LAIRD EASES RELEASE OF TECHNICAL PAPERS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP74B00415R000500140014-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 13
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 13, 2000
• Sequence Number: 14
• Publication Date: October 16, 1970
• Content Type: NSPR

- '-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
THE EVENING STAR
A
D iP
--1c)
Laird Eases Release
Of Technical Papers
The Pentagon is stripping se-
curity classifications from thou-
sands of technical documents in
an effort to make more informa-
tion available to the general
public and the technical commu-
nity.
Defense Secretary Melvin R.
Laird announced what was de-
scribed as a "major policy
change" yesterday. Under the
new policy, security classifica-
tions such as secret and top se-
cret will be assigned to docu-
ments only after study of two
considerations, Laird said.
In the past, his announcement
said, the major consideration for
restricting data has been the
possible benefit of the informa-
tion to potential enemies.
Now, major consideration in
favor of disclosure will be given
to the possible benefits to the
United States and it allies
through the use of the informa-
tion.
The new policy will sharply
cut back on the number of both
classified and unclassified docu-
ments whose distribution is lim-
ited.
Each year about 45,000 de-
fense technical documents are
prepared. Of these, about 17 per-
cent are withheld from public
distribution for security reasons.
Another 39 percent are limited
in their distribution.
In the past, documents could
be marked "no foreign," "U.S.
Government only," or "Depart-
ment of Defense only," and
marked for use of certain indi-
viduals.
Now, the only such restriction
will be "U.S. government only."
This will be used to protect in-
formation given to this govern-
ment by other countries or by
private businesses with some re-
striction on its distribution.
Although the new rules have
been ordered by Laird, the re-
strictions previously pleaded on
documents will be allowed to ex-
pire normally. They usually run
three years. In addition, there
will be a review of documents
classified for security reasons,
to be completed by Jan. 1, 1972.
As an example of the change
in policy, a report of the Na-
tional Materials Advisory Board
on "Hot Corrosion in Gas Tur-
bines" has long been restricted
and could not be given to for-
eign governments or foreign
nationals.
This morning, an advisory
board official called the Penta-
gon and ,asked if the document
now can be made available for
unlimited distribution. It was,
within a few minutes, and a
sticker was pasted to the re-
port: "This document has been
approved for public release. It's
distribution is unlimited."
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP741300415R000500140014-3
September 8, 1.970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE
in full. This includes physician services,
psychiatric services, hospital and other
institutional care, dental services, medi-
cines, therapeutic devices, appliances,
and equipment, as well as needed sup-
porting services.
Furthermore, money will be provided
to develop a more adequate supply and
appropriate distribution of health pro-
fessionals and supporting personnel. The
program will actively encourage more
efficient organization of existing health
manpower, provide funds for special
training of physicians, dentists, and
other health workers needed for this
program, and apply financial incentives
to stimulate the movement of health
manpower to medically deprived areas.
We have heard talk all during this
Congress that there were "new" pro-
posals forthcoming from the adminis-
tration, that we should wait and see.
Mr. President, I have been urged for
months to wait and see, that the admin-
istration will have a bill. And I have
been waiting. But it is late in the session.
The time for waiting is now past. We
can no longer wait for a band-aid ap-
proach for our disintegrating health
system that needs major surgery. While
the bill I introduce today is not the com-
plete answer, it is the best answer we
have yet come up with.
Mr. President, I have been on the
Health Subcommittee of the Senate for
nearly 13 years, up until last year under
the great Lister Hill as chairman. I have
listened to the evidence for 13 years. We
have talked to the experts, and we have
studied this question for years. Last Jan-
uary, when I became chairman of the
subcommittee, I expressed a desire to in-
troduce such a comprehensive health
care bill. This, I repeat, is the best we
have been able to come up with after
hearing testimony from the people who
have worked in this field over in the pri-
vate structure of the economy, made a
study of the problem, and come in with
their recommendations.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill
be printed in the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
BELLMON). The bill will be received and
appropriately referred; and, without ob-
jection, the bill will be printed in the
RECORD in accordance with the Senator's
request.
The bill (S. 4323) to create a health
security program, introduced by Mr.
YARBOROUGH (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY,
Mr. COOPER, and Mr. SAXBE), was re-
ceived, read twice by its title, referred to
the Committee on Labor and Public Wel-
fare, and ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
[The bill will be printed in a subse-
quent edition of the RECORD.]
the return of such matter at the expense
of the sender.
ADDITIONAL COSPONSOR OF A BILL
S. 3220
At the request of the Senator from
West Virginia (Mr. BYRD) the Senator
from Nevada (Mr. CANNON) was added
as a cosponsor of S. 3220, to protect a
person's right of privacy by providing
for the designation of obscene or offen-
sive mail matter by the sender and for
CORRECTION OF ANNOUNCEMENT
ON VOTE
Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. President, on be-
half of the Senator from Colorado (Mr.
ALLOTT) , I ask that the permanent REC-
ORD be corrected to show that on vote
No. 283, the passage of the Treasury-
Post Office appropriation bill for 1971,
the Senator from Colorado, if present
and voting, would have voted "yea."
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSTITUTION RELATING TO DI-
RECT POPULAR ELECTION OF THE
PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESI-
DENT?AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT NO. 878 ?
Mr. GRIFFIN submitted amendments,
intended to lit proposed by him, to the
joint resolution (S.J. Res. 1) proposing
an amendment to the Constitution to
provide for the direct popular election
of the President and Vice President of
the United States, which were ordered
be printed.
to lie on the table a
ANNOUNCEMENT OF EARINGS:
FEDERAL DATA BANKS AND THE
BILL OF RIGHTS
Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, in recent
months, with the discovery of each new
Federal data bank and data system, pub-
lic concern has increased that some
of the Federal Government's-collection,
storage, and use of information about
citizens may raise serious questions of
individual privacy and constitutional
rights.
The Constitutional Rights Subcom-
mittee has received countless letters and
telegrams from Members of Congress
and from interested persons all over the
United States, urging that hearings be
scheduled to consider the total impact of
some of these data programs on preser-
vation of individual rights.
I wish to announce that, in response to
these demands, the subcommittee has
scheduled a new series of hearings on
"Federal data banks and systems and
the bill of rights." The first stage of the
hearings will be held October 6, 7, and 8.
The subcommittee has already under-
taken a survey Of Federal data banks
and automated data systems to deter-
mine what statutory and administrative
controls are governing their growth and?
what rights and remedies are provided
for the citizen. The analysis of the ex-
ecutive branch replies to that subcom-
mittee questionnaire, together with the
hearings held in the last session on "pri-
vacy and Federal questionnaires," and
the hearings which begin in October, will
assist Congress in determining the need
for a new independent agency to control
Federal data banks on behalf of the pri-
vacy and due process rights of citizens. It
has been my conviction that such an
agency is needed, along with new reme-
dies in the courts and other corrective
actions. I detailed the reasons for my
S 14935
belief in a Senate speech in November
1969.
The purpose of the hearings is: First,
to learn what Government data banks
have been developed; second, how far
they are already computerized or auto-
mated; third, what constitutional rights,
if any, are affected by them; and, fourth,
what overall legislative controls, if any,
are required.
Witnesses familiar with the constitu-
tional and legal issues, as well as the
practical problems raised by some cur-
rent and proposed data programs will
document these for the record. The Sec-
retary of the Army and other representa-
tives of the Defense Department have
already been invited to attend the Oc-
tober hearings to describe how and why
the Army and other armed services have
collected and stored information on ci-
vilians, and to what extent the records
have been automated for easy access and
retrieval.
Prof. Arthur R. Miller of the Univer-
sity of Michigan Law School, author of
a forthcoming book, "The Dossier So-
ciety: Personal Privacy in the Computer
Age," has been invited to describe the
state of the law governing information
flow in our society and its relationship
to legal rights. Another witness will be
Christopher Pyle, an attorney and former
Army intelligence officer, who has in-
vestigated the Army's civil disturbance
data programs, and has written widely
on the subject.
In later hearings, other representatives
of the executive departments and agen-
cies will be invited to respond to the
complaints and fears which have been
expressed by the public. They will be af-
forded the opportunity to explain ex-
actly what their data programs on peo-
ple involve, and how, if at all, the privacy,
confidentiality and due process rights of
the individual are respected.
? The subcommittee has received en-
thusiastic support from specialists in the
computer sciences, in both the computer
industry and in the academic commu-
nity. We hope to receive the benefit of
their expertise for our hearing record.
Mr. President, our Nation is predicated
on the fundamental proposition that
citizens have a right to express their
views on the wisdom and course of gov-
ernmental policies. This involves more
than the currently popular notion of a
so-called right to dissent. Our system
cannot survive if citizen participation is
limited merely to registering disagree-
ment with official policy; the policies
themselves must be the product of the
people's views. The protection and en-
couragement of such participation is a
principal purpose of the first amend-
ment.
More than at any other time in our
historY, People are actively expressing
themselves on public questions and seek-
ing to participate more directly in the
formulation of policy. Mass media have
made it easy for large numbers of people
to organize and express their views in
written and oral fashion. Rapid means
of transiCortation have aided our mobile
population to move easily to sites of cen-
tral and local authority for the purpose
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
S .11.946 (T,)NGRESSIONA E, RECORD SENATE Sf(- 4ember 2, f970
of expressing t.rejr views mere puleiche
The freedom of our form of ecivernment
and the richness of our econemy have
made it possible for individuals to move
Phalli-, freely and to seek their best inter --
eats tit; they in vocations arid awoce-
ions ot their choice. or indeed, to pur-
sue none at all for a time, lf that is
what they wish, If modern teehnoloev
snresicied citizens with more efficient
timans tor recording their dissent, or for
reiiiiitermg their politicel, ee.osiomin. er
eseial views, it has also oliteed in the
_]aiirlri .f executive branch officials new
methods of taitine note of that expression
,)i v.exisi; and that political activity Fee-
tnese ne-isons, those individuals who work
!tett-vele for public causes are more visible
thee ever before.
These new sciences have octiord.ed those
who control government increased power
io discover and record immutably the
actMties. thoughts and philosophy of an
individual at any given morne at of his
life. That picture of the persirn. is re-
r orded Ate:ever. no matter now the person
flay cleinge as time goes on. Eiery pen,'
sores past thus becomes an inicapiable
eart of ins present -and futere. The corn-
tatter never forgets.,
To be Kure, recordkeeping is nothing'
slew in he history of government; nor
indeed, is the habit all governments and
ill societies have of surveillance, black-
listing and subtle reprisal For leapopular
iiolitical or social views. Men has always
had to contend with the memories of
tithei men. In the United States, .however,
we are messed with a Constitution which
provides; for due process of law. This an.
rues to the arbitrary use of the 'record-
keeping and information power of gov-
ernment against the individual.
Deepitfi these guarantees. the new tech-
nology has been nuietly, but steadily, en,
towing .officials with the unprecedented
iailitieal power which accompanies coni-
titers and data banks and ecientifie
Lechniques of managing information Tt
ilas et:yen Government the power to take
irote of anything, whether it be right or
ivrones relevant to any purpose or not,
and to retain it forever. Unfortunately,
Lhis revelution is coming about under
reitdated laws and executive orders gov-
erning the recordkeeping and the con-
cepts of -privacy and confidentiality rele-
vant to an earlier time.
These developments are particularly
significant in their effect on the first
amendment to our Constitution.
No longer can a man march with a
eign down Pennsylvania Avenue and
(hen return to his hometown, his identity
tiegottere if not his cause.
No ioneer does the memory of the au-
thorship of a political article fads as the
tiages of his rhetoric yellow and iTurnble
with time.
No louver are the flambovane words
eiechanged in debate allowed to echo into
'he past and lose their relevanee with
he issue of the moment which prompted
them.
Na loner can a man be assured of his
eojoyraent of the harvest of wisdom and
maturity which comes with -age, when
the indiscretions of youth if noticed at
all, are spread about in forgoteen file
cabinets in basement archives,
Instead, today, his activities are re
corded in computers or data banks, or 1.
not, they may well be a part of a grea
investigative index.
Some examples come readily to mind
from the subcommittee survey.
The Civil Service Commission maize.
tains a "security file" in electrical: 5.
powered rotary cabinets containing
120,000 index cards. These bear lead inn
formation relating to possible questions
of suitability involving loyalty and sut
versive activity. The lead information
contained in these files has been de-
veloped-from published hearings of' con r-
gressional comm ttees, State legislative
committees, public investigative bodien,
reports of investigation, Publications cf
subversive organizations, and various
other newspapers and periodicals. This
file is not new, but has been growing
since World War U. The Cornmission has
found it a reasonable, economical and
invaluable tool in meeting. its investiga-
tive responsibilities. It is useful to all
Federal agencies as an important source
of information.
The Commession chairman reports:
mvuestigative ane intelligence officials ol
the various departments and agencies of the
Federal Government make extensive official
use of the file through their requests fa'
searches relating to investigations they are
oonducting.
Tn. its "security investigations index,"
the Commission maintains 10,250,000 ine
dex cards filed alphabetically covering'
Personnel Invesigations made by the Civi.
Service Commission and other agencies.
since 1939.. Records in this index relatc-
to incumbents of Federal positions
former employees, and applicants on,
whom investigations were made or are in
process of being made.
The Commission's "investigative file"
consists of approximately 625,000 file
folders containing reports of investiga-
tion on cases investigated by the Com-
mission. In addition, about 2,100,000
earlier investigative files are maintained
at the Washington National Records
Center in security storage. These are
kept to avoid duplication of investiga-
tions or for updating previous investiga-
tions.
For authorization for these data banks,
the Commission cites Executive Order
10450, an order promulgated in 1953.
- ing the armed services from subversion,
f the Department of the Army and other
t
military departments have been collect-
ing information about civilians who have
no dealing with the military services.
The Secret Service has created a com-
puterized data bank in the pursuit of its
? programs to protec., high Government of-
ficials from harm and Federal buildings
from damage. Their guidelines for inclu-
sion of citizens in this data bank refer
to "information on professional gate
crashers; information regarding civil dis-
turbances; information. regarding anti-
American or anti-U.S. Government,
demonstrations in the United States
or overseas; infoienation on persons
who insist upon personally contact-
ing high Government officials for the
purpose of redress of imaginary griev-
ances, and so forth.-
In the area of law enforcement, the
Bureau of .Customs has installed a cen-
tral automated dina processing intelli-
gence network which is a comprehensive
data bank of suspect information avail-
able on a 24-hour- a-day basis to Cus-
toms. The initial data base, according to
the Secretary of the Treasury, IS a
"modest" one compeising some 3,000 sus-
pect records: He states:
These records include current information
from our informer, fugitive and suspect lists
that have been maintained throughout the
Bureau's history as an enforcement tool and
which have been avatable at all major ports
of entry, though in much less accessible and
usable form, With the coordinated efforts of
the Agency Service's intelligence activities,
steady growth of the suspect files is expected.
This data bank, which is used by the
Bureau to identify :suspect persons and
vehicles entering. the United States, is
an "essential tool" in Performance of
Customs officers' search and seizure, au-
thority, Secretary Kennedy has stated.
The Department of Justice is estab-
lishing comprehensive law enforcement
data systems in coeperation with State
governments, and is funding State data
programs for law enforcement, civil dis-
turbance and other surveillance pur-
posehse.
The National Science Foundation has
created a data bank of scientists. -
The Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare has established a data bank
on migrant children to facilitate the
transfer of school records.
During our subcommittee hearings last
year, case after case was documented of
the vast programs to coerce citizens into
supplying personal Liformation for sta-
tistical data banks ii- the Census Bureau
and throughout other Federal agencies.
These are only a few of the data pro-
grams which have raised due process of
law questions from Congress and the
public.
HOW do these things come about? It
would be unfair, perhaps, to attribute
suspicious political motives, or lack of
ethics to those responsible for any one
program or for any group of programs
for collecting and ssoring personal in-
formation about citizens. Frequently,
they just grow over the years. Sometimes,
exeeutive department data banks are ei-
ther merely good faith efforts at fulfill-
ment of specific mandates from Con-
gress; or they are based on what some of-
Another department, the Housing and
-Urban Development Department, is con-
sidering automation of a departmental -
procedure. According to the report made
to the subcommittee:
The data base would integrate records
now included in FRA's Sponsor Identifica-
tion File, Department of Justice's Organized
Crime and Rackets Pile, and HUD's Adverse
Information File, A data bank consistiru, of
approximately 325,090 3x5 index cards has
been prepared covering any Individual or
nem which was the subject of, or mentioned
prominently in any investigations dating
from 1954 to the present. This includes all
FBI investigations of housing mati,ers as
well, In addition, HUD maintains an index
file on all Department employees which re-
flects dates and types of personnel security
investigations conducted under the provi-
sions of Executive Order 10450.
In the Interest of preparing for pos-
sible civil disturbances and for protect-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
SePember 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE S 14937
ficials think to be implied mandates to
acquire information necessary for Con-
gress to legislate. If so, then Congress has
no one to blame but itself when such pro-
grams unnecessarily threaten privacy or
other rights. But it then has an even
greater responsibility for acting, once its
own negligence is discovered.
Perhaps the most such officials can be
charged with is overzealousness in do-
ing their job within narrow confines, to
the exclusion of all other considerations.
Sometimes the issue of threats to indi-
vidual rights is presented only after a
data system has developed, and only after
practical problems are raised which were
not envisioned on paper.
At times, due process may be threat-
ened by the failure of the computer spe-
cialists to consider only the information
on a person absolutely essential for their
programing.
There are political reasons also. One is
the failure of heads of executive depart-
ments and agencies to mind .their own
stores and stay out of the business of
other agencies. Each department does
not not need to seize the total man when
it administers a program; only those por-
tions of him necessary for the job. An-
other reason is the tendency of executive
branch officials in the interest of politi-
cal expediency and shortcuts to law and
order goals, to seize upon the techniques
of data banks, intelligence gathering, and
surveillance activities as a substitute for
hard-hitting, practical law enforcement
work by the proper agencies, and for
creative administration of the laws.
All of these excuses will not help the
law-abiding citizen who, at the whim of
some official, is put into an intelligence-
type data bank which is part of a net-
work of inquiry for all manner of gov-
ernmental purposes.
No one would deny that the Govern-
ment of such a populous and farflung
country should not avail itself of the
efficiency offered by computers and sci-
entific data management techniques.
Clearly, Government agencies must, as
Congress has charged them, acquire,
store, and process economically the in-
formation it obtains from citizens for
administrative purposes. There is an
ever-increasing need for information of
all kinds to enable the Congress to legis-
late effectively and the executive branch
to administer the laws properly.
Furthermore, there is an obvious need
in such a complex mobile society for
recording and documenting amply the
official relationship between the individ-
ual and his government.
More and more frequently, misguided
individuals are resorting to violence and
violation of the law. Communities are
faced with rising crime rates. Local,
State, and Federal Government have
a right and a duty to know when a per-
son has a legal record of violation of the
law which, under the law, would deny
him certain rights or benefits. They
should be able to ascertain these
matters quickly.
There are always some problems of ac-
curacy and confidentiality with such
records, especially when automated. It
is not the carefully designed individual
law enforcement data, banks which con-
cern the public. Rather, the subcommit-
tee study is revealing that data programs
which have aroused the most apprehen-
sion recently are those?
Which bear on the quality of first
amendment freedoms by prying into
those protected areas of an individual's
personality, life, habits, beliefs, and legal
activities which should be none of the
business of Government even in good
causes;
Which are unauthorized, or unwar-
ranted for the legitimate purpose of
the agency;
Which keep the information they ac-
quire too long, and which by the very
retention of unknown data may intimi-
date the individual subject;
Which are part of a network of
data systems;
Which make little, if any provision
for assuring due process for the individ-
ual in terms of accuracy, fairness, review,
and proper use of data, and thereby may
operate to deny the individual rights,
benefits, privileges, reputation, which are
within the power of government to in-
fluence, grant or deny.
There is growing concern that the zeal
of computer technicians, of the systems
planners, and of the political administra-
tors in charge of the data systems threat-
ens to curtail the forces of society which
have operated throughout our history to
cool political passions and to make our
form of government viable by allowing a
free exchange in the marketplace of
ideas.
The new technology has made it lit-
erally impossible for a man to start again
in our society. It has removed the quality
of mercy from our institutions by making
it impossible to forget, to forgive, to un-
derstand, to tolerate. When it is used to
intimidate and to inhibit the individual
in his freedom of movement, associa-
tions, or expression of ideas within the
law, the new technology provides the
means for the worst sort of tyranny.
Those who so misuse it to augment their
own power break faith with those found-
ers of our Constitution who, like Thomas
Jefferson, swore upon the altar of God
eternal hostility against every form of
tyranny over the mind of man.
Mr. President, it has become danger-
ously clear in recent times that unless
new controls are enacted, new legal
remedies are provided, and unless Fed-
eral officials can be persuaded to exer-
cise more political self-control, this coun-
try will not reap the blessings of man's
creative spirit which is reflected in com-
puted technology. Rather, if the sur-
veilliance it encourages is allowed to con-
tinue without strict controls and safe-
guards, we stand to lose the spiritual and
intellectual liberty of the individual
which have been so carefully nourished
and so valianty defended, and which our
Founding Fathers so meticulously en-
shrined in the Constitution.
I say this out of my conviction that the
undisputed and unlimited possession of
the resources to build and operate data
banks on individuals, and to make deci-
sions about people with the aid of com-
puters and electronic data systems, is
fast securing to executive branch officials
a political power which the authors of
the Constitution never meant any one
group of men to have over all others. It
threatens to unsettle forever the balance
of power established by our Federal Con-
stitution.
Our form of government is the fruition
of an ideal of political, economic, and
spiritual freedom which is firmly rooted
in our historical experience. Basic to its
fulfillment has always been the monu-
mental truth that such freedom is truly
secure only when power is divided, lim-
ited, and called to account by the peo-
ple. For this reason the central Govern-
ment was divided into three separate
and equal branches.
a For this reason, the bill of rights was
added to secure certain areas of liberty
against incursion by Government and the
exercise of Federal power was limited to
certain purposes.
For this reason, we cherish and pro-
tect the legal freedom of each citizen to
develop his mind and personality and to
express them free of unwarranted gov-
ernmental control.
I differ with those who say that there
are no existing checks on this develop-
ing power of computer technology, for I
believe they already exist in our form of
Government. The guarantees are estab-
lished in our Constitution.
The forthcoming hearings will help
Congress determine how these guaran-
tees may best be implemented to meet
the demands of the computer age.
In the interest of responding to the
many inquiries from scholars, reporters
and members of the public who are work-
ing on this subject, I should like to refer
to other sources of materials which pro-
vide useful background information.
The subject of how Government man-
ages its information systems, and its
paperwork, how and when it uses com-
puters and automation to assist in this
effort, has been a continuing subject of
concern by a number of congressional
committees and their efforts should in-
terest those working on this subject.
The Senate Administrative Practice
and Procedures Subcommittee has con-
tributed valuable hearings, reports and
studies on the subject of computers, pri-
vacy, and Government dossiers. Particu-
larly informative is their 1967 report
"Government Dossier: Survey of Infor-
mation on Individuals Contained in
Government Files."
The Senate Government Operations
Committee has, in other years, con-
ducted comprehensive hearings and is-
sued reports on Government information
systems and management uses of com-
puters.
In the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Science and Astronautics
has held a provocative and stimulating
series of hearings and panel discussions
on the impact of technology, especially
on the management of Government in-
formation.
The House Government Activities Sub-
committee of the Government Opera-
tions Committee, chaired by Represen-
tative JACK Bloom, has produced valu-
able hearings, reports and legislation on
"Date. Processing Management in the
Federal Government."
More than anyone else, Representa-
tive CORNELIUS GALLAGHER has continu-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
149:!8 coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE September 8, 1970
LIly hob ited out the dangers to individual
zeelits end privacy of the establishment
ef a rl'aional data center, and his Spe-
cial Suacommittee on Invasion of Pri-
vacy, -a ter stimulating hearings, -pro-
duced. a classic and concise :report en-
alec The Data Bank Concept," The
recox di t his hearings contains testimony.
:rorii iny expert witnesses on the phi-
losophy of privacy and comnueer tech-
The elensus and Statistics Subcom-
el;ttee the House Post Office end Civh
;eervice Committee produced a thought-
provoking and influential repont in the
deth Cengress entitIed The Fed era
paperwork jungle." Scholars will find
most ieformative that subcommittee's
iiiearinge and renorts dealing .with the
papenverk requirements placed upon
businese, industry, and the public by the
feedeeal departments.
I commend the publications of ad of
these teanmittees and the thoughtful
epeechee of the cliairrnen and tee mem-
bers .34' these committees to persons in-
terested in this subject.
It is :ire/ hope that the hearings ann
etudy by the Constitutional Rights Sub-
comnntlee will add a unioue arid valu-
able dimension to the public and con-
ereseeortel dialog on the role of data
banks, information systems, aid com-
puters in our constitutional form 01
government.
Ben le Franklin, in an excellent ar-
ticle ,Lri he New -York Times on June 28,
1970, has described some of the current
data banks and computers in the Federal
(iovernment and their possible effect on
indiv,dual rights and privacy. I ask
unaneneus consent that his most per-
ceptive article be printed in the RECORD
at tins eoint together with the following
ttiouehtint articles and editarikts. These
ere aely a few of the excellent editerials
end articles on this subject which have
tome to my attention, and they suggest
nationwide interest.
Editmials from the Greensboro, N.C.,
Daily News, July 1, 1970; Asheville, N.C.,
Times, :June 18, 1970; Omaha, Nebr.,
World Herald, January 15, 1971); Sioux
Falls, S. Dak., Argus, Jamiary 1.6, 1970;
New York Post, June 30, 1970; Washing-
ton, D.C., Post, April 24, 1970 Asheville,
N.C., Cidzen, July 2, 1970; New York
Times, July 4, 1970: Computerworld,
'Marcia 4, 1970. and August 27, 1969;
Huntsville, Ala.. Times, July 12, 1970;
Washineton, D.C.. Evening Stan March
16, 1970; and Houston. Tex., Pose, March
1.6, 1970.
An article by Tom Wicker, entitled "In
lie Nation: A Right Not To Be Data-
Banked from the New York Times,
i.fuly ')70, and an article from the Bois-
i?on, Maas., Herald Traveler by John S.
7,ang, eetitled "Big Brother, U.S., Is
Watching You," April 19, 1970, an article
From the Morning Call, Allentown, Pa.,
entitled "Guardian of Freedom," June
30, 1570, "Mitchell Defends Justice De-
eartreen 'Big Brother' Role," by Jared
Stout Staten Island, N.Y., Advance, July
19, 1970., and "Justice Department Keens
e7iles on Activists," by Morton Kon-
dracke, Roanoke, Va., World News.
.1\larch 1 I, 1970.
There being no objection, the edito
rials and articles were ordered to bii
printed in the RanORD, as follows:
!Freer the New York Times, June Sit, 19701
Peneeer Coeirprirsais AMASS FILES ON SUSPEC!!!
OTTIZENS--MANY AMONG HUNT/RI:MI Ola
THOUSANDS LISTED RAVE No CRIMINAL MEC,
ORDS---CKETICS SEE INVASION OF PRIVACY :
(By Ben A. Franklin)
WASHINGTON, June 27.?The police, semi;
rity and military intelligence agencies of tlai
Federal Government are quietly comniiing ii
mass 01 computerieed, and microfilmed files
acre on hundreds at thousands of law abid-
ing yet suspect Americans.
With the justification that a revolutionar[e
erre nf assassination, violent political dissena,
and civil disorder requires it. The Govern.;
merit is building en artily of instantly re-
trievable information on "persons of in..
terest.-
The phrase is an agent's term for thosei
citizens, many with no criminal records
whom tne Government wards to keep tracl;
of in an effort to avert subversion, rioting,
and violence or harm to the nation's leaders.'
Celtics of this surveillance, so far few in
number, believe that the collection and dia.;
semination of such information on re:merlin-
inala?for whatever purpose?is unauthora
ized by law and raises the most serious con.;
stitu Lionel questions.
The foremost among them, Senator Sam J,
Ditrvin, Jr., Democrat of North Carolina, hat
seici 'het computerized files already in exist.;
ence here are leading the country toward
"police state."
Discussions with officials, an exammatiore
of some known data hies and informatiorn
supplied by the Senator show that the file:
often contain seemingly localized and mun-
dane information, reflecting events that to.:
tlay aro virtually conimonplam.
- The leader of a Negro protest against wel-
fare regulations in :at. Louis, for example. Is?
the subiect of a teletyped "spot renort" tc
Washington shared by as many as half a ,
dozen Government intelligence gathering
groups.
The name oi a college professor who finds:
himself unwittingly, even innocently, ar-
rested for disorderly conduct in a police,
roundup at a peace rally in San Francisco:
goes into the data file.
A student light in an Alabama high school:
is recoreed--if it Is interracial.
Government officials insist that the inter-
author , is needed and is handled discreetly to
protect the innocent, the minor offender and.
the repenta:at.
The critics--incl ading the Washington
chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union
and Representative Cornelius E. Gallagher,
Democrat of New .Jersey?charge that the -
system is an invasion_ of privacy and a po..n
tential infringement of First Amendment:
lights of free speech and assembly.
MASS SURVEMLANCE SYSTEMS
Senator Ervin, a conservative, a student of
ale constitution, a former judge of the
North Carolina Superior Court, and the
ehairman of the Smate Subcommittee on.
Constitutional Rights, says that the advent
of computer technology in Government file
keeping is pushing the country toward "a
mass surveillance system unprecedented in.
American history."
In a recent series of Senate speeches, Mr. ,
Ervin said that the (Langer was being masked
by a failure of Amer: cans to understand "the
computer mystique' and by the undoubted
sincerity and desire for "efficiency" of the
data bank Operation s and planners.
The Government is gathering information
on its citizens at the following places
A Secret Service computer, one of the
newest and most sophisticated in Govern-
ment. In its Memory the names and dossiers
of activists, "maicontents," persistent seekers
of redress, and those who would "embarrass"
the President or other Government leaders
are filed with those of potential assassins
and persons corivieted of "threats against
the President."
A data hank comp ted by the Justice De-
partment's civil distiirbance group It pro-
duces a weekly printeut of national tension
points on racial, class and political issues
and use individuals :Ind groups involved in
them. Intelligence oil peace rallies, welfare
pretests and the like provide the "data base"
againet which the c.unputer measures the
mood of the nation and the militancy of its
ditieens. Judgments ere made; subjects are
listed as "radical" or -moderate."
A huge file of inicr ifilmed intelligence re-
ports, clippings and other materials on civil-
ian activity maintained by -the Army's
Counterintelligence Analysis Division in
Aleatandria, Va. Its purpose is to help prepare
deployment estimatee for troop commands
on alert to response co civil disturbances in
25 American cities, Army intelligence was
ordered earlier this year to destroy a larger
data bank and to stip assigning agents to
"penetrate:- peace gioups and civil rights
, organizations. But eemplaints persist that
both are being continued. Civilian officials of
the Army say they "assume" they are not.
Computer flies intended to catch criminal
suspects?the oldest and most advanced type
with the longest success record--maintained
by the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Na-
tional Crime Information Center and re-
cently installed by tha Customs Bureau. The
airline information center's computer pro-
vides 40,000 instant, automatic teletype
printouts each day on wanted persons and
stolen property to 49 states and Canada and
it also "talks" to 24 other computers oper-
ated by state and local police departments
for themselves and a total of 2,500 police
jurisdictions. The centers says lie informa-
tion is all "from the public record," based
on local and Federal warrants and com-
plaints, but the sum product is available
only to the police.
A growing number rif data banks on other
kinds of human behavior, including, for ex-
ample, a cumulative computer file on 300,-
000 children of migraii t farm Workers kept by
the Department of Stealth, Education, and
Welfare. The object is to speed the distribu-
tion of their scholastic records, including
such teacher judgments as "negative atti-
tude," to school distriets with large itinerant
student enrollments. There is no statutory
control over distribution of the data by its
local recipients?to prospective employers, for
example.
WARNINC BY ERVIN
Senator Ervin luta warned: "Regardless of
the purpose, regardless of the confidential-
ity, regardless of the harm to any one indi-
vidual [that might occur if there were no
computer files], the eery existence of Gov-
ernment files on how people exercise First
Amendment rights, how they think, speak,
assemble and act in lawful pursuits, is a
form of official pisychoiogical coercion to keep
silent and to refrain ram acting."
But despite his sounding of such alarms,
Senator Ervin has no ed that there is "un-
usual public and congressional compel-
cency.?When he speaks on the Senate floor
of "techniques for monitoring our opinions"
and of "grave threats to our freedoms,"
the chamber is more often, than not nearly
empty. He has gained little Congressional
support and scant attention outside the
Congress.
Meanwhile, various official and high-level
pressures on Government agencies to acquire
computers and to advance their surveillance
are producing results.
The pressures include a stern recommen-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
September 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14939
dation for the broadest possible surveillance
of "malcontents'' and potential assassins by
the Warren Commission, which investigated
the assassination of President Kennedy. The
commission's mandate is widely cited in the
Government as the authority for citizen
surveillance.
The commission, headed by former Chief
Justice Earl Warren, disapproved as too nar-
row, the criteria for persons to be bought
under "protective" surveillance proposed in
1964 by the Secret Service. The guidelines
were "unduly restrictive," the commission
declared, because they required evidence
of "some manifestation of animus" by
disgruntled and activist citizens before those
persons could be brought under Secret Serv-
ice surveillance as poential "threats to the
President."
EVERY AVAILABLE RESOURCE
"It will require every available resource of
the Goverrunent to devise a practical system
which has any reasonable possibility of re-
vealing such malcontents," the commission
said.
The guideline was broadened. A computer
was installed by the Secret Service last Jan-
uary. The commission's edict became a sur-
veillance bench mark.
For surveillance of persons who may be
involved in civil disturbances, the riots of
1967 and 1968 served the same purpose.
"The Warren Commission and the riots
legitimized procedures which, I grant you,
would have been unthinkable and, frankly,
unattainable from Congress in a different
climate," one official said. "There are obvious
questions and dangers in what we are doing
but I think events have shown it is legit-
imate," the official declined to be quoted by
name.
Senator Ervin contends that in the "total
recall," the permanence, the speed and the
interconnection of Government data files
there "rests a potential for control and in-
timidation that is alien to our form of Gov-
ernment and foreign to a society of free
men." The integration of data banks, mixing
criminal with noncriminal files, is already
underway, according to his subcommittee.
INTEGRATION OF FILES
The subcommittee has been advised by the
Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment, for example, that its data systems
planners have proposed to integrate on com-
puter tape files concerning thern following:
the identities of 325,000 Federal Housing Ad-
ministration loan applicants; the agency's
own "adverse information file," the Justice
Department's organized crime and rackets
file, and F.B.I. computer data on "investiga-
tions of housing matters." The object, the
Department said, is a unified data bank list-
ing persons who may be ineligible to do busi-
ness with H.U.D.
As another example of how computer data
proliferates, the subcommittee cites a report
it received from the Internal Revenue
Service.
The I.R.S., with millions of tax returns to
process, was one of the earliest agencies to
computerize. It has also had a reputation as
a bastion of discretion. The privacy of indi-
vidual tax returns has been widely regarded
as inviolate, to be overcome only by order
of the President.
But the subcommittee has been told that
the I.R.S. has "for many years" been selling
to state tax departments?for $75 a reel?
copies of magnetic tapes containing encoded
personal income tax information. It is used
to catch non-filers and evaders of state taxes.
The District of Columbia and 30 states
bought copies of the I.R.S. computer/cover-
ing returns from their jurisdictions in 1969,
the service has told the subcommittee. Each
local jurisdiction was merely "requested" to
alert its employes that the unauthorized dis-
closure of Federal tax data was punish-
able by a 61,000 fine.
FIREARMS DATA FOR SALE
The I.R.S. also sells at cost?apparently
to anyone who asks?the copies of its data
files of registrants under the various Federal
firearms laws it enforces.
The Secret Service computer file is capable
of instant, highly sophisticated sorting and
retrieval of individuals by name, alias, locale,
method of operation, affiliation, and even by
physical appearance.
The agency's Honeywell 2200, with random
access capability, makes it possible to detect,
investigate and detain in advance "persons
of interest" who might intend?or officials
concede "they might? not but we don't take
chances"?to harass, harm or "embarrass"
officials under its protection.
Unknown to most Americans, the names,
movements, organizations and "characteris-
tics" of tens of thousands of them?crimi-
nals and noncriminals?are being encoded
in the Secret Service data center here.
The names of other thousands have been
inserted in less specialized computers oper-
ated by the Justice Department and the
F.B.I. Although the agencies insist that they
do not, the computers can?and senator
Ervin stresses that no law says they may
not ?"talk" to each other, trading and com-
paring in seconds data that may then spread
further across the nation.
The Secret Service can now query its com-
puter and quickly be forewarned that, say,
three of the 100 invited guests at a Presiden-
tial gathering in the White House Rose
Garden are "persons of protective interest."
Under current Secret Service criteria, they
may have been regarded by someone as the
authors of reportedly angry or threatening
or "embarrassing" statements about the
President or the Government. The action
taken by the Secret Service may range from
special observation during "proximity to the
President" to withdrawal of the invitation.
What constitutes a computer-worthy
"threat" thus becomes important. The Se-
cret Service asserts that it applies relatively
easy-going and "sophisticated" standards in
deciding who is to be encoded. But the
critics point out that the vast capacity of a
computer for names and dossiers?unlike
that of a paper filing system, which has
self-limiting ceiling based on the ability to
retrieve?is an encouragement to growth:
The information or "data base" for a Se-
cret Service computer name check flows into
the protective intelligence division from
many sources?abusive or threatening let-
ters or telephone calls received at the White
House, F.B.I. reports, military intelligence,
the Central Intelligence Agency, local police
departments, the Internal Revenue Service,
Federal building guards, individual inform-
ants.
Much of it that may be "of interest" to the
Federal monitors of civil disturbance data
is screened out, Secret Service spokesmen
say, or is merely name-indexed by the com-
puter with a reference to data reproducible
elsewhere.
According to guidelines distributed by the
Secret Service last August, the types of in-
formation solicited for insertion in the com-
puter?broadened at the insistence of the
Warren Commission?included items about:
Those who would "physically harm or em-
barrass" the President or other high Gov-
ernment officials.
Anyone who "insists upon personally con-
tacting high Government officials for the
purpose of redress of imaginary grievances,
etc."
Those who may qualify as "professional
gate crashers."
Participants in "anti-American or anti-
U.S. Government demonstrations in the
United States or overseas."
In an interview, Thomas J. Kelley, assist-
ant director of the Secret Service for pro-
tective intelligence, said the computer name
insertions already totaled more than 50,000.
The Secret Service is extremely careful, he
said, both in evaluating the encoded subjects
and in checking to determine that those
who receive a printout are entitled to it.
But there apparently is no formal guide-
line or list of criteria for dissemination, as
there is for insertion. And direct, automatic,
teletype access to the computer from dis-
tant Secret Service bureaus?the system used
by the airlines and the National Crime In-
formation Center?may be the next step, Mr.
Kelley said.
Nothing demonstrates how remote access
multiplies the output of a computer better
than the crime information center's system,
staged by the F.B.I. in 1966.
With direct-access teletype terminals in 21
state capitals and large cities, the informa-
tion center computer here can be queried
directly by local police departments on the
names, aliases, Social Security numbers, li-
cense tag numbers and a broad array of
stolen goods (including boats) that come
hourly before the police.
An officer in a patrol car tailing a suspici-
ous car can radio his dispatcher, ask for a
check of a license number, and be told by
teletype and radio in less than a minute that
the automobile is stolen anti that its oc-
cupants may be "armed and dangerous."
With one of the newest and most sophisti-
cated random access computers in Federal
service the Secret Service data center can
also perform some wizardry that no other
equipment here can master. It can be or-
dered, for example, to print out a list of all
potential trouble makers?"persons of pro-
tective interest"?at the site of a forthcom-
ing Presidential visit, The random access
scanning can be geographical.
Photographs and descriptions can be as-
sembled for the traveling White House de-
tail. Investigations, even detentions, can be
arranged at the site.
"You take a waiter in a hotel dining room
where the boss is going to speak," a Secret
Service spokesman explained. "Let's say the
computer turns up his name and we investi-
gate and decide it would be better for him to
be assigned to some other duties. No one has
a constitutional right to wait on the Presi-
dent, you know. That's how it works."
Cued by another more elegant electronic
program, the same computer can also produce
all the information it contains on the "char-
acteristics" of subjects encoded on its tapes?
all the short, fat, long-haired, young white
campus activists in Knoxville, Tenn., for ex-
ample. Only the Secret Service computer
can do that.
The American Civil Liberties Union of-
fice here protested last October that the Con-
stitution protects such acts as an effort mere-
ly to "embarrass" a Government official, the
persistence of citizens in seeking redress even
of "imaginary" grievances, and their partici-
pation in "anti-U.S. Government demonstra-
tions." The Secret Service, however, has de-
clined to withdrew or amend its intelligence
reporting guidelines.
"They seem satisfactory to us," Mr. Kelley
said. "If we weren't getting the information
we want, we'd change them."
Under the heading, "Protective Informa-
tion," the guidelines read as follows:
"A. Information pertaining to a threat,
plan or attempt by an individual, a group, or
an organization to physically harm or em-
barrass the persons protected by the U.S.
Secret Service, or any other high U.S. Gov-
ernment official at home or abroad.
"B. Information pertaining to individuals,
groups, or organizations who have plotted,
attempted, or carried out assassinations of
senior officials of domestic or foreign govern-
ments.
"C. Information concerning the use of bod-
ily harm or assassination as a political weap-
on. This should include training and tech-
niques Used to carry out the act.
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
'8 14.9 i0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENATE
D.Illeormation on persons who nqili
upon personally contacting Meth Govern-
ment oeicials for the purpoee ef redress of
imaginery grievances. etc.
-'Si. Information on any person who makes
=wed or Ivritten statements about high Gov-
ert .111 eat officials in the follc>wine eategorlee:
(1) threatening stetesments: (2) irrational
eaterriente, and (ii) abusive statements.
ea, tiforinatitett on profeseional trete
:re eh ere
G. Le:formation pertainhatr to 'terrorist'
"A le formation pertaining in the owner-
:Olio Dr concealment by individuals or groups
iii eaohee of tirearms, explosives, OT other im-
oleinenin of war.
Ineemation regardine eine -American
e? aritieu S. Government demorietratione in
ihe United States or overseas.
J. Information regarding ,evie disturb-
ances."
eniater Ervin, who is noted for a piquant
.4211se or humor, said in a speech a few
months age: "Although I em not a 'profes-
sional gate crasher.' I am a 'malcontent.' on
many isenes.
heee written the Persidene end other
high officials complaining of grieve/ices that
one ITH,11tV consider 'imaginary.' And on on-
I may also have 'embeeeeesed high
etovemment officials,"
oaned on the emidelines. the Senator as-
eerted, ice himself is qualified for the eorn-
pu ter.
[Ettore toe Greensboro (N C.) DE ily News,
.eme I, 1970i
PERS01.4 OF fierrease
Are ?het a "person of interest" to this
United States government? You may be
whether you know it or not, anti regardless
of whether you have a criminal record or
eet.t in irrest record.
elem are if you:
e re t ? ? erofessionai" gate crasher.
I fa..ee ttempted or plan to attempt, either
Jiittivieluelly or as a member of a group or
aree,nizeieon, to "ohysIcally harm or ember-
the persons protected by the U.S. Secret
!ervice, ,er any other high U.S. gcvernment
official Si. home or abroad."
lccci'ohe any oral or written seatements
oeoul high government officials that might
jn-eerereted as ?threateninee' "it ration al,"
,er -abusive."
Occasionally or regularly "insist opon per-
eonall y contacting high governmert officials
eor the purpose of redress of imaginary griev-
ances ee.e."
eause are some of the guidelines certain
:federal agencies are using as they quietly
;oiled up information (some of it almoet oar-
tainly false information based on rumors!
tbaniers in hundreds of thousands of taw-
;mining, but for one reason or ancther sus-
lea-. American citizens.
ft aim- Lhe federal agencies engaged in this
oirt of information gathering are the Secret
cice, he Federal Bureau of investigation_
eattire Department, Internal Revenue Serv-
ice and. the Army's Colintertn.telIlF.,T1CP,
ioehysis Division, These agencies swap in-
Formal:101i freely and make their Mee avail-
onto to eertain other federal agences.
Tee eetencies involved cite as the source
ii their authority the recominendatione of
I ccNeinreo Commission. The commission
recommended the broadest possible surveil-
lance of emalcontents" and potential asses-
et11,1.. ...tieugh toe COITIEM SRI() T1 'f. reV -
meedations have riot been enacted into law,
the fedentie agencies now in the surveillance
emess are going far beyond therm Par-
oaeioe in an ante-war cietnoestratien is
oloegh In get on the list.
This is taking place epparenely with the
tacit coneent of a majority of American cite-
:ens, posethly because most of them are un-
tare of ;lie extent of the inforrnet.on gath-
ening anti its implications,
The broad language of the guidelines the
agencies use Is dangerous in itself. So is the
practice of integrating the files on ell:inn-tall
with the files on law-abiding citivens. To.
gether with certain provisions of the Nixon
administration's omnibus crime bill such
as the preventive detention and "no-knock.
search clauses, they lay the ground work for
a police state of a sort Americans have never
known except by hearsay.
Few public critics of this developing sur.
vetIllanee system have emerged. The only two
in Congress are Senator Sam J. ErvM Jr, or
North Carolina and Rep. Cornelius Gall.aehet
of New Jersey. Mr Ervin charges that thi
system is a threat to the right of privaer
and a potential irfringement of the First
Amendment rights of free speech and astern.
lily,
Senetor Ervin, chairman of the Senato
Subcommittee on Conetitutional Rights,
tee-es the view the the government's in,
formation gathering about the lives and
habits of its citizens is pushing the croun,
try toward a mass surveillance system un
precedented in American history." 'rhe fed.
end gumshoes are setting by with it hecausi
Amerienns fail to understand the compute!
mystique and its implications, Mr. Ervin
says.
Briefly, the computer mystique Is thd
doetrine that the cDmouter is foolproof_ Mil
per cent objective, .mci naturally superior tu
the human brain that created it. Emotion
clearly does not enter into a compute/et
iecisions. And a computer can perform a;
routine task much faster than a man. But
thousends of Americans on computer billing
lists know the computer can make the samit
eft'OrS eclat men mare.
The difference is that when a compute'.
makes a mistake it is almost impossible to
get it to correct itself without the inter-
;cotton of the humans who guide it. But ie
is liot La the self-interest of those who pro-
gram end operate the computer to catch ri
iii too many mIstuees. That would tend tO
undermine the computer mystique upon'
which their Jobs and power depend.
Senator :Ervin contends, and we agree..
that within the government data files them
exibee "a potential ior control and intimate-
teen that is alien to our form of goverzunene
end ioeeign to a society of free men."'
Based on the guidelines, the Senator told re-
porters, he is himself qualified for the com-
puter a, es.
"I have written the President and oehei
high officials complaining of grievancei:
that tome may consider 'imaginary.' And
on occasion may also have 'embarrassed
high government oilicials," he said.
how do you breaa up the snoopers' nay-
house in Foggy Bottom? The quickest way is
to let your congressman and senators know
you don't like it. Congress can put the na-
tional data bank oat of business. Congress
will put it out of business when the public'
uemands it, but not before.
IFrom the Asheville (N.C.) Times, June 18
1910I
BIG BY:OTHER WINS ANOTHER (Tete
Overriding a lower court, the New Jersee
Ptnnrerae Court has decreed that pollee aeon-
Mae in that state may indeed compile ex-
haustive dossiers on persons who bike panO
In demonstrations---whether or not the de-
monstrations Involved disorder and whether
or not the person investigated committed
eny illegal act.
The range of this Big Brotherism is dan-
gernueey wide. It permits the compiling of
information on the individual's family em-
ployment, finances, personal habits end past
activities. The danger is that it makes people
who may have been only innocent bystanders
subject to the most intensive kind of official
prying. The mere gathering of the informa-
tion, which involves police questioning of
friends, employers and others, can all too
So?ptember 8, 13,170
often arouse unjustified suspicion among
acquaintances.
This prying trend is by no meant con-
fined to New Jersey, It has been revealed
recently that Army Intelligence has dossiers
on millions Of Arnerleans with the only ex-
case that such persons might sonic day be
Investigated for sensitive posts in the mili-
tary establishment ,.eust recently the White
House instigated a check into the personal
backgrounds of 250 State Department em-
ployees who protested the Cambodian In-
vasion. The FBI or course has voluminous
files
It would seem that the point is right here
at which to draw the line on this ever-
increasing snooping into the private lives
of presently uninvolved citizens. The line
shoold be at the point where an individual
has actually applied for a sensitive position,
or has actually been involved in illegal dis-
ordees. Mere partielpetion in an orderly de-
monstration should ie no authorization to
open a file.
Werth Carolina's aenator Sam J. Ervin
has been the leader 171 Congress in defending
federal employees from the often outrageous
lengths to which security checks go. Ht could
well lift his sights end take in the Whole
range of official prying into private lives.
Enforcement agencies have the right and
duty to learn all they can about individuals
who seek sensitive posts or who are sue-
pentad of eommittine illegal acts. Investiga-
tion before the act IsTndefensible.
Hopefully, the New Jersey ruling will be
taken into the federal courts and there over-
turned_ Big Brother has too much power
o?
alreedv.
[From the Omaha World-Herald, Jan. 15,
1970]
ERVIN ON GUARD
The trouble with le ..ting government agen-
cies have all those data processing machines
is that It helps creitee a demand for more
data to be processed.
This can lead to the government's having
much more informal-ion than it needs or
than is good for it or the country, especially
when the information consists of files on in-
dividual citizens.
Sen. Sam. J. Ervin, D-N.C., chairman of a
subcommittee on constitutional rights,
thinks he detects an instance in which the
government Is trying to collect too much
about too many people, and for insufficient
reason.
Perrin has questioned the Secret Service's
attempt to enlist (Alex' government agen-
cies in the compiling of computer dossiers
on persons who make threatening, irraoional
or abusive statements about high govern-
ment officials; professional gate crashers;
persons who insist or personally contacting
high government officials for the purpose of
redress of grievances, or people who take part
in demonstrations.
This sort, of inforreation gathering Ervin
characterised as "COIVIliellie to a mass sur-
opillence imprecederr ed in American his-
tory." He wrote a concerned letter about it
to Treasury ?Secretary David M. Kennedy,
whose department in(ludes the Secret Serv-
ice.
Kennedy replied ti at the Secret Service
limited such activiteee to its mission of pro-
tecting the President and others for whose
safety it is responsible.
Ere said the infolenation Ervin referred
to was being sought only from law enforce-
ment agencies, not from "run of the mill"
government workers. He also said that the
information relating to people who had taken
part in dernonstratiOns was required only in
connection with the safety of the President
while traveling.
Ervin also que,stior ed whether the in-
formation the Secret Service was gathering
would be in safe hands_ He said he was con-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP741300415R0_0_0500140014-3
September 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14941
corned over who would have access to the
files.
Kennedy replied that all computer person-
nel have, top secret clearances and that no
other persons or agencies had direct access
to the files.
That, perhaps, is the key to maintaining
continued freedom from mass surveillance
by the government. If the information on
individuals obtained by one branch or de-
partment is kept in its own files and used
only for its own necessary purposes, the like-
lihood of untoward government surveillance
is reduced.
However, if all the agencies of government
started comparing notes and collecting indi-
vidual files into master dossiers, Washington
could end up with a frightening array of
weapons that coulld be used, at the whim of
a bureaucrat, for any number of unsanctified
purposes.
Sen. Ervin has suggested several ap-
proaches to computer control and legislative
safeguards, including prohibitions on trans-
fer or use of data collected for one purpose
only.
Perhaps, in the case of tffe Secret Service,
nothing particularly ominous is involved in
the gathering of Information. At least Sec-
retary Kennedy's reassurances to Sen. Ervin
sound convincing.
But this assuredly will not be the last
time when the government's use of informa-
tion gathering and storing techniques will
be called into question. The best way to keep
1984 from getting here before it is due on
the calendar is to be alert to the dangers,
and we hope Sen. Ervin and others will con-
tinue to be.
[From the Sioux Falls (S. Dak.) Argus
Leader, Jan. 16, 19701
A HINT OF BIG BROTHER
Sen. Sam J. Ervin of North Carolina, chair-
man of a Senate subcommittee on constitu-
tional rights, has expressed concern about
what he sees as a new threat to First Amend-
ment freedoms.
The threat, he fears, is embodied in new
Secret Service guidelines for gathering and
storing information about many citizens.
Ervin has performed a valuable public serv-
ice by calling attention to this matter.
It is the old story: Little exception could
be taken to what the Secret Service is doing
if there were firm guarantees against mis-
use of the data, but there are no guarantees.
Congress had better get busy and provide
for some. Ervin thinks "the criteria for filing
Information about individuals are question-
able from a due process standpoint, are im-
practical and are conducive to a mass sur-
veillance unprecedented in American his-
tory." That is something to worry about.
[From the New York Post, June 30, 1970]
BIG BROTHER'S NEW TOYS
There has been little response on Capitol
Hill to disclosures about the government's
growing industry in recording the names and
activities of "malcontents" on its computer-
ized and milcrofilmed tapes. But the Senate's
leading lecturer on Constitutional law, Sam
Ervin (D-N.C.); has suggested that under
the government's criteria, he could well be
suspect.
According to Secret Service guidelines,
among the dissidents the computer should
know about are:
?Those who would "physically harm or
embarrass" the President or other high
officials.
?Those who seek personal contact with
high officials "for the purpose of redress of
imaginary grievances."
Obviously there's room there for more
than just one Senator.
Consider the phrase "imaginary grievance."
To whom is a grievance imaginary?the law-
maker who brings it or the official who re-
jects it? The answer, of course, is the official;
he's also the guy with the computer.
That section, then, nets all of Sen. Ervin's
colleagues in Congress. The only remaining
Capitol Hill figure unaccounted for is the
president of the Senate, Vice President
Agnew, and he could fit the composite for
section one.
That he feels to embarrass the Presi-
dent has been adequately proven. That he
might physically harm 'him would seem im-
plausible. But it should be noted that he has
had to look elsewhere than the White House
for his golfing companions and tennis
partners.
[From the Washington Post, Apr. 24, 1970]
IN THE NAME OF SECURITY
A fear of unorthodoxy is the first symp-
tom of insecurity. It marks national admin-
istrations that have no clear sense of pur-
pose or direction. Such administrations quite
naturally, like a stream seeking its own level,
tend to seek in their personnel mediocrity,
conformity, conventionality. Innovation
frightens them; dissent dismays them. And
so they bar from employment anyone who
has ever displayed any signs of eccentricity
or independence. It is all the more disquiet-
ing that such a system of selection is always
undertaken in the name of national security.
It operates, manifestly, to diminish security
rather than enhance it.
Sen. Sam 3. Ervin Jr., chairman of the
Senate's Constitutional Rights Subcommit-
tee wrote to the chairman of the U.S. Civil
Service Commission last week to inquire
about report "new rules governing qualifica-
tions for federal employment which would
exclude persons who have engaged in dem-
onstrations and protests." The CSC says that
no new rules have been adopted; the old
rules are simply being applied with a bit
more stringency. In this connection it is
alarming indeed?although by no means
surprising?to learn that the Civil Service
Commission maintains a blacklist contain-
ing the names of at least 1.5 million Ameri-
cans who might, at some time, have been
involved in "subversive activity." The black-
list is largely compiled, without any fixed
standards, from references to individuals in
the publications of so-called radical student
movements.
Shades of Titus Oates and Joe McCarthy!
These scraps of information squirreled away
in the files of the CSC are like so many pellets
of deadly poison. Although they are not
supposed to be taken in themselves as proof
of subversive activity or intent, they operate
inevitably, nonetheless, as flags disqualifying
their subjects for federal employment. The
Injustice of this system to the individuals
damaged by it is the least of the problem.
The worst of it is the impact on the public
service. As Senator Ervin observed, it is es-
sential to assure that any denial of a se-
curity clearance or of a federal job is rend-
ered on equitable, just and timely standards
of social behavior. Otherwise we face danger-
ous conformity in our national life and a
bleak future of mediocrity in the federal
service.
[From the Asheville (N.C.) Citizen,
July 2, 1970]
You CAN BE A PERSON OF INTEREST
Despite the fact that a few voices are raised
in opposition?notably that of Senator Sam
J. Ervin?intelligence agencies of the Fed-
eral government are still quietly compiling
Informational files on hundreds of thousands
of law-abiding?though presumably sus-
pect?Americans.
Declaring that violent political dissent and
civil disorder require the policy, the govern-
raent is building a mass of computerized in-
formation on "persons of interest."
The phrase is a term for those citizens,
many with no criminal records, whom the
government wants to keep track of, just in
case trouble breaks out.
The files often contain seemingly unim-
portant data, which can be shared?almost
instantaneously?by half-a-dozen intelli-
gence gathering groups.
The operation does not disturb us particu-
larly, though it is unauthorized by law and
raises serious constitutional questions.
Critics claim the computerized "who's
who" is leading the country toward a police
state.
Possibly so, and much of the action seems
senseless. But think what a convenient tool
the flies would be if the country?God for-
bid?ever drifts toward dictatorship.
[From the New York Times, July 4, 1970]
OUR ALIENATED RIGHTS
One hundred and ninety-four years ago
the Founding Fathers asserted their inde-
pendence with a ringing Declaration of man's
"unalienable rights."
Today, as too often before, those rights are
once more threatened. They are threatened
not by some tyrannical foreign monarch, but
by domestic governmental agencies whose ac-
tions and proposed actions against crime and
dissent endanger constitutional guarantees
designed to safeguard the rights of Ameri-
cans to "life, liberty and the pursuit of hap-
piness."
Typical of these new dangers is the spread-
ing web of Federal prying into the private
lives of citizens. Utilizing modern computer
technology, Federal police, security, military
Intelligence and other agencies are accumu-
lating vast stores of data on the activities of
hundreds of thousands of unsuspecting "sus-
pect" Americans.
There is nothing wrong with the use of the
computer to help make more efficient and
effective the legitimate work of law-enforce-
ment and other agencies. A modern society
must use modern techniques to help enforce
and administer its laws and to protect itself
from those who would do violence to its
leaders and institutions.
But a subcommittee headed by the highly
respected Senator Sam J. Ervin Jr., Democrat
of North Carolina, has unearthed alarming
evidence that Federal agencies have been em-
ploying the new technology to amass data
that has little or no direct relation to criminal
or other activities of legitimate Federal con-
cern. Particularly disturbing are persistent
reports that the Army's Counterintelligence
Analysis Division is disregarding orders to
stop collecting information on peace and civil
rights organizations. Furthermore, the sub-
committee reports that restrictions on the
dissemination of "intelligence" accumulated
by some agencies is woefully inadequate.
Among the "persons of interest" on whom
the Secret Service collects data are individu-
als who have merely threatened to "embar-
rass" a high Government official, who "in-
sist upon personally contacting high Gov-
ernment officials for the purpose of redress of
imaginary grievances, etc.," and who par-
ticipate in anti-American or anti-United
States Government demonstrations.
Senator Ervin, a conservative and a student
of the Constitution, has observed: "I am a
'malcontent' on many issues. I have written
the President and other high officials com-
plaining of grievances that some may con-
sider 'imaginary' and on occasion I may also
have 'embarrassed' high Government offi-
cials."
Senator Ervin is obviously a "person of in-
terest" by Secret Service definition and
therefore grist for a Federal computer. In-
deed, any American today who vociferously
? articulates unpopular or unorthodox views is
in danger of being digested by a Federal com-
puter, along with common criminals, and of
being exposed to potential harassment and
humiliation.
If Americans still cherish the Declaration
of Independence and the rights we celebrate
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
194: ciNGRESSIONAL RECORD-- SENATE
thee will insist that their represen-
e.tites in i1ongre.ss support Senator Ervin's
toerta to mace street legal limite or Federal
yilect en and disseinination (If irlformation
the aetivities of nrivate citizens
S' am, citniniter world, Aug. 27, 19691
Jam, r,r!t LOSr?
in bill to implemerit Preside-it Nixon's
"ionel aerie:untamed lob bank program
as give lee secret.' ury of labor the 'sower to
mescribe "rules and regulatione to assure
c I ty ni Information brail ted
otoldeeme" to one of the bank,.
eet noweere is tnere any mentioe of the
toint made by President Nixon during
eleotem campaign. At that, time, he
rsstsj WA; only lobs would be stared. Ap-
aecarits tveuld not have to mount their
e.,..tees, seid, only their quallaceitons. This
weuid ass era privacy and eliminate .my pos-
e/14111w tan additio:nal personal records
gethered and stored.
While tie absence of this precriction from
iteebit.. dees not mean this safeguard will not
leicluderi in the time program. tte would
miurli eappier it it were enellet. out in
bill.
17TRVSSITRE. NEE. FD
posits, the Individual has no protec-
e agaidar the use or misuse of personal in-
1,51,1:rilat OD Ft data banks, and it now appears
leatt it be several years before adequate
motective e!gislation can be formeleted,
eiut the most imeortant data leanks are
'ming set 13p now, and there is a need for im-
mediate !.a.otection. Several congressmen
hrwe suggested that a person or group be
named as a data bank ombudsman, with the
eewer anti responsibi env to protect the Mei-
eltimel age mat the misuse of informnion in
Mata banks_
Medi ae ombudsman provide, an im-
mediate sotution to an immediate problem.
And he would also help to find a loag-term
solution, because he would be able tc use els
experieoce to help formulate laws regulating
data banks.
rmibudsucen shoule be appointed en both
tht: stale and federal level. But the appoint-
t1 -t tt, n such ombunemen OehlIT only it
meesueu 'la brought on legislators new. This
is an election year and consumer protection
Is un ler per tent issue?con geessmen a ad state
teieslators wni be more responsive this year
than at any other time.
tee propose that undividuats and local
ehapters m professional societies irnmellately
nein a campaign for data bank ombodsmere
etich a campaign shouid be primarily edu-
eationaa at erst: informing local newepapers.
seeete legisietors, and congressmee of the
lengers posed by computerized date banks
-uod propeemeg the appointment of ombuds-
men as an inunediate solution. Ane we moat
keen the messure on.
:t!ata bark ombudsmen offer the aim hone
erotectine, the riches of the individual in
te near future. Concerted action by corn-
er rame,sionais could make slich pre-
tostion a reality.
iFrom the Washington Evening i";sr, Mar.
le. 1970i
mem 500 THE COMPTITER
'"lie cliche about people having skeletons
-their closets is woefully out of date,. These
,eise, the seeietons are in, computerized data
melte. Whet a worse, the figurative seeletons
;AL7 be it; stabeled with the wronir owners'
lames, or they may be the figment of a corn-
eitterls nriagination.
The dangers of the mysterious, bard-to-
elide data banks have been much discuesed
'la the litet few years. The discussion is
about to accelerate aizain, and it's a good
heiftr, because eventually something may ee
etme about the problem.
The National Academy of Sciences has a
$149,500 Russell Sane Fartindatlon grant to
conduct a broad study of how to preserve
privacy and civil liberties against the on-
eleeght of the commuter age. The study will
be conducted by toiumbia Professor Alan
Westin. an expert on the subject, and will
focus on how to protect the rights of persons
(meani.ag everybody O on whom information
IS collected and stored for a variety of uses.
Westin will be backed by a panel including
Ralph Nader, James garmer, former Attorney
General. Katzenbach end Representative Cor-
iltAiLLS Gallagher of New York, who heads
the House subcommittee on invasion of pri-
vitcy.
On aaother front, House committee hear-
ings are to start tomorrow on the proposed
Fair Credit Reporteig Act, which already
has Senate approval The bill aims at giving
consumers a way to counter erroneous or
malicious information on file against them
in credit data bank'.. Included in the bill's
moyisions are rules to limit disclosure of
htformation, to let the consumer know
what's in his own fie and to give hin the
right to dispute the . nformation.
Still dormant is the 5-year-old proposal
for a National Data Bank, a menacing cen-
I ralization of the information collected by
iraleral agencies. The plan raised congres-
sional howls in 1960 and was quickly put
down as an Orwellian step toward Big Broth-
erism. :But don't c' tent it out?it makes
too much computer-type sense to have one
Mg control panel able to spill the beans on
all our
Future studies are likely to add to the
growing pile of horrer stories abotit people
whose lives were marred because a computer
Indeed up some embarrassing fact from the
sooner-forgotten past?or from nowhere. It's
too bad the comprehensive National Academy
-If Science investigati en, which could lead to
important reforms, 15 scheduled to take 2ea
years. Became that will bring us 21t, years
closer to 1.984.
!Preen the Houston (Tex.) Post, Mar, 16,
1,701
DATA BANK IDEA ALIVE
the proposal advar red a few years ago to
eetablish a national "data bank" in which
informaidon collected by federal agencies
would he stored and made available at the
push of a computer button appears to be
-.ar from dead..
it is being talked sip again, at least suf-
aciently for Sen. Sam J. Ervin of North
Carolina, chairman or the Senate's subcom-
mittee en constitutional rights, to say that
he will reopen the herrings this year.
Despite assurances that there would be
ell kinds of safeguards to protect the privacy
Isi incliatetual citizens, the mere thought of
the pooling of all the information gathered
by government agencies was enough to
,'.use la the minds of a great many people
Orwellian nightmares of a "Big Brother"
watching theit every move constantly.
:aver' though it was promised that the
-toted information would be impersonal and
,uot linked with any individual, being of the
6:mere' leme collected by the Census Bureau,
there we're fears that once the information
hank should be established, this could be
heneed It would be a relatively simple mat-
ter to compile and file away a fairly com-
plete dossier on every citizen, containing all
kinds of highly personal information. This
information might or might not be accurate.
The great fear was that any concentration
of data could be abs ted and the informa-
tion misused, perhaps not immediately but
at some time in the futtne. The instinctive
reaction of most peeple that it would be
much safer, so far as the privacy and per-
haps the freedom of the individual citizen
is concerned, not to permit the proposed
-bank" to be created.
Sen/ember 8, /970
Potentially, there could be a great con-
centration of power in the hands of who-
ever assembled and &enrolled the informa-
tion, and it IS elementary that the diffusion
of power is the bee t protection against
tyrannical government.
Federal agencies eras collect a great deal
of information about a great many people
In the course of their uormal operations, but
the data Collected by one in most cases is
not available to the others. For the "data
bank" idea to be acceptable to most people,
It Would be necessary that there be strong
restrictions upon the information that is
pooled, on how it is to be used and to whom
le is to be made available. It remains for
advocates of the idea to prove that adequate,
foolproof safeguards against misuse and
abuse are possible.
Although efforts to establish a national
"data bank" have been blocked thus far, vast
quantities of highly personal information
already are stored in computers about prac-
tically every American citizen, and if the
data ever .should be brought together, it
would make fairly complete dossier on him
and all of his personal effairs.
The tremendous exransion of this coun-
try's credit system has made neceeeary the
compilation of informittion about everybody
who buys anything on credit. It is necessary
for those who extend credit to know a great
many facts, much of it very personal, about
those seeking credit to determine how good
credit risks they are. This has given rise to
many private agencies that collect this in-
formation. Many of these co-operate and
exchange information.
It is estimated that one credit agency
alone has data on millions of American. on
file in its computers. Every time a citizen
draws a paycheck or answer's a census ques-
tion, the information is recorded on some-
body's computer somewhere.
There is relatively little reason for alarm
in this because the information is frag-
mentary and widely scattered, What arouses
concern ere contimerm efforts to bring all
these bite said pieces of information together
in one vast computer hank, with the possi-
bility that the data might fall into the wrong
hands and/or be misused,
[From the New York Times, July 7, 107a]
IN THE NATION: A :armee No To tBit
DATA-BANNED?
(By Tom Wicker)
WASHINGTON.?Do yea have a right not to
be stored in a computer, where you can be
called up for instant Mvestigation by any
bureaucrat or law officer who considers you a
"person of interest" oe who may want to
provide someone else?maybe your em-
ployer?with "facts" shout you? If you
haven't thought about that, it's high time
you did.
Ben A. Franklin detailed in The New York
Times of June 28, for example, how Govern-
ment "data banks" are mushrooming out of
computer wizardry. Literally hundreds of
thousands of individual dossiers now are
being Stared on -tape by various agencies. The
tape can be fed to computers with instant
reetep end the computers and tapes can be
interconnected from one agency or region to
another in an ominots national network.
Numerous state agencies have easy access to
the ineterial in this computer network, arid
ere under little or DO pressure to keep it
confidential.
At the very least, therefore, some guide-
lutes on the compilation of these banks and
some safeguards on disseminating the mate-
rial appear in order. An interesting case
rending in Federal court here (Menard at
Mitchell and Hoover) may help provide
them.
A Maryland man was arrested in Cali-
fornia in 1955 on susolcion of burglary, held
for two days, then released when police
found no basis for charging him with a
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
September .8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE S 14943
crime. Subsequently, a brief record of the While the machine is enabling heretofore have ben keeping tabs onou. Some agents
e y
detention, together with the Maryland man's impossible analysis of the activities of or- have seized garbage in hunting incrimi-
fingerprints, appeared in F.B.I. criminal files. ganized criminals, it is also raising new ques- nating evidence.)
Maintaining that the record is misleading tions about computers in law enforcement WasmNarow.?Behind the closed door of
and incomplete and that it is not properly and invasion of individual privacy. Room 2439, a handful of government clerks
a "criminal record," the Maryland man Within the computer's memory, the de- search through radical newspapers, method-
moved in Federal District Court here to have partment is storing histories of the major ically snipping out names. They are hunting
d minor figures in confederated crime, Americans favorably mentioned by the publi-
how and where they travel, even details on cations of dissent.
their eating habits. Found, snipped, checked, reviewed, the
But the department is also computerizing names are conveyed down a wide clean cor-
the names of those legitimate individuals ridor to be fed into a "subversive activities"
with whom the Mafiosi often deal, persons data bank already bulging with names of 1.5
against whom no charges have been brought million citizens.
or proved. The name-hunters in Room 2439 are low-
Thus while members of the Organized level servants of the Civil Service Commis-
Crime and Racketeering section are highly sion, the agency set -up to oversee federal
pleased with the workings of their still em- employment.
bryonic system, they are deeply troubled by The commission's security dossier?not to
the privacy issue. be confused with its separate files on the 10
"I feel like I'm walking around with a million persons who have sought federal jobs
bomb in my hands," said one official who since 1939?are indicative of the watch the
has worked on the project and who declined government keeps on Americans in this age
to be quoted by name. "Some of this in- of dissent and social turmoil.
formation is really dynamite." An Associated Press study showed:
"The fact is the privacy issue is one of Military intelligence agents have spied on
paramount importance and we haven't yet civilian political activities and kept secret
figured out a way to balance the law en- computerized files on thousands of individ-
forcement needs with the constitutional uals And organizations although Pentagon
safeguards for privacy," the official said. counsel cannot cite any law authorizing this
For the moment, however, the privacy surveillance.
question is being put to one side as the The Army has kept a so-called blacklist
department fine-tunes the computer and ex- which included the names, descriptions and
plores its use in analysis of what's going pictures of civilians "who might be involved
on within the organized- crime community, in civil disturbance situations."
Individuals now included within its mem- A second list has been circulated by the
ory against whom there may be no more
than a suspicion?a person who, for ex-
ample, is frequently seen in the company
of a known hoodlum?are protected by tight
security.
According to the department, only law
enforcement, agencies with a need to know
are given information drawn from the com-
puter, and they insist that individuals listed
because of unverified suspicions are made
known to none outside the federal investi-
gative family.
The basic data for the computer has come
from reports given the organized crime sec-
tion by 26 other federal agencies, principally
the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service and
others that regularly join the section in co-
operative investigations.
The information is, however, keyed into
portions of the 400,000 file cards containing
250,000 names of Mafia or Mafia-related
individuals.
Until six weeks ago, the file cards were ,
the major source of section information, a
system that prevented recall of the data they
contained without spending days, perhaps
weeks, of manual sorting.
The computer makes possible high-speed
searches of the records the section has in-
corporated within its memory, yielding up
in minutes, for example, a list of all those
Mafia figures nicknamed "Sonny."
it purged from the F.B.I. files.
COURT CONCERN INDICATED
The Court denied this motion, and the
man appealed. On June 19, the Court of Ap-
peals for the District of Columbia, while
finding no fault with the district court's rul-
ing on the motion, ordered the case remand-
ed for trial and "more complete factual de-
velopment. The supporting opinion, al-
though limited to the case, suggests the cir-
cuit court's concern about what ought to go
into Government files, under what rules, and
whether proper safeguards surround its dis-
semination.
The judges (Bazelon. McGowan and Rob-
inson) pointed out that the fact that the
police had been "unable to connect" the
Maryland man with a crime did not neces-
sarily acquit him of having committed one,
and they conceded that certain arrests not
followed by a charge or a conviction might
be a proper part of someone's criminal record.
But, they asked, did the mere fact that a
man had been picked up and held for two
days justify the F.B.I. in retaining the record
in its criminal identification files?
An arrest record (the distinction between
a "detention" and an "arrest is considerably
less than a difference) can be terribly damag-
ing to one's opportunities for schooling, em-
ployment, advancement, professional licens-
ing; it may lead to subsequent arrests on
suspicion, damage the credibility of wit-
nesses and defendants, or be used by judges
in determining how severely to sentence.
Moreover, thousands of arrests are made
every year without any further action against
the arrested person, usually for lack of
evidence.
DISSEMINATION ISSUE
Thus, the court asked, if a person is
arrested, even properly, but no probable
cause for charging him is developed, should
he "but subject to continuing punishment
by adverse use of his 'criminal' record?"
This has particular point because of the
lack of established safeguards on dissemi-
nation. The Maryland man's record, for in-
stance, could be made available by statutory
authority to "authorized officials of the
Federal Government, the states, cities, and
penal and other institutions" and also, by
an Attorney General's regulation, to govern-
ment agencies in general, most banks, in-
surance companies, and railroad police.
When New York recently passed a law
requiring employes of securities firms to be
fingerprinted, several hundred were dis-
missed for "criminal records," but about half
of them had only arrests, not convictions,
on their records. The Appeals Court, noting
this, reasoned that F.B.I. records had been
passed directly to the securities firms in-
volved.
As data banks proliferate, so will the in-
discriminate use of the material they con-
tain. And that raises the question whether
an American citizen has a constitutional or
legal right not to be data-banked, comput-
erized, stored exchanged and possibly dam-
aged?materially or in reputation?by the
process.
[From the Huntsville (Ala.) Times,
July 12, 19701
"MAFIA MACHINE" GOES To WORK
(By Jared Stout)
WASHINGTON.?A computer nicknamed the
Mafia Machine has gone to work in the Jus-
tice Department, giving organized crime
fighters their most powerful weapon to date.
But it may be a mixed blessing.
Such information becomes useful because
the operators of big crime often speak of
one another only in nickname references.
Gerald Shur, the man-in-charge of the
computer program, said in a recent inter- billion times in federal records. This means,
view "the kinds of questions we can ask are the panel said, that the statistical odds are
limited only by the data we can feed into that a dozen different agencies have files on
the computer." the typical law-abiding citizen.
Shur said ultimately the department hopes Much of this data is held in strictest con-
to store enough information to enable pre- fidence, Census questionnaires, for example,
dictions about the impact of investigations can be inspected only by Census Bureau em-
or develop economic theories to estimate ployes?and they're sworn to secrecy.
what kinds of business situations organized
Federal income tax returns also are con-
crime may be heading toward. sidered confidential by the IRS. But they
?
may be seen by the heads of federal agen-
[From the Boston Herald Traveler]
cies, some congressional committees, the gov-
BIG BROTHER (U.S.) IS WATCHING You ernors of every state and by a special coun-
(By John S. Lang) sal to President Nixon.
(NOTE?The government knows far more A proposal three years ago to gather files
about you than you may suspect. And if of all agencies into a National Data Bank
you've ever taken part in protest marches or and use them for statistical purposes kicked
the like, even the military services probably up such a furor in Congress that, according
Pentagon's counter-Intelligence Analysis Di-
vision as a two-volume, yellow covered, loose-
leaf publication entitled "Organizations and
Cities of Interest and Individuals of In-
terest"?according to a court suit.
The FBI, with the most extensive security
files and 194 million sets of fingerprints, has
infiltrated the leadership of virtually every
radical organization in the United States.
Agents of the FBI, Naval Intelligence and
local police have seized citizens' garbage in
hunts for incriminating evidence. In one case
Navy agents examined garbage from an en-
tire apartment house to find information
about one tenant.
The Secret Service has set up a computer
with 100,000 names and 50,000 investigative
dossiers on persons who it says could be dan-
gerous to top government officials.
A Senate subcommittee found that fed-
eral investigators have access to 264 million
police records, 323 million medical histories
and 279 million psychiatric dossiers. In each
category, that's more numbers than there are
people in the United States.
And the massive files of investigative and
intelligence agencies contain but a small por-
tion of the information the government col-
lects on its citizens.
Millions of scraps of information go into
federal files routinely when citizens pay
their taxes, answer the census, contribute
for Social Security, serve in the military, or
apply for a passport.
In fact, a Senate subcommittee calculated
that the names of U.S. citizens appear 2.8
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
S 149 It cONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
Lo 0"-te iliciaj, "now that issue is dead as
coda;'
tut I ie AP etude ehowed that in:testier-1th;
and ..ntelitgence agencies cam---and do?share
the information they gather.
For es-ample, investigative attendee of the
executive branch have access to the "sub,.
7erSiVe activities" data bank in the Civi
;Service Commission 'a down tow ft Wash in e.
it heatiquarters.
Acs3ording to an official corn:re:Aston pulelt.
eetion. roe data barer "at nreeent . enn-
lams approximately 2.5 nellion Index (sleds
;simmer:1MS information relating to Commil.
nab on.other subversive esedvities."
eurnent adds: "No information
shoed to this file until it 'has been deters
mined atter careful review by it reep01,01111,7
filial Who is experienced in this fielij. that
en melee question of eubversive Activity 1,3
in volved. . ."
A quiele thumbing t.hrottell the file die-
iioarea. neenes like:
(ha ties Garry a white San Erancisce at-
,aney eviter represents the Bleck Panthers,
Robert eshelton, a leader of the Ku Rine
Man.
..o?,..a,ton Lyme a professor and radical
ltoter- llesPuele head of the Minutemen
The ales are kept as index cards in treaeb-
anized retary egibinets. There are thick bun-
dles of cards for some individeeise only one
an Ct ibr others. The cards ?do not state any-
thing, ithent a person: they are more like a
innfaiioai-r citing publications which seen-
too Lint (Mtn evaluated, ti-ne el-innings are
.:Lbnsiberett i'raw data" and are kept in other
F,iine; cabinets.
One -ithine in the raw data. s that of Wil-
1 am. Kees tier, civil rights a.tior ley who
renre,sent:ad the defenriante in the: "Chicago
conspiracy trial and who feces a jail term
ler contempt of court.
Kimball Johnson. direator of the commie.
reati of Personnel en yea eeeteene?
!aye the security file is kept 111) to date by 17
"m inerts in the field," who read Coin-
'no ,ttsl elications, the Black Panther
the free presses, unite:ground
e'nears :bee other publications stick, ets The
termer-bap Workers World,. The eseeeant
Le:en-item News Service.
We reiet these anti clip the name; of pen-
ci euppocled by them," Jobnson. says. "rt's
et in the nubile domain. ft's Renner -5hait
fass you rho it and title it ebere's no one
-mind thee can comerehend it."
-aviation tester Pieree waives a hero' toward.
;,tank ri mblicatione on a table hi his of-
eine tr:tys: "That's what we chsck. !it's
teI :atteiersive material. Note the Com-
mie are emassio and others ell tied in to
3.earanterevrree
t, Cite a statute or reputation an-
itiorizinF the security file, Johnson replied.
here ii no StleCIfie hhii, But, he atiee
he filt is an es,ential teef the erten-
e"ssion'e leieal function of investieeeing tee
satiess I aeple for sed.eral eit:pleernent 'or
ority pieetions. And there le
which i3hifted ramonsibility sor naskiee
;ter:a:11nel investigations from, the Ear to the
il Servire Commission."
cOn,hission tt;, vs its seccritc eitig
person,-el investigation vsh eh trite "the
6ons 31e LC,S111701100 that all eersen3 preet.-
tesee ts es, emplochri. , "internment
ttlietWOrthy, of rood cOnditet
charartr, and or complete end unswerr-
eit loyalty to the United States, "
a FFIT. Director J. Edgar Hoover told Congre
last year his agermy had placed leformarr
e and sources "at all levels including the tc
echelon" of such groups ea the Student Nor_
violent Coordinating Committee, the K
Klux Klan, the Black Panther Party, the Ri.
public of New Africa, the Nation of Ulan
l the Revolutionary Action Movement, th
Minutemen and the Third Nationat Confer
ence tan Black Power.
Hoover also gave a hint of the scope c
FPI re-runty flies when he outlined holt
agents keep tabs ors sympathizers who core;
tribute money for radical causes.
"Included among these," he testified,
a Cleveland industrialist who has long beei3
a Soviet apologist, the wife of an attorney
In Chicago who is a millionaire, an heires3
In the New Englani area who is married to
an individual prominent in the academie
community who ha:; been active in New Left
activities, and a wealthy New York lecture'
and writer -who for years had been linked to
more than a score of Communist-front ore
ganizations and has contributed liberally to
many of them.
"These individuals alone have contributee
more than $100,000 in support of New Left
ectivities."
Hoover also said agents have identified
most of the writers of antiwar newspapers?
which he termed "Use work of the dedicated
revolutionaries who are against ROTC and
against our war effetit in Vietnam"?and had
referred that information to the Justice De-
partment for possible prosecution.
Don Edwards, a member of the subcom-
mittee which oversees FBI budget requests,
complains that Congress does not exert pro-
per authority over the FBI. He believes one
reason for this is fear stemming. from long
standing rumors that the FBI, among its
many dossiers, has illes on each member of
('ongress.
"There are lots of congressmen who think
that probably they do have files," Edwards
told an interviewer.
But the rumors have never been proven
and there have been few complains from
congressmen.
There was, howevai, much alarm expressed
in Congress with the recent disclosure that,
for the past several years, military intelli-
gence agents have canducted surveillance of
civilian political ace vista and have fed in-
formation on individuals and organizations
into date books.
In reeponee to BO congressional inquiries,
the Army admitted sat it:
Kept a so-called acklist which ircluded
-the names and descriptions and pictures of
civilians "wee': might be involved in ciiil dis-
turbance situations."
Operated a computer data bank for ster-
age and retrieval of civil disturbance in-
formation.
Used its intelligersie agents in some in-
stances for direct observation and lailltra-
tion of civilian orgaeizations and political
meetings.
But ir making these admissions, the Army
said that during the past year it has sbarply
curtailed such activities after realizing they
weren't needed to ?repare for any civil
clisturbannes.
The Army said the blacklist?a term to
which it objected?had been ordered with-
drawn and destroyed. It said the computer
data bank had been discontinued and that
its agents have conducted no overt opera-
tions in the civilian area during the past
year.
Extensive details of the military's do-
ineetic intelligence activities were desclosed
In January in an article written by a termer
intelligence officer, Cmistopher H. Pile of
New York, for the tlagazine Washingtoa
Monthly.
Pyle wrete that the Army's Intelligence
Command, headquartered at Pt. Holaleird,
was in a position to develop one of the
Sio-)tember 8, 1970
E largest domestic intelligence operations out-
side the Communist world.
p A fete weeks later, the Pentagon an-
- flounced that Ft. Holabird would be closed in
ti an economy move and the Army Intern-
- gence School there would be moved to Ari-
l'e mlAna. Army spokesman said the domestic
s surveillance operations were expanded in
1967 after the outbreak of serious chill dis-
f orders.
"There was a teeing we had to be in in.
position to predict when federal troops would
be used again. We need more information
to inform tactical commanders on the streets
and to guide them. This led to widespread
collection efforts," las- said.
The information gathered by the military
was funneled into Ft. Holabird, summarized
and eent out on the Army's Teletype system.
One weekly summeey, marked "Pass to DIA
Elements," was distributed to Army com-
mands throughout the world. It contained
this dispatch:
"The Philadelphia ihapter of the Women's
Strike for Peace ep.msored an anti-draft
meeting at the First Unitarian Church which
attracted an audience of about 200 persons.
Coined Lynn, an author of draft evasion
literature, replaced Yale chaplain William
Sloan Coffin as the peincipal speaker at the
meeting."
Lynn, the Women's Strike for Peace and a
dozen other inclividuels and groups identi-
fied in the summary have filed suit through
the American Civil Liberties Union. claim-
ing the Army has violated their constitu-
tional rights of free speech and association.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in
Washington, contends that in addition to
the surveillance and computer operations the
Army admits conducting, it is concealing
from Congress the existence of:
A large microfilm data bank on civilian
political activity indexed by computer and
maintained by the Counterintelligence Anal-
ysis Division.
A second computerized domestic intelli-
gence data bank maintained by the Con-
tinental Army Command at Ft. Monroe, Va.,
as well as extensive regional files at other
locations.
The "two volume, :sellow-covered, loose-
leaf publication entitled Counterintelligence
Research Projects Organizations and Cities
of Interest and Individeals of Interest, which
describes numerous individuals and organi-
zations unassociated with either the Armed
Forces or with domestic disturbances."
The Army said it would not comment on
the lawsuit's charges.
But, in an interview, a spokesman for the
office of the Army's chef counsel could cite
no legal basis for surveillance of civilian ac-
tivities.
"In' the civilian sphere the FBI has juris-
diction," the spokesman. said. "We must get
approval for what We do from the PEI. Terre
is no specific law on domestic intelligence as
such applying to the Army."
To determine the rile ige of domestic inn-
itary surveillance, The essociated Press sub-
mitted a list of 20 questions to each branch
of the service. Army se okesmen declined to
answer the questions specifically, preferring
to speak generally ahont the program. The
Air Force said it does not have any domestic
-program. The Navy never responded.
! But Navy intelligence operations slipped
!into public view 12,st August when the ACLU
complained that agents were sifting through
garbage from the apartment house of Sea-
man Roger Lee Priest accused by the Navy
of soliciting members el' military forces to
desert in an underground newspaper lie
published.
A spokesman for the District of Columbia
government acknowledged garbage from all
apartments in the building where Priest
lived Was searched bectuse it couldn't he
u1S) t',.Cc that when. :try sill-ear:eve le-
eirmiltiOn '-'sin the security fiie in. identified
selie a persen ender investigation the seise
is referred re: the Eisi for s fun field loyalty
'tabs,
The VET, has overall reartottsthillty
!.rtd pawereasharsed on Istesiiiehil,1 (tree_
aves datine batik to 1989---for ineestigating
:attars reeiting to espionage, sabotage and
iiiceatlers el- neutrality laws.
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 ? CIA-RD_P_74130,.Q414.11W0500140014-3
SepUmber 8, 1970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?
separated from the seaman's prior to collec-
tion.
"We ended up with an ONI agent posing
as a sanitation worker and picking up trash
and bagging the garbage," he said.
"Then the Civil Liberties union got in,
raising hell."
Searching citizen's garbage apparently is
not uncommon for government security
agencies. Last summer a D.C. Sanitation De-
partment official disclosed that the city, on
request of investigators, makes up to a dozen
special garbage collections yearly 'fin the
interests of law and order."
Besides garbage, private mail also is often
watched by government law enforcement
agents.
The most commonly used means is the
"mail cover," recording from a letter the
name and address of the sender, the place
and date of postmarking and the class of
mail.
The Post Office declines to say haw many
mail covers are in effect. A Senate committee
asked for a list of several years ago, but the
agency objected.
"The list you have requested would con-
tain the names of about 24,000 persons, a
large percentage of whom are innocent of
any crimes," a postal official said.
More recently, the Post Office confirmed a
new regulation allows federal agents to open
all mail coming into this country frim vir-
tually every nation in the world.
"However," a spokesman said, "it's not in-
tended to be used on personal mail."
When threatening letters are received by
the President or other high government offi-
cials, the Secret Service moves into action.
Operating under guidelines adopted after
President John F. Kennedy's assassination,
the agency collects "protective information"
which is fed into its computers.
One of the 1963 guidelines asked other
federal agencies to relay information on citi-
zens who make abusive statements or at-
tempt to "harm or embarrass' high govern-
ment officials.
Civil libertarians objected that this guide-
line means that any, citizen: who writes a
strongly worded letter of complaint to a
government official might come under the
agency's scrutiny.
A Secret Service spokesman responded:
"At the time the guidelines were passed emo-
tions were high. Everyone was saying, 'Let's
protect the President.' Now people are ap-
parently forgetting the tragedy of that
year .. ."
Several years ago when Congress was con-
sidering proposals to establish a National
Data Bank to gather files from all agencies
and use them for statistical purposes, author
and sociologist Vance Packard raised the
spectre of Big Brother, the symbolic total-
itarian government in George Orwell's book
"1984."
Noting that the year 1984 would come in
the next decade, Packard told a-congressional
committee:
"My own hunch is that Big Brother, if he
ever comes to the United States, may turn
out to be not a greedy seeker, but rather a
relentless bureaucrat obsessed with effi-
ciency."
[From the Morning Call, (Pa.) June 30, 1970]
GUARDIAN OF FREEDOM
Sen. Sam J. Ervin Jr. is a conservative
Democrat from North Carolina. But he is
also a guardian of constltutionlly guaran-
teed freedoms.
Sen. Ervin is currently worried about the
massive record-keeping which has come into
vogue in government agencies. And press re-
ports concerning the type of records being
kept give substance to his fears.
It is all very well for the FBI to utilize
computers to process information on crimi-
nals and persons sought in connection with
crimes. This type of 'service has been cred-
ited with speeding the apprehension of sus-
pects.
But it is a different matter when the Jus-
tice Department, the government's prosecu-
tor; maintains dossiers on participants in
peace rallies and welfare protests. Moreover,
Justice takes it upon itself to categorize such
persons as "radical" or "moderate" although
it is unclear upon what criteria it bases this
distinction.
The Secret Service, which says it is trying
to spot potential assassins, also has recourse
to the computers: It keeps files on miscon-
tents, persistent seekers of redress and those
who would "embarrass" the President or
other high-ranking government officials.
These are just a few of the agencies which
maintain voluminous files on the activities
of citizens in a wide variety of fields. The
reasoning behind this extensive bookkeep-
ing is valid. Agencies believe that to be fore-
warned is to be forearmed. In brief, it is a
continuing hunt for potential trouble-
makers.
But when the government gets into the
business of gathering intelligence about its
own citizens, it can easily go too far. And
there is evidence that it has already done
so.
For what reason should an agency keep
notes on persons who are doing nothing more
than exercising their right to freedom of
speech, assembly and petition? Since when
has it become a crime to persistently seek
redress of grievances?
When It gets into these areas, government
is dangerously close to trampling on consti-
tutional freedoms and on the individual's
right to privacy. It is easy to see how Sen.
Ervin reached the conclusion that such
methods have "the potential for control and
intimidation that is alien to our form of
government and foreign to a society of free
men."
[From the Advance, July 19, 1970]
MITCHELL DEFENDS JUSTICE DEPT.'S "BIG
BROTHER" ROLE
(By Jared Stout)
Wssnincron.?The Justice Department
has asserted a virtually unchecked right?
not subject to the Constitution?to keep rec-
ords on persons who are "violence prone"
in their protests of government policies.
The right, Atty. Gen. John N. Mitchell
said through a spokesman, arises from the
inherent powers of the federal government.
"to protect the internal security of the na-
tion. We feel that's our job."
It was the first time Mitchell had out-
lined the legal basis for the collection and
computerization of dossiers on protesters
within the department's special Civil Dis-
turbance Unit.
The assertion matches in breadth the
claim made June 13, 1969 when the
government said it had unlimited powers to
eavesdrop on those the Justice Department
thinks are seeking to "attack and subvert
the government by unlawful means."
The eavesdropping claim was made in de-
fense of electronic eavesdropping against
some defendants in Chicago Seven riot
conspiracy trial.
The extension of this doctrine to the de-
partment's domestic intelligence operation
came in response to questions arising from
Mitchell's news conference last Tuesday.
Mitchell declined to give the legal founda-
tion for the intelligence operation last Tues-
day. He said only "there are no court de-
cisions that would restrain us from compil-
ing this type of information."
Later, however, he acknowledged through
the department's spokesman that the legal
argument used to justify the Chicago Seven
eavesdropping also applied to the intelli-
gence operation.
In the Chicago case, the department said
nothing in the Constitution's ban on un-
reasonable searches and seizures limits the
S 14945
powers of the President?and the Attorney
General?to eavesdrop, and now keep records
on, those who try to "foment violent dis-
orders."
This position has been sharply attacked
by critics including Sen. Sam Ervin Jr. (D-
N.C.) as a step toward "a police state" and
a potential violation of First Amendment
rights to free speech and association.
Earlier this past week, it was disclosed that
Treasury Department agents had been seek-
ing the names of those who had checked
out books on bombs and explosives from
public libraries in Atlanta and other cities.
Ervin attacked this step as he has other
intelligence efforts, including those of the
Secret Service which lists in computer files
all those who may pose a threat to the
President.
Throughout his opposition to such activi-
ties, Ervin has stressed the lack of standards
in deciding who shall be listed within such
files, and how once a person is catalogued,
he may learn of the step and question his
inclusion.
The Justice Department spokesman said
the definition of "violence prone" persons
for its purposes included those who either
acted violently, counselled violence or ap-
peared in the ranks of violent confrontations.
He said the dossiers were not kept on "as
broad a range as those compiled by the
Army," a reference to the watch military
intelligence agents have kept on civilian
protesters. No notice is given to those whose
names have been recorded.
According to the spokesman, this means
those individuals listed in department records
at least had to be present or in the leader-
ship of violent events. Army records included,
for example, those who subscribed to New
Left publications.
It was learned, however, that the justice
intelligence unit still has access to the records
compiled by the Army, which said in Febru-
ary It had discontinued its record-keeping
but has hung on to those it made in four
years from 1966.
[From the World News, Roanoke, Va., Mar.
11, 1970]
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT KEEPS FILES ON
ACTIVISTS
(Note.?In the last few weeks members of
Congress have responded with cries of out-
rage to a magazine article that reported on
how the Army was maintaining a computer-
ized data bank on perSons it considered po-
litically dangerous. As a result, the Army
announced it was closing down the data bank
and that it only began it because the Justice
Department, which is responsible for political
Intelligence functions, was unable to handle
them. Now the Justice Depanntent says it is
ready to take over. Morton Kondracke, who
reported the government's political intelli-
gence activities-in this article.)
(By Morton Kondracke)
WASHINGTON.?While the Army has closed
down its political computer, the Justice De-
partment maintains an even bigger one in its
"war room" containing data on thousands
of individuals, including many whose activi-
ties are entirely nonviolent.
Political computers were part of the fed-
eral government's response to the problem
of controlling ghetto riots. Now that the
riots have subsided, the government is more
and more devoted to gathering intelligence
on campus disorder, antiwar activity and
militant left and right-wing groups.
The government's justification for such
surveillance is its need to be aware of po-
tential violence, but thousands of persons
are drawn in whose activities are peaceful
and lawful.
For example, the Army continues to main-
tain a microfilm file that reportedly contains
information on such persons as Mrs. Mar-
tin Luther King Jr., Georgia State Rep. Ju-
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3
14946 CONGRESS] ONA L RECORD-- SENATE
iinn Reed and retired Adm. Arno3d E, True,
:A. oii iiot the Vies mini war.
rrhe Army file is primarily, made up of
reports, and FBI reports ars also the
ehiel source or data feeding the Justice De-
partment's computer. The FBI makes it a
sino keep is information in "raw"
etrmeetnevaluated as to truth or :faleite.
Those who process the FBI data at Justice
'tee 1, e; impossible to tell whetncr or not any
tt chines from wiretaps, Atte, Gen. John
antenell has declared that taps may be used
without court permission on domestic or-
i,,ann;ations believed seeking to "ittack and
,eibvert. as government."
Beetles input from the FBI Justice's
-,.olitiiuter contains information supplied by
ee IT S. attorneys around the country anti by
,,thei? government agencies, such as the
Treandy department's Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax bieision. which enforces federal ere-
erms laws,
ttcree, information comes also from the
,71.ceret Servie,e, which has lately begun as-
eemeline a data bank of its own. The vera-
Ice's primary concern is with threats to the
'resident, but its data bank will also con-
join iniroxnation on demonstrations, "atm-
'ave etatements" and plans to embarrass goy-
emir gmt officials.
Faele week, the ,Iustice Departsient com-
,mtee nesgorges its intelligence onto print-
out aper. The product Is four books, cacti
;thout two inches thick and enclosed in
erown cardboard covers,
Eaeti book refers to a region of the ecren-
try. :=t centains a city-by-city assessment of
the potential for civil disorder. indicating
,,vhal marches, rallies or meetings are oc-
etirring, the orgenizations and individuala
,moniori them and the city's disturbance
eisecry.
the books are combed by officials of the
depaetni cot's interclivisional ir orm stem
unit, winch sends pertinent clam to the
attorney genera,' and the various divisions
ef the department.
The community relations service gets in-
Zone:Ilion, for example, on potential racial
eroblerne for it to try to conciliate. The civil
eights division gets reports on possible vio-
iations el the laws it enforces. The criminal
eivision gets data on such violattens as in-
terstate movement to incite riots.
iteiddes city 'print-nuts, the computer can
oroduee a run-down on a specific upcoming
ettajor event, listing all stored information on
the ritlividuals end organizatione who are
laiiin On', it,
This was done, for example, nrior to the
;tog. 15 antiwar march on Washington or-
? i7ed he the New Mobilization. Committee
to Er.d the War in Vietnam and ths
T\loraterlum Committee,
Sneciei print-out reports have also been
,ione on et least one oreanivation, the Black
Pantner Party.
Wieteer special. reports have eeen pre-
oar-et or, individuals is not known, although
nu eritivisional int urination lin it director
,lines I'. Devine said it could be done if
)frri also chief of the tlenartm ent 's civil
iisttinemee group, declined to identify any
ea-liven:lel whose name is on computer tape.
however, that it is "iMpoSsible not
ei have information on nonviolent indiviclu-
Ms." He added, "I think it's realistic to ex-
that what would normally ie in the
of the Justice department would reflect
,?tc.i.t in the computer. You CAM make your
,W11 as&H711ptions I about who is istedl.
eioulci. unit be difficulit.."
A n other Justice department 'if trial said
at, a seecific unmet report on an individual.
eight tell "he made a speech On such-and-
men a night at such-and-such a place. This
wh LI, lie said, This was the result."
Geeernment officials differ on whether
,omputerizeci storage of political informa-
.4011 is dangerous to the civil linerties of
emereans.
Devine contended that it is not. Ile sad
it is "a ghost" to see danger.
"The information is here anyway, in -Us,
records of the department. Putting it on e
computer is just a matter of systematizir
it and making it Icore retrievable," he said.
He added: "Hay ng your' name on a com-
puter does not involve the question of guilt
or innocence."
This is not the attitude of the two chid
congressional cleneiders of the right to
privacy, Sen. Sam Ervin, (D-N.C.) and Rel
Cornelius Ciallagte r, D-N.J.
The two were responsible, along with 18
other congressmen who wrote letters, for
forcing the Army to abandon its political
computer at Fort Holabird in Baltimors.
Ervin snd Gallagher are continuing inquiriet
Into other Army political files.
Neither has commented about the Justice
Depaetment computer. It is not known
whether they are even aware of its exist
once, for no specific authorization Era
sought from Congress to set it up. Justine
does not believe le rislation was necessary to
computerize files already maintained in the
department.
.VaiDITIONAL STATEMENTS OF
SENATORS
1iitISONERS OF WAR STILL A
MATTER OF PRIORITY
. Mi. BAKER. Mr. President, as we re-
turn to do the work of the people after
the Labor Day reoess I would call atten-
tion once again lo one of the great un-
solved problems of the year?the plight
of the Americans held prisoner by th?
North Vietnamese.
Commui List regime remain3
adamant against abiding by the Geneva
Convention on Plisoners to which it is ;t
signatory power. Those agreements pro-
vide the bare minimum of guarantees foe
the captured men. They are entitled to
health care, an adequate diet, propel
shelter, and at least minimal communil
cations with their families. In addition
the government is required to notify one
Government of their capture, listing
their names and condition when cap..
tured.
The North Vietnamese have abided lo,/.
.?
none of these agreements.
It must 'remain is matter of top priority
with the Government of the United
States to ease the lot of these men and
to continue every possible avenue of nei;
aotiardon for ther safe return to thei!
waiting families.
VERY DAY THE STAKES GROW
HIGHER FOL HUMAN RIGHTS!
'1'11E LEGACY OF ROBERT F ;
KENN VlI)Y
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the
Past few days have been fraught with
senseiess violence and bloodshed, both
here and abroad. The tragic bombing a;
the University. of Wisconsin and the ter-.
rorism so prevalent in the Middle Flag;
made me think back to a speech of the
late Senator Kennedy that is memorable
In its insight and compassion. In his;
speech at Fordham University and also
to students in South Africa in 1967, Sen..
ator Kennedy spoke poignantly of wham;
must come close to being his persona.
philosophy:
Each time a man stands up for an ideal,
or acts to improve tie lot of others, or strikee
SPAtPmber R, 14.471)
out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny
ripple of hope, and crossing each other from
a million different centers of energy and dar-
ing, those ripples build a current that can
sweep down the miehtiest walls of oppres-
sion and resistance,.
Mr. President, it little more than 3
years ago, Robert ICennedv spoke of po-
litics] courage in the quest for human
rights. It was his firm conviction, both
in his words and his acts, that "only
those Irlio dare to fail greatly can ever
achieve greatly."
I ask unanimous consent that this stir-
ring and provocative statement by one of
the most gifted leaders of our time be
printed In the RECORD.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
THE WOLK i Ornt HANDS
If you fly in a plane over Europe, -toward
Africa or Asia, in a few hours you will cross
over oceans and countries that have been a
tamable of human history. In minutes you
will trace the rolgrar ion of men over thou-
sands of years; seconds, the briefest glimpse,
and you will pass battlefields on which mil-
lions of men once seruggled and died. You
will see no national boundaries, no vast gulfs
or high walls dividing people from people;
only nature and the works of man?homes
and factories and farms?everywbere reflect-
ing man's common effort to enrich his life.
Everywhere new technology and communica-
tions bring men and nations closer together,
the concerns or one more and more becom-
ing the concerns of all. And our new close-
ness is stripping away the false masks, the
illusion of difference that is at the root of
injustice and hate and War. Only earthbound
man still clings to the dark and poisoning
superstition that his world is bounded by the
nearest hill, his universe ended at river shore,
his common hUmanitty enclosed in the tight
circle of those who Share his town and views
and the color of his skin.
Each nation has different obstacles and
different goals, shaped by the vagaries of
history and experienca. Yet as I talk to young
people around the werld I am impressed not
by the diversity but by the closeness of their
goals, their desires and concerns and hope
for the futUre. There is discrimination in
New York, apartheid in South Africa and
serfdom in the mountains of Peru. People
starve in the streets of India; Intellectuals
go to jail in Russia: thousands are slaugh-
tered in Indonesia; wealth is lavished on
armaments everywhere. There are differing
evils, bUt they are she e0frimon works of
man. They reflect the ireperfection of human
justice, the inadequacy of human compas-
sion, the defectiveness of our sensibility to-
ward the sufferings of our fellows; they mark
the limit of our abilli y to use knowledge for
the well-being of others. And therefore, they
call upon common qualities of conscience and
of indignation, a shared determination to
wipe away the unnecessary sufferings of our
fellow humall beings at home and around
the world.
TO ELIA ON lintrrx
Our answer is die world's hope; it is to
rely on youth?not a time of life but it, state
of Minci,a temper hi' the will, a quality of
the imagination, a predominance of courage
over timidity, Of the appetite for adventure
over the, love of ease The cruelties and ob-
stacles of this swiftly changing planet will
not yield to obsolete dogmas and outworn
slogans. It cannot be moved by those -who
cling to a present that Is already' dying, who
prefer the illusion of security to the excite-
ment and danger that come with even the
most peaceful progress. It is a revolutionary
world we live in; and this generation, at home
and around the world, has had thrust upon it
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP74600415R000500140014-3