SPEECH OF REPRESENTATIVE LESLIE C. ARENDS, (R.III.) RANKING MINORITY MEMBER OF THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE, ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE, CONCERNING THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 29, 2013
• Sequence Number: 74
• Publication Date: March 26, 1964
• Content Type: MISC

Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
FROM THE OFFICE OF:
L. C. ARENDS, M.C.
1201 N.H.O.B.
Washington, D.C.
._11;INU RELEASE
March 26, 1964 - Thursday
12 Noon
SPEECH OF REPRESENTATIVE LESLIE C. ARENDS, (R.Ill.)
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER OF THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES
COMMITTEE, ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE, CONCERNING THE
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY.
Mk. Speaker, one of the most important: agencies of our
Government, particularly during this period of international
uncertainties and anxieties, is our Central Intelligence Agency.
The time has long since arrived when someone should take
cognizance of the baseless criticism that has been and continues
to be heaped upon it. That is my purpose here today, as a member
of the CIA Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services since
its establishment. I do not purport to speak as an authority on
all the functions and activities of the CIA. But I do presume to
speak with some factual knowledge about the CIA as an organization
and how it functions.
I do not mean to imply that the CIA should be above
criticism. No agency of government should be above criticism.
Constructive criticism makes for improvement, and there is always
room for improvement.
But much of the criticism directed at the CIA is not
constructive. It cannot possibly be, as it is not based on facts.
It is based on half-truths and distortions. Indeed, some of it
constitutes complete untruths, with no foundation whatever in fact
or in reason. This is what concerns me. Something once said,
however false, is readily oft-repeated and in time is accepted as
a fact although an outright falsehood. And we know there are those
who would, if they could, discredit the CIA. Others of us, having
no such intention, unwittingly become their victims.
Let me present one illustration. I refer to the much
publicized, much discussed case of the Polish defector, Michal
Goleniewski. I refer to the irresponsible series of articles
concerning the CIA that has been recently published in the New York
Journal American.
Among these wild accusations is that the CIA has attempted
to prevent Michal Goleniewski from appearing before the Senate Inter-
nal Security Subcommittee. They go so far as to charge that the
CIA has quashed subpoenas. That simply is not true. A simple
telephone call to the Chairman of that Subcommittee would have
brought forth the information that going back to last August, when
the first subpoena was served on this man, the Executive branch
of the Government has been cooperative with the Senate Subcommittee
throughout.
Contrary to what has been reported in the press, the
postponements of Michal Goleniewski's appearance before the Senate
Subcommittee were at the request of the man himself. And the Sub-
committee agreed to his request.
I might add that the CIA Subcommittee, of which I am a
member, went into every aspect of this case. I am personally
satisfied that the publicized statements purported to come from
Michal Goleniewski are not correct. The information as reported
in the press is not in agreement with the information Michal
Goleniewski has made available to many departments of Government.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Speech by L. C. Arends, MC
March 26, 1964 --- Page 2
Stories such as have been circulated on this case dis-
play a reckless regard of the truth. They can be harmful, and
those who circulate them do a great disservice to maintaining public
confidence in the CIA.
Before commenting further with respect to the CIA and
unfounded criticisms of it, perhaps I should first take cognizance
of the criticism of the CIA Subcommittee, of which I am a member.
It is quite understandable that some Members of Congress might feel
we are not as well acquainted with the operations of the CIA as we
should be. No one, except members of the subcommittee itself, has
any knowledge of just how extensively and intensively we inquire
into the activities of this intelligence agency. We hold no public
hearings. We issue no reports. We cannot do otherwise and preserve
the effectiveness of the CIA as a secret fact-gathering agency on
an international scale. We can only hope that the House has
sufficient confidence in our subcommittee, as individuals and as a
committee, to accept our assurances that we are kept well informed
and we have no hesitancy of keeping a close eye and ear on CIA
operations.
I was very much distressed to read an article in Esquire
magazine, written by a distinguished Member of Congress -- one of
the best and one of my good friends -- in which he says: "the
Members of four subcommittees themselves, by definition, have
relatively low status." Not because I am a member of one of those
subcommittees, but for the other members of our Armed Services
Subcommittee on CIA, I must take exception to the implication of
that statement as to their status.
The membership of our subcommittee is comprised of the
distinguished Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee,
Mr. Vinson, the distinguished ranking majority member, Mr. Rivers,
and another distinguished ranking member, Mr. Hebert. Serving with
them are the other very distinguished members: Mr. Price, Mr. Bray,
Mr. Bennett, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Huddleston, and Mr. Osmers.
I am not at liberty to announce the members of the other
subcommittees in the Congress dealing with CIA matters; but I can
assure the House they are not "by definition, of relatively law
status."
The article to which I refer goes on to state, "but even
had those Subcommittees both status and time the difficulties
involved in dividing jurisdiction among the four would I think be
insuperable."
This point deserves analysis. Since the proposed solution
to the matter of low status and little time would be to establish
a Joint Committee on Foreign Information and Intelligence, several
questions arise.
In addition to CIA, there are other intelligence activities
which are component parts of the Department of Defense, the Department
of State and the Atomic Energy Commission. I do not believe that
the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Armed Services Committee or
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy would be likely to relinquish
their responsibilities for legislative oversight of the components
of those departments which are presently under their jurisdiction.
We would thus be establishing a Joint Committee on Foreign Intelligenct
that would, in fact, be superimposed on the existing committees and
subcommittees. This brief analysis does not begin to delve into the
jurisdictional problems that would thus be raised within the congress-
ional committee structure and the Congress itself.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Speech by L. C. Arends, M.C.
March 26, 1964 --- Page 3
In the same Esquire article it is asserted in connection
with the Bay of Pigs situation, and I now quote, Not only was CIA
shaping policy -- perhaps understandable because of the absence of
direction from policy making organs of the government -- but that
policy was patently at odds with State Department thinking." The
author of the article then adds that be does not wish to fully
rehearse the events which preceded the Bay of Pigs, nor do I. This
accusation, however, is not founded in fact but, on the contrary, is
flatly inconsistent with the truth. It will be recalled that the
white House issued a statement on April 24, 1961 saying, "President
Kennedy has stated from the beginning that as President he bears
sole responsibility for the events of the past few days. He has
stated it on all occasions and he restates it now so that it will be
understood by all. The President is strongly opposed to anyone within
or without the administration attempting to shift the responsibility."
To assume or assert that CIA shaped policy and then executed it when
that policy was at odds with the official policy of the Department
of State not only demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the coordination
and control procedures in the Executive Branch but further implies
that the Director of Central Intelligence or other officials of the
CIA are violating their oath of office by willfully disregarding
the views and instructions of the President. Based on my knowledge,
the assertion and implications of the statement are false.
The Esquire article indicates the author's recognition
that a high degree of secrecy is essential to the workings of the
intelligence community and with this I agree. But the article
continues by saying there are dangers if public confidence in the
intelligence establishment erodes. The article continues by stating
that such erosion "is less likely if a body of the people's
representatives properly constituted and carefully chosen by the
leadership of the two houses of Congress remains continuously aware
of the activities of the intelligence community." Based on my
long-term membership of the CIA Subcommittee, I again can assure
the House that the Subcommittee has been continuously aware of Agency
activities. I must reemphasize that this Subcommittee in fact is
properly constituted and carefully chosen by the distinguished
Chairman of this Committee.
The statement has been made that CIA meddles in policy.
This is an often heard allegation about the Agency, but the facts
do not support it. CIA is an intelligence organization and takes
its direction from the policy makers. The late President Kennedy
commented on this in October 1963 when irresponsible sources were
alleging that CIA was making policy in VIETNAM. He said, "I must
say I think the reports are wholly untrue. The fact of the matter
is that Mr. McCone sits in the National Security Council. I imagine
I see him at least three or four times a week, ordinarily. We have
worked very closely together in the National Security Council in
the last two months attempting to meet the problems we face in
South Vietnam. I can find nothing, and I have looked through the
record very carefully over the last nine months, and I could go back
further, to indicate that the CIA has done anything but support
policy. It does not create policy; it attempts to execute it in
those areas where it has competence and responsibility." The
President went on to say: "I can just assure you flatly that the
CIA has not carried out independent activities but has operated
under close control of the Director of Central Intelligence, operating
with the cooperation of the National Security Council and under my
instructions. So I think while the CIA may have made mistakes, as
we all do, on different occasions, and has had many successes which
may go unheralded, in my opinion in this case it is unfair to charge
them as they have been charged. I think they have done a good job."
This was President Kennedy's statement.
It has been asserted that there are no effective checks
on the Ahency's activities. The facts are that every activity the
Agency engages in is approved in advance at the appropriate policy
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Speech by L. C. Arends, M.C.
March 26, 1964 Page 4
level. It is also said that "Crucial decisions are made for us and
in our name of which we know nothing." This is not true. The Sub-
committee, of which I am a member, is kept informed on a current
basis of the activities of the Agency and, as I mentioned before,
this organization is not a decision-making body but one which carries
out the instructions of others.
The magazine article I mentioned speaks of the personnel
in the Agency, and acknowledges that CIA officials are among the
most distinguished in the entire federal establishment. With this
I would readily agree. But the Author of the Esquire article is
in error when he says that CIA is "served by only one politically
responsible officer." Both the Director and Deputy Director of the
Agency are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate,
and I would note that all other employees of the Agency can be
terminated by the Director of his own authority. The implication
that they are not responsible is beneath reply. He says that CIA
relies heavily on the services of retired military officers. The
facts do not support this as there are very few retired military
officers in the Agency. Of the top 46 executives in the Central
Intelligence Agency, only two are retired military officers, and
the proportion of retired military officers to professionals
throughout the Agency is even smaller. He says that the Agency
relies heavily on services of political refugees. It is true that
it does on occasion use political refugees, but a misimpression
is given here. These individuals are used when their expertise and
area knowledge is required and the information they provide is
extensively cross-checked against a great variety of other sources.
I would note also that my esteemed colleague in one
paragraph indicates that the daily chore of coordinating and cross-
checking intelligence data is the responsibility of the Defense
Intelligence Agency. According to the National Security Act of
1947 the Central Intelligence Agency is actually charged by law
with the coordination of intelligence. The law reads, "For the
purpose of coordinating the intelligence activities of the several
Government departments and agencies in the interest of national
security, it shall be the duty of the Agency, under the direction
of the National Security Council -- to make recommendations to
the National Security Council for the coordination of such intelligence
activities of the departments and agencies of the Government as relate
to the national security." As a matter of actual practice the
responsibility for coordination over the years has been that of the
Director of Central Intelligence, who has been supported in this
regard by the CIA.
The magazine article also makes the statement that CIA
is both the chief fact gatherer and the chief agency for coordination.
As I have just mentioned, the Agency is charged by law with
coordination, and it is also charged, and I quote, "to correlate
and evaluate intelligence relating to the national security, and
provide for the appropriate dissemination of such intelligence
within the Government." In effect, what this means is that the CIA
takes intelligence from all different sources, departments and
agencies and produces the national intelligence required by the
policy makers.
During the years that I have served on the CIA Subcommittee
I have sat many hours questioning the Director and other Agency
officials about their activities and how they go about their work.
On many occasions this Subcommittee has quietly looked into some
of the then current accusations against CIA.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3
Speech by L. C. Arends, M.C.
March 26, 1964 --- Page 5
Let me assure you, Mr. Speaker, that we have always
received the information needed. Also, we have been privileged to
learn of many events in the secrecy of our meetings before the events
have happened.
The CIA officials who have been before our Committee have
at all times been responsive and frank in their discussions with us.
I do not believe that baseless charges against the CIA
are serving the national interest. If there are those who have infor-
mation which they believe would be of assistance to the CIA Subcommitte
in its review of Agency activities let them come forward -- we would
welcome such information. Let me make it clear, however, that those
who would expect the Subcommittee then to report on its findings will
be due for disappointment. By the very nature of the Agency's
mission, revelation of its activities will truly destroy it.
It is my view that the establishment of CIA in 1947 by
the Congress was extremely wise and showed amazing foresight into
the problems that would face this country in the years to follow.
The wisdom of the Congress in establishing this Agency to provide
the President with the necessary information on which to base our
foreign policy has been borne out by the performance of the Agency.
I do not claim that the Agency has been 100 per cent correct. But
I do believe it has provided the President and our policymakers
with the tools that they must have.
Certainly the Armed Services Committee and the Appropriations
Committee of both Houses have been enabled to judge more correctly
our defense needs on the basis of the information CIA has been able
to provide. While the Agency is a newcomer in the history of the
nation and among its foreign counterparts, I wish to state now that
it probably is the finest intelligence agency in the world today.
I believe that the Congress and the country should applaud the
dedicated and highly professional career officers of CIA for the
magnificent job they have performed over the years.
1 Declassified and Approved For Release 2013/10/29: CIA-RDP80M01009A000100050074-3