TESTIMONY OF SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ON SOUTHEAST ASIA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 44
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 7, 2003
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: February 25, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For' Release 2003/10/15 CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
ouse of Representatives
The House met at 12 o'clock noon.
Rev. Father John F. Lincoln, St.
Vincent de Paul Parish, South Boston,
Mass., offered the following prayer:
In the name of the Father and of the
Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen.
We beseech Thee, Almighty God, to
look favorably upon our beloved Speaker
of the House, Hon. JOHN W. MCCORMACK,
and all the Members of this great legis-
lative body, and direct, we beseech Thee,
Almighty God, all their actions by Thy
holy inspiration.
We beg of You to pour forth upon Your
humble servants?the Representatives of
' the United States of America?the light
of Your own divine wisdom?to know
thoroughly, understand completely, and
perform faithfully the duties and re-
sponsibilities entrusted by divine provi-
dence.
May Thy divine love, manifested by
our very presence, inspire each and every
lawmaker to seek only that which is good
and just and unselfish.
May their every prayer, every law and
action, by Thy gracious help and assist-
ance, always begin with Thee and
through Thee be happily ended, you
who live and reign forever and ever.
Amen.
THE JOURNAL
The Journal of the' proceedings of
yesterday was read and approved.
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
A message from the Senate by Mr. Ar-
rington, one of its clerks, announced that
the Vice President, pursuant to section 5,
Public Law 87-758, had appointed Mr.
Paoury as a member of the National
Fisheries Center and Aquarium Ad-
visory Board.
The message also announced that the
Vice President, pursuant to Public Law
207, 81st Congress, had appointed Mr.
Doss as a member of the Board of Visi-
tors to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy.
The message also announced that the
Vice President, pursuant to Public Law
1028, 84th Congress, had appointed Mr.
ROBERTSON, Mr. MCGEE, and Mr. PrtiasoN
as members of the Board of Visitors to
the U.S. Naval Academy.
The mes,sage also announced that the
Vice President, pursuant to section 1,
PUblic Law 372, 84th Congress, had ap-
pointed Mr. 1VIcCARTHY as a member of
the_Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial
Commission.
The message also announced that the
Vice President, pursuant to section 1,
Public Law 67-759, had appointed Mr.
BASS as a member of the Battle of New
3560
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1965
Orleans Sesquicentennial Celebration
Commission.
The message also annonuced that the
Vice President, pursuant to Public Law
1028, 84th Congress, had appointed Mr.
BARTLETT, Mr. PASTORE, and Mr. BOGGS
as members of the Board of Visitors to
the U.S. Military Academy.
REPORT OF THE JOINT ECONOMIC
COMMITTEE
Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, section
5(b) (3) of the Employment Act of 1946,
as amended, requires that the Joint Eco-
nomic Committee file its report on the
President's economic report by March 1.
This year the Congress passed Senate
Joint Resolution 3, extending the date of
transmission of the President's 1965 eco-
nomic report from January 20 to Jan-
uary 28. Because of this late filing of
the economic report our committee was
not able to hold hearings and prepare its
own report in time to meet the deadline
of March 1.
I ask unanimous consent that the Joint
Economic Committee be permitted to file
Its report on March 17, instead of
March 1.
This has been approved by the minor-
ity members of the Joint Economic Com-
mittee.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
reserving the right to object, would the
gentleman from Texas say again what
he said concerning the attitude of Mr.
CtTRTIS?
Mr. PATMAN. Yes. It was taken up
before the whole committee this morning
and Senator JAVITS approved it and Mr.
CURTIS approved it as well as all of the
members of the committee approving it.
It is absolutely necessary and unavoid-
able. We cannot help it. We just can-
not file it by Monday, because our hear-
ings were not finished until Saturday.
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. The net ef-
fect of what the gentleman is requesting
Is what, then?
Mr. PATMAN. It is to extend the time
of filing the report under the law from
March 1 to March 17.
Mr. GERALD R, FORD. And that
date, March 17, has been agreed to by the
minority members of the committee?
Mr. PATMAN. Yes. By the minority
as well as the majority members of the
committee.
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection.
IMMIGRATION HEARINGS
(Mr. FEIGHAN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, hearings
on immigration legislation by the Sub-
committee on Immigration and Na-
tionality will commence on Wednesday.
March 3, at 10 a.m. These hearings
were originally scheduled to open on Feb-
ruary 16, but were delayed because of
hearings on Presidential inability before
the full Judiciary Committee.
Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach
has been invited to appear as the first
witness. He will be followed by other
witnesses representing the interested and
concerned departments and agencies of
the Government.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker, on
Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of
last week I was absent from the House of
Representatives attending business in
my district relative to the closing of
Truax Air Force Base. As a result of
this absence, I was not recorded on three
House votes taken during Wednesday
and Thursday, February 17 and 18. Mr.
Speaker, had I been here I would have
voted in the affirmative on rollcall No. 16
to extend the Arms Control and Dis-
armament Agency; in the negative on
rollcall No. 19 on the motion to recom-
mit the bill (H.R. 45) relating to the
Inter-American Development Bank, and
in the affirmativ on the subsequent roll-
call No. 20 on final passage of the same
measure.
TESTIMONY OF SECRETARY OF DE-
FENSE ON SOUTHEAST ASIA
(Mr. ICHORD asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute, to revise and extend his remarks,
and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. ICHORD. Mr. Speaker, as a fol-
lowup of the discussion yesterday on
South Vietnam I think it would be very
appropriate to insert in the RECORD an
unclassified version of the testimony of
Secretary McNamara which was made
available to the committee, and which
was made before the Committee on
Armed Services on May 25, 1964.
Mr. Speaker, this concise and very ex-
plicit statement does a magnificent job of
summing up the importance to the free
world of the United States carrying out
Its announced objectives in South Viet-
nam, as well as why the President and
the Department of Defense must have
the complete support of the people of the
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
1965 Approved FtratimAN/ArlheacBDP%7M4pRO00300170001-0
Pagan, John P.
Pankey, Paul A.
Partin, Richard A.
Patak, Lowell W.
Paul, Charles H.
Pearson, James W.
Pentz, Everett W.
Perkins, Dennis N. T.
Perso, James C.
Peters, William J.
Pickersgill, Douglas
W.
Pinney, Charles A,
UI
Piste111, Ldo E.
Polyascko, Gerald .1.
Price, Lawrence A.
Prout, Patrick M.
Puskar, Robert J.
Ramsdell, Jeffrey IC.
13'0. 37-14
Rankin, William
Ranta, Berton M. '
Rapuano, John J., Jr.
Rauwald, Thomas C.
Raymond, literbert D.,
Reed, Don T.
Regan, Richard J.
Rehrauer, Mark A.
Reynolds, Clarence 0.,
Jr.
Rick, Kevin G.
Rick, Rcinald A.
Robinson, Larry L. '
Roe, Prederiet S.
Roser, Herbdrt G.
Rowe, John g.
Russell, David R.
Russell, Glenn W., Jr.
Saarela, David E.
Saracino, Lynn E.
Baum, Robert W.
Schensnol, John L.
Schiller, Paul J.
Schmit, Harvey T.
Schmitt, James H.
Schwartz, Donald M.
Schwartz, Timothy P.
Shabosky, Ronald J.
Shambaugh, Dale It.
Shoff, James R.
Singer, John D., HI
Snell, Charles S.
Snyder, Ray G.
Springer, Robert C.
Squired, Robert J.
Steele, Thomas W.
Stern, George E., Jr.
Stevens, John L., III
Stevens, John M.
Stewart, Joseph D.
Stewart, Raymond A.,
Jr.
Stiemke, Dean A.
Stolz, Prank C.
Stoughton, David H.
Strong, David E.
Tatlock, Alan R.
Total, Robert R.
Thompson, Jack C.
Thompson, James R.
Tirnberg, Robert R.
Tinsley, William A., III
Tschan, Robert E.
Tucker, Phillip E.
Van Houten, Robert
A., Jr.
Vankat, William j.
Van Riper, James I.
Van Riper, Paul X.
Varrell, Thomas A.
Vernon, Laurens M.
Vetter, Lawrence C.
Jr.
Vogel, Lyman W., Jr.
Voffendorf, James A.
Walke, Alfred J.
Walker, James R.
Walker, Larry D.
Wallick, Dwight A.
Ward, Joel D.
Weber, John D.
Weeks, Larry L.
Wegge, James A.
Welch, Bruce E.
Welch, Jerome A.
Westling, William A.
White, Richard T.
Whitehouse, John J.
3559
Wilkins, James R.
Williams, Charles G.,
, Jr.
Williams, Clarence D.
Willson, Gordon R.
Wilshin, David B.
Winching, Robin F.
Wood, Laurice E., Jr.
Wood, Mansel M.
Wood, William M.
Woods, Erik C.
Wooldridge, Larry A.
Wright, Joseph D.
Wright, William E., Jr.
Yoshida, Hubert M.
Zavacki, Francis
Zey, Richard B.
Zimmermann, Jack B.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Pelruary 25, 19Vproved ForclitOMEEPARIVORRtrii0P-6-W5144P1i000300170001-0
4)1P'
United States in their efforts to stop
Communist aggression in southeast Asia.
I commend this statement to the, at-
tention of the Members. ,
UNCLASS1rit.0 VERSION QF TESTIMONY OF SEC-
RETARY MCNAMARA BEFORE THE HOUSE
ArtmEn SERVICES COMMFFIXE ON MAY 25,
1964, ON 8017THEAST ASIA
The independence of southeast Asia is not
only important in itself but has great sig-
nificance for maintenance of favorable U.S.
relationships throughout the Far East and
even beyond. If Vietnam, Laos, and Cam-
bodia lost their independence, direct Com-
Munist pressure could be brought to bear
on Thailand. It and other nations in south-
east Asia would have great difficulty in main-
taining their independence unaided. Event-
Willy, Korea and the offshore nations?
Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan?would
feel the pressure to accommodate them-
selves in various ways to closer Communist
pressure. Other countries, such as Australia,
New Zealand, India, Pakistan, and even Iran
would be more exposed to the Communist
threat. And the results of such expansion
?calla someday affect the attitudes of our
Western European Allies. /n short, the re-
lationships we now have with all these coun-
tries would be modified fundamentally and
distinctly to the disadvantage of the se-
curity of the United States if southeast Asia
fell to the Communists.
TAX CRET)IT FOR COSTS OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
(Mr. EDWARDS of Alabama asked and
was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute and to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Mr. ED,VVARDS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, I am introducing today a bill to
provide a tax credit to individuals for
the costs of higher education. And I
want to can attention to this general
kind of approach to Government assist-
ance. Instead of Making our Govern-
ment into a kind of funnel through which
the taxpayer's money is collected, sent
to Washington, and then dispensed back
to individuals in the form of aid accom-
panied by controls, this approach empha-
sizes the need to let individuals keep
more of their own money. This way they
can better meet their own needs and do
It according to their own judgment and
conscience.
This bill is distinct from those propos-
ing deductions from an individual's tax-
able income. My bill provides that when
an individual computes his income tax
arid arrives at the amount due he sub-
tracts from that amount with certain
limitations, funds he has spent for higher
education for himself or another person.
He pays that much less as his income tax.
The amount of the credit would he
limited to 75 percent of the first $200,
25 percent of the next $300, and fo per-
cent of the next $1,000, spent for tuition
fees, books, and supplies for a student
at an institution of higher education.
The maximum credit is $325.
This seems to me a thoroughly healthy
Way to 'sibyl& educational assistance to
a taxpayer and his dependents. First,
It is an efficient way, because each dollar
Is utilized directly.
Second, this is aid without regard to
the controversy surrounding public ver-
sus private education. The individual
uses the benefit as he himself sees fit,
apart from any involvement with the
Government.
Third., it would relieve the pressure on
scholarship funds. As individuals be-
come more able to provide for their own
educational expenses, the limited funds'
available for scholarships could then be
directed to those most deserving and
most in need of outside financial assist-
ance for education.
Fourth, our educational system, oper-
ating independent of Government, is a
national asset which surely ought to be
encouraged. This approach provides
that encouragement.
I join with others of both political
?parties who support this approach to
higher education assistance in asking
that it receive early committee consid-
eration so that we can move ahead to-
ward enactment of this needed and thor-
oughly justified legislation.
CALL OF THE HOUSE
Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I
make the point of order that a quorum is
not present.
The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum
is not present.
Zr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a
call of the House.
,,A call of the House was ordered.
The Clerk called the roll, and the
following Members failed to answer to
their names:
[Roll No. 22]
Belcher Hall Morse
Boggs Halleck Multer
Bow Hanna Murray
Burton, Utah Hays Nix
Byrne, Pa. Holiffeld O'Brien
Byrnes, Wis. Holland Powell
Celler Irwin Reid, N.Y.
Dawson Jones, Mo. Schneebeli
Diggs Karsten Smith, N.Y.
Duncan, Oreg. Kelly Sullivan
Everett Keogh Taylor
Farnsley King, Calif. Thompson, Tex.
Fulton, Tenn. Macdonald Toll
Goodell Machen White, Idaho
Green, Oreg. Mailliard Widnall
Gurney Martin, Mass. Wilson,
Hagen, Calif. Miller
Charles H?
The SPEAKER. On this rollcall -379
Members have answered to their names,
a quorum.
Ey unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.
TO PROVIDE FOR EXPENSES OF IN-
VESTIGATION AND STUDY AU-
THORIZED BY HOUSE RESOLU-
TION 68, BY THE COMMITTEE ON
VETERANS' AFFAIRS
_
Mr. BURLESON. Mr. speaker, by di-
rection of the Committee 04 1-101,1se Ad-
ministration, I call up the resolution (H.
Res. 69) and ask for its immediate con-
sideration.
The Clerk read the resolution as fol-
lows:
H. RES. 69
Itesolvjd, That effeativa-Jart-nary 3,1985:the
exPenses of the investigatien and study au-
thorized by H. Res. 68 of the Eighty-ninth
Congress incurred by the Committee on Vet-
erans' Affairs, acting as a whole or by sub-
committee, not to exceed $150,000, including
expenditures for the employment of experts,
and clerical, stenographic, and other assist-
3561
ince, shall be paid out of the contingent
fund of the House on vouchers authorized
by such committee, signed by the chairman
thereof and approved by the Committee on
House Administration.
SEC. 2. The official stenographers to com-
mittees may be used at all meetings held in
the District of Columbia unless otherwise
officially engaged.
SEC. 3. No part of the funds authorized by
this resolution shall be available for expendi-
ture in connection with the study or investi-
gation of any subject which is being investi-
gated for the same purpose by any other
committee of the House, and the chairman
of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs shall
furnish the Committee on House Adminis-
tration information with respect to any
study or investigation intended to be
financed from such funds.
With the following committee amend-
ments:
On lines 1 and 2, strike out "January 4,
1964" and insert "January 3, 1965".
On line 5, strike out "$150,000" and insert
"$75,000".
The amendments were agreed to.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
STUDIES AND INVESTIGATIONS AU-
THORIZED BY HOUSE RESOLU-
TION 84
Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, by di-
rection of the Committee on House Ad-
ministration, I submit a privileged reso-
lution (H. Res. 149) and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows:
H. RES. 149
Resolved, That, effective January 3, 1965,
the expenses of conducting the studies and
investigations, authorized by H. Res. 84,
Eighty-ninth Congress, incurred by the Com-
mittee on Foreign Affairs, acting as a whole
or by subcommittee, not to exceed $118,250,
including expenditures for the employment
of experts, clerical, stenographic, and other
assistants, shall be paid out of the contingent
fund of the House on vouchers authorized by
such committee or subcommittee, signed by
the chairman of the committee, and approved
by the Committee on House Administration.
SEC, 2. No part of the funds authorized by
this resolution shall be available for expendi-
tures in connection with the study or investi-
gation of any subject which is being investi-
gated for the same purpose by any other
committee of the House, and the chairman
of the Committee on Foreign Affairs shall
furnish the Committee on House Administra-
tion information with respect to any study or
investigation intended to be financed from
such funds.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
EXPENSES OF COMMITTEE ON UN-
AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
Mr. BURLESON. Mr. Speaker, by di-
rection of the Committee on House
Administration, I offer a privileged reso-
lution (H. Res. 188) and ask for its
Immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-
lows:
H. RES. 188
Resolved, That, effective January 3, 1965,
expenses of conducting the investigations au-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3562 Approved For Redtitqta033gagpitqatReRb7.1109ffiffli00300170001-0 February '2 5
tee to be heard in full. If the critics have I do not know when in the history of our
a case that can be made, let us have it pre- country the National House of Represents-
seated under circumstances which permit tives has ever provided by rule for a per-
cross-examination of the witnesses who level manent investigative committee. Mark what
the charges and testimony in rebuttal to be we are doing. This is not a question of
presented-by those who disagree with them, establishing an investigating committee to
The Congress of the 'United States is the investigate conditions that arise from time
proper forum in which to present the pros to time; it is a question of amending the
and cons of controversial positions of a po- rules of the House to provide for a permanent
Mimi nature. The Congress constantly ful- standing committee that does not consider
fills this function through public hearing legislation, but has one subject, one field, the
by its standing committees. Utilizing the field of investigating and making a report.
Congress in this fashion is the best way to There is a big difference between establish-
resolve matters wEere grave differences of inea standing committee to investigate and
opinion exist on subjects of a political na- establishing a special investigating commit-
ture, such as this one, tee for a particular Congress. If this amend-
ment is adopted, as far as I know, it will be
the first time in the history of this body
that a committee of this kind was ever estab-
lished as a permanent or standing com-
mittee.
thorized by section 18 of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, in-
curred by the Committee on Un-American
Activities, acting as a whole or by subcom-
mittee, not to exceed $880,000, including
expenditures for employment of experts,
special counsel, investigator's, and elerich1,
stenographic, and other assistants, shall be
paid out of the contingent fund of the House
on vouchers authorized by said committee
and signed by the chairman of the commit-
tee, and approved by the Committee on
House Administration.
SEC. 2. That the official stenographers to
committees may be used at all hearings, if
not otherwise officially engaged.
Sac. 3. No part of the funds authorized by
this resolution shall be available for expendi-
ture in connection With the study, or investi-
gation of any subject Which Is being investi-
gated for the same purpose by any other
committee of the House, and the chairman of
the Committee on Un-American Activities
shall furnish the Committee on Hottte Ad-
ministration information with respect to any
study or investigation intended to be
financed from such funds.
With the following committee amend-
ment:
On page 1, line 5, strike out "$380,000" and
insert "070,000".
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from
Texas [Mr. FlusizsoNl is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. F3U1LESON. Mr. Speaker, I un-
derStand that this resolution will prob.-
ably not receive unanimous support. For
that reason May I simply mention that
the funds requestof the Committee On
Uri-American Activities was rechred by
$10,000. They will have approximately
the Same amount that Was appropriated
last year. Actually, when we ,cerielder
the fact that there was an automatic pay
Increase for employees, amounting to
something over $20,000, it means that
the amount is a little less than it was in
the 1st sesalon of :the $8th,?,Congress,
Mr. Speaker, -Understand there are
several Members who want, to make some
remarks on this subject. / am going to
yield- at this time 10 minutes to the
gentleman from California [MT., ED-
WARDS ] .
(Mr. EDWARDS of California asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
-Mt. EDWARDS of California. 'Mr.
Sneaker, / woUld_hke to take a moment
tri- exPlain To my bolleague:s what we ex-
Wet the procedure will be "today.
there will be a debate laiting INA More
than 1 hour. At the termination Of the
debate there will be a motion to recommit
this bill to the Mouse Administration
Conunitteg, with instructions to hold pub-
lic hearings on the silbjeet "of the bUdget
for the'llouse Committee On Un-Ameri-
can Activities.
Public hearings were suggested by, the
distinguished gentleman and legal schol-
ar from Missouri [Mr. Cuarisi. ; would
like to make it clear that Mr. CURTIS does
not OPPOS-B the House Un-American Ac-
tivities Committee. In the CQNUES-
SIONAL Rseosa, February 8, 1965, Mr.
Cnsits addressed the House as follows:
I think it would be helpful if the House
Administration Committee would holci pub-
lie hearings at the thne the_budget of the
House Un-American ActiVitiea CompAteels
under consideration and invite the critics of
the House In-American Activities Conimit-
I commend the gentleman from Mis-
souri and support his recommendations
for examining this vexing situation in
a proper manner. To that end and in
the course of this debate today, I will
offer this motion to recommit with in-
structions to the House Administration
Committee to hold open hearings.
A vote in favor of the motion to recom-
mit, let me emphasize, is a vote enabling
this House to get proper information on
which to base a decision. I urge my col-
leagues to vote for the motion to recom-
mit and, in the event it fails, to vote
against the appropriation.
Mr. Speaker, I think it appropriate for
me to try to analyze why we are faced
with this problem today, why there are
some of us Members who feel that we
have no -choice but to oppose this resolu-
tion of appropriation for the House Com-
mittee on Un-American Activities, and
why we are supported by great numbers
of patriotic Americans, by distinguished
lawyers, professors, scholars, by world-
respected newspapers and eminent
religious leaders.
Our objections are fundamental.
They are constitutional. They are not
assuaged In the least by recent an-
nouncements that the committee now
eCrntemplates inquiry into the activities
of the Ku Klux Klan, the Minutemen, the
Black Muslims, or any other group that
may be described as a part of the radical
right. The same constitutional disabili-
ties exist regardless of the political
philosophy of the committee's targets.
The rub is that the House Committee
on Un-American Activities never should
have been created by this body as a
standing committee. Let me review with
you for a moment what happened here
in this very Chamber.
When the 79th Congress convened on
January 3, 1945, the mandate of the Dies
committee, predecessor to the House
Committee on Un-American Activities,
had expired. It had been established as
a temporary investigative committee and
would have needed new authorization
and appropriation in the Congress just
convened. Congressman Sabbath offered
the usual resolution to the effect that the
rules of the 79th Congress be the same
as those of the 78th Congress but at that
moment Congressman John Rankin, of
Mississippi, offered an amendment to
make the House Committee on Un-
American Activities a permanent stand-
ing' committee. A spirited debate fol-
lowed and the majority leader, the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr.
TvleCosmaexl, now our distinguished
Speaker, protested the Rankin amend-
ment as follows:
After further debate the previous ques-
tion was ordered and a division de-
manded. The resolution lost by a vote
of 134 to 146, Congressman Rankin
asked for the yeas and nays. The
Rankin amendment prevailed by a vote
of 208 to 186 thus establishing the House
Committee on Un-American Activities
as a standing committee. It is signifi-
cant to note, however, that those voting
in the negative included the majority
leader, Mr. McColl MACK, Mr. Francis
Walter, of Pennsylvania, later to become
the committee's chairman, and the fol-
lowing other distinguished Members of
the House: Messrs. CANNON, HOLIF1ELD,
Kefauver, KEOGH, KING, K.IRWAN, MAD-
DEN, MANSFIELD, MILLER of California,
MONRONEY, PATMAN, POAGE, PRICE Of 11-
Sheppard, SPARK1VIAN, THOMAS of
Texas, and Vinson.
So Mr. Speaker, the mistake was made
by this House against the advice of the
majority leader, against the advice of
Representative Francis Walter and Clyde
Doyle, both of whom voted against the
Rankin amendment. Except for the vote
on the committee's appropriation in May
1946, where 81 Members voted against
the committee, the Committee on House
Un-American Activities has had no great
difficulty in remaining a standing com-
mittee. That is the way of life in this
great legislative body. A standing com-
mittee once established is immensely dif-
ficult to get rid of, even though its man-
date is probably unconstitutional and its
behavior embarrassing and belittling to
the Congress.
I have no doubt that the U.S. Supreme
Court will ultimately find the resolution
establishing the House Committee on
Un-American Activities in violation of
the Constitution. In the Watkins ease--
354 U.S. 178, 1957?the Court by a 6-to-1
decision defined the limits of the con-
gressional power to conduct investiga-
tions:
The power is broad. It encompasses in-
quires concerning the administration of e c-
isting laws as well as proposed or possibly
needed statutes. It includes surveys of de-
fects in our social, economic, or political sys-
tem for the purposes of enabling the Con-
gress to remedy them. It comprehends
probes into departments of the Federal Gov-
ernment to expose corruption, inefficiency,
or waste. But broad as is this power of in-
quiry, it is not unlimited. There is no gen-
eral authority to expose the private affairs of
individuals without justification in terms of
the functions of the Congress.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 Approved F6 70001-0
A821
to Wilmington from New York City in
October of 1956 to organize the senior center.
She had been director of the Yorkville
Neighborhood Club in New York, a similar
organization for older people, and has worked
in YMCA and YWCA programs for many
years.
"Our aim is to make people realize that life
has not stopped," explains Mrs, Patterson.
"They used to go to work each day, now they
come here to find creative activity and stim-
ulating experiences."
Creative activity includes everything from
daily dances to classes in crafts, enameling,
weaving, music and discussion groups. Stim-
ulating experiences might include meeting
new friends, the daily fellowship of lunch
and games with old friends, learning new
skills and helping others. All are a part of
the senior center's program.
A typical day for Mrs. Patterson and her
senior citizens might include a discussion
group in the morning on the problems of the
older person, led by State Senator Louise
Conner, lunch at 12:15, dancing from 1 p.m.
"until we're tired," and classes.
The looms, kilns, painting equipment and
other materials available fill multiple pur-
poses, Mrs. Patterson feels.
"Doctors frequently refer arthritic or
stroke patients to us," she explains. "The
activity involved, and the joy of creating,
often make a person forget his pain while
it is being helped. A great deal of physical
rehabilitation goes on at this 'recreation'
center. Nearly half of our people live alone;
this gives them a place where they can have
fun with people of their own age and inter-
ests.
"We are also involved in community serv-
ice projects, such as mailing and stuffing
envelopes. We work with the Red Cross, the
American Cancer Society, and many others.
Each Wednesday 50 to 60 people meet here
to fill workers kits for door-to-door can-
vassing.
"And it's important to feel needed and use-
ful?our rhythm band regularly puts on
programs for other older persons' groups in
the area. One lady, 94 years old, plays one
of our eight harmonicas.
"We are open to anyone 60 years old or
over. One man, 90, goes bowling three times
a week?we recently celebrated his birthday
with a bowling party. A visiting group calls
and visits our sick members."
On the need for and the role of women
in community service, Mrs. Patterson says,
"If one has had a varied background, experi-
ence, training, it's a shame to waste this on
staying home and minding the knitting. We
all need goals in life; if you don't live up to
your resources and talents and experiences,
you are not carrying your share in your com-
munity or country."
Medicare Versus the AMA's Latest
Substitute
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
op
HON. MORRIS K. UDALL
Or ARIZONA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. UDALL. Mr. Speaker, the Amer-
ican Medical Association has recently
circulated to all of our offices letters and
literature about its new proposal called
eldercare. The proposal purports to
Offer the elderly people of this country
"comprehensive health care." I am sure
many of my colleagues have wanted to
see an independent and unbiased analy-
sis of this proposal and a comparison of
its features with those contained in HR.
1, the King-Anderson bill.
I have just read such a comparison,
and I should like to call it to the atten-
tion of my colleagues. It is an article
appearing in the March issue of Con-
sumer Reports, a respected journal pub-
lished by the Consumers Union of Mount
Vernon, N.Y. Without objection, the ar-
ticle follows:
MEDICARE VERSUS THE AMA's LATEST
SUBSTITUTE
After two decades of effort, 1965 appears to
be the year for medicare?a federally admin-
istered national hospital insurance plan, fi-
nanced through social security contributions
for persons over 65. This time the admin-
istration's medicare bill seems assured of
passage. As usual, though, the American
Medical Association has proposed a last-gasp
substitute. A comparison of the two pro-
posals is instructive.
The medicare bill may of course be altered
in the legislative process, but its four basic
provisions are not likely to be changed sig-
nificantly. They can be outlined briefly.
For those over 65, medicare would:
Pay the full costs of up to 60 days of hos-
pitalization (in ward or semiprivate accom-
modations), minus a first-day deductible,
for each benefit period (which begins on
the first day of hospitalization and ends
whenever the patient has accumulated 90
days out of the hospital within a period of
180 days) .
Provide for an additional 60 days of post-
hospital care for each illness in a convales-
cent or rehabilitation center operating under
an agreement with a hospital (not an ordi-
nary, custodial-care nursing home).
Pay for up to 240 home nursing visits a
year under medical supervision, in programs
organized by nonprofit voluntary or public
agencies.
Provide payment for hospital outpatient
diagnostic services and tests, minus a de-
ductible that would exclude routine low-cost
laboratory or other diagnostic procedures.
These provisions would be financed by an
increase in the social security withholding
tax. Ultimately, a citizen would contribute
(to a special, separate health care trust fund
within the social security system) 0.45 per-
cent of his earnings up to $5,600, and his
employer would contribute an equal amount.
Special provision would be made for those
now oyez 65 who are not covered by social
security through the Government's general
fund.
The medicare program gives the citizen
free choice of physician and hospital. It
does not pay the costs of doctor bills, out-of-
hospital drugs, prolonged or catastrophic ill-
ness requiring long, continuous hospitaliza-
tion, or extended custodial care in nursing
homes.
CU's medical consultants believe that this
is, by and large, a sound basic package. The
60-day provision would encompass all but
about 5 percent of the usual hospital stays
of older persons, and the extended-care pro-
posal would both relieve the pressure on gen-
eral hospital beds and spur the construction
of badly needed convalescent and rehabili-
tation facilities in many communities. Serv-
ices of this kind are essential in many ill-
nesses following their acute stage and prior
to the time a patient can return to his home
or transfer (if necessary) to a custodial in-
stitution.
The provision for organized home nursing
service has obvious value: such services often
preclude the need for hospitalization and
permit earlier discharge from hospital or con-
valescent center. Outpatient diagnostic serv-
ices also are capable of averting many costly
hospitalizations by encouraging the early
detection and treatment of disease?at a time
when it may be cured or controlled by rel-
atively simple short-term procedures.
Since the heaviest health cost of the elderly
is hospitalization, the medicare coverage
could make it financially possible for the first
time for many citizens to purchase voluntary
insurance (of the Blue Shield type) to cover
physicians' bills and other supplementary
costs.
The AMA substitute for medicare at first
glance seems invitingly comprehensive. (It
is, in fact, a resurrection of proposals made
during the Eisenhower administration that
the AMA bitterly opposed at the time, and
again just a few months ago at its house of
delegates meeting. The AMA now refers to
its new proposal as a redefinition of policy.)
The AMA substitute simply proposes the use
of State and Federal funds to buy Blue Cross-
Blue Shield or commercial health insurance
for indigent persons over 65?it does not say
how the funds would be raised, in the ab-
sence of a social security tax.
The proposal does say, however, that a
means test would be required to determine
the eligible poor, with the States using
State and Federal money to pay all, some,
or none of the insurance premium cost,
depending on the citizen's qualification
under the means test. Means tests are?
moral consideration aside?enormously ex-
pensive and difficult to administer. Further-
more, the program would be administered by
the States, raising the possibility that there
would be 50 different kinds of governmental
machinery, eligibility standard, and payment
procedures. (Under some State rules setting
eligibility for help under the current Kerr-
Mills law, ownership of property or even
ability of one's children to pay can make an
old person ineligible.)
The subsidized insurance would pay for
physicians' and surgeons' bills and drug costs
as well as hospital bills, and an AMA state-
ment asserts that this would be "compre-
hensive health care" and not "limited to hos-
pital and nursing home care representing only
a fraction of the cost of sickness." As CU
has pointed out, however, this "fraction"
covers the heaviest, the most financially
crippling share of the burden. Furthermore,
since the AMA has not spelled out specifically
what the private insurance would cover (and
in existing voluntary insurance policies, cash
benefits, days of coverage, and other provi-
sions vary widely from plan to plan and from
area to area), it is difficult to tell how com-
prehensive the protection of the AMA's pro-
posal would be.
The current medicare proposal, obviously,
will not solve every aspect of the Nation's
health problems, even for those over 65. It
does not and cannot guarantee good medical
care to its beneficiaries, and it pays relatively
little attention to the quality of the services
It pays for (though the bill does contain a
provision for periodic review, by the medical
staffs of participating hospitals, of the neces-
sity for hospitalization, length of stay, and
other such features) . However, it is a sig-
nificant beginning.
The War in Vietnam?I
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. THADDEUS J. DULSKI
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, early this
month Mr. Lucian C. Wafren, chief of
the Washington Bureau of the Buffalo
Courier-Express, Buffalo, N.Y., arrived in
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
A822
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX February 25
Saigon to participate in a 10-day tour of
Vietnam to observe conditions there. He
was officially invited by the Department
of Defense to make this observation and
to report conditions as he saw them. His
report, which is in several parts, reflects
his own uncensored views, and there were
no restrictions with respect to the copy
he sent to his paper.
Mr. Warren made several trips into the
war zones and participated in a number
of Air Force and Army combat missions.
He was briefed by the U.S. Embassy, the
U.S. Information Service, and the U.S.
Military Assistance Command in South
Vietnam. In addition, Mr. Warren had
the opportunity to talk With rank and
file soldiers both of the South Vietnam
forces and American military forces in
the combat zones. He also talked to
civilian and military officials of the South
Vietnamese Government, as well as na-
tives in various sectiOns of the country.
Mr. Warren is an outstanding reporter
in our Nation's Capital for the past 20
years and a former president of the Na-
tional Press Club. I commend his on-
the-spot report of conditions in Vietnam
to the attention of my colleagues.
Under leave to extend my remarks, I
include the first of this series which ap-
peared in the Buffalo Courier-Express on
February 21, 1965:
THE WAR IN VIETNAM?SAIGON PRESENTS TWO
PACEZ
(By Lucian (I. Warren)
(Lucian C. Warren, who has reported the
Washington scene with distinction for the
Courier-Express for many years, has gone
to South Vietnam to have a look at that war-
torn land with his reporter's perceptive eye.
This is the first of a series of stories on his
experiences and observations. It describes
his arrival in Saigon and his first day in
that uneasy city.)
Sszaort?"Pan American welcomes you to
Saigon," proclaims a picturesque leaflet dis-
tributed to disembarking passengers just be-
fore arrival at the capital of South Vietnam.
The cover page shows two well-dressed
American couples smiling happily as if they
arrived for a vacation at the Riviera. Inside,
after telling passengers how to get through
customs and immigration stations, the
pamphlet suggests that the city of Saigon
"offers much to the pleasure seeker," with
"fine wines, cognac and choice meals served
at excellent restaurants and nightclubs
throughout the city."
For awhile after arrival, a Saigon visitor
might be fooled into thinking that Pan
Am's idyllic message still rang true. The
20-minute ride from the airport into down-
town Saigon at noontime offered initial
supporting evidence.
CHILDREN PLAYING
Many children with schoolbooks were in
evidence, some engaged happily in the Saigon
version of tag.
The streets abounded with beautiful Viet-
namese women, attired in spotlessly laun-
dered oriental garments.
A noontime traffic jam, the prelude to a
3-hour siesta during the hottest period of
the day, features hundreds of taxis, both
of the motored and rickshaw variety, in a
mad game of chicken. The idea seemed to
be to come as close as possible to hitting
another vehicle or pedestrian without actu-
ally doing so.
Certainly the Caravelle Hotel, at which
this correspondent registered, was elegant
enough with fancy draperies, polished brass
fixtures, automatic elevators and air
conditioning throughout.
CONTRAST
But it didn't take long for disillusionment
to set in, and the drab and ugly aspects of
a tropical oriental city engaged in one of
the world's nastiest wars became clearly
manifest.
A. U.S. colonel entrusted with newsmen
chaperoning duties, saw to it that imme-
diately after the siesta the newly arrived
reporters were shepherded to the local Pan
American ticket office to get reservations for
departure about 10 days hence. He said he
had seen too many get caught without plane
accommodations home to take a chance.
VENDORS
Along the street, one sidewalk vendor of-
fered to sell "feelthy" pictures. We were
warned to have on truck with such vendors
of others of the moneychanging variety.
Seems that these sidwalk entrepreneurs will
offer a fantastic exchange rate for American
dollars?something in the neighborhood of
140 Vietnamese piasters to the dollar, when
the official rate is 70 to the dollar.
The gimmick is that these sleight-of-hand
artists will punctiliously count out the 140
piasters, then vanish quickly before the vic-
tim discovers he is many piasters short. We
were warned also that the pickpockets are
more numerous than in Times Square and
that the slightest jostle might mean that
your wallet was being lifted.
PARLIAMENT BUILDING
On our way to filing the necessary appli-
cation for accreditation, we passed a large
and ornate building.
"That's where Parliament meets * * *
when it meets," our escort remarked. But
of course the Parliament hasn't met for
many weeks as one military coup succeeded
another in the Vietnamese Government game
of musical chairs for the leaders. The only
thing uniform about the coups was that
Parliament stayed dissolved. Indeed, the
Hall of Parliament was advertising orchestra
concerts and other engagements as one way
to collect a few rentals during the long and
perhaps permanent parliamentary hiatus.
At the Vietnamese accreditation office for
newsmen, a young Vietnamese woman took
our applications and issued our accredita-
tion cards with brisk precision.
"A clever girl," our gUide volunteered.
"She has lasted through four administra-
tions."
BARBED WIRE
Soon after, we became official American
war correspondents by being accredited at
the U.S. Information Service headquarters.
A tangle of barbed wire in front was a
sharp reminder that USIS not only had to
worry about Vietcong saboteurs, but needs
protection also from the riotingSouth Viet-
nam non-Communists when they might be-
come displeased at the U.S. attitude toward
the latest cynical coup d'etat.
A 5 p.m. press briefing for some 150 war
correspondents, a daily ritual here, was al-
most totally concerned with the mad scram-
ble to get U.S. dependents evacuated in a
10-day period.
KHANH SEES PRESS
Two hours later Lt. Gen. Nguyen Khanh,
South Vietnam's current military strongman,
held his own press conference to announce
that 24 South Vietnamese planes had success-
fully bombed military installations in North
Vietnam with the help of a "cover" of U.S.
fighter planes.
As he spoke, the rumble of firing could be
heard, possibly as much as 10 to 20 miles
away.
"They're probably lobbing shells at the
Vietcong, who usually begin their military
activity at dusk," someone explained.
BOMBING SCENE
As we bedded down later at the Caravelle
Hotel, after first killing what looked like a
giant cockroach and brushing our teeth with
bottled water (tapwater might produce
dysentery), we reflected that only 5 months
ago a Vietcong bomb went off in the fifth
floor of our hostelry.
Life certainly is not dull in Saigon.
Uncle Sam Is a Salesman
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ROY A. TAYLOR
OF NORTH CAROLINA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1985
Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks I include ex-
cerpts from an article by Ralph McGill,
appearing in the Atlanta Constitution
of February 13, 1965, pointing out the
progress that our country is making in
world trade and the great contribution
made by former Secretary of Commerce,
Luther Hodges, in increasing export
sales.
UNCLE SAM AS A SALESMAN
Uncle Sam has become a go-getting sales-
man. Be is, in fact, doing better than ever
in history. He was, of course, obliged to do
so. But the important fact is that he has
not failed_
After the Second World War ended condi-
tions new and strange were imposed on the
economy and understanding of the United
States. These have changed with the years.
There now is a prosperous Europe?insteed
of a bankrupt one as in 1945. NATO, a para-
mount necessity in the years after war's end,
is in need of revision.
The treaties made by the late John Foster
Dunes With Eastern countries were never
very meaningful. They are less so today.
The story goes on and on?the need for
revision of organizations and attitudes is
great.
Increasingly, since about 1947, the balance-
of-payments problem has become more and
more acute. One way we can improve it is
to sell more abroad.
Little attention was paid this important
aspect of the U.S. economy until President
Kennedy ordered it. In 1961 the then Sec-
retary of Commerce, Luther Hodges, a former
able Governor of North Carolina, was asked
to set in motion a plan to increase trade.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Based on accomplishments, the program
begun in 1961 provedto be sensational. An
itemized account emphasized the impressive
facts of it.
1. Since the inception of the program in
1961, exports have increased by 28 percent.
They reached a total of $25 billion in 1964.
This was 13 percent above the total of $22 3
billion in 1969.
2. Our trade surplus, exports over imports,
has increased by a whopping 45 percent since
1960. Our surplus is currently at the rate
of $6.8 billion; it is $1.8 billion, or 30 per-
cent greater than a year ago.
3. Commerce Department and Department
of Labor statistics agree that more than 3.4
million American workers are employed, di-
rectly or indirectly, in production, transpo:r-
tation, and marketing of the more than $25
billion worth of goods sold to foreign cus-
tomers.
4. It is estimated that each additional bil-
lion dollars of exports creates about 135,000
jobs.
If we do not engage strongly and com-
petitively in world trade we seriously will
weaken ourselves with growing unemploy-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved Fo6SitttlesgpaRk1iiEJA7RDP671300446R000300170001 0
UKU ? APPENDIX A835
xtvarrRY SHOT= BE tiloAil
-
Many of the matters of possible inquiry
would have to colloid's changes in laws and
parliamentary procedures. House Concur-
rent Resolutions 4 and 20 contain a proviso
that the joint "committee would not be au-
thorized "to make any recommendations
with reepect to the rules, parliamentary pro-
cedures, practices, 'and/or precedents of
either Rouse, or the consideration of any
Matter on the floor Of either House." While
this language is identical with 'that in the
Monroney bill, Senate Concurrent Resolu-
tion 2, I personally do not believe that the
study efforts which will be made should be
in any manner circumscribed.
The reaS011, for th? restrRining language,
as we all know, is he sensitivity of each
Rouse to the constitutional provision that
"each House :nay determine the rules of its
proceedings." Of course, any changes in the
formal proceedings would be a matter for
action separately in each House. I see no
bar in constitutional or public policy against
recommendations by a joint committee.
Indeed, the very purpose of? a joint study
effort is to lay the foundation in facts and
analyses for each House to be able to judge
whether changes in formal proceedings
should be matte, Therefore, the mandate of
the committee should not be limited; and
if it is authorized to study, certainly it
Should be authorized to make recommenda-
tions. I would gladly support an amend-
ment to this. effect in the resolution.
While I am on the subject of amendments,
I note that the resolution does not have any
specific time limit for its tenure. Whether
or not this implies that the committee would
lapse with the end of the Congress authoriz-
ing it, it might be useful to specify that
the committee tenure would continue
through the 89th Congress, with whatever
stipulations are appropriate for the presenta-
tion of final reports.
? Finally, I nate that House Concurrent
Resolutions 4 and 20 provide for equal rep-
resentation of both parties on the joint
Committee, This follows the precedent of
the LaFollette-Monroney special committee,
Which had, equal numbers of Republicans
and Democrats of both Houses.
Ordinarily, committees reflect the party
composition of each Rouse, and some Mem-
bers may prefer that these ratios be reflected
on' the proposed joint committee. I recall
that when I sponsored a resolution back in
1951 along with Senator HUMPHREY in the
Senate, provision was made for more Demo-
crats than 4epublicahs, in accord with party
composition of the Houses. However, there
are matters in which party differences should
have a lesser role. Z note that the Senate
Committee on Ethical Conduct has equal
party representation. This follows the prac-
tice of the committee which was established
to rule on the conduct of the late Senator
Joseph. McCarthy.
Certainly party differences need not be a
factor in our study of congressional reor-
ganization. I believe that a majority of the
Members In both parties favor such an
effort, and I am perfectly willing to see that
both parties are equally represented on the
joint committee. This would be a special
joint committee and would expire when its
work is done,
Equal bipartisan representation is justi-
fied in the soma sense that a special com-
mittee is justified. Ordinarily, the Com-
mittee on Government Operations in each
Rouse has jurisdiction over organization
matters, including legislative reorganization.
While it is proper for the Government
Operations Committees to have and exercise
such, jurisdiction from year to year, we are
Foposing here a comprehensive one-time
review, encompassing both Houses of Con-
gress and all its operation. A special joint
comMittee detached from day to day respon-
sibility and limited in tenure seems more
'appropriate for this task, which we similarly
dionmitssioned a committee to do 20 years
ago.
Mr. Chairman, / thank you for the oppor-
tunity to appear here and support the reso-
lution for a Joint Committee on the Organi-
zation d Congress.
Vietnam Discussion Needed
SPEECH
OF
HON. GEORGE E. BROWN JR
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 24, 1965
Mr. BROWN of California. Mr.
Speaker, I have been deeply concerned
that we develop in the Congress, and
among the people of this Nation, a more
enlightened discussion of our country's
foreign policy?particularly our policy
in certain crisis situations such as Viet-
nam. Without this enlightened discus-
sion, based upon facts rather than pure
emotion, this Nation, the Congress, and
the administration Will be unable to
properly develop a reasonable consensus
as to our national intent. Consequently,
we would be unable to adequately relate
our policy and actions throughout the
world to that national interest.
Instead, we will tend to merely react
to crises in trouble spots around the
world?crises created by our enemies in
most cases. These reactions may well be
inspired by the most laudable of goals?
the protection of freedom and democ-
racy, the honoring of commitments to
our friends, the maintenance of our na-
tional honor?but, because an emotional
reaction is never a sound basis for deci-
sionmaking in the complex field of for-
eign affairs, the actual results may, in
fact, reduce our effectiveness in achiev-
ing those goals.
The realities of the world today force
us to recognize that our country is not
all powerful; that our national will can-
not prevail in every situation; and that
we may even be wrong in our evaluation
of what is desired by, or desirable for, the
citizens of other countries. Under these
circumstances, it is imperative that we
realistically,evaluate and assign priorities
to matters affecting our national interest.
We must carefully utilize our national
forces and resources to achieve limited
and practical goals, and we must be
sensitive to the changing political forces
in every part of the world.
With this introduction, I want to say
that I welcome the increasing popular
and Congressional concern on the sub-
ject of Vietnam. There are very legit-
imate, different points of view on this
complex issue. They all need to be aired.
Personally, I cannot agree with all of our
actions in South Vietnam and the poli-
cies behind them. I intend to develop
my own views on this subject before the
public, and the Congress, during the days
ahead.
Today, as a beginning, I would like to
Insert in the RECORD the newsletter which
I sent to many of my constituents and to
the newsoaners of My district on Febru-
ary 15, 1965. I would also like to insert,
at this point, the thoughtful column of
Walter Lippmann which appeared in the
Los Angeles Times of February 21, 1965.
I shall follow this with a further elabora-
tion of my views in the days ahead.
The newsletter and column follow:
WASHINGTON HIGHLIGHTS
(By Congressman GEORGE E. BROWN, JR., 29th
Congressional District, California)
Last week in Washington there was some
indication that the rapidly deteriorating sit-
uation in South Vietnam might filially pro-
duce some discussion of U.S. policy among
the Members of Congress.
It is clear that the United States is carry-
ing on an undeclared war against North Viet-
nam. U.S. forces are being used in air strikes
against North Vietnamese targets. The pre-
tense that we are merely supplying advisers
to a friendly country to aid them in con-
trolling guerrilla insurgents is hardly tenable
under present circumstances.
The question for the American public, and
for the Congress, to answer is: "When is a
war a war?" Without a doubt, if a foreign
power was to make an air strike on U.S. ter-
ritory we would consider it an act of war.
U.S. strikes on North Vietnam are quite com-
parable in magnitude to the Japanese at-
tack on Pearl Harbor, and probably far
greater in their relative damage to North
Vietnam than was the damage done to the
United States at Pearl Harbor. Probably, the
North Vietnamese were not taken quite as
much by surprise by our attack, as we were
by the Japanese attack, but, in other re-
spects, the events are comparable.
If we are at war with a foreign country
(and I think are are), then Congress, which
under the Constitution is the only body au-
thorized to declare war, is cooperating with
the executive branch in a violation of the
Constitution. How far must we go in this
ridiculous pretense? Is it possible that some
day soon this country will find itself engulfed
in a nuclear maelstrom, still blithely pre-
tending that we are at peace?
I strongly disagree with this country's ac-
tion, and lack of policy, in Vietnam. Even
more strongly do I object to the squandering
of billions of our tax dollars and hundreds of
American lives in a situation which may in-
volve us in world war III. without an oppor-
tunity for the Amerioan people and their
Representatives in Congress to debate the
issue.
What vital American interests are involved
in an Asiatic jungle which France, after be-.
tug bled dry, gave up over 10 years ago?
What evidence is available that the peas-
ants of South Vietnam, or even the military
puppets who claim to head the government,
really want the United States in their
country?
In 10 years our level of assistance has
risen from about 1,000 men and $100 mil-
lion, to 25,000 men and $600 million?sup-
ported by a large part of our Navy, which
we do not even count in these figures. In-
stead of improving our situation, this has
left us in a far worse position than we were
in 10 years ago.
What astute American general is willing
to predict what the situation will be next
year or the year after? Will it be fifty or a
hundred thousand U.S. soldiers? Will it be
$2 or $3 billion per year in American tax-
payers' money?
But the amazing part of the whole situa-
tion is that no logically foreseeable outcome
of 'our present involvement in South Viet-
nam can either help America's position in
the world today, strengthen democracy, or
weaken international communism. The
most realistic military analysts hope only
for a temporary stalemate in Vietnam.
The additional chaos that we are helping
to create in South Vietnam weakens the
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 :CIA-RDP671300446R0Q0300170001-0
A836 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX February 25
possibility of North Vietnam being able to
continue as an independent Communist
force, or of South Vietnam achieving a viable
neutrality. Further escalation of this war
only drives the Communists closer to-
gether?South Vietnam with North Viet-
nam?North Vietnam with Red China?Red
China with Russia.
Our carefree willingness to help destroy
Asiatics only strengthens the rapidly grow-
ing view that white Americans are quite
willing to lend their military technology to
the destruction of as much of the nonwhite
world as possible.
All of these things weaken America's posi-
tion in the world today, weaken our hopes
for a stable world, and endanger the future
of our country.
I would hope that vast numbers of Amer-
ican citizens would join with me in de-
mending that we have a full, free and
informed discussion of this problem by the
public and by the Congress. Out Of this
discussion should come a policy which would
protect America's interest and America's
future.
[From the Los Angeles (Calif.) Times, Feb-
21, 19651
AS/AN REDS, ON BRINE. OF CONQUEST, MAY BE
COOL TOWARD NEGOTIATIONS
(By Walter Lippmann)
We are just seeing another attempt to form
a government in Saigon, and much depends
for the near future at least on whether it
is able to hold together for a decent time.
For the reason why the situation in Vietnam
haS become so critical in the past 3 months
is that South Vietnam has been crumbling
and is at th.,e point of collapse'.
'The Vietcong have been so near winning
the War and forcing the United States to
withdraw its troops that Hanoi and Peiping
have brushed off feelers for a negotiated
peace. They believe themselves to be in sight
of a dictated peace.
We, for our part, have found ourselves
quite unable to put together a South Viet-
namese government which is willing or able
to rally enough popular support to hold back
the advancing Vietcong. The American Army
fighting the Vietcong has been like men try-
ing to drive away a swarm of Mosquitoes with
baseball bats. However, because there is
nothing else to do, we keep On. We do not
wish to fke the disagreeable fact that the
rebels are winning the civil war.
The easy way to avoid the truth is to per-
sande ourselves that this is not really a civil
war, but is in fact essentially an invasion of
South Vietnam by North Vietnam. This has
produced the argument that the way to
stabilize South Vietnam is to wage war
against North Vietnam.
The more thoughtless and reckless mem-
bers of this school of thinking hold that only
by attacking North Vietnam with heavy and
sustained bombardment can we snatch a vic-
tory in South Vietnam from the jaws of de-
feat. They have not yet carried the day
in Washington. But the President, when he
ordered the retaliatory raids, no doubt in-
tended to remind Hanoi and Peiping that the
United States could, if it chose to, inflict de-
vastating damage.
Apart from the question of the morality
and the gigantic risks of escalating the war,
there is not sufficient reason to think that
the northern Communists can be bombed
into submission. We must not forget that
North Vietnam has a large army?larger, it
Is said, than any other artily on the East
Asian mainland except China's. This North
Vietnamese army can walk, and nobody has
yet found a way of bombing that can pie-
Vent foot soldiers from walking.
It is most likely that if we set out to
devastate Hanoi and North Vietnam, this
array would invade South Vietnam. In South
Vietnam we could not bomb the army be-
cause that would mea,n that we would be
killing our South Vietnamese friends. There
is little reason to think that the Saigon
Government and its very dubious troops
would be able to fight back, or in fact that
it would want to fight back.
The Asian Communists fight on the land,
and they think about war in terms of in-
fantry. I believe that the reason why they
are not terrified, nor much deterred, by our
kind of military power is that they believe
a war on the mainland will be fought on the
ground and will be decided on the ground.
There they have not only superior numbers,
but widespread popular support.
For this country to Involve itself in such
a war in Asia would be an act of supreme
folly. While the warhawks would rejoice
when it began, the people would weep be-
fore it ended. There is no tolerable alterna-
tive except a negotiated truce, and the real
problem is not whether we should negotiate,
but whether we can.
It is not certain, given the weakness and
confusion in South Vietnam, that Hanoi and
Peiping who are poised for the kill will agree
to a cease' fire and a conference and a ne-
gotiation. But while this has, I believe, been
the implied objective of our policy, the time
has come when it should be the avowed ob-
jective, an objective pursued with all our
many and very considerable diplomatic
resources.
Annual Nathan Hale Essay
Contest Awards
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. J. EDWARD ROUSH
OP INDIANA
IN flik, HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. ROUSH. Mr. Speaker, earlier this
month I had the opportunity to partici-
pate in the 25th annual Lincoln Pilgrim-
age conducted by the Meshingomesia
Council, Boy Scouts of America, held in
Wabash, Ind.
During the program, I was given the
honor of presenting the council's annual
Nathan Hale essay contest awards to
Steven Murphy of troop 76 in Hartford
City, Incl., and to William Van Dyke
Jones, Den No. 3, Pack 49, Marion, Ind.
This is a program sponsored nationally
by the Freedoms Foundation as part of
its effort to Strengthen America's
heritage.
I am always impressed by the ability
of our youth to express themselves sup-
.cinctly on the basic principles. The
award-winning essays are as follows:
WHAT THE SCOUT LAW AND OATH MEAN TO ME
(By Steven Murphy)
The oath means a chance to better my-
self, physically, mentally, and normally.
This means a chance to improve my loyalty
toward my country, my troop, and my God.
The laws are a goal for all scouts. To
achieve this goal is to live a good life. The
laws are not to be learned, then forgotten.
They should affect a scout for all of his life.
The Scout oath and laws are important
and should help guide a Scout through life.
WHY I LOVE AMERICA
(By William Van Dyke Jones)
Why should anyone ask me why I love
my country? Don't you love America?
America is a land of freedom, a land of op-
portunity. Many people migrated to this
great land because they wanted to be free
and not to be told what to do. And that we
can worship where we please and we have
freedom of speech. And if Thomas Jefferson
loved America enough to write the Consti-
tution, I love it enough to write this essay.
Secretary of Agriculture Acknowledges
George Washington Carver Plaque
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, February 23, 1965
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, on Feb-
ruary 23, 1965, I brought to the attention
of the House a speech delivered last
Thursday by our colleague, the gentle-
man from New York, the Honorable
HERBERT TENZER, on the occasion of a
plaque being presented to the U.S. De-
partment of Agriculture as a memorial to
the late George Washington Carver. Dr.
Rosa L. Gragg, chairman of the George
Washington Carver Commemoration
Committee, is one of my constituents.
Today, I bring to the attention of the
House the remarks made by the Honor-
able Orville L. Freeman, Secretary of
Agriculture, upon accepting the plaque
on behalf of the Department.
The speech follows:
SPEECH OF HON. ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, SECRF -
TART OF AGRICULTURE
Dr. Oragg, Congressman TENZER, other dis-
tinguished guests, you do the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture, and me personally, a
great honor in presenting to us this plaque
commemorating the name and accomplish-
ments of George Washington Carver, a great
American who served his country and his
State selflessly and with honor.
On behalf of the Department I airs proud
indeed to say a few words of tribute to this
remarkable scientist; this teacher of rare
ability. He was a truly admirable man. He
remains so in our own memory and use of
his achievements.
In his quiet, humble way, George Wash-
ington Carver did far more than most of us
realize to shape the development of our
USDA. He was born 2 years after the De-
partment was established, and when he died
the Department had 81 years of growth and
accomplishment behind it. His life spanned
many of the major changes in American agri-
culture; and the truth is that many of these
changes he himself helped bring about.
He showed how agricultural products could
be used industrially, and he led the way in
bridging the gap between lab research and
the practical application of that research on
the farm. In so doing he foreshadowed the
work of our modern utilization research and
our extension programs.
Dr. Carver was a close personal friend of
at least three Secretaries of Agriculture:
"Tama Jim" Wilson, Henry C. Wallace, and
Henry A. Wallace. Two of them taught him;
one of them he taught?taught in the best
Way of all, informally, in quiet conversa-
tions while hunting plants in the woods and
the fields.
Henry A. Wallace was only 6 years old at
the time, but, looking back much later, tie
wrote: "Because of his friendship with my
father and perhaps his interest in children,
George Carver often took me on botany ex-
peditions, and it was he who first introduced
me to the mysteries of plant fertilization."
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
/965
royalty payments in U.S. funds?thus
furthering the objectives of America's
export expansion program.
As a ease, 1r point, it is estimated that
If the Clupak extensible paper now made
every year in foreign countries were
made in papermills built with American
capital?Instead of under license from
Clupak, Inc.?it would have required an
egpenditure of $50 to $75 million for
plant facilities alone.
This procedure is in line with recent
call by President Johnson for American
bu-sinessmen "to limit their direct in-
Vestments abroad, their deposits in for-
eign banks, and their holdings of finan-
cial assets."
Clupak, Inc, currently has 44 licensees
producing Clupak extensible paper in the
United States and 15 foreign countries
In Europe, Africa, South America, and
Asia.
Licensees of Clupak, Inc., serve world-
wide markets from, Argentina, Canada,
Chile, China (Taiwan), Colombia, Eng-
land, Finland, France, Germany, Japan,
Norway, Peru, South Africa, Sweden, and
Yugoslavia.
Clupak extensible paper, an uncreped
kraft with built-In stretch and extraor-
dinary toughness, is used widely
:throughout the world for multiwall bags
and for industrial wrapping paper.
Clupak, Inc., is owned jointly by Clu-
ett, Peabody & -Co., Inc., and West Vir-
ginia Pulp &Paper.
I am happy to announce the presenta-
tion of a,n "E" Award to this outstanding
company.
Approved Fcains& g ?sal itiEKADP 67A1nritly 300170001-0
The War in Vietnam?III
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
QF
HON. THADDEUS J. DULSKI
OF NZ's, 'roam
DT ink HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ThursclaY , February 25, 1965
Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, under
unanimous consent I wish to include the
third installment of the report by Mr.
Lucian C. Warren, Washington corre-
spondent for the Buffalo Courier-Ex-
press, on his recent trip to Vietnam.
Part lit, which appeared in the Buf-
falo Courier-Express, Buffalo, N.Y., on
February 23, 1965, follows:
TUE WAR IN VIETNAM, III?DISASTER STRTILES
AT QUI RIION BASE
(Death can come swiftly and unexpectedly
In the picturesque country of South Viet-
nam?and it has been coming to an increas-
ing number of Americans there. Here, Lu-
cian C. Warren, Washington correspondent
for the Courier-Express, describes a brief trip
to the U.S. alrbase at Qui Nhon, a pretty
coastal town where only a few hours later
Red guerrillas destroyed an American bar-
racks and brought death to many GI's.)
(By Lucian C. Warren)
?.
DANANG, bOUTII Vismst4.?It had been an
uneventful, if a hit uncomfortable, flight
from Saigon to this war-torn nation's second
largest city, just south of the border with
Communist North Vietnam,
I rode in a ,lannbering C-128 "Flying Box-
car," perhaps the Air Force's most reliable
transport plane.
? ,
A public address system is unknown to the
0-123, probably because the roar of the en-
gines in its non-sound-proofed fuselage is so
loud that it wouldn't serve any useful pur-
pose.
SIGNS
Instead, the navigator manipulated a sim-
ple sign on approaches to and takeoffs from
landing fields.
"Cans hut thuoc?No smoking," proclaimed
the sign during the takeoff and landing pe-
riod. While in flight, the sign was turned
oVer to read: "Cam hut hut tlauoc?Smok--
ing permitted."
There was no accompanying sign about fas-
tening seat belts, as the Air Force assumed
that even the most stupid would know when
to strap himself in.
A couple of dozen passengers on assorted
war mibsions made the milk run with me on
the afternoon's flight from Saigon to Danang.
They sat in bucket seats facing each other,
while in the rear was cargo and mail.
TALE
A C-123 does not provide reading lights, but
a few attempted to read paperbacks with
light filtering in through small windows.
Most took the opportunity to seize 40 winks.
I attempted some conversation with my
bucket peat mates, but shouting a conversa-
tion is not the easiest Way to communicate.
/ did learn that the man on my right, a
North Carolinian, had Just begun his year's
tour of duty with the Army and was not at
all enchanted with the prospect.
wouldn't care so much," he said, "if
I had a decent place to live. The Army
tries hard, but the accommodations aren't
the greatest."
WAYSTOPS
The Saigon-Danang milk run provided for
three intermediate stops on its 5-hour
400-mile run north along South Vietnam's
coastline.
Natrong was the first stop. This, in more
peaceful times, is South Vietnam's resort
area. Here, Madame Nhu had a palatial
Riviera-type home. Since the assassination
of her brother-in-law, President Ngo Dinh
Diem, she has been living in forced exile
abroad.
But her home was not visible from the
makeshift airport the Air Force had con-
structed.. There wasn't even a snack bar
around in which to while away the time
while the C-123 unloaded and loaded cargo.
can wiltny
At the next stop the accommodations were
better. "The USAF welcomes you to Qui
Nhon," read the sign on a small building,
on the inside of which soft drinks and sand-
wiches were available.
The airport was not far from the (Mean,
where waves could be seen lapping gently at
the beaches. It seemed an idyllic spot.
So it seemed too, to four Army enlisted
men a month ago. An ideal place for a lit-
tle fishing expedition.
The next day, their bodies were washed
up on the shore. Their hands were tied
behind their backs apc1 Vietcong bullets had
riddled their heads.
The trip was soon completed after the
Qui Nhon stop, and it wasn't many hours
later when I had bedded down in the quar-
ters of Col. Roy S. Geiger, deputy U.S. sen-
ior adviser for the Vietnamese Army's Corps
I in the Danang area.
A mosquito netting was all that separated
the colonel's bed and mine. Beside his bed
was an emergency phone.
We had not been asleep long, when the
phone rang.
The news was bad:
. ,
The Vietcong had blown up a hotel in
which American enUatearnen were quartered.
There was one known dead and 27 missing.
A829
For several hours, Colonel Geiger's phone was
busy as he assisted in lining up engineers
to rescue men still alive, but buried, in the
rubble.
The place of the disaster?the not so idyllic
town of Qui Nhon.
Presentation of ARBA Award by Boyd S.
Oberlink, President, American Road
Builders' Association, February 23,
1965
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN A. BLATNIK
OF MINNESOTA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Speaker, a num-
ber of us were present at the American
Road Builders' Association luncheon and
were privileged to see our modest, able,
and effective chairman of the House
Public Works Committee, Hon. GEORGE H.
FALLON, receive recognition for his out-
standing contribution to highway prog-
ress. It is an honor to place the re-
marks of our friend, Mr. Boyd S. Ober-
link, at the presentation of the ARBA
award ceremony, in the RECORD:
PRESENTATION OF ARBA AWARD BY BOYD S.
()BERLINK, PRESIDENI., AMERICAN ROAD
BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION, FE'BRUARY 23, 1965
One of the most agreeable duties of the
President of the American Road Builders'
Association is that of presenting the annual
ARBA award, which is presented each year
to a member of the association who has made
an outstanding contribution to highway
progress.
The president of ARBA does not select the
recipient. The selection committee is
composed of the award winners for the past
3 years. In this case, I think the selection
committee itself deserves to be congratulated
for its work, for I can think of no one more
deserving of this award than GEORGE H.
Pazt,pw.
Congressman FALLON was assigned to the
House Roads Committee when he first came
to Congress, in January 1945, and has served
the highway program ever since. He became
the first chairman of the Subcommittee on
Roads in 1949. He is attending his 21st
ARBA convention.
Congressman FALLON is sometimes called
the father of the interstate highway pro-
gram. He does not call himself that, be-
cause he is always more than willing to share
the credit and, certainly, many people played
parts in the establishment of this program.
However, no single individual did more than
Congressman FALLON. He was the author of
the bill which became the Federal Aid High-
way Act of 1956 and set into motion the
world's greatest public works program.
This one achievement would be sufficient to
earn a place in the highway program's hall
of fame, but Mr. FALLON has continued to
distinguish himself ever since.
Back in 1956, the House Public Works
Committee formally stated its intent to in-
crease_ the authorization for the ABC high-
way program in annual increments of $25
million until such time as the authorization
would reach the $1 billion level. Although
this was a reasonable rate of growth?the
necessary rate, in fact, to keep the ABC pro-
gram in balance with the Interstate?the
increases were never obtained without over-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67500446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 .? CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
.A$30 , CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX
corning formidable opposition. Mr. FALLON
not only worked out the problem; he did it
without incurring animosity.
Throughout his tenure as chairman of the
House Road Subcommittee he has fostered
harmonious relations with the exlcUtive
branch of the Government, with the minor-
ity members of the subcommittee, with the
State highway departments and with the
representatives of the highway industry.
Because of this harmony, the legislative
problems associated with the highway pro-
gram have been worked out in, an intelligent
way, in an atmosphere of understanding.
On the occasion of the final enactment of
the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956, several
members of the House Public Works Com-
mittee made comments in the House Cham-
ber praising Mr. FaLLorz for the manner in
which the bill was handled.
I particularly like the comment by the
late Congressman Dempsey, of New Mexico,
concerning GEORGE FALLON :
"He is a man who does not especially like
praise and most certainly does not seek it,"
Congressman Dempsey said. _ "He is a very
modest person, or I would have a lot more
to say about his ability. I congratulate him
because I think he has done a magnificent
job."
These words of Congressman Dempsey are
as appropriate today as they were in 1956.
We could be more extensive in our praise,
but it is appropriate to say, simply, that
Congressman Fm..r..orq has done a magnificent
job, and it gives me a great personal pleasure
to present to him, without further ceremony,
the ARBA Award
VFW Prize-Winning Speech
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ALEC G. OLSON
OF MINNESOTA'IN THE HOUSE OF rt EP R ES ENT ATI vE s
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. OLSON of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, I am pleased to note that the
Minnesota winner in the annual Vet-
erans of Foreign Wars voice of democ-
racy contest is a student at Redwood
Falls High School in my district. Young
David Harvey, in his winning speieh,
stresses eloquently the importance of the
individual in a democracy. But I am
especially proud of David. This boy,
Who presented so well a philosophy which
is close to the heart of every American
citlien, is not himself ?, an American
citizen. David is a foreign exchange
student from New Zealand.
Mr. Speaker, with unanimous consent
I. place David's prize-winning speech at
this point in the Appendix to the RECORD:
THE CHALLENGE OF CurzEriskup
When St. Paul was brought before the
Roman governor, he used those magic words
which gave him immunity from Hebrew jus-
tice 'Civis Romanus Stim."----q am a lioncian
citizen." and he had the right to appeal to
Caesar, which he did.
Today, as in the time of St. Paul, one's
citizenship is a thing to be proud of, but say-
ing that one is a citizen of a country and
saying that one practices good citizenship
are tWo different things.
citizenship is not flagwaVing_ patriotism,
but for us it is identifying ourselves as those
who are entitled to the rights and privileges
of free men; and sensing the qualities of our
obligations and responses to a community.
Now let us discover what the challenge of one
entitled to the rights and privileges of a free
man actually involves.
Today we are surrounded by forces that
threaten to take away our freedom. We all
have heard of these over the media of com-
munication, so there is no need for me to re-
iterate all the dangers that face us. Yet we
are faced by an equally dangerous enemy
within that threatens to take away our most
important freedom?the freedom to think as
we please, the freedom to make our own
decisions and to act upon them. All the
time we 'are told what to do, what to buy,
how we should do this and how we should do
that, ana gradually we are allowing other
people to do our thinking for us. The time
will come when no longer will we make our
own decisions, but some "big brother" will
tell us what to do and what to think. We
will be told who is good and who is bad, whom
we shall love and whom we shall hate.
Happily, today we are only on the brink of
this horror, but it is, nonetheless, frighten-
ingly close. What we need to do now, at
this moment, is to wake up and think for
ourselves. When we do this we must not
be affected by prejudice, be it racial, political
or religious, and above all we must stick to
our decisions once we have made them. If
our ideas differ from those of the majority,
and if we truly and genuinely believe in
them, then we must stick to them as the
American colonists did more than 175 years
ago.
Individualism is a keynote of our society
and it must be maintained by sustaining
freedom of thought, and it is up to the good
citizen to preserve this freedom as well as
all the others. By upholding these freedoms
when it is perhaps easier to be passive, which
are the rights of every person, the citizen
practices good citizenship.
Yet how many people criticize and censure
the individualist for his different ideas; he
Is reviled, insulted, even called a Communist.
This is the wrong attitude to adopt toward
those who use the freedom of thought, and
it is this that is challenging us today. We
must accept this challenge?a challenge
which, if we do not accept, will take away
our freedoms. To practice good citizenship
we must fight for and preserve our free-
doms?the freedom to speak as we please;
the freedom to worship as we please; the free-
dom to live without having to worry; and
the greatest freedom of them all?freedom
to think as we wish. Preserve them, for if
we do not, then we do not accept the chal-
lenge of citizenship?for these as we care-
fully exercise them, become not ours alone,
but equal rights of others, strengthened like
links in a chain.
Our Future Farmers
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. LYNN E STALBAUM
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. STALBAUM. Mr. Speaker, as a
onetime member of the Future Farmers
of America, I have been long aware of
the keen insight such participation af-
forcIS young men who learn the full
values necessary to good citizenship.
The role of the Future Farmers of
America in today's complex world is in-
creasingly more important.
Therefore, I am genuinely pleased to
call attention of my colleagues to the ex-
February 25
cellent editorial in the Beloit, Wis., Daily
News of February 17, 1965. The article
follows:
OUR FUTURE FARMERS
Future Farmers of America Week is to b
observed during the February 20-27 perioc
And this is one of those annual events that
is fully worthy of the attention and interest
of us all.
The stated purpose is "public recognition
of the Future Farmers of America organiza-
tion in developing better agriculture and
rural citizenship." The young people who
participate are brought close to the profound
values that are a part of nature. They have r
healthy and dedicated interest in crops, in
farm animals, and in the ever-changing tech-
niques which give our agriculture its vast
efficiency and productivity and help make us
the best fed people in the world. The city-
dweller is totally dependent on the farmer
for the means of life itself.
Beyond this, the Nation faces a critice 1
problem of juvenile delinquency. Various
cures are offered, based on the home, schools,
and churches. In addition, those groups
which work with youth, in all manner of
fields, can do an essential job in building
character, honor, and responsibility. The
Future Farmers organization is one of the
best of them.
Buffalo Area Chamber of Commerce State-
ment on Proposed Head Tax on Trav-
elers
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. THADDEUS J. DULSKI -
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, February 23, 1965
Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks in the REC-
ORD, I wish to include a statement of the
Buffalo Area Chamber of Commerce,
Buffalo, N.Y., concerning a proposed tax
on residents of the United States who
travel abroad.
The statement follows:
BUFFALO AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE STAT
MEN T ON PROPOSED HEAD TAX ON TR AVE ..-
ERS
The proposal to levy a head tax of $100
on V.S. residents traveling to foreign lands
or in fact any further Government restric-
tions affecting the natural rights of its citi-
zens is vigorously opposed.
Such a tax not only would place an onerous
burden on educators, students and others
having a limited travel budget but alio
would add considerably to the cost of doing
business abroad. It would be a serious detri-
ment to increased and freer trade between
the United States and friendly nations.
The goodwill now created by American
tourists abroad would be considerably cur-
tailed and if other countries imposed a sim-
ilar tax in retribution, our growing number
of foreign visitors would be lessened.
Revenues derived from the proposed tax
might amount to somewhat less than a neg-
ligible $200 million and the balance-of--pay-
ments deficit might be lowered by a few hun-
dred million dollars. This amount, com-
pared to the U.S. billions flowing overseas
through investments, Government loans and
giveaway programs, would have very little
effect on the balance-of-payments deficit.
We sincerely urge that no serious consid-
eration be given to this proposal.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965
Approved 5?dity:AR91.43At0/06eppki,9,061R0003001 70001 -0 .025
the same time, I want those who recOg-
nize and observe our rules to receive pub-
lic recognition and praise. In other
words, let the personal reputation and
esteem o a country's, mission here in Our
Nations capitaj rise or fall on the wa43,
they observe or abuse our hospitality.
Flint Journal Salutes SS "Hope"
ErrgicsioNOy gnmAriks
OF,
110N. JOHN C. MACKIE
or FLICHIesx
THE HOUsg OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. MACKIE. Mr, Speaker, since
World War 11 Americans have realized
that their fates are entwined with the
destinies of people of other nations.
Not only our Government, but the
people of the United States acting out-
side the governmental sphere have in-
creasingly shown a desire to help the less
fortunate of the world.
A leader in these people-to-people type
programs has been Dr. William B. Walsh
and the organization he founded 7 years
ago, Project Hope.
Project Hope, the principal activity qf
the People-to-People Health Foundation,
Inc., sponsors the voyages- of the white
hospital ship SS Hope.
In 4 years this floating medical center
has brought American doctors and nurses
to Asia, Latin America, and Africa, where
they have trained ,their counterparts in
the latest medical skills.
Mr. Speaker, the success of this mag-
nificient project is appropriately saluted
In a recent editorial in the Flint, Mich.,
Journal, and I wish to insert the editorial
In the RECORD:
88 "HOPE" SETS SAIL AGAIN AS U.S. GOOD-
' - TiVLLL SYMBOL
Arnold Toynbee, English historian and au-
thor of such well-known works as "War and
Civilization.," "A Study of History," and
."Civilization On. Trial," several years ago
wrote in the New York Times Sunday maga-
zine: "The 20th century will be chiefly re-
membered * * * as an age in which human
society dared to think of the welfare of the
whole human race as a practicable objective."
A feature of our social development which
inidcates that Mr. Toynbee's theory might
become reality is an increasing recognition
throughout the world that the security and
welfare of the human race are interd,epend-
ent within each geographical area, and the
security , and welfare oi each area are de-
pended on the security and welfare of the
world as a whole.
This is a concept shared more and more by
a great majority of people regardless of their
race, religion, and nationality. And it inch-
, cotes that the held of health and rehabilita-
tion offers an effective approach toward in-
ternational understanding. * * * This same
area of understanding through the healing
arts is be,ing expanded by Project Hope.
Only recently the hospital ship SS Hope re-
turned from Sputh America and now is
headed on her fourth mission of Mercy to
ease human suflering in foreign lands. This
cruise will caery the ship along the west
coast of Africa, Earlier journeys have been
to Indonesia ansi pou,t4 Vietnam, Peru, and
most recently to Ecuador,
The former hospital ship Consolation was
taken from mothballs in 1959 and converted
with private donations under the direction
of the People to People Health Foundation
into a floating medical school.
The ship carries up to 15 doctors, 24 nurses,
a dentist, 22 medical and dental technicians,
plus supporting personnel. It has 250 pa-
tient beds, 3 operating rooms, a special room
for eye surgery, and an obstetrical delivery
rooM. .
The first aim of Project Hope is to teach,
net treat 1-13.e main purpose is to train na-
tive medical workers in the rudiments of pub-
lic liealth and medical treatment. However,
at foreign ports of call, residents are in-
vited aboard for examination and treatment.
Operations performed run into the thousands
and treatments into the hundreds of thou-
sands. On the recent trip to Ecuador, 500,000
children alone were immunized.
The venture is one which people under-
stand. It is providing a service in a field in
which everyone speaks the same language.
Relief of suffering is something that peo-
ple in all countries can see and feel and
relate.
Not only does the search for good health
provide a common denominator among peo-
ple of all nations, but it is fundamental to
economic self-sufficiency. As Dr. Charles
W. Mayo of the Mayo Clinic once said with
great simplicity: "Sickness makes people
poor. Poverty makes people sick."
it doesn't seem to be overstating the po-
tential t6 point out that some of the most
effective tools in the world today, as far as
international understanding is concerned,
can be found in the field of health.
In this field, the SS Hope is fulfilling its
role as an impressive symbol in the far cor-
ners of the world of the good will of Amer-
icans. It is helping to demonstrate in a
most practical way that imaginative private
foreign aid can be tremendously effective,
and that individual Americans are willing
to finance it.
Resolution on the VISTA Program
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. LYNN E STALBAUIVI
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. STALBAUM. Mr. Speaker, our
country today is graced with a truly
superb moving, humanitarian force, the
Volunteers in Service to America--
VISTA?and it serves as a great primary
part of the Economic Opportunity Act.
The National Lutheran Council recog-
nized VISTA's contribution to the do-
mestic tranquility of our Nation at its
47th annual meeting in Hollywood,
Calif., February 8-10, 1965, in a fine res-
olutkon.
I am pleased to call the attention of
my colleagues to this outstanding res-
olution. It follows:
RESOLUTION ON VISTA Paocainu
Whereas establishment by the U.S. Gov-
ernment of the Volunteers in Service to
America (VISTA) program provides an op-
portunity for individuals to volunteer their
services for periods of time to assist in
specific domestic projects in connection with
the Economic Opportunity Act; and
Whereas VISTA thus presents creative of,-
portunities for citizens of good will and com-
petence to serv,e human need;4?nd
Whereas the Christian's call to love for
and service of his fellow man must involve
him in a service in the world: Therefore be it
Resolved, That the National Lutheran
Council (1) register its general endorsement
of the objectives of the VISTA program; and
(2) encourage qualified Lutherans to give
consideration to participation in the VISTA
program as an opportunity for meaningful
service, and a fulfillment of their Christian
vocati n.
The War in Vietnam?II
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. THADDEUS J. DULSKI
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
.Mr. DULSKI. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks, I include
the second part of a report on conditions
in Vietnam by Mr. Lucian C. Warren,
who has just returned from a 10-day
tour of Vietnam.
Mr. Warren is the Washington corre-
spondent for one of Buffalo's leading
newspapers, and part II of his report
which appeared in the Buffalo Courier-
Express, Buffalo, N.Y., on February 22,
1965, follows:
WAR IN VIETNAM, II?COPTER LOSS RATED
LI
(Helicopters are anew and potent weapon
of warfare being brought fully to bear for
the first time in the South Vietnam fighting.
Lucien C. Warren, Washington correspondent
for the Courier-Express who is taking a
closeup look at the southeast Asia war, de-
scribes his visit to U.S. Army helicopter head-
quarters and his meeting there with a west-
ern New York officer.)
(By Lucian C. Warren)
SsmoN.?Some old military traditions are
being chopped down in the jungle warfare
against the Communist Vietcong.
It used to be that generals and their aides-
de-camp never got near the firing line. And
for a number of years after World War II,
the U.S. Army had to yield all major opera-
tions of aircraft to the U.S. Air Force. \
But that's all changed now.
At headquarters of the U.S. Army Support
Command in Vietnam, the man in charge,
Maj. Gen. Delk M. Oden, and his aide-de-
camp, Capt. Richard Kenyon of Medina, N.Y.,
are living proof that military traditions
change.
SIX MEDALS
Major General Oden and Captain Kenyon
each has three air medals to his credit in
recognition of having flown 75 combat mis-
sions together in Vietnam.
They fly about 15 days each month in their
role of helping support the South Vietna-
mese ground forces. Their command has
about 509 aircraft at their disposal, of which
300 are Bell Aerospace UH1-B helicopters.
These are the choppers that rush South
Vietnamese troops into trouble spots where
the Vietcong may have the upper hand.
On the day the two men were interviewed
at U.S. Army Support Command headquar-
ters, the Bell choppers had just returned
from a fierce engagement with the enemy.
NOT DAD
Elements of two South Vietnamese bat-
talions were flown in to help resist a Vietcong
attack in the Phyoc Thy area about 35 miles
east of Saigon.
_C.
Approval For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
,AS26
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 ? CIA-RDP67E0446ROM300170001-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? AFFENDIx February 25
The Vietcong shot down three helicopters,
killing one 'U.S. Army crewman and wounding
eight others.
At least 18 Vietcong were killed during the
exigagernent and much Vietcong equipment
Captured, as compared with 9 South Viet-
h/armee who lost their lives.
All in. all, the losses have been remarkably
light for the chopper forces 'With only 21 lost
in a year when 247,500 hours were floWn by
Army aircraft. An additional five fixed-wing
craft were downed, but General Oden con-
Skiers these losses remarkably light.
roe THE caost
He Is proud, too, of the fact that his air-
craft have the highest availability rate of any
air force in the world.
The general's strong "right arm" and co-
pilot, Captain Kenyon, is the son of Mr. and
Mrs. Duane Kenyon, of Lyndonville, N.Y.
His wife, the former Virginia Mix, lives in
Medina with their three small children.
Captain Kenyon was graduated from West
Point in 1957 at the top of his doss, and
entered the Army Corps of Engineers. Ile has
found thne to take 2 years in advanced engi-
neering at Princeton and has seen duty for
-114 -years in Europe, before arriving at this
hot spot.
"I think this a wOrthwhile cause, and Pm
glad to be participating in this war against
the Vietcong Communists," he says.
ELT TN RICE
MB DOSS is satisfied that his men have made
a real contribution to the Vietnamese war
effort. Aside from flying troops to the hot
spots, the choppers fly In supplies to so-called
pacified areas, where the non-Communist
Vietnamese are struggling to rebuild their
In one recent weration of this kind, the
shoppers flew in supplies of rice that tempted
the Vietcong to return and raid the supplies.
This made the villagers so angry that they
cooperated in telling where the Vietcong
might be found. Subsequent raids deci-
mated these forces.
-Pm...Mom. SHAKES
General. Odehforesees a tong war here be-
fore the Vietcong can be wiped out and he
acknowledges the difficulties of working with
a people Whose government is unstable and
politically immature.
"We're willing to remain here a long time
and work hard at understanding the Viet-
namese. I think our difficulties will begin to
waspore.teand the war will be won," he says.
If so, the work of the general and his
Buffalo area Mde-de-camp and their Bell-
-made aircraft will have made a major contri-
bution.
No Time Limit
EX"I'ENSION OF REMARKS.
ot
HON. LESTER L. 'WOLFF
, .
OF NEW 'TOM
Di Ilia HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, Pebruary 25, 1965
_ . _
Mr. WOr..F14.4 Mr. Speaker I should
like to call to the attention of this august
body an editorial which appeared in the
Westbury Times of Thursday, February
11, 1965. This Long Island newspaper
Ilia been consistently Cited for eXcel-
Terme and has also been the recipient of
=MY neWsp an er -awards.
Tim editorial is as follows:
Ito -Tnyth LIMIT
There Would mem to be a reasonable
-Chance that the west German Governinent
WEI repeal the statute of limitations on
Xast war crimes which is due to expire on
May 8. 1965?certainly there should be no
time limit to the punishment of those who
perpetrated the hellions crimes committed
against humanity during the Second World
War, including that of genocide against the
Jewish people.
We are not in a position to demand that
the Bonn government revise this statute of
limitations?but since the crimes themselves
were of a nature that revolted and outraged
the entire world, the Westbury Times be-
lieves it would be fitting that a resolution be
passed by the Congress of the United States
requesting the West German Government to
eliminate the soon-to-expire statute in the
name of justice and morality.
In the event that Bonn takes no action,
those Nazi war criminals who have not been
indicted or have had no judicial procedure
initiated against them before May 8, 1965,
will be free of the threat of trial and punish-
ment. This, as we view it, would be an af-
front to the millions who gave their lives
to end this tyranny.
A Key Post in Able Hands?Ellington
Directs Emergency Planning
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. JOE L. EVINS
07 TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. EVINS of Tennessee. Mr. Speak-
er, the Senate has confirmed the nomi-
nation of former Governor Buford El-
lington, of Tennessee, as Director of the
Office of Emergency Planning, a key sen-
sitive post to which he was recently
appointed by President Johnson. As the
Director of the Once of Emergency Plan-
ing, Governor Ellington also serves as a
member of the National Security Council.
In selecting Governor Ellington for
this post, the President has wisely chosen
to place this important position in able
hands.
In this connection, Mr. Speaker, an
editorial appearing in the Nashville Ban-
ner of February 20. 1965, follows:
A KEY JOB IN ABLE HANDS
Men who do not feel they know all the an
,-
were are possessed of the willingness to
search for them?such is the caliber of stew-
-duds needed in positions of great respael-
bility. In picking former Gov. Buford El-
lington as Director of the ?Mee of Emergency
Planning, President Jonnson was selecting
Abet kind of man. He put that important
job in able hands.
Swift approval by the Senate Armed Serv-
ices committee, and confirmation yesterday
by the Senate, attested to the faith of Con-
gress in Mr. Eilingtona capacity for this as-
signment. The swearing-in scheduled for
today will launch him upon a task whose
magnitude requires?in the national inter-
est?a personal ability of corresponding di-
mensions.
Buford Ellington's experience is in admin-
istrative endeavor, the organizing and co-
ordinating of effort to accomplish construc-
tive purpose. With a job to do, he does it
with the rainimuni of lost motion.
The Office of Emergency Planning is a staff
arm of the President. Its Director advises
the Cigef Executive on the mobilization and
management of the Nation's fesources in the
interest of -natio-nal security. By law he Is
a member of the National Security Council.
-Nartinie the OEP would be the nucleus
of an overall resource control agency. In
peacetime, its task relates to the husbandir g
of strategic materials, and the coordination
of Federal and State effort in coping with
major disasters.
It is a big responsibility requiring the best
administrator obtainable. In Buford Emu
ton, it has that best; and Washington has
officially taken note of that fact.
Again, congratulations.
Economic Benefits From Oceanographic
Research
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. HASTINGS KEITH
OF MASSACHUSETTS
IN THE HOUSE OF' REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr.- KEITH. Mr. Speaker, one of the
most encouraging documents issued by a
government agency in many months is
the special report of the Committee ori,
Oceanography of the National Academy
of Sciences?National Research Coun-
cil, "Economic Benefits From Oceano-
graphic Research."
The committee?NASCO?headed by
Dr. Milner Schaefer, has made a detailed
and thoughtful evaluation of future mi.,
nomic benefits that could result from
oceanographic research, and compa:es
these benefits with the cost of doing the
research. During its year of study the
committee recognized, of course, that le-
search deriving from scientific brec.k-
throughs and revolutionary technical xi-
novations cannot be forecast. Similarly,
-dollar values could not be placed on
oceanographic requirements for national
defense, or the benefits, which are trily
incalculable. We need only consider the
strategic drop Polaris has given us in the
nuclear arms race to understand the
life-and-death importance of our na-
-tional efforts in what has come to be
known as "hydraspace" or "innerspace."
We have devoted only a minor fraction
of our Federal research dollar to the
marine sciences, but Federal support of
this area of research, fortunately, has
increased substantially in the past few
yeerr=trom $24 million in fiscal year
1958 to $124 million in 1963.
Can we justify this rapid growth of
appropriations? Dr. Schaefer's Commit-
tee answers with an emphatic "Yes."
The fact is, we cannot afford not to de-
vote greater attention to this final but
most promising frontier on our hungry
and troubled planet.
The committee's report conservatively
estimates that a continuing national in-
vestment in oceanography of approxi-
ziately $165 million a year?not counting
defense expenditures?"will be an essen-
tial component in bringing about savings
of nearly $3 billion a year, plus added
annual production worth almost as
much."
In other words, in a period of 10 to 15
.yeara, with reasonable Federal support,
we can anticipate an annual yield in re-
turn of about $6 billion.
Mr. Speaker, Congress will be devoting
considerable attention to our national
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-R0P67B00446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- APPENDIX
? use of them. Otherwise the same old high-
way planners will continue to make the same
old decisions from their new desks in a re-
gional planning office. A future article in
this series will consider ways in which con-
sumer groups can effectively participate in
the new planning process.
Showdown Is Only Way To End
Red Aggression
EXTENSION Or REMARKS
OF
HON. BOB WILSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. BOB WILSON. Mr. Speaker,
under leave to extend my remarks in
the RECORD, I include the following arti-
cle from the San Diego, Calif., Union,
February 13, 1965:
SHOWDOWN IS ONLY WAY TO END
RED AGGRESSION
(By David Lawrence)
The United States has every justification
for severing diplomatic relations with the
Soviet Union and sending home all personnel
of the Russian Embassy in Washington. Not
only has the American Embassy in Moscow
been stoned and the safety of American
diplomats jeopardized?with the full ap-
proval of the Communist regime itself?but
the Soviet Premier has pledged military aid
to the North Vietnam Government, which
has been attacking and killing American
citizens.
Americans are in South Vietnam on a
legitimate mission?at the request of the
existing government. The attacks on them
are, therefore, in violation of international
law and constitute a flagrant act of war by
the North Vietnam Government.
Since the Soviet Union lines itself up
with a government which has made war
upon American troops, the question now
arises whether reprisals or retaliatory actions
against the North Vietnamese will be ade-
quate. For the real enemies are Red China
and the Soviet Union, both of which have
come out in the open in support of the mili-
tary operations against an independent gov-
ernment in South Vietnam.
These acts of aggression will unquestion-
ably continue and aggravate the situation
further unless the United States is ready
to call for a showdown between this coun-
try and the Communists. What is needed
is action by the entire Western alliance.
There certainly is little to be gained by the
United States in continuing to supply eco-
nomic, military, or financial aid to countries
Which are unwilling to take the side of the
United States and present a united front
to the world against aggression.
There have been in recent months various
plans to ezpand and enlarge trade relation-
ships between the United States and the
Communist-bloc countries, which means, of
course, that products which are forbidden
to be transported directly to the Soviet
Union and Red China are then shipped
indirectly to those same countries.
Many businessmen, both in Europe and the
Vilited. States, whO are mostly interested in
Making money, have been arguing that trade
with Communist areas should be expanded.
But this trend developed before the wanton
attacks on Americans In South Vietnam and
oh the American Embassy in Moscow. Un-
der present circumstances, an economic em-
bargo becomes a logical weapon to force
some kind of international cooperation that
will restrain the enemy from further acts of
aggression.
More important, however, than any other
factor is the treachery committed in Mos-
cow, where the Government itself instigated
a mob attack on the U.S. Embassy.
It is difficult to see bow President Johnson
ilow can carry out any plans for a visit to
Moscow. How can there. be improvement of
cultural relations or other exchanges as long
as the Soviet Government is sending arms
and supplies to the North Vietnamese to kill
American citizens engaged in defending the
South Vietnamese Government, whose in-
dependence was supposedly guaranteed by
international agreements signed by the Com-
munists themselves?
The severance of diplomatic relations with
the Soviet Union has often been suggested,
but has usually been brushed aside as likely
to be of no avail. The Soviets know this, and
have taken advantage of the passivity of the
United States.
A breaking of diplomatic relations could be
based upon the many violations by the Mos-
cow government of treaty obligations and
American rights that have occurred since the
United States did extend recognition. Cer-
tainly there have been few cases in history
when nations have maintained diplomatic
relations after the safety of their personnel
has been threatened and violence has been
directed against them.
Soviet Authorities Easing Up on
Availability of Matzoh
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SEYNIOUR HALPERN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 24, 1965
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, I
noted with great interest an article by
Henry Tanner in this morning's New
York Times indicating that the Soviet
Government is making some efforts to
insure that matzoh is available in Mos-
cow this year for the traditional Pass-
over.
Last year, as my colleagues will re-
member, many of us brought to the at-
tention of the House the hypocrisy, du-
plicity, and official preventive measures
which the Soviets took in order to stifle
the production and distribution of
matzoh.
We can say, without reservation, that
this particular chapter has formed part
of the officially inspired effort to sup-
press Jewish religious arid cultural life.
Mr. Tanner now reports that two Mos-
cow synagogues have received permis-
sion to make the unleavened bread avail-
able.
I am deeply hopeful that this sign of
relaxation will mean sufficient supply for
not only Moscow, but other communities
throughout Russia.
The article follows:
SOVIET GIVES MOSCOW SYNAGOGUES PERMISSION
To BAKE MATZOH FOR PASSOVER
(By Henry Tanner)
Moscow, February 24.?Representatives of
two Moscow synagogues declared today that
enough matzoh would be available in the
capital this year to satisfy the needs of Jews
who wish to observe the dietary laws of Pass-
A839
over. Three bakeries have been in operation
since mid-January.
Both synagogues received permission from
the Soviet authorities to set up the bakeries
in rented houses to produce matzoh on a
nonprofit basis for their congregations and
for outsiders who put in orders.
The situation in the capital thus is differ-
ent from that of last year, when many Jews
had to forgo the unleavened bread.
But private Jewish sources expressed con-
cern that the current situation in Moscow
might not be typical of other Jewish com-
munities in the country.
They urged Jews in the United States and
Western Europe not to abandon their efforts
to ship matzoh to Jewish communities in
the Soviet Union.
Communal bakeries have also been set up
in Leningrad and perhaps in Kiev, these
sources said, but they added that in other
parts of the Soviet Union Jewish communi-
ties had not received permission.
PUBLICITY IS CREDITED
They added that they thought the im-
provement in Moscow and Leningrad was pri-
marily the result of the publicity that last
year's shortage had received abroad.
Some private Jewish citizens said that even
with this year's baking operations by the two
synagogues there would be enough matzoh
only for a fraction of the Jewish population -
of the capital, which is estimated at half a
million. There are about 3 million Jews in
the Soviet Union.
At the Maryina Roshcha synagogue in Mos-
cow this morning, two dozen men and wom-
en, most of them elderly, waited in a room
to hand in flour and to place orders for
matzoh.
In another room, a second group of elderly
persons, who had brought their flour in 2
days ago, were about to receive their allot-
ment of matzoh in big brown cartons. There
were two large stacks of PUB cartons in the
room.
The customers paid 1 ruble 40 kopeks
(a1.55) for a kilogram (2.2 pounds) of mat-
zoh. This is what the synagogue figures it
pays for wages, transportation, rent for the
house and other production costs. (At one
New York City supermarket yesterday a
pound of matzoh cost 31 cents.)
The flour was taken by truck to a distant
suburb, where an improvised bakery had
been set up in one of the few old dwellings
that still have large, old-fashioned brick
ovens.
Eight men and a young woman in white
smocks and white caps were turning out thin
matzoh at a fast clip under the supervision
of a representative of the rabbi.
The supervisor said up to 1,100 pounds of
matzoh a day was being produced. A second
bakery set up by the synagogue in another
suburb is turning out about 440 pounds a
day.
George Lieb, president of the synagogue,
said it hoped to produce 44,000 pounds for
its 2,500 regular worshipers and for others
who handed in flour and placed orders.
ABOUT 45-TON TOTAL EXPECTED
At the central synagogue, Moscow's larg-
est, Chief Rabbi Yehudi-Leib Levin said the
bakery set up by its congregation in a third
suburb was producing 2,200 pounds of mat-
zoh a day.
He said that his congregation had 10,000
regular worshipers and that 6.4 pounds a
person was needed, or about 30 tons.
He expects the bakery to produce 45 tons
by April 17, the beginning of Passover. The
surplus will go to the small Cherkizovo syna-
gogue, which is Moscow's third in size, and
to other Jews who want to observe the Pass-
over dietary laws even though they do not
worship regularly.
Throughout the world, many nonreligious
Jews observe the Passover dietary laws as a
matter of custom.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
A840
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX February 25
The problem of procuring matz0h for Pass-
over began 4 years ago, when Soviet state
bakeries were ordered to stop baking it.
There has never been a ban on the baking
of matzoh by individual families. But few
families have the kind of oven needed for
matzoh baking.
Those who were not able to do the bak-
ing themselves could not buy Matzoh from
their friends or neighbors either, since Soviet
laws forbid the production and sale of mat-
zoh, or anything else, by private individuals.
These laws, Rabbi Levin said today, are the
reason the synagogues had to apply for spe-
cial permission to bake and distribute mat-
zoh. The synagogues have in effect been
exempted from the law against private en-
terprise in baking.
In several instances in recent years Jews
have received jail sentences for selling
matzoh.
The rabbi said that this summer the cen-
tral synagogue would build its own bakery.
"Construction materials are already there,"
he said with a nod in the direction of the
yard behind the building,
Sears Leads the Way in Profit-Sharin
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SPARK M. MATSUNAGA
OF HAWAII
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, a
major fringe benefit of our system of free
enterprise is that more and more busi-
nessmen and industrialists are making
It possible for the workers of America to
realize their dream of someday being
able to retire in security and comfort.
One plan which has gained great pOpu-
laxity in my fair State of Hawaii is the
profit-sharing plan, now adopted by ap-
proximately 400 private firms.
An outstanding leader in this field
over the years has been the Sears, Roe-
buck & Co., which operates one of the
Most successful branch stores in Hono-
lulu. An almost fantastic story of its
plan is told in an article by Shure' Hiro-
roma in the Honolulu Star Bulletin of
February 16, 1965. Because I believe it
may lead others to take a serious look
at this amazing plan of a company which
claims it "has everything," I offer the
article for inclusion in the RECORD.
SlEtRS PROFIT-SHARING PLAN' POTS IKANT ON
EASY Seltzer
(By Shurei Hirozawa)
The secret of the fantastic benefits of the
Sears profit-sharing plan is the amazing
growth in Sears stock, which makes up 90
percent of the plan's investments.
This became apparent to members of the
Hawaii section, Council of Profit Sharing In-
dustries, as they listened to William Mc-
Curdy, administrator of the Sears program,
at a luncheon yesterday at Ala Moans Ban-
quet Hall.
Approximately 400 companies in Hawaii
have profit-sharing plans.
-Tate a Pia over 50 who has been with
Sears at least 25 years. His account might
have had a value of $201,000 at the begin-
ning of 1984, and by the end of the year it
was worth $263,000.
The increase of $6,000 was mainly due to
the appreciation in Sears stock, which went
from about $97 a share at the beginning of
1964 to $128 a share at the end of the year,
a gain of almost one-third.
AVERAGE FIGURES
What the man contributed was very minor,
probably $500 during the year.
Average figures for those who have retired
show the following:
Those with 10 to 15 years' service contrib-
uted an average $2,036 and retired with
$10.754; with 15 to 20 years' service $2,036
and retired with $27,780, and with 20 to 25
years service contributed $3,712 and retired
with $60,669.
McCurdy said Sears employees are urged
not to make partial withdrawals from their
accounts not only because they lose tax ben-
efits but stock splits and stock appreciation
which are the factors that increase their
benefits.
For example, two men started work in 1928
at about the same pay. One withdrew $5,000
in 1945 and $4,000 in 1955, but the other
didn't.
When they retired, the one who withdrew
from his account had $156,230 while the other
had $234,095. This means that the $9,000
withdrawn coat the employee $77,865.
Or another example where an employee
withdrew $12,000 to lmy a house for cash in
1940. This meant the plan had to sell 220
shares of Sears stock to get him the money.
That 220 shares, through stock splits and
appreciation would be worth $380,000 today,
McCurdy said.
Employees contributed $43 million and the
company $63.5 million last year, and today
the plan is worth $2.6 billion..
About 90 percent of the funds is in Sears
stock, and the rest in notes, bonds, cash, and
other evowth stock.
South Vietnam
SPEECH
OF
HON. BURT L. TALCOTT
OW CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 24, 1965
Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, most of
the recent talk in and out of the Con-
gressional Chambers about negotiation
of South Vietnam is irrelevant.
Certainly, we must support the pres-
ent position of the President to "not
negotiate."
Under what authority is the United
States entitled to negotiate?barter or
trade away?any part or parcel of South
Vietnam. We own nothing there.
We have no "rights" there. Are we
not in South Vietnam simply and solely
at the specific invitation of the Govern-
ment of South Vietnam? Would any
respectable invitee undertake to sell or
trade away his host's property or posses-
sions?let alone his freedom or liberty.
The Administration has a better
"right' or authority to negotiate or trade
away Alaska or Hawaii?at least in the
latter cases we have some indicia of own-
ership.
If we have any justifiable reason to be
in South Vietnam it is a responsibility?
a responsibility to help defend their lib-
erty from external aggression and a re-
sponsibility to help establish internal
stability from insurgency?but certainly
no right.
Somehow our State Department in re-
cent years seems to excel in negotiating
"away free lands and the liberty of free
peoples. The Communists never nego-
tiate any nation away to freedom.
If we participate in negotiations which
neutralize or communize South Vietnam,
I doubt that many free nations will in-
vite Uncle Sam back. Imperiled nations
will tell us to go home while they still
have their possessions.
Heroism in Oregon During Floods
EXTENSION OP REMARKS
OF
HON. WENDELL WYATT
OF OREGON
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, February 9, 1965
Mr. WYAT'T. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to call the attention of my col-
leagues, particularly those from the
Pacific Northwest, to the following ac-
count of heroism on the part of Robert
Cody and others of Estacada, Oreg., in
the rescue of persons caught in the flood-
ing waters resulting from the disastrous
storms in Oregon in December and Jan-
uary of this year. Certainly the unself-
ish and gallant efforts of these people
are to be commended and will illustrate
briefly the terrible hardships endured by
many of the citizens of my State during
this tragic period.
The heavy floods of December and January
which brought so much damage to Oregon
and hardships to Oregonians, provided 1,
unique opportunity for the people of the
State to exhibit their individual initiative
and courage. No single action better exem-
plifies the spirit in which Oregonians met this
test than the dramatic rescue of four trapped
men at Paradise Park, 5 miles north cf
Estacada.
At 1 in the afternoon on December 22,
Estacada Grade School Superintendent Rob-
ert Cody learned that two men, Don Brown,
a Yale student home for vacation, and a Mr.
Barrett, both of Estacada, were trapped on
the roof of Brown's Paradise Park home by
the rapidly rising waters of the Clackamas
River. Cody, accompanied by Roland Girt
of Estacada, set out in his motorboat to
rescue them. After a rough trip through a
raging river filled with debris, Cody and Girt
succeeded in removing Brown and Barrett
from the roof. The boat then turned back
toward Estacada.
Shortly thereafter the boat became caught
in a crosscurrent and was hurled into a large
Douglas fir tree, where it snapped in half,
the men being thrown in the 25-mile-per-
hour current. Fortunately, the four managed
to swim to trees, where they partially pulled
themselves from the river, They SOOH at-
tracted attention to their plight, but a heli-
copter sent to their aid failed to locate them.
Three of the men hung onto the trees, par-
tially submerged in the water and in im-
minent danger of being swept away, while
Girt climbed to the top of a house. Finally,
at about 7 p.m., about 4 hours after their
spill, a National Guard DUKW set out to
pick them up, but became itself an object
of rescue attempts when it went aground.
It was 9 a.m., 18 hours after the motor-
boat accident, before an ex-Army DUICW,
owned and operated by John McCallister,
John Kobbe, and Mike Park, all of Beaver-
ton, was able to reach the men and transfer
them to shore. On the way back in, the
Beaverton crew managed to pull out the
National Guard MEW as well; but only
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 23 10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD?APPENDIX A843
which, if directed into the proper channels,
can effect the greatest influence for good that
humanity has yet to observe. We have no
election but to meet this challenge; for if
we fail in this, the world's great peoples will
not follow suit and abandon their quest.
They will never cease in their valiant search.
But rest assured, my fellow Americans, their
conquest will not be an eternal one. Long
ago it was said: "Opportunities are never
lost; the other person makes use of those
you miss." If we fail in this, our national
commission, the Communists will rise to
meet the occasion.
Though not totally without flaw, the Gov-
ernment of these United States is the most
perfect yet established by man. We in this
strong Nation have the political philosophy
which the masses seek; we have found the
answer, but all the promises we can make
in this age will not sway them, for words
are cheap. We live in a world filled to over-
flowing with tired souls; tired of predictions
that never come to pass and tired of promises
that are never realized. We of this country
are obligated to take to the earth's four corn-
ers those freedoms by which this country was
first anchored, and by which, with God's
aid, it shall forever be moored. As ministers
of liberty we cannot rest until this object
of our March is obtained. In proportion to
the degree in which we have received free-
dom, let us declare It to the world.
We accept the fact that "a chain is only
as strong as its weakest link."
Involuntarily, each American is an indi-
vidual link that attests to the strength, or
lack of it, in the American cause. And what,
In truth, is that American cause of which
we speak? It was emphatically stated in the
words of that "Firebrand of the American
Revolution," Patrick Henry, when he said: "I
know not what course others may take, but
as for me, give me liberty or give me death."
It was clearly pronounced in Lincoln's Get-
tysburg address: "Forescore and seven years
ago, our fathers brought forth on this conti-
nent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and
dedicated to the proposition that all men are
created equal." This holy cause is engraved
upon the hearts of all true Americans in the
immortal words of America's birthright, the
Declaration of Independence, when it de-
clares, "We hold these truths to be self-evi-
dent; that all men are created equal; that
they are endowed by their creator with cer-
tain inalienable rights, that among these are
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
This is the binding tie that, indeed, shoula
unite our members in kindred cause; the dig-
nity of the individual, and the equality and
liberty of all mankind.
Yet, has our beloved American cause be-
come a common term that no longer ex-
presses a significant truth? Have we lost
that patriotic zeal that long ago spurred our
fathers to attain liberty? Do we lack love of
country to the extent that we are no longer
stirred by our national anthem or to the
point that so many of us do not know even
the first verse to our Nation's hymn? Are we
ashamed to declare with boldness our pledge
of allegiance to our Nation's emblem, the
Stars and Stripes? Do we shudder to con-
template the opinions of our comrades, when
ohr eyes well up with tears, and chills play
havoc with our spines, whenever we pause
to recall how dear a price was paid that this
homeland might be established?
American brethren, let us rise now to-
gether; and as citizens of this, the greatest
nation on earth, let us march forth to meet
the challenge that inevitably awaits us; let
us perpetuate to the ends of the earth those
ideals which have thus far sustained us; let
us so pledge ourselves to the emancipation
of all humanity, until generations hence
shall be numbered with us under the banner
of "we the people, and America shall remain
the one, true hope of the world."
Vietnam: Negotiate or Escalate
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JACOB H. GILBERT
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
MX'. GILBERT. Mr. Speaker, I want
to call to the attention of my colleagues
In the House an interesting editorial in
today's New York Times, which position
I fully concur with and believe to be in
the best interest of our country. The
article follows:
NEGOTIATE OR ESCALATE
It is time for someone in Washington to
remember John F. Kennedy's words in his
inaugural address: "Let us never negotiate
out of fear. But let us never fear to nego-
tiate."
The pressures on this country to seek a
negotiated settlement of the Vietnamese con-
flict are approaching a point where the United
States is being isolated. In recent days Rus-
sia has joined France in appealing for talks;
the British would like to see negotiations
started; the news from Noth Vietnam hints
at a desire to confer; India had previously
expressed the same wish, and yesterday Sec-
retary General Thant of the United Nations
disclosed that he has been engaged in dis-
cussions with the United States and other in-
volved nations and has made concrete pro-
posals for a negotiated settlement.
Washington, to be sure, is not quite alone.
Communist China has been adamant against
negotiations, and it is quite possible that
Peiping will refuse to talk. However, Mr.
Thant, President de Gaulle and the Russians
believe that China can be induced to join a
reconvened meeting of the 14-nation Geneva
Conference.
Yesterday, it was announced that Ameri-
can jet bombers, with Americans manning
the weapons as well as the controls, are now
fighting in Vietnam. Their involvement
makes Americans open combatants in the
war, not just advisers; thus the conflict has
again been escalated. Correspondents in
Washington are being informed that U.S.
policy now permits attacks on North Viet-
nam even without further provocations. The
point of no return on a wider war may be at
hand.
A State Department spokesman goes on re-
peating that the United States will reject
negotiations so long as Hanoi supports the
Vietcong guerrillas; Peiping says it will not
talk until all American troops are out of
Vietnam. Both preconditions are utterly un-
realistic. One of the fundamental reasons
for negotiations is precisely to arrange for a
cease-fire and nonintervention.
Unquestionably, President Johnson worries
about the effect on South Vietnamese morale
of any move toward negotiations, but the re-
cent upheavals in Saigon have indicated that
the will to resist the Vietcong, even among
the commanders of the armed forces, is al-
ready near the vanishing point.
Time is working against the United States.
Secretary Thant is right in saying that the
situation is going "from bad to worse." The
notion that to negotiate would be a defeat
for the United States has become one of the
most pernicious misapprehensions of the
conflict. The United States is amply proving
its military strength and its determination
to stay in South Vietnam in present cir-
cumstances. An agreement to negotiate sur-
renders nothing; it opens up the possibility
for determining whether the goals of effec-
tive neutralization now being sought milt-
,
tartly can be achieved at the conference
table.
The most significant thing that Secretary
Thant said yesterday was this: "I am sure
that the great American people, if they only
know the true facts, will agree with me that
further bloodshed is unnecessary and that
political and diplomatic negotiations alone
can create conditions that will enable the
United States to withdraw gracefully from
that part of the world."
President Johnson is the man to whom
the American people look for the true facts.
Message From South Vietnam
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. HARRIS B. McDOWELL, JR.
OF DELAWARE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. McDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, I take
this opportunity to bring to the attention
of my colleagues, and others who read
the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, a deeply
warm communication from a family of
young Americans serving the United
States abroad.
To me, this message exemplifies the
young Americans who are the unsung
heroes of our foreign service. They are
dedicated ambassadors of good will who
thoroughly and wholesomely portray the
American way In the large number of
foreign stations where they serve our
country.
I am proud to say that the Crocker
family, from whom I received this com-
munication, is from my State of Dela-
ware. I would add that Mrs. Crocker
and the children were recently evacuated
from Saigon, in the evacuation of Amer-
ican families from South Vietnam.
Dave, the father, is still on duty in Sai-
gon.
The communication follows:
HAPPY NEW YEAR
For us in Saigon, the new year holds a
bright hope and promise, as we see the old
year fade into history after so much action.
excitement, and adventure. The passing
year has been a full one for the Crocker
family.
The start of 1964 found us in Hong Kong,
where we were enjoying an enforced vacation
as refugees first class of our evacuation from
Cambodia with the closing of the U.S. AID
mission there. In mid-January, we returned
to Washington, D.C., where Dave put in a
couple months' temporary duty before trans-
ferring as a regional agricultural adviser to
Vietnam. Mary Evelyn, Linda, and Tofnmy
checked in at Stephens City, Va., for the sec-
ond semester of school, and Susie continued
in school in Tempe, Ariz. Dave went to Sai-
gon in April, and the family came out in
July, after school was out and Susie had re-
joined the others. Dave revisted Phnom
Penh, Cambodia, for Memorial Day weekend,
seeing old friends, renewing old ties, and en-
joying a restful holiday without the tensions
of Vietnam. He brought Linda's Siamese
cat back with him when he returned to Sai-
gon, and she promptly had five kittens 2
days later.
In Saigon, the family settled into a nice
new house and into the local community
activities. Tommy, now a life Scout, is
working toward eagle rank, and ts well along
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0 February 25
A844 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX
on the God and country award given jointly
by Scouts and the church. Susie and Linda,
together again after 2 years apart, in the
teen club, church, high school, and Rain-
bow Girls, are busy as they can be. M.E. is
teaching first grade in our American com-
munity school as well as her usual church
and home activities. Dave has been busy
continuously in the field, in the Mekong
River Delta region, to which he was moved
after arrival in Saigon. His work as agri-
cultural adviser has dealt mainly with a large
fertilizer program, rice production improve-
ment work, and the multitude of problems
of agriculture in a country torn by war. In
the 15 provinces of his region, he travels by
armed combat helicopters, military planes,
and armed escorts to work with the farmers
in the hamlets of the delta, and spends most
of his weekends with the family in Saigon.
This summer, while our minister, Reverend
Evans, was on vacation in England, Dave had
the privilege of conducting some of our serv-
ices as licensed lay reader.
With the movements of the past year, we've
said farewell to many old friends, met many
new friends, and renewed many friendships
from the past, from many other places.
Many of our American friends of Korea and
Cambodia times were seen in Washington,
and many others are now with us here in
Vietnam. Several we have visited and been
visited by, by mail. Others we hope to meet
again in our work and travels around the
globe, and our prayers and best wishes go
out to all of you, wherever you are this new
year.
Affectionately yours,
The CROONERS in Saigon.
Time for Talk in Vietnam
? EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. WILLIAM F. RYAN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, once again
the New York Times has provided us
with insight into the complex issue of
Vietnam. Today's editorial states:
The notion that to negotiate would be a
defeat for the United States has become one
of the most pernicious misapprehensions of
the conflict * * * An agreenient to negoti-
ate surrenders nothing; it opens up the pos-
sibility for determining whether the goals of
effective neutralization now being sought
militarily can be achieved at the conference
table.
I strongly urge all my colleagues to
read the following editorial:
NEGOTIATE OR ESCALATE
It is time for someone in Washington to
remember John F. Kennedy's words in his
inaugural address: "Let us never negotiate
out of fear. But let us never fear to nego-
tiate."
The pressures on this country to seek a
negotiated settlement of the Vietnamese
conflict are approaching a point where the
United States is being isolated. In recent
days Russia has joined France in appealing
for talks; the British would like to see nego-
tiations started; the news from North Viet-
nam hints at a desire to confer; India had
previously expressed the same wish, and
Yesterday Secretary General Thant of the
United Nations disclosed that he has been
engaged in discussions with the United Stites
and other involved nations and has made
concrete proposals for a negotiated settle-
ment.
Washington, to be sure, is not quite alone.
Communist China hall been adamant against
negotiations, and it is quite possible that
Peiping will refuse to talk. However, Mr.
Thant, President de Gaulle and the Russians
believe that China can be induced to join a
reconvened meeting of the 14-nation Geneva
conference.
Yesterday it was announced that American
jet bombers, with Americans manning the
weapons as well as the controls, are now fight-
ing in Vietnam. Their involvement makes
Americans open combatants in the war, not
just advisers; thus the conflict has again
been escalated. Correspondents in Washing-
ton are being informed that U.S. policy now
permits attacks on North Vietnam even with-
out further provocations. The point of no
return on a wider war may be at hand.
A State Department spokesman goes on re-
peating that the United States will-reject
negotiations so long as Hanoi supports the
Vietcong guerrillas; Peiping says it will not
talk until all American troops are out of
Vietnam. Both preconditions are utterly
unrealistic. One of the fundamental rea-
sons for negotiations is precisely to arrange
for a cease-fire and nonintervention.
Unquestionably, President Johnson worries
about the effect on South Vietnamese morale
of any move toward negotiations, but the
recent upheavals in Saigon have indicated
that the will to resist the Vietcong, even
among the commanders of the armed forces,
is already near the vanishing point.
Time is working against the United States.
Secretary Thant is right in saying that the
situation is going "from bad to worse." The
notion that to negotiate would be a defeat
for the United States has become one of the
most pernicious misapprehensions of the
conflict The United States is amply prov-
ing its military strength and its determina-
tion to stay in South Vietnam in present
circumstances. An agreement to negotiate
surrenders nothing; it opens up the possi-
bility for determining whether the goals of
effective neutralization now being sought
militarily can be achieved at the conference
table.
The most significant thing that secretary
Thant said yesterday was this: "I am sure
that the great American people, if it only
knows the true facts, will agree with me that
further bloodshed is unnecessary and that
political and diplomatic negotiations alone
can create conditions that will enable the
United States to withdraw gracefully from
that part of the world."
President Johnson is the man to whom the
American people look for the true facts.
Tribute to an American
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SAMUEL N. FRIEDEL
OF MARYLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. FRIEDEL. Mr. Speaker, Felix
Frankfurter, who came to this country
an immigrant boy and rose to a Supreme
Court Justice died this week at the age
of 82.
It is perhaps significant that the date
of his death also marked the birth date
of another great American, George
Washington. I say another great
American for Felix Frankfurter was just
that?a great American. Though he
was given many labels during the course
of his public life, none aptly described
this man, or perhaps all of them did, for
he never strove to fit into any particular
niche. His guiding star seemed to be the
achievement of individual liberty as de-
fined in our Constitution. Thus, I think:
he could best be describe as "guardian
of constitutional liberties."
The Baltimore Morning Sun editorial
of February 24, 1965, briefly but accu-
rately portrays this American, and
recommend it to my colleagues.
The article is as follows:
FELIX FRANKFURTER
It can be said in full truth that Felix
Frankfurter was one of the most influential
men in the United States during the half
century of his mature, active years. He was
influential, moreover, because of the power
and depth of his intellect and his personality.
As is often the case of men of great intellec-
tual capacity, he was interested in everything
that went on, and had his own views to ex-
press. The scope of his daily reading was
enormous and the range of his conversation
was as wide as it was brilliant. The glow
of his originality and his convictions shone
out from his judicial opinions.
He was a complex man and simply refused
to lit in?or, at least, to stay in?the liberal
or conservative pattern by which we try to
classify men in public life. He made the law
his love and his career, as a teacher at Has
? Law School and as an Associate Justice
of the U.S. Supreme Court, but he declined
to be the cloistered professor or judge. Be
had many critics, for he reveled in the clash
of ideas, and it undoubtedly brought amuse-
ment to him that in his early years he was
denounced as a radical liberal and a leading
spirit of the revolutionary New Deal, white
during his last years on the Supreme Cow-t
he became a favorite of conservatives.
His influence was widespread and conta-
gious. At the Harvard Law School he was
the inspiration of scores of young lawyers,
many of whom went to Washington in the
early years of the economic depression of the
1080's to take part in the great expansion of
the Federal Government's responsibility and
authority. As a Justice of the Supreme Court
his influence spread in other directions, en-
couraging among other things a profound
respect for the traditions of our courts and,
for that matter, of our entire governmental
system. His last major opinion, in 1962, was
a brilliantly composed dissent to the Supreme
Court's majority opinion that the apportion-
ment of seats in a State legislature came
within the jurisdiction of Federal courts. He
described the problem of districting legisla-
tures as a "political thicket" and argued that
the Federal courts should leave the settle-
ment of such matters to the people and tae
regular political processes.
The United States was fortunate that as
came here as an immigrant boy from Austria
and that he gave this county so freely of
his many talents. Re was one of the giar ts
of our time. All those who knew him, or saw
him in the court, or heard him in lively talk
at the dinner table, felt themselves privileged.
And Now, a Tax on Tourists
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ROBERT McCLORY
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE:,
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, few
proposals have aroused such outpourings
of alarm as the recent intimation that
American tourists going abroad would
be taxed $100 each. My daily mail bears
witness to the concern of my constitu-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX A845
ents, many of Whom had hoped to enjoy
travel in other countries soon. Some of
these letter's quote from. editorials, com-
mentators, and even from a last Sunday's
sermon?heard in a local church.
For serious consideration, I Offer an
editorial from the Waukegan News-Sun,
which appeared in that Illinois daily on
February 17,1965:
AND Now, A TAX ON TOUXISTS
It is a sorry thing when the richest Nation
in the world must consider penalizing a citi-
zen the sum of $100 when he leaves the
country as a tourist.
When one Stops to think about it, one
Would have to conclude that official Wash-,
ington had taken leave of its senses. It's
not the balance-of-payments situation that
Xe in bad-shape?it's the reason, or lack of
reason, behind the proposal.
Unfavorable balance of payments means
that the United States is spending more
abroad than it is taking in from abroad and
that our gold supplies are being steadily
depleted.
American tourists contribute to the deficit,
certainly, but they are hardly the sole, or
even Major cause. Still, the 2 million of
them who went overseas last year spent
about $1 billion more than their foreign
counterparts spent in this country. That
amounts to about one-third of the total
balance-of-payments deficit.
The $100 head tax is frankly designed to
discourage Americans from going overseas
and to reduce their spending there if they
do go.
It has certain paper logic. Even if no
one is discouraged from going abroad, the
tax would bring hi $200 million, based on
1964's figures.
But a tax on tourism is more than just
the bureaucratic concept of milking the
masses. Such a levy could deny the retired
couple who have been saving for years, or
the young college student operating on a
shoestring, the one opportunity they may
ever have to see the world.
The vast majority of travelers are not rich
and $100 could make the difference between
going and not going on a dream adventure.
This latest adventure in fuzzy thinking
Is more than simply subtracting x number
of dollars from x number of people. You
also take away from the experience of the
Nation itself. To impose such a tax would
be to put blinders on the Nation at a time
when it has raised itself to leadersZilp of
half the world. True, the Soviet Union does
the same thing, but we had always believed
that the relationship of our Government to
its citizens was on a higher level than in
the U.S.S.R.
It is fantastic to think that Aunt Minnie
spending a couple thousand dollars to see
the sights in Paris and Roine is putting the
United States on the path to economic ruin.
Have our experts in Washington never con-
sidered the drain on the dollar from our mili-
tary stationed overseas? And while foreign
aid is more often in goods rather than dollars,
it too plays a big part, as do a host of other
economic conditions.
If we are really serious about stemming the
unfavorable balance of payments, let us con-
sider the problem in terms of the whole world
economic picture. Could changes in our
business and trade or our domestic and for-
eign policies lighten the burden? Such a
study could provide the basis for a workable
and lasting program.
If we are not serious about finding a solu-
tion, then letus go ahead with this plan to
exact tribute from Aunt Minnie and the
others who might want to see what's on the
other side of the ocean. We might enlarge
the program to extract $100 from every 'U.S.
serviceman sent overseas also. And perhaps
President Johnson might drop a hundred
dollars in the pot on the way over to Moscow
for the talks with the Soviet leaders.
Need for Basic Immigration Reform
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SEYMOUR HALPERN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, February 24, 1965
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, re-
cently I received at my office a copy of
the resolution passed by the National
Lutheran Council at its February an-
nual meeting in Los Angeles.
The resolution voices support for fun-
damental reform of the Nation's immi-
gration statutes. This has long been a
primary objective of mine.
Under unanimous consent I place the
council's resolution on immigration at
that point in the RECORD:
RESOLUTION ON IMMIGRATION
"Whereas the National Lutheran Council
has consistently expressed hope that Con-
gress will establish immigration laws, 'just
to all and ministering most truly to the pub-
lic welfare,' and
'Whereas the National Lutheran Council
has stated its 'firm conviction that the ex-
isting immigration legislation has severe
shortcomings, as a result of which neither
traditional Christian humanitarianism nor
enlightened self-interest are adequately ex-
hibited,' and has expressed hope that Con-
gress will 'seek a just and workable substi-
tute for the national origins quota system,'
and
"Whereas the statement 'Immigration Pol-
icy: Moral Issues and the National Interest,'
endorsed by the National Lutheran Council
at its meeting on February 4, 1960, com-
mended for study and consideration the fol-
lowing five possible objectives as the basis
of a revised U.S. immigration law:
"1. To supply our permanent population
with a steady proportion of newcomers who
have chosen the United States as their new
homeland and who can impart to their
American neighbors an understanding of the
cultures, attitudes, and interests of other
races and peoples of the world;
"2. To assume the U.S. share of interna-
tional responsibility for the resettlement of
refugees and of other persons urgently in
need of the compassionate haven of a new
homeland;
"3. To facilitate the reuniting of families;
"4. To facilitate the entry of persons pos-
sessing special skills or other capacities
tnuereed;ed by the American economy and cul-
"5. To admit annually a reasonable num-
ber of the persons described above on an ob-
jective basis of selection which, while dis-
criminating, will not be discriminatory with
respect to race, national origin, color, or re-
ligion, testifying thereby to the U.S. recogni-
tion of the interlocking and mutual interests
of all nations with regard to the migration
of people, the interaction of cultures, and re-
spect of universal human rights; and
"Whereas the proposed legislation submit-
ted to Congress by President Johnson on
January 13, 1965, represents substantial prog-
ress toward the fulfillment of the basic hopes
and objectives expressed in prior National
Lutheran Council resolutions: Therefore be it
"Resolved, That the National Lutheran
Council reaffirm its concern for a fair and just
immigration law, and express its hope that
Congress will enact into law the principles
and objectives contained in the President's
proposal now before Congress; and be it fur-
ther
"Resolved, That the' congregations of the
member bodies of the National Lutheran
Council be encouraged to welcome immi-
grants into their fellowship and to assist
them in. continuing integration into commu-
nity life."
Resolution adopted by the National Lu-
theran Council at its 47th annual meeting,
Los Angeles, Calif., February 8-10, 1965.
Sixteen Eventful Years
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. DONALD D. CLANCY
OF OHIO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. CLANCY. Mr. Speaker, the abate-
ment of stream pollution is a matter of
vital importance to our country. There-
fore, I would like to call attention to the
accomplishments of a regional control
program conducted by eight States in the
heavily industrialized, thickly populated
area of the Ohio River Valley.
In 1948 the Congress approved a com-
pact entered into by the States of Illi-
nois, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Vir-
ginia for the control of water pollution
in the streams of the Ohio River Basin.
Working together, these States have
compiled an impressive record. Almost
a billion dollars have been invested by
cities and villages for pollution abate-
ment facilities.
Under unanimous consent, I am in-
serting in the RECORD an excerpt from
the 16th Annual Report of the Ohio River
Valley Water Sanitation Commission and
commend it to the attention of my col-
leagues:
SIXTEEN EVENTFUL YEARS
Today, 99 percent of the sewage emanat-
ing from communities along the 1,000 miles
of the Ohio River is piped into purification
plants. Sixteen years ago all of this effluvia
was poured untreated into the river. To
visualize what these treatment facilities are
handling in terms of quantity, here is a
comparison: If this sewage flow had to be
conveyed away in railroad tank cars for
disposal, it would require a train 350 miles
in length every day.
Matching this progress in cleanup efforts
on the main stem of the river has been the
Installation of sewage-treatment facilities
on tributaries of the Ohio. Throughout the
entire drainage district there are now more
than 1,300 communities?with a total popu-
lation of 10,700,000?provided with purifica-
tion plants. What this means is that 94 out
of every 100 persons connected to a sewer
system in the Ohio Valley has made an in-
vestment in pollution abatement. How
much? The total is about $1 billion?
averaging $100 for every man, woman, and
child.
Another goal of this regionally coordinated
crusade for clean streams initiated in 1948
by eight States has been the curbing of in-
dustrial-waste pollution. There are more
than 1,700 industrial establishments whose
effluents are discharged directly into streams
of the Ohio Valley district. Today, 90 per-
cent are recorded as complying at least with
minimum interstate requirements?and some
are rated as doing even better.
These are the salient facts that emerge
from the 16th annual inventory of pollu-
tion control compiled by the member States
of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission. These States are pledged by a
compact, approved by the Congress of the
United States, "faithfully to cooperate in the
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
A846
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDF'671300446R000300170001-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? APPENDIX February 25
control of future pollution in, and the abate-
ment of existing pollution from, the waters
of the Ohio River Valley."
Vietnam
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. GLENARD P. LIPSCOMB
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Speaker, the
widely respected military editor of the
New York Times, Mr. Hanson W. Bald-
win, has written an excellent commen-
tary on the situation in Vietnam.
The article appeared in the Feb-
ruary 21, 1965, New York Times mag-
azine entitled, "We Must Choose?(1)
'Bug Out,' (2) Negotiate, (3) Fight," in
which he analyzes with clarity and deep
understanding the purposes and effect of
our actions in Vietnam.
In calling for a strong approach, saying
that we must use what it takes to win,
he says that, "Our policy should not be
'unconditional surrender' or unlimited
victory. Our goal of victory should be
the defeat of Communist attempts to con-
quer South Vietnam and extend their
control deep into southeast Asia."
? I believe Mr. Baldwins summary of the
Vietnam problem will be of interest to the
Congress and under leave to extend my
remarks submit it for inclusion in the
RECORD:
WE MUST CHOOSE?(1) "BUG OUT,"
(2) NEGOTIATE, (3) FIGHT
(By Hanson W. Baldwin)
What should we do?"bug out" or fight?
Should we be "hawks" or "doves"? Or is
there a third choice--negotiations now?
Recent events in Vietnam indicate that
"the war that is not a war" has reached a
crossroads. Washington's policy of the past
4 years, based on the polite fiction that we
were not fighting a war but merely helping
the Vietnamese to defeat the Vietcong in-
surgents within their own territory, has
reached a point of no return.
Compromise and consensus?perhaps ap-
plicable to some of the Nation's great domes-
tic. problems?cannot be guideposts to for-
eign policy. There must be a clear cut and
courageous decision. And though in Viet-
nam we fate the hard problem of risking
Much to gain little, the risk must be taken:
we must fight a war to prevent an irreparable
defeat. We must use what it takes to win.
Our policy should not be "unconditional
surrender" or unlimited victory. Our goal
of victory should be the defeat of Commu-
nist attempts to conquer South Vietnam and
extend their control deep into southeast Asia.
The reasons we must fight for Vietnam
have little to do with making Saigon safe
for "democracy" or "freedom." There has
been far too much cant on this point, far
too much effort devoted to trying to establish
a politically legitimate South Vietnamese
Government after our own image. Nor does
it do much good to argue the past, debating
whether or not we should have become in-
vOlved in Vietnam in the first place. The
facts are that Communist expansionism in
Asia has been consistent, related and pro-
gressive, that the end of the Korean war,
without a simultaneous settlement in Viet-
nam, gave Peiping and North Vietnam's Ho
Chi Minh the opportunity in southeast Asia
they have so well exploited.
Belatedly, but nevertheless Clearly, Mee
United States became aware of the threat.
Our commitments to Saigon began in the
Eisenhower administration and were enor-
mously amplified after the Kennedy admin-
istration took power 4 years ago. Today, we
are committed?fully committed?by the
words of Presidents and Cabinet members,
by the actions of the Government, by the
deep involvement of U.S. military forces.
U.S. global prestige and power is in-
timately bound up with the outcome of
the Vietnamese struggle. In Vietnam, we
are attempting to formulate an answer to
the Communist strategy of creeping aggres-
sion, of subversion and insurgency, of what
Khrushchev called "wars of national libera-
tion." If the might and will of the United
States cannot evolve a victorious answer to
such tactics, we are undone; the map of the
world will gradually become red. And if we
will not fight in Vietnam, where?after the
series of Communist conquests in the past
20 years?will we fight? Where will we draw
the line?
The psychological and political conse-
quences of a U.S. defeat in Vietnam, a U.S.
withdrawal, or a negotiated peace likely to
lead to a Communist takeover, would be dis-
astrous in much of Asia. It would under-
mine Thailand (already openly threatened
by Peiping), Laos (even now half conquered
by communism). Malaya, the Philippines
(with its growing anti-Americanism) , Burma,
India, Japan, and even Taiwan, Okinawa, and
Australia.
For a long time after the politically stale-
mated end of the Korean war, Peiping was
successfully depicting the United States to
the peoples of Asia as a "paper tiger." The
defeat of the French?backed heavily by
American aid?in Indochina enhanced this
image of a windy, weak-willed, feeble Uncle
Sam. That image has since been dispelled
by U.S. actions in and around the Taiwan
Straits, during the Cuban missile crisis and,
recently, by President Johnson's retaliatory
air attacks ?upon North Vietnamese objec-
tives. But the portrait of flabby indecision
could be easily revived if the United States
loses in Vietnam.
Strategically, South Vietnam is too impor-
tant to be allowed to go by default. North
Vietnam badly needs the rice of the South.
More important, the area is the traditional
rice bowl of the continent. Geographically,
Vietnam is a long appendix pointing toward
the rich archipelago of Indonesia and abut-
ting strategic sea passages. Whoever domi-
nates it will eventually control most of the
Indonesian archipelago.
The strategic importance of the area is
similar to the so-called rimlands, or mari-
time nations, of Western Europe which repre-
sent a powerful bastion against the heart-
land of Soviet Russia. In Asia, the non-
Communist strategic position vis-a-vis Red
China is based upon mainland positions?
Pakistan, India, southeast Asia, and the is-
land bastions of the Philippines, Taiwan,
Okinawa, and Japan. If the rimlands of
Asia fall to communism, the island positions
will be doomed sooner or later. Ultimately
the Communists will challenge us upon what
is now our unchallenged domain?the
oceans.
In a word, we must remain in southeast
Asia for our own security needs. South
Vietnam is in itself not vital in the sense
that the United States cannot live without it.
But if lost we would be forced to commence
the next chapter of the world conflict in re-
treat, and at a disadvantage.
Despite the admitted importance of South
Vietnam to the U.S. global position, the cur-
rent breed of neoisolationists and the
"Doves" who believe we must cut our losses
and get ont advance many arguments against
deeper involvement and in favor of with-
drawal.
Most of the arguments represent the voices
of defeat and despair, caution and fear.
WHY NOT NEGOTIATE NOW?
Any negotiations opened now would lead
from weakness, not strength. If we want to
negotiate?and not to surrender?we shall
have to raise our ante considerably. And
meaningful negotiations are meaningful
to the Communists only if they are faced
with superior power and a position of
strength.
We must arm to parley. Personally, I
seriously doubt whether talks can guarantee
peace in Vietnam and southeast Asia, as some
quarters have suggested, by neutralizing the
area politically and militarily; in short, by
eliminating the struggle for influence be-
tween Communists and non-Communists.
Nevertheless, we need not fear negotiations if
we speak from strength, by really putting up
a fight for Vietnam.
Continuing U.S. air and sea attacks on
North Vietnam would serve notice on Hanoi,
Peiping, and Moscow that the United States
will no longer tolerate sanctuary warfare.
They might?hopefully?force Hanoi to the
conference table. Indeed, such a policy
would appear to be the minimum necessary
to open any kind of negotiations. Yet even
such a program will not win the war in the
South.
If the French couldn't win, how can the
United States achieve victory?
The implication of this argument is two-
fold: (1) We have donned the colonial mantle
of the French, and (2) our power is no great-
er than that of Paris. Both suggestions ate
absurd.
As some of our diplomats have found to
their discomfort, South Vietnam is distinctly
an independent country?not, as in France's
day, part of a colonial empire. In fact, the
fear of Chinese Communist colonialism is
probably greater in all of Vietnam, and Ln
North Vietnam in particular, than the fear
of U.S. imperialism. As for a comparison be-
tween the political, economic, and milita fy
power of the United States and France, there
is none. Particularly in the air and at sea
we can mobilize power completely unavail-
able to France, backed up by the ultimate
force which France did not possess?a nu-
clear arsenal.
You can't win a war against guerrillas.
Not true. We have dressed up the fight-
ing in Vietnam with a fancy name?coun-
terinsurgency?but some of its basic mili-
tary elements resemble the kind of war
Americans have fought successfully many
times in the past in Nicaragua, Haiti, and
behind the main fighting fronts during the
Korean war. Other anti-Communist guerril-
la wars were won in Greece, the Philippines,
and Malaya. The Portuguese seem to have
done a pretty good job of stamping out the
rebellion in Angola. Guerrillas can be de-
feated, but it takes careful organization, spe-
cial training, and security forces that should
be from 10 to 30 times larger than the guer-
rillas. It takes infinite determination and
patience.
"Continued fighting or expanded U.S. in-
volvement will mean higher U.S. casualties
and greater risks of broadening the war."
Of course. You cannot win a war without
spilling blood. We must pay the price of
power. Risks are unavoidable in any foreign
policy worthy of its name. The question is
not whether there will be risks, but the
degree of risk. For against the perils of
action must be weighed the perils of in-
action. Political and military history clear-
ly reveal that compromise, hesitancy, or ap-
peasement merely lead to ultimate disaster.
In Vietnam, the longer we wait, the greater
the price we shall have to pay for even par-
tial victory (as we are now discovering), and
the more restricted our choice of options.
"We have no moral right to be in Vietnam,
or to attack North Vietnam."
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 Approved Fospoon woRslocommi tElp,46p..0_6:BigA49519po3oo 70001-0
Neither do the Vietcong. Nor does North
Vietnam have the right to support the civil
war in the South. Our involvement Was
a response to Communist aggression. Since
. the beginning, Hanoi has organized, sup-
plied, and directed' the Vietcong insurgency.
We were invited by the South Vietnamese
? Governnont,to come to its aid. A high.
moral purpose is an essential element, Of QUr
foreign policy but We can be left with no
? purpose?moral or otherwise?it we are con-
quered by the doctrine that the ends Justify
the means. If we are inhibited front action
by Hamlet-like indecision over legalistic
'concepts of international law, We shall lose
,
the world.
What's the use of further military in-
volvement, when the political instability of
South Vietnam pulls the rug from under
our feet? ,
Here is, one of the pore cogent objections
to greater involvement. But in the king
history of Vietnam there have always been
' feuding sects and fictions. Moreover, the
French left behind them a people still un-
equipped for self-government. Yet somehow
or other the, viar has gone on, and some-
What better, in + some respects recently.
Greater V4. involvement?above al), a
tangible determination to win?may well do
more for Saigon's political stability than
any amount of diplomatic pressures.
Isn't ?the ,real danger that escalation
? Might involve us in k larger war?, Wouldn't
the Chinese cOine hal
This is the $64 million question. It is
quite clear that if the United States becomes
more involve, a we must be prepared for
greater effort by the enemy. Escalation in
some form would be not only possible, but
? likely. But we have advantages. We are
fighting, as we did in Korea, on a peninsula
'Where our .superior sea and air power can
be most effective. `11orth Vietnam's few
powerplants and industries are vulnerable
to destruction. The Gulf, of Tonkin is
easily blockaded. And China itself, with an
Obsolete air forge and minimal naval power,
could not defend itself effectively against a
determined air and sea attack.
'
Nevertheless, an expanded effort by the
United States in Vietnam may well be an-
OWereli by an increased flow of supplies and
Men from North Vietnam, perhaps by an all-
out attack by the North Vietnamese Army,
and perhaps ultimately by aid from China
into South Vietnam. Though the flow, could
be hampered and reduced by air attacks it
could not be completely halted. It is quite
possible that the United States night become
involved in a new kin,d of Korean Wax. _But
this would not be hopeless by any. means.
/xi fact, some well-informed authorities be-
lieve the United States could win a, Korean
? type of war in South Vietnam-Laos against
the best that the Chinese Comm-411a could
throw against us. _
"What about the specter of nuclear weap-
ons? Wonldn't Nueslajoln in, even if China
didn't have enough A-bombs to do us any
harm?" -
? There is no certain answer to these ques-
tions, but a full-scale nuclear war IS highly
unlikely. The United States has scared it-
self to death by its own nuclear propaganda.
The fear a a nuclear ,,exchange?never
probable, or even likely?has been the great-
est single restraint U100/1 a positive and firm
U.S. diplomacy, since World War H.
Presidents arid public alike have been in-
hibited by the nightmare of the mushroom
cloud. Yet th,e lessons of the Cuban missile
crisis should be remembered. Is it in any way
probable that the kremlin would risk for
Vietnam what. it woqii not risk for, Cuba?
Moscow knov,T our, nuclear power. Would
rtt}ssia, invite its own destruction as a nation
by invoking the use of nuclear weapons in
any Cause except the defense of its own soil?
The questions answer themselves.
_
We must also remember the risks of delay.
If there is a danger of nuclear retaliation to-
day by Peiping, how much greater will it be
tomorrow when China will have accumulated
a stockpile of weapons? Time is restricting
our options.
Clearly, then, the stakes in Vietnam are
large enough to warrant the risks of greater
U.S. involvement, Whether or not we raise
our ante, the enemy will. The Communists
are implacably determined to triumph, and
the only factor that can prevent their victory
is superior power in all its forms. More of
the same on our part will no longer serve any
purpose save slow defeat,
What, should We do? First and foremost,
we must recognize as a Government and_as a
people that we are fighting a war in Vietnam,
not merely advising how to fight one. Such a
recognition would awaken a greater sense of
national and military determination, inspire
a Presidential and congressional enunciation
of purpose, and create a more streamlined
military operation in Vietnam.
Second, the United States itself must pro-
vide maximum possible security in Vietnam
to major U.S. installations such as airfields
'supply depots, and headquarters. Secretary
McNamara's statement that It was impossible
to guard against such attacks as those re-
cently made by the Vietcong against U.S. air-
fields and barracks is no answer, Of course,
100 percent security is impossible in any
war; defense against terrorism and sabotage
is. especially difficult. But there is 410 doubt
whatsoever that we can provide better secu-
rity to key installations than the South Viet-
namese, who have been responsible for the
job in the past.
We need U.S. ground tactical units in
South Vietnam- to defend our installations,
We need infantry battalions, military police
bonnianies, Army engineers, and Navy Seabees
to build aircraft, revelments, dugouts, and
protected barracks. yet all this is purely
defensive; it should recluCe U.S. casualties
but it will not "win" the war.
Another essential measure is simplifica-
tion and streamlining of both the high mili-
tary command and the "country team" units,
composed of 'representatives from various
' Government agencies, that support our aid
effort in Vietnam. We must get more Amer-
icans and more Vietnamese out of the bistros
of Saigon and into the bush. The coordina-
? tion between the military, the Central In-
telligence Agency, the State Department, the
U.S. Information Agency, and the Agency for
International Development is far better than
it once was. But it is still far from perfect,
in Saigon or In Washington. The war has
shown, for instance, that South Vietnamese-
United States teams have been able in Many
instances to carry out the military portion
of the "clear-and-hold" prescription for vic-
tory. But AID?not the military?is re-
sponsible for police and internal security
forces in Vietnam, and these cadres rarely
have been able to hold an area once it has
been cleared of the Vietcong. Perhaps mili-
tary troops should be charged with the
"hold," as well as the "clear," part of the
operations. Certainly internal policing needs
a major overhaul,
A basic change in the prescription for vic-
tory demands a United States-South Viet-
namese unified command such as now exists
in South Korea.
Continuous and heavy air and sea attacks
against staging areas, supply routes, train-
ing fields, camps, and recuperation centers
of the Vietcong in North and South Vietnam
and Laos will be necessary for any appre-
ciable diminution in the flow of men and
supplies to the Communists. The one-shot
retaliatorY raids have only temporary and
nalhimum military importance; viewed as
political and psychological warnings, they are
likely to provoke the Vietcong and North
Vietnam to a redoubled war effort.
A847
The history of air power dictates the need
for unrelenting, massive attacks. Bombing
targets in North Vietnam probably would
have to be broadened to include power-
plants, bridges, industries, road junctions,
docks and oil storage facilities. A naval
blockade and naval gunfire may well sup-
plement the air bombardment. To carry
out effectively any such program as this,
U.S. air and naval forces in the western
Pacific would require material strengthen-
ing.
Meanwhile, it would take years of effort
inside South Vietnam ? itself to reduce the
Vietcong to manageable proportions. Much
larger, and better led, South Vietnamese
forces would be necessary. They would have
to be supplemented by U.S. ground troops?
perhaps in small numbers at first, but more
later, particularly if North Vietnamese reg-
ular forces and Chinese soldiers joined the
Vietcong.
How many U.S. soldiers would be needed
is uncertain?probably a minimum of 3 to
6 divisions (utilized chiefly in battalion or
brigade-size units), possibly as many as -10
or 12 divisions. Including Air Force, Navy
and supporting units perhaps 200,000 to 1
million Americans would be fighting in Viet-
nam, _
Obviously, this would mean a Korea-type
conflict, a major war, no matter what euphe-
misms would be used. Nor could we wage
It in the present "business-as-usual" econ-
omy. We would require partial mobiliza-
tion, vastly beefed-up military production.
Many weaknesses in our military structure
would need strengthening. Even so, we
coud not anticipate quick success. The war
would be long, nasty, and wearing.'
No one could relish such a prospect as
this; the stark statistics of war explain the
President's reluctance to embark upon a
path that has no turning.
Vietnam is a nasty place to fight. But
there are no neat and tidy battlefields in the
struggle for freedom; there is no "good"
place to die. And it is far better to fight
in Vietnam?on China's doorstep?than fight
some years hence in Hawaii, on our own
frontiers.
Britain: The Lion's Lost Its Roar
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. BOB WILSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, February 25, 1965
Mr. BOB WILSON. Mr. Speaker, un-
der leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include the following article
by Lt. Gen. Ira C. Eaker, U.S. Air Force,
retired:
BRITAIN: THE LION'S LOST ITS ROAR
(By Lt. Gen. Ira C. Eaker)
What happened to Britain on the way to
the future? This question currently inter-
ests both historians and economists the world
over. Last year, a remarkable book pub-
lished in England, "Suicide of a Nation?"
explored the subject in searching detail.
This subject must be of interest to any
thoughtful U.S. citizen deeply concerned
about the security of our country, for as the
British have been unable or unwilling to
carry their prior share of the peacekeeping
load, we have had to take up the additional
burden.
A curious and tragic anomaly lies in the
fact that although Britain won in the last
war, the nations tha,t lost have recovered
e
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
A848
Approved FoaRtietesg941A1?dERRTRE6Rwiiiiiiii900300170001-0February 2
Its ramiftcations is in fact an issue of fiend-
ish complexity.
Let me indicate the scope and importance
of the flour-milling industry in one of our
States: Kansas. Prior to the present crisis
the 24 flour mills located in 20 cities had an
estimated 2,500 workers and annual payrolls
totaling more than $15 million. These mills
purchased an average of just under 100 mil-
lion bushels of Kansas wheat annually from
1959 through 1963, or almost half the State's
wheat crop. The mills pay $7 million in
taxes a year and spend $21/2 million annually
oii capital improvements. At least seven
other substantial industries exist in our State
because of our flour mills.
Obviously, such an industry contributes
directly or indirectly to the prosperity and
well-being of every citizen of the State. As
an indication of the size of the milling in-
dustry in neighboring States, for the 5-year
period from 1959 through 1963, flour mills in
Missouri purchased annually an average of
more than 46 million bushels of wheat; in
Minnesota more than 58 million bushels; in
Texas more than 35 million bushels; in Okla-
homa more than 20 million bushels; and
Nebraska more than 16 million bushels.
In deploring the loss of this great industry,
are we crying wolf? I can assure you that
the wolf has entered the fold and has begun
his feast.
Actually, four Kansas flour mills have al-
ready closed in the last 6 months chiefly be-
cause of this freight rate differential, and
authenticated accounts of similar develop-
ments in other of our 10 States can be cited.
The effects of these closings are calamitous.
Let's examine what has happened in one
community where a mill recently closed,
Winfield, Kans., a city of 10.000. The Win-
field population has declined by 280, the
number of households by 80 and the num-
ber of students in school by 73. Personal
income has dropped $568,000 and bank de-
posits $183,000. There are 77 fewer passenger
cars registered in the city, and the number of
gainfully employed workers has declined ba
the 80 employees of the mill plus 52 work-
ers in other businesses. Retail sales have de-
clined $264,000. There have also been
substantial losses in taxes, property values,
insurance, bank and mortgage loans and
other facets of the economy, according TO
business leaders of the city.
I can cite similar catastrophic results from
mill closings in three other Kansas towns;
my committee colleagues can cite examples
from their own States of mills which have
discontinued operations or may be forced to
do so in the near future.
It is the height of irony that a freight rate
differential subject to Federal regulation is
creating new pockets of poverty at the very
time the Federal Government is mounting a
vigorous multibillion-dollar war on poverty.
Just how are the mills of our 10 States
affected by these differential shipping costs?
In 1962, prior to the current crisis, there
was no significant difference in grain and
flour rates from such Midwestern points is
Wichita and Hutchinson, Kans., to mills and
bakeries in the East and South. At that
time a typical Kansas mill marketed 22 per-
cent of its flour in the South and 14 percerat
in the East. This flour was delivered at $5.1.5
per hundredweight which was essentially the
same price charged for flour milled on the
eastern seaboard and in the South.
Because of technological progress in
methods of hauling wheat by rail coupled
with intensified competition from other
carriers, the railroads in 1963 initiated sharp
reductions in grain rates without commen-
surate reductions in flour. The Southern
Railway, for example, in 1963 reduced grain
rates 53 percent, but left the rates of flour
unchanged. This process has continued un-
til the Norfolk & Western, representing a
merger of several lines serving the Midwest,
posted last month reduced rates on wheat
more quickly and now far surpass Britain in
economic well-being.
I served alongside British forces for more
than 3 years in World War IT. Never did a'
people under trial show such stoic courage
and steadfast determination. At the time
of the Battle of Britain, at Dunkirk, as they'
stood alone before Hitlerk might, they were
magnificent. They deserve a better' fate.
If peacetime reward matched wartime effort,
the British people today IVCrald enjoy a
prosperity far ahead of any Umber enemy or
ally.
But Britain has not prospered as have her
former enemies, Germany-, Italy and Japan,
nor as have her wartime allies. In the last
8 yeart British exports in Creased by f3 per-
cent. Common Market exports by 50 per-
cent. A recent survey 'reports that more
than half the young people of Britain would
emigrate if they had a choice.
Many reasons have been advanced for this
dismal picture.
I suggest, however, that ',When Britain's
rise and fall has had the treatment of a Gib-
bon, when there has been time for the con-
saints of history, these reasons-for the tragic
decline of Britain will head the list:
After World War II, the British people
did not go to work to the mane degree as did
the people of Germany, France, Italy, and
Japan.. The per capita productivity of
Britain, postwar, was scarcely half that of
Germany, and considerably less than that of
France, Italy, Japan, and the 'United States.
The British people clearly showed that they
ballad enough of "blood, tears and sweat."
Thus, by their own decision, they deserted
the "glory road" they had trod in the war
years.
,Reld, the British people, postwar, spurned
the 'Vrilliant leadership which had carried
them to victory. Prime Minister Churchill
was defeated in the general elections in 1945.
Many friends of Britain said at that time
that people who would discard the "man of
the century" the moment danger passed were
doomed and would deserve their fate. It is
nota clear that inspired, able nationalleadere
are as necessary in peace as'in war.
Finally, an examination of the state of
the economy and welfare of the natrons of
Europe will show that those which prospered
held to the principles and practices of the
free enterprise system, -the ofit incentive
and sound currency. The British followed
the siren songs of socialism, the welfare
stat?"the world owes me a living"?and
they are now reaping the inevitable harvest.
'This conclusion can give a thoughtful U.S.
citizen nightmares when he realties tow
often in the past our country has followed
Britain's example. Recognizing in time what
has happened to Britain and why, can Prevent
siMilar tragedy here.
Remarks by President James A. McCain,
Kansas State University, at Meeting of
10-State Grain and Grain Products
Freight Rates Committee With Vice
President Humphrey, Washington, D.C.,
February 25, 1965
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. CHESTER L. MIZE
07 KANSAS
THE SOUSE OF REPRE48ENTATIVES
Thursday, P'ehivary 10(5
Mt. MIZE. Mr. Speaker, under leave
to extend' my remarks in the REcOao,
include the following:
REMARK-9 Or JAMES A. McCain', PRESIDENT OP
KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY
I appear before you today as chairman of
a Governors' 10-State Grain and drain Prod-
ucts Freight Rates Committee representing
Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Mon-
tana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
South Dakota, and Texas. These States have
in common a great flour milling industry,
the world's largest in fact, with Kansas as
the No. 1 flour-producing State in the Union
and Minnesota a close second.
This coramittee was created' following a
couference held last December 21 in Topeka,
Kans., to which Kansas Gov. John An-
derson, invited the Governors or their official
representatives from the other nine States to
consider and take appropriate action relative
to the threatened loss of this industry from
these States. Gov, William Avery, successor
to Governor Anderson, has vigorously fos-
tered the activation of our committee. Pre-
sumably, I have been appointed committee
chairman because of my association with
Kansas State University which, for more
than a half century, has served as the na-
tional research and educational center for
the great flour-milling industry and in co-
operation with the University of Minnesota
and other of our State universities has been
a prime stimulus to the development of flour
milling in the 10-State area.
In behalf of our committee and the leaders
here today of industry, agriculture, and gov-
ernment from our 10 States and Iowa, I as-
sure Vice President HUBERT HUMPHREY of
our deep gratitude for affording us the op-
portunity at this luncheon to impress him
with the dimensions of this economic crisis
and its potential impact on our area, includ-
ing as it does the Vice President's great State
of Minnesota. Similarly, we applaud and
thank the Members of the Congress from our
States who have joined us at this luncheon.
Our flour-milling industry is in jeopardy
because of the disparity which has developed
in recent months in railway shipping rates
for wheat as opposed to shipping rates
for milled flour. Although our 10-State com-
mittee has just begun operations, at its first
meeting held on February 16 the committee
agreed unanimously on its prime objective:
"To promote the establishment of trans-
portation rates from this 10-State region that
will protect the grain producers and encour-
age the retention and development of mill-
ing and other processing industries urgently
needed to maintain a competitive position in
the production, processing, and marketing of
grain and grain products."
In the threatened erosion of our flour
milling industry, each of our 10 States is
faced with an economic setback of major
proportions. No aspect of this crisis is more
frustratinz than its basic cause. The Fed-
eral Government in its infinite wisdom and
power has not decreed that it Is in the na-
tional interest to mill flour in New York and
the Southeast instead of in Texas, North
Dakota, Kansas, or Minnesota. Nor are we
victims of the operations of our magnificent
free enterprise system. Our millers have not
failed to keep abreast of technological prog-
ress; they have, in fact, continuously, and at
considerable expense, modernized their
plants as more efficient machinery has been
developed. We do not suffer from an Made-
quate labor supply, excessive labor costs, or
bad labor-management relations, or from
discriminatory taxes. Quite to the contrary,
flour milling grew and flourished in our States
because of a variety of natural advantages
awl these favorable conditions still persist.
We are losing this industry primarily be-
cause of a technicality, the fact that for
various reasons the railroads have sharply
out costa for shipping raw grain without a
commensurate reduction in shipping costs
for flour. Of course, this is an oversimplified
statement of the technicality which in all of
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
19 .#5 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
ciples of the Charter of the United Nations
and of international law, have deliberately
and repeatedly attacked United States naval
vessels lawfully present in international
waters, and have thereby created a serious
threat to international peace; and
Whereas these attacks are part of a deliber-
ate and systematic campaign of aggression
that the Communist regime in North Viet-
nam has been waging against its neighbors
and the nations joined with them in the col-
lective defense of their freedom; and
Whereas the United States is assisting the
peoples of southeast Asia to protect their
freedom and has no territorial, military or
political ambitions in that area, but desires
only that these people should be left in
peace to work out their own destinies in their
own way: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled, That the Congress ap-
proves and supports the determination of
the President, as Commander in Chief, to
take all necessary measures to repel any
armed attack against the forces of the Unit-
ed States and to prevent further aggression.
SEC. 2. The United_States regards as vital
to its national interest and to world peace
the maintenance of international peace and
security in southeast Asia. Consonant with
the Constitution of the United States and
the Charter of the United Nations and in ac-
cordance with its obligations Under the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty, the
United States is, therefore, prepared, as the
President determines, to take all necessary
steps, including the use of armed force, to as-
sist any member or protocol state of the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty re-
questing assistance in defense of its free-
dom.
SEC. 3. This resolution shall expire when
the President shall determine that the peace
and security of the area is reasonably as-
sured by international conditions created by
action of the United Nations or otherwise, ex-
cept that it may be terminated earlier by con-
current resolution of the Congress.
Approved August 10, 1964.
Mr. KUCHEL. I also ask unanimous
consent to have the rollcall on that joint
resolution printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the vote on
the joint resolution was ordered to be
printed in the RECORD, as follows:
SOnTHEAsT AMA Rzsotarrzorr
Subject: Resolution on maintaining peace
in southeast Asia (H.J. Res. 1145). Vote on
passage.
Action: The resolution was passed.
The result was announced?Yeas 88, nays
2, as follows:
Yeas, 88: Aiken, Allott, Bartlett,' Bayh;
Beall, Bennett, Bible," Boggs, Brewster,' Bur-
dick,' Byrd of Virginia,' Byrd of West Vir-
ginia,' Carlson, Case, Church," Cooper, Cot-
ton, Curtis, Dirksen, Dodd," Dominick,
Douglas,' Eastland,' Ellender," Ervin," Fong,
Fulbright; Goldwater, Gore,' Hart,' Hartke,"
Hayden,' ' Hickenlooper, Holland,'
Etruska, Humphrey,' Inouye,' Jackson,' Javits,
Jordan of North Carolina,' Jordan of Idaho,"
Keating, Kuchel, Lausche,1 Long of Missouri,'
Long of Louisiana,' Magnuson,' Mansfield,'
McCarthy,' McClellan," McGee,' McGovern,'
McIntyre," McNamara,' Mechem, Metcalf,'
Miller, Monroney; Morton, Moss," Mundt,
Muskie," Nelson,' Neuberger,' Pastore,' Pear-
son, Pell,' Prouty, Proxmire,' Randolph,'
Kibicoff," Kobertson; Salinger,"
Saltonstall, Simpson, dmathers,1 Smith,
Sparkman,' Stennis,' Thurmond," Tower,
Walters,' Williams of New Jersey,' Williams
Democrats.
of Delaware, Young of North Dakota, Young
of Ohio.'
Nays, 2: Gruenlng," Morse."
Not voting, 10: Anderson,' cannon,' Clark,'
Edmondson, Johnston,' Kennedy,' Scott,2
Symington,' Talmadge,' Yarborough.'
Analysis of vote
Yeas
88
Nays
2
Not voting
10
Total
100
Republicans:
Yeas
32
Nays
0
Not voting
1
Total
33
Democrats:
Yeas
56
Nays
2
Not voting
9
Total
67
Positions of Senators not voting:
Not paired?position "yea" (Repub-
lican)
Not paired?position "nay" (Demo-
crat)
g
Scott.
I Anderson, Cannon, Clark, Edmondson,
Johnston, Kennedy, Symington, Talmadge,
Yarborough.
Absent: Official business: Johnston,
Talmadge. Necessarily absent: Cannon,
Clark, Edmondson, Scott, Symington, Yar-
borough. Illness: Anderson, Kennedy.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I do
not stand here to argue the legality of
the action under which Congress passed
that joint resolution, for I think there
is no question about it. It is the type of
commitment made with respect to the
treaty for the Atlantic Alliance.
RESOLUTION OF GENERAL ASSEM-
BLY OF RHODE ISLAND
Mr. PEEL. Mr. President, my senior
colleague and good friend, Senator JOHN'
0. PASTORE, is known not only for his
ability and concern for the people of our
State and Nation, but for his oratorical
ability; an ability which we have often
seen displayed in this body. A remark-
able example of this ability and one that
was seen by our whole Nation and the
world, was last August at the Democratic
National Convention. There, Senator
PASTORE combined the breadth of his
wisdom, the depth of his knowledge, and
the sharpness of his logic into a truly re-
markable speech that brought the con-
vention to its feet time and time again.
He set the tone and pattern for the en-
suing campaign which resulted in one
of the greatest mandates our Democratic
Party has ever received.
Because our State is proud of its fa-
vorite son, our general assembly passed
a resolution to this effect. I ask unan-
imous consent that this resolution may
be printed in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
'Republicans.
3489
Resolution congratulating the President of
the United States upon his choice of Sen-
ator JOHN 0. PASTORE, senior Senator from
Rhode Island, to make the keynote address
at the Democratic National Convention
held at Atlantic City, N.J., in August 1964
Whereas Hon. Jonx 0. PASTORE, senior Sen-
ator from Rhode Island, has been a Member
of the U.S. Senate from 1950; and
Whereas he has demonstrated through the
years, his ability as a legislator and orator;
and
Whereas Senator PASTORE has a record of
stanch support for the, administration; and
Whereas the President recognizing the out-
standing attributes of the senior Senator
from Rhode Island in calling upon him to
make the keynote address at the 1964 Demo-
cratic National Convention: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That the General Assembly of the
State of Rhode Island and Providence Plan-
tations heartily congratulate the President
of the United States upon his choice of Sen-
ator JOHN 0. PASTORE, Of Rhode Island, to
make the keynote address at the Democratic
National Convention held at Atlantic City,
N.J., is August 1964; and be it further
Resolved, That the secretary of state be
and he hereby is authorized and directed to
transmit a duly certified copy of this resolu-
tion to the President of the United States.
AUGUST P. LAPRANCE,
Secretary of State.
JUSTICE FELIX FRANKFURikat
Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. President,
as a Member of this legislative body, as
a lawyer, and as a former judge, I have
great respect for the human forces
which influence, shape, and ultimately
determine the course of law in this
Nation.
With the death of Justice Felix
Frankfurter, this country suffered the
loss of one of the most significant legal
scholars and judges of this century. As
a jurist and as an academician, the
vast influence exerted on our social and
legal system by Justice Frankfurter, was
always exemplified by a judicial and
compassionate sense of justice. His nu-
merous decisions and his thoughtful
commentaries are his own tribute, and
they will long stand as an example to
those who are the guardians of the liber-
ties and the welfare of our Nation.
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS
Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President,
there have been many comments on the
subject of the balance-of-payments
problem and the President's recent mes-
sage on the subject.
One comment which I think should
be brought to the attention of the Senate
is an article, published in Business Week
for February 20, showing the point of
view of the business commnuity. I ask
unanimous consent that two items from
Business Week?entitled "Business Cool
to Payments Program" and "Washington
Outlook"?be printed at this point in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3490
[From Business Week, Feb. 20, 19651
BUSINESS COOL TO PAYMENTS PROGRAM?
PRESIDENT'S PLAN To EASE U.S. DEFICTT
THROUGH CURBS ON INVESTMENT ABROAD
DRAWS FIRE
President Johnson's stepped-up drive to
end this country's persistent balance-of-
payments deficit?in part by limiting private
investment overseas has not won broad sup-
port from the U.S. business community.
A Business Week survey of U.S. companies
shows that most businessmen feel this time
the President has made a wrong move.
Leaders of the Business Council backed the
President's call for voluntary restraint on
direct investment abroad. But few other
executives like the program, and many doubt
that it will work. A Washington briefing
session by Secretary of Commerce John T.
Connor this week?aimed at explaining the
program to business leaders--cleared up
some of the confusion but it isn't likely to
silence critics.
NEXT STEP
To be sure, most businessmen will try to
comply by exporting fewer dollars for oversee
inveitment and by sending home more of the
Y1113.C1S they now hold overseas. There is gen-
eral agreement that the payments deficit-43
billion in 1964?must be eliminated, Says
President William B. Murphy of Campbell
Soup Co.: "I think business will do every-
thing it can to benefit our balance of pay-
ments."
There is also the realization that if the
voluntary approach fails, the next step could
be direct exchange controls?tight rationing
of the dollars that U.S. companies and indi-
viduals could take abroad. "We shudder to
think what would happen if voluntary con-
trols don't work," says a spokesman for a
major electronics company.
TWO COUNTi3
Still, there is substantial opposition to the
President's program, and it comes on two
broad counts.
There is the widespread belief that other
remedies should have been tried?tightening
credit at home, cutting back on military and
foreign aid spending?before the administra-
tion took aim at private oversee investment.
"My initial reaction," says Randal W. Reed,
treasurer of Atlantic Refining Co., "is that
the President didn't face up to the problem.
He's skirting around the main issues?mili-
tary and foreign aid spending." And Finan-
alai Vice President Morris J. Vollmer of Mil-
waukee's A. 0. Smith Corp. says: "I'm afraid
banking and business are going to be the
whipping boys for the balance-of-payments
problem."
Beyond this, there's the argument that
clamping a lid on private investment abroad
will shake the competitive standing of U.S.
companies in world markets?and in the
long run cut the income from foreign in-
vestments, which now considerably exceeds
the outflow for new direct investment.
Foz;d Motor Co., on this count, notes that
between 1950 and September 30, 1964, it had
"made a plus contribution of $2.981 billion to
the U.S. balance of payments." General
Motors Corp. puts its contribution at $2.2
billion in the past 5 years. More blunt is the
eastern businessman who snaps: "If we lose
our foreign markets, we'll have a deficit so
big there'll be no way of closing it."
NOT A LID
The administration is not seeking an out-
right lid on direct oversee investment. It
realizes that more dollars flow in than now
out through this channel, and that a pro-
longed cutback would hurt the long-range
U.S. balance-of-payments position. It wants
companies to finance more of their oversee.
investments without sending dollars
abroad?by borrowing funds abroad and by
tapping the earnings of oversee operations.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0 I
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE February25
Companies also would step up the repatria-
tion of funds held abroad. The administra-
tion reckons that there are billions of dollars
held abroad by companies simply to gain the
higher returns offered in some foreign capital
markets. Companies would report quarterly
on what are, in effect, their own individual
payments positions.
Moreover, the program would apply only to
investments in the industrial nations?in
Europe and Japan.
HOW ErrACTIVE?
Where businessmen differ is over how well
this program?with its emphasis on volun-
tary controls?can work.
If the plan does falter, most company ex-
ecutives agree, it will be because competitive
pressures (and the lure of a possibly higher
return overseas) pushed too hard against
voluntary restraints. "A voluntary program
can work for just so long," says a New York
City executive. "It fails the day you realize
that going along has given your competitors
an edge." And a midwesterner echoes: "I
can't see that Johnson's proposal is going to
be effective. Companies have to move where
their interests dictate. You can't stand still
and let opportunities abroad go sailing by."
The big international oil companies?most
of them now scrambling to set up in the
North Sea gasfields?f eel they could be par-
ticularly hard hit by a curb on oversee in-
vestment. Equally unhappy are the drug
companies?many of which derive a substan-
tial share of earnings from their foreign ven-
tures. An electronics company executive
argues: "If we give an inch anywhere, the
Japanese will swarm all over us."
NEWCOMERS FEAR
Some companies say they can get by with-
out exporting more dollars. GM this week
announced plans for a$100 million Belgian
plant?to be financed through, locally bor-
rowed funds and earnings from its Belgian
operations. But other companies wonder if
they will be able to borrow enough locally?
at rates they can afford?when U.S. com-
panies turn heavily to local capital markets.
A number of U.S. corporations say they will
step up repatriation of funds. A number al-
ready have, to protect themselves against a
possible devaluation of the pound sterling.
Yet there also are rumors of companies rush-
ing to beat the new program by funneling
dollars abroad. A midwestern capital goods
company concedes: "Last week we were send-
ing dollars overseas as a hedge against John-
son's action?a half-million here, a half-mil-
lion there."
Hurt most keenly perhaps, will be com-
panies just pushing into oversee markets.
Says a spokesman for Cleveland's Diamond
Alkali Co.: "The established companies may
be able to do business with existing facili-
ties, but companies new to oversea markets
can't stop in midstream. If they do, they
drown."
[From Washington Outlook, Feb. 20, 1965]
COLD SHOWER FOR BUSINESS ON DEFICIT
The administration goal now is to arouse
the U.S. business community?chiefly big
bankers and big industrialists?to what
could happen if the voluntary campaign to
narrow the balance-of-payments deficit
should fail.
Business leaders who trooped to Washing-
ton this week got the cold shower treat-
ment: Unless there is a dramatic improve-
ment in the deficit soon, the administration
may have to decide between tight money?
and an end to the business boom?or manda-
tory exchange controls for the first time in
U.S. history.
Thus the skeptics in this country and
abroad who say the voluntary program will
fail really serve the administration's purpose.
The last thing officials want is to make
the administration's approach look easy.
The stress is on how tough the job will be
and how short the time is.
STRESS PUT ON QUICK TIMING AND HARD FIGH-,
On the question of timing: One of the top
financial officials of the country says the
voluntary program has only "3 or 4 months"
to show solid results.
There is also the question of how deep
the cut in the deficit should be this year.
For this, a look at the recent record 13
helpful.
The deficit has been edging slowly down
$3.6 billion in 1962, $3.3 billion in 1963, $3
billion in 1964. Last year was the shocker.
There had been hopes the deficit would fall
as low as $2 billion, and on down to $1.5
billion this year.
The goal for 1965 is still $1.5 billion. If
the deficit averages this low for the year,
the administration probably will be satisfied.
But reaching it will not be easy. In the last
quarter of 1964, the deficit was running at
an annual rate of $6 billion; even adjusted
for nonrecurring items, the rate was $4
billion.
BANK LENDING MAY HOLD KEY
Whether the voluntary program succeeds
may depend on what happens to short-term
bank lending abroad.
The Federal Reserve will seek to limit new
loans abroad this year to no more than a
5-percent rise over the $9 billion outstanding
at yearend. This would be a rise of only
$450 million, if the goal is met, compared to
a rise of around $2 billion in 1964.
By comparison, the effort to get industry
to cut down on the outflow of funds has a
relatively modest potential. One guess is
that a maximum of $500 million could be
saved, partly by postponing direct invest-
ment and partly by curtailing the practice
of sending short-term funds abroad to earn
higher interest rates.
Smaller potential savings are seen in a re-
duction of portfolio lending to foreigners,
further cutbacks in defense spending abroad,
and by cutting the limit on duty-free goods
bought by U.S. tourists from $100 to $50.
All together, these items will not affect the
balance very much.
The administration's eggs are in the bank-.
ing basket, although this will not be stressed
in the drive to get across-the-board business
backing for the program.
TUNGSTEN
Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, as
chairman of the Joint Committee on
Defense Production, I call to the atten-
tion of the Senate a disposal plan an-
nounced by the General Services Ad-
ministration, under which 77.9 million
pounds of tungsten would be disposed of
under the provisions of the Defense Pro-
duction Act covering the disposal of the-
materials from the Defense Production
Act inventory.
The disposal program would cover all
the tungsten in the Defense Production
Act inventory. This tungsten, much of
which was acquired under other laws
had an acquisition cost of about $315
million. Its market value, last June, was
approximately $105 million. By Decem-
ber 31, the market value had risen to
more than $160 million.
I ask unanimous consent that a state-
ment on this subject be printed at this
point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
TUNGSTEN
On February 18, 1965, the Acting Admin-
istrator of the General Services Admints-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0 '
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3487
SYRACUSE, N.Y., February 22, 1965.
LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
President of the United States,
The White House, Washington, D.C.
DEAR PRESIDENT JOHNSON: I am forward-
ing the enclosed petitions to you on behalf
of their signers who are students and faculty
members of Syracuse University and/or resi-
dents of Syracuse, N.Y.
As the petition says, the reasons of the
signers are various and individual. My own
reasons are twofold. As a Catholic, I feel
conscience-bound to oppose your current
policy in Vietnain as basically unjust and
immoral. I can find no moral justification
for it, not evvi within the provisions of the
Catholic Church's doctrine of "just war," a
more permissive standard, perhaps, than the
strictures of the gospel. I can cooperate in
no way with you in this crime. Nor can I
say that I am proud to be a member of the
Great Society that engages in such misad-
ventures.
My second reason for objecting to your
policy is based on my analysis of the Viet-
nam situation as a student of political sci-
ence. Along this line, suffice it to say that
I am in essential agreement with Senator
WAYNE MORSE.
I hope that the beclouded picture one gets
of your Vietnam policy in the press is only
a function of your wariness of public opin-
ion. If so, perhaps this letter and petition
will help you to see your way clear to a dif-
ferent course of action.
Until such time, I remain in sincere and
complete opposition to you on this topic.
Very truly yours,
EVERT MAKINEN.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Enclosed is a copy of
a letter and petition that I have sent to the
President. A copy has also been sent to
Senator FULBRIGHT.
Together with the others who signed the
petition, I am hoping that this small action
on our part will provide support for your
efforts and encourage you and Senators
CHURCH, MCGOVERN, GRUENING, and others
to continue in your efforts to change the
course of the administration's policy.
' My wife and I were very happy to hear you
speak on the Syracuse University campus
recently. I wonder if it would be possible
for you to send us a copy of that speech, to-
gether with a copy of the remarks you have
printed on pages 242-253 of the 190 CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD of January Et.
Sincerely,
EVERT Mmtrimi.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: / firmly applaud your
stand in favor of a negotiated settlement of
the situation in Vietnam through peaceful
Means.
Your actions axe much, greatly appreciated,
and lend hope and inspiration to an other-
wise cloudy picture.
Please continue your efforts; you are right.
Yours,
J. SULLIVAN.
HON. WAYNE MORSE,
DEAR SENATOR: Thank the good Lord we
have a courageous man like you, who is not
afraid of being a loud and clear opposition
and who raises his voice in dense of truth
and sanity.
We need to hear your point of view more
often.
How can we bring your ideas to the people
more often so they can see for themselves
that there is another point of view?
The trend of the times since Roosevelt's
day seems to me to have been defined in one
single easy conclusion. We're the good guy
in the story, and Moscow is the bad guy, or
China, and that is all there is to it.
No. 37-5
But the turmoil of our world is much more
complex when so many millions of peoples
are involved, in tiny nations as well as great
ones; therefore, I feel the problems which
confront the world will not necessarily be
solved by our way, nor will force bring our
way about any sooner. Why can't we have
a newscast from our Government in which
all sides of a picture are freely discussed?
Whether we live or die in atomic war is
too grave a question to leave to our leaders.
If we are going to chance annihilation, we,
too, should have a clear view about that
which we give up all humanity for.
Why shouldn't we help decide?
What I and many of your admirers would
like is to hear from you more often (and
men like you). Only truth on all sides and
logic can keep us free and safe.
Thank you for fighting always for the
right as you see it.
We wish there were many more peoples'
representatives like yourself.
Sincerely,
MTS. PAULINE DICKSON.
FARMINGTON, PA.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We have just sent
the following telegram to the President:
"DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: Our hearts cry out
for peace. We beg you to lead the Amer-
ican people and the world away from the
abyss of escalating war in Vietnam. Friend-
ly nations, the United Nations, leaders of
worldwide stature have offered their services
to help us overcome the obstacles to peace.
We beg you to hear the world's longing in
this crucial hour and to lead us into the ways
of peace."
We appreciate very much and are grate-
ful to you that you have raised your voice
on this issue, and used your influence to pre-
vent precipitate action. We would like you
to know our support for this.
Respectfully yours,
FOR THE SOL.Lea Y OF
BROTHERS:
ARTHUR WISER,
JOHN WINTER,
DONALD NOBLE,
ANDREAS MEIER,
MICHAEL HRANDES,
JOHANN C. ARNOLD.
NEW YORK, N.Y.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Bravo for your
courageous stand on the Vietnam fiasco. /t
Is through voices like yours that the truth
will finally seep through to the public. If
we can't get the United States to recognize
its illegality, perhaps whoever is running this
show, will get around to negotiate rather
than retaliate. Instead of bombing to show
the strength which the whole world knows
we have, we can show our strength of
character by a unilateral cease-fire. This
should bring many more benefits to us in
the world, than any display of our well-
known military capacities.
Sincerely,
PHILIP ERANDS'rEIN.
Dimurii, Minn.
Hon. LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
President, United States of America,
White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: We are extremely con-
cerned about the situation in Vietnam. Long
articles, not to mention books, have been
written on the subject. We do not intend,
herein, to develop involved points of view
and further we recognize that this is not a
simple situation.
We do however want to make a few obvious
observations:
1. We live in a nuclear age. It is difficult
for the average human mind to grasp fully
the implications of this. The magnitude of
the destructive possibilities should not escape
the grasp of those in positions of leadership
who are in effect the custodians of the re-
sults of thousands of years of slow and pain-
ful development of the human race.
2. Vietnam is in the backyard of China.
This is not said to excuse any abuse of the
responsibility of elementary neighborliness
by any nation anywhere, except to pose the
question this way:
What would our reaction be if some other
nation was engaged in military action in
Mexico or Canada?
Would such actions be inclined to en-
courage friendly attitudes and potential re-
lations or suspicion and hatred?
3. What evidence do we have of the desire
of the South Vietnameese for the kind of
protection we are giving them? This last
question directed to the chaotic game of
"musical chairs" currently played by the
various in and out factions vying for power
in South Vietnam.
We feel strongly about this situation. Our
friends and neighbors and associates gener-
ally are expressing a growing uneasiness over
this situation.
We urge that our Government respond to
the suggestions of numerous governments,
the U.N. Secretary General, the Pope, and
various other organizations and individuals
and agree to participate in a broad confer-
ence of all interested parties seeking to find
a peaceful settlement for this war weary peo-
ple and an ultimate disengagement of our
Armed Forces.
Respectfully yours,
GEORGE E. and RHODA L. DIZARD.
Copies to the Honorable HUBERT H.
HUMPHREY, Vice President; Hon. EUGENE MC-
CARTHY, U.S. Senator; HOU. WALTER F. MON-
DALE, U.S. Senator.
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA,
Norman, Okla.
The Honorable WAYNE L. MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Your courageous
stand on the South Vietnam war will be re-
membered by those of us who wince every
time our Government issues an official state-
ment on that war as a welcome voice allaying
our frustrations caused by lack of a forum.
Your thorough article that appeared some
time ago in the New York Times Sunday
magazine I found irrefutable.
My wife and I, both, are native Oregonians.
We are proud to claim you as a Senator
from our home State. We enjoy the argu-
ments that our esteem for you gets us into.
If it is possible, we would appreciate any
materials that you could send on the Viet-
nam war so that we may better enlighten our
friends of "the other view."
Very truly yours,
HERBERT W. TITUS,
Assistant Professor of Law, University of
Oklahoma.
NEW YORK, N.Y.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please continue your
present course on Vietnam.
Your course and that of Senator GRUENING
have set the pace and, with recent recruits
to your side, can well turn the tide.
Please do not falter.
Respectfully yours,
ROBERT MELTON.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, next
week I hope to have finished a speech
that I am now preparing in answer to
others that have been given in the Sen-
ate in recent days by my colleagues who
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDF'671300446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February425
want to continue America's aggressive
policies in Asia. The advocates of a war-
hawk approach in our course of action
in southeast Asia ought to ponder for a
long time the statement issued yesterday
by Secretary General of the United Na-
tions U Thant. That is particularly true
for those in the Senate who are trying
to cover over the fact that there is a
civil war going on in southeast Asia.
One of the most remarkable announce-
ments of recent days was that this is not
a civil war at all. Mr. President, it is
completely a civil war, plus the aggres-
sive course of action of the United States
participating where it has no business
or right to be.
Mr. U Thant made it perfectly clear
yesterday that it was a civil war. One
of the saddest hours is the hour in which
we find the administration of our Gov-
ernment releasing statements to the press
to the effect that it is not interested in
negotiating a peace.
I say with sadness in my heart that,
In my judgment, the United States of
America is the greatest threat to the
peace of the world in this dark hour.
We are the greatest threat to the peace
of the world because of the illegal war
that we are fighting in southeast Asia
quite openly and blatantly, with Ameri-
can jet planes dropping bombs on North
Vietnam. These planes are completely
manned by American military person-
nel. This is being done without a decla-
ration of war.
Let me say to the war hawks in the
Senate and House of Representatives,
"You ought to bring in a declaration of
war, if you really want to support a war
In southeast Asia."
I shall continue to pray that reason
and sense will come to pervade the lead-
ers in the Pentagon, the State Depart-
ment, and the White House so that
America will stop its shocking outlawry.
If we continue this course of action?and
let someone in the Senate deny it on the
basis of the briefings we have heard in
recent days?we are bound to provoke
Red China into committing an overt act.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. TIM-
INGS in the chair) . The time of the Sen-
ator has expired.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, may I be
permitted to speak for 1 additional
minute?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the Senator from Oregon is
recognized for 1 additional minute.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, that will
give the war hawks of the Pentagon, the
State Department, and the White House
an excuse, but not a reason, to bomb the
Chinese nuclear installation?which I
am satisfied is their objective and has
been their objective for some time.
When that installation is bombed, the
big show will be on. Let no one deny
that it would require sending to Asia
immediately no less than 300,000 Ameri-
can boys who would start meeting
Chinese ground forces that would be
poured in, to the number of several
million-300,000 American solders would
be but a start in the sacrifice that the
United States would have to make in the
event of an all-out war on the ground
in Asia, which we can never win, I care
not how many American divisions we
Pour into Asia. We would bog this coun-
try down for 25 or 50 years, and drain
It dry in materiel and blood, until some
candidate for President runs on a plat-.
form of "I will go to Vietnam" and nego-
tiate a settlement.
This is a critical hour in the history
of our Republic. My voice will continue
to be raised in opposition to my Govern-
ment's warmaking policies in Asia, short
of a declaration of war. Present that
declaration of war; vote it through Con-
gress; and, on the basis of the present
facts, I shall vote against it. But once
we vote for a declaration of war, I shall
urge that we unite behind that declara-
tion until we can somehow, in some way,
put that war behind us. But that war,
plus our present outlawry in southeast
Asia, does not have a scintilla of justi-
fication to support it.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I be-
lieve that I reflect the views of the
American people when I say that we are
a peace-loving country.
We joined the United Nations because
we believe in peace. We seek no ag-
grandizement. We desire no colonies.
We have the responsibility of leadership,
as I see it, in the cause of peace with
justice around this unhappy globe.
The senior Senator from Oregon is my
friend. But the Senator from Oregon
Is completely in error in the comments
which he has just made.
I suggest that, 10 years after the
President of the United States saw fit
to respond to a call for assistance by
the people in the Government of South
Vietnam, it is far too late to argue
whether we should have taken that po-
sition at that time.
Let me recall that only a year ago
Congress overwhelmingly adopted a
resolution clothing the President with
complete authority to utilize the might
and power of the people of the United
States with respect to the commitment
that this country, in 1954, had made.
Representatives of the Senate and the
House of Representatives overwhelm-
ingly gave that kind of authority to the
President.
An agreement was reached in 1954.
The major nations of the world, on both
sides of the Iron Curtain, participated
In that agreement. That agreement was
that there would be no further maraud-
ing from north of the 17th parallel to
the south.
I agree with the President. This sad
conflict can be terminated immediately
if the Communists abide by the agree-
ment which was entered into in 1954.
In the meanwhile, as an American citi-
zen, I support the President of the United
States.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I shall
take 3 minutes to reply to the Senator
from California.
I completely disagree with the premises
laid down. In the first place, the United
States started immediately to violate the
same agreement that the Senator from
California is/ talking about. We did not
negotiate the agreement. We did not
even sign the agreement. The neutral
commission that was set up has found
us to be in violation of it.
Why do people who continue to advo-
cate the outlawry in South Vietnam not
tell the American people the facts about
our violation of that agreement? The
Secretary General of the United Nations
knows those facts and it may be that
Americans will have to learn from him
what our own Government will not tell
US.
The Senator from California repeats
the argument that we made a commit-
ment in South Vietnam. Whether we
set up that puppet government in 1954
or not, that is our puppet today. That
fact does not give us any right to make
war in South Vietnam.
The Senator spoke about the United
Nations. No nation is as guilty of scut-
tling the United Nations at the present
time as is the United States, as a re-
sult of the conduct of our United Nations
Ambassador in the latest session. To
think that our Ambassador would stand
up and try to tell the American people
that we voted only on a matter of pro.
cedure the other day. The United Na-
tions voted. Mr. President, are you sur-
prised to hear the spokesman for Red
China say, as announced in the Press,
that the United States has lost its case
In the United Nations because of the
surrender we made on the vote the other
day? The sad fact is?I am sorry it must
be admitted?that he is correct. The
United States has much to answer for in
the shocking position it took which re-
sulted in the weakening of article 19 of
the United Nations Charter. We should
have held Russia's and France's noses to
the grindstone. A better figure of speech
would be that we should have held them
to the rule of law. We have let France
and Russia get away with defying the
charter of the United Nations.
I repeat now, by reference, every word
I said to which the Senator from Cali
fornia attempted to reply. Now is the
time for the United States to make clear
to the world that we are willing to ne-
gotiate honorably, but only honorably,
for an honest settlement in Asia. Let me
say to the Senator from California that
if we continue this action we are going
to get the world in an unnecessary war.
The argument that we have given
power to the President to act overlooks
the fact that we do not have the con-
stitutional authority to delegate our
power under article I, section 8 of the
Constitution.
I shall always be glad to have my
descendants read that I voted against
the resolution to which the Senator re-
ferred. The resolution cannot give the
President legal power to make war.
Congress ought to adopt another resolu-
tion, a declaration of war, if that is what
Congress wants.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that there be printed
at this point in the RECORD the text of
the Indochina joint resolution passed at
the previous Congress.
There being no objection, the joint
resolution was ordered to be printed in
the RECORD, as follows:
Whereas naval units of the Communist re-
gime in Vietnam, in violation of the prin-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1945 Approved FoHysitanACRAIN5Rat9P9MMIR000300170001-0
places, that the South Vietnamese are vastly
better off than their countrymen to the
North.
When / went to Vietnam, I shared the
common Canadian view of such faraway
places. I half suspected that, for those un.-
fortunate enough to live in such countries,
life in the free sector was just about as
miserable as life under communism. But
a few visits to Hanoi and other Communist
centers quickly disabused me of this notion.
I'll never forget the people who would pass
me on the streets and whisper "A bas les
, Communistes," or the officials who risked
-their freedom to tell me privately of their
hatred for the regime of Ho Chi Minh. It
was a rude contrast with Saigon, where free
speech, while not prevalent, is at least still
possible.
For all their strategic failings, the Ameri-
cans are fighting a just war. But they're
going to lose it unless they make drastic
changes?for at present, the American is his
own worst enemy in Vietnam. By his obtuse
policies and actions he has squandered the
good will of his allies. Without it, he can't
win. Without it, there is nothing left to win.
DULUTH, MINN.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senator, Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My wife and I wish
to thank you for your courageous efforts
and sound thinking about the Vietnam mess.
May your efforts meet with increased and
growing support and be ultimately, crowned
with success. Were it not for voices like
yours, one would be inclined to think he
were habitating a giant madhouse.
Enclosed is a copy of a letter we are send-
ing to President Johnson and our Senators
as well as Vice President HUMPHREY.
Again may be express our appreciation for
your outspoken intelligent attitude and fur-
ther, advise you that countless numbers of
our friends, neighbors and , associates share
our views.
Respectfully yours,
GEORGE E. and RHODA L. DIZARD.
RUSCOMB PRODUCTS CO.,
Fleetwood, Pa.
President LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
White House, Washington, D.C.
DEAR PRESIDENT JOHNSON: As a free and
independent man I urge you to reconsider
our present policy in Indochina.
This policy has alienated Cambodia and
continues to hurt our image in many other-
wise friendly nations. We have given full
support to one dictatorship after another
In. South Vietnam, thereby, probably push-
ing those people closer to communism.
As a mature nation we are surely capable
of altering our policies when necessary with-
out fear of losing prestige. ?
Very truly yours,
FREDERICK SCHWARTZ,
President.
RUSCOMB PRODUCTS CO.,
Fleetwood, Pa.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR Sra: There have been many occa-
sions in the past years that I have read with
admiration, of the positions you have taken
on various issues.
I agree with your views concerning U.S.
foreign policy in southeast Asia.
You are courageous and I wish there were
? many more Senators like you.
Very truly yours,
FREDERICK SCHWARTZ,
President.
PIONEER METHODIST CHURCH,
Portland, Oreg.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
DEAR Sia: Please accept my support in your
attempts to get the war in Vietnam stopped.
Which is more dishonorable? To pull out
now without victory? or to wait 3 years and
pull out then still without victory?
Sincerely yours,
P. MALCOLM HAMMOND.
RESOLUTION ON SOUTH VIETNAM
"Whereas the conflict in South Vietnam
has reached such proportions that it threat-
ens to escalate into a third world war; and
"Whereas it is becoming more apparent
daily that the presence of the U.S. forces is
an anathema to the citizens of South Viet-
nam; and
"Whereas the vast sums of money that our
country is expending could be put to use in
more humane ways in our own country, in-
stead of supporting a group of militarists
who do not have the confidence of their own
people; and
"Whereas our posture as so-called ad-
visers to South Vietnam has become unten-
able morally and economically; therefore be
it
"Resolved, That the 57th Assembly District
Council Issues Conference of the California
Democratic Council urge in the best interests
of the United States and all parties con-
cerned that our Government find means im-
mediately to negotiate a settlement of this
conflict."
Moved, seconded, and passed on February
20, 1905, at said Issues Conference, Encino
Community Center, Encino, Calif.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We are enclosing
a copy of two resolutions acted upon by our
council. We submit them for and request
your thoughtful action.
RICHARD J. HUNTER,
First Vice Chairman, 57th Assembly
District Council, California Demo-
cratic Council.
BINGHAMTON, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am Writing to you
to express my support of your position on
Vietnam. Further U.S. military action in
this area can lead to a situation where free-
dom for all peoples and all nations will be
at an end, where everything of value will
be utterly destroyed.
The United States can do as much as al-
most any nation in the world to turn away
from a course toward war and toward one
where meaningful and moral acts are possi-
ble. Military action cannot achieve the
goals of freedom or self-determination. The
choice of the United States may be the most
crucial one in history.
Sincerely yours,
ALICE SARDELL.
CLEVELAND, OHIO.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR Sue: I agree with your views on Viet-
nam 100 percent and all this intervention
will just bring on a big war.
We've got enough problems here at home
without worrying about every country in the
world. All we're doing is making enemies by
supplying arms and giving our money away.
You're doing a fine job and many people
are with you, thank you very much.
Sincerely,
EDWIN J. KOZELUH.
WILLOUGHBY OHIO.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I read in the Cleve-
land Plain Dealer about your speech in City
Club Forum. We are proud to say, you are
one of our greatest Americans.
Sincerely,
JOSEPH HENS and WIFE.
3485
CAMBRIDGE, MASS.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Although I am not
one of your constituents, I am taking the
liberty to write to you to express my appre-
ciation for the position you are taking con-
cerning our involvement in Vietnam.
One hears the voice of reason and justice
in your speeches, and I trust it will reach
more and more people in our country. I feel
grateful to you for your statesmanlike ap-
proach to this problem.
Sincerely yours,
PETER R. PRIFT'/.
SANTA BARBARA, CALIF.
DEAR SENATOR: You have put up a good,
long, honest fight to get our troops out of
that Vietnam mess. We hope and pray that
God gives you the strength and health to
keep on fighting.
Why do we have such fools for leaders?
Yours respectfully,
JACK E. O'DONALD.
ROYAL OAK, MICH.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Mr. DIRKSEN says
"are we going to run away from the Com-
munists?" I might remind him, we have
been running from them since the Korean
war. We couldn't lick the North Koreans,
how we going to defeat Red China?
We shelved the big bomb during the
Korean war; the Russians didn't explode
their first atom bomb until 1952. Then, they
had no stockpile in. 1950 at the outset of the
Korean conflict. Why didn't we explode the
atomic bomb against North Korea? We
didn't hesitate to use it on the Japs.
Mr. MORSE, we cannot defeat Red China
without the use of nuclear weapons. That
is very evident. We cannot afford a long,
drawn out, jungle war.
We have but two alternatives; viz:
We can furnish Chiang Kai-shek atomic
weapons and let him fight his way back to
the mainland; or
We can pull out entirely from southeast
Asia and wait for Russia and Red China to
eventually engag,e each other in an all-out
conflict.
In any case we must not make the tragic
mistake of exchanging frontline pawns with
Red China.
Yours truly,
MELVIN I. SMITH.
SAN JOSE, CALIF.
Senators MORSE, MCGEE, FULBRIGHT, MANS-
FIELD, and GRTJENING,
Senate Office Bulding,
Washington, D.C.
SIRS: I wish to express my heartfelt ap-
preciation for whatever you have done in
your effort to get someone to listen to the
wish of people who really think, to call a halt
to this foolish fighting in Vietnam.
The beginning, of course, must be a cease-
fire and withdrawal of American troops from
Vietnam but to stop there would be pretty
negative.
I think there needs to be widespread pub-
licizing of proposals for and actual begin-
nings on an extensive "TVA" type of develop-
ment of the Mecong Delta resources for
power which could make possible the sort
of economic development which would form
the basis for the increased human welfare
which is the really deep need in this trouble
area.
To move forward in this area with aid
comparable to that which we are pouring
down the drain in military action would?
or could?go a long way toward allaying the
fears of those who feel that withdrawing
our troops might throw Wide open the doors
to a Communist takeover.
It seems to me that the ones who arrive
"the fustest with the raostest" of what will
really help the people will render an in-
estimable service not only to the people of
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?SENATE February t5
Vietnam but to mankind as a whole. For
it seems to me that this is the anly depend-
able way to work at stabilizing the situation
there and preventing the spreading of
hostilities.
Keep up your good work?and expand it in
every way possible.
Very truly yours,
MARIE E. ANDERSON.
CLEVELAND, OHIO.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I Wish to express my
wholehearted agreement with the views you
expressed here on what we should do in
South Vietnam?I oppose escalation of the
war there. I believe that we should do
everything we can possibly do through dip-
lomatic channels to bring about a peaceful
settlement in that wartorn and politically
unstable country.
I agree with your ideas of exporting eco-
nomic freedom to underdeveloped countries.
I do not believe in giving military aid to
countries which can then use this military
aid against us and those we support. Look
at what Sukarno 14 up to now.
Thanks for coming to Cleveland and ex-
pressing your views. They need to be heard.
Yours truly,
KATHERYN S. WEITZEL.
McMINNviiin, OREG.
Data SENATOR MORSE: I want to commend
you on your forthright stand concerning
Vietnam. Any expansion of the war would
be suicidal?and I only hope that it is not
too late to negotiate honorably.
While I often disagree with you, I admire
your courage and honesty. On this prob-
lem, I am 100 percent with you.
Sincerely yours,
Cants H. MALnuE.
CHICAGO,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I am writing you to tell you
that many people around the country are
grateful to you for your efforts to prevent
America getting involved in a world war in
Asia. We hope that you WIll keep it up,
so that all will know that the American
people are ?not ready to rubberstamp an
escalation. We hope that you will continue
to attack the policy of retaliation in the
North.
There follows a short poem in honor of the
present confusion:
"Big Minh, Khanh, and Little Minh,
When one is out, the other's in.
Who's in charge? We do not know,
He surely stands for freedom though.
And if we risk a world war,
It's certainly worth dying for."
Sincerely yours,
DAVID B. BAartoN, M.D.
BERIELEY, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MAR SENATOR: We strongly support your
position of favoring negotiations on the ques-
tion of South Vietnam.
Yours truly,
Prof. and Mrs. HERBERT STRAUSS.
CARMEL, CALIF.
MY DEAR SENATOR: I certainly agree with
you about a cease fire and negotiate a peace
In Vietnam and get out of there. We cannot
police the world. The U.N., instead of re-
cessing, should have stayed in session and
have done something about the mess out
there. I heard you and the Senator from
Alaska speak about getting out of Vietnam,
over a year ago.
Best regards to you,
1???????????
Emma L. TURNER.
Sr. LO-crits, Mo,
HOIL WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MOESE: Have you seen the
article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scien-
tists (December 1964), which outlines the
remarkable work which many countries are
joining in to develop the lower Mekong
Valley?
It describes a More humanitarian solution
to Vietnam than the course we are pursuing.
You are no doubt familiar with the subject
matter of the article, but it does set it out in
complete form.
Why can't we support this instead of
shooting each other?
Sincerely,
MARIE BLISS.
CINCINNATI, OHIO.
Senator WAYNE MORSE:
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I would like to com-
mend you for your brilliant views on the
Vietnam crisis. I feel very strongly for a
settlement and withdrawal. I sincerely hope
you continue your strong stand concerning
this vital situation.
Thank you very much,
JEFFREY BERLINER.
PORTLAND, OREG.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senator:
It is hard to believe that the United States
deliberately is trying to settle a dispute by
force otitside the United Nations. The
United Nations was created to avoid future
wars, to negotiate differences. All countries
should take part in this matter. In order
to be effective for disarmament, an army con-
sisting of members of all countries should be
the only body to have the right to police
and watch that nobody is able to arm
secretly.
Sincerely,
E. MERE!.
LEBANON, OREG.
DEAR SENATOR MoasE: We implore you to
use all the influence you have to stop this
foolhardy mission in Vietnam.
We worked hard for Johnson before elec-
tion, but feel that he has betrayed the hopes
and trust of Democrats and Republicans
alike.
We are not concerned with "loss of face."
(Leave that to the orientals.) We are con-
cerned with peace in the United States.
Martin Luther King made more sense in his
TV message to his people on nonviolence,
than any of the soothing syrup that has
come out of Washington. This is an insult
to any American who can read. We can see
the flag-draped coffins of our men, who died
needlessly.
Before we set out to show another coun-
try how to run their government, let us
repair our own. For this purpose. Ameri-
cans will more gladly give their hard earned
tax money. We need our money here at home
to take care of our old people. We need
It for education. We need it for the protec-
tion of our citizens from criminals.
I wish I could say all these things to
President Johnson, but I would have to have
a fairy godmother to make that possible.
I am a Democrat. I am an American. I
hope that some day I can say that proudly
again, and in any country I might be in.
Today, I would be afraid to travel, because
we are hated and scorned.
May God grant you power and health,
WAYNE MORSE. You have not let us down.
Very sincerely,
WLNNLE THOZIPSON.
LIMA, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
Six: Enclosed with this letter is a copy of
a letter we have addressed to Senator KEN-
NEDY of New York, also to Representative
RICHARD MCCARTHY of the 39th Congressional
District, New York.
We fully endorse the stand you take in the
Senate in relation to our activities in south-
east Asia and we believe you will be interested
to know that there are some people like us
who share your views and who sympathize
with the victims of the 'U.S. militarists and
their allies. We reject completely all military
activities. They are vicious, cruel, and stupid
and entirely unfit for human beings to en-
gage in.
Respectfully yours,
R. W. and G. H. BAUM.
ELMA, N.Y.
Senator ROBERT KENNEDY and
Representative MCCARTHY:
The writers of this letter wish to express
their feeling of horror concerning the vicious
activities of the U.S. military machine on the
rampage in southeast Asia. Are these really
the acts of human beings? Is Congress really
so helpless in the wake of all of this vicious
brutality? Is Congress a mere rubber
stamp for the Pentagon and its allies?
Won't you do your part to put an end to
this disgraceful performance, demanding
that U.S. forces be brought home where they
belong? The people of southeast Asia must
be permitted to settle their affairs peacefully,
which they would have done years ago if they
had been permitted to do so.
Mr. Eisenhower, when President, address-
ing a Governor's Conference on August 4,
1958, had this to say:
"Now let us assume that we lost Indo-
china * ? ? the tin and tungsten that we so
greatly value from that area would cease
coming.
"So when the United States votes $400 mil-
lion to help that war, we are not voting a
give away program. We are voting for the
cheapest way that we can prevent the occur-
rence of something that would be of a most
terrible significance to the United States."
And to obtain cheap tin and tungsten and
more on our own terms we have become the
world's most loathesome people. Hiroshima
is not forgotten.
R. W. and G. H. BArrnt.
We, the undersigned, wish to state our firm
opposition to the continuation of current
U.S. policy in Vietnam. Our reasons are
various and individual, but we are together
In calling for an immediate cessation of
American military activities in Vietnam, in
callng for the U.S. Government to seek ac-
tively a negotiated settlement, and in sup-
porting Senators MORSE, GEUENING, MCGOV-
ERN, CHURCH, and other public officials who
have dared to challenge the administration's
orthodoxy and who have called for a nego-
tiated peace in Vietnam.
We also call upon Senator FuLaatarrr and
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to
conduct thorough and public hearings on
the Vietnam policy of the United States in
order that the American people may know
exactly what their Government has been
doing there and why.
James D. Hunt, Evert Makinen, Bert
Fowler, Robert Lain, Carl Beal, David
Borthwick, Byron Fox, Harvey Bates,
Vernon Biefer, Morris Barker, Bill Eck-
house, Sandra Ann Dryers, Jill Fergu-
son, Judy Labeu, John A. Strong,
A. Achanya, Joao Webba, David
Wiener, Patrick Brumzawcebridge, Al-
fred D. Bredber. and Anbin Pesko.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
198d1 CON(TRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
Law, chemistry; Jeana Levinthal, medical
school; Bernard Lown, public health; Carlton
Maley, history of science; Jean Mayer, public
health; Everett Mendelsohn, history of sci-
ence; Matthew Messelsoia, biology; John E.
Murdoch, history of science; Martn Peretz,
government; Elmer Pfefferkorn, medical
school; Edward P. Radford, Jr., public health;
John R. Raper, biology; Herbert Richardson,
theology, divinity; W. R. Riddington, Jr.,
anthropology; Paul A. Riemann, divinity;
Gerald Rosenthal, economics; Robert Rot-
berg, history; William M. Sacks, astronomy;
Victor W. Sidel, preventive medicine; Ray-
mond Siever, geology; Steven Smith, philoso-
phy; Joseph L. Snider, physics; Rui Soeiro,
medical school; Max Stackhouse, ethics, di-
vinity; Edward A. Sweeney, dental medicine;
John T. Tate, mathematics; Karl Teeter, lin-
guistics; George Wald, biology; Thomas H.
Wilson, medical school; Marvin Winkler, bio-
chemistry, and Daniel Wulff, biology.
College of the Holy Cross: William Van Et-
ten Casey, theology; Thomas Coffee, sociol-
ogy; John Dorenkamp, english; James Gross,
economics; William Guindon, physics, and
Paul Rosenkrantz, psychology.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology;
Marcia K. Allen, biology; Maria Bade, biol-
ogy; Eugene Bell, biology; Aron Bernstein,
physics; P. Bon, modern languages; Michael
Brower, management; Gene M. Brown, bio-
chemistry; Joel E. Brown, biology; Stephen
Chorover, psychology; Charles 0. Coryell,
chemistry; Richard M. Douglas, humanities;
Carla Dowben, biology; Robert Dowben,
biology; Maurice Fox, biology; Steven
Gilborn, humanities; Marvin Goody, ar-
chitecture; Glen Gordon, nuclear chem-
istry; Bernard Gould, biology; Charles
Gross, psychology; Theodore Gurney, Jr., bi-
ology; Albert Gurney, humanities; Alan Hein,
psychology; Richard Held, psychology;
Charles Holt, biology; Kerson Huang, physics;
Thomas Jackson, humanities; William Jack-
son, eleCtrical engineering; Elizabeth Jones,
biology; Karl Kornacker, biology; Edwin
Kuh, management and economics; Cyrus
Levinthal, biology; S. E. Luria, biology; Kevin
Lynch, city planning; B. McCune, modern
languages; Boris Magasanik, biology; Diane
Major, biology; Travis Merritt, humanities;
Franco Modigliani, economics; Philip Mor-
rison,- physics; Irwin Oppenheim, chemistry;
R. B. Pan, modern languages; David Perl-
mutter, modern languages; Norman Pettit,
humanities; Louis Pfeiffer, physchology;
Helen Revel, biology; P. W. Robbins, bio-
chemistry; Ronald Rolfe, biology; R. H. Ruby,
biology;? David L. Schalk, humanities; Robert
Sekuler, psychology; David Shoemaker,
chemistry; William Siebert, electrical engi-
neering; 0. R. Simha, administration; Mal-
colm Skolnick, physics; Cyril Smith, human-
ities and metallurgy; Marvin Stodolsky,
biology; N. S. Sutherland, psychology; James
Thomson, humanities; Patrick Wall, biology;
William B. Watson, humanities; John S.
Waugh, chemistry; Joseph Weizenbaum, elec-
trical engineering; Burton White, psychol-
ogy; Robert Zimmermann, biology; Arnulf
Zweig, humanities, and Alexander Rich, bi-
ology.
University of Massachusetts: Don E.
Abramson, speech; Robert Agard, library;
Dean A. Allen, health services; Leon Barron,
English; Phillip R. Biddle, speech; Milton
Cantor, history; Jules Charnetsky, English;
Mario S. DePilis, history; David Clark,
English; T. P. Dikes, history; Louis A. Gel-
hard, history; Arthur Gentile, botany; F.
Greeley, forestry; Richard Haven, English;
Joseph Hazens, health services; Vincent liar-
di, history; C. A. Johnson, agricultural en-
gineering; Joseph Langland, English; David
P. Leonard, history; Guenter Lewy, govern-
ment; David Porter, English; William J. Price,
speech; Howard H. Quint, history; Trevor
Robinson, chemistry; Ann Sagan, history;
Jay Savareid, speech; A. S. W. Srheffey, for-
estry; Richard S. Stein, chemistry; Jack M.
Thompson, history; Richard H. Towers, his-
tory; Ronald D. Ware, history; J. W. Zahrad-
nik, agricultural engineering; Arthur H.
Westing, forestry.
Northeastern University: Richard Arno-
witt, physics; Philip Backstrom Jr., history;
Terry Bialor, anthropology; Wallace 'Bishop,
history; Roger Brighthill, psychology; Rose
Laub Coser, sociology; Henry H. Crapo, math-
ematics; Alan H. Cromer, physics; Ellen H.
Dunlap, mathematics; Marvin H, Friedman,
physics, Mitzi Filson, library; Norbert Full-
ington, history; Michael J. Glaubman, phys-
ics; Stephan Golburgh, education; Joseph
Gresser, chemistry; Barry Karger, chemistry;
Frank Lee, anthropology; Milton Leitenberg,
biology; Harold Naidus, chemistry; Dolores
Newton, anthropology; Irene A. Nichols, edu-
cation; J. David Oberholzer, physics; Louis
Roberts, English; Fred Rosenberg, biology;
Deborah S. Roseblatt, modern languages;
Norman Rosenblatt, history; Eugene J, Sale-
tan, physics; George Salzman, physics; Ina
Samuels, psychology; Burt Scharf, psychol-
ogy; Stan Stenbridge, history; Harold
L. Stubbs, mathematics; H. T. Tien, chem-
istry; Harold Zamasky, psychology.
University of Rochester: Albert B. Craig,
Jr., physiology; John A. Ernest, mathematics;
Joseph Frank, English; William D. Lotspeich,
physiology; William F. Neuman, radiation bi-
ology; Arnold W. Ravin, biology; Hayden V.
White, history.
Simmons College: Frederick Anderson,
philosophy; Tilden Edelstein, history; Bruce
Hawthorne, history; John Hunter, history;
Sumner Rosen, economics; James Newman,
French; Georgia Noble, education; Richard
Clark Sterne, English.
Smith College: Gladys Anslow, physics;
Leonard Baskin, art; George Burt, music;
Eli Chinoy, sociology; Jean Cohen, psychol-
ogy; Louis Cohn-Haft, history; Thomas S.
Deer, chaplain; John Duke, music; Robert
Fabian, mathematics; Philip Green, govern-
ment; Bruce Hawkins, physics; David C.
Huntington, art; Rita Jules, education; Alice
Lazerowtz, philosopty; Morris Lazerowitz,
philosophy; D. Bruce Marshall, government;
Elliott Off ner, art; Patricia Olmsted, adminis-
tration; Harold Poor, history; Michael Rice,
physics; Peter N. Rowe, government; Ramon
Eduardo Ruiz, history; Paul H. Seton, psy-
chology; J. Diedrick Snoek, psychology; A. H.
Spees, physics; Melvin Steinberg, physics;
Sten Stenson, religion; John Van Doren, Eng-
lish; Renee Watkins, history.
Tufts University: Betty Burch, government;
Kalman A. Burnim, drama; Dean Ashley
Campbell, engineering; Ernest Cassara,
theology; John Conwall, economics; Dorothea
J. Crook, psychology; Michael Fixler, Eng-
lish; Sanford J. Freedman, psychology; Bern-
ard W. Harleston, psychology; Hilde HeM,
philosophy; Percy Hill, engineering; Frank-
lyn D. Holzman, economics; Albert H. Imlah,
history; David Isles, mathematics; William
S. Jacobson, English; Leonard Kirsch, eco-
nomics; Mary Jane Kramer, sociology; Zella
Luria, psychology; Bernard McCabe, English;
Robert L'H Miller, religion; A. William Mills,
psychology; Thornton Roby, psychology;
Nancy L. Roelker, history; Laura M. Roth,
physics; H. Ronald Rouse, mathematics; Allen
Schick, government; Edwin Schur, sociology;
Sylvia Sherwood, sociology; Newlin R. Smith,
economics; Jack Tessman, physics; Frank W.
Wicker, pschology.
Wellesley College: Roberta Blackburn, Eng-
lish; Thomas Blackburn, chemistry; Walter
Houghton, English; Clifford Noll, English.
Wesleyan University: Samuel W. Anderson,
psychology; James A. Ciarlo, psychology;
Richard C. DeBold, psychology; David P. Mc-
Allester, anthropology; Norman Rudich, lan-
guages; Richard Winslow, music.
Others: Edgar D. Bell, Littleton; Arthur W.
Chickering, Goddard College; Dorothy D.
Ciarlo, Yale; Edward J. Collins, Boston Col-
lege; Irvin Doress, Cardinal Cushing College;
3483
Paul Gross, Brown University; Francis W.?
Holmes, Bernard Howard, Worcester Poly-
technic Institute; Seymour Lederberg, Brown
University; Raymond T. McNally, Boston
College; David Todd, Worchester Polytechnic
Institute; J. Huston Westover, Acton.
(Institutional affiliation for purposes of?
identification only.)
If you approve of this statement, reprint
it in other newspapers and write or wire Pres-
ident Lyndon B. Johnson, White House,
Washington, D.C.
This open letter is being published as an
advertisement paid by the signers. Com-
ments and contributions toward cost should
be sent to Ad Hoc Committee for Open Letter
on Vietnam, Post Office Box 35, Belmont,
Mass., Prof. Salvador E. Luria, chairman;
Prof. Cyrus Levinthal, treasurer.
[From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch]
AN INCREDIBLE SITUATION
The Senate Democratic leader, MIKE MANS-
FIELD, of Montana, is putting it mildly when
he terms conditions in South Vietnam "an
incredible situation." He says the squabbling
generals should take notice that the United
States is not committed to support the situ-
ation that now exists.
South Vietnam is pretty close to anarchy.
Lt. Gen. Nguyen Khanah, the strong man
for 13 months, was bounced over the weekend
by a group of quarreling generals. The latest
civilian government installed a few days ago
by General Khanh is still nominally in power.
But Khanh is out. So It seems almost irrele-
vant for Washington officials to say the
United States is continuing full support of
the civilian regime. What is to be sup-
Torted?
The situation is going from worse to worse.
The Communist-led Vietcong have now vir-
tually cut South Vietnam In two and con-
tinue to make gains. U.S. troops are keep-
ing the war going, but it is a losing struggle.
The United States might have profited from
its recent retaliatory air raids on North
Vietnam by maneuvering for negotiations
in the hope that it could sepak from a
strengthined position, but that potential
initiative has been lost.
Instead, Washington dispatches say the
administration is firmly resisting all efforts
by Allied governments to bring about a nego-
tiated political settlement. If this is so, it
also is an incredible situation. The argu-
ments of French Foreign Minister Maurice
Couve de Murville. General de Gaulle's top
foreign policy expert, apparently fell on deaf
ears. Couve de Murville spent an hour with
President Johnson last week; he reportedly
told the Chief Executive he thinks North
Vietnam and Red China would be interested
in negotiations. He urged the United States
to seek a political solution immediately.
This may be distasteful, but what is the
alternative in the absence of a Saigon gov-
ernment ready, willing, and able to carry
on? It would be comforting to think that
the Americans, the Russians, and the Chinese
do not mean precisely what they say, that
somewhere in the diplomatic underground
people are talking privately about public
conferences. That would be a sensible and
statesmanlike procedure; we only hope there
is more to it than the stuff of dreams.
BOSTON UNIVERSITY,
Boston, Mass.
Mr. MORSE,
Senate Budding,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I am a 22-year-old senior at
Boston University. Although I am a New
York State resident voter. I wish to applaud
you for taking a stand in favor of peaceful
negotiations in Vietnam.
I sincerely believe in working toward peace
positively. I am very pleased the U.S. Gov-
ernment has created and is continuing the
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA:RDP671300446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February 25
Peace Corps. I also deeply believe in democ-
racy and defending the United States and
I am anxious to prevent communism from
dominating the world. However, I am aware
of the unique conditions under which the
United States developed its political system.
I am cognizant also of the fact many of the
underdeveloped countries seem to need a so-
cialistic form of government to cope with
their basic problems such as hunger and land
distribution. I do not equate socialism with
Russian or Red Chinese communism neces-
sarily. I believe that each country should
develop the type of government which most
successfully helps it grow.
I believe our foreign policy in South Viet-
nam has been and is being mishandled
badly. It is as much a fault of Americans'
indifference as it is of the Government. Our
policy has been and is immoral. We are sup-
porting a government which is supported by
30 percent of the South Vietnamese at the
most. Even worse for us, we are working
against a main goal in the cold war. By our
,current militant strategy, we are pushing
Russia and Red China closer together and
forcing North Vietnam closer to them.
In view of the rise of nationalism in the
world and the fact the fighting in Vietnam
began as a civil war, I am not certain that
Red China would dare to militarily occupy
Vietnam if we withdrew from South Viet-
nam.
It is basically for these reasons that I am
in favor of peaceful negotiations in Vietnam.
I gravely hope that the Government as a
whole will have your, courage and vision to
recognize our errors and turn toward negotia-
tion to settle the Vietnam crisis instead of
edging the world further toward destruction.
To have any type of successful negotia-
tions, it may well be necessary to include
Red China. If it is, I would be in favor of
such action.
I have also written to Senators KENNEDY
and J'Avrrs and President Johnson, stating
my beliefs.
Yours truly,
Mrs. NANCY MOORE-
CHICAGO, ILL.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Care of Illinois Institute of Technology,
Chicago, Ill.
DEAR SENATOR: The enclosed article On
Vietnam and our actions there, appeared in
a prominent Canadian magazine this week.
In view of your great interest in the deplor-
able South Vietnam situation, I deemed it
important enough to place in your hands.
The author, a well-known RCAF officer and
a former member of the International Con-
trol Commission would have little reason to
magnify the situation but apparently has
been able to publish in Canada, views which
would be heavily censored in our country.
Whether we should remain in Vietnam or
not, we are there and apparently making the
same mistakes we did in Korea, only this
time, we aren't supposed to be at war.
I feel confident that not only will this
article furnish you with material you would
want to have but that you will continue to
force the issue with all the vigor so prevalent
in your distinguished career.
Sincerely,
ROY B. NORDHEIMER.
HUGH CAMPBELL SAYS?THE AMERICANS ARE
THEIR OWN WORST ENEMIES IN VIETNAM
The United States is now entering its third
year of full-scale war in Vietnam. Any day
now we can expect the customary New Year
pronouncement from the American high
command in Saigon to the effect that, while
the situation is serious, it is not hopeless;
and that the war can and will be won.
After nearly 2 years in Vietnam. I've heard
a good many such assurances. But since, as
a Canadian delegate on the three-nation In-
ternational Control Commisison, I had a
unique opportunity to observe the war from
both sides of the firing line, I think the
Americans are talking through their well
padded brass hats. The war, as it's now
being waged, cannot be won by our side?
because the Americans, for all their brave
talk about developing new antiguerrilla tech-
niques, are still using obsolete methods to
fight a new kind of invisible enemy.
Exactly how invisible this enemy?the
Communist Vietcong?can become was forci-
bly demonstrated to me one day on a dusty
gravel road leading through the jungle in
North Vietnam. It was a routine inspection
patrol for the International Control Com-
mission and, for no apparent reason, the
Communist officer in the lead jeep suddenly
suggested a halt. We piled out of our jeeps
and stretched our legs, apparently in the
middle of nowhere. Just as inexplicably, he
then suggested we resume the patrol. As the
convoy started off, he beeped his horn and,
somewhere nearby, a whistle shrilled.
Instantly, both sides of the road were lined
with troops, grinning infantrymen whose
faded khaki uniforms contrasted sharply
With the dark jungle background. They'd
been there all the while, standing not a dozen
yards from the convoy. But because of the
foliage that covered their backs from helmet
to canvas sneakers, they'd been invisible to
three experienced military officers.
There was nothing threatening about this
mock ambush. The Communist troops were
simply practicing camouflage, and used the
International Control Commission as an un-
witting umpire. And although their camou-
flage was excellent, it was the mobility of the
troops that impressed me most. They were
many miles from any known base, and they
carried on their backs everything necessary
for living and. fighting. They didn't need
roads, jeeps, helicopters, or mobile kitchens.
They were jungle fighters, as elusive as pc ison
gas and twice as deadly?the kind of guer-
rillas who wore down the French masters of
Indochina, and finished them off at Dien-
bienphu in 1954.
The Pentagon, naturally, has been deter-
mined not to repeat France's mistakes. In
the past 3 years they've poured in aid and
advisers at the rate of more than a million
dollars a day. So generous, so overwhelm-
ing has been this avalanche of assistance, that
it's aided South Vietnam almost to death.
In 1962, there were fewer than 300 U.S.
military advisers in the country?and they
were making noticeable headway against the
Vietcong. The advisers were scattered in
tiny detachments around the country. They
were tough, highly trained men, and they
were revered by the Vietnamese.
But the Pentagon apparently reasoned that
20,000 advisers could win the war 20 times
as fast as 800; they started airlifting them
into Saigon by the thousands (in defiancr,
incidentally, of the Geneva truce agreement).
With them came wives, children, PX super-
markets, Coca-Cola machines, air condition-
ers, officers' clubs, station wagons, insurance
salesmen, schoolteachers, public relations
men?all the equipage of a progressive sub-
urb, without which the American military
seems unable to function abroad. Suddenly,
it stopped being a jungle war, with Ameri-
cans fighting on the same terms as their
enemies. It became instead a desk-soldiers'
war, with the fatuities of Saigon's brass hats
canceling the efforts of the men in the field.
A gap appeared between the South Vietna-
mese and their American protectors, and the
gap has been widening ever since.
There's also a gap between the Pentagon's
concept of mobility and that of the guer-
rillas. Putting troops on wheels or in heli-
copters has proven unrealistic in a Jungle
war. Disguised as peasants, the Vietcong
simply watch the machines charge futilely
by?perhaps into a mine trap or ambush
or, if they're detected, simply melt into the
jungle. Pursuit on foot is fruitless; the South
Vietnamese troops, carrying enough Ameri-
can-made equipment to fight the Battle of
the Bulge, would be ineffective even if they
were as hardy as their enemy. But of course
they aren't, since they're now accustomed tc.
riding to work.
But all the mistakes haven't been com-
mitted by the military. There are a host of
non-military agencies fighting Saigon's war,
from the spooks of the CIA to the flacks of
the U.S. Information Agency. They fre-
quently operate at cross-purposes and, in
general, it may be said that they do not
enhance America's image abroad.
Take, for instance, the unimportant but
revealing case of the American pro football.
player who arrived in Saigon under State
Department auspices to set up an athletic.
program for the Vietnamese. "Gonna teach
these gooks football," he announced to all.
within earshot. Several days later, he an-.
nounced a change in policy: the gooks, he'd.
decided, were too small for football?so he
was going to teach them soccer, a game he'd.
never played himself.
Or take the average American service Wife
in Saigon: for boorishness, offensiveness and
condescension toward her inferiors, she
takes the fur-lined mug. The generous al-
lowances, PX privileges, villa, chauffeur and
servants are all new to her?and with rare
exceptions, it shows. Her kids are no better.
The spectacle of a bunch of crew-cutted,
gum-chewing teenagers lording it over the
natives in the streets of Saigon is a lesson
in how not to conduct foreign relations.
Or, finally, take the matter of Saigon'e
justly famous night life, which consists of
scores of saloons, each equipped with a bevy
of the prettiest little bar girls in southeast
Asia. The patrons are almost exclusively
American; and one South Vietn.amese wo-
man, who owns a string of such establish-
ments, told me she estimates that half he::
girls are actively pro-Vietcong, while the
rest maintain a profitable neutrality by spy-
ing impartially for both sides. Multiply this
example by a hundred, and you have an ef-
fective intelligence network?and an ex-
planation for the failure of so many well-
planned, secret sorties against the Vietcong.
The result of all this ugly Americanism
has been exactly what you'd expect: the
South Vietnamese is starting to wonder if his
Communist enemies might not be preferable
to his American friends. Once he publicly
mourned the loss of American lives. Now,
the nearly 300 Americans killed in Vietnam
seem meaningless compared with his own
terrible losses?more than 160,000 dead.
Once he believed that his Gthernment, good
or bad, would be free of foreign interference.
Now he's convinced that his Government?
whichever assortment of generals happens
to be in power at the moment?is a puppet
of the Pentagon. And every time a big.
American car zips by him on the streets of
Saigon; every time he enters a restaurant
he can no longer afford; every time he re-
turns to his shabby dwelling (the Americans
have grabbed all the best accommodations )
he sees himself moving closer and closer t3
second-class citizenship.
If the foregoing sounds like an anti-Amer-
ican tirade, it's not intentional. There are
still hundreds of smart, dedicated, and effec-
tive Americans in Vietnam. They want to
,-win this tragic war and, through a firsthand
acquaintance with the realities of guerrilla
warfare, they think they know how to do it.
Unfortunately, they're only fighting the war,
not running it. And they're vastly outnum-
bered and outranked by the desk-pilots in
Saigon.
For this reason, the Communists are al-
most certain to nibble their way to victory
eventually. When they do, it will be a dis-
aster for the West. For all my reservations
about life in the Saigon sector of the free
world, I'm convinced, after seeing both
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300/70001-0
.065 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3481
NEW YORK, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: As I read Hanson Baldwin's arid-
ole in the New York Times Magazine section
yesterday, I became filled with terror. Can
our country be so arrogant, so reckless as
to risk total war over Vietnam, an area in
which we have no business entrenching our-
selves, and where we are hated by the over-
whelming majority of the people?
I applaud your courage in speaking out,
almost alone in the Senate, and I want you
to know that many people are behind you.
Sincerely yours,
Mrs. CLAUDIA ZASIAVSKY.
OAKLAND, N.J .
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I support you 100
percent in your opposition to our presence
in Vietnam. Please keep up the good work.
Sincerely yours,
NELLE H. MORAN.
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SENATOR: You are fighting for all the
men in U.S. forces in southeast Asia and for
the people there and for us here.
We believe that you will not give up no
matter what the administration may do.
Thanking you very truly,
ARTHUR and HELEN BERTHOLF.
VENICE, CALIF.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
.-DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Your courage and
integrity in becoming the spokesman for an
unpopular view regarding our policy in Viet-
nam is sincerely appreciated.
We strongly oppose bombing of North
Vietnamese supply lines or extending the war
in Vietnam.
We urge you to continue to do all in your
power to bring about immediate negotiation.
Yours truly,
MIS. MARILYN HORN.
HO/1: WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We commend you on
your forthright position in demanding U.S.
withdrawal and negotiations in South Viet-
nam. We have written letters to President
Johnson and to our congressional delegation
to do likewise,
We need more representatives like you in
Congress.
Sincerely,
PALO ALTO, CALIF.
SARA ALCHERMES.
ERNEST J. ALCHERMES.
SALEM, OREG.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am writing in
regard to the situation in Vietnam. I under-
stand how you feel in regard to this. Before
more pressure builds up to attack the North,
vigorous efforts should be made to negotiate
an end to the war. The U.N. should have a
vital role in this. What South Vietnam needs
is an internationally supported program to
eatablish stable government. We all know
this, but how to accomplish it is the problem.
Sincerely,
' ELLA B. BRADFORD.
NARRAGANSETT, rt.i.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Keep up the good
Work re South Vietnam.
FRANK G. WIENER.
SANTA CRUZ, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: We are solidly back of your ef-
forts to persuade the U.S. Government to
try to negotiate an end to the war in Indo-
china.
If negotiations should fail, we should not
under any circumstances commit a larger
land army to the mainland of Asia:. In the
long run it would be a trap and sure suicide
for thousands of our men, if we tried to beat
the unlimited manpower of China on the
ground.
China entered Korea when she was much
weaker, and the present government had
been in power only 3 years.
If we invade to the north, I believe China
would enter an unlimited number of soldiers
to stop us, and her millions could not be
stopped.
We are a great sea and air power, and I
believe we could hold the Pacific and the
islands now in our possession indefinitely.
Let's withdraw from the mainland now,
while it is possible.
Please continue your efforts.
Yours truly,
GEORGE M. GATES.
CINCINNATI, OHIO.
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: In the last 2 weeks
I have sent a pair of wires to President
Johnson and a letter to each of the Ohio
Senators. In these messages I deplored esca-
lation of the conflict in Vietnam and urged
our immediate withdrawal. In any event, I
want those who have spoken up for disen-
gagement in Vietnam ,to know that their
views are not without some support among
the citizens of Ohio.
If it was not apparent previously, the
events of this weekend, which found our
South Vietnamese allies turning the weapons
we supplied them against each other, surely
prove beyond any doubt that defense of
South Vietnam is 1mpossible (short of estab-
lishing a government of occupation and com-
mitting all of our resources). And though
loss of South Vietnam would be regrettable,
isn't this inevitable in any event? We can-
not hope to win a land war in Asia, should
China become a participant, and surely not
even the administration is prepared to make
good upon that eventuality. This means
that all of Vietnam must ultimately come
under the influence of her powerful neigh-
bor. And deplore this as we must, it is fool-
hardy to commit our prestige and the lives of
our citizens in a quixotic adventure bound to
end in failure.
My main concern, however, is not for our
prestige. What I fear most immediately Is
that increasingly reckless actions growing out
of a hopeless situation will plunge the world
into nuclear war. By our rash attacks of 2
weeks ago we entered upon a course which if
continued can only lead to the entrance of
China and the Soviet Union, and at last?
unless God should intervene?the final world
war.
I love my country and I value the peace
of the world too much to keep silent at such
a time. Nothing, no cause, no principle?
certainly nothing so insubstantial as pres-
tige, can ever justify risking the destruction
of America in nuclear war. And though
tough talk may appeal to some of our coun-
trymen, there will be only curses?and no
applause, on that day of doom that brings
the bomb to the United States.
The President is playing Russian roulette
with American security. I urge you to do
everything in your power to end this deadly
game, calling for the sane and reasonable
conduct of our foreign policy in a very dan-
gerous world.
Most sincerely,
PAUL 0. SCHMIDT.
BERKELEY, CALIF.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I urge you to work
for a peaceful, negotiated settlement in Viet-
nam and to oppose a continuation or an es-
calation of this fruitless conflict. We are
indeed losing this war, not because of inter-
vention by North Vietnam but because the
Vietcong, a basically indigenous movement,
has the support of the South Vietnamese
people. In a situation which called for po-
litical and economic measures, we chose to
rely on military force.
The disastrous results of this policy are
now obvious. We cannot win this war. Es-
calation only leads to the prospect of a
larger war in Asia with North Vietnam and
possibly China; this larger conflict in turn
would probably lead to a general nuclear
war. The situation demands a peaceful set-
tlement; the American people want a peace-
ful settlement, not a larger war. Therefore
I urge you to continue to speak out and to
express your dissatisfaction with our present
policy. We must begin negotiations now with
all interested parties to work for a peaceful
and neutralized Vietnam. There is no al-
ternative to a negotiated settlement except
a general war.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM B. CORI.
DEAR SIR: My name is Mrs. Jo Ann Heltsley
of 496 Brittain Road, Akron, Ohio.
I was listening to the news this evening
and heard a portion of the speech you made
concerning the United States and Vietnam.
I have heard many speeches concerning Viet-
nam but you seemed to be just about the
only one who feels as I do.
I have a special interest in Vietnam due
to losing my husband there.
His name was Pfc. Paul R. Heltsley, III,
RA-16675814, the first Akron area serviceman
to die in Vietnam. He was killed July 17,
1984, while accompanying a patrol as a medic
on a combat mission.
I guess I'll never understand the Vietnam
problem. In the telegram I received from
the War Department it said he was killed by
hostile action while on a combat mission. I
also have received many letters from service-
men in Vietnam concerning my husband's
death, or should I say murder. Even Presi-
dent Johnson wrote me telling me my hus-
band died while performing duties for his
country.
I wrote President Johnson shortly after
receiving his letter asking him some ques-
tions. As I told him, I have a baby girl who
will never know her father. Some day I'm
going to have to explain his death to her.
How can I possibly explain something I don't
understand?
Before my husband's death he wrote many
letters concerning Vietnam. How the people ,
wouldn't fight for themselves, how his bud-
dies were getting killed each day, and how
he wanted to come home safely.
It seems like all President Johnson can
say is, "Be proud of him, as we are, he died
for something we as Americans believe in."
I don't feel Johnson or anyone can know
how helpless we are in Vietnam until you
lose someone there. I'm not only speaking
for myself, but for the other American people
who have lost sons, husbands, and fathers
in this so-called undeclared war.
Before my husband left the United States
he told me he would receive hazard-duty pay,
also $10,000 insurance in case of death.
This proved to be untrue. I guess the Gov-
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February 25
ernment doesn't feel he was in the danger
zone. If this is true I'd like to know why
he was in the combat zone. I've also been
told that there is no insurance on the men
unless the United States declares war.
I can't understand why our men are giving
their lives in a war that isn't a war. Maybe
someday I'll be able to explain to my daugh-
ter the truth about Vietnam, if it's ever
brought out in the open. / just wanted you
to know that there's an awful lot of good
Americans who feel the same way about
Vietnam as you do.
May God bless you.
Sincerely,
MIS. Jo ANN HELTSLEY.
IDLEYLD PARK, OREG
WAYNE MORSE,
Oregon State Senator,
Eugene, Oreg.
DEAR SIR: I wish to go on record that I de-
sire a cease fire in Vietnam and a negotiated
settlement.
I know what your personal opinion on this
matter has always been, and I admire you for
speaking out. Some of the rest of us wish to
speak out also.
On the radio news this morning I heard
this statement made by Senator CHURCH, of
Idaho, then the commentator added that
much of the mail voicing this opinion would
be "Communist inspired,"
I wish to state that I am most certainly
not "Communist inspired," and I know many
people who hold this opinion who are not.
Sincerely,
MTS. HELEN DAVIS.
[From the New York Times]
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JOHNSON ON
VIETNAM: LET' US TAKE THE INITIATIVE
Each day we hear fresh news from Viet-
nam, news both strange and grim. We strike
by air in reprisal against North Vietnam be-
cause our soldiers, sent as armed technicians
and advisers to an army which cannot yet
guard them well, have been attacked in their
barracks in the very heart of South Vietnam.
We have widened the war?how wide will it
become?
Fear of escalation of this undeclared war
against North Vietnam mounts with each
sudden report of renewed violence. Unless
the situation is very different from what it
appears to be, we have lost the political
Initiative in Vietnam and are attempting to
substitute military actions for political ones.
We face grave risks in Vietnam. Americans
have faced even graver risks for good and
high cause, Mr. President, but we must first
understand why we must take such risks.
What are our goals in Vietnam? Are they
just? Can they be accomplished? Are they
truly worth what they are bound to cost in
dollars and human lives?
With whom are we allied in Vietnam?
Are our soldiers fighting side-by-side with
troops of a representative and legitimate na-
tional government, or are we embroiled in
defense of an unpopular minority in a fierce
and costly civil war? Our representatives
assure us that we and the Saigon government
have the overwhelming support of the Viet-
namese people. How can this be so? On the
same day that Mr. McNamara said sneak at-
tacks upon our soldiers cannot be prevented,
an American officer on the scene in Vietnam
declared that "any of the people in the ham-
let over there could have warned us that the
Vietcong were around, but they did not warn
us." The weapons used against us are most
often American weapons, captured from or
surrendered by the South Vietnamese Army.
Mr. President, we submit that weak field in-
telligence in South Vietnam and a steady
loss of workable weapons to the enemy, are
deep symptoms of an unpopular cause.
Why are we fighting in Vietnam? Mr.
President, we think we understand why we
Went into Vietnam after the French with-
drew. It was because this Nation hoped to
encourage the development of a popular,
stable, and democratic government which
would help to lead all southeast Asia toward
lasting peace. Historical, political, social,
religious and sectional factors have pre-
vented this development. The original as-
sumptions are no longer valid. We have be-
come increasingly unwelcome everywhere in
southeast Asia. Our presence seems to
deepen, rather than to relieve, the bitterness
and hostility of the people. It was only 10
years ago that the Vietnamese defeated a
French army of nearly half a million men.
Will the same battles occur again?
Can we win in Vietnam? Mr. President,
we know that our Nation has sufficient fire-
power to destroy the entire world. We also
know that you do not wish to call upon this
awesome power. How can we possibly win
and yet prevent a widening of this conflict?
How can we win in Vietnam with less than
30,000 "advisers" when the French could not
win with an army of nearly half a million
fighting both north and south of the present
dividing frontier?
Is it worth the cost? The French defeat
in Indochina cost them 172,000 casualties.
Yet, before their final bloody defeat at Dien-
bienphu, the French generals and diplomats
spoke with the same toughness and opti-
mism, the same assurances we now hear from
our leaders.
The French had overwhelming numbers
and firepower but they lost in Vietnam be-
cause they lacked the support of the popu-
lation. Do we face the same prospect, or
are there facts which the public does not
know which show our situation to be clearly
different?
Mr. President, we are aware that you have
secret information which cannot be shared
with us. But could such information com-
pletely refute the picture of events and the
political insights provided to us by serious
newspapermen who have been in the area for
years?
All we can see is a seemingly endless series
of demonstrations and riots in Saigon and
Hue, of military coups, of threats and chal-
lenges to the dignity of our Ambassador and
our other representatives by the very men we
seek to sustain in power.
We have lost the initiative in Vietnam.
A few guerrillas can trigger American re-
actions that widen the war. The events of
the past week are leading step by step along
the path to war with China.
Would it not be both prudent and just
to take the initiative toward peace in Viet-
nam? If we are not to widen the war be-
yond all conscience, as reasonable men we
must initiate negotiations while there is still
time.
Amherst College: Henry Commager, his-
tory; Van R. Halsey, administration; William
M. Hexter, biology; Philip T. Ives, biology;
Allen Kropf, chemistry; Edward R. Leadbet-
ter, biology; Leo Marx, English; John Pem-
berton, religion; Oscar E. Schotte, biology;
Marc Silver, chemistry; Henry T. Yost, bi-
ology.
Andover-Newton Theological College: Wes-
ner Fallaw, religion; Nels F. S. Ferre, the-
ology; Norman K. Gottwald, Old Testament;
John C. Scainnton, Old Testament.
Bates College: Leland Bechtel, education;
Walter Boyce, administration; Robert M.
Chute, biology; Robert Hatch, health; George
Healy, Peter Jonitis, sociology; Robert Peck,
health; Richard Sampson, mathematics;
Richard Warye, speech.
Boston University: George D. W. Berry,
philosophy; Bernard Chasan, physics; Joseph
Cochin, pharmacology; Robert S. Cohen,
physics; Paul K. Deets, Jr., theology; Alvin
Fiering, film; George HeM, chemistry; Carol
Kaye, psychiatry; Conan Kornetsky, pharma-
cology; John H. Lavely, philosophy; Allan F.
Mirsky, psychiatry; Bernard S. Phillips, so-
ciology; Freda Rebelsky, psychology; Melvin
Rosenthal, psychiatry; Julius A. Roth, so -
ciology; Nancy St. John, basic studies; Ar-
mand Siegel, physics; Robert H. Sproat, Eng -
lish; John J. Stachel, physics; Gerald Stech -
ler, psychiatry; Max W. Wartofsky, philos -
ophy; Charles E. Willis, physics; Alvin D.
Zalinger, sociology; Howard Zinn, govern-
ment.
Bowdoin College: Philip M. Brown, eco-
nomics; Thomas Cornell, art; Luis 0. Coxe,
engineering; Clarence Davies, government;
John C. Donovan, government; Reginald
Hannaford, English; Ernst C. Helmreich, his-
tory; Gordon Hiebert, chemistry; John How -
land, biology; Charles E. Huntington, biology;
Gerald Kamber, French; Fritz C. A. Kollin,
German; Albert Nunn, French; Marvin Sa.dik,
art; James A. Storer, economics; William B.
Whiteside, history.
Brandeis University: Rose Abendstren, lan-
guages; Herbert H. Attekar, sociology; Max
Chretien, physics; Saul Cohen, chemistry;
Lewis A. Coser, sociology; George L. Cowgill,
anthropology; Herman T. Epstein, biology;
Jerrold Fassman, biochemistry; Kenneth B.
Feigenbaum, psychology; Gordon A. Penman,
sociology; David H. Fischer, history; Lawrence
Fuchs, history; David G. Gil, sociology; Ray
Ginger, history; Jack Goldstein, physics,
Theodore Goodfriend, biochemistry; Stephen
J. Grenclzier, languages; Mary E. Griffin, Eng-
lish; Eugene Gross, physics; Allan Grossman,
English; Lawrence Grossman, biochemistry;
Lincoln D. Hammond, languages; Thomas C.
Hollocher, biochemistry; Mary Ellen Jones,
biochemistry; David Kaplan, anthropology;
Nathan Kaplan, biochemistry; Attilla C.
Klein, biology; Laurence Levine, biochem-
istry; Henry Linschitz, biochemistry; Alvin
Lucier, music; Robert Manners, anthrone'.
ogy; Herbert Marcuse, philosophy; William
Murakami, biochemistry; Joseph F. Murphy,
politics; Robert 0. Preyer, English; Murray
Sachs, languages; Benson Saler, anthropol-
ogy; Gordon Sato, biochemistry; Silvan
Schweber, physics; Philip E. Slater, sociology;
B. Z. Sobel, sociology; Morris Soodak, bio-
chemistry; Mark Spivak, sociology; Maurice
Stein, sociology; Maurice Sussman, biology;
Helen Van Vunakis, biochemistry; John
Vickers, philosophy; E. V. Walter, sociology;
Roland L. Warren, sociology; Alex Weingrod,
anthropology; Harold Weisberg, philosophy;
Robert S. Weiss, sociology; John Wight, en-
gineering; Kurt H. Wolff, sociology; Irving
K. Zola, sociology.
Clark University: J. Richard Reid, lan-
guages; Morton Wierner, psychology; Charles
Beinderman, English; Abraham Blum, psy-
chology; Walter H. Crockett, psychology;
Bernard Kaplan, psychology, and Philip G.
Olson, sociology.
Harvard University: Harold Amos, medical
school; French Anderson, medical school;
Ralph Baierlein, physics; Guy 0. Barnett,
medicine; Reuben Brower, english; Lawrence
Burkholder, divinity; Ian Cooke, biology,
Frank Moore Cross, Jr., languages; R. Dama -
dian, medical school; Bernard D. Davis, med-
ical school; David Denhardt, biology; E. S.
Dethlefsen, biology; Donald T. Dubin, med -
ical school; Michael T. Dubin, medical
school; Michael Edidin, medical school; John
Edsell, biology; Leon Ehrenpreis, mathemat -
ics; Rupert Emerson, government; Ann Farn-
ham, medical school; John Felstiner, English;
Donald Fleming, history; A. S. Freedberg,
medical school; Walter Gilbert, physics;
Philip Gold, chemistry; Irving H. Goldberg,
medical school; Luigi Gorini, medical school,
David Cavers, law; Howard H. Hiatt, medical
school; H. Stuart Hughes, history; Stanley
Katz, history; Gordon D. Kaufman, theology;
Eugene P. Kennedy, medical school; John
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
-*
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3479
CLEVELAND, OHIO.
Senator WAYNE Moasa,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: YOU have restored
again my faith in democracy. Enclosed is a
copy of my letter to the President in support
of your position on South Vietnam.
Sincerely yours,
R. DracnENKo.
CLEVELAND, OHIO.
Mr. LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
President of the United States,
White House, Washington, D.C.
MR. PRESIDENT: I take it upon myself, as
a concerned citizen and your supporter, to
urge you that you heed the warnings of
Senator MORSE and others regarding our
policies in South Vietnam.
The honor of a great nation does not re-
quire from her leaders to sacrifice the lives
of her people rather than admit a past mis-
take in policy. Our involvement in South
Vietnam was a mistake. Let us have wis-
dom and courage to admit it.
Respectfully yours,
R. DIDCHENKO, Ph. D.
MEDFORD, OREG.
Senator WAYNE L. MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: For several months
I have been intending to write and thank
you for your stand on one great, current is-
sue?our involvement in Vietnam. I thank
you. I admire you for your suggestion that
we submit the issue to the United Nations.
I want to add my bit of support for your
efforts.
Of course, I have excuses for not writing
you before this. But they are not good ex-
cuses. With the current escalation of our
military actions in Vietnam and the ever-
increasing visibility of our Government's
untruthful news releases and stubborn per-
sistence in the same shameful rut, I could
no longer delay writing you without violat-
ing my conscience further.
I wish sincerely that the current adminis-
tration would struggle to come up with as
visionary ideas for our responsibilities to
the poverty stricken and politically repressed
people of Vietnam and other nations as they
have for such people in our own country.
As long as I have pen in hand I do want
to relate another somewhat narrower but, I
believe, important concern. That is the VA
intention to close a number of their hos-
pital and domiciliaries including the near-
by one at White City. If one grants the
VA's apparently clear assumption that their
responsibility is only for acute medical treat-
ment for veterans it is difficult to refute
the logic of their action. Even if one agrees
with that assumption, however, I think that
one could argue that building new and
larger hospitals in the big cities in conjunc-
tion with medical schools sometimes results
In admissions being based on what do we
want to teach the medical student next,
rather than on what medical services do the
veterans need. In any event I see reasons
to argue with their basic assumptions. To
point out only one?the domiciliaries were
set up as homes, not as hospitals. They
were set up to meet a social need of disabled
and underprivileged veterans. The Great
Society has not yet arrived?there are in-
adequate economic and social supports for
these veterans and the domiciliaries are still
providing an essential service to this seg-
ment of our poverty stricken society.
Whether or not hospitals are associated with
these domiciliaries is therefore beside the
point.
If the VA is bound and determined to get
out of the homes service, I would at least
No. 37-4
hope that Congress would pressure them to
phase out the domiciliaries over a period of
time?so that individual planning for the
provision of alternative services could be
provided for some of these veterans?rather
than shipping them en masse from their own
communities to distant parts of the coUn-
try.
Yours truly,
ROBERT R. GOHRKE.
PRINCETON, N.J.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dzsa Sin: I wish to commend your opposi-
tion to our policy in Vietnam. It takes a
great deal of courage to stand against such
emotion-laden policies. You have my ad-
miration and unqualified support in your
efforts to do so.
The basic trouble in our foreign policy is
that it is a holding action designed to pre-
serve the world sta,tus quo. But the status
quo is an abominable mess. We need a
positive policy aimed at accelerating politi-
cal, economic, and social reforms.
If you will excuse me for departing from
the realm of the practical, for my own satis-
faction I would like to suggest that the basic
planks in our foreign policy should be the
following:
1. A massive worldwide program for birth
control.
2. The establishment or improvement of
public health programs. Most people live at
the mercy of disease.
3. A program of agricultural reform and
industrial expansion, backed by the kind of
money we put into war.
4. The development of education on a
worldwide basis. Only in education can we
hope to improve men's thinking.
5. Forceful support of movements to
establish social justice, which we too often
oppose.
6. The encouragement of democratic in-
stitutions. Only on this point is even our
thinking straight. But I do not think we do
much to implement it.
Sincerely yours,
Joicx C. BOWEN.
ELSINORE, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please permit me to
tell you that my family and I fully support
your stand on Vietnam.
No good, decent person wants the escalation
of this useless terrible war. It can only end
in a holocaust for the world and what will
remain will not be democracy, therefore it
must be stopped now.
Wishing you good health and happiness
and thank you for your fine leadership.
Respectfully yours.
MTS. NINA HAMMER.
DEAR SIR: In light of the recent events in
Vietnam, the Swarthmore Student Council
presented the enclosed resolution to referen-
dum to the Swarthmore student body on
February 18, 1965. The resolution passed by
a vote of 370 to 255, with about 60 percent of
the student body voting.
Sincerely yours,
ANN B. MOSELY,
President, Swarthmore Student Council.
RESOLUTION ON VIETNAM
On the basis of publicly available infor-
mation concerning the situation in Vietnam,
we believe that with each passing week, the
situation there poses an increasing threat to
world peace. We view with great fear any
new military action which would further
heighten the danger of escalating the con-
flict ? For this reason We strongly protest
the recent air strikes against North Vietnam.
Further, we believe that:
1. U.S. attacks on North Vietnam not only
violate international law but also increase
the possibility of Chinese intervention in
the undeclared war.
2. 'U.S. support of the Shanh regime in
South Vietnam is unwarranted on our Gov-
ernment's stated grounds of support for free-
dom and democracy. It is apparent to all
that the Khanh regime lacks the backing of
the South Vietnamese people.
3. Military tactics used by the United
States in South Vietnam. such as defoliation
(which destroys crops as well as revealing
guerrilla hideouts) and strategic hamlets
(which involve the forced eviction of fam-
ilies from their villages) have not been ef-
fective and are deplorable on humanitarian
grounds.
4. Our Government has failed in its duty
to supply the American people with full in-
formation on its policies and actions in Viet-
nam.
We conclude that the use of brinkmanship
policies in the grave situation in Vietnam
could escalate the war from an internal con-
flict to a broader struggle. We therefore sup-
port a negotiated peace settlement and with-
drawal of American military forces from
South Vietnam.
NORTH BEND, OREG.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Get us out of Vietnam. Let's
not worry about dignity?just get out.
We never should have been there, and it
won't hurt us as a nation, to admit a mistake.
With your position in the Senate, your
knowledge, and your following, you should
be able to throw a lot of weight around.
Sincerely yours,
Roscoz B. HAZER.
SAN DIEGO, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I express my ap-
preciation for your position regarding our
country's illegal and dangerous intervention
In Vietnam? Your Denver speech was a
masterpiece of logic and intelligent patriot-
ism. Most people seem to be either con-
fused or to feel that it is useless for a citi-
zen to voice an opinion that is contrary to
Government policy.
I heard part of a quotation from your re-
marks regarding our recent bombing of North
Vietnam on the radio during the night, but
it was never repeated, and I have been un-
able to find any mention of it in the daily
press.
I would appreciate receiving any of your
speeches or remarks since your Denver ad-
dress on December 11, 1964. If possible, I
would like to receive any of your future re-
marks on the above subject without making
a separate request on each occasion.
Yours very truly,
MARK FISHER.
CAMBRIDGE, MASS.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I BM SO appalled at
the undoubted signs our Government has
chosen war. Is there nothing to be done?
Who is advising the President in such a dis-
astrous course?
I have just read a dreadful article by Han-
son Baldwin which I feel is the Government
point of view, in the Sunday Times, which
must be answered point by point. I do hope
you will do this.
I am so grateful to you and the other Sen-
ators--GauzNiNa, Cirmicn, and so on?for
your positions on this dangerous situation.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3480 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February n
It would be possibly of great importance
for you all to answer Hanson Baldwin's
shocking article.
Very gratefully,
PHYLLIS BYRNE COR.
ST. HELENS, GREG.
DEAR SENATOR: Please use your influence
and vote to get a social security medicare
bill.
We would like repeal of section 14.B, Taft-
Hartley Act.
We like your stand on the Vietnamese
question.
Keep up the good work.
Sincerely yours,
Mr. and Mrs. CARL SoutsTRAND.
Nnw Yortx, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Deep gratitude to you for standing firm for
negotiations. Keep up the fight.
EizzABETzt Moos.
BANDON, OREG.
Hon. WAYNE B. MORSE,
Senator from Oregon,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR MR. MORSE: This is to let you know
the thoughts and wishes of Mrs. Burris and
myself relative to the handling of this coun-
try's foreign affairs.
We agree with you that the United States
should get out of South Vietnam at once and
quit this foolish waste of American lives and
resources. France saw the futility of the
situation and wisely went home. Such a
withdrawal at this time would not mean
defeat but if we continue on our present
course it can lead only to total war on the
Chinese mainland.
We also heartily agree with Dan Smoot
that we should abandon Africa completely
and withdraw all forms of aid from coun-
tries that don't want or don't appreciate it.
This country has been dissipating its re-
sources all over the world for many years,
surely to the delight of the Communists,
while our national debt continues to grow
out of control. It is not enough to simply
balance the budget, which this cpuntsy has
not done for a long time. It is mandatory
that we start to reduce the national debt at
once. If we are unable to do so now, when
the President reports our national economy is
at an all-time high, then we had better give
up. We cannot spend our way into pros-
perity at home, or in city. State or Federal
governments.
It is our hope that you use your full power
toward getting this country out of all its
foolish commitments around the world. Let
us discontinue all of our silly giveaway pro-
grams and adopt a get-tough policy. Con-
serve our resources, strengthen our country
and reduce our national debt, and all coun-
tries will have to respect us. There Is no ma-
son why we should be openly insulted and
scorned by such petty nations as Cuba,
Panama, Africa, and others too numerous
to mention, while we continue to pour more
money into those same countries than they
ever saw. We should take every penny away
from them and see how much the Com-
munists want them then. Then get us out
of the United Nations. We are footing prac-
tically the entire bill and it is unable to
accomplish a thing. Their intentions were of
the best but they just won't work.
We thank you for the fine stand you are
taking in these matters, and also for your
kindness in looking out for the welfare of
retired Federal civil service employees. May
we be fortunate in having you as our Senator
for many years.
Respectfully yours,
HAROLD T. BURRIS.
PORTLAND, OREG.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: In reference to the Vietnam
situation, I would appreciate if I could be
advised on what particular legislation the
President is carrying on the so-called house-
keeping operations in South Vietnam. I am
particularly interested in the matter since
the Constitution of the United States de-
clares that Congress has the responsibility of
declaring war. Is there any particular legis-
lation which has delegated this respon-
sibility to the President under certain condi-
tions of limited warfare. It is a distressing
situation. Our failure to adhere to our own
Constitution and also fundamental principles
of international law is keeping us in a state
of turmoil. I would like more enlightment
on the subject.
Sincerely,
DONALD C. WALKER.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR Sin: This letter that I am writing
may not do much good, for perhaps I am
one in a million that would attempt to write
their opinion of the things that are prevail-
ing of today which are very wrong, and to
my way of thinking, could be curtailed if
the heads of our Government would really
try to solve these problems now. They say
what they will do, but I fail to see action.
Perhaps the medicare will not go through
for some time, maybe never, but if they
would increase the lower bracket social secu-
rity, people then could perhaps afford their
own medical aid. But, how could I as one
of many situated the same as I, and I am
widowed with $85 coming in a month. IM-
possible to do anything with that amount,
and this excise tax was to be taken off too?I
fail to see that in effect. I think it wrong
that social security people should have to pay
it. Many people think as I do and I think
you will approve too, that Robert S. Mc-
Namara, Secretary of Defense said, and /
quote?that: "The Vietnam crisis is grave,
but by no means hopeless," and expressed
doubt the Chinese would step I n with a
major attack. It's obvious they would. I
think he should be removed and many more
think the same for if he is left in charge we
will surely be involved. We're sitting on a
bomb right now, and I don't think the people
realize the grave situation we are in. I have
a son that was in the World War and a
Pearl Harbor survivor, and I have four grand-
sons and I'm certainly sure I wouldn't like to
see them and many more of our young men
involved in another war. So I think they
had better get busy and down to earth *ith
some way of solving this serious situation
that is hanging over us. I know you have
great influence and on these people the
masses of people are surely depending for
peace and prosperity and to help our own
people first.
Sincerely,
Mrs. BEATRICE GERRANS.
BEAVERTON, OREG,
Hon. WAYNE MORRIS,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: This letter is written to let
you know what my opinions and feelings are
concerning some of the matters which are
before Congress at the present time.
First, may I say that I'm in agreement with
you in regards to the Vietnam problem.
Second, my opinion on Federal aid to
schools; well and good if confined to pub-
lic schools. Private schools and institutions
receive enough aid as it is by being tax ex-
empt in many ways. As a church member I
believe their business property, investments,
and holdings should be taxed. If people
think enough of their churches they will
support them. Let church and state remain
separated as our wise forefathers intended.
Third, that of foreign aid: It seems to me
that a lot of our money has been wasted on
those countries that show no appreciation.
Why keep trying to buy friendship and re-
spect? We've given away billions?in return
for what? Those countries that received
most?Egypt, France, etc.?where's the ap-
preciation? They speak for themselves?
"Go jump in the ocean," and even now
France wants our gold, why can't she apply
some of those dollars she has to repay our
loan. Yet we still believe that we can buy
friendship? Let us cut down on foreign aid
and use some of that money in our own
country and loan only to those countries
that appreciate our aid like little Finland
Please tell Congress to use discretion with
our (tax) dollars.
Thank you for listening.
Yours truly,
N. C. THOMPSON.
EUGENE, OREG.
DEMI SENATOR MORSE: I am a Reed College
graduate (1961) and a gTadute student at
the School of Music at the University of
Oregon. You have my constant support and
affection for your work in the Senate.
consider your stand on Vietnam a really
courageous act. Is there any chance we can
get out of there?
I feel so terribly uninformed about Viet-
nam?where can I find out what is really
going on?
With respect,
JON APPLETON.
NEW YORK, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate of the United States
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This is just a short
note to voice my admiration of your long
and hard battle against our involvement in
South Vietnam. Developments in that area
of the world certainly point to the correct-
ness of your views. I hope you will continue
your fight for reason?particularly for the
involvement of the U.N.?in the Vietnam
problem.
Sincerely yours,
WILLIAM WOLPERT.
LANDENBERG, PA.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This IS just to let
you know that I am fully in agreement with
your opposition to our further involvement
in Vietnam.
Why not let the U.N. give it a try as U
Thant has suggested?
Sincerely yours,
V. WEINM A YR
OLIVISTEAD FALLS, OHIO.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I heard over the
radio the talk you gave at the City Club in
Cleveland, Friday, February 19.
We thought your talk an excellent one
and wished every city in our country could
have heard the talk and the questions after
your speech which you answered very well.
If the people of our country could hear
the truth about Vietnam as you gave it in
your talk to the City Club, the administra-
tion's actions in Vietnam would be ended
soon; immediately.
I would like to have a copy of this talk.
If you have many copies, please send me
several. We can get it reproduced in Cleve-
land and distribute several hundred copies.
Thank you very much for giving the truth
to the American people.
Sincerely yours,
Mrs. VnuAN Wnson.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1-9 6 5 Approved For Releasg...2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
wiNL.T.ttt,SSIONAL RECORD SENATE 3477
out of fear. But let us never fear to nego-
tiate."
The pressures on this country to seek a
negotiated settlement of the Vietnamese con-
flict are approaching a point where the
United States is being isolated. In recent
days Russia has joined France in appealing
for talks; the British would like to see ne-
gotiations started; the news from North Viet-
nam hints at a desire to confer; India had
previously expressed the same wish, and yes-
terday Secretary General Thant of the United
Nations di,sclosed that he has been engaged
in discussions with the United States and
other involved nations and has made "con-
crete proposals" for a negotiated settlement.
Washington, to be sure, is not quite alone.
Communist China has been adamant against
negotiations and it is quite possible that
Peiping will refuse to talk. However, Mr.
Thant, President de Gaulle and the Russians
believe that China can be induced to join a
reconvened meeting of the 14-nation Geneva
conference.
Yesterday it was announced that American
jet bombers, with Americans manning the
weapons as well as the controls, are now
fighting in Vietnam. Their involvement
makes Americans open combatants in the
war, not just "advisers"; thus the conflict has
again been escalated. Correspondents in
Washington are being informed that United
States policy now permits attacks on North
Vietnam even without further provocations.
The point of no return on a wider war may be
at hand.
A State Department spokesman goes on
repeating that the United States will reject
negotiations so long as Hanoi supports the
Vietcong guerrillas; Peiping says it will not
talk until all American 'troops are out of
Vietnam. Both preconditions are utterly
unrealistic. One of the fundamental reasons
for negotiations is precisely to arrange for
a cease-fire and nonintervention.
Unquestionably, President Johnson worries
about the effect on South Vietnamese morale
of any move towarenegotiations, but the
recent upheavals in Saigon have indicated
that the will to resist the Vietcong, even
among the commanders of the armed forces,
is already near the vanishing point.
Time is working against the United States.
Hperetary Thant is right in saying that the
situation is going "from bad to worse." The
notion that to negotiate would be a defeat
for the United States has become one of
the most pernicious misapprehensions of the
conflict. The United States is amply proving
its military strength and its determination
to stay in South Vietnam in present circum-
stances. An agreement to negotiate sur-
renders nothing; it opens up the possibility
for determining whether the goals of effec-
tive neutralization now being sought mili-
tarily can be achieved at the conference
table. -
The most significant thing that Secretary
Thant said yesterday was this: "I am sure
that the great American people, if it only
knows the true facts, will agree with me
that further bloodshed is unnecessary and
that political and diplomatic negotiations
alone can create conditions that will enable
the United States to withdraw gracefully
from that part of the world."
President Johnson is the man to whom the
American people look for the true facts.
[From the New York Times]
INDIA 'URGES CONFERENCE ON VIETNAM
NEW DELHI, February 8.?India's External
Affairs Ministry called today for a Geneva-
type conference for Vietnam and said it was
"essential for a peaceful and enduring solu-
tion to the problem."
Shortly after this statement was issued,
Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri said he
was writing to President Johnson and Pre-
mier Aleksel N. Kosygin of the Soviet Union
to urge that they meet as soon as possible
to insure that peace Is not disturbed in
southeast Asia.
Mr. Shastri spoke upon emerging from two
almost consecutive half-hour meetings with
Premier Georges Pompidou of France, who
arrived today with his wife and Foreign
Minister Maurice Couve de Murville on an
8-day official visit to India. Mr. Pompidou
observed that he was glad to say he had
found the positions of the French and In-
dian Governments on Vietnam "very close."
The External Affairs Ministry's statement
said, "There should be an immediate sus-
pension of all provocative action in South
Vietnam as well as in North Vietnam by all
sides."
India is chairman of all three international
control commissions set up in Geneva at
the seven-power conference of 1954 to main-
tain peace in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.
Although not a participant in that con-
ference, India was invited to head the control
commissions.
[From the New York Times]
UNITED NATIONS: THE FRITSTRATIONS OF THE
U.N.
(By James Reston)
UNITED NATIONS, N.Y., February 18.?The
weakness of the United Nations was never
more obvious than in its present paralysis
over the Vietnamese crisis. It could not hope
to settle that conflict, for it was never orga-
nized to deal with the disputes among the
great powers, but at least it was organized
to talk, and it is not even talking about Viet-
nam.
The excuses for not talking about it are
clear enough. Three of the four major an-
tagonists in Vietnam?Communist China,
North Vietnam, and South Vietnam?are not
members of the international organization.
The Communists regard the Vietnamese
struggle as an internal war of national lib-
eration, and therefore deny the competence
of the U.N. to deal with it. The Soviet Union
would veto any action on the question by the
Security Council, and the General Assembly
is now so dominated by the new nations of
Asia and Africa that even the Johnson ad-
ministration is not sure it would be sup-
ported in that body.
SECURITY AND MONEY
Beyond all that, U.N. officials are so worried
about the security problems that would arise
in New York if the Chinese Communists were
to come here to discuss the Vietnamese ques-
tion that they are not eager to get into the
controversy. And they are so concerned
about the financial bankruptcy of the U.N.
that they are talking more about money and
voting than they are about their principal
responsibility, which is the maintenance of
peace.
Nevertheless, there are at least three argu-
ments for having a U.N. debate on the sub-
ject of Vietnam or any other threat to'`the
peace. First, the principles and spirit of the
U.N. Charter require it. Second, the U.N.
will be weakened even more than it now is if
it ignores Vietnam. And third, a U.N. debate
might have a restraining effect on the mili-
tary operations in Vietnam and would prob-
ably end with a resolution that would put
pressure on both sides to negotiate an honor-
able settlement.
What is going on now over Vietnam is an
increasingly dangerous military struggle
amidst a tangle of verbal obscurities and
misleading propaganda.
The Communists are engaged there in
what they call a "war of national libera-
tion," which any careful debate in the U.N.
would expose as nothing more than an inter-
national war for Communist domination of
the whole country and peninsula.
Washington is also playing the obscurantist
game. The President says he "wants no
wider war," but widens it anyway by bomb-
ing North Vietnam. These bombing raids,
however, are not usually described as
"bombings" or as "raids," but as "responses."
HYPOCRISY UNLIMITED
At least a debate in the U.N. would expose
this hypocrisy on all sides, including the
hypocrisy of our allies, who are treaty-bound
to help us in South Vietnam, but are doing
nothing of the sort. And while a debate
would cause us some embarrassment in the
U.N., it would surely make clear the central
fact?namely, that Washington went into
that country originally to prevent the Com-
munists from overpowering the South Viet-
namese in violation of specific international
agreements.
The United Nations is in a sad plight. It
is broke, but it need not be bankrupt in
spirit. More than likely it is not going to be
able to take effective military action in the
future to oppose aggression, as it did in the
Congo.
All it has left, therefore, is the power to
talk and clarify, to appeal to the conscience
of the peoples, and if it is going to give up
this responsibility it will have little or noth-
ing left in the field of international politics.
The Secretary General of the United Na-
tions has tried to get the antagonists in
Vietnam into negotiations, but both he and
the Pope have been brushed aside?even in
Washington.
The main reason for the weakness of the
U.N. today, of course, is that its principles
have constantly been violated by the Com-
munist nations ever since it was founded 20
years ago. Washington, however, also has
to take a part of the blame.
BLOC VOTING
For it was the United States that started
the practice of bloc voting in the organiza-
tion. Now the Communists have taken it
up, and with all the new nations from
Africa and Asia, they have a bloc that threat-
ens to overwhelm, not only the American
bloc, but the principles of the charter as
well.
The U.N. cannot be revived, however, by
silence and capitulation. It has to speak
out for its principles in the Vietnamese
crisis, even if it cannot make them prevail.
[From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch]
ILLUSIONS AND FALSE ANALOGIES
Assuming that there is still time to think
about Vietnam?that the deadly cycle of mil-
itary escalation is not yet irreversible?Amer-
icans should examine the validity of the
official rationale for the reprisal bombings of
North Vietnam.
The rationale is that attacks on South
Vietnamese and American bases are planned,
armed and supplied predominantly from the
north, and that the attacks will stop if we
hit the north hard enough. The fatal flaw
In this theory is that the major portion of
the weapons used by the Vietcong are Amer-
ican weapons, captured and turned against
us. While supplies from the north undoubt-
edly help the Vietcong, there is little basis
for supposing that they are indispensable, or
that the Vietcong would fade away if supply
lines could be cut?even if the lines could
be cut by air action alone, which is most
Improbable.
Should it not be clear by now that we
are not dealing with a simple case of ex-
ternal aggression, as the official policy of our
Government assumes? If after 10 years of
steadily increasing American aid the South
Vietnamese Government is weaker than it
was before, then something other than ex-
ternally supported subversion must be in-
volved.
All the evidence points to a high degree
of local sympathy or outright support for
the Vietcong as a major element in its suc-
cess. The bombing of North Vietnam does
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15: CIA-RDP67B00446R0003001700010
3478 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE February 25i
not touch this source of conflict and prob-
ably strengthens it.
The false assumption of external aggres-
sion as the essential element in the situation
is strategic as well as tactical. rt is one of
the major reasons our forces are in Vietnam.
Apologists for official policy are fond of
quoting Churchill's warning after the par-
tition of Czechoslovakia in 1938?"The belief
that security can be obtained by throwing a
small state to the wolves is a fatal delusion."
Czechoslovakia, however, was a victim of
' direct external aggression. What we face in
Vietnam Is the quite different problem of an
indigenous revolution, 25 years in the mak-
ing, which has succeeded in ending French
colonialism and withstanding 10 years of
American intervention.
In such a situation even our great military
strength does not give us power to decide,
by a simple decision to fight, that a small
state shall be "saved." It is one thing to
g0 to the aid of a nation under overt attack,
and another to interfere in a local revolu-
tion, in which the essential element is not
external aid but the people themselves.
Only they can "win the war," and after 10
years of not winning, South Vietnam's will
and capacity to do so must now be doubted.
Some Americans, of course, believe that
it is our national mission to police the
world, particularly to police it against rev-
olution. That belief, in our view, Is as
immature as isolationism was, and indeed
may well be an over-reacticin to isolationism.
The United States tried to turn its back
on the world, and failed; participation in the
Second World War established firmly the
conaracMsense proposition that for America
involvement in international affairs is un-
avoidable. Rut *hat is involvement? Some
Americans evidently swung so far from their
isolationist past that they regard involve-
ment as deciding everything for everybody,
and particularly deciding the nature and
scope of social revolution anywhere. A role
. in world leadership certainly is the Ameri-
can mission, but we need a More sensible
view of what world leadership really is.
The truth is that Vietnam does not pre-
sent a simple case of external aggression,
direct or indirect, and a policy based on that
false assumption is bound to fail, as ours
has failed for 10 years. No matter how
strenuously we may justify the bombing
of North Vietnam to ourselves, and no mat-
ter how well it might be defended as pure
reprisal or revenge, the fact remains that
there is no military solution to the problem
so far as the United States is concerned.
If we step up otir attacks and the degree
of our involvement, and even if we do not
provoke Chinese or Russian intervention, all
we can really expect is to take over the whole
war from the South Vietnamese--in other
words, to occupy and govern South Vietnam
indefinitely.
What would such an occupation gain for
us? /t would not serve our true national
Interests, it would poison our relations with
half the world, and it would hamper our
freedom of maneuver in more important
areas of conflict.
Our Vietnam policy is at a dead end. Our
interests can new be served only by a politi-
cal rather than a Military solution, one that
will enable us ultimately to end a profitless
involvement in a profitless Asian land war.
Unless President Sohn,son is seeking a politi-
cal solution, he is not only risking nuclear
war but basing national policy on dangerous
illusions.
[From the New York Times]
WASHINGTON: THE UNDECLARED AND
UrsitxruinsTED WAR
(By James Resthn)
Wasnrtforox, February 13.?The time has
Come to call a spade a bloody shovel. This
country Is in an undeclared and unex-
plained War in Vietnam. Our masters have
a lot of long and fancy names for it, like
escalation and retaliation, but it is war just
the same.
The cause of the war is plain enough. The
North Vietnamese Communists, with the aid
of Red China and to a lesser extent the Soviet
Union, have sent their guerillas into South
Vietnam in violation of the 1954 and 1962
Geneva agreements, for the express purpose
of taking over the government and territory
of South Vietnam.
AMERICA'S 'RESPONSE
The course of the war is equally plain. We
were getting licked in South Vietnam. The
Communists were steadily defeating the
South Vietnamese 'armed forces, terrorizing
a war-weary and indifferent pbpulation, and
taking advantage Of a divided and quarrel-
some South Vietnamese Government.
More than that, the Communists were
stepping up their attacks on the bases and
barracks which serve the 23,000 American
troops in South Vietnam, and it was in re-
sponse to this that President Johnson or-
dered the bombing attacks on the Commu-
nist military installations in the south of
North Vietnamese territory.
Very few people here question the neces-
sity for a limited expansion of the war by
U.S. bombers into Communist territory.
The American and South Vietnamese posi-
tion was crumbling fast, and the political
and strategic consequences of defeat would
have been serious for the free world all
over Asia.
There is a point, however, where this ex-
ercise will become critical. As the military
targets in the southern part of Commtinist
Vietnam are knocked out, and our bombers
move northward, they will soon come within
the range of the North Vietnamese and Red
Chinese Mig fighters, and if we get into that
situation, the pressure for attacks on the air
bases in North Vietnam and South China
will steeply increase.
The immediate problem, therefore, is how
to put enough pressure on the North Viet-
namese to bring them into negotiations for
a settlement of the war, without provoking
a mass Communist counterattack we are
In no position to meet.
This is a delicate and highly dangerous
situation. The United States has the air
and naval power to wipe out North Vietnam
and the Chinese Air Force, if it comes into
the battle. But the North Vietnamese have
a quarter of a million men under arms who
have never been committed to the battle at
all, and few observers in Washington believe
this force could be stopped without the in-
tervention of a very large American army
on the ground.
THE SILENT WH/TE HOUSE
Nobody has made all this clear to the
American people. President Johnson has not
made a major speech on the details of this
war since he entered the White Rouse.
Neither did President Kennedy. We have
had one long speech on the subject by Sec-
retary of Defense McNamara on March 26 of
last year, and a lot of statements here and in
Saigon, many of them highly optimistic and
misleading. But the fact is that we are in
a war that is not only undeclared and unex-
plained, but that has not even been widely
debated in the Congress or the country.
The whole history of this century testifies
to the difficulty of predicting the conse-
quences of war. We impose& a policy of
unconditional surrender on the Kaiser only
to find that the two greater menaces of
Communism and Nazism took his place. One
of the main objectives of the two World
Wars was the freedom of Eastern Europe,
which ended up with less freedom under the
Communists than it had before.
Lasirrma THE WAR
Few people here question that President
Johnson wants to limit the war in Vietnam
and avoid a ground war on the continent of
Asia, but the future is not wholly in his
control. He may be bombing merely to force
a negotiated settlement, but the Chinese and
the North Vietnamese don't know that. In
fact neither do the American people, whose
airmen are carrying out the President's
orders.
Nor, for that matter, do the allies, who are
treaty-bound to support us if we get into a
larger war in southeast Asia. They will un-
doubtedly support a policy of limited re-
taliation in North Vietnam if it is for the
purpose of negotiating a settlement, but they
will not support us for long unless we define
and limit our aims.
The implications of this war, then, extend
far beyond Vietnam. President Johnson's
hopes of building a strong alliance with Japan
and the other free nations of Asia are not
likely to be promoted by replaying the old
script of American planes once more bomb-
ing Asians.
lie has started on a massive program of
reconstruction and development at home, but
he can forget about his Great Society if he
gets bogged down in a major land war in
Asia on territory favorable to the enemy.
Freedom expands in peace and authoritarian
government in war, and this is precisely the
danger now, for the Communists have the
manpower to cause us an almost unmanage-
able situation not only in Vietnam but in
Korea, and force us into a war that could
divert our energies from the larger con-
structive purposes of the Nation.
In this situation it is difficult to under-
stand why the problem is not discussed more
openly by the President, why the terms of
an honorable settlement are not defined,
and why the negotiating efforts of the Sec-
retary General of the United Nations and
other world statesmen are so blithely brushed
aside.
It is true that the instability, weakness and
sensitivities of the South Vietnamese Gov-
ernment have to be kept in mind, but no-
body is suggesting a sellout at their expense.
The talk here is not about a Munich agree-
ment but a Korean agreement in which
South Vietnam, like South Korea, would be
in a better position to order its own life.
This would not be ideal, but it would
be better for the South Vietnamese and for
the United States than what we have now,
and it would be better for North Vietnam
and China than a larger war.
CHINA'S DANGER
For if this dangerous game gets out 0!
hand, it is not likely that China's new Indus..
tries, including her atomic installations at
Taklamakan Desert in Central Sinkiang, will
be spared. What her manpower can grab
beyond her borders would be worth far less
than what she would lose at home.
Somebody, however, has to make a move
to reverse the trend and stop the present
crooked course. For the moment, we seera
to be standing mute in Washington, para-
lyzed before a great issue, and merely dig-
ging our thought deeper into the accustomed
military rut.
SYRACUSE, N.Y.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I send you this let-
ter to indicate my appreciation of your
article in the January 17 issue of the New
York Times magazine, and my support of
your demands for negotiations in the Viet-
nam conflict. My opinion that victory is
impossible in Vietnam, and that the United
States has no right to sponsor mindless
fratricide there is shared by many of my
professors and fellow students here at Syra-
cuse University. Please continue to protest
current U.S. policy, and presist in your de-
mans for negotiations.
Yours truly,
MISS DALE BRABANT.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Re ? se 2003/10/15 CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL 'RECORD ? SENATE 3475
4 [From the Daily Courier, Grants Pass, Oreg.]
SOLDIER SEES VIETNAM WAR , AS FOOLISH.
. TjEELESS
We read, each day, about what is going on
in Vietnam, periodically, we are given some
correspondent's version of just what it is all
about.
But what are the actual observations of
the country, its people, and the fighting that
go on in the heads of our servicemen sta-
tioned there? Only they can say.
We have been allowed to peek into one of
these soldiers' minds via a letter he wrote to
local kin and the view is rather startling. It
also is eloquent and enlightening.
. The writer is a ca6tain in the U.S. Army,
is a medical doctor, and is assigned to one of
our advisory teams in South Vietnam. What
he writes is this, in part:
"You asked about the advisory team. As
far as I know, this is unclassified informa-
tion. Incidentally, from occasional infor-
mation which we get from our enemy, the
Vietcong, they know each of us, our arrival
dates, our ranks, serial numbers, and our
jobs, so advisers are not too secret.
"Well, America was more or less 'invited'
to help in this war many years ago and we
are, therefore, 'guests' of the country.
"We supposedly do not actually fight the
war, so it is a trifle different than your Korea.
Someone said, the other day, however, that,
'yes, we are advisers in the war. We drop
several thousands of pounds of "advice" every
day.'
"There are advisers for everything: cooks,
artillery, infantry, commandos, doctors?
everything except beggars, but they seem to
make out fairly well anyway.
"My particular role is somewhat nebulous,
I'm afraid, but it deals with helping Viet-
namese Army doctors take care of civilians
In their partieular areas. I work in two dif-
ferent Provinces which lie directly north and
directly South of Saigon. There are about 3
million people in the two states and about six
fully trained doctors, so we have plenty to do
usually. I am the leader of three grizzly
sergeants, and we just travel around training
Vietnamese Army medics in the treatment of
the civilian population.
"We call it 'The Traveling Medicine Show'
and the amount of actual good which we do
Is questionable. But you know the Army?
'it is not for us to question why * *
"Saigon is a fantastic city. It is oriental
enough to be full of intrigue and danger, and
French enough to be beautiful and exciting.
The city sprawls out like a big woman curled
along the Saigon River. Saigon is the heart,
the pride and the joy of all South Vietnam.
She is the biggest center of industry, culture
and population of the entire nation. I am
afraid that I love her.
"But the people are the real reason for my
existence. They are a beautiful, curious, in-
dustrious and active group. They are not as
artistic or original as their Chinese ances-
tors, nor are they as aggressive as their Jap-
anese neighbors. They are small, affection-
ate, beautiful, simple (superficially) and
mystic. They have never really known peace,
apd their attitude in war is one of com-
idlacency and patience, almost indifference.
"They are good people. They have fed me
when I was hungry, given me their mats
when I was tired and given me their friend-
ship and trust when I was a stranger. Some-
day I hope that I can return something to
them,
"For it is a fabulous country, this Vietnam.
High rugged mountains with their tops
poked through the mist clouds, rushing white
water and deep mountain pools, a beach of
white-tan sand which stretches for 1,200
miles, island ? that would give Hawaii
jealousy, a jungle with all the color and dan-
ger and lite of Africa, all superimposed upon
a culture as old and as deep as the earth
itself.
"War, of course, ruins it all, and I really
believe that that is what the man who said
'war is hell' actually meant. Someday I shall
tell you about the war, when we can talk for
hours.
"The chief points are:
"(a) This is a war, despite what news-
papers may call it, and (b) war is useless,
pointless, and ridiculous.
"At first it was (and I hate to admit it)
exciting: getting shot at, always worried
about mines on the roads or mortars at night,
and the sounds of artillery at night (it is a
wonderful sound, you know), but then after
a while, the foolishness and waste of it just
gets downright tiresome.
"Useless, ridiculous, pointless, foolish,
wasteful, tiresome. That's what wars are to
the men who fight them. But so long as
tyranny and jealousy and greed exist between
nations, I imagine we can expect more use-
less, ridiculous, pointless, foolish, wasteful
and tiresome wars, and more men will fight,
and die, and learn the truth about the whole
process."?H.L.E.
[From the Toronto Globe and Mail]
SEEKING A WAY To SETTLE AN EXPANDI,NG WAR
Prime Minister Lester Pearson proposed no
solutions to the Vietnam dilemma in his
speech this week, and he is undoubtedly
right to insist, at this critical stage, that any
specific views the Canadian Government has
should be expressed privately in Washington.
The United States carries a heavy and dan-
gerous burden in Vietnam, and this is no time
for friendly governments that do not share
that burden to go faultfinding in public.
From Mr. Pearson's analysis of the problem,
however, it is fairly plain that the Govern-
ment sees a negotiated settlement leading to
the withdrawal of all foreign forces, as the
only way to peace and stability in southeast
Asia.
Mr. Pearson sees no hope of mastering the
Vietcong guerrilla forces in a continuing war
confined to South Vietnam and only a faint
hope that air attacks on North Vietnam
might bring the Communist leadership to
the conference table; in fact, such an en-
largement of the war could well succeed in
producing a major Far Eastern war between
the United States and Communist China.
The Prime Minister endorses the appeal
this week by the Government of India for
"an immediate suspension of all provocative
action in South Vietnam as well as North
Vietnam by all sides," and an international
conference to settle the future of the area.
This is substantially the way out urged re-
peatedly by President Charles de Gaulle of
France. In the French view, no amount of
force would be sufficient to defeat the Viet-
cong.
Mr. Pearson also drew attention to the es-
sential weakness of the United States posi-
tion in South Vietnam, in that the "free"
Vietnamese Government it is supposed to be
helping has no basis of popular support in
the country.
Ideally, he said, there should be "a unified,
independent, neutral Vietnam," ending both
foreign intervention and the partition im-
posed by the 1954 Geneva agreement. But
how to prevent a unified Vietnam from turn-
ing inevitably Communist under Chinese
pressure?
The answer to Mr. Pearson's question is
probably that no stable Vietnantese Govern-
ment, North, South, or unified, can now be
formed without Vietcong participation, if
not dominance. The one realistic hope is,
by international guarantees emerging from
a news conference, to prevent southeast Asia
from falling under the dominion of the Chi-
nese Government.
In the present climate of American opin-
ion, this is a difficult outlook for the U.S.
Government to accept. A still greater ob-
stacle to negotiation over southeast Asia is
the fact that any conference would have to
include Communist China as one of the prin-
cipally interested powers.
Under President Lyndon Johnson, U.S. pol-
icy shows no signs of abandoning its refusal
to recognize the existence of China. The
1954 Geneva conference could be held with-
out direct U.S. participation, because France
was the Western Power mainly involved.
This time it is the U.S. responsibility, and
Washington's stubborn refusal to deal with
Peiping is one of the major reasons why war
continues and threatens to expand in south-
east Asia, Korea, the Formosa Straits, and
now Vietnam; crisis after crisis, and still the
United States will not face the realities of
power in the Far East. Mr. Johnson has re-
jected out of hand the international appeal
for a new Geneva-style conference.
Yet, as the events of this week have shown,
the only likely alternative to negotiation is
escalating warfare. The Chinese-American
war Mr. Pearson warned of is only part way
up the escalator; at the top is a world holo-
caust. The whole world therefore is vitally
concerned with the immediate future in
Vietnam, and the world has a right to de-
mand more from U.S. leadership than the
present static policy of retaliatory or "deter-
rent" reactions to Vietcong attacks.
The air strikes on North Vietnam bases
may be justified as an interim measure to
stave off complete defeat for the United
States-sponsored South Vietnam Govern-
ment. But only if there is also a real effort
to find a formula for peace.
[From the New York Times]
THE DANGERS IN VIETNAM
The Vietnamese situation has entered a
new stage. The war will not be the same
since the Vietcong attack on Pleiku and the
reprisals against North Vietnam which con-
tinued yesterday. It seems axiomatic of this
type of warfare that it either escalates or
it stops. For the present, it is escalating and
becoming more expensive in lives and more
perilous every day.
Pleiku has once again proved, as Secretary
McNarama said, that the American forces
cannot protect themselves against this type
of "sneak attack." Its sequel served notice
on Hanoi?and indirectly on Peiping and
Moscow?that the United States will retaliate
when Americans are attacked. The whole
affair indictees forcibly that the long-recog-
nized dynamism of the Vietnamese conflict
has risen to a dangerous level.
Secretary McNamara says that the situa-
tion has not reached a crisis; but it has done
so in the sense that the United States is be-
coming less and less able to restrict the con-
flict to minor proportions. The possible
choices of action or inaction are being stead-
ily whittled down. The United States is
gradually approaching a point where it either
goes on to a major engagement involving
North Vietnam and Communist China, or
it actively seeks a diplomatic solution, which
amounts to a disengagement on reasonable
and honorable terms.
President Johnson has in the past denied
that the United States has any intention of
carrying the war to North Vietnam. Yet he
considered it necessary in the past few days
to help the South Vietnamese raid North
Vietnam twice. Since it is not to be expected
that the Vietcong in South Vietnam will
cease their attacks on their tactics, and since
Peiping and Moscow are committed to help
Hanoi, the dangers of the future are only
too obvious.
The Americans working on the Vietnamese
problem in Washington and Saigon must
often feel as if the problems have a night-
marish or fourth dimensional quality. West-
ern ideas, modes of thought and methods do
not function as it seems that they logically
should. Mortars and bombs do speak a uni-
versal language; but they may ultimately
lead to the unthinkable conclusions of a
nuclear war.
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300170001-0
3476 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February 2S
The only sane way out is diplomatic, inter-
national, political, economic?not military.
A solution will not he found by exchanging
harder and harder blows. Surrender is out
of the question and "victory" for either side
is impossible.
Perhaps a new start can be made from
an untried base?that Americans, Viet-
namese, Chinese, and Russians are all sen-
sible human beings who are ready for peace
in southeast Asia, or at least willing to con-
sider it. There would be prices to pay, but
there would be gains as well as losses. Diplo-
macy is surely not yet a lost art or a dead
language.
[From the New York limes]
BLACK DAY IN VIETNAM
The slugging match in Vietnam contin-
ues; the war escalates; the danger grows; the
goal of peace recedes. Just in 1 day?yes-
terday?many Americans were killed when
an enlisted men's barracks was blown up by
Vietcong terrorists, while in the north, in a
pitched battle that began on Monday, Viet-
cong guerrillas wiped out five companies of
South Vietnamese troops. Everybody con-
cerned is braced for Washington's response.
In accordance with the new policy of
reprisals.
There is a frightening "normality" about
the situation. Events are occurring with the
inexorability of a Greek tragedy. President
de Gaulle, who yesterday returned to his
suggestion of another Geneva Conference
and a negotiated settlement, was right in
saying that the war cannot be won no mat-
ter how much air and naval power the
United States commits or what reprisals
China may take. It cannot be won by any
outsider, American or Chinese.
Washington evidently hopes that if North
Vietnam is threatened enough or punished
enough it will agree to a truce, Korean style;
and then the United States will be in a posi-
tion to negotiate peace or a controlled neu-
tralization from a position of strength. The
greatest weakness of this reprisal policy
against North Vietnam is that while it is true
the Vietcong gets orders, advice, some arras
and some men from North Vietnam, the war
is being fought in South Vietnam. That Is
where American lives were lost yesterday and
where American-trained and armed Vietnam-
ese soldiers were defeated.
The Vietcong live and operate in South
Vietnam, using American arms captured
from the Vietnamese. The peasants either
help them, or accept them, or are cowed into
submission by them. The guerrillas, as
Vietminh against the French a few years ago,
or as Vietcong today, have been fighting for
two decades. They are tough, dedicated,
fanatical, well trained. Perhaps they are not
winning, but certainly they are not losing.
Meanwhile, each day that passes gives fur-
ther evidence of the relentless escalation of
the conflict.
This is what gives special point to Presi-
dent de Gaulle's renewed suggestion to recall
the 14-nation Geneva Conference to seek an
"international accord excluding all foreign
intervention" in southeast Asia. The key
factor in the De Gaulle proposal?and the
main stumbling block for the United
States?is that no conference and no settle-
ment is possible in that region without the
participation of Communist China. Whether
we like it or not?and we do not like it?
Communist China is an interested party;
and the United States knows of course that
North Vietnam cannot be bombed as if Com-
munist China did not exist.
There may still be a choice: talk or fight.
If everybody waits too long, the chance to
talk will be gone.
[From the New York Times]
GREATNESS BY RETRALNT
Escalation of the war in Vietnam, such as
took place last week, has led the United
States to the entrance of a one-way street.
If followed to the bitter end, this road could
lead to a major wax involving Communist
China and probably the Soviet Union. But
there is still time to stop.
A great power can demonstrate its great-
new by its restraint. The United States has
the air and naval power to destroy everything
of importance in North Vietnam; but this
country would show itself to be far wiser and
far stronger by refraining from doing so
than by pursuing a policy of repetitive
retaliation, which is at once so seductive and
so dangerous. Despite the administration's
oft-restated desire "to avoid spreading the
conflict," this present policy of reprisals is
inexorably carrying the United States into a
major armed struggle in southeast Asia?
unless a halt is called, and soon.
When President Johnson ordered last Sun-
day's retaliatory strike after the Vietcong
attack on Pleiku, there was understanding
and support for his action. Yet, it was re-
cognized that the two actions?the assault
on a U.S. military installation in
South Vietnam and the American decision to
respond by striking at staging areas in North
Vietnam?vastly increased the perils to
world peace that have always been inherent
in the Vietnamese conflict.
Now each side feels obliged to match a
show of power by the other with an even
greater response?a course that can only in-
vite holocaust. For the United States the
problem is made severer by the impossibility
of striking effectively at the Vietcong with-
out carrying the war into North Vietnam
and thus intensifying the pressure on
Peiping and Moscow to become actively in-
volved.
President Johnson is up against his great-
est foreign policy test. Surely he knows that
the complex problems of Vietnam and south-
east Asia cannot be settled by arms alone.
An infinity of social, political, economic, reli-
gious, tribal, nationalistic, historic and tradi-
tional factors are at work in Vietnam. This
country can best demonstrate its wisdom and
responsibility by keeping its powder dry and
meanwhile trying patience, diplomacy and
negotiation.
History, good intentions and a concatena-
tion of events have led the United States
into a morass where we sink deeper each
day. The Vietnamese conflict should not be
almost exclusively a U.S. burden. The Rus-
sians have good reatons to want peace in
Vietnam. The French want to bring about
an international conference. So does United
Nations Secretary General Thant. The Chi-
nese would probably refuse to attend one or
even to compromise; but nobody will know
unless a conference is tried.
What the United States is now doing in
Vietnam is playing directly into the hands of
Communist China by taking actions that?
however defensive in intent?lead to a stead-
ily escalating, and hence more dangerous,
conflict. This, surely, is the last thing in the
world that the Johnson administration and
the American people want. Therefore some-
thing else should be tried, and this something
has to be negotiation with all parties con-
cerned.
The United States has made its point very
forcefully with bombs during the last week.
Its power is indisputable. /n the light of the
strength this country has shown, it can now
offer to continue the argument over a con-
ference table where its power will be un-
diminished. But the outcome might then
be peace instead of war.
[From the New York Times]
THE PRESIDENT ON VIETNAM
If the United States has a policy in South
Vietnam, its outlines do not emerge with any
clarity from the statement President John-
son appended to his speech before the Na-
tional industrial Conference Board yesterday.
The President reiterates that this coun-
try wants no wider war, yet his statement
surrenders all initiative to the Vietcong and
their external allies. "Our continuing ac-
tions will be those that are justified and
made necessary by the continuing aggression
of others," Mr. Johnson says. He stresses
that the United States seeks no conquest and
that its sole aim is to "join in the defense and
protection of the freedom of a brave people."
All this is admirable as a reaffirmation of
the consistent American position on the
Vietnamese conflict, but it provides no an-
swer to two factors that have emerged with
overwhelming force in recent weeks. One is
that the South Vietnamese, ruled by a suc-
cession of fragile governments under the
domination of bickering warlords, are show-
ing little appetite for doing any fighting in
their own defense or even for helping to
guard our troops against sneak attack. The
second is that the nature of the Vietcong
guerrilla tactics makes it almost impossible
to hit back at the Communist forces without
carrying the attack into North Vietnam and
thus creating the wider war the President
wants to avoid.
Each northward strike enlarges the peril
of active intervention by Communist China
and increases the pressure on Soviet Russia to
abandon the withdrawn position it so plainly
prefers. What is still lacking in the Presi-
dent's formulation is any hint of the circum-
stances under which a negotiated settlement,
of the type proposed by Secretary General
Thant of the United Nations, might be ap-
proached. Without such a move, the poten-
tiality of a vastly expanded war increases
each day.
[From the New York Times]
THE WAR HAWKS
A comparatively small group of Americans,
at this moment predominantly political in
character and predominantly Republican in
politics, is doing its best to multiply the
perils and frustrations of the war in southeast
Asia.
This group ignores the realities of the pres-
ent situation. It ignores the obvious war-
weariness of the people of South Vietnam.
It ignores the steady stream of desertions
from the Vietnamese Army. It ignores the
difficulty of protecting isolated American
bases against the surprise attacks of
guerrillas.
It ignores the possibility of an invasion
of South Vietnam by the very considerable
North Vietnamese Army. It ignores the
problem of how an aerial counterattack
could cope successfully with a massive ground
attack of this character. It ignores the pos-
sibility of Chinese intervention. It ignores
the logistics and belittles the cost in lives
lost, blood spilled and treasure wasted, of
fighting a war on a jungle front 7,000 miles
from the coast of California.
The whole aim of this group is to expand
the Vietnamese war, even if it means draw-
ing in China and perhaps the Soviet Union
as well. By its lights, President Johnson's
declaration that the United States seeks no-
wider war is as much a prescription for
failure as any attempt at a negotiated peace
It is one thing to say, as Secretary McNamara
did in his testimony yesterday, that this
country has "no other alternative than con-
tinuing to support South Vietnam against
the Red guerrilla onslaught." It is quite an-.
other to argue that the road out of the pres-
ent hazardous situation is to invite worlc.
destruction. The American people made it
overwhelmingly clear in the last election that
they do not want to plunge recklessly down
that road.
[From the New York Times]
NEGOTIATE OR ESCALATE
It is time for someone in Washington to
remember John F. Kennedy's words in his
inaugural address: "Let us never negotiate
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/1.5 ? CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3473
continued market access for U.S. farm prod-
ucts." This, in a nutshell, is the U.S. posi-
tion.
Whether the U.S. position will finally pre-
vail depends largely on two things:
First, the extent to which the Common
Market is willing to concede in matters of
agriculture in order to win for its booming
industry a bigger slice of the rich U.S. con-
sumer market. "European industrialists,"
Mr. Ioanes predicts, "will be our most im-
portant ally in arguing for trade liberaliza-
tion."
Second, U.S. success depends, too, on Wash-
ington's determination to withstand pres-
sures from certain segments of American in-
dustry; pressures, that is, to subordinate
farm exports if necessary to accomplish
quick settlement of industrial trade liberali-
zation.
Indeed, a nagging fear that agriculture may
be "sold out" at the bargaining table is the
chief worry of a so far small but audible
group of administration critics. In support
of their concern, they charge that the United
States has already backed down from its
tough-line pledge that agricultural and in-
dustrial trade would be negotiated only as a
single package, not separately. Late last
year, 'U.S. negotiators in Geneva agreed to
temporarily table topics of agricultural trade
and to take up industrial trade differences.
"It's a change in tactics rather than sub-
stance," officials here retort. What's more,
it's added, the U.S. position is the same as
before: No trade agreement will be concluded
that does not include concessions for U.S.
agriculture. "That's definite."
On at least one often-asked question?
Washington's timetable for achieving bar-
gaining table victory?negotiators are both
officially and unofficially mum. "If you have
a deadline and the other fellow doesn't," in-
sists Mr. Ioanes, "you always lose."
Despite the earlier analogy of an inter-
national poker game for high stakes, it's
fervently contended here that if more liberal
trade can be won, then everyone is a winner.
Americap farmers have plenty of reason to
hope soi It's their chips.
VS
HE CRISIS IN VIETNAM
Mr. YOUNG of Ohio. Mr. President,
we read in the Washington Post of Feb-
ruary 24 exactly what we have had rea-
son to expect during the recent weeks.
One of South Vietnam's Buddhist lead-
ers, Thich Tam Chau, told a gathering,
"You cannot win the war through fight-
ing. Killing Vietcong guerrillas was the
same as killing brothers." This, of
course, will probably be followed by state-
ments of other. Buddhist leaders in power
in South Vietnam and then probably
by some of the ambitious generals who
have banished the former strong man,
Gen. Nguyen Khanh, that they seek an
end to "civil war" and "Americans go
home."
Today, Mr. President, the Prime Min-
ister of South Vietnam announced that
his nation should not continue the con-
flict and he sought peace with honor for
South Vietnam. This according to the
7:30 o'clock radio report.
Do we have a duty to send our armed
forces into the jungles to maintain free-
dom for some 8 million people who do not
have the will to preserve freedom for
themselves?
Do we Americans have a mandate from
Almighty God to police the world?
Mr. President, when the conflict was
raging in South Korea and American
lives were being lost, this was derisively
termed "Truman's war" by some per-
.sons. In 1954 we became involved in
South Vietnam. Our Commander in
Chief sent in fighting men of our armed
services. General Eisenhower was Presi-
dent then. You remember early in 1954
Vice President Nixon announced that
President Eisenhower was planning to
send our ground forces into Indochina
and following that after a period of
vacillation a few hundred soldiers were
sent there.
Nixon is still a war hawk. Both he
and former presidential candidate Barry
Goldwater are urging that we bomb
Hanoi. In 1954, following Vice Presi-
dent Nixon's statement which apparently
somewhat vexed the then President,
President Eisenhower then modified his
position somewhat and plans were tem-
porarily postponed to send in some
thousands of soldiers.
In 1954 and the following years under
President Eisenhower an increasing
number of men of our Air Forces and
ground forces went into South Vietnam,
then a part of Indochina. They were
termed military advisers. By 1961 when
President Eisenhower left the White
House we were committed with our
Armed Forces in South Vietnam, a
country where religious controversy then
as now raged between the Catholic and
Buddhist leaders. Many people in South
Vietnam even then were saying "Yankee
go home." That chorus from Saigon has
increased in volume as time went on and
the number of Americans stationed over
there increased. There is just as much
justification for terming the conflict in
South Vietnam "Eisenhower's war" as
there ever was for terming the Korean
war as "Truman's war."
Do not be surprised if a newly formed
government in South Vietnam announces
to the world that Americans should get
out. Either leaders of the government
now being formed or of the next one
which, judging the immediate future by
the past, may be only a few weeks from
now may do so.
It appears that officials of the United
Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and perhaps
also North Vietnam are hinting that ne-
gotiations could be undertaken to end
this civil war. It is my judgment that
our officials in Saigon and in Washington
should be receptive to any negotiations
Initiated to end a conflict where from
1954, when under President Eisenhower
we committed our Armed Forces to
southeast Asia; the lives of 300 Americans
in our Armed Forces have been lost in
this effort to repel Communist aggression
and guerrilla infiltration in what was
Indochina.
In South Vietnam we have observed an
unparalleled and fantastic instability of
governing groups with some eight
changes of government in a mere 16-
week period. This instability and evident
lack of will on the part of the people
of South Vietnam to save themselves
from the aggressors to the north is a
great handicap to the forces of the free
world.
Is it better we retain a professional
general, Maxwell Taylor, as Ambassador
though he must have incurred animosity
of some leaders in South Vietnam during
the months of turmoil with things going
from bad to worse during the time he
represented us as Amabassador? It
would have been natural also for any
Ambassador during such period to have
acquired likes and also dislikes toward
some of the South Vietnamese officials
with whom he had dealt. Would it not
be better that we send in a skilled and
experienced diplomat?one of our great
men?a civilian?whose career has been
marked with successes and who deserv-
edly enjoys the confidence of all Ameri-
cans? A fresh start in that direction
might be advisable. I would suggest Am-
bassador Averell Harriman or Ambassa-
dor Adlai Stevenson or former Senator
Kenneth Keating.
The Founding Fathers pr6vided that in
the United States civilian authority must
always be supreme over military author-
ity. Personally, I lack confidence in a
professional general as ambassador of
the United States in a critical area in this
grim cold war period. Is the decision to
win the war in Vietnam worth the risk
and sacrifice? I believe it is. Unques-
tionably, our administration should make
It crystal clear at this time to the heads
of state throughout the world that we
have committed our forces to save South
Vietnam from Communist aggreSsion.
We will not withdraw until the civil war
raging in South Vietnam is ended and
Vietcong infiltrators and aggressors
abandon their operations. Very definite-
ly we shall continue to repel force with
force. Very definitely we shall destroy
staging areas within North Vietnam
where installations used by Vietcong
forces are located. Very definitely it is
Irresponsible talk to urge that our war-
planes bomb and destroy Hanoi.
Mr. President, we shall continue to ful-
fill our commitments to the Government
of South Vietnam. However, that Gov-
ernment has failed miserably to obtain
the loyalty and support of the South
Vietnamese people. That Government?
if it can be called a government at this
point?is nothing more than a series of
military dictators each grabbing for him-
self what he can before he is overthrown
by a fellow officer. Our Vietnam policy
is almost at a dead end. I believe that
our interests can now be served best by
a political and diplomatic solution rath-
er than by military means which to date
have failed. A reasonable diplomatic
solution to this problem would end a
profitless involvement in an armed con-
flict which has resulted in terrific casual-
ties to the Vietcong and substantial cas-
ualties to armed forces and civilians of
South Vietnam. After 10 years of stead-
ily increasing American aid to South
Vietnam, the Government there is weak-
er than it was before and its ability and
capacity to win the war there must be
doubted. Unfortunately, 300 Americans
have been killed in this conflict and many
more wounded.
We should again state to the heads of
state of the world through our embassies
that as soon as the Communists to the
north agree to withdraw their forces
from South Vietnam and agree to leave
their neighbors to the south alone, and
demonstrate their good faith by their
actions, we will immediately withdraw
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0 '-
3474 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February 25
our forces. Surely an honorable truce
and neutralization of Vietnam is to be
hoped for and it should be achieved at
the conference table. We wish to see an
independent South Vietnam safe from
aggression and free to determine in peace
the kind of government its people wish.
Such a South Vietnam should not be
menaced nor would it menace its neigh-
bors.
Our President has made it clear we
seek no bases and that we shall withdraw
our forces when the Communists leave
their neighbors to the south alone. Let
us face the facts. It is too late now to
argue that President Eisenhower was
wrong in committing our forces in 1954
In the first instance. That is history.
It would be as wrong to term the Vietnam
conflict "Eisenhower's war" as it was un-
fortunate and untruthful to term the
Korean war as "Truman's war." The
free world would gain if there were to be
a conference in Geneva or London or
Hong Kong where the representatives of
the heads of state of North and South
Vietnam, Red China, the Soviet Union,
the United Kingdom, Japan, India, Aus-
tralia, Thailand, Pakistan, France, and
the United States, and representatives of
other nations of Europe and Asia, negoti-
ate fully and freely to neutralize all of
what was once Indochina. The facts are
that by negotiation we have achieved
complete neutralization of Korea and
Austria, Laos has also been neutralized.
The limited nuclear test ban has been
achieved. This treaty has not been vio-
lated by the Soviet Union nor by any
other nation. Now is the time to hope to
add North and South Vietnam to the list
of neutral areas.
It appears that we have demonstrated
our strength in the retaliatory blows we
have struck from our carriers and that
the South Vietnam forces have defended
themselves over the last 10 years and that
now is the time for diplomats and for-
eign affairs officials of the Communist
nations and the leaders of North and
South Vietnam and the nations of the
free world to offer to negotiate.
PROSECUTION OF NAZI WAR
CRIMINALS
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, the West
German cabinet voted yesterday to sup-
port an extension of the May 8 deadline
which now marks the end of the period
of limitations for the prosecution of
Nazi war criminals. This matter will be
acted upon by the Bundestag in a debate
to begin on March 10. I express the
hope that the Bundestag may follow the
cabinet in ratifying this decision.
Normally, we do not consider what is
taking place in the parliament of an-
other government. However, this is
properly a subject cognizable every-
where, including the U.S. Senate, be-
cause it deals with world crimes of the
most heinous character?designated
world crimes by the tribunal at Nurem-
berg and by the action which that tri-
bunal took in the name of legality and
justice throughout the world. Those
words?"legality" and "justice"?are the
key words which were used in the resolu-
tion adopted by the West German cabi-
net. All of us must feel deeply grati-
fied that Chancellor Ludwig Erhard has
led his cabinet into making this con-
structive decision.
Much is at stake?not only bringing to
justice men guilty of the most heinous
crimes, but also upholding the conscience
of the people of Germany in the eyes of
the whole world, and upholding, too, the
image of the Federal Republic of Ger-
many as being a government determined
and empowered by the people to do jus-
tice in its own heart with respect to the
crimes committed by Hitler and his co-
horts in the name of the German people.
When this is done, the responsibility
for action will rest clearly upon East
Germany and the satellite powers of the
Soviet Union, which have made many
allegations that they have evidence of
Nazi criminals not yet prosecuted who
will escape prosecution if the deadline
of the statute of limitations is not ex-
tended. I am confident now that the
deadline will be extended by the will of
the German people. We shall see now
whether the Communist countries will
play politics with elementary justice and
hide from the just punishment of their
crimes thousands of Nazi criminals con-
cerning whom they claim to harbor in-
formation. It seems to me that what is
proposed by the West German cabinet is
the way the matter should be handled.
As one who believes there can be a
Pan-European renascence and a unified
Germany if the path of justice and
righteousness is pursued, I am deeply
gratified that this action has been taken.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed at this point in the
RECORD an article entitled "West Ger-
man Cabinet Supports Extension of
Nazi Crimes Law," written by Philip
Shabecoff, and published in the New
York Times of February 25, 1965.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
WEST GERMAN CABINET SUPPORTS EXTENSION
OF NAZI CRIMES LAW
(By Philip Shabecoff )
BONN, February 24.?The West German
Cabinet voted unanimously today to support
the proposed extension of the statute of
limitations for the prosecution of Nazi war
criminals beyond the May 8 deadline.
A Government statement said that the
decision was based on the fact that new
evidence indicated that criminal acts com-
mitted during World War II would go un-
punished if the 20-year statute were allowed
to expire as scheduled.
Today's vote in effect reverses the decision
last November 5 when the Cabinet declared
that legal obstacles prevented extension of
the statute.
Chancellor Ludwig Erhard said at the time
that he disagreed with that decision but
would go along with his Cabinet.
However, the Government took pains in
today's gingerly worded statement to note
that it had not specifically reversed its pre-
vious decision.
"The Federal Government," the statement
said, "will support the German Bundestag
(lower House of Parliament) in its efforts to
create the possibility of satisfying justice
while maintaining the principles of legality."
In other words, the Federal Government
will not itself make any suggestions to ex-
tend the statute of limitations, but will sup-
port legislation introduced in Parliament
that is designed to do just that.
A Bundestag debate on extension of the
statute is scheduled for March 10.
The cautious tone of the Cabinet state-
ment was a case of political egg walking.
Dr. Ewald Bucher, West Germany's Minister
of Justice, has steadfastly maintained that
the statute could not be legally extended
and has threatened to resign if the Cabinet
did not accept his recommendations.
Dr. Bucher based his opposition to an ex-
tension of the statute on article 103 of the
West German Constitution, which prohibits
retroactive legislation.
However, Parliament can amend the Con-
stitution and probably will do so if it de-
sires to extend the statute.
STEP HELD MORALLY DEFENSIBLE
It has been contended that such an
amendment would weaken the rule of law
in West Germany's young democracy. But
current opinion seems to hold that bypassing
the ex post facto provision in this particular
instance is morally defensible.
Dr. Bucher went along today with a Cabi-
net decision that in effect shifted respon-
sibility for action to Parliament.
Apparently Dr. Bucher felt he could go
along with the Cabinet since it was not spe-
cifically repudiating its previous position and
in so doing rejecting his own recommenda-
tions.
Today's vote actually was to approve a
report on the action taken against Nazi
criminals and to be presented to the Bun-
destag March 1. The Government statement
declared the investigation and prosecution
of Nazi misdeeds was "unique in extent in
all legal history."
The report noted that about 70,000 Ger-
mans had already been sentenced for Nazi
war crimes in West Germany and abroad and
that under systematic investigations not yet
completed 13,000 other prosecutions were un-
derway.
The Government pointed out that it had
appealed to the nations of the world to make
available any information pertaining to Nazi
crimes not yet investigated.
It noted that much additional material,
had come in from Eastern-bloc states and
that officials of East Germany had declared
that they had tone of documents relating to
war crimes that had not yet been sifted
20 years after the war's end.
"The suspicion of propagandistic misuse
(of these materials) is hardly avoidable," the
Government said.
It concluded in its report "that contrary
to the previous assumption, the possibility
cannot be excluded that new punishable acts
will become known after May 8, 1965, which
would necessarily occasion further investi-
gation."
New information aside, informed observers
here believe that the Cabinet decision on the
statute was in large part influenced by a
shift in political sentiment recently.
West German opinion on extending the
statute may have been ambivalent last fall,
but there seems to be wide sentiment for ex-
tension today.
This sentiment appears to have been rein-
forced by the belief that West Germany let
Israel down when it canceled arms ship-
ments to her underpressure from the United
Arab Republic.
E SITUATION IN VIETNAM
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that there be printed
at this point in the RECORD certain edi-
torials and communications which I have
received expressing opposition to a con-
tinuation of the U.S. undeclared war in
Asia.
There being no objection, the editori-
als and communications were ordered to
be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
1965 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3497
of a stable government in South Vietnam and
the withdrawal of 17.S. forces from that
part of the world."
The Secretary General said at a news con-
ference that he had presented "concrete ideas
and propoialf?' to "some of the principal
parties directly involved in the question
of Vietnam," including the United States.
He declined to disclose their responses.
Mr. Thant reiterated his belief that the
prospects for a peaceful settlement would be-
come more and more remote with the pas-
sage of time" but that it was not too late to
make an attempt at "diplomatic and political
methods."
He did not directly criticize the Johnson
administration's refusal to agree to negotia-
tions on Vietnam. He said he had "the great-
est respect for the great American leader,
President Johnson, whose wisdom, modera-
tion and sensitivity to world public opinion
are well known."
GREAT AMERICAN PEOPLE
At the same time, Mr. Thant declared:
"I am sure that the great American people,
if only they know the true facts and the
background to the developments in South
Vietnam, will agree with me that further
bloodshed is unnecessary.
"The political and diplomatic method of
discussions and negotiations alone can
create conditions which will enable the
United States to withdraw gracefully from
that part of the world. As you know, in
times of war and of hostilities the first cas-
ualty is truth."
A U.S. spokesman declined to comment on
Mr. Thant's statement.
The Secretary General was informed after
his news conference that the Soviet Union
and France had decided to take preliminary
action toward a conference on Vietnam. He
commented that this was "not unexpected."
PLAN DEALS WITH TECHNIQUE
Reliable sources said that Mr. Thant's pro_
posals dealt with the technique of negotiat-
ing rather than the substance of a settle-
ment. According to these sources, Mr.
Thant has suggested a series of informal
talks, with himself or some other third
party as an intermediary, between the prin-
cipal parties, including the United States,
Communist China, North and South Viet-
nam, France, the Soviet Union, and Britain.
The Secretary General, it was understood,
envisions a series of interlinked "dialogs"
as a preliminary to negotiations at a formal
conference.
Instead of direct talks between the United
States and China, for example, the inter-
mediary would talk with a U.S. representa-
tive, then discuss the issues in dispute with
a Chinese representative, and so on.
The Secretary General did not explain
what "facts" regarding Vietnam were not
known by the American people.
A United Nations source said Mr. Thant
felt that Americans were not adequately in-
formed about two "facts" the Secretary Gen-
eral considers important: that military
action will not resolve the situation and that
Communist China, which the United States
has refused to recognize is a factor.
Citing the example of his native Burma,
which was confronted with a widespread
Communist insurrection after independence
in 1946, Mr. Thant criticized the U.S. policy
of supplying military advisers and equipment
to South Vietnam for the suppression of the
Vietcong guerrillas.
The Secretary General, who had cabinet
status from 1948 until he became Burmese
representative at the United Nations in 1957,
said that "the Burmese Government dealt
with this internal problem by its own means,
without asking for any outside military as-
sistance or outside military arms or outside
military advisers?or whatever you call them.
"The Burmese Communist Party is still
underground after 17 years and still illegal,"
he added, "but let me tell you: There has not
been a single instance of outside help to
the Burmese Communists inside Burma in
the last 17 years. And Burma has main-
tained and still maintains the friendliest re-
lations with all its neighbors?with Thai-
land, with Laos, with mainland China, with
India, and with Pakistan."
NOT ONE AMERICAN LIM
Pointing out that Burma has a 1,000-mile
frontier with Communist China, the Secre-
tary General said that if she had requested
outside assistance to suppress insurrection,
one of two things would have happened:
"Either the country would be divided into
two parts or the whole country would have
become Communist long ago.
"Not one American life has been lost in
Burma," Mr. Thant said. "Not one American
dollar has been spent in Burma in the last 17
years. We should ask the great question:
Why?"
The Secretary General suggested last Fri-
day that the 1954 Geneva Conference on
Indochina be reconvened to take up the Viet-
nam question, but this is opposed by the
State Department.
Asked if he was still in favor of such a
move, he replied that "if there are still dif-
ficulties on the part of some of the large
powers as regards the immediate convening
of a Geneva-type conference, it could be
worth while exploring the possibilities of in-
formal, private, and confidential dialogs
between some of the parties directly in-
volved, as a preliminary step toward the con-
vening of a more formal conference."
He remarked that he had never advocated
the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from
South Vietnam, then said:
"But I feel that once the diplomatic and
political methods have been tried, and if
there is any perceptible improvement in the
situation, if an agreed formula is at hand,
If some sort of stability can be restored in
the country, then at that time, of course, the
United States can withdraw its troops with
dignity."
CONTROL OF OIL ?IMPORTS
Mr. MORTON. Mr. President, I wish
to address this body for a few minutes on
a subject of great interest to both the
coal producers and the oil producers in
my State, and of vital concern to all the
United States?the question of the integ-
rity of the Johnson administration's pro-
gram controlling imports of oil into this
country.
Recent pronouncements by the Secre-
tary of the Interior, Stewart Udall, give
rise to suspicion that the oil imports con-
trol program?already riddled by politi-
cally motivated loopholes?is about to be
manipulated anew.
I refer to Mr. Udall's announcement of
February 11, which he evidently timed
very nicely, so as to coincide with Con-
gress recent absence from Washington.
At a press conference on that day, he
revealed plans to juggle the U.S. import
program, so as to allow an additional
50,000 barrels a day of petroleum feed-
stock from the Caribbean to enter via
Puerto Rico.
Mr. TJdall attempts to justify this latest
of a series of special decisions under the
oil-import program by saying that it
would benefit the economy of Puerto
Rico. I have no doubt that it would help
Puerto Rico's self-sufficiency, and this
Is a goal all of us would favor. Thanks
to the special import quota Mr. Udall has
promised, one American oil company is
planning to invest $600 million in a
sprawling petrochemical complex on that
beautiful island.
As I suggested, I am all for Puerto
Rico's boosting her economy by all ap-
propriate means. We must admire and
salute the Puerto Rican people on the
success of their Operation Bootstrap. I
wish them the very best.
The point I wish to make, however, is
that while we may applaud the benefits
to Puerto Rico from Mr. Udall's efforts,
we had better make extra sure that in
the bargain, he does not destroy the in-
tegrity of a program affecting the energy
market and, indeed, the economic bal-
ance of the entire United States.
I pose no idle conjecture. This single
project proposes dumping from 15,000 to
25,000 barrels a day of gasoline into the
already chaotic east coast U.S. gasoline
market. And beyond the immediate
threat of dumping products and byprod-
ucts in the U.S. market is the very real
prospect that this will create new pres-
sures for additional patchworks in what
is already a crazy quilt of special deals.
Right now, for example, I understand
that the Interior Department has under
consideration some special import ar-
rangements for a duty-free petrochemi-
cal complex in the New Orleans area.
According to press reports on his re-
cent news conference, Mr. Udall called
his Puerto Rico deal "inviting in terms
of hemisphere politics." That is a nice
choice of words; but his remarks would
have been just as pertinent without the
word "hemisphere."
From the start, politics seems to have
been the yardstick of this program. One
has only to leaf through back copies of
oil industry publications to discover all
sorts of examples.
Here one finds an account of probably
the largest existing loophole; that is,
until Mr. Udall's Puerto Rico proposal.
This is the so-called northern tier sit-
uation.
An article in the Oil Daily for Novem-
ber 26, 1962, tells about two oil companies
which are, to this day, receiving special
treatment, totaling well over 15,000 bar-
rels a day.
Under the Trade Expansion Act, Presi-
dent Johnson must give his blessing to
any substantial changes in the oil-import
program. Therefore, before a Presiden-
tial proclamation seals his Puerto Rican
deal, I suggest that Mr. Udall be asked
to come up with some convincing answers
to a number of questions:
First. If the White House is planning
to issue a new proclamation on oil im-
ports, what reassurance can Mr. Udall
give us concerning continuing restriction
of residual oil imports into the United
States?
Second. In view of the fact that the
Johnson administration has asked Amer-
ican corporations to reduce by 15 to 20
percent their net flow of dollars out of
this country, will this new increment of
foreign imports through Puerto Rico help
or aggravate the balance-of-payments
problem and the gold-flow position?
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3498 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE February4.5
Third. What specific products are to
be produced, and in what quantities, by
the proposed Puerto Rican chemical
plants?
Fourth. Where will the products pro-
duced in this new complex be marketed?
Fifth. What quantities of what specific
products will be dumped in the U.S.
market?
Sixth. What is the specific position in
the t7.8. market?shortage or depressed
surplus situation--of each product to be
produced in the Puerto Rico complex?
Seventh. Will anything be done, as a
counter to the Puerto Rican project, to
plug existing loopholes, such as the
northern tier situation?
Eighth. How does Mr. Udall propose
to arrange this Puerto Rican deal, "con-
sistent with the basic objectives of the
mandatory oil import control program,"
as stated in his press release of Febru-
ary 11, 1965?
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed at this point in the RECORD a COPY
a Mr. Udall's February 11 press release
and several pertinent news accounts.
There being no objection, the release
and the articles were ordered to be
printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[From the U.S. Department of the InteriOr.
Feb. 11, 1965]
Dscisiour ANNOUNCED To ESTABLISH PETRO-
CHEMICAL INDUSTRY IN PUERTO Rico
Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall
today announced his decision to take action
under the oil import control program to
encourage a huge petrochemical complex to
be established in Puero Rico.
Secretary Udall has determined that the
establishment of a petrochemical industry
on the island deriving its feedstocks from
the Caribbean would not be inconsistent with
the objectives of the oil import program.
This determination was based on a careful
study in the Department and on an exami-
nation of the record of a hearing on the mat-
ter of a proposal for the establishment of a
petrochemical complex conducted by the Oil
Import Administration on July 31, 1964.
Secretary Udall made the announcement
in the presence of Commonwealth Governor
Roberto Sanchez Vilella following a dis-
cussion of the basic economic situation in
Puerto Rico.
filecretary Udall said that economic prog-
ram in Puerto Rico has been remarkable as
a result of Operation Bootstrap conducted
by the government of the Commonwealth.
It is evident, however, that unless there is a
fundamental shift in the nature of the eco-
nomic development of Puerto Rico to the
establishment of basic industries that are
capable of affording greatly increased oppor-
tunities for stable employment on the
island, the Commonwealth will face serious
econOnaic difficulties and mounting unem-
ployment in the relatively near future.
In recognition of the difficulties confront-
ing the island, Secretary Udall pointed out,
officials of the Conunonwealth have con-
cluded, after extensive planning and re-
search, that one of the most attractive possi-
bilities from the standpoint of potential
employment would be the establishment in
Puerto Rico of the nucleus of a petrochemi-
cal industry. The existence of such a
nucleus would make feasible the establish-
ment of a broad range of satellite operations
capable of utilizing a large labor force in the
manufacture of products, Including con-
sumer goods, from petrochemicals.
Today's announcement clears the way for
the initiation of active negotiations lead-
ing to the establishment of a petrochemical
nucleus.
In carrying out the decision Secretary
Udall indicated initial consideration would
be given by Department officials to a highly
promising proposal by the Phillips Petro-
leum Co.
Phillips has made a concrete offer to the
Commonweath government and to the De-
partment of the Interior for the establish-
ment of a petrochemical core facility. The
Oil Import Administration has given careful
consideration to this offer and last July con-
ducted a public hearing on the matter. In
light of the importance of developing basic
industry in Puerto Rico, the Department will
enter final negotiations with Phillips ,to as-
certain whether a plan can be developed
which will insure the building of a major
petrochemical complex that will involve
maximum economic benefits and maximum
employment opportunities for Puerto Rico.
In conducting these negotiations it was in-
dicated that Interior intended to work close-
ly with, and look for general guidance to,
the Governor of Puerto Rico in making any
final decisions concerning the Phillips Petro-
leum proposal.
If satisfactory arrangements can be made,
it would be the Department's intention to
allow petroleum import allocations to the
successful applicant sufficient" to provide
feedstocks for the proposed complex. Any
arrangements made, in addition to provid-
ing a stimulus to the Puerto Rican economy,
would be consistent with the basic objec-
tives of the mandatory oil import control
program.
[From the Oil and Gas Journal, Feb. 22,
1965]
WATCHING WASHINGTON: WILL PRODUCT IM-
PORTS FROM PUERTO Rico BE RESTRICTED?
(By Gene T. Kinney)
Pressure is being revived to place Puerto
Rico under a quota system to control im-
ports from the Commonwealth to the U.S.
east coast.
It arises from Interior Secretary Stewart
L. Udall's approval of Phillips Petroleum
Co.'s plans to build a petrochemical plant
there and ship byproduct gasoline to the
United States.
Udall has approved in principle the quota
of 50,000 barrels a day In unfinished oils for
the plant, as well as the shipment of gaso-
line to the United States. He is negotiating
with Phillips to minimize the gasoline vol-
ume, which the company has estimated
would range up to 24,800 barrels a day.
The Interior Secretary is assuring the do-
mestic industry that the gasoline imports
won't boost the U.S. total. They are to be
accommodated somehow without raising
nonresidual imports into district 1-4 above
the 12.2 percent ratio to domestic produc-
tion.
Just how it will be worked out has not
been decided, Udall indicates. Anything he
does will be an exception to present regula-
tions which will have to be changed accord-
ingly.
Will other importers have to move over to
make room for Phillips' increase? Will Phil-
lips have to use any of its 21,100-barrels-a-
day existing quota for this purpose?
The Independent Petroleum Association of
America is pressing Udall for a specific an-
swer. So is the Texas Independent Producers
& Royalty Owners Association. TIPRO raises
again the issue of foreign-source products
which enter the United States from Puerto
Rico outside the mandatory controls pro-
gram.
Udall's assurances of holding the line on
total imports are placating neither domestic
producers nor refiners. They complain of
circumvention of the program and unfair
competition from a significant increase in
foreign products in an already oversupplied
east coast market.
When mandatory controls were imposed in
1959, regulations were drawn to freeze light
products shipments from Puerto Rico to the
mainland at 1958 levels. This was done by
the indirect method of controlling crude al-
locations.
The two Puerto Rican refiners are allowed
to import enough crude to meet local and
export demand, and to continue the 33,000
barrels a day of light products shipments to
the United States that were being made when
controls were imposed.
If the full Phillips plant output were added
to this, gasoline and distillate imports from
the island would almost double.
This arrangement, TIPRO charges, rewards
the Puerto Rican economy and importing
companies at the expense of domestic pro-
ducers.
U.S. refiners maintain that the deal vio-
lates the arrangement made in lieu of a pro-
posed quota system for products from Puerto
Rico. It therefore again raises the question
of restricting Puerto Rican shipments which
the Commonwealth successfully resisted 6
years ago.
Some sources suggest a quota system on
imports from Puerto Rico as a substitute for
controls on Imports into the island.
While its legal status would be uncer-
tain, advocates of the plan say shifting the
point of control would solve two problems.
It would open up the island to competing
refiners and petrochemical companies to
serve local and foreign markets from plants
to be built there. At the same time, it would
close what many consider to be a loophole
in the imports program.
? [From the Oil Daily, Feb. 22, 1965]
UDALL ASSURES IPAA ON IMPORTS FROM
Poinrro Rico
Wasmitorox.?Interior Secretary Udall has
assured the Independent Petroleum Associa-
tion of America that any oil product ship-
ments from Puerto Rico to the U.S. main-
land, resulting from the proposed petro-
chemical complex to be built by Phillips
Petroleum Co. will not result in any "net In-
crease" in imports to the United States under
import controls set by the Government.
' Minor Jameson, Jr., executive vice presi-
dent of the IPAA, said that "the intent is
clear?any increase in shipments from Puerto
Rico to the United States will be deducted
from the controlled import level set by the
Interior Department, either products or
crude oil. We oppose any product imports,
but if these are continued then it would seem
any shipments by Phillips from Puerto Rico
would force other importers to `move over,'"
Interior Secretary Udall wrote H. A. True,
Jr., IPAA president, that if "establishment
of such a complex results in increased ship-
ments of gasoline or other petroleum prod-
ucts into the United States, we can assure
you that it would be our intention to seek
adjustments of the program to insure that
net receipts in the United States of petro-
leum products from foreign areas would not
be increased as a result of such shipments."
[From the 011 Daily, Feb. 17, 1965]
INTERIOR DEPARTMENT SFRNS To CLARIFY
POINT IN PHILLIPS COMPLEX OK
WasimicioN.?Top officials at the Interior
Department are now trying to clarify one
point Interior Secretary Udall believes may
not have received enough emphasis in re-
ports dealing with his tentative approval of
the Phillips Petroleum Co. plans to build a
massive petrochemical complex in Puerto
Rico.
They said that Udall wants to make it
clear that if the Government permits Philips
to import byproduct gasoline from Puerto
Rico to the east coast mainland, this im-
port will be covered in the level of imports
which is set to control the flow of crude
unfinished oils and finished products into
districts I-IV
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10115: CIA-RDP671300446R000300170001-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 3495
said in a speech that bar associations
throughout the country and other special
interest groups had "declared open season
on the press."
A CHANGE IN SCOPE
An analysis of the press coverage of last
week's biggest arrest story?the alleged plot
by four conspirators to dynamite the Statue
of Liberty and other national monuments?
shows that the proposed codes would dras-
tically change the present scope of coverage,
if they are ever enforced.
Under the New Jersey Supreme Court code
and the proposed Pennsylvania code, two vital
aspects of the dynamite story could not have
been released to the press.
One was the long statement by Police Com-
missioner Michael J. Murphy, quoting alleged
admissions by the plotters to the police un-
dercover man who exposed the plot. The
statements included colorful details of how
the defendants allegedly hoped to blow the
arm and the head off the Statue of Liberty,
and also the explanation that they were mo-
tivated by a desire "to dramatize the plight
of the Negro."
The codes would also have prohibited the
disclosure by the police of prior arresth of
three of the alleged conspirators.
If the arrests had occurred in States where
such codes were in effect, the police officers
could have told only the details of the arrests,
and the identity and photographs of the ad-
dused, their residences descriptions and fam-
ily status.
However, the fact that the dynamite story
was reported in full in the New Jersey news-
papers illustrated the difficulty of limiting
press coverage under American law.
The U.S. Supreme Court held in 1941 that a
judge cannot punish a journalist for con-
tempt for commenting about a pending trial
unless there is a "clear and present danger"
of obstructing justice.
This is in sharp contrast to the British
practice, where judges impose harsh fines
and prison sentences on journalists who print
details about accused persons prior to their
trials.
But even if the dynamite suspects had been
arrested in New Jersey, the judges could not
have enforced their rules against the police
officials, since their code says such violations
should be punished by superior officers.
Thus the court-imposed bans can be en-
forced only against lawyers subject to the
judges' discipline, and even this control is
subject to "leaks."
In recent years the courts have demon-
strated a growing tendency to declare mis-
trials when they feel the news media has pre-
judiced the public against a defendant.
Dr. Sam Sheppard was released from Ohio
State penitentiary, after serving 10 years of a
life term for the murder of his wife, in part
because a Federal district judge felt his case
had been prejudiced by unfair newspaper
publicity.
Mistrials have been declared in recent
months in Nevada and Rhode Island because
the trial judges felt the defendant's chances
for a fair trial had been prejudiced by news-
paper publicity.
EDITOR IS CRITICAL
Police officers have criticized the proposed
press bans on the grounds that the public
should be informed when a dangerous crim-
inal who has been terrorizing a community
has finally been caught.
Felix R. McKnight, executive vice president
and editor of the Dallas Times Herald, re-
cently said in a speech to the Oklahoma Press
Association: ,
"More and more protective measures are
asked for the accused criminal, and fewer
and fewer freedoms for the press to publicly
unmask these degenerates who rob, rape,
murder, and intimidate the citizens of this
Country."
No. 37-6
Many representatives of the communica-
tions industry have said there is a real need
to protect the rights of defendants, and in
Massachusetts and Oregon the press and bar
have adopted joint guides for their relation-
ship.
On the national level the American News-
paper Publishers Association organized a
Committee on Free Press and Fair Trial last
week, the Associated Press Managing Edi-
tors Association has a committee working on
the problem, and the American Society of
Newspaper Editors is urging all branches of
the news media to study the matter.
The American Bar Association has a paral-
lel committee working on a 3-year study un-
der the chairmanship of Justice Paul C.
Reardon of the Supreme Judicial Court of
Massachusetts.
THE PRESIDENT NEEDS OUR SUP-
PORT AS VIETNAM POLICY UN-
FOLDS
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. President, Mc-
George Bundy recently said, "Wars al-
ways end in negotiation."
No doubt the present war in Vietnam
will also end in this way. Already, pre-
liminary probings have been undertaken
by allies, neutrals, and trusted third par-
ties. Once again the Secretary General
of the United Nations is demonstrating
his skill and his great usefulness by his
responsible services as a reliable go-
between.
I am not dismayed by this turn of
events, Mr. President; I welcome it. I
welcome negotiations, not because I be-
lieve the United States should or could
pull out from its commitment in South
Vietnam, but because I believe this com-
mitment lacks purpose, sense, and direc-
tion unless we are willing to work on all
fronts, diplomatic as well as military, in
our efforts to stabilize the area. "War
is but a political instrument," said Von
Clausewitz, and Churchill added, "We
arm to parley."
We arm and we war for nothing if we
refuse to parley. Most certainly this is
true in southeast Asia, where our unques-
tioned superiority in the air and on the
sea makes it impossible for other nations
to ignore the might of our commitment,
while at the same time Red China's
strength on the ground and her geo-
graphical proximity make her inevitably
a part of any equation for the stabiliza-
tion of southeast Asia.
I do not fear our parley on the settle-
ment of the war in Vietnam. In recent
weeks, we have more than demonstrated
our determination and our power to in-
sure that South Vietnam will not be en-
gulfed by her neighbor to the north. We
have made clear to all concerned that we
have the capability and, if need be, the
will to level the north, to preserve the
integrity of the south. We shall not be
speaking from weakness when we go to
the conference table. It will be no
Munich, no appeasement, po surrender.
I..ast, and most important, I have no
fear of parley, because we have, in the
person of our President, one as skilled as
any in recent history in the power of per-
suasion and the art of negotiation. His
surpassing talents in understanding men,
their motivation, and their feelings will
serve us well as the United States under-
takes discussions at whatever level.
Our Nation would go to the conference
table with a strong hand and a skilled
player.
Mr. President, of course, we cannot
know now just what is underway in in-
ternational channels. We do know that
the British, the French, the Indians, the
Russians, and the Secretary General are
participating in a search for a mutually
acceptable basis from which negotiations
might proceed. We do know that Ho Chi
Minh has repeatedly sought such nego-
tiations. And we do know that the Presi-
dent has informed our allies that the
United States has no stated objections to
their interest and that "we have natural-
ly given them a full account of the situ-
ation and our views." Well and good,
Mr. President; well and good.
I believe it is important for Senators
to give the President the support he needs
as these delicate and critical events un-
fold. He must have the flexibility and
the freedom of action he needs at this
juncture?a flexibility and a freedom
which our confidence and our support
can supply.
I ask unanimous support that three
articles dealing with these matters be
made a part of the Recoil]) at this point.
The first, by Drew Middleton, is from
the New York Times; the second, by
Murray Marder, is from the Washington
Post; and the third, by Thomas Hamil-
ton, is also Prom the New York Times.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the New York Times]
HANOI SAID TO ASK FRANCE TO PRESS UNITED
STATES TO NEGOTIATE?HO CHI MINH IS Er.-
PORTED EAGER FOR GENEVA TALKS ON VIET-
NAM SETTLEMENT?DE GAULLE EFFORT
SEEN?MEDIATION ROLE SUGGESTED?WASH-
INGTON REJECTS IDEA OF NEW CONFERENCE
Now
(By Drew Middleton)
PARIS, February 22?North Vietnam re-
cently urged France to intensify her efforts
for a negotiated settlement of the war in
South Vietnam, a reliable French source said
today.
The appeal was made during the present
crisis and was related to President de Gaulle's
last call, on February 10, for the reconvening
of the Geneva Conference to negotiate a
peace, the source said.
He did not link the North Vietnamese move
directly to the U.S. air strikes on targets in
North Vietnam. Inquiries tonight failed to
elicit either confirmation or denial of the
connection.
He emphasized, however, that the govern-
ment of Ho Chi Minh had proposed that, in
view of France's known support of a nego-
tiated peace, General De Gaulle's govern-
ment take a more active role in calling a
conference.
SUPPORT FOR MOVE HINTED
The French have interpreted this sugges-
tion as a hint that North Vietnam would
support France if she proposed a date for the
reconvening of the Conference and would
attend the meeting.
(In Washington, officials said that they
had refused to give the French a mandate
as mediators and that they were not inter-
ested now in reconvening the Conference.)
The North Vietnamese have used the
French mission in Hanoi, headed by Jacques
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3496 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
de Buzon, for overtures to the United States
before the one disclosed today.
Diplomatic sources have reported For-
eign Minister Maurice Couve de Murville
as having said, as early as last December, that
President Ho Chi Minh had told France that
he wanted to discuss the basis for an ac-
commodation with the United States either
directly and privately or through a third
party, presumably France.
An even earlier indication of President Ho
Chi Minh's desire to negotiate developed at
the first meeting between President Johnson
and U Thant, Secretary General of the United
Nations, after the assassination of President
Kennedy.
At that encounter, according to diplomatic
sources, Mr. Thant gave Mr. Johnson a mes-
sage from the North Vietnamese President
suggesting talks on a settlement.
The French source who disclosed the lat-
est approach said Prance had told President
Ho Chi Minh she did not wiih to do any-
thing to embarrass the United States at this
critical juncture.
The French Government, allied diplomats
said, appeared to be playing a rather involved
role in the crisis.
The French source said the Government
believed China and North Vietnam would
be responsive to proposals for a conference
that would discuss the future of southeast
Asia and of the United Nations.
Allied diplomats here are convinced that
General de Gaulle's government is trying to
elbow its way into a central position as me-
diator between the United States and the
two Asian powers.
This French effort is being made despite
the continuing opposition of the administra-
tion in Washington to either a conference or
negotiations carried out directly or through
a third power.
France's insistence that China participate
in a negotiated settlement on the future of
southeast Asia has developed some new
aspects.
According to this source, China would
probably accept and France would be ame-
nable to a conference that discussed both
southeast Asia and the future organization
of the United Nations.
General de Gaulle proposed a meeting of
the major powers, including China, on the
future of the United Nations on February 4.
Six days later the French Cabinet renewed its
appeal for a meeting of the Geneva Confer-
ence as the forum for a negotiated settlement
in South Vietnam,
PIMPING CONCESSION Emil
The French apparently are convinced that,
despite Chinese demands that the United
States withdraw from southeast Asia as a
condition for a meeting. Peiping would ac-
cept a conference with American troops still
in South Vietnam.
The Chinese, however, have not offered
any warm, public diplomatic support for
French initiatives on a conference.
The source's estimate of the course of
events in southeast Asia after a negotiated
settlement apparently reflects President d.e
Gaulle's long-term thinking.
It is taken for granted here that the United
States would leave South Vietnam and Laos
as a consequence of any settlement and that
this would leave France the dominant
Western Power in the area because of eco-
nomic and cultural ties left over from the
colonial era.
This, however, would be a transitory period.
The French expect the advent of "revolu-
tionary authoritarian socialism" throughout
southeast Asia, the source said.
The impression given by this source was
that the French want to expand their role
as Mediator in the southeast Asia crisis.
Mr. Couve de Murville, they expect, will trans-
mit the views of President Johnson and
Secretary of State Rusk to the Chinese Am-
bassador here on his return from the United
States.
U.S. BARS A MANDATE
WASHINGTON, February 22.?In his talks
here this week with President Johnson and
other officials, Foreign Minister Couve de
Murville said the French Government had
reason to believe that North Vietnam and
Communist China would agree to negotia-
tions called without conditions.
French officials did not disclose the basis of
this belief and U.S. officials said they had not
been told of any specific Communist over-
tures. They said they had refused to give
the French a mandate as mediators in the
Vietnam situation arid were not interested at
this time in a return to the conference table.
From the Washington Post]
SMELL ADHERES TO /TS RIGHT To HIT BACK
(By Murrey Marder)
Confirmation came yesterday that the
United States wants a door kept open for
possible negotiations on the Vietnamese
crisis, without relinquishing the American
option to strike again at North Vietnam.
British Prime Minister Harold Wilson said
his nation now is "actively engaged in diplo-
matic consultations of a confidential nature,"
to seek a basis for "peaceful settlement" of
the Vietnamese conflict. The State Depart-
ment confirmed disciissions with Britain on
Vietnam, but avoided characterizing their
purpose. Britain in fact is engaged in prob-
ing talks with the Soviet Union.
In Paris, Soviet Ambassador Sergei Vino-
gradov had a 20-minute meeting with Presi-
dent De Gaulle. A French official said at a
diplomatic reception afterward: "The Soviet
Union wants to put us in her game in the
preparation of a possible conference on Viet-
nam."
These events came against a background
of other diplomatic reports which, cumu-
latively, raised speculation that the crisis
now may be clearly headed toward negotia-
tions.
But informed sources here hold this is
an ironic case in which there is considerably
less diplomatic motion below the surface
than there appears to be from the seeming
activity on the surface. Even the most ne-
gotiation-minded sources agree that there is
nothing yet in sight that begins to form a
basis for negotiations.
Britain, it was earned, is conducting more
talks with the Soviet Union in Moscow to
determine if the Russian would be inter-
ested in reviving the British-Soviet cochair-
manship of the 1954 Geneva Conference on
Indochina, North and South Vietnam, Laos,
and Cambodia.
At present the Soviet Union acknowledges
that it has a cochairman role only for Laos,
which was the special subject of a 1961-62
conference designed to reinforce that na-
tion's neutrality.
DOUBTS ON SOVIET COURSE
If the Soviet Union were now to indicate
interest in asserting a cochairmanship role
for all former French Indochina, that would
indicate a willingness to serve in some medi-
ating capacity in the Vietnamese crisis.
Even if the Soviet Union demonstrates in-
terest in such a course, that would be several
steps removed from any actual negotiation.
Some diplomatic sources are especially
doubtful that the Soviet Union wants to
make such a decision now, because of the
international Communist conference sched-
uled in Moscow for Monday.
That meeting originally was called to pre-
pare for a Communist world conference,
which many thought might bring a show-
down in the world ideological rivalry between
Russia and Communist China. But the Viet-
namese conflict has tended to create some
February-45
greater degree of Sino-Soviet common inter-
est. It is for this reason that the Soviets
may be especially reluctant now to be cast
In any mediating role over Vietnam.
The United States will get a direct op-
portunity today to take its own soundings
with Communist China on the Vietnamese
crisis.
John M. Cabot, U.S. Ambassador to Poland,
Is due to meet in Warsaw with Chinese
Communist Ambassador Wang Kuo-chuan.
While the United States and Communist
China do not have official diplomatic rela-
tions, the Warsaw talks will be the 126th
meeting that the two nations have held in-
termittently for diplomatic contacts since the
collapse of French power in Indochina in
1954.
Since the United States and South Viet-
namese retaliatory air strikes against North
Vietnam, Red China has warned the United
States that it is risking a repetition in Viet-
nam of the Chinese military intercession in
the Korean war. China publicly has been
goading the Soviet Union to hold a firm line
in support of North Vietnam.
U.S. STATEMENT
American officials again avoided any sub-
stantive comment on either the Vietnam
crisis or the diplomatic maneuvers. All that
was said here in response to questions about
Prime Minister Wilson's remarks in the
House of Commons was the following cryptic
statement by State Department Press Officer
Robert J. McCloskey:
"The British and other governments have
been in touch with us with respect to our
attitude on South Vietnam, and we have nat-
urally given them a full account of the situ-
ation and our views."
That phrasing officially enabled the United
States to continue avoiding any public hint
of interest in possible negotiations on the
Vietnam crisis. The Johnson administration
is continuing its policy of publicly avoiding
that issue entirely, so that it can, if it deems
it necessary, repeat its efforts to apply pres-
sure on North Vietnam by air strikes or other
retaliatory measures.
The carefully drawn statements yesterday
in London and Washington allowed each
nation to serve its own interests. The
British statement enabled Wilson to create
the impression that a good deal was under -
way in secret confidential talks, particularly
to soothe the leftwing of his British Labor
Party. The United States, in turn, sought
to create the impression that 24 was holding
itself at arm's length from British dipla -
matic probing of the Soviets.
Reports from Paris during the previous
2 days, stating that North Vietnam recently
urged France to settle the crisis, were
strongly denied again here by several sources,
including French diplomatic sources. French
Foreign Minister Maurice Couve de Murville,
in urging negotiations in his talks here last
week, did not contend that North Vietnam
was soliciting them., all sources here agreed
SOVIET VERSION GIVEN ?
After Soviet Ambassador Vinogradov's call
on President de Gaulle yesterday, Soviet
sources in Paris were quoted as saying that
he left a memorandum summarizing what
he told De Gaulle. The sources said the
message "underlined the gravity of the pres-
ent situation" in Vietnam, "especially the
American bombing of North Vietnam."
[From the New York Times]
THANT ASKS VIETNAM TALKS LEADING TO
U.S. PULLOUT?U/1. CHIEF REPORTS HE HAS
OFFERED SOME PROPOSALS?SAYS THAT 11.
AMERICANS HAD FACTS THEY WOULD BACK
Him
(By Thomas J. Hamilton)
UNITED NaTrons, N.Y., February 24.?The
Secretary General, U Thant, advocated today
informal negotiations for the establishment
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
United States
of America
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 CkA-RDP671300446R000300170001-0
Congressional Record
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89t1 CONGRESS FIRST SESSION
Vol. 111
WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1965
No. 37
The Senate met at 12 o'clock merid-
ian, and was called to order by the
Acting President pro tempore (Mr. MET-
CALF) .
The Chaplain, Rev. Frederick Brown
Harris, D.D., offered the following
prayer:
0 God, very great, yet very near?
nearer than breathing, nearer than
hands or feet: Wherever goodness is, or
truth or beauty, there Thou art.
We thank Thee for human love, which
at its purest and best bears witness to
Thee, and evermore keeps faith and
hope alive in the world.
With all our Imperfections and fallible
judgments, grant unto us a compassion
for others, whatever their need?a sym-
pathy which understands and pities and
forgives.
Undergird us, we pray, with the vision
splendid of eternal values which have
supported the valiant who were seeking
ends too great to be reached in their own
lifetimes.
In a conf used world where we see the
dreadful penalties of selfish human
separations, dedicate us anew as we
strive to serve this anguished genera-
tion, as builders of bridges across all the
dividing gulfs which mar and rend this
sadly severed earth.
We ask it in the dear Redeemer's
name. Amen.
THE JOURNAL
On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and by
unanimous consent, the reading of the
Journal of the proceedings of Wednes-
day, February 24, 1965, was dispensed
with.
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages in writing from the President
of the United States submitting nomina-
tions were communicated to the Senate
by Mr. Jones, one of his secretaries.
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session,
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore laid before the Senate messages from
the President of the United States sub-
mitting sundry nominations, which were
Senate
referred to the Committee on Armed
Services.
(For nominations this day received,
see the end of Senate proceedings.)
LIMITATION OF STATEMENTS DUR-
ING MORNING HOUR
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that statements
made during the morning hour be limited
to 3 minutes.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore. Without objection, it is so ordered.
COMM:al LE MEETINGS DURING
SENATE SESSION
Upon request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and
by unanimous consent, the Subcommittee
on Immigration and Naturalization of
the Judiciary Committee and the Sub-
committee on Public Lands of the Com-
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs
were authorized to meet during the ses-
sion of the Senate today.
CORRECTION OF THE RECORD
Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President,
through an inadvertent reporting error
Wednesday, February 24, during the col-
loquy the senior Senator from Wyoming
[Mr. McGEE] and I were having concern-
ing the Vietnam policy of the United
States, a very considerable statement by
the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Mc-
GEE] appearing on page 3438 is at-
tributed to me.
Obviously such attribution is highly
confusing to the reader since I appear
to assume a position directly in opposi-
tion to that which I hold. Therefore, I
wish the RECORD to show that my remarks
In column 1, page 3438, are contained in
the single paragraph which reads:
Mr. GRUENING. The Senator from Wyo-
ming makes reference to the interesting
question concerning negotiation. Why not
negotiation now? When we sit down to
negotiate, we sit down to try to make some
reasonable, rational adjustment in an area
where there are honest differences of opinion.
The response of the distinguished Sen-
ator from Wyoming [Mr. MeGss] im-
mediately follows, beginning with his
statement in the final paragraph of col-
umn 1, page 3438, which is: "We have no
indication that anyone wishes to sit down
on the other side," and continuing
through the second column and con-
cluding in the runover paragraph at the
top of column 3 which ends with the sen-
tence "Once we clear the air on that
point, we shall be in a position to sit down
and talk realistically about some kind of
settlement of the issues that have gen-
erated unrest in this area."
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore. The correction will be made.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS,
ETC.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tern-
pore laid before the Senate the following
letters, which were referred as indicated:
PAYMENT OF INCENTIVE PAY FOR SUBMARINE
DUTY
A letter from the Secretary of the Navy,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to amend title 37, United States Code, to au-
thorize payment of incentive pay for sub-
marine duty to personnel qualified in
submarines attached to staffs of submarine
operational commanders (with an accom-
panying paper); to the Committee on Armed
Services,
REPORT ON EXPORT CONTROL
A letter from the Secretary of Commerce,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on
export control, for the fourth quarter of 1964
(with an accompanying report); to the Com-
mittee on Banking and Currency.
PROPOSED LEGISLATION RELATING TO FEDERAL
POWER COMMISSION
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Power
Commission, Washington, D.C., transmitting
a draft of proposed legislation to amend sec-
tion 12 of the Natural Gas Act with respect
to the issuance of securities for the construc-
tion, acquisition or operation of pipeline fa-
cilities (with an accompanying paper); to
the Committee on Commerce.
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Power
Commission, Washington, D.C., transmitting
a draft of proposed legislation to amend the
Natural Gas Act to authorize the Federal
Power Commission to prescribe safety re-
quirements for natural gas companies (with
an accompanying paper); to the Committee
on Commerce.
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Power
Commission, Washington, D.C., transmitting
3455
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0
3456
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67B00446R00030017000f1-0 February 25
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
a draft of proposed legislation to amend the
Natural Gas Act to require a certificate of
public convenience and necessity for the
acquisition of a controlling interest, through
the ownership of securities or in any other
manner, of any person engaged in the trans-
portation of natural gas, and for other pur-
poses (with an accompanying paper); to the
Committee on Commerce.
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Power
Commission, Washington, D.C., transmitting
a draft of proposed legislation to amend sub-
section 14(a) of the Natural Gas Act to
provide the Commission with broad author-
ity to gather information concerning the
operations of the natural gas industry, and
to publish and disseminate appropriate in-
formation thereon for the benefit of con-
sumers, interested agencies, and the indus-
try itself (with an accompanying paper); to
the Committee on Commerce.
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Power
Commission, Washington, D.C., transmitting
a draft of proposed legislation to amend sec-
tion 2(7) of the Natural Gas Act to enlarge
the definition of "interstate commerce" to
include commerce across the international
boundaries of the country (with an accom.:
panying paper); to the Committee on Com-
merce.
APPOINTMENT or COMMISSIONERS or THE
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Mari-
time Commission, Washington, D.C., trans-
mitting a draft of proposed legislation to
provide that Commissioners of the Federal
Maritime Commission shall hereafter be ap-
pointed for a term of 5 years, and for other
purposes (with accompanying papers); to
the Committee on Commerce.
PROPOSED LEGISLATION RELATING TO DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
A letter from the President, Board of Com-
missioners, District of Columbia, transmit-
ting a draft of proposed legislation relating
to the rental of quarters by the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes (with an
accompanying paper); to the Committee on
the District of Columbia.
A letter from the President, Board of Com-
missioners, District of columbia, transmit-
ting a draft of proposed legislation to pro-
vide for subsistence supplies for severely
handicapped children in schools or classes
established for their benefit in the public
schools of the District of Columbia (with an.
accompanying paper); to the Committee
on the District of Columbia.
REPORTS OF COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF ?THE
UNITED STATES
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the 'United States, transmitting, pursuant
to law, an audit report of financial state-
ments, fiscal year 1964, Veterans' Canteen
Service, Veterans' Administration, dated Feb-
ruary 1965 (with an accompanying report);
to the Committee on Government Opera-
tions.
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report on savings to be realized by
encouraging private physicians to permit
Veterans' Administratipn pharmacies to fill
prescriptions with less 'expensive, generically
equivalent drugs, Veterans' Administration,
dated February 1965 (with an accompanying
report); to the Committee on Government
Operations.
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant
to law, a report on unnecessary procurement
of shipping containers and packaging mate-
rials for 2.75-inch rockets, Department of the
Navy, dated February 1965 (with an accom-
panying report); to the Committee on Gov-
erment Operations.
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the 'Milted States, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report on unnecessary costs incurred
in the procurement of reusable metal con-
tainers for the Bullpup missile, Department
of the Navy, dated February 1965 (with an
accompanying report); to the Committee on
Government Operations.
AMENDMENT or CHAPTER XI OF BANXRUPTCY
Acr
A letter from the Director, Administrative
Office of the U.S. Courts, Washington, D.C.,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to amend chapter XI of the Bankruptcy Act
to give the court supervisory power over all
fees paid from whatever source (with ac-
companying papers); to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
AMENDMENT OF BANKRUPTCY ACT TO PERMIT
A HUSBAND AND WIPE TO FILE A JOINT
PETITION
A letter from the Director, Administrative
Office of the U.S. Courts, Washington, D.C.,
transmitting a draft of proposed legislation
to amend the Bankruptcy Act to permit a
husband and wife to file a joint petition in
ordinary bankruptcy and chapter XIII (wage
earner) proceedings (with accompanying
papers); to the Committee on the Judiciary.
REPORTS OF NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD AND
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
A letter from the Chairman, National Medi-
ation Board, Washington, D.C., transmitting,
pursuant to law, a report of that Board, to-
gether with a report of the National Rail-
road Adjustment Board, for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 1964 (with accompanying re-
ports); to the Committee on Labor and Pub-
lic Welfare.
REPORT ON POSITIONS IN GRADES GS-16, GS-17,
AND GS-18
A letter from the Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Manpower, _transmitting, pursuant
to law, a report on positions in grades GS-
16, GS-17, and GS-18, for the calendar year
1964 (with an accompanying report); to the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.
REPORT ON STATUS OF CONSTRUCTION, ALTERA-
TION, OR ACQUISITION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS
? A letter from the Acting Administrator,
General Services Administration, Washing-
ton, D.C., transmitting, pursuant to law, a
report on the status of construction, altera-
tion, or acquisition of public buildings, dated
December 31, 1964 (with an accompanying
report); to the Committee on Public Works.
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS
Petitions, etc., were laid before the
Senate, or presented, and referred as
indicated:
By the ACTING PRESIDENT pro
tempore:
A joint resolution of the Legislature of
the State of California; to the Committee on
the Judiciary:
"CHAPTER ?
"Senate Joint Resolution 3?Relative to
Legislative apportionment
"Whereas the U.S. Supreme Court has held
that both houses of a bicameral State legis-
lature must be apportioned on the basis of
population; and
"Whereas it will now be totally impossible
to apportion representation to reflect the
diverse and conflicting interests within a
State; and
"Whereas California's present apportion-
ment unduly deprives urban areas of ade-
quate representation in the State senate,
nevertheless the Court's decision will enable
heavily populated areas to dominate State
legislatures, and will lead to a virtual loss
of representation in all other areas of the
State; and
"Whereas in order to prevent this complete
disruption of the legislative process in the
States, and to preserve for each State the
right t6-balance its representation in the
manner best suited to its individual situa-
tion, it is essential that the Constitution of
the United States be amended to enable the
State to apportion one house of its legislature
on factors other than population: Now,
therefore, be it
"Resolved by the Senate and Assembly of
the State of California (jointly), That they
respectfully request the Congress of the
United States to propose an amendment to
the Constitution of the United States, in ac-
cordance with the provisions of article V
thereof, to add an article providing that:
" 'ARTICLE ?
" 'SECTION 1. Nothing in the Constitution
of the United States shall prohibit any State,
which has a bicameral legislature, from ap-
portioning the membership of one house
of its legislature on factors other than pop-.
ulation, provided that the plan of such ap.-
portionment be submitted to a vote of all
of the people of the State at an election in
which the franchise is not denied on the
basis of race, creed, or color and resubmitted
to a vote of all of the people of the State,
prior to the implementation of the apportion-
ment plan, and at regular intervals not to
exceed 10 years.'
"Resolved, That the secretary of the sen-
ate is directed to transmit copies of this
resolution to the President and Vice Presi-
dent of the United States, to the Speaker of
the House of Representatives, and to each
Senator and Representative from California
in the Congress of the United States."
A resolution adopted by the Daughters of
Isabella, Holy Family Circle No. 824, Carver
County, Minn., favoring price support pro-
grams for basic commodities; to the Com-
mittee on Agriculture and Forestry.
The petition of E. L. Decker, of Sun City,
Ariz., praying for the enactment of S. 1,
to provide a hospital insurance program for
the aged under social security; to the Com-
mittee on Finance.
A resolution adopted by the city council
of the city of Millbrae, Calif., favoring the
adoption of a constitutional amendment
relating to reapportionment; to the Commit-
tee on the Judiciary.
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF
SOUTH CAROLINA LEGISLA-
TURE
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, on
behalf of myself and my colleague, the
senior Senator from South Carolina [Mr.
JOHNSTON], I send to the desk a concur-
rent resolution adopted by the South
Carolina State Legislature memorializ-
ing Congress to protest the proposed
drastic reduction in technical assistance
to soil conservation districts. I ask that
this resolution be printed in the CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD and appropriately re-
ferred.
There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was referred to the Committee on
Agriculture and Forestry, and ordered to
be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING
CONGRESS TO PROTEST THE PROPOSED
DRASTIC REDUCTION IN TECHNICAL ASSIS"'-
ANCE TO SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS
Whereas the budget proposal of President
Lyndon B. Johnson provides for a reduction
of $20 million in funds to USDA Soil Cor.-
servation Service for the provision of tech-
nical assistance to landowners in the appli-
cation of the soil conservation district
program; and
Whereas this proposal also embraces a
change in the traditional method of financ-
ing the cost of technical assistance through
soil conservation districts to landowners
Approved For Release 2003/10/15 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300170001-0