our
most able men and women. Nothing less,
we think, will suffice. These are such men.
So on behalf of a fortunate nation, made
stronger by their service, I am proud this
morning to salute them and to honor them
with this highest award that the Nation
can bestow for distinguished civilian service.
Mr. Doar, like all those honored today, has
served under administrations of both parties.
It is the hallmark of the ideal public servant
that he is motivated not by desire to serve
a party, but to serve all the people. Mr. Doar
has made a basic contribution to our democ-
racy as a vigorous champion of equal voting
rights under the law enacted in 1957. I want
to congratulate Mr. Doar especially for the
high standards that he has set in its enforce-
ment.
Dr. Friedman's career typifies the new
kinds of challenge being offered today within
the public service. Back during World War
II, one of his inventions permitted a major
breakthrough in productivity in the manu-
facture of radio circuits. I understand the
wartime savings in man-hours was more
than 50 million, and that this invention is
still as valuable now as it was 20 years ago.
Dr. Friedman's creativity continues. He
holds more than 50 patents, and nearly all of
the new information we have accumulated in
the past 15 years about the upper atmosphere
has come from the experiments Dr. Fried-
man conceived or designed or executed. I
hope that the brilliant and ambitious young
scientists of our colleges and universities will
keep this in mind when they choose their
career courses,
All of us know Lyman Kirkpatrick's re-
markable and inspiring story. After a dis-
tinguished and brilliant career, he was felled
in 1952 by polio. In 1953 he was back at
work, travelling around the world as Inspec-
tor General of the CIA. His contribution
to his country and to the free world has been
equalled by few and exceeded by none in the
years that he has been restricted by a hand-
icap that many would have regarded as an
excuse for simply giving up.
Since this is an election year, I guess I
had better not say that Brom Smith is the
most valuable man in the White House.
But there are some of us here who think
that Bromley Smith is a leading candidate
for that title.
For more than 10 years he has done a most
remarkable job of enabling the Presidency,
under three Presidents to be a more respon-
sible and more vigilant and better informed
office.
I am personally very grateful and person-
ally very proud of you today.
Now if the recipients would all come
around, we will have a picture together, and
then we will have them individually with
each and their family.
CITATION FOR JOHN DOAR
An exceptionally able attorney, he has sig-
nificantly contributed to the development
and administration of the law in the field of
voting rights. By his effective mediation, he
has personally secured peaceful progress in
human relations.
In a difficult area of Federal-State rela-
tions, he has displayed fidelity to democratic
ideals, demonstrated courage and under-
standing and won the confidence of the
courts, opposing counsel, and citizens gen-
erally.
CITATION FOR HERBERT FRIEDMAN
A brilliant and imaginative research scien-
tist, he has been the originator and leader
in the new science of rocket astronomy. His
achievements have greatly advanced the Na-
tion's progress in space and extended man's
knowledge of the universe.
His fundamental scientific discoveries
about the upper atmosphere and the radia-
tions from the sun and the stars are inter-
nationally recognized.
CITATION FOR LYMAN B. KIRKPATRICK, JR.
An outstanding administrator and advisor
in the field of foreign intelligence, he has
been instrumental in achieving notable im-
provements in the operational effectiveness
of the Central Intelligence Agency and the
foreign intelligence activities of our country.
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
196.E CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
talks about my criticizing an illegal and
immoral Asian policy. Let the editor of
the Washington Star sit down and try
to write an editorial justifying the U.S.
war in southeast Asia on the basis of in-
ternational law. Let him try to justify
it on the basis of the U.S. Constitution.
Let him try to justify it under the United
Nations Charter. It cannot be justified
on any of those grounds.
The fact is that our President has no
constitutional right or power, legally, to
send a single American boy to his death
in South Vietnam without a declaration
of war.
In speech after speech on the floor of
the Senate in the past several weeks I
have been calling upon my President to
send up a declaration of war proposal
and let the American public, through
their elected representatives intCongress,
react to the proposal of war. I have said
that if this Congress votes a declaration
of war, the senior Senator from Oregon
will get behind that declaration of war,
because then we must be a united people,
and do everything we can to successfully
prosecute that war to victory. We would
have no other course. But since I first
came to the Senate I took an oath at the
desk four times to uphold the Constitu-
ion, and I do not intend to follow my
President, short of a declaration of war,
in violation of that oath.
I intend to continue to raise my voice
in the interest of peace. I intend to con-
tinue to raise my voice, as I said on the
"Today" program this morning on NBC
television, to try to bring my country
back inside the framework of interna-
tional law-and, I add again today, in-
side the framework of the Constitution,
too.
Let the editor of the Washington Star
sit down and write an editorial justifying
U.S. action in South Vietnam as a matter
of international law. It cannot be done.
y,,.-,The editorial continues:
It is that enemy-
Meaning, of course, the Communist
enemy in southeast Asia-
It is that enemy, of course, and not the
United States, which threatens the peace.
I do not, know where the editor has
been. It happens to be the United States
that is making use of air power in South
Vietnam, bombing and killing. It hap-
pens to be the United States, in clear
violation of the Geneva accords of 1954
and 1962, that has sent pilots to drop
bombs in Laos.
What justification has the editor of
the Washington Star for these illegal acts
of outlawry on the part of the United
States in southeast Asia2 I should like
to have some evidence that the editor of
the Washington Star ever heard about
the Charter of the United Nations. I
should like to have some evidence that
the editor of the Washington Star knows
that the United Nations exists. One
would not know it from reading the
smear editorial that he wrote yesterday
against the senior Senator from Oregon.
I should like to have some evidence that
the editor of the Washington Star-has
ever read articles 2, 33, 37, and 51 of the
charter, in violation of which the United
States stands at the very moment that
I speak. In fact, the United States
stands in violation, in southeast Asia, of
the whole framework, the spirit, the in-
tent, and the purpose of the United Na-
tions Charter.
The United States, I may say for the
benefit of the editor of the Washington
Star, has set itself up as the guardian,
the policeman, and the enforcement offi-
cer of the Geneva accord of 1954, which
the United States never even signed.
As I said this morning on the "Today"
program, Bedell Smith, acting for John
Foster Dulles, sat in Geneva as an ob-
server. When the accord was signed by
the other signatories, he announced, in
behalf of the United States, that we
would recognize and respect it as setting
forth the principles of international law.
We have not respected it. We have
violated it. We put ourselves in the
position of a country that did not even
sign the accord, taking upon ourselves
the prerogative of enforcing it, because,
say we, it is being violated by North
Vietnam, Laos, and Red China.
I believe that is true. Those vicious
Communist countries are violating the
Geneva accords of 1954, but so are we.
We have already been found guilty of
violating the Geneva accords by the Neu-
tral Council, which was established for
the very purpose of reporting violations.
That Neutral Council, consisting of rep-
resentatives from Poland, India, and
Canada, has found that North Vietnam
is a violator of the Geneva accords of
1954. and that South Vietnam is a viola-
tor of the Geneva accords of 1954.
It cites, as its evidence that South Viet-
nam is in violation, the supplying by the
United States, in clear violation of the
terms of the accords, both of military
assistance and military personnel that
we have poured into South Vietnam in
the past several years.
I believe that one reason why we are
leery about going to the United Nations
is that we have a good idea as to what
the verdict would be.
What,, else did we do in 1954? The
1954 accord was the accord which parti-
tioned Indochina after France had
pulled out because the French people
were about to pull down the French Gov-
ernment, and they did. They pulled
down a French government because that
government had permitted 240,000
French boys to become casualties in a
war in Indochina.
The United States poured a billion and
a quarter dollars plus into that French
war, in trying to help France win it.
Not only that, but, as I have said In
past speeches on the floor of the Sen-
ate-and I will repeat it for the benefit
of the editor of the Washington Star-
Dulles went to Europe in 1954 and tried
to persuade the Prime Minister of Great
Britain, Winston Churchill, and the
Foreign Minister, Anthony Eden, to en-
ter into an agreement between Great
Britain and France, whereby, if Great
Britain would join the United States in
sending American boys and British boys
into the Indochina war, perhaps France
would stay in it. Once we had obtained
that agreement, the news would be
broken to the Congress.
One of the most dramatic episodes in
history happened at that time._ We in
Congress were protected, not by our Sec-
retary of State, John Foster Dulles, but
by the Prime Minister of Great Britain.
The response of the Prime Minister of
Great Britain was to the effect that that
would be practicing a deception on the
Congress of the United States. It was
old power politics in international
affairs: Get a fait accompli and then an-
nounce what you have done.
We did something else in 1954 through
our Secretary of State that will not read
well in the pages of American history
in the decades ahead.
We are in grave danger o1 finding we
have secretly been committed- to a. sim-
ilar war, this time without any allies at
all.
We succeeded in persuading South
Vietnam not to sign the Geneva accord
of 1954. South Vietnam has never
signed those accords. We did something
more. Of course, the puppet that the
French had been maintaining in Indo-
china was all through. When the
French recognized that, they had to get
out. So we set up our own puppet in
South Vietnam. This puppet, Diem, who
was a creature of the United States, as
far as his ruling power in South Viet-
nam was concerned, was the U.S. police
state puppet.
We hear talk about freedom in South
Vietnam. There has never been any
there. The overwhelming majority of
the inhabitants of South Vietnam, illit-
erate people, would not understand the
meaning of the term if it were uttered
in their presence. They have been the
subjects of a police state tyranny ever
since the United States set up its puppet
in South Vietnam.
Also, our hypocrisy is well recognized
around the world. People talk about
freedom in South Vietnam. There is no
freedom there, and there has never been
any.
Diem did not work out very well.
Therefore he was overthrown, and we
made certain he was replaced by a simi-
larly pliable tool. His replacement was
Minh, a general-dictator. He did not
work out very well for us. So we threw
in with Khanh, the present military ty-
rant, the military ruler of South Viet-
nam. -What voice have the people of
South Vietnam had in these changes?
None whatever. - These governments
have been imposed on them by the Unit-
ed States.
There is no word about that from the
editor of the Washington Star. There
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
14604 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
is no attempt on the part of this yellow
sheet to give the facts to the readers of
that newspaper about what has hap-
pened in South Vietnam. Rather, the
attitude is to wave the flag into tatters.
Anyone who does not go along with him
is supposed to be against the flag.
Mr. President, no combination of yel-
low journalists in this country is going
to close the lips of the senior Senator
from Oregon so long as there is any
hope of our country following a course of
international law instead of American
jungle law based upon military right, for
it is still jungle law, whether the mili-
tary might is displayed by the United
States or Red Russia or Red China.
What I am seeking to do is to bring an
end to a resort to the jungle law of mili-
tary might as the weapon for trying to
resolve the crisis in Asia, to avoid being
thrown into a major holocaust that
would cost the lives of tens upon tens
of thousands of Americans boys.
If the Pentagon thinks for a moment
that if we begin to bomb North Vietnam,
Red China will sit across the border and
not fight back, the Pentagon could not
be more wrong, The great danger is
that we may become bogged down in a
war in Asia for years to come if we do
not stop this policy.
I am shocked to hear it said-and some
say it in private conversations-"Wait.
We have nothing to worry about. We
can knock out Peiping, we can knock out
every population center of China and
North Vietnam-and they know it-in a
short time with nuclear bombs."
When I hear comments like that-and
they are quite prevalent-I wonder what
is happening to moral standards in the
United States. I wonder what has hap-
pened to our morality. I wonder what
is happening to our professings about
being a Christian nation, because I can-
not square that kind of policy with the
teachings of my Master. As a Christian,
I do not intend to support, on Christian
and moral principles, an illegal war in
southeast Asia. Rather, I intend to ar-
gue, no matter what the castigation and
the political consequences might be, that
my country should return to the frame-
work of international law. We cannot
separate the principles of morality that
we expect to govern the personal and
private lives of the American people from
the policies of their Government.
Whenever the policies of the Amer-
ican Government cannot be squared with
moral principles, we are headed for dis-
aster. We shall be headed for disaster
in southeast Asia if we follow a course
of action that will lead us to an all-out
war in Asia-and that is exactly what
we are headed for.
What is more, these men who have
such confidence in nuclear weapons have
not one word about the aftermath. What
happens after they have been dropped
on China? They do not have any
thought of that.
My prediction is that communism as
such will be infinitely strengthened in
Asia by such a policy. China may be
temporarily weakened; but communism
in China and throughout Asia will be
vastly strengthened.
As I said the day before yesterday, a
couple of leading military officials, speak-
ing for our Government in recent days,
announced to the world that the United
States is ready to take on the risk of war
with Red China. I do not know what
reprimand those officers have received,
or whether the administration knows it
is creating the impression that those of-
ficers bespeak the policy of the adminis-
tration; for the policy of this administra-
tion, I may say to the editor of the Wash-
ington Star, who did not like my use of
the word "immoral," is immoral-and it
is illegal, too.
Follow a course of action of bombing
in North Vietnam and Laos and China,
and we will win, for decades to come,
the hatred of much of mankind.
Furthermore, the editor of the Wash-
ington Star had better consider the alter-
natives. The Senator from Oregon has
been urging not a get-out policy in South
Vietnam, but a stay-in policy with allies,
to make peace and stop making war.
But not a word has been said by the
editor of the Washington Star about the
SEATO Treaty and the international law
obligations that the SEATOTreaty im-
poses upon the United States. Yes, it is
a paper-tiger treaty. As I have said in
past speeches, the editor of the New York
Times, Mr. Sulzberger, stated one day
in one of his columns that in a confer-
ence he had with John Foster Dulles in
1955, Dulles explained , that the main
reason for the SEATO Treaty was to
give a legal basis for the U.S. action in
South Vietnam; but it did not accom-
plish its purpose.
As I said the other day, the President
of the United States has been quoted to
the effect-rand I paraphrase him, but
accurately-that the only legal basis he
needed was SEATO. He had better re-
read the SEATO treaty, for it gives him
no basis for the course of action he is
following in South Vietnam. The
SEATO treaty, signed by allies who have
walked out on us-Australia, New Zea-
land, Pakistan, Thailand, the Philip-
pines, France, and Great Britain-pro-
vided a protocol agreement, or in fact
had a section that is known in interna-
tional law as a protocol agreement,- in
which it was announced that South Viet-
naw was an area of mutual concern and
interest to them. Under international
law, such a protocol agreement does
not give the United States or any other,
power the unilateral right to proceed to
send in military forces and equipment
to make war to enforce the Geneva ac-
cord agreements of 1954 and 1962.
Let us look at SEATO. The protocol
agreement refers to an understanding
among the signatories thereto about mu-
June 25
teal concern and interest. I ask the
American people: Where are those allies
today? Where have they been since
American boys began to die in South
Vietnam? They have not been with us.
The United States has never called upon
them to associate in a joint action to
keep the peace in South Vietnam.
Oh, yes, there was a meeting of the
warmakers in Honolulu some time ago,
attended by the Secretary of State, the
Secretary of Defense, and various other
leading American officials. They had
a SEATO meeting earlier. But it is in-
teresting to note that out of the SEATO
meeting came no agreement for partici-
pation by the other countries with us
in any operation in South Vietnam. One
of the ambiguous, confused general
statements of Secretary of State Rusk
emanated from that meeting, and it
added up to nothing. We stood exactly
where we stood before the meeting was
ever had; the United States was to func-
tion as a unilateral police officer in South
Vietnam.
I have said this over and over again,
but I shall continue to say it over and
over again, because as a former teacher I
know the educational value of repetition.
When we have a blacked-out press, by
and large, except for such outstanding,
notable examples at the St. Louis Post-
Dispatch, it is necessary to use every
medium available to try to get the fac-
tual information across to the American
people. I have urged from the very be-
ginning that the SEATO nations join us
until the United Nations can take juris-
diction. They ought to join us in or-
ganizing a peacekeeping corps, not in a
warmaking program in South Vietnam.
They should join us by contributing sub-
stantial forces to maintain peace. We
ought to make it clear to both sides that
our position is to be a position of neu-
trality, so far as participating in the
war is concerned; and then, under the
Articles of the United Nations, file our
request with the United Nations that
that organization take jurisdiction over
the threat to the peace of the world in
South Vietnam, and now that it has
spread to North Vietnam and Laos, as
the additional trouble spot, the threat of
full-scale war in southeast Asia.
It has been my position, which I repeat
today for the edification of the editor of
the Washington Evening Star, that the
United Nations would ultimately decide
to set up a United Nations trusteeship,
or protectorate, for as many years as
would be necessary to bring stability to
that area of the world, and to help the
people develop economic freedom for
themselves. Only out of economic free-
dom can political freedom take root and
grow. We cannot implant political
freedom first-one of the great failures
of America foreign policy in many of
the areas of the underdeveloped parts
of the world.
But we bring these people to an un-
derstanding of the precious values of
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 Approved For Release 2003/12/02 ; CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
1964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
economic freedom of choice for the in-
dividual, we bring to them betterment
of the standard of living, betterment of
health, betterment of longevity and the
betterment of general welfare coinci-
dental to economic freedom; and in not
too many years we shall have a free so-
ciety politically.
The United Nations should follow that
course of action. It has the power to
follow it. There is nothing novel about
that. We are strong for a United Na-
tions peacekeeping force in the Middle
East, and we have supported it for some
years. We are for sound application of
international law. We favor sound sub-
stitution of the rule of law for the jungle
law of military might.
We loo} in vain, Mr. President, for
any student of the history of the Mid-
dle East who would not tell us that if the
United Nations had not been in the
Middle East for the past several years,
that area of the world would have been
in outright war. We have not the
slightest idea where that would have
extended.
We have been strong for the United
Nations peacekeeping force in the Con-
go. It has had its problems and will
continue to have its problems. Does
anyone have any doubt as to what would
have happened in that dark area of
Africa if the United Nations had not
been there?
When that great world statesman Dag
Hammarskjold was Secretary General of
the United Nations, and the United Na-
tions first took jurisdiction over the
Congo, Russia was in.. Russia was about
to take over the Congo, and that coura-
geous man, speaking for the United Na-
tions, said to Russia, "Get out, or we
will put you out."
Russia got out.
I was one of the delegates, along with
the Senator from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN],
in the famous shoe-thumping session of
the United Nationsin 1960. I saw Khru-
shchev melt under the heat of world
public opinion, for he came to that ses-
sion apparently believing that he could
get by with his troika doctrine, and he
thought that he could scuttle the posi-
tion of the United Nations in the Congo.
What did he run up against? A unified
opinion of the small nations, many of
them new members of the United Na-
tions, African states; and delegate after
delegate told me this, as I sat for many
hours during those weeks of that session
and in conferences with delegates from
the underdeveloped areas of the world,
that they recognized it was the United
Nations that stood as the guarantor of
their freedom against the threat of
Communist takeover.
It is acceptable for the Congo, but
not for South Vietnam.
Finally, the United States became in-
teres~ed in Cyprus. That, too, is having
its ups and downs. Merely because the
United Nations goes into some area of
the world does not mean that it will have
fair sailing, with no storms ahead for the
United Nations Ship of State: It is sad
to contemplate that the United States
was first opposed to the United Nations
going into Cyprus. It is an interesting
paradox and commentary that in that
instance-I do not believe it will be true
in South Vietnam-but in that instance
it was Russia that took the lead to urge
that the Cyprus issue be submitted to
the United Nations, plus the Premier of
Cyprus.
Unfortunately, the United Nations
wrote a sad chapter in foreign policy
there, in that we wished NATO to take
over; because Cyprus is not a member
of NATO.
Why NATO should take over, I never
was able to understand, because we never
got any sensible reasoning out of Secre-
tary of State Rusk as to why that should
be our policy. But the United Nations
did take over, and it is much better than
would have been the case if the United
Nations had not done so.
There will be failures in the United
Nations, too, but the great failure of the
United States at this hour in world af-
fairs is that we have not attempted to
get the United Nations to take jurisdic-
tion over the southeast Asia problem.
We have been dragged before the Secu-
rity Council of the United Nations by
that little country Cambodia after the
Prince of Cambodia kicked us out, and
after we were caught violating the Cam-
bodian border and dropping a fire bomb,
or bombs, and burning out a village and
killing 16 natives. We were caught be-
cause the American plane was shot down
and the American pilot was killed. So
we quickly apologized. We offered com-
pensation. We were caught. Does any-
one believe there would have been -an
apology if we had not been caught?
I do not know what the facts were, but
the Cambodians claimed that that was
only one of many violations. Yet not one
word was written by the editor of the
Washington Evening Star about those
ugly facts of American policy.
We have had a clear duty from the
beginning to lay before the United Na-
tions the charge of violation of the
Geneva accord by North Vietnam and
Laos. We have not done so. We have
decided to set ourselves up as the deter-
miner of what policy there shall be in
South Vietnam. So far as I am con-
cerned, I believe one of the tragedies of
our time-and I repeat it, so that the
record may be complete today-was that
our Ambassador to the United Nations,
Adlai Stevenson, lent his lips to reading
a speech, obviously written for him at the
State Department, in which, in effect,
he announced to the world that we were
going to do what we pleased in South
Vietnam and that the rest of the world
could like it, or else.
14605
That was some position for the United
States to take.
He sits there, not only as an Ambas-
sador from the United States, but also
as one of the trustees of the charter of
the United Nations.
If I were Stevenson, I would much
rather have sacrificed my Ambassador-
ship and resigned than to walk out on
all the great, eloquent pronouncements
Stevenson has made over the years about
the importance of the United Nations to
maintain peace in the world. But that
is done. We have to move on from there.
The point is that any U.N. member
at all can seek to bring the issue before
the U.N. We run the risk every day of
being called to account there, and being
compelled to answer the charges of
others. I am satisfied that sooner or
later we will find ourselves in that situ-
ation, unless we first go to the U.N. with
our own case and our own proposals.
I wish the editor of the Washington
Star would try to write editorials deny-
ing those facts of international law and
those facts about the ugly record of the
United States in violation of the inter-
national law in South Vietnam.
The editor continues:
In helping the free Asians to cope with
this threat-
Where are these free Asians? Name
them. They are subjects of dictator-
ships. The South Vietnamese are the
subjects of a military dictatorship main-
tained as a United States protectorate
in South Vietnam. The editor says:
In helping the free Asians to cope with
this threat, our country is serving high prin-
ciple and its. own security interests. Senator
MossE owes an apology to the President and
the American people. He has done a gravely
obnoxious thing in falsely accusing them,.
before the whole world, of endangering the
peace.
May I say to this smear artist who is
the editor of the Washington Star that
I now incorporate by reference every
statement I have ever made in opposi-
tion to my country's policy in Vietnam.
And I stand on each and every state-
ment. That is my answer to him.
Mr. President, I will continue, as an
advocate of the reelection of Lyndon
Johnson to the Presidency of the United
States, to do all what I can to help him
change the course of action-that I
think he ought to change-in connection
with American foreign policy, and try
to get this country to see that before it
is too late we ought to get back within
the framework of international law, and
try to use the rule of law as an instru-
mentality for preserving peace, rather
than to use the military might of the
United States to lead mankind further
toward the danger of a major war in
South Vietnam, North Vietnam and
Laos.
If the Chinese do what I think we have
every reason to believe they will do if
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 14606
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
we carry out the bombing of North Viet-
nam and Laos-engage in a 'full scale
war in Asia, a war which could not be
won without the use of atomic power-
then we will be bogged down in Asia for
a quarter of a century or longer. Mili-
tary victories do not produce peace.
They can destroy a temporary tyrant.
But let us assume a hypothesis that we
bomb out North Vietnam, Laos, and
China. When we are through with that
military victory, will we come home?
Mr. President, we shall have a job then
of control, a job of supervision, a job of
rebuilding. And we have neither the
manpower nor the financial means to car-
ry out what would be clearly our obli-
gation if we were to follow that immoral
policy.
I do not intend to let the proponents
of American warmaking get away from
what I consider to be the foundation of
this whole issue as to what our policy
should be-the issue of morality.
I think we have a duty as'Christians-
and when I refer to Christians, I refer
also to believers in another faith who
believe in one God, those of us who be-
lieve in a supreme being-we have 'a
moral, religious duty to try to work
out a peace under a rule of law rather
than to endanger mankind in a major
war.
It is too bad that before the editor of
the Washington Star stuck his poison
pen into my bloodstream yesterday, he
did not read a column 'that he published
in the same issue in which he published
his ad hominem argument against the
Senator from Oregon, a column by Max
Freedman.
I shall read it, not only for the bene-
fit of the Senate, but for "the benefit of
history. The Max Freedman article lays
down the major premises that the Sen-
ator from Oregon hasbeen pleading for
in the Senate for weeks.
:I hope Max Freedman will not find
himself in difficulty with this smear edi-
tor who operates the Washington Star.
But I know Max Freedman to be a cou-
rageous journalist who will stand up and
be counted for his convictions.
Listen to what he said, Mr. President,
in the same issue of the Washington
Star in which this yellow journalist, who
is the editor of the Washington Star, paid
his disrespects to the senior Senator from
Oregon.
The heading of the article is: "The
Prospect of War With China-President
Urged To Take U.S. People Into Full
Confidence in Wake of Threats."
I shall digress from the article from
time to time for comment. I ask unani-
mous consent that when I finish my dis-
cussion, the entire article be printed in
the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. MORSE. The article reads:
In the past few days, both in Washington
and southeast Asia, various spokesmen for
the Johnson administration have raised the
prospect of a war with China if the Peiping
government does not stop making trouble in
Vietnam. This kind of threat is more likely
to divide and worry American opinion than
it is to frighten Peiping or to serve the cause
of peace.
I have been saying that in various
The article continues
Although the warning is addressed to
China, the real culprit: is North Vietnam.
Until now, the United States has blamed
North Vietnam for the unrest in South Viet-
nam and Laos. It has acted on the belief
that North Vietnam did not wish to be a
mere puppet of China.
The interesting thing is that this Com-
munist, tyrannical dictator of North
Vietnam has mentioned time and time
again that he would like to consider him-
self another Tito, that he would like to
maintain a Communist independence of
Red China. I do not know what facts
there are that would support that ob-
servation.
We all know that when we are dealing
with this Communist dictator of Vietnam
we are dealing with one of the most able,
experienced guerrilla war directors in the
world. It was not so many years ago
that we were embracing him. It was not
so many years ago that were singing his
praises. He was with us against Japan.
Times have changed.
Let me make clear, so that no one will
try to distort what the Senator from
Oregon has just said, that no one could
be more opposed to the policies of the
dictator of North Vietnam than the Sen-
ator from Oregon.
That Is why I have been insisting that
he ought to be haled before the United
Nations. That is why we ought to have
been filing our complaint against him
long ago for violating the Geneva accord.
But I point out that we are not dealing
with a dummy-either a dummy from
the standpoint of intellect, or a dummy
representing Red China. We are deal-
ing with one of the most able Commu-
nist leaders in the world-a man well
along in his seventies.
I think it is clear that the French
have had hopes-and that was the rea-
son for De Gaulle's suggestion to try to
reach a negotiated, political settlement of
the situation in southeast Asia-that the
dictator leader of North Vietnam might
be persuaded to enter into some kind of
a neutralization settlement of the area
if it could provide for a guarantee of his
independence vis-a-vis Red China.
Why are we not willing to try it? We
have not even been willing to agree to a
proposal of the French ' for a 14-nation
conference on the problem. We always
talk about conditions being attached
which we know would make the con-
ference impossible.
The sad fact is that the United States
has not been willing to go along with
various proposals that would fit into the
framework of an international law ap-
proach to the problem. Who knows? I
do not know what understanding might
be reached in an international law proce-
dure settlement with the dictator of
North Vietnam. I believe we ought to
try. I said that he is in his seventies.
What makes anyone think that we are
June 25
going to frighten him with American
threats of bombing Hanoi?
Today I called for a transcript of a
National Broadcasting Co. newscast of
last night in which a reporter covering
the Pentagon announced that certain
points in North Vietnam have been se-
lected for bombing by South Vietnamese
pilots flying U.S. planes and if that does
not work, by U.S. pilots. This report
further reported that the United States
will also send troops through Thailand
into Laos, if that proves necessary to
induce Ho Chi Minh to back down.
When I obtain the written text of this
report, I shall do my best to find out
whether this is in fact why General
Taylor is going to the southeast Asia
theater of operations.
What are we thinking of if there is
any basis in fact for that kind of report?
We ought to take the dictator of North
Vietnam right before the United Nations,
or at least before a 14-nation Confer-
ence in regard to southeast Asia, and
find out what agreement, if any, can be
reached.
People continually say to me, "But we
have no assurance that we could reach
a settlement with this approach."
Of course, we have not. But we shall
never know until we try. We have a
moral obligation as well as a legal one
to try.
Max Freedman's column, published
last night, speaking about North Viet-
nam not wishing to be a mere puppet
of China, continued as follows:
This belief has now collapsed. For it
makes no sense at all to think of raids on
selected targets in North Vietnam if China's
strength has first to be broken before a set-
tlement can be reached.
In all previous discussions, two extreme
courses were always excluded from serious
consideration. It was assumed that the
United States would never run away from
Vietnam, nor would it threaten military ac-
tion against China. For the flimsiest of
reasons, and without advancing any proof
that the new policy would succeed, these
administration leaders have now decided to
fling a direct military challenge at China.
Apparently they think they can out-
bluff China.
We approach the problem from the
standpoint of a Christian-Occidental
mind, or from the standpoint of an
Occidental mind that believes in God.
We are making a horrendous, false as-
sumption if we think, in dealing with the
desperate men who rule Red China, that
they are going to pay any attention to
moral values and that they are going
to wither before us and run for cover
under our threats. We know that many
months ago the Communist leader of
China stated in effect that China could
sacrifice 400 million human bodies and
still survive as a strong country. Exact
knowledge of the population of Red
China is unavailable, but it is generally
agreed by students of China that she
has at least 700 million, and probably
800 million inhabitants. She has al-
ready demonstrated in past military
operations that she places no value on
human life as she sends one wave after
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
 1964,a
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
another wave after another wave of
human bodies against an enemy.
Mr. President, when we get into that
kind of war with Red China, there will
be a shocking reaction around the globe
from the standpoint of the morality of
it. I believe the Pentagon is making a
serious mistake if it thinks it can out-
bluff Red China by threats of bombing.
Max Freedman's column which ap-
peared in the same issue of the Wash-
ington Star as its editorial, raises issues
that its editorial totally ignores. But if
they had been taken into account, the
editorial could not have been written.
His article continues:
How Is China to be punished? Presumably
not even these advocates of reckless war
are in favor of landing American troops in
China, though such action may become in-
evitable if they are allowed to have their
way. China cannot be broken by attacks
from the sea or by landings from the air.
Are we to drop some hydrogen bombs on
China? That would at once expose us to
the fatal charge that we reserve our most
deadly weapons for the people of Asia. This
charge would cause us more damage in south-
east Asia than the worst defeat we could
suffer in Vietnam.
-I believe that Max Freedman is unan-
swerably correct in that observation. I
commend him for his journalistic cour-
age in saying so in this hour when the
propaganda is to go along as a test of
patriotism with an unsound American
policy in Asia. Max Freedman con-
tinued:
Nor would we have very much help in
trying to crush Chinese resistance. Not a
single member of the NATO alliance would
support this reckless adventure. It does no
good rebuking our NATO partners. They see
no similarity at all between the Berlin prob-
lem and the situation in Vietnam. For
many years Berlin has been a common re-
sponsibility for the whole alliance. No such
shared responsibility has ever been accepted
in. Vietnam. The political goals sought by
the United States may have commanded gen-
eral agreement but the military burden, in
essentials, has fallen on this country alone.
So would the agony of a war with China.
After Korea it is not permissible for any
American to make light of what a struggle
with China inevitably means.
But I plead that my Government take
to heart the penetrating analysis that
Max Freedman just set forth in that
paragraph, for we shall be without allies.
Our so-called SEATO allies have not
lifted a hand, but the State Department
is trying to set up a facade, a face-saving
rationalization.
As I said on the "Today" telecast this
morning on this subject matter, the State
Department announced that Australia
was going to double her assistance in
South Vietnam. Yet when we bored in
to find out what that doubling of assist-
ance would be, we discovered that Aus-
tralia.was going to increase its manpower
contribution to South Vietnam from 30
,
p
to 60 men, but all to be assigned to duty and be counted, within the framework of
that would keep them far from the battle international law. As I have said so
front, and that in 4 months they thought many. times, if she vetoes the proposal in
they might be able to contribute. six the Security Council, we can then go into
transport planes to carry material into the General Assembly of the United Na-
South Vietnam. How generous of them. tions, as provided for in the procedures
But no Australian boys are to the on the of the United Nations.
battle front-only American boys. Freedman continues:
also is, if we can only get our country to
recognize that reality, that we should
try. to press for United Nations consid-
eration. Let us try it. It does not mean
that we will move out of South Vietnam.
It will mean that there will be a change
in strategy. It means, as I have said,
that we get our SEATO allies to come in
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
14,607
While I am talking about killing in Perhaps this whole effect is simply designed
South Vietnam, do not forget that we are to prove that the Johnson administration
killing many innocent, illiterate people, can be as tough as Senator GOI.DWATER. It
who do not understand what it is all had better watch itself or it will merely
about, many South Vietnamese, many prove-
natives in villages. It is a horrible thing, And, under the rules of the Senate, I
so unnecessary, and so immoral. will have to paraphrase-it would merely.
The editor of the Washington Star prove itself to be stupid. Of course, if
does not like me to use the word ` im_ I said that on my own-and I now asso-
moral." I can well understand why he ciate myself with Max Freedman's com-
would not, because it demonstrates a ment-the editor of the Washington Star
lack of understanding of the relation- would probably dip his poison pen of
ship between principles of morality and yellow journalism into my bloodstream
American foreign policy. again. Let him do it.
Freedman continues: Freedman is so right. He goes on to
Besides, no one can now say with exact say:
knowledge what Russia's role would be in Not even in his worst moments was John
such a struggle. Russia has a treaty to come Foster Dulles ever guilty of such a crude and
to the defense of China If China is at- reckless act of brinkmanship as the one into
tacked. This treaty has now been ques- which the Johnson administration has now
tioned by Russia but has not been repudi- stumbled.
ated. What right has anyone in Washing- Only one remedy is left. President John-
ton to assume that Moscow would do noth- son must take the American people into his
ing while America lunged at China? This full confidence. He must be more explicit
might be the one thing that could still bring than he was yesterday. There must be an
Russia and China together in a common end to these melodramatic briefings by sen-
policy. Or Russia might go on fresh adven- for officials who refuse to be quoted by name
tures of her own while America was bogged and who refuse to accept personal responsi-
down in China. Have these risks and dan- bility for their provocative statements.
gem been sufficiently weighed by our policy-
makers. On that point, one of the great jour-
nalists of our county called me off the
For weeks I have been making this floor of the Senate yesterday and told me
argument on the floor of the Senate. about a top secret briefing a number of
For weeks I have said that I believe selected journalists had in the last couple
there are two great dangers. One is that of days by high-ranking officials of the
our plans to escalate the war into other State Department, "But, of course," he
parts of Asia might very well drive Rus- said, "bur lips are sealed." But he said
sia and China back together again. I that what took place will become known
would like to put Russia on the spot in and that we can be sure it is known al-
the United Nations. I would like to find ready in the capitals of the world. He
out whether Russia is willing, in the said that it is perfectly clear that if the
Security Council, to go along with United program is not stopped, we are headed
Nations supervision over the crisis in straight for a major war in Asia.
southeast Asia. I' want to read that paragraph of the
I do not want to follow a course of Max Freedman article again:
action that runs the risk I have pointed There must be an end to these melodra-
out, and that Freedman verifies in his matic briefings by senior officials who refuse
column, of possibly bringing Russia and to be quoted by name and who refused to ac-
China back together. cept personal responsibility for their pro-
The second argument I have made for vocative statements. President Johnson
weeks on the floor of the Senate-which should know that many Americans will re-
is supported by Freedman in the para- coil in anger and. indignation from our pres-
graph I have just read-is that if we be- ent course in Vietnam if it leads to a war
come bogged down in Asia, doing Russia's with China.
lob for her in Asia, if Russia decides on Every time I speak on this subject, it
a permanent split with Red China, with is with a heavy heart, but it is my patri-
our knocking out China by the kind of triotic duty to plead and plead and plead
victory we would obtain with the use as long as there is any chance of return-
of nuclear power, we would weaken our ing to a policy of the use of international
own security thereby and antagonize law and of my country's following a
hundreds of millions of people around peaceful course, and not a warmaking
the world. Russia would then be free to course.
carry out her Communist designs else- Mr. President, it is easy for the Secre-
where in the world, tary of State to say: "All that the tyrant
I believe that she has not varied one in North Vietnam needs to do is to stop
iota from her ultimate intention of com- annoying South Vietnam."
munizing the world whenever she thinks It is easy for the Secretary of State to
she can do it. Make no mistake, the say: "All that the Communists in Laos
policy of the United States in southeast need to do is to stop annoying their
Asia is an asset to Russia and a threat neighbors."
to the peace of the world. I want to keep The reality is they are annoying their
Russia in this picture through the United neighbors. The reality is they are, vio-
Nations
constantly making her stand u
lating the Geneva accords. The reality
 14608
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE June 25
and help us keep peace until the United
Nations decides whether it will or will
not do something about it.
People have asked me the question--
and they think this is the knockout
blow-"But, suppose the United Nations
will not come in?" That is an old high
school debating tactic. I will answer
that question when we find out what the
United Nations policy is.
Our policy now ought to be to keel)
faith with our signature to the United
Nations Charter. That should be our
policy.
All I can do is'call attention to what I
consider to be the keen and unanswerable
analysis of the southeast Asia crisis by
Max Freedman, published in the same
issue of the Washington Star in which
the editor of the Washington Star tried
to draw my blood.
I want the editor to know that I am
more healthy, politically and physically,
than I was before he wrote his editorial.
EXHIBIT 1
THE PROSPECT or WAR WITII CHINA-PRESI-
DENT URGED To TAKE U.S. PEOPLE INTO FULL
CONFIDENCE IN WAKE OP THREATS
(By Max Freedman)
In the past few days, both' in Washington
and in southeast Asia, various spokesmen
for the Johnson administration have
raised the prospect of a war with China
if the Peiping Government does not stop
making trouble In, Vietnam. This kind
of threat is more likely to divide and worry
American opinion that it is to frighten
Peiping or to serve the cause of peace.
Although the warning is addressed to
China, the real culprit is North Vietnam.
Until now, the United States has blamed
North Vietnam for the unrest in South Viet-
nam and Laos. Ithas acted on the belief
that North Vietnam did not wish to be a
mere puppet of China.
This belief has now collapsed. For it
makes no sense at all to think of raids on
selected targets in North Vietnam If China's
-strength has first to be broken before a
settlement can be reached.
In all previous discussions, two extreme
-courses were always excluded from Serious
consideration. It was assumed that the
United states would never run away from
Vietnam, nor would it threaten military ac-
tion against China. For the flimsiest of
reasons, and without advancing any proof
that the new policy would succeed, these
administration leaders have now decided
to fling a direct military challenge at China.
Now is China to be punished? Presum-
ably not even these advocates of `reckless
war are in favor of landing American 'troops
in China, though such action may become
inevitable if they are allowed to have their
way. China cannot be broken by attacks
from the sea or by landings from the air.
Are we to drop some hydrogen bombs on
China? That would at once expose us to
the fatal charge that we reserve our most
deadly weapons for the people of Asia. This
charge would cause us more damage in
southeast Asia than the worst defeat we
couldsuffer in Vietnam.
Nor would we have very much help in
trying to crush Chinese resistance. Not a
single member of the NATO alliance would
support this reckless adventure. It does no
good rebuking our NATO partners. They
see no similarity at all between the Berlin
problem and the situation in Vietnam. For
many years Berlin has been a common re-
sponsibility for the whole alliance. No such
shared responsibility has ever been accepted
In Vietnam. The. political goals sought by
the United States may have commanded
general agreement but the military burden,
in essentials, has fallen on this country
alone. So would the agony of a war with
China. After Korea it is not permissible for
any American to make light of what a strug-
gle with China inevitably means.
Besides, no one can now say with exact
knowledge what Russia's role would be in
such a struggle. Russia has a treaty to come
to the defense of China If China is attacked.
This treaty has now been questioned by Rus-
sia but has not been repudiated. What right
has anyone In Washington to assume that
Moscow would do nothing while America
lunged at China? This might be the one
thing that could still bring Russia and China
together in a common policy. Or Russia
might go on fresh adventures ' of her own
while America was bogged down in China.
Have these risks and dangers been suffi-
ciently weighed by our policymakers?
Perhaps this whole effect is simply de-
signed to prove that the Johnson adminis-
tration can be as tough as Senator GOLDWA-
.TER. It had better watch itself or it will
merely prove that it is more stupid . than
.the Senator. Not even in his worst mo-
ments was John Foster Dulles ever guilty of
such a crude and reckless act of brinkman-
ship as the one into which the Johnson ad-
ministration has now stumbled. -
Only oneremedy is left. President John-
son must take the American people into his
full confidence. He must be more explicit
than he was yesterday. There must be an
end to these melodramatic briefings by senior
officials who refuse to be quoted by name
and who refuse to accept personal respon-
sibility for their provocative statements.
President Johnson should' know that many
Americans will recoil in anger and indigna-
tion from our present course in Vietnam if
'it leads to a war with China.
EDUCATION LEGISLATION-IM-
PACTED AREAS AMENDMENTS
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I wish to
speak on another matter. I owe an ob-
ligation to a colleague in the Senate to
make this statement.
Mr, President, earlier this year I in-
troduced two bills designed to broaden
the scope of the impacted areas statutes,
Public Laws 815 and 874. Since that
.time I have been receiving substantial
.and increasing support for the concepts
-contained in those two bills. Therefore,
I propose to discuss briefly each of them
and to insert into the RECORD certain
background data which I believe will be
helpful to Senators who have expressed
to me their interest in the proposals.
S. 2528, PUBLIC LAW 874, IMPACTED AID
EXPANSION
The first measure, S. 2528, if enacted,
would add two additional categories of
children among those who would be
counted in the computation of benefits
under Public Law 874. Public Law 874,
as it now is written, recognizes the Fed-
eral responsibility for financial -aid to
school districts based upon the number
of pupils serviced by those districts
whose parents either live or work on
Federal property. There are, it is true,
certain exclusions from the computa-
tion process of the children of certain
Federal employees, such as those whose
parents are employed by the Post Office
Department in the community. This
is a separate question not touchedupon
in S. 2528 but it is a question which I
believe, in our hearings on S. 2528, ought
to be reexplored by the subcommittee.
The two new categories which would be
added to the act under the terms of S.
2528, thus serving to increase the total
amounts- paid to the school district are:
First, those children on whose behalf a
parent is receiving an aid-for-dependent
children grant; and second, in certain
areas of the country which have been
certified by the Secretary of Labor as be-
ing areas of substantial unemployment,
those children whose parents are receiv-
ing unemployment compensation bene-
fits.
The logic of the proposed expansion
of the act rests upon two propositions.
The first is that the children whose par-
ents are receiving an aid-for-dependent-
Children grant are, in fact, federally con-
nected to a degree approximating the
Federal connection of the children whose
parents either live or work in the facility
serviced by the school district. The
Federal Government through its contri-
bution to the family income, is paying
for their food, in part, is helping to clothe
them in part, and it is paying a share of
the rent for the roof over their heads.
This is a laudable and necessary ex-
penditure, but the families, by the very
nature of their need, are not able to con-
tribute to the local taxes which maintain
the local schools, to the same degree as
those homeowners who are in higher in-
come brackets. It would seem quite
proper, therefore, for the Federal Gov-
ernment, which pays a share of those
other costs, to make a direct contribu-
tion to the local school district which has
'the responsibility of providing an op-
portunity for education to those young
people to pay for part of the cost of
educating them. Many of them need a
type of training which is more costly to
the school district than the standard
,educational program. English, for ex-
ample, when it is a second language for
the child, requires specially trained
teachers. Guidance and counseling
services in the schools are particularly
important if the youngster is to be able
'to realize his talents. -
Since the Federal Government does
not bear the sole responsibility, however,
the payment proposed is but a fourth
of that which it makes in the case of a
child whose parents both live and work
on Federal property.
The second proposition is that the aid
proposed is calibrated in terms of com-
munity need; whether it is rural or urban
is immaterial; both types of communities
would benefit to the degree that the prob-
lem, as measured by the number of chil-
dren in these two categories, exists in
that school district. The proposal is
not a general Federal aid-to-education-
grant concept, much though I should
like to see such a program enacted, rather
it is pinpointed assistance to those dis-
tricts most needing help. It is a limited
program with a built-in responsiveness
to changing conditions-as the need
drops the payments drop, as the need in-
creases, the assistance mounts.
Mr. President, at this, point in my re-
marks, I ask that there be inserted a
table which shows the dollar amounts
which would have flowed to the counties
of the several States if section 4(A) (1)
of S. 2528 had been operative in 1960.
There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as fdllows:
Approved For Release 2003/12/02 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300120017-8