MIDDLE EAST CRISIS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 11, 2004
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: June 20, 1967
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
June 20, 1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -APPENDIX
Plant Manager, J. F. Queeny Plant, Monsanto
Company, 1700 South Second Street, St.
Louis, Missouri,
The U.S. Delegation in Geneva is now
putting into final form the results of our
agreements on the thousands of tariff classi-
fications which were subject to negotiation
In the Kennedy Round, Drafting the sched-
ule of concessions to be granted by the
United States is underway. Schedules of
concessions granted by other countries are
being checked as soon as they are received.
These schedules will have to be approved by
all participating countries before the U.S.
can release details of the Kennedy Round
agreement. According to present expecta-
tions, it will not be possible to release de-
tails of the agreement before June 30, Even
then, more time may be needed to assemble
data for public release since the legal docu-
ments for signature by governments are not
too informative as to the significance of the
agreement.
Though the Executive Branch is not able
now to release details of the agreement, it
is possible to provide some comment that
may be useful in replying to Mr. Munie's
inquiry and In considering the issues in-
volved. In doing so it is necessary to place
the issues on chemicals in perspective so
that the significance of the Kennedy Round
agreement can be fairly assessed.
U.S. domestic shipments of all chemicals
were valued at $33.6 billion in 1964, the
statistical base year for the Kennedy Round
negotiations. U.S. exports totalled $2.4 bil-
lion while imports amounted to $710 million.
(Of the latter amount, 52 percent entered
duty-free.) Our exports were therefore more
than three times the value of imports. Im-
ports amounted to slightly more than 2 per-
cent of domestic sales.
In the part of the industry making benze-
noid chemicals, which is the area subject to
the American Selling Price (ASP) system of
valuation, domestic shipments were valued
at $3.4 billion, exports at $285 million and
imports at $53 million. Thus, as a percentage
of all chemicals, the benzenoid area accounts
for about 10 percent of domestic production,
12 percent of exports and 7 percent of im-
ports. However, imports of benzenoid chem-
icals amounted to only 1.5 percent of do-
mestic sales of benzenolds. Further, since
only $25 million of the $53 million of im-
ports were classified as "competitive" by
the Bureau of Customs, and therefore sub-
ject to ASP, the ratio might be considered
lower than one percent. The remainder, or
$28 million of benzenoid imports, were en-
tered chiefly by 13 U.S. subsidiaries of for-
sign manufacturers. Since these were clas-
sified as "non-competitive" because there
was no similar domestic production, they
were not subject to ASP.
As you may know, the ASP system was
adopted in the Tariff Act of 1922 to assist
what was then an infant chemical industry.
This system, which is highly restrictive to
imports, has come under extremely harsh
criticism of our trading partners abroad in
recent years in light of our heavy export
surplus in chemicals, particularly in the
benzenoid area. Rightly or wrongly, our
trading partners made the ASP system a
central issue in the Kennedy Round, and it
became clear several years ago that if the
U.S. was to obtain tariff concessions for our
chemical and other industries, it would have
to do something about the ASP system. With
that background the Tariff Commission in.
December 1965 instituted an investigation
of the ASP system at the request of the
President's Special Representative for Trade
Negotiations. In late July 1966 the Com-
mission filed its report (Tariff Commission
Publication No. 181--July 1966). After much
study and consideration by the agencies con-
cerned in the Executive Branch, a request
was made to the President seeking his au-
thority to enter into negotiations for Olin-
mating ASP. After obtaining the President's
authorization the U.S. entered into inten-
sive negotiations with the European Eco-
nomic Community, the United Kingdom and
Switzerland, the countries most concerned
about ASP, with the clear understanding that
any agreement entered into would provide
a quid pro quo and be subject to legislation
by Congress insofar as elimination of ASP
was concerned.
The negotiation was extremely difficult in
that other nations did not want to enter
into an agreement which would be subject
to approval or disapproval by the U.S. Con-
gress. U.S. negotiators insisted that if any
agreement was to be concluded, it would have
to be in two self-balancing packages since
(1) the U.S. could not obtain overall rec-
iprocity if chemicals were excluded from
the Kennedy Round settlement; and (2) any
package to be presented to Congress on ASP
would have to be one which could be accepted
or rejected independently of the Kennedy
Round settlement.
Briefly, the agreement reached at Geneva
on chemicals entails two agreements. The
first, which is incorporated in the Kennedy
Round, will stand regardless of Congresional
action on ASP. In this first agreement, the
U.S. will reduce its duties on chemicals by
an average of about 43 percent while other
countries will reduce by about 25 percent.
This latter figure is a preliminary estimate
of the numerous reductions made by other
countries and includes reductions ranging
from 20 to 50 percent. Canada, negotiating
as a country with special trade problems in
accordance with agreement of other de-
veloped countries, will make cuts of varying
degrees on a vast array of chemical products.
In the second package, which is subject
to Congressional action on ASP, the U.S.
would eliminate ASP and reduce duties above
20 percent down to that level except for
coloring agents (dyes, pigments and azoics),
sulpha drugs and several other products.
The EEC, the U.K. and the U.S. would place
in effect the remainder of the 50 percent
reduction withheld in the first package, with
the U.K. reducing some rates by over 60 per-
cent. The EEC, the U.K. and Switzerland will
take action on a non-tariff barrier to
reciprocate for the elimination of ASP,
All countries, including the U.S., will ex-
cept some chemical items from the full 50
percent reduction. Exceptions of other coun-
tries were made chiefly to balance off the
U.S. maintenance of rates above 20 percent
on coloring agents and sulpha drugs.
The effect of both agreements on chem-
icals would be to reduce sharply the rates on
chemicals in major world markets, With the
exception of items subject to ASP, U.S, rates
in most cases were already relatively low
and were no bar to imports. On the items
subject to ASP, the U.S. will in either
package, still retain the highest rates of duty
of any industrialized country. The rates of
other countries on U.S. exports will be re-
duced to very low levels, probably to a maxi-
mum of 121/z percent for the EEC and U.K.
if the second pacage goes into effect.
The first package is a compromise which
favors the EEC and the U.K. in regard to
depth of reduction and the U.S. Insofar as
trade coverage is concerned. We estimate a
significant positive balance in favor of the
U.S. in the first package because the varied
nature and heavy volume of our exports
provide more opportunity to benefit from
the 25 percent tariff out than does the 43
percent reduction on our imports. Moreover,
ASP will be retained.
The second package pro\ ides benefits in
the U.K. and EEC markets which should pro-
vide further impetus for our exports. Our
part of this package-elimination of ASP-
is an action which was recommended in 1951
by the Treasury Department when Congress
was considering customs simplification. In
the last Congress, ASP was eliminated from
A 3143
protective rubber footwear and the Senate
Finance Committee late in 1966 asked the
Tariff Commission to study and report on
ASP as well as other valuation problems.
The Commission report has been sent to the
Committee but has not yet been made pub-
lic,
The chief criticisms of the ASP system are
its uncertainty and the very high rates of
duty that result from its application. U.S.
importers are not sure whether their ship-
ments will be subjected to ASP, and even if
they are, they do not know the amount of
duty which will be assessed until the ship-
ment is processed through Customs. Duties
can and do run over 50 percent and in some
cases over 100 percent, In the trading world
of today, such a system of valuation is gen-
erally considered obsolete and overly restric-
tive to trade. In this respect this Depart-
ment and the Foreign Service are constantly
trying to obtain fair and equitable trading
conditions for U.S. Industry abroad and we
believe that the success of our efforts is con-
tingent to a large extent on-our own willing-
ness to remove similar barriers. We therefore
support elimination of the ASP as a part of
the second agreement on chemicals in the
Kennedy Round.
In general, we do not expect any serious
dislocations in the chemical industry from
the Kennedy Round agreements. All con-
cessions will be made in five equal install-
ments over a period of four years and one
day, and while there will be adjustments as
prices change when tariffs are reduced, we
expect that U.S. industry will have time to
take such adjustments in stride. Moreover,
we expect that gains from exports will offset
any increase in imports.
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT L. MCNEILL,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Trade
Middy East Crisis
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. JACOB H. GILBERT
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, June 20, 1967
Mr. GILBERT, Mr. Speaker, recently
our distinguished colleague from New
Jersey [Mr. HOWARD] stated his feelings
on the situation in the Middle East be-
fore an audience in Asbury Park, N.J.
Mr. HOWARD articulated the feelings
shared by many of my colleagues and
fellow Americans. At this time I would
like to submit his remarks for insertion
in the RECORD: -
SPEECH BEFORE ISRAEL SOLIDARITY RALLY BY
CONGRESSMAN JAMES J. HOWARD AT AsBURY
PARK, N.J., JUNE 7, 1967
We meet tonight in a somber time in his-
tory and although we meet in a free city in
a free nation, freedom is being once again
placed under seige on our planet. The eyes
of the world are tonight focused on the
Middle East and most particularly on the
tiny country of Israel. Once again this Jew-
ish State is facing a threat to its indepen-
dence and its very existence, a threat that
comes from the hostile Arab world which
encircles it.
We know that adversity and hostility are
not new experiences to the Israeli people.
From as far back as Biblical times the king-
doms of Israel and Judah were set upon time
and time again by hostile neighbors, Syria,
Babylon and ironically enough Egypt. We
know and have sympathized with the fact
that through the pages of history have been
 A 3144
Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
CONGRESSIC NAL RECORD -APPENDIX June 20, 1967
recorded aggressive acts against the Jew-
ish people, burning, killing, plundering,
which led up to dispersal. For centuries the
Jewish people wandered the globe, ridiculed,
tormented and unaccepted. But through
those years a hope and a dream persisted,
a nation of Israel. Efforts toward this end
and the concept of such a return to Jerusa-
lem was exemplified in Zionism which has
been embedded in Jewish thought since
the early years of the Diaspora. Progression
from the idea of Zionism to the reality
of Israel began about 100 years ago. We are
all familiar with the names of Moses Hess,
Peretz Zmolenskin and Judah Pinsker, and
the founder of the Zionist movement as we
know it, Theodor Herzl. Herzl's organiization
of the first Zionist Congress in Switzerland
in 1897 was followed by slow, but measured,
steps which led to the creation of Israel in
May of 1947. So for over 19 years we have
seen the growth of democracy in the Middle
East. We have proudly watched it become the
model nation of the area, a model in edu-
cation, in health, in economic progress and
perhaps most importantly, a model for all
of its neighbors to see that the best way
to live is through themeans of a democrati-
cally organized parliament and government.
Just a few weeks ago I had the honor of
visiting this justifiably proud nation and
.people. I felt a pride myself, which I knew I
shared with the Jewish members of this area
in visiting the modern city of Tel Aviv,- in
watching its people, well fed and happy, and
determined to do everything necessary to
combat the clouds of Arab animosity that
were forming over their very heads. I was
proud to visit the city of Herzlia, where I
spoke with the physician who operates the
clinic built mostly through funds gathered
and donated by the Histadrut and other con-
cerned citizens of our -own central New Jer-
sey. Themodern hospital on the hill behind
Herzlia is an inspiration to all who visit it,
especially when we realize that not many
years ago the hospital served tuberculosis
patients from only the immediate area, but
now needs to devote only one wing of it for
all the tuberculosis patients in the entire na-
tion. Through hard work and cooperative ef-
fort Israel has become a island of hygiene in
the ocean of disease that is known as the
Middle East.
On the eastern shore of the Galilee or
Lake Tiberius, I visited the Kibbutz of-Ein-
Gev. Here, at Emn-Gev, the animosity of the
Arab world had already been felt, for less
.than two weeks before, the Syrian guns lo-
cated on the hilltop a few hundred yards
away had wantonly shelled this tiny com-
munal colony. I saw the bomb craters in the
playground, the schoolroom halt blown
apart, and visited an underground area that
has one of the most discouraging names I
have ever heard. It was called the Kinder-
garten Bomb Shelter, not a rusted relic of
World War II but a necessary piece of "physi-
cal equipment" in Israel today. I spoke with
Jack Steinberg, one of the leaders of the
Kibbutz, and met his young daughter, who
stood-only a few feet from where one of the
bombs landed but miraculously escaped in-
jury. I was informed just this afternoon
by the Israeli Embassy in Washington that
little Ein-Gev received massive shelling
from the Syrians yesterday but-they had no
report as to the number of casualties, and I
can only wonder and hope concerning what
remains of Ein-Gev and the condition of
Jack Steinberg and his daughter. -
These are but just a few of the memories
I have of Israel in May of 1957, but what
impressed me most and will live with me
for the longest time was the air and attitude
of the people of Israel. They are a young
nation, actually a teenager in- years. They
are filled with national pride, pride in what
they have accomplished and confident of
their future. This generation of Israelis
may 'indeed be called "the chosen people."
For centu-ies fathers told their sons, and
they in ti rn their sons, that some day the
Jewish pe :)ple would have and build their
own nati(--n. This generation of Jews has
been eho,en to accomplish that mission.
They hav done well although harrassed by
the Arab lotions around them and have no
intention of being dispersed again,
One yer r ago, speaking in Lakewood on the
18th ann.versary of Israel's Independence.
I stated `Currently there are scant indica-
tions the t her neighbors are willing to ac-
cept Israt I as a reality but it is also a reality
that Isra.1 is here-to stay." What-I told the
people of Lakewood last year, the nation of
Israel is showing the world today. As Abbe
Eban sai 1 last night at the United Nations:
"Egypt has openly proclaimed that Elath
did not form part of Israel and had pre-
dicted t. fat Israel itself would soon expire.
That pr.,clamation was empty. The predic-
tion nov - lies in ruins." As Israel moves for-
ward ag Linst its aggressors, let no one in or
out of tae United Nations nor in or out of
the Unt Ed States point a finger of condem-
nation i.pon her. Never before in history has
a natior taken so much abuse for such a long
period .'f time before insisting upon their
rights a 3 free people in a free world. A hard
and bit ter lesson was learned ten years ago
in assr wing that Nasser, after his bitter
defeat, would allow Israel its territorial in-
tegrity. Let us not permit the lesson of the
past to a years to reoccur in the next ten.
Let he people of the world know that
when s free people are threatened our Pres-
ident, )UT government, and your Represen-
tative n Congress will stand on the side of
justice . . and in the Middle East, the
word 'justice" is pronounced Israel.
1XTENS'ION OF REMARKS
or
ION. DANIEL E. BUTTON
OP NEW YORK
IN IRE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, June 20, 1967
Mi. BUTTON. Mr. Speaker, last Sun-
day Major John V. Lindsay, of New York,
a fo- mer Member of this House and a
Repi.blica.n, appeared on "Meet the
Pres :." David Broder asked him the fol-
lowi'- ig question :
Th 3 House Republicans are trying to cone-
pletE ty revamp the poverty program and in
the l rocess abolish Sargent Shriver's poverty
agen ;y. Do you think it's a good idea?
Tee mayor of the Nation's largest city
mac e an answer which, I believe, merits
the close attention of my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle. He said:
W3 have had good luck and success with
Mr. Shriver's OEO office and we find that
in I ew York, at least, that it is wise to have
a s ngle office with which to deal in this
eno moutly complicated program. It is a
difli cult program to administer at both ends
of ;he stick, both in a locality and here
in Washington, D.C. To dismember it and
to rat its various functions scattered about
in ive or six Federal agencies, I think would
be a mistake. -I fear that it would compound
the problem of administration that not only
exi ;ts in Washington but in all of the cities
toe ay.
:n his column "Political Parade" in to-
day's Washington Post, Mr. Broder has
al:.o analyzed John Lindsay's stature
at Long his fellow American mayors and
commented trenchantly on various
Republican responses to the almost over-
whelming problems facing our cities. I
am sure that this column, excerpts of
which I at this point include in the
RECORD will also be highly interesting to
every Member of this House.
[From the Washington Post, June 20, 1967]
THE OUTSIDER
(By David S. Broder)
HONOLULU.-After less than two years in
office and still a very junior member of the
club, New York's Mayor John V. Lindsay has
established himself in the eyes of his fellow
mayors as a spokesman and leader in the
fight for urban America.
He emerged unmistakably at this week's
meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors
here as one of the strong men of municipal
government. His was the dominant voice on
the six-mayor "meet the press" panel, and
his was the most influential viewpoint in the
deliberations of the conference platform
committee.
A veteran of these mayors' meetings rated
Republican Lindsay among the "big three"
of the organization, along with the two top
Democrats, Detroit's articulate Jerome P.
Cavanaugh and Chicago's Richard J. Daley,
a four-term veteran almost universally re-
garded as America's most 'effective mayor.
Much as his victory in 1965 was cheered by
the GOP as an early symptom of the recovery
from the Goldwater disaster, Lindsay as
mayor, it must be said, has made almost no
effort to turn himself or his administration
into a model or showcase of specifically Re-
publican concern for city problems.
Still, when one sees the prestige Lindsay
enjoys among his fellow mayors, it remains
almost unbelievable that the Republican
Party, obstensibly interested in the big city
vote, lets an asset like him go to waste.
His constituency is the most important
political prize in the country. Lindsay him-
self has more political glamour than any
other Republican east of Ronald Reagan.
Tall, broad-shouldered, good-looking, he
stops traffic among the tourists and is prob-
ably the one Mayor in the country who is
recognized by residents of a city other than
his own.
Lindsay has an mole staff, and he does his
homework. He appeared to be the best-
briefed man among the two dozen mayors
on the resolutions committee.
He is still not a polished public speaker,
but he has learned to make his points more
clearly and succinctly than he did in the
House. He carried the majority of mayors
with him on the key policy statements on
urban needs, welfare, crime, the antipoverty
program and housing.
Politically, however, much of what Lindsay
was promoting here runs directly contrary
to the record his own Party is writing in
Washington. Lindsay joined the unanimous
vote in the resolutions committee for con-
tinuation of the model cities program, which
most House Republicans opposed. Where
House Republicans are currently trying to
dismember Sargent Shriver's Office of Eco-
nomic Opportunity, Lindsay argued for con-
tinuation of centralized administration of
the antipoverty program, which he (unlike
most Republicans and some mayors) pro-
nounces a success, at least in New York City.
Most pointedly, Lindays offered and had
endorsed a resolution which "deplores" the
action of the House of Representatives-
claimed as a great victory by House Republi-
cans-in cutting off further funds for the
rent-supplements program.
In short, what Lindsay is asking of his fel-
low Republicans is a commitment to finance
city programs on a top-priority basis with
every dollar that can be spared from the
Vietnam war. And that is a commitment the
congressional Republicans from their rural
and suburban districts do not seem prepared
to make.
Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
 Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
June 20, 1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
In releasing the report today, Mr. Freeman
said, "The new -era in agriculture gives us
a realistic opportunity, as well as a chal-
lenge, to set up our goals for the future.
Building on the accomplishments of recent
years, we can now define our objectives for
tomorrow. This is the purpose of our current
Agriculture/2000 project, a blueprint for ac-
tion now and in the years ahead. The fact
that U.S. agriculture has entered a new era
makes Agriculture/2000 a realistic under-
taking.
Among the 1966 advances cited by the
Secretary are:
Disappearing surpluses.-"For the first
time in more than a decade agriculture is
now generally free of surpluses," the report
says. The surpluses of wheat, feed grains,
rice, milk, butter, and cheese are no more.
The new cotton program, combined with
increased domestic and foreign use, Is cut-
ting sharply into the cotton surplus,
Government investment sharply down
In 1966, the Commodity Credit Corporation
investment in farm commodities "fell to $4.4
billion, the lowest since 1953. CCC invest-
ment is now $4 billion below the peaks
reached in 1956 and 1959."
Income sharply up.-"Realized farm net in-
come in 1966 climbed to $16.3 billion-over
$2 billion more than in 1965 and about $4y,
billion more than in 1960." Net income per
farm in 1966 averaged $5,024, 20 percent more
than in 1965 and 70 percent above 1960. For
the first time in half a century, parity of
income for adequate size family farmers "is
clearly in sight."
Flexible farm programs.-Farm production
can now be guided and brought into balance
by means of farmer self-determination with
government assistance. "Under the flexible
provisions of the Food and Agriculture Act
of 1965, farmers are expected to bring back
into 1967 production about- 18 million acres,
mostly wheat and feed grains, out of the 63
million acres diverted in 1966."
Rebirth in rural America.-"The revitaliza-
tion of rural America continues, with more
farm and nonfarm rural people enjoying pure
water, better community facilities, improved
schools, medical services, and an increasing
number and variety of off-farm jobs." The
report points out that USDA advanced $1.2
billion in loans In 1966 to more than 700,000
rural families, helping them to build new
homes, establish more productive farming
enterprises, and develop water and sewer
systems.
Better diets.-"USDA food assistance pro-,
grams now help improve diets and nutrition
for 45 million Americans-school children,
low-income families, and others who have
inadequate diets. The Food Stamp and the
Commodity Distribution Programs fpr needy
families were available at the end of calendar
1966 in over 2,100 counties and cities in all
States a>id the District of Columbia. More
than 18 million children were served low-
cost, nutritious school lunches."
Expanding exports and food aid abroad.-
"Exports of farm products reached all-time
highs of $6.7 billion for fiscal 1966 and $6.9
billion for the calendar year, registering
gains of 10 percent and 11 percent, respec-
tively, over the corresponding year-earlier
periods." U.S. grain shipments to drought-
stricken India saved 60 million persons from
starvation.
Growing resource conservation."Conser-
vation treatment for soil, water, timber, and
wildlife was applied on over a million farms
with government cost-share assistance in
1966." USDA continued to give technical as-
sistance to nearly 3,000 local soil and water
conservation districts that include about 99
percent of the nation's farms. The Depart-
ment approved construction assistance to 89
watershed projects covering 6 million acres.
The National Forests had a record timber
harvest for the fourth consecutive year.
More consumer services.-"USDA Inspected
for wholesomeness and safety close to 90 per-
cent of all the meat and poultry sold in the
United States, a new record." It gFaded 60
percent of the meat (excluding pork) and 63
percent of the poultry sold, thus helping
consumers select the qualities they needed
for specific cooking purposes. Further prog-
ress was made in wiping out animal diseases,
some of which are transmissible to humans.
By chemical, biological, and other means the
Department continued to protect fruits and
vegetables against pest damage. New foods
and crop varieties were developed for bet-
ter living.
NEW ERA-NEW RESPONSIBILITIES
"Probably never before," the Secretary says
in the report, "has the change in the posi-
tion and responsibilities of American agricul-
ture from one year to the next been so great
as in 1966."
Having entered a new era, U.S. agriculture
now faces new responsibilities, Mr. Freeman
continues. "A great and growing agriculture
must meet a great and growing array of
challenges-in the countryside, in the na-
tional economy, and in the world. .
"We must build the American family farm
into an even more productive, effective, and
prosperous unit of the economy.
"We must help to revitalize and reinvigo-
rate the whole of rural America.
"We must lead the crusade for a world
free from hunger.
"We must expand our areas of vital serv-
ices to assure that the abundance produced
by American farms, the resources available
in farm and rural America, and the knowl-
edge developed by agricultural science are
used to support an era of better living for all
our people."
A NEW PLATEAU
In releasing the report, the Secretary
pointed out that although farm income in
1966 was 40 percent more than in 1960 and
farm prices averaged 13 percent higher, it Is
proving difficult to continue the advance in
1967. "We have reached a new plateau, Farm-
ers still- face big problems. The art of bal-
ancing production with demand is far from
perfected. Largely as a result of a bumper
world grain crop and increased domestic
production of hogs, cattle, poultry and milk,
farm prices have dropped sharply from the
peak reached last August.
"We are using all available programs, in-
cluding price support, purchase programs,
and other marketing aids, to strengthen farm
prices and Income. We expect farm prices to
strengthen and farm income to come close to
last year's record. It is vital that the gains of
recent years be not only maintained but ex-
panded. Despite their Immense contribu-
tions to the economy, our farmers are still
being inadequately rewarded."
Mr. Freeman concludes his report with an
epilog in which he says: "Ours is an age
of collapsed time. We see more technological
and scientific progress in a year-perhaps in
a month-than our ancestors saw in a cen-
tury....
"The challenge of our generation is to
turn the scientific, technological, and infor-
mation explosions to the advantage of the
human race.
"And we in agriculture are particularly
challenged-because agriculture can, must,
and, I believe, will provide many of the most
basic tools. Fortunately, the continuing prog-
ress of the year 1966 gives promise that agri-
culture can and will meet its Challenge-
Today and Tomorrow."
A CHOICE OF APPOINTMENT
(Mr. FULTON of Tennessee (at the
request of Mr. ECKHARDT) was granted
permission to extend his remarks at this
H7589
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. FULTON of Tennessee. Mr. Speak-
er, all Americans who believe in the fair-
ness of advancement through merit, abil-
ity, and qualification will agree in the
wisdom in the appointment to the Su-
preme Court of Mr. Thurgood Marshall.
The appointment by President John-
son of Mr. Marshall as Associate Justice
of the Supreme Court is a well-deserved
tribute to a brilliant jurist, a law scholar,
an experienced and able attorney, and an
outstanding American.
The appointment has received wide-
spread acclaim. I am glad to report that
recent editorials in the Nashville Ten-
nessean and the Nashville Banner have
commended our President for this nomi-
nation.
The Nashville Tennessean stated in its
editorial:
It would be difficult, if not impossible, to
find a candidate for the Supreme Court with
better recommendations than Mr. Marshall's.
The Nashville Banner states in its edi-
torial:
On its merits the only valid basis for such
judicial appointment, or for impartial evalu-
ation of it, the nomination accords with
reasoned judgment.
I fully concur with the view that Mr.
Marshall "has accented the law and con-
stitutional processes ... and condemned
violence as the method of its implementa-
tion."
Under unanimous consent, I Insert
into the RECORD the editorials from the
Nashville Tennessean and the Nashville
Banner endorsing Thurgood Marshall's
appointment :
A CHOICE APPOINTMENT
There are two reasons why Mr. Thurgood
Marshall should have been appointed to the
United States Supreme Court.
One-and the most important-is that he
has superior qualifications for the job. The
supporting reason is the simple demand of
justice that he be the first member of his
race to serve on the nation's highest court.
No justice now sitting on the Supreme
Court has higher qualifications in ability
and experience than Mr. Marshall has.
The new associate justice finished law
school at the head of his class, As general
counsel for the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, he argued
32 cases before the Supreme Court, winning
all but three of them.
His landmark victory was the 1954 decision
by the court outlawing segregation in the
schools.
Mr. Marshall then served four years as a
federal judge on the U.S. Second Court of
Appeals in New York. He was appointed U.S.
Solicitor General in 1965. As solicitor gen-
eral, he argued 18 cases for the government
before the Supreme Court. He won 13 of
them.
Thus the record of Mr. Marshall's ability
and experience is clear and convincing. So
is the record of his love for the devotion to
the law, and his adherence to legal processes
for the settlement of issues.
Yet, despite his undisputed qualifications,
some will say he should not have been
appointed to the Supreme Court and that
his appointment was made on the basis of
political considerations.
There can be little doubt that political
results may come from the appointment of
Mr. Marshall. But this is no reason why the
appointment should not have been made,
Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
 Approved For Release 2004/05/25 : CIA-RDP69B00369R000200300007-4
H 7590
The new associate justice-grandson of a
slave and son of P. Pullman steward-,sym-
bolizes the rapid progress of his race over the
past two generations. And the most spec-
tacular progress was brought about through
his own initiative and skill before the bar of
justice.
It would be difficult, if not impossible, to
find a candidate for the Supreme Court with
better recommendations than Mr. Marshall's.
If his appointment sprang from political
considerations-and. what Supreme Court
appointment did not-the nation can be
thankful that the political forces worked out
to put such an outstanding legal talent on
the court.
MARSHALL IS QUALIFIED
President Johnson's nomination of Thur-
good Marshall as Associate Justice Tom C.
Clark's successor on the U.S. Supreme Court
comes as no surprise. That the nominee
would become the first Negro on that tri-
bunal was almost a foregone conclusion, as
widely speculated at the time of his 1965
appointment as Solicitor General.
In the latter capacity-No. 3 official in the
Justice Department-he has capably borne
the responsibilities assigned; the govern-
ment's lawyer in cases before the supreme
bench, having personally argued 19 of these.
Of further significance as to preparatory ex-
perience, he served for about three years as
a judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
handling cases from New York, Connecti-
cut and Vermont.
Thus he has nct only scholarship In law,
but a background of judicial record, as a
basic qualification. As firmly as any present
member of the Supreme Court, and more
so than most of these, he has spoken out
against elements of anarchy in the civil
rights movement'-and that as recently as
June 7 of this year.
Admittedly the strong advocate of racial
equality-within the meaning of full citi-
zenship and opportunity incorporated in:
that term-he haA3 accented the law and con-
stitutional processes to that end and con-
demned violence as the method of its im-
plementation.
On its merits, the only valid basis for such
judicial appointment, or for impartial eval-
uation of it, the nomination accords with
reasoned judgment.
(Mr. FULTON of Tennessee (at the re-
quest of Mr. ECKHARDT) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.) -
[Mr. FULTON of Tennessee's remarks
will appear hereafter in the Appendix.]
FLAG DESECRATION AMENDMENTS
(Mr. CORMAN (at the request of Mr.
ECKHARDT) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Speaker, we have
just concluded passage of H.R. 10480
which purports, among other things, to
be a bill to prohibit the burning of the
flag. We also adopted an amendment of-
fered by Mr. BIESTER and myself to re-
quire that the word "knowingly" be in-
serted before the words "cast contempt"
making it clear that the House intended
a contemptuous state of mind on the part
of the accused. It is to be noted that the
word "burning" was added to the bill
during the Committee of the Whole by
a committee amendment.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE June 20, 1967
Both of tl ese amendments were passed
in the Con mittee of the Whole by an
overwhelmi ig vote. They are, however,
not a part (f the legislation we have just
passed bees use of the parliamentary ef-
fect of the passage in the Committee of
the Whole ind the subsequent defeat in
the House of the Wyman amendment.
Because o: the fate of the Wyman
amendmen ; the words "burning" and
"knowingly" were both deleted from the
bill as final 'y passed. -
It was of viously the intent of an over-
whelming I .umber of Members that those
words sho- tld be included. It is hoped
that an o; )portunity will present itself
to correct :his matter before H.R. 10480
finallyeec Vines law,
y 7 `~
TLEMEN r IN THE MIDDLE EAST
The SP] TAKER. Under previous order
of the Ho Ise, the gentleman from New
York [Mr. ADDABBOI is recognized for 15
minutes.
Mr. AD) )ABBO. Mr. Speaker, the five-
point pro 3osal for settlement in the
Middle Ea at offered by the President yes-
terday is a fair and sensible approach
to lasting peace in that explosive area
of the v: orld. President Johnson has
urged an even-handed solution to the
basic problems which underly both the
outrageous aggression againstIsrael over
the last 20 years and Israel's rebirth as
a State i 1 1948. He has called on the
parties t( o move the temporary cease-
fire towa 'ds a permanent armistice by
sitting in conference with the Israelis to
iron out tit least some of the immediate
problems which threaten the peace and
security Df the Middle East-problems
such as '