THE COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT OF 1986 (H.R. 4562)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 29, 2010
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: April 16, 1986
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
E 1206 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks
COMET RENDEZVOUS AND ASTEROID FLYBY [CRAF]
CRAF is the first in a series of planetary ex-
plorers to be flown aboard Mariner Mark II
spacecrafts. CRAF is a priority mission of
NASA's Solar System Exploration Committee
[SSEC]. The SSEC has outlined a series of
low-cost planetary missions. CRAF will give us
a better understanding of the nature of
comets, a valuable followup mission to the
Comet Halley rendezvous. If CRAF does not
start in fiscal year 1987, the United States will
miss the opportunity to study the comet Wild
2-a highly desirable comet because of its
pristine qualities. CRAF is a window through
which we can see the mysteries of the solar
system.
LIFE SCIENCES
During the current fiscal year, the activities
in life sciences were significantly cut back. In
order to maintain ongoing activities related to
near term space flight schedules, the cuts
were made in life science research relating to
the space station. Crucial work needs to begin
in the space station's health care facilities; in
bioregenerative life support systems; and in
radiation protection for crew members.
I urge my colleagues not to be timid about
supporting a more aggressive space program.
Whether we have a barely viable American
space program or a true "flagship program"
depends on the decisions we make in this
Congress.
THE COMPUTER FRAUD AND
ABUSE ACT OF 1986 (H.R. 4562)
1
HON. WILLIAM J. HUGHES
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 16, 1986
Mr. HUGHES. Mr. Speaker, on April 10,
1986, I introduced the Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act of 1986 (H.R. 4562) along with
Congressmen McCoLLUM and NELSON in the
House of Representatives. An identical bill
was introduced by Senators TRIBLE and LAx-
ALT in the Senate (S. 2281). This bill is the
culmination of 3 years of hearings in the Con-
gress and we believe it meets the problem
created by the misuse of our rapidly expanding
computer technology.
Our investigation in this area indicates that
the computer has become an integral part of
our everyday lives. Computers are critical to
our national defense, financial institutions, and
information transmission. By 1990, in addition
to the vast commercial use of computers, it is
projected that 80 million home computers will
be in use.
Computer technology has brought us a long
way in the past decade. However, computer
technology'-with all its gains-has left us with
a new breed of criminal: the technologically
sophisticated criminal who breaks into com-
puterized data files. One element of this ex-
panding group of electronic trespassers-the
so-called "hacker"-is frequently glamorized
by the media, perhaps because the image of
the hacker is that of a bright, intellectually cu-
rious, and rebellious youth-a modem-day
Huck Finn. The fact is these young thrill seek-
ers are trespassers, just as much as if they
broke a window and crawled into a home
while the occupants were away. The hacker of
today can become the white-collar crime su-
perstar of tomorrow, and we must not glamor-
ize our Huck Finns into John Dillingers.
While we need to be concerned about
youthful hackers, they pale in significance In
comparison to the computer sophisticated
criminal who combines his technological skill
with old-fashioned greed and criminal intent to
rob banks or destroy business records or steal
trade secrets. The tools of the trade are not
Smith and Wesson, but IBM and Apple. How-
ever, in today's world of instant electronic
transfer of funds, the result can be more far-
reaching-and harder for law enforcement to
reach.
What can be done about these crimes? We
believe government and industry have a dual
responsibility: industry must work to prevent
such crimes, and government must be willing
and able to prosecute when crimes occur.
The legislation we introduced will expand In
an appropriate but limited manner the types of
criminal misconduct involving computers that
will be subject to Federal jurisdiction. Howev-
er, we intend that the Federal role be expand-
ed only to those areas where there is a com-
pelling Federal interest In the prevention and
punishment of computer crimes. To that end,
this bill provides additional protection against
computer crimes affecting the Federal Gov-
ernment itself and those activities in which
there is a unique Federal interest.
AMENDMENTS TO PRESENT LAW
At present, 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(1) provides
for punishment of thefts by computer of na-
tional security-related information. This bill will
alter that provision of law only to the extent
necessary to simplify the language pertaining
to those who "exceed authorized access" to
a particular computer system.
The same clarification on "exceed author-
ized access" will be made in 18 U.S.C.
1030(a)(2) in regard trespass of financial insti-
tutions. In addition, 1030(a)(2) will be altered
by changing the state of mind requirement
from "knowingly" to "intentionally." We are
concerned that a "knowingly" standard when
applied to computer use and computer tech-
nology, might not be sufficient to preclude li-
ability on the part of those who inadvertently
"stumble into" someone else's computer file.
This is particularly true with respect to those
who are authorized to use a particular com-
puter, but subsequently exceed their author-
ized access by entering another's computer
file. It is not difficult to envision a situation in
which an authorized computer user will mis-
takenly enter someone else's computer file
because the user had "knowingly" signed
onto the computer in the first place. The
danger exists that he might incur liability for
his mistaken access to another file. The sub-
stitution of an "intentional" standard is meant
to focus Federal criminal prosecutions under
this paragraph on those who evince a clear
intent to enter, without authorization, computer
files belonging to another.
The premise of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a) (2) in ex-
isting law remains the protection, for privacy
purposes, of computerized information relating
to a customer's relationships with a financial
recordkeeper. We believe strongly that the
protection offered consumer reporting agen-
cy's in the 1984 computer crime legislation
must-be preserved. This bill will also extend
those privacy protections to information on
any customer's (including corporations and
small businesses) financial records.
April 16, 1986
This legislation will also clarity the present
18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(3); making clear that it ap-
plies to acts of , simple computer trespass
against computers belonging to, or being used
by or for, the Federal Government. To allevi-
ate those concerns, this legislation will make
clear that 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(3) is a trespass
offense by "outsiders." "Authorized users" of
Federal computers will no longer be covered
under this subsection but such misconduct is
presently covered by administrative sanction
and such laws as the Privacy Act, trade se-
crets laws, 18 U.S.C. 1361, at cetera. This
should also alleviate concerns that first arose
in 1984 about disclosures of Government/re-
lated information by "whistleblowers" that was
stored in a computer. The Intentional modifica-
tion or destruction of computerized Informa-
tion belonging to the Government by outsiders
will be covered by a different felony provision
of this proposal. As with 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2),
the state of mind requirement in this para-
graph will be changed from "knowingly" to
"intentionaly."
While the provision of present law relating
to attempted offenses will remain unchanged,
the provision relating to conspiracies (18
U.S.C. 1030(b) (2)) will be deleted. Conspir-
acies to commit computer crimes would be
covered under the general Federal conspiracy
statute, 18 U.S.C. 371.
NEW OFFENSES
The new paragraph section 1030(a) (4) to
be created by this bill is aimed at penalizing
thefts of property via computer trespass that
occur as part of an intent to defraud. It will re-
quire a showing that the use of the computer
or computers in question was directly related
to the intended fraud, and was not merely in-
cidental. To trigger this provision the property
obtained by the offender In wrongfully access-
ing a particuah computer must further the in-
tended fraud, and not be superfluous to it.
The mere use of a computer, without obtain-
ing property that furthers the fraud, is not
meant to constitute an offense under this pro-
vision. This subsection is designed, in part, to
help distinguish between acts of theft via com-
puter and acts of computer trespass. In inten-
tionally trespassing into someone else's com-
puter files, the offender obtains at the very
least information as to how to break into that
computer .system. If that is all he obtains, the
offense should properly, be treated as a
simple trespass. But because the offender has
obtained the small bit of information needed
to get into the computer system, the danger
exists that his and every other computer tres-
pass could be treated as a theft, punishable
as a felony. We do not believe this is a proper
approach to this problem. There must be a
clear distinction between computer theft, pun-
ishable as a felony, and computer trespass,
punishable as a misdemeanor. The element in
the new subsection 1030(a)(4), requiring a
showing of an intent to defraud, is meant to
preserve that distinction, as is the requirement
that the. property wrongfully obtained via com-
puter furthers the intended fraud.
The new subsection 1030(a)(5) is a mali-
cious mischief provision, and is designed to
provide penalties for those who intentionally
damage or destroy computerized data belong-
ing to another. Such damage may include an
act intended to after anther's computer pass-
word, thereby denying him access to his own
computerized information. It will be necessary,
Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
 Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
April 16, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - Extensions of Remarks
large extent, will be a message to the admin-
istration, rather than a working budget.
I am confident that the President will come
forth with a comprehensive proposal to re-
place the lost shuttle launch capacity. It is my
hope the President's plan, once unveiled, will
include a supplemental appropriations bill to
fund a mix of at least one more shuttle orbiter
and complimentary expendable launch vehi-
cles [ELV's].
At markup, however, the Space Subcommit-
tee will be forced to make some assumptions
about expected launch capability. In my opin-
ion, those assumptions should be as optimis-
tic as possible, and include the launch vehicle
mix mentioned above. If more restrictive budg-
etary realities present themselves later, then
the authorized funds can be adjusted either in
full committee, in the Appropriations Commit-
tee, or on the House floor.
Despite so many unknowns in the NASA
budget, I am confident that under the leader-
ship of Chairman NELSON, the Space Science
and Applications Subcommittee will mark up
the NASA authorizing bill to reflect what is
best for the Nation's Space Program and our
continued global leadership in space.
The President's proposed fiscal year 1987
NASA budget was, on the whole, a good pro-
gram. Funding for the space station will allow
the program to proceed to the development
phase in early 1987. The development of the
orbital maneuvering vehicle will continue on
schedule. The ocean topography experiment
[Topex], a new start in the NASA fiscal year
1987 request, is a joint United States-French
initiative. Topex is an exciting experiment
which will give a better understanding of the
oceans' general circulation. Space exploration
development is progressing on the Magellan
Venus radar mapper and the Mars observer
mission. I am also excited about funding for
the transatmospheric vehicle research and
technology development I am pleased that
these elements were included in the Presi-
dent's fiscal year 1987 budget, and I plan to
support their full funding throughout this
budget cycle.
Mr. Speaker, the heart of the space pro-
gram is embodied in NASA's R&D function,
and in particular the Office of Space Science
and Application [OSSA]. The Associate Ad-
ministrator of OSSA, Dr. Burton I. Edelson,
heads the program, which, despite its critical
importance, takes only 20 percent of the
NASA budget. In Dr. Edelson's testimony to
the House Subcommittee on Space Science
and Applications he said, "The benefits we
have realized from space science and applica-
tions in the past have been enormous. Man-
kind now has a new view of the Universe."
The space scientists and engineers conduct
basic research into the nature of the "entire
universe, with efforts ranging from the most
distant galaxies to the neighboring worlds of
the solar system, and finally to the land,
oceans, and atmosphere of the planet Earth."
Unfortunately, despite the achievements in
space science and space applications, there
has developed a feeling of frustration and dis-
appointment in the scientific and technical
community because many projects have been
delayed or canceled due to congressional or
executive shortsightedness. In 1981, for ex-
ample, NASA was forced to make broad,
sweeping cuts in the space science program
to provide necessary funds for the space
shuttle development Clearly, as a matter of
national security, the shuttle had to be com-
pleted, but it was counterproductive to force
cuts in space R&D as a result. The Nation has
consistently used the space science and ap-
plications program as the arena for cuts when
budget tightening was required. The 1981 de-
cision resulted in postponements and cancel-
lations of dozens of programs. For example,
the mission to encounter Comet Halley was
dashed; the international Polar orbiter mission
was postponed; the advanced communication
technology satellite was postponed; and data
reception from the Pioneer space probe was
terminated-later rescinded.
We may see a similar series of cutbacks in
space science and applications programs as a
result of the Challenger explosion. The Con-
gressional Budget Office, in a report on the
impact of the shuttle accident, suggests that
one "area in which to reduce NASA spending
over the next 2 to 3 years is the research and
development [R&D] function, since the loss of
shuttle capacity will lead to a dramatic reduc-
tion in shuttle flights available to launch R&D
payloads during this period." I strongly urge
my colleagues not to be swayed by this argu-
ment. To significantly cut this critical Space
Science Program would result in the discon-
tinuation of vital research, disbanding of irre-
placeable research teams, and a general
weakening of America's lead in cutting-edge
technology in the world market. We seriously
run the risk of gutting the space science and
application effort; the result will be inadequate
programs to meet the science and applica-
tions needs in the 1990's.
Last week, Thomas Donahue, Chairman of
the Space Science Board of. the National
Academy of Science, in testimony before the
Senate Science, Technology, and Space Sub-
committee, observed that
This nation has been trying to carry out a
highly visible, prestigious national enter-
prise on the frontier of technology, with a
resource level so meager that one tragic ac-
cident has crippled the entire program, civil
and military ? ? ? I would urge that you re-
solve to turn the space program around and
to either carry on a space program at a level
that makes sense for a flagship program for
our nation or get out of it altogether and
leave it to the Russians.
I think Mr. Donahue makes a convincing
case for support for the space program, even
in face of the shuttle disaster and Gramm-
Rudman-Hollings. Now is the time when Con-
gress and the administration must show great-
er support for NASA and fund it appropriately.
Most importantly, we must begin building-or
rebuilding-a program now which will lead
toward "a flagship" program in the 1990's, as
Mr. Donahue suggests.
I am concerned, for example, about those
programs in the fiscal year 1987 NASA budget
that have been unjustifiably canceled, post-
poned, or severely cut. In addition to the rec-
ommendations contained in the President's
NASA budget request, I believe that there are
other important areas of the budget that re-
quire funding. After consulting with individuals
in the major national professional associations
and reviewing their testimony before the
Space Subcommittee, I have identified a
number of programs which I believe require
budget enhancement. I will outline those pro-
grams in brief below:
E 1205
ADVANCED COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY SATELLITE
[ACTS}
ACTS is the latest in a series of NASA ex-
perimental communications sateMites. The de-
cision to delete this program from the fiscal
year 1987 request was irrational. ACTS repre-
sents the cutting edge capabilities that will
revolutionize future satellite telecommunica-
tions. The investment necessary for the tech-
nology development of ACTS is not within the
R&D means of the communication satellite in-
dustry. The payback in hardware sales alone
from a $350 million investment by the United
States in ACTS is expected to be over 100 to
1. If the United States doesn't follow through
on its commitment to the ACTS Program, the
private sector will be forced to continue the
research at a greatly reduced pace, allowing
foreign competitors such as Europe and
Japan to develop the technology first.
SOLAR OPTICAL TELESCOPE [SOT]
SOT has been a priority mission of solar
physics scientists for a number of years, but,
due to congressional and other criticism, the
program was dropped. Originally, the SOT
proposal was a project requiring several trips
on the shuttle and designed so that it would
eventually be mounted to the space station.
NASA, however, is working on an alternative
proposal aimed at keeping the essence of the
solar physics, but at much lower cost. I think it
would be in the Nation's interest to help
NASA proceed with development of a modi-
fied SOT.
ORBITAL TRANSFER VEHICLE [ON]
There is a clear need for a versatile, cost-
effective OTV to exploit space orbits beyond
those the shuttle and the space station will be
able to reach. The planned OTV will be reus-
able, space-based, and able to deliver 15,000
pounds of payload to geosynchronous orbit.
The OTV will contribute greatly to the efficien-
cy of the space infrastructure, and more em-
phasis on the program at this time is justifies.
MICROGRAVITY RESEARCH
In the rush to commercialize microgravity
products, we have, to some extent, ignored
basic research in microgravity. Instrumentation
in many research labs is obsolete and no
longer capable of reaching technology fron-
tiers. Plans for anticipated activities aboard
the space station should begin in fiscal year
1987 if the facilities are going to be ready for
initial operation capability. Projects such as
the automated protein crystal growth facility,
the advanced levitation device and the high
temperature directional solidification facility
should be funded to proceed at a more vigor-
ous pace.
INTERNATIONAL SOLAR-TERRESTIAL PHYSICS
PROGRAM [ISTP]
ISTP is an effort to draw on the resources
of a worldwide scientific community to make a
concentrated and coordinated study of the
interaction in the Sun-Earth system, and to ex-
trapolate this knowledge to the other planets
and to the universe beyond. The program
would be a multinational effort, with participa-
tion from NASA (United States), ISA (Japan)
and ESA (Europe). The President has only re-
quested $5 million for ESA and ISAS instru-
mentation. This is an important program that
is ready and should be allowed to begin as a
new start. It would also demonstrate to our
allies that the United States is a reliable space
science partner.
Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
 Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2
April 16, 1986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-Extensions of Remarks
in proving this offense, that the Government
demonstrate that a loss has been Incurred by
the victim totaling at least $1,000 in a single
year. This is necessary to prevent the bringing
of felony-level malicious mischief charges
against every individual who modifies an..
other's computer data. Some modifieatioaso
while constituting "damage" in a sans, do
not warrant felony-level punishment, partic u.
lady when they require almost no effort or.ex
pense to repair. The $1,000 valuation is rani
sonaby calculated to facilitate felony punish-
ment in cases Involving more serious damage
or destruction. In instances where the requi-
site dollar amount cannot be shown, misde-
meanor-level penalties will remain available
against the offender under the trespass sub-
section. Thus, the valuation will not exist for
determining the presence or absence of Fed-
eral jurisdiction, it will serve Instead to help
determine whether the act constituting the of-
fense is punishable as a felony or a misde-
meanor.
In addition, the concept of "loss" embodied
in this paragraph will not be limited solely to
the cost of actual repairs. The Justice Depart-
ment has suggested that other costs, irmclud-
ing the cost of lost computer time necessitat-
ed while repairs are being made, be permitted
to count toward the $1,000 valuation. I and
the other sponsors of this bill agree.
Finally, in new subsection 1030(a)(6), this
bill provides a misdemeanor penalty for those
who, through what is called "pirate bulletin
boards," knowingly and with an Intent to de-
fraud, traffic In computer passwords belonging
to others. If those elements are present-and
if the password In question would enable un-
authorized access to a Government computer,
or if the trafficking affects interstate or foreign
commerce-this provision could be invoked
Having worked with experts on computer
crime over the past several years, we believe
the legislation passed last year along with the
bill now being considered by the Congress-
combined with active efforts of industry to
safeguard their property-will address the
emergency of the computer criminal in our so-
ciety.
Protections--both through law and technol-
ogy-can and must be developed for the in-
tangible property-information-which Is the
life blood of computer systems.
Unless we act now to secure the "locks"
and provide the laws, computer crime win .be
the crime wave of the next decade.
THE MILLS OF GOD GRIND
SLOWLY-BULGARIA AND ITS
JEWISH CITIZENS DURING
WORLD WAR II
HON. TOM LANTOS
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 16, 1986
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker. the roll of courh?
tries which% at great risk, helped their Jewish
citizens during World War It is very small, but
worthy of honor. Denmark has received fitting
tribute for the successful rescue mission of
the Danish Jews. But few people realize that
Bulgaria, too, saved Its large Jewish com muni.
y consisting of 50.000 people from the hor-
rors of deportation and murder at the hands of
the Nazis.
On a recent private visit to Bulgaria, my wife
and I had the opporhmtity to check out at
first-hand the Bulgarian record of resistance to
Nazi atrocities against the Jewish community.
I spoke to members of the government, rang.
irg two Deputy Foreign Minister Lyuben
Gotsev to Chairman of the Parliament Stanko
Todorov, to officials in local governments, to
the president of the Bulgarian Jewish commu-
nity Josiff Levi, as well as to private citizens. -
They added details to the story and they all
agreed that the moral courage manifested by
the people of Bulgaria during the dark der
praved days of Nazi power was truly extreord-
nary Unfortunately, these deeds have been
overlooked by the world community.
Although the Axis-allied government of Sul-
garia, which was an ally of Hitler's German
acquiesced to some degree in the and-Jewish
policies of the Nazis, the Bulgarian people-
partisans, representatives in parliament, mem-
bers of municipal councils, union and church
leaders-manifested their opposition to the
Nazis. The first abortive attempted to deport
Bulgarian Jews aroused a storm of pretest
When inaly. as a result of constant Gomm
pressure, the Bulgarian Government agreed to
said the Jews to labor camps; the people
sabotaged the effort. On the day the first
group of Jews were to be sent away. the parts.
sans crowded into the railroad station and
interfered with the deportation.
Other rescue operations inckrded the denial
of Jewish origins of their neighbors suspected
by the Nazis. One impressive woman I met,
Margarita Delina, the vice chairwoman of the
district of Plovdiv, told us that when she was a
girt, her parents protected several- Jews.
When Nadi SS troops came to their house
and asked the names of their neighbors, her
mother changed the JewialFsounding names
to protect them. "I couldn't understand' R at
the time," she told us, "I asked my mother
afterwards why she gave the wrong came, but
she didn't answer. I found out only after the
war."
The efforts on behalf of the Bulgarian Jews
took many and varied forms. Mass "mercy-
baptisms" took place with both parties know-
ing that the "convert" would later renounce
his vows. There were mixed marriages on a
gigantic scale. Josiff Levi, the president of the
Jewish community in Bulgaria, remembers
Rabbi David Tsion, who organized large rallies
at which Bulgarian Jews and non-Jews dem-
onstrated against the transportation of Greek
Jews through Bulgaria to "work camps."
In view of the fact that Hitler found eager
collaborators In almost all countries allied with
or occupied by the Nazis, it is indeed a mira-
cle that in a few places he ran Into unified and
outraged resistance. Bulgaria was one of
those countries. The Bulgarians chose not to
become passive bystanders or depraved col-
laborators. Instead they decided, as a people.
to come to the aid of their Jewish neighbors.
The mils of God may grind slowly but they
do grind justly. Just as 40 years after the war
we are still discovering Nazis who hid their
disgraceful pest, so we are also discovering.
sometimes In the most unexpected places.
compassion. sympathy. and bravery on the
part of a whole nation who befriended the
Jewish people in their moment of greatest
danger and abandon iwk This: Is a story that
must be told to gat a true picture of the nature
of the Bulgarian people, in whose homeland
E 1207
the Nazis also tried to perform their infamous
atrocities but failed.
Because the Bulgarian public wholehearted-
ly supported and cooperated with all rescue
efforts, Bulgaria has a record second to none
to its successful salvation of its entire Jewish
population-45,000 of whom returned to Israel
after the war, tatting with them the warm
friendship and farewell of the Bulgarian people
among whom they were welcomed and re-
spected during the many years of their exile.
Bulgaria's acts illustrate to me once more
that Nazi Germany was not as powerful as the
world tried to pretend and that moral courage
and determination, whether from an individ-
uals like Raoul Wallenberg, or from a small
country like Denmark or Bulgaria, could suc-
cessfully thwart "the final solution."
This is a story that must also be told. As
Sholem Ash said:
It is of the highest importance not only to
record and recount-both for ourselves and
for the future-the evidences of human deg-
radation, bet side by side with them to set
forth the evidences of human nobility and
brotherhood. Let the epic of heroic deeds of
courage and caring as opposed by those of
hatred, of rescue as opposed to destruction
bear equal witness to unborn generations.
HON. BARNEY FRANK
OF IIASSACHusrrrrs
IN THE HOUSE Or REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 16, 1988
Mr. FRANK. Mr. Speaker, one of the hap-
pier aspects of American politics, In my judg-
ment. Is the broad and deep support which
exists in the electorate at large. and in our
governmental institutions, for an American
policy which is s>loongy supportive of the inde-
pendence and integrity of the State of Israel.
I believe that this broad support Is based
essentially on the recognition In this country
that the State of Israel is both the nation in
the Middle East which most nearly carries out
in its goveranee the ideals which Americans
believe ought to be followed, and is also the
nation in that area which has been most will-
ing to ally itself with America on important
strategic issues. Marry people in our country
make their foreign policy decisions based
largely on moral grounds; others use strategic
and geopolitical basis as the foundation of
their foregn policy judgments. Given both Its
strong democratic; system and its goal in the
world, Israel stands out as a worthy friend of
America on both counts.
There are some who try to explain away
strong American support for Israel by claiming
that a conspiracy of a small number of Jewish
Americans somehow exerts a disproportionate
financial and media influence, and that this re-
suits in American policy being as supportive
as it Is of Israel. Strangely, some Americans
who are among Israel's strongest fiends inad-
vertently give comfort to this argument by ex-
aggerating the extent to which financial contri-
butions must lbw to Members of Congress to
assure reasonable levels of American foreign
assistance for Israel- America provides sub-
star" foreign aid to Israel largely because it
makes sense In teems of both America's inter-
est and America's values. The support which
many friends of Israel give In this country is
Approved For Release 2010/12/29: CIA-RDP87B00858R000400470009-2