THE VIETNAM CRISIS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 36
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 27, 2005
• Sequence Number: 10
• Publication Date: May 16, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

v.- 7>
.4-A Approved FCQ6gG}}~~~~II SM(l.Q 6/ DPS lqk6R000400070010-0 10171
May I6, 1966 C~
Alaska although ample opportunity exists. to compromise the reasons for the American administration stop killing American
In fact, the Soviets have consistently op- presence in Vietnam. It is the President of boys to keep General Ky in power. They
posed high seas salmon fishing, holding, as the United States who, at Honolulu, em- must demand an end to a war that sees
we do, that such a practice makes it im- braced General Ky; and it is General Ky who American soldiers go out to kill the Viet-
possible to implement proper conservation . Is not long for power. If the bland Buddhist of South Vietnam
measures. We are in a much better position pressure in the city streets and villages con- tong fight each while the other. soldiers They must refuse m
with the salmon resources regarding In- tinues to grow in the days ahead, it will allow American forces must to
formation needed for conservation regula- undermine the Ky regime.
tion since, unlike the ocean perch and other For the Johnson Administration, the fighting a war to keep Ky and his
species the Russians may be taking, it has American position in Vietnam is subject to flunkies in power against the wishes
been exploited and under management for the most disheartening speculations and of a majority of people in Vietnam who
many years. ironical afterthoughts. The basis of our are not even controlled by the Vietcong.
I trust this information will be helpful. being there, it has been said like a litany, is I hold in my hand today's Washington
Sincerely1 rtyours, the long-standing United States "commit- News, with the headline "Vietnam on
'DONALD L. MCKERNAN, meat" to a succession of South Vietnamese Brink of New Civil War." I ask "Vietnam on
a Communist takeover. governments to support their opposition to mous consent that the article connected
.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, it was However, so far as has been heard from with the headline be printed in the
encouraging to note that the threat to Secretary Rusk or the President, we have no RECORD at the close of my remarks.
Columbia River salmon from Russian "commitment" to support the government The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
fishermen appears to be negligible, at in Saigon against a takeover by its own objection, it is so ordered.
least at this time. people. (See exhibit 1.)
I look forward with great interest to Underneath all this turmoil, the GIs know Mr. MORSE. Mr. President let us
that one of the messages which the demon-
the recommendations which the Bureau strators are giving out is that Americans are face it. We are escalating a war to
plans to make in the near future regard- not welcome in their country. It is to the keep a military junta in power that has
ing appropriate action to be taken in this American forces that our keen sympathies no appreciation for the meaning of
matter. [ go. As one said to Jack Foisie "If they the word "freedom" and could not care
?
don't want us, what are we here fob
] less.
'iYl N The present outbreak in Vietnam,
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I ask THE PRESIDENT AND VIETNAM
unanimous consent that there be in-
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, in recent
serted in the RECORD at this point an days, President Johnson has sought to
editorial from the Everett Herald, cover up the collapsing situation in Viet-
Saturday, May 7, 1966, "Two Years Ago." nam with increasingly blatant appeals to
There being no objection, the editorial national honor for its own sake, not for
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, the sake of practicality or likelihood of
as follows: success or true national American inter-
[From the Everett (Wash.) Herald, ests.
_'Way 7, 19661 The Nation heard him use the occasion
Two TEARS AGO of the Democratic fundraising dinner
Suppose a U.S. political leader running for publicly to denounce and ridicule the
re-election this year campaigned on the fol- Senate Foreign Relations Committee
lowing platform: hearings on Vietnam and China. Why?
1. American boys should not be sent to Because it has been the Foreign Rela-
fight in Viet Nam because it is an Asian war. tions Committee hearings that have ex-
lines t. U in n North planes Viet should Nam. not bomb supply posed to public view the bankruptcy of
3. Bombing North Viet Nam is likely to the Johnson foreign policy.
involve this country in a major land war Those hearings have revealed the im-
with Communist China. morality, the uselessness, and the illegal-
4. The V.S. should confine itself to an ad- ity of the slaughter in Vietnam, a
visory.role and provide equipment to South slaughter perpetrated as much by the
Viet Nam. United States as by anyone.
Would the politician be elected. Or de-
feated? The New York Herald Tribune notes The administration cannot withstand
that this is the stand President Johnson took this public discussion of the war in Viet-
in the Presidential campaign of 1964-just nam any more than it could withstand
two years ago. an analysis of its Dominican interven-
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I also ask tion by the Foreign Relations Committee
unanimous consent that there be in- chairman.
serted in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD at So it is necessary for the President to
this point an editorial from the San try to upstage the committee as he did
Francisco Chronicle, April 13, 1966, "The by summoning General Ky to meet him
Viet Crisis We Now Face." in Honolulu, and then to denounce the
There being no objection, the editorial hearings in their entirety.
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, I extend my tribute and support to the
h n of our committee Senator
a
ma
demonstrating the further mstabrlrty on
the part of the puppet we have been
supporting, calls upon the President of
the United States to issue a request for
a cease-fire now, to stop killing these
American soldiers.
My President does not have the slight-
est moral right to send another American
to his death in Vietnam, in the light of
the civil war within the civil war in
Vietnam.
That is why I have been heard to say-
and I shall continue to say it from coast
to coast-that the President must be
stopped with ballots, for it is the only
way left to stop his bullets. We have
no right to be shooting those bullets in
South Vietnam now, in view of the shock-
ing record that has been made by the
Ky regime and the previous military
puppets that the United States has set
up in South Vietnam, in open violation
of the Geneva accords.
We must call a halt to the flow of
American blood to defend General Ky
so he can impose his own bloody rule
upon the helpless people of the South.
Every day the war continues, more
lives will be lost needlessly, for the
rotten foundation of the South Vietnam
Government becomes more precarious
every day. General Ky and his fellow
militarists do not want elections, and
I predict he will arrange things so there
will be none in which anyone can place
any confidence.
It is still a criminal offense in Vietnam
r
: c a
as follows
[From the San Francisco Chronicle, Apr. 13, FULBRIGHT, whose statesmanship in these to be a "neutralist." Who is or is not a
196?_1 matters has reduced to disrepute the "neutralist" will naturally be decided by
THE VIET CRISIs WE Now FACE foreign policies of the United States General Ky. The world has already
The buddhist political crisis in South based on bombs and bayonets. heard that "Communists" and "neutral-
Vietnam has confused, disturbed and frus- In the last week, the President has fists" will be fought by the Ky govern-
trated officials in Washington. Well it may, stopped talking about peace and negotia- ment. As is customary in Vietnamese
for the evidence of 1963 showed beyond tions altogether; he has had little to say elections, North or South, the election,
question that the Buddhists held the ulti- about elections in Vietnam. He gives if it is held at all, will be controlled by
mate strings of popular control over South every evidence of total adherence to the the means of controlling the candidates
Vietnam. They showed they could bring advice of his military leaders who believe allowed to run.
down the Nge Dinh Diem, the Catholic dic armed force is the best answer to every- In fact, I have heard nothing in the
tator, and eliminate him, which was a relief thing and who are bent on war with discussion of these proposed elections
uu For at the time, the Buddhists wern China, in my opinion. that offers a prospect of their being
on our side, or, more accurately, we were on It is now up to the American people to meaningful. They can be a decoy, how-
tehs.
The Ky government fie clearly on the losing demand that the war in Vietnam be ever, to American public opinion. They.
side of a political showdown. This threatens stopped. They must demand that the can mislead American public opinion into
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10172
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0 f 4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May. 16;'1,1 66
the false assumption that these elections by us to local armies, under a military
mean something. These elections, for dictatorship or the direction of a military
the most part, will be metropolitan elec- junta.
tions in areas under the control of the Not long ago a very highly respected
Government. Republican came over to my seat on the
Mr. President, I shall be proud to have Senate floor. He asked me whether I
the RECORD show that I was the first in thought President Johnson could control
the Senate to call for international super- the Military Establishment of the United
vision of these elections, as some months States. I asked him what he meant by
ago I called for international supervision that. He said he believed the Military
of the elections in Guatemala, where a Establishment was so in charge of the
democratic administration was not in war in Vietnam that he questioned
charge of the election machinery. whether the President could carry out
We can be sure that any elections in any Vietnam policy of which the military
South Vietnam under this tyrant and did not approve. It has long been my
corruptionist Ky will be featured by care- opinion that if the President wanted to
fully screened candidates, just as all can- find a political settlement of the war, he
didates were screened by Ngo Dinh Diem could not do it because the military now
in the elections he conducted. has such a vested interest in a direct con-
By the time only Government candi- frontation with China that they will not
dates are allowed to run for seats, what Allow our presence in Vietnam to be dis-
kind of "election" do you have? You sipated or eliminated for any reason.
have the same kind the Communists con- This is a fear I repeated to the members
duct, where only the candidates of the of the Foreign Relations Committee this
Communist Party are allowed to run for morning, and which I said I thought had
office and they then poll 98 or 99 percent to be a part of our discussion and decision
of the vote. on the aid program.
That is what Americans are dying for Never has pursuit of freedom for South
in South Vietnam, and they are dying for Vietnam been an object of American pol-
nothing worthwhile. They are dying for icy. Pursuit of containment of China
nothing productive of freedom. They and the possibility that war in Vietnam
are dying for nothing more than the per.- could lead to war with China has been
sonal ambitions of a few local leaders of the object of military policy in Vietnam.
South Vietnam who do not have the con- As the Ky regime falls apart in Viet-
fidence or backing of their own people. nam, the President is pressed into more
Above all, they are not dying for any and, more blatant contortions of history
American interest in Vietnam, for the to seek to maintain the image of Ameri-
American interest lies in getting the can purity. His Princeton audience
fighting stopped, not In escalating it. heard him say that American interven-
The American military has no means tion in foreign countries was justified on
of stopping the fighting. Its only sug- the ground that "not one single country
gestions and recommendations are for where America has helped mount a ma-
expanding it and increasing it. That is jor effort to resist aggression, from
why I share the fears of Arthur France to Greece to Korea to Vietnam-
Schlesinger, when he fears that the Pres- not one single country where we have
ident has lost control of American for- helped-today has a government servile
eign policy. The control over American to outside interests."
foreign policy has passed to the Penta- The President conveniently neglected
gon, and the Pentagon is maneuvering to say that none of the countries where
this President and his country ever closer we have intervened is servile to anyone
to war with China. except the United States. The govern-
This morning the Foreign Relations ments of Korea and Vietnam are today
Committee met for its first executive ses- creatures of the American Treasury and
sion in connection with the foreign aid the U.S. Defense Department. Without
bill. I served notice on the committee both, those governments would disap-
that I shall insist upon exercising all pear. Their countries would not neces-
parliamentary rights, to assure that no sarily disappear, but their present gov-
action is taken by the committee on the ernments would. Much the same is
foreign aid legislation without a quorum probably true of Greece, whose political
being present and without full and ex- adventures in Cyprus that have so debili-
tensive discussion of the relationship of tated her economy and
oliti
y
p
cs are
a
ots now, unless the
this bill to the Military Establishment largely subsidized by Uncle Sam. Of the Congress at long last wants to assume its
and its plan for international interven- countries the President named, only constitutional trust and proceed to irn-
tion. France can lay claim to not being servile pose on this Democratic administration
It is through the foreign aid bill that to any outside interest. the constitutional checks that the fore-
much of the disaster of American policy I regret hearing the President of the fathers wrote into the organic law.
has been carried out. It is through the United States continually tell the Amer- With the defeat of 50 or more Mern-
foreign aid measure that Secretary of ican people such a simplified and glori- bers of Congress in November, I want to
Defense McNamara expects to carry out fled version of international events, a say to the American people that we have
a goal of American policy, which he de- version always calculated to reassure us a chance to stop the war. However, if
scribed before the committee last week as that everything we do and everything the American people reelect to Congress
one of seeking "stability" throughout the we touch abroad is gilded with selfless- or send to Congress men and women that
less developed countries of the world. At ness and crowned with success. I am will rubberstamp this President in carry-
Princeton, the President called it "forces sorry to hear him misrepresent the effect ing on this shocking war, In my judgment
of disorder" that must be opposed in of American interventions in the world, we will end up in a war with China and
Asia. Stability and order are something because he misleads the American people the American people will die by the hun-
the Secretary of Defense wants military when he tries to tell them we no longer dreds of thousands, for it will be the
aid for, because where stability is not im- are the sole support of Korea or Vietnam beginning of world war III.
posed directly by American force of arms, or Greece or Turkey, or Taiwan, because I have been heard to say so many times
he hopes to see it imposed by arms given we are. More often than not, where we that in my judgment that is what the
have intervened, we have created an-
other dependency for American taxpay-
ers to support and American soldiers to
defend, and dying in the defending.
That is the record of the postwar era.
That is why we have troops stationed in
hundreds of thousands outside our coun-
try, in numbers not matched by all the
other countries of the world combined.
There is no other power on the face of
the earth that maintains major military
establishments and bases and forces out-
side of their jurisdiction, except for this
little remnant of British support in
Singapore and Gilbraltar; and the Brit-
ish are not going to be in Singapore in-
defintely. They have already learned
that no Western power can maintain a
dominating foothold in Asia. We have
not learned that lesson yet. And how
many coffins have to come back from
Asia bearing the bodies of American boys
before our Government learns that sad
lesson?
Mr. President, I shall be proud to have
my descendants read that I have not cast
a vote for this war, and, short of a
declaration of war, I intend to cast no
vote to support it, because this is an
inexcusable, immoral, and unjustifiable
war.
As I said to my friend, the Senator
from Alaska [Mr. GRUENINGI, who is sit-
ting in the Senate Chamber, as I go
through these airports-and i go
through several every week-I see hun-
dreds of American boys, 18, 19, 20, and
21 years of age, on their way to Vietnam,
where they did not ask to go. On the
basis of our present escalating of war,
I think that 15 percent of them will never
come back.
As I see these boys, I ask myself the
question: "By what moral right are we
doing this? What is the justification for
this?" All the semantics of the Presi-
dent of the United States cannot change
the sordid fact that we are without a
scintilla of legal or moral right to kill
these boys.
That is the reason why I say to the
American people: "You are the only ones
left to stop this. You have got to stop
it with your ballots by defeating those
who are supporting the war."
It does not make me happy to say so.
However, this is the issue facing the
American people, and this happens to be
their constitutional right and preroga-
tive. I repeat that we can stop the kill-
ing onl
with b
ll
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 RDP~g~~ggpp4g68000400070010-0
May 16, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORID SENATE 10177
exactly as he did 17 years ago, the same must
be said of Dean Rusk, who became Assistant
Secretary of State for the Far Fast in 1950
and whose views of U.S.-Chinese relations re-
main in the same antiquated and dangerous
rut along with Mao's.
The same program translated the slogan
uttered by small school children to the ef-
fect that "if the American soldiers come to
China, they will be buried in our soil" The
commentary went on to describe this as evi-
dence of China's "belligerence" toward the
United States.
The recitation of recent Chinese history
before our Committee, and the extent to
which it has rebutted official doctrine that
China is another Nazi Germany that must
be surrounded with military power has pro-
voked some familiar old charges of "appease-
ment" and "apologists for Chinese com-
munism."
But what has been surprising is the extent
to which this review has been accepted calm-
ly by the American public. What our hear-
ings did was to reflect not a fear and appre-
hension of China among the public, but the
extent to which official policy clings to old
myths and fears that no longer reflect public
opinion.
The dust has settled in China. Her Com-
munist regime is here to stay. While India
has staggered in her effort to mobilize and
organize her economy and depends upon
hundreds of millions of dollars worth of
gratuitous food from the U. S., China has
manages to feed a much larger population
by paying hard dollars for what she needs
from the West. Most significant of all to the
American public, in my opinion, has been
China's development of a nuclear weapon.
However primitive it may be, and however
impossible for her to deliver upon U. S. cities
from the air, nonetheless Americans no less
`,than the Soviet Union or China respect force
'and power, A country that commands nu-
blear power commands far more respect
ong the American public than one that
toes not, no matter what ideology guides
,So since our hearings began, it has be-
come respectable in Congress, among aca-
demicians, the press, and the public to point
out that isolation is a bad thing for China
because she is a nuclear power. So is the
isolation of any nuclear power a bad thing
for the United States, and it is on this basis
that many of us believe American interests
and security would be better served with
Peking in the U. N. than outside it.
Diplomatic recognition is perhaps less ur-
gent; but it is nonetheless unfortunate that
those who seek to transfer our containment
policy from Russia to China continue to'
overlook the diplomatic relations we had
with Russia and the extent to which they
enabled us to judge Russian purposes and
reactions firsthand.
The body of "Kremlinologists" and such
State Department Soviet experts as George
Kennan, Charles Bohlen, and Llewellyn
Thompson did not develop their body of
ized by one outside power. Yet it also meant
that every western power could walk all over
China together and not just one at a time.
Since 1949, we have sought the opposite.
We have had a Closed Door policy toward
China. Under it we perpetuate the greatest
myth of American foreign policy which holds
that Chiang Kai-shek on Taiwan is the gov-
ernment of China. Under our closed door
policy we permit no trade, and we limit hu-
man travel to a tiny handful of public health
specialists, selected journalists, and academi-
cians, which China does not admit.
Under the Closed Door policy, we have
sought to close her off to other countries as
well. British recognition of Peking is be-
littled, French recognition was opposed by
the United States, Japanese and German rec-
ognition is forestalled by immensely strong
U.S. representations, and we do all we can to
limit trade from western nations, most par-
ticularly Japan and West Germany.
Despite our diplomatic efforts, despite her
recent failures in poor countries, and despite
the constant exhortations by the Secretaries
of State and Defense that China is a vora-
cious monster, out to devour Asia today and
tomorrow the world, most industrial nations
are moving toward more normal relations
with her. Japanese trade with China is
small but growing, and recently moved ahead
of the volume of her trade with the Soviet
Union. The consortium of European firms
headed by Germans to construct steel mills
has apparently gone ahead despite protests
by the State Department.
In fact, as China's commercial and tech-
nical relations with the Soviet Union have
atrophied, her commercial and technical re-
lations with the West have grown. Britain,
France, West Germany, Japan, Canada-most
of our key allies-have sent trade missions
to China. They have found that trade with
mainland China is possible, practical, and
can be quite profitable. In fact, NATO-
associated nations accounted for $223 mil-
lion worth of imports from Communist China
in 1964 alone.
OPPORTUNITY TO OPEN THE CLOSED DOOR
I suggest that China is burgeoning eco-
nomically, and technically, far beyond the
limits of our capacity to contain her with
military force alone. We are satisfied to say
that China is isolated because of her own
actions, but she is isolated because we have
for 17 years done our best to keep her that
way. The Chinese are quite right in point-
ing to the ring of American bases which con-
front her on three sides as a source of fear
to her national security. And the testimony
and speeches of our leading cabinet officials
make clear that our dominant attitude to-
non-strategic goods.
We need to start talking to her and to
other affected Asian countries about a settle-
ment of the status of Taiwan, for we ' use
Peking's ferocity about Taiwan as the excuse
for our bad relations; but we have been quite
content to let it go at that, and to keep the
issue of Taiwan around for just this pur-
pose.
We need to stop being satisfied with China's
isolation. We need to mount a diplomatic
offensive that will open the door of normalcy;
between China and the rest of the world.
We need to stop talking about sanctuaries
and how easy it would be to bomb her nu-
clear bases and start talking about how China
can be brought into the community of na-
tions at all levels and in all fields.
We need a massive effort on the diplomatic
and economic fronts to open the door to
China once again, for ourselves and for all
nations, not for exploitation but on the basis
of full national equality. This should be our
offensive.
China is the last of the emerging nations
remaining outside the community of nations.
It is not good for her, but I do not suggest
these changes in American policy for her
sake, but for our own.
I do not believe exclusive reliance upon
military containment is a sound, reasonable,
or productive policy for this country any
longer. In my opinion, it stands to lead us to
war far more certainly than to peaceful co-
existence.
Within the foreseeable future, China will
be a genuine nuclear power; by the end of
the century, she will make up half of the
world's population. I am interested in find-
ing where our interests lie in the Pacific that
can be defended without costing more than
they are worth, and I am interested in achiev-
ing a condition that will enable us to live
in peace with China. I do not believe this
condition can be achieved without a diplo-
ward China is that if she makes one false
move, we will pulverize her with nuclear
weapons.
Officialdom in Washington has brain-
washed itself to the extent that Chinese air-
bases are called "sanctuaries," just as though
they had no right to fly 30 miles across their
border over North Vietnam, but we have
every right to fly thousands of miles from
our borders to bomb North Vietnam. The
matic effort commensurate with our military
effort. To that end, I believe we should
initiate a calculated, sustained, and overt
effort to rebuild normal relations between
our two countries.
RELATIONS WITH UNDEVELOPED WORLD
ly from U-2 plane pictures,-from questioning containment dogma that allowed the Soviet
of refugees, from statistics published by the Union a rather ample ring of Soviet-domi-
.Communist government, and similar intelli- nated countries around her borders does not
gence sources. They were in Russia; they permit any such ring of Chinese-dominated
knew and talked to Russian leaders at high countries around her borders, for if the Chi-
and low levels; they lived in the country and nese do what we did in the Dominican Re-
saw the people and how they lived. public, that will be aggression.
Sixty-eight years ago we had toward China We need something more than a simple
what we called the policy of the Open Door. change of policy in Washington. We need a
It sought to maintain for American com- change of official mind and attitude. We
mercial interests equal access to the Chinese need to have a new Open Door policy toward
empire with European imperial powers. It China. It must take into account her status
opposed exclusive rights extended to any one as a near-great power; her interest in protect-
European power and demanded that the ing her borders just as Russia and the United
United States receive from China whatever States have done by assuring countries near-
extra-territorial or trade concessions any by that are not hostile if not downright
other nation received. The "Open Door" was friendly or communist; her legitimate claim
looked upon by some as the best China could to the seat assigned to China in the United
hope for, and it kept) her from being colon- Nations Charter.
Finally, I would like to discuss generally
our policies toward Latin America and the
rest of the poorer nations of the world.
Much of what I shall say applies also to
China and Southeast Asia, for they, too, must
be counted among the poorer nations of the
world.
One of the saddest statements I heard in
our hearings this year was uttered only
Wednesday by. the Secretary of Defense. In
discussing the $917 million military aid
budget, Senator PELL asked him whether all
the references the Secretary had made to
what are called "civic action" programs by
indigenous armies really exemplified an
"eleemosynary intent."
The Secretary replied with what I think
has become the epitome of American policy
toward these countries on whom we heap
military assistance:
"Well, I just think that instability is a
danger to our peace and security, and that
instability may come from communist or
noncommunist causes. It isn't only com-
munism that is causing revolution in the
world today. I have the figures here, there
have been 160 or 180 political disorders in
the last several years, five or six years. And
perhaps no more than half of those have been
caused by communists, but all of them are
a danger to us, because all of them disrupt
the peace of the world, and when the peace
of the world is disrupted, nations can very
easily come into conflict One with another,
and it is extremely difficult for the great
powers to separate themselves from those
conflicts."
"Instability" is what we fear and oppose in'
the undeveloped world, not privation nor
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10178
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0 r
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 16, 1616
injustice nor lack of opportunity, but in-
stability. And whether communist inspired
or not, the Secretary of Defense tells us that
all disorders "are a danger to us," because
they might involve the great powers. So as a
great power, we have promptly involved our-
selves in them, in an effort to preempt the
political field for ourselves.
In many ways, the most tragic of these
interventions has been in the Dominican Re-
public, about which Mr. Frankel probably
knows as much as I do! In keeping with
the view expressed by the Defense Secretary,
the Administration found that a disorder
which was not communist inspired at the
outset was not controlled by the American
embassy, either, and therefore it regarded it
as a danger to American peace and security.
So acting upon endless false representations
from our embassy in Santo Domingo, the
President ordered a virtual occupation of the
Dominican Republic by American military
forces, in total and complete violation of our
treaties with the Dominican Republic and
other nations of the hemisphere.
In my opinion, that intervention did more
to help communism in Latin America than
any other course we could have followed. It
remains to be seen from the scheduled elec-
tion June 1 whether we have brought stabil-
ity to the Dominican Republic, even at .,he
cost of many American and Dominican lives,
or as in Vietnam, whether our intervention
will merely widen and intensify the conflict
it was intended to suppress.
In what I thought was a mild, restrained,
and helpful address, the Chairman of our
Committee, Senator FULSRIGHT, sought to re-
view the circumstances of that intervention
and draw some conclusions from them that
would help us avoid similar situations in the
future.
Among his conclusions was this:
"The movement of the future in Latin
America is social revolution. The question
is. whether it is to be communist or demo-
cratic revolution and the choice which the
Latin Americans make will depend in part
on how the United States uses its great influ-
ence. It should be very clear that the choice
is not between social revolution and conserv-
ative oligarchy but whether by supporting
reform, we bolster the popular non-commu-
nist left or whether, by supporting unpopular
oligarchies, we drive the rising generation
of educated and patriotic young Latin Amer-
icans to an embittered and hostile form of
communism like that of Fidel Castro in
Cuba. . . . I think that in the case of the
Dominican Republic we did close our minds
to the causes and to the essential legitimacy
of revolution in a country in which demo-
cratic procedures had failed."
As one who was pleased to support the
findings and conclusions of Senator FUL-
BRIGHT, I am dismayed to find that even this
week, the State Department refuses to un-
derstand what is really going on in Latin
America.
Thanks to the New York Times, I have
read that State Department aides have ap-
parently succeeded in censoring the views
of a prominent American labor leader, who
is part of our delegation to the Inter-Amer-
ican Conference of Ministers of Labor. I
read in a May 11th dispatch from Caracas
the following about my good friend, Joe
Beirne of the Communications Workers:
"In the first version of his address-copies
of which soon became scarce because they
were destroyed by aides of the United States
delegation-Mr. Beirne declared: 'When we
speak of nonviolent change, the priority, if
it should come to that, is on change, not on
non-violence.'
"He also said, 'We believe in obtaining so-
cial reforms through lobbying and voting
rather, than by fighting, but if anyone were
to take away our rights to lobby, to strike or
to vote, you can be sure we would fight.'
"State Department aides here would say
only that Mr. Beirne would not speak today
and that the only speech they knew of was
being 'translated.' But a copy of the new
address showed considerable softening of Mr.
Beirne's remarks."
Mr Beirne is also quoted as telling news-
men: "I am sticking by my address and if
you can't get a copy I'll show you mine in
longhand."
The "translation" of Joe Beirne's speech
was not into Spanish but into State Depart-
ment language that will once again put sta-
bility and order ahead of change in order
of importance.
That is where we are going wrong every-
where in the world. We are forgetting that
the first message of America to mankind
was not the Alliance For Progress, nor the
Marshall Plan, nor NATO, nor the Four Free-
doms, nor the Declaration of Independence.
Our first message was the shot heard round
the world from Lexington, and there are still
some of us in the Senate who will never be-
lieve that shot was fired on behalf of sta-
bility, or even order. It was fired on behalf
of change.
Yet from Latin America to Europe to Asia
by way of the Middle East, we trust to mili-
tary power to maintain stability with as lit-
tle change as possible. Out of our immense
wealth, we can sustain such a policy for a
long time. But as we are finding in Viet-
nam, what military force can prevent it can-
not always solve, and what it can start it
cannot necessarily finish.
Our effort to bring peace and stability to
Southeast Asia by armed force has only
brought an ever-widening circle of war's dis-
ruption. Still the escalation goes on, but
now we are hearing of "mutual escalation"
rather than American escalation. The only
prospect for the future in Vietnam is one of
more troops sent, more installations in North
Vietnam to be bombed, and more warnings
to China that her planes will have no "sanc-
tuary" if they interfere.
In closing I offer you something Carl Sand-
burg once wrote about the American Civil
War. It surely has application far beyond
that conflict, for he called it "Hammers
Pounding" :
"Grant had a sledgehammer pounding and
pounding and Lee had a sledgeham-
mer pounding and pounding
And the two hammers gnashed their ends
against each other and broke holes
and splintered and withered
And nobody knew how the war would end
and everybody prayed God his ham-
mer would last longer than the other
hammer
Because the whole war hung on the big
guess of who had the hardest ham-
mer
And in the end one side won the war because
it had a harder hammer than the
other side.
Give us a hard enough hammer, a long
enough hammer, and we will break
any nation,
Crush any star you name or smash the sun
and the moon into small finders."
Today, the United States possesses the
power to smash our world into small flinders.
But do we possess the will, the capacity, the
desire, the intellectual means to help the
world cope with its shifting problems by
peaceful means?
That is the test for this generation,
ExHrsIT 3
VIETNAM: THE TURNING POINT
(By Jean Lacouture)
"Here Is Your Enemy," by James Cameron.
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 160 pages, $3.95.
On the screen an old peasant woman stands
amidst devastated houses and fields; like 25
million men and women in both parts of her
country she wears black silk pajamas. Her
left sleeve hangs empty. The picture: dis-
solves quickly and those who see her on the
television film that James Cameron, an Eng-
lish newspaperman, has brought back from
North Vietnam will forget her-unless they
have also read his book, "Here Is Your
Enemy." It is dedicated to the "old lady who
lives in the village of Naah Ngang, in the
Thanh Hoa province of North Vietnam which
is unfortunately near a strategically impor-
tant bridge."
The bridge as far as we know still stands
[Cameron writes], but the old lady had her
left arm blown off by one of the bombs that
went astray. She was more fortunate than
her daughter, who was killed. She said:
"I suppose there is a reason for all this, but
I do not understand what it is. I think I am
too old now ever to find out."
Most Americans are not too old to under-
stand and are living far enough from the
bombed bridges to appraise soberly the Viet-
nam policy pursued in their name. Indeed
they have more information available to them
about the war than any other nation that
has ever fought in a remote foreign land.
Now, at a moment when the war seems to be
reaching a turning point, James Cameron's
book and film give us the first perceptive re-
port we have had in years on the lives, reac-
tions, ideas, and leaders of the enemy in the
north.
Cameron was the first Western correspond-
ent admitted to Hanoi since the beginning
of the bombings. "Why I was selected out
of a clamoring multitude of serious news-
papermen is an enigma to me," he writes.
"It could have been the fact that I had in-
sisted on going, if I went, on my own terms,
uncommitted and unsponsored." In any
case, it was a fortunate choice. Cameron is
not a neutral observer-he has been critical
of both the Conservative and Labor posi-
tions on Vietnam-but he seems less suscep-
tible to the passions and resentment we
might have expected from a French or Amer-
ican reporter. An English liberal with long
experience in Asia, he is able to distinguish
between the totalitarian Communist appara-
tus which rules in North Vietnam and the
authentic drive for national identity and in-
dependence which has made the Vietnamese
revolution possible.
Much of Cameron's book will be familiar
to those who read his dispatches in The New
York Times and the London Evening Stand-
ard last September. What emerges most
clearly from the second reading is his sense
of the ordinary Vietnamese people he met
during the winter of 1965 when American
bombs were falling on the transport and
communications systems throughout the
country. Cameron is not a sentimentalist
but he was enormously impressed by the re-
markable courage and cheerfulness of the
Vietnamese in the face of death. Indeed the
most important contribution of his book is
to show that the stoicism of the Vietnamese
is one of the most important, and most
neglected, factors in the debate over Viet-
nam-as important as the follies of French
colonialism, or the calculations of Secretary
Rusk. Western leaders have not understood
that bombing operations that might produce
panic and disruption in their own coun-
tries have had remarkable little effect on a
people who resisted French "mopping up"
operations for eight years and are led by
an old man who has spent one third of his
life in prison and another third shaking off
the agents of various colonial police forces.
So far from terriorizing and disrupting
the people [Cameron writes) the bombing
seemed to me both stimulated and con-
solidated them. By the nature of the at-
tacks so far, civilian casualties had not been
very great, but they had been great enough
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May 16, 1966 , _rr. -v~ .CUIVGRESSId1 A~ fr~CZ5~tT5`- 5'E1QA''IE'"..- -.,.,.,- __ "" '"
to provide the government of the Vietnam
republic with the most totally unchallenge-
able propaganda they could ever have
dreamed of. A nation of peasants and man-
ual workers who might have felt restive or
dissatisfied under the stress of totalitarian
conditions had been obliged to forget all
their differences in the common sense of re-
sistance and self-defense. From the moment
the United States dropped its first bomb on
the North of Vietnam, she welded the na-
tion together unshakably ... even in their
own interests the U.S. planners failed to
recognize the reality of a society like this.
A bomb here, a bomb there; a family elimi-
nated here or there; . these were trou-
blesome, infuriating; they were not disabl-
Pig. The destruction of a bridge or a road-
in Western terms it could be disastrous.
Here it was a nuisance.
One might add that since the resumption
of the bombing the rate of North Vietnam-
ese infiltration into the South has quad-
rupled; the number of American casualties
has risen; Northern influence in the South
has increased along with the prestige of the
Communist cadres in the Vietcong. More-
over, the membership of the PRP, the Com-
munist organization within the National
Liberation Front, has tripled during the last
year.
No doubt Cameron's book will be dis-
missed-as his articles were dismissed by
Time-as a "conduit for North Vietnamese
propaganda," naive in its uncritical presen-
tation of talks with North Vietnamese lead-
ers. But Cameron writes, It seemed to me
from the beginning that I of all people was
most likely to be handled with circumspec-
tion and to receive in official conversations
the most distilled official line." On the other
hand, his observation of the effects of the
war on the North Vietnamese are his own
and they are important. Those who have
served as a "conduit"-if not as a source-
for official American propaganda justifying
the bombings can learn from Cameron's re-
port how badly this policy has failed.
The events of the past month make Cam-
eron's book all the more pertinent. The
bombings in the North have become even
more severe, while the demonstrations in the
South seem to have made a political solution
more possible. At least some of the more
fragile American myths have been exploded
and the hard political questions that have
been obscured by Washington's rhetoric are
coming into the open. Can the war be justi-
fied as a "defense of free men against a
foreign invasion" when thousands of people
have been openly demanding an end to dic-
tatorial government, not to mention the
American presence itself? Do all the non-
Communists really want a powerful Ameri-
can army to fight in Vietnam until the last
Vietcong is killed or driven North? If not,
what is the basis of the American
commitment?
These questions can at last be raised
largely because of the agitation of the Budd-
hists in their Northern stronghold of Hue
and Danang as well as in Saigon. But the
intentions of the Buddhists are not easily
discerned, for they have been reluctant to
announce their concrete political aims. Tri
Quang and his followers have advocated
"absolute peace" and "absolute national-
ism," while shrewdly improvising ways to
undermine the military dictatorship. If
their views seem abstract or contradictory,
this is a characteristics of Vietnamese politi-
cal life. Nationalism and Communism have
long been intermingled in the Vietnamese
revolution; so have the desires of the South
Vietnamese for reunification and their re-
sentment of Northern domination. In much
the same way it is extremely difficult to dis-
tinguish the religious principles of the
Buddhists (and often the Catholics) in the
'South from their political activism.
But it should be made clear that the Budd-
hists are a relatively new force in South
Vietnamese politics. They did not begin to
make their influence felt until the early
Sixties when the pagodas and monasteries
became centers of resistance to the oppres-
sive (and largely Catholic) Diem govern-
ment. The recent demonstrations are the
Buddhists' third political offensive. The first
created the situation which led the army to
bring down Diem in 1963; the second ended
in the fall of Khanh in 1964. Their current
campaign is a direct reaction to the mount-
ing intensity of the war and the increasing
numbers of civilian casualties all over the
South. (According to the recent testimony
of Representative ZABLOCxr of Wisconsin be-
fore the House Committee on Foreign Affairs,
it is estimated that at least two civilians,
and perhaps as many as six, are being killed
for each Vietcong soldier.)
"This cannot go on!" is the Buddhist
slogan. It is aimed not only at the war it-
self but at the recent national humiliation
which is summed up by the word "Hono-
lulu." For the Honolulu meeting exposed
the nearly total failure of a great Western
power to understand public opinion in a
small country, where feelings of oppression
and resentment have been smoldering for
years. In organizing the conference Wash-
ington had hoped not only to strengthen
Ky's position but to encourage him to be
more flexible politically and to undertake
social reforms. However so far as most
Vietnamese were concerned, Washington had
already shown unprecedented contempt for
their country by imposing Premier Ky on
them in the first place; to them, the meeting
was no more than a summons from a foreign
general to a cocky lieutenant--a glaring ex-
ample of Saigon's "abject" dependence on
Washington. The following week Tri Quang
warned an American visitor that a wave of
anti-American agitation was sure to follow:
Obviously a considerable part of the popula-
tion shared his feelings.
The crisis that broke out on March 10 may
well have set a hopeful process in motion.
It has shown Washington that the Viet-
namese cannot be treated simply as pawns to
be managed by native dictators, but that
they are in fact a volatile and touchy people
with a complex politics of their own. And
in South Vietnam itself Washington has be-
gun to act with more politicial acumen.
Although General Ky was foolish enough to
claim that Danang was in Communist hands,
and the U.S. Airforce was available to help
"liberate the city," no serious reprisal was
allowed to take place; and William P. Bundy,
the Assistant Secretary of State, was unusu-
ally calm in his appraisal of the situation.
Futhermore William Komer, the new White
House advisor on foreign affairs, met with
Tri Quang in Hue soon after the crisis
erupted. He listened to his complaints
against the Ky government and then fore-
warded a letter from Tri Quang, to Mr. John-
son. In this letter the Buddhist leader re-
quested that the United States support the
convening of a Vietnamese national Con-
gress that would settle peacefully the
political and military future of Vietnam
would, in particular, decide whether U.S.
forces should continue to be present in the
country.
The promise of elections on August 15
seems to have pacified Tri Quang, at least
for the moment, but we may be sure that the
continuing presence of American troops will
remain the central question of the future.
Tri Quang and his colleagues will have more
to say on this subject. Their elusive
neutralism may turn out to be quite incom-
patible with any permanent foreign mili-
tary presence.
Thus the basis of the American commit-
ment in Vietnam has been thrown into
doubt. Until now Washington's professed
10179
aim has been to allow the South Vietnamese
to choose their future freely. The recent
campaign of the Buddhists could finally
make such a choice feasible, but it may also
mean that the Vietnamese will eventually
demand the removal of the American garri-
son. The question must be raised, however,
whether some leaders in Washington are
committed not to "self-determination" but
to preserving South Vietnam as a military
base for the containment of China. In a
remarkable essay in the April Commentary,
George Lichtheim suggests that the essential
American motive is to maintain a strong
American presence in Vietnam-particularly
the enormous air base now being built at
Cam Ranh-in preparation for the day when
Communist China will possess a nuclear
force. Furthermore, in his interview with a
correspondent of Le Monde George Ball de-
fined Washington's view of an acceptable
Vietnamese neutrality as the absence of for-
eign alliances-but said nothing about
foreign bases.
The hypothesis that certain American au-
thorities are anxious to have a large perma-
nent base in Vietnam may help to explain
certain aspects of American behavior in the
past; its intransigent opposition to direct
dealings with the Vietcong, for example.
However, the policy has not been publicly
stated or defended and it remains unclear
why the U.S. should need a base in South
Vietnam at all, in view of its other strong
installations in the area as well as the
Seventh Fleet. But if such a policy were to
be adopted, an espousal of neutralism by the
Buddhists would make them, for American
purposes, the allies of Chinese imperialism
and they would soon be swept aside. Tri
Quang could easily find himself in the same
position as Juan Bosch did last year.
Obviously Washington is about to make
vital decisions. The rainy season in the
South will start in two months and this will
sharply limit air operations and therefore
the efficiency of General Westmoreland's
troops. We may also expect that attempts
will be made during the next two months
to reconvene the Geneva conference-pos-
sibly as a result of General de Gaulle's visit
to Moscow. When this happens, the interna-
tional pressures on Washington to participate
will be heavy. President Johnson would be
well advised to undertake his own diplomatic
efforts first.
In this situation Washington may reckon
that it has two months to win the war. As
General Ridgeway has recently written in
Look, the war could be won if the full force
of U.S. air and naval power were brought to
bear on the enemy. But the price would be
genocide: Much of Vietnam would be turned
into a desert occupied by Marines, a result the
General believes unworthy of American tradi-
tions and not justified by the threat of
China. Meanwhile another experienced ob-
server, J. K. Galbraith, has warned that the
country is running an "intolerable risk" of
provoking Chinese intervention as it launches
heavier and heavier bombing attacks on the
North.
At the same time certain hopeful, if little-
publicized, diplomatic developments have
taken place: Along with the recent negotia-
tions with the Buddhists they may help to
provide an alternative to genocide and fur-
ther escalation. It seems clear, for example,
that new and very discreet contacts have
been made with the Vietcong. For over a
year negotiations have been underway to
obtain the release of Mr. Hertz, a U.S. offi-
cial held prisoner by the Vietcong. First.
Paris attempted to intervene with Hanoi on
Mr. Hertz's behalf; then Senator ROBERT
KENNEDY stepped in. Four months ago
Hanoi let it be known that the National
Liberation Front insisted on conducting its
own negotiations concerning the prisoner.
After some hesitation Washington made con-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10180
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0 f
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 16, 1,966
Constitutional Convention might be able to
work out procedures to form a more perma-
nent congress made up of delegates repre-
senting all the significant groups in the
South., Until the signing of a cease fire, a
number of seats could be held open for the
representatives of the NLF. Meanwhile the
Congress would set up a caretaker govern-
ment that would eventually deal with the
NLF and prepare the way for its return to
legitimate political life.
During the second phase the military lead-
ers on both sides would meet to work out
a cease fire: Representatives of the American
tact with the Vietcong and several meet-
ings followed. So far as is known, a dialogue
is now secretly taking place somewhere in
the South between the U.S. government and
the N.L.F. Apparently no results have been
achieved so far, but at least a channel of
communication has been established.
Official doctrine is also changing. While
Vice President HUMPHREY denounced Viet-
cong "assassins" in Honolulu, Charles Bohlen
and Averell Harriman hinted at a more flex-
ible U.S. position: The Vietcong, they said,
might back candidates in the next election
and thus participate in a South Vietnamese
government. And later, after Senator KEN-
rrEDY's statement on Vietnam, Bill Moyers
stated that no g`_roups could be denied par-
ticipation in the public life of South Viet-
nam, provided its representatives had been
duly elected. This "Moyers Compromise" theory that a long struggle will bring them
would seem to be the last authoritative word" total victory as the U.S. grows weary of the
on the subject. Neither Hanoi nor the NLF
has as yet rejected Senator KENNEDY'S sug-
gestion that the Vietcong might participate
in a coalition government (the first "goal
of war" of the NLF), although Peking called
it a "new imperialist maneuver." Whether
or not this is of any significance remains to
be seen.
Let us suppose that the American leader-
ship finally rejects the course of escalation
and decides to bring the war to an end. The
logical objectives of such a policy would be:
(a) to restore the moral prestige of the
United States in Asia and in the world; (b)
to allow the South Vietnamese to create
their own independent state which can pre-
pare a future merger with North Vietnam
and co-exist with China; (c) to promote the
development in South East Asia of a broad
movement based on both neutralism and
nationalism-a movement that would in-
clude the political tendencies of both India
and Indonesia and would establish friendly
relations with Japan.
Is it possible to suggest precisely what
steps should be taken to implement such
a policy? A peaceful settlement might be
pursued in three stages. At first, every ef-
fort must be made to encourage the local
forces in South Vietnam to come forward
and take their place in the political life of
the country. If democracy has any chance
in Vietnam it will succeed only by the vigor-
ous political activity of the groups that
genuinely represent Vietnamese society-the
Buddhists, Catholics, trade unions, students,
army, Cao-Dai, and "Hoa-Hao" among others.
These are the famous "chickens" that Mr.
HuMPHREY wants to protect from the hungry
"fox." But if they are bold enough to chal-
lenge a regime supported by the U.S. army
there is good reason to believe they will be
able to resist threats to their integrity in the
future. Tri Quang may favor neutralism
and negotiations, but he is not a man in-
clined to yield power to any competing
group.
Recently there has been a tendency in the
United States to make glib jokes about
Vietnam's political "instability." But it re-
mains to be seen whether people who have
refused to support a series of despicable dic-
tatorships openly backed by foreigners-the
regimes of Bao Dai, Diem, Khanh, and Ky-
have proven their instability or their desire
for identity and freedom. Should the Viet-
namese be called "irresponsible" and "un-
governable" because they reject the rule of
an unknown jet pilot trained by the French
at the height of the Algerian war?
We can now say that the first step toward
a peaceful settlement of the war was taken
this Spring, although many questions remain
in doubt. Will elections be held on August
15 to form a National Congress? Will this
assembly meet only to write a South Viet-
namese constitution and decide on the form
of a future civilian government? It is pos-
sible to arrange reasonably fair elections
under present conditions? In any case, a
and South Vietnamese armies would nego-
tiate with leaders of the Vietcong and their
Northern Allies. But this will be a harder
task than the first because there is no evi-
dence that the Vietcong have abandoned the
war. Indeed one of the great tragedies of
the conflict is that both sides are so badly
informed about the firmness of the other's
intentions. Undoubtedly the hard-line Com-
munists in the Vietcong want a long war.
For one thing it brings them new recruits.
Communist membership has grown from ten
thousand since 1951 to almost a hundred
thousand at the present time.
The principal effort of American policy
must therefore be to provide political op-
portunities to those revolutionaries who have
not become "professional warriors." Unlike
the guerrilla fighters who enjoy the adven-
ture and power of warfare, many of the Viet-
cong followers are exhausted. Senator Ken-
nedy's proposal is therefore sound, because
it may strengthen the position of those
revolutionaries who would like to convert a
military into a political struggle. However
while the Vietcong is a most efficient machine
of war, its political and psychological skill
may not match its fighting power. This is
probably one reason why its chiefs prefer
war.
The only chance of persuading the guer-
rillas in the South to accept a cease fire is
to speak to them directly and not through
Hanoi or at an international conference.
They have not forgotten the 1954 Geneva
conference when their interests were sub-
merged in a deal among the great powers
(and the less-than-great Vietminh). The
Southern combat forces were sent off to the
North while the country remained in "reac-
tionary" hands.
Many of the same guerrillas have now re-
turned to the "Maquis" in the South and
have resumed fighting. It is true that they
now depend on the North and the nations
of the Communist bloc for much of their
support; and any agreement with the guer-
rillas would eventually have to involve Hanoi
as well as the great powers. But since the
guerrilla chiefs are wary of being duped
again by an international deal-and are en-
joying the prestige of battle-they are quite
capable of sabotaging an agreement made
without their full consent. Therefore any
efforts to make peace must start with them-
if peace is the goal.
Once a cease-fire agreement is in prospect,
the third stage-preparation for self-deter-
mination--should begin. The opposing forces
must agree on the procedures for a nation-
wide referendum. It should be pointed out
that, unlike the FLN in Algeria, the NLF lead-
ers have unequivocally, admitted that their
movement cannot fully represent the South
Vietnamese people. This has been made
clear not only in public statements but in
the allotment of public seats on the National
Council to volunteers--who are not volun-
teering. Is it possible that the two incom-
plete assemblies-the National Congress and
the NLF committee-might merge to form
a fully representative parliament for South
Vietnam? -
No matter how it is organized, a referen-
dum would reveal the full diversity of South
Vietnamese society. it is entirely possible
that the NLF will appear as a "major factor
of the South Vietnamese political scene," as
George Carver has recently written in Foreign
Affairs. It is also quite likely that the Con-
gress will reflect the various zones of influence
in South Vietnam, with Buddhists predom-
inating in the Hue and Danang areas., the
Catholics around Saigon, Cal Daiists in the
West, and Hoa-Hao in the South West. The
Vietcong may be expected to predominate-in
the East (Zone D), the South, and. the
Quang Ngai area, which lies between the
strongholds of the Buddhists in the North
and the Catholics in the center of South
Vietnam. In Vietnam, as in most countries,
men have a stronger political appeal than
ideas: The referendum might therefore be
more effective if it were to choose a head of
state rather than a cabinet government
drawn from different factions or parties--
but this would require the non-Communist
groups to agree upon a common candidate,
something that seems highly unlikely at
the moment. The key to the political situa-
tion and to a workable balance of power
among the forces in the South will be the
possibility of cooperation between the Bud-
dhists and the Catholics. The Vatican is
now trying to bring this about with the
help of the new liberal Catholic groups which
center around Mgr. Binh and the Archbishop
of Saigon, and are now providing a counter-
force to the reactionary traditions of Viet-
namese Catholicism. -
It should be clear that no solution will
be acceptable to Hanoi unless there are guar-
antees of close ties between the two Viet-
nams before the country can be reunited.
It is far from clear haw long reunification
itself might take. Ho Chi Minh estimated
that it might take ten years when I spoke- to
him in 1962, while in 1965 an NLF spokesman
in Algiers thought fifteen years more likely.
It could take a long time indeed.
Finally, it will remain for international ne-
gotiation to guarantee the results of the
peace talks, perhaps making use of an en-
larged version of the International Control
Commission of 1956 (India, Poland, Canada)
to supervise the referendum and protect
Vietnamese neutrality. As a matter of fact,
international negotiations among the Great
Powers have secretly been taking place since
1964. It is rumored that Secretary General
U Thant now plans to request a leave of ab-
sence from the United Nations in order to
concentrate on the Vietnam question. This
will put him in a better position to deal with
the Asian Communists who distrust his or-
ganization but trust him personally. Some-
thing may also come of General de Gaulle's
trip to Moscow, as well as new interventions
by Pope Paul VI. Harold Wilson may at last
choose to display his diplomatic talents by
assuming his position as cochairman at a
reconvened Geneva conference. He could
then count on the assistance of Canada
whose delegate at the International Control
Commission has kept in close touch with
Hanoi).
The next two months will be decisive. The
United States can certainly hold South Viet-
nam and impose a military government
simply by threat of force; it can retain a
firm grip on its "enclaves" and bases with-
out worrying about popular feelings. The
Vietnamese have been subjected to treat-
ment of this kind for many years. Even if
this Spring's uprising has demolished some
of the myths on which American interven-
tion has been based, it cannot be expected to
end power politics.
Washington has intervened in Vietnam
four times: first, from 1950 to 1954 it sup-
ported France in her fight against Asian
Communism; second, from 1954 to 1963 it
supported Mr. Diem, "the defender of free-
dom"; third, from 1963 to 1965 it sent Amer-
ican troops to fight in the South; fourth,
since 1963 it has extended the war to all of
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
May 16' 1966 CONO ESS16NAL RECORD - SENATE
Vietnam. There is no reason why there
should not be a fifth stage during which it
holds on to the large base of Cam Ranh, in
case there is to be a sixth stage-a great war
against China.
We can only hope that it is not too late to
attempt a different policy, one that would
place reliance on the Vietnamese them-
selves-all the Vietnamese-to maintain
their integrity in the face of whatever forces
may threaten it.
EXHIBIT 4
DETROIT, MICH.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
We support you completely in your con-
victions on foreign policy and wish you suc-
sees in their implementation.
Mr. and Mrs. VICTOR LINDEN.
PACOIMA, CALIF'.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.:
Your stand on Vietnam wonderful. Ad-
ministration and public must hear it again,
LOS ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
God bless you for your speech today May
11 before the Senator Fulbright Committee.
Mrs. HELEN LOMAN.
HADDONFIELD, N.J.
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We agree with your courageous stand on
Viet Nam. Urge continuance of valiant
SALLY and DICK PRYOR.
SYLVIA and KEN NEWCOMB.
RUTH and JOE KRAUSE.
DEL MAR, CALIF.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
W,gshington, D.C.:
A thousand thanks to you for your coura-
geous onslaught upon ugliness in our pre-
cious land.
F2'`LIZABETH D, NEWTON.
SAN ANTONIO, TEX.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
The following message sent to President
Lyndon B. Johnson. "Please listen to Sena-
tor MORSE before it's too late for our country,
our people, and the world."
Mr. and Mrs, W. J. LYTLE.
BAKERSFIELD, CALIF.,
May 12, 1866.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Democrat,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR; Thank God there are meil like
-Dr. HARRY.GORA,N AI,TAFFER.
PASERENA, CALIF.,
May 11 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
W ashitsgtont DC.:
Congratulations on'your stand before For-
eign Relatinons Committee, live. this ? a.m.
Especially in regard to Americans got matter
before U.N. and get U Thant out.. Is this the
way 4'. defend the vested interests in war
profits and bloodshed. How long before all
of us will be silenced. Since peace is not
NEWTON, N.J.,
May 21, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Heartily endorse your stand (Senate
Caucus Room) yesterday. Johnson venture
Vietnam far greater folly than Crimean War.
FRED FARR.
ORELAND, PA.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
You have made me angry because you
never made your point crystal clear today
you were clear erudite and I must say I
agree with your point of view President
Jonhson should go to the United Nations
lie should put us on record there to call the
colors of the Nations of the World and then
we should go to the brink the tree of liberty
need blood shed for nourishment, sir, as
said by Thomas Jefferson.
HOWARD W. DYSON.
WEST ORANGE, N.J.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.: -
I applaud and salute you.
Mrs. ALEX PORTNOFF.
DES MOINES, IOWA,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please don't fail our Americans negotiate
a just peace or bring our boys home now.
Mrs. ROBERT L. STAPES.
YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Thanks for your tireless efforts for peace
blessed are the peace makers.
Mrs. WILLIAM DAGGETT.
MONSEY, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Agree on a cease fire and enforcement in
Vietnam through the efforts of the U.N.
Mrs. MARY ANNE LEVY.
DAYTONA BEACH, FLA.,
- May 11, 1966.
Hon, WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
The magazine "Nation" year 1927 the
British Ambassador Turner and the Amer-
ican Ambassador MacMurray gave permis-
sion to the C}iinese war lords to violate the
sovereignty of the Russian Embassy at
Peking China and 30 Chinese girl clerks were
taken out and strangled." Louisville Courier
Journal April 26, 1966, "are Lodge's fears of
Vietnam vote hi s ,ow;i_, or the, President, at
best his (Lodges) remarks seem to be a pre-
lude to a vote of no confidence in the elec-
tion at worst they could be a warning that
we will not accept a vote that doesn't please
us if this is Mr. Lodge's view it is one thing.
It is something else if it was relayed to him
from Washington." Both the Vietnam and
Korean wars were and are designed for the
recapture of China for the American dol-
lar patriots highest regards to you Senator
MORSE and Senator FULBRIGHT.
GEORGE EDWIN ENGLISH.
10181
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your arguments re Vietnam are very con-
vincing. I have so wired Johnson, McNamara,
and Rusk.
Very truly yours,
INDIANAPOLIS, IND.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please continue to ask questions and make
decisions which will lead to peace.
Your admirer,
FRANCES P. FRIEDMAN.
BOSTON, MASS.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I think you are very right.
JEAN GUSTAFSON.
VAN Nuys, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
I support your views that we should get
out of Vietnam, however, if we must fight
our soldiers should have the best equipment
possible. The reports of shortages are dis-
gusting and unforgivable. As the mother of
a newly enlisted marine I want to do any-
thing I can to support your cause and please
consider me as a volunteer.
Mrs. MARILANE PERKINS.
MILWAUKEE, WIS.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C:
Your vigorous and courageous defense of
peace and morality is a highwater mark of
American patriotism today. You have our
support.
OAKLAND, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
You are the greatest. What is the U.S.
Senate for? The Constitution states you
represent the people. Let's keep it that way.
No 5-year aid. Make them ask for approval
each year.
BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please accept our thanks and amen for
your courageous stand against the illegality
of the dirty war in Vietnam.
LESTER A. DAVISON.
OXNARD, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Applaud comments to McNamara. Hope
fellow colleagues see validity. U.N. still ex-
ists. Let's use it.
Three grateful mothers,
KAREN OLSON.
KAY MIKITA.
COLLEEN DALPORTO.
Approved For. Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10182
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May ? 16L 1966
PARKRIDGE ILL., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building.
Washi3ongton, D.C.:
7JIi11ns of Americans agree United Na-
tions main function is to intervene and help
in Vietnam. McNamara should be investi-
gated, psychoanalyzed for saying decisively
Russia and Red China will not merge and
inferring we have unlimited military power.
All efforts must be used immediately to end
war or what good urban renewal etc., if we
are conquered. Please give your last breath
to terminate war along line suggested at this
morning's hearing.
Mrs. PFEGEN,
BERKELEY, CALIF., May 11, 1966.
Senator MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your position in opposing our
present policies in Vietnam. America needs
your courage.
MIKE SOBILOFF,
HovszoN, TER., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE, MORSE,
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, D.C.:
Propose stand of immediate elections as
requirement of continuation of military aid.
This will give us an out either way.
E. H, PALMER,
RICHMOND, VA., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Give 'em hell.
Dr. D. E. WHELESS.
MIOLLAND, MICH., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
I agree, if the Vietnam issue was put to the
voters today, Johnson would be clobbered
worse than Goldwater and his war mongers
were in 64.
STORRS, CONN., May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
U.S. action in Vietnam in contravention of
UN charter articles 52 regional peaceful set-
tlement of disputes and 53 section NE if such
action is justified by SEATO. Articles 51
and 54 are violated by unilateral nature of
intervention.
ADREA HELMS.
MENDOCINO, CALIF., May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your courageous stand
against Rusk. Please reopen televised Sen-
ate hearing on Vietnam.
EMMY Lou PACKARD.
MENDOCINO, CALIF., May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your courageous stand
against Rusk. Please reopen televised Sen-
ate hearing on Vietnam.
MONTCLAIR, N.J.,
May 10,1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
.;leash;ngton, D.C.:
19trongly support your courageous efforts to
bring about a just peace in Vietnam.
R. C. CAMMERER.
BARRINGTON, R.I., WORCESTER, PA.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please insist upon bringing out the legality
of this war.
Mrs. CARLTON B. CURRY.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
Senator WAYNE Morass,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Bravo, we applaud your efforts to end the
horrible war in Vietnam.
ERIC and NAOMI FONER.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
A small element in the American ferment.
Thank you for your representation hearings.
Mrs. MARION BEARDSLEY.
WILMINGTON, DEL.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations TV today. Following
night letter sent to President Johnson:
"Nazi war criminals were prosecution of
American war criminals-decent people sick-
ened by pictures in pamphlet called the un-
speakable war. Now circulating inhuman
burning by napalm. Now torture by nausea
gas. Have wired WAYNE MORSE to start
movement demanding immediate resignation
of Johnson, Rusk, McNamara."
CRUSADERS FOR PEACE,
K. A. IIORseER,
President.
MARIE IIITCHENS,
Secretary.
MILLBRAE, CALIF., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Request open hearings with testimony by
international law witnesses legality U.N.
Vietnam position.
MARTHA RozEN.
DENVER, COLO.,May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Bravo for your views in the Senate hear-
ings today. Admire your courage keep up the
good work.
WILLIAM HANNAH..
SEATTLE, WASH., May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Please accept our congratulations for your
continuing courageous opposition to the
Vietnam war.
DWARD ALICE DAVID.
PATRICK FI:IEL.
JACKSONVILLE, FLA.,
May 9, 1966.
U.S. Senator from Oregon,
Washington, D.C.:
Concerning today's Senate hearings, your
courageous defense of our constitutional
government advances the cause of freedom
-throughout the world, and is a further step
toward a world of law for suffering humanity.
All men everywhere stand In your debt. May
God grant you victory and long life in this
noblest of causes.
DAVID B. LORD.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
We support your proposed hearings on the
legality of Vietnam war gratefully.
WALTON and NICOLITA GETTER.
BUFFALO, N.Y.,
May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:
We strongly support your stand on Viet-
nam and respect both your rationalists and
humanism.
Dr. and Mrs. JAMES R. RQBINSON.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.: .
Count us as two grateful citizens of the
many in our land you speak to and for when
you ask about questions In committee of our
unhappy involvement in the Vietnam war.
Mr. and Mrs. ROBIN KINDEAD.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
Nay 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:
Thank you Senator for effort to get us out
of Vietnam. How can we help?
Mr. and Mrs. MAX SCHIFFMAN.
WINNETKA, ILL.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: Keep it up; we're all for you
and so are many friends here.
JAMES ZACHARIAS FAMILY.
NEW HOPE, PA.,
May 9, 1966.
SenatorWAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:
Bravo, magnificent.
Mr. and Mrs. FRANCIS L. LOVETT.
PALO ALTO, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C..
Congratulations. For God sake keep it up.
You have the country behind you.
FELIX GREENE.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.:
.We support your stand on U.S. foreign
policy. Thank you.
JAY and KELLY TWIGG.
HAYWARD, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: We wholeheartedly agree
with you views and course of action.
Mr. and Mrs. L. ENRIQVEA.
REDOAK, IOWA,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
South Vietnam legally is separate nation?
If not, then with which military dictatorship
have we made treaties? Is interference in
a civil war justification for threatening the
safety of the world? I believe we are the
aggressors in this inglorious conflict. The
executive branch of our Government has
proved it is incapable of wisdom in global
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67500446R000400070010-0
 Approved For qo P6 000400070010-0
Qy 16, !966 c ~s 9 i~P~ ~z ~ 4 ~'
strategies and power policies. Congress
would be wise to challenge such leadership.
Respectfully.
GREret1N GrrrRNs
Mrs. pert" tittins.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 9,1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:
Our great admiration for your courageous
stand regarding Vietnam. Please enlist more
Senators to help end this senseless war.
Sincerely,
Mrs. HELEN SAUER.
CHICAGO, ILL., May 9, 1966.
senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate, ' 11 Washington, D.C.:
Please continue as you have this morning
in the questioning of the Secretary of State.
Please continue to bring the truth to the
people of the United States. Millions of our
citizens support you completely. With our
deepest thanks.
ALFRED LIPSEY.
NEW Yonx, N.Y., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
That was a very good talk you made today
before the committee and hope you get the
Secretary of State to answer to your satisfac-
tion.
H. K. WHITEHEAD,
Seamans Unit P.O. No. 1.
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Great praise for your stand on Vietnam.
Deeply appreciate efforts. Bring truth to
Mrs. W. A. PEEx.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Our wholehearted support in your intelli-
gent unequivocable questioning entire U.S.
policy in Vietnam.
Dr. and Mrs. SIDNEY VOGEL,
SEATTLE, WASH., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Our continued admiration and prayers for
your courage and actions.
Mr. and Mrs. ALDEN H. BowES.
WHEATRIDGE, COLO., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
'Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Much support here your pursuit of facts
on foreign aid and Vietnam. Glad some-
one supports own honest conviction.
Mrs. RALPH D. BARNHART.
RICHMOND, VA., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
I wish to thank and support you for your
statements and views made this morning
on our country's legal obligations concern-
ing our administration's actions in Vietnam.
I, too, would like a clear, concise, undis-
puted decision defining our lawful rights in
our Vietnam policy and whatever this de-
cision, see the administration confine its
activity to boundaries and restrictions of that
JOHN H. FARMER.
ASBURY PARK, N.J., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Foreign Committee Meeting,
Washington,'D.C.:
Congratulations your stirring, eloquent
speech. God bless you. Fight to stop need-
less war and loss American lives. World
CHERRY HILL, N.J., May 9, 1866. '
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
your position taken at Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee meetings.
Mr. and Mrs. STANLEY WEISS.
MIAMI, FLA., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate House,
Washington, D.C.:
Keep up the good work. We're all behind
you.
Mrs. Roy T. RUSSELL.
GREAT NECK, N.Y.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C:
Your courageous voice our bulwark against
mass destruction. We humbly thank you.
RUTH BLUMENTHAL.
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Cheer for your speech. May your wisdom
prevail. Americans should not be killed for
MARS, PA.,
May 9, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Don't give up. Many American citizens
SACRAMENTO, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
MODESTO, CALIF?
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.:
We are all back of you. Please keep with it.
ELEANOR HAUN.
BERKELEY, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
?. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.Cf.`
Hail to'a great American. God bless you
Senator MORSE. Wish you would 'be, our
President,, Very sincerely good American
citizen.
. MARK ,PEWERS and MANYA PICKUS.
No. 80-20
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Armed Services Committee,
Washington, D.C.:
Please ask Mr. Rusk what free people he is
under the impression we are aiding in Viet-
nam.
RAY E. DEBARRA.
NEW YORK, N.Y.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator MORSE,
Senate House,
Washington, D.C.:
Bravo Senator MORSE for factual intelligent
position on Vietnam. My unequivocal sup-
10183
DETROIT, MICH.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
Your speech on TV wonderful. Seems you
alone understand the majority of American
people and are speaking our thoughts for us.
If there is anything we can do to help please
let us know.
God bless you and keep up the good work.
Mrs. B. MORRIS.
WILWAUxEE, WIS.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Investigating Committee,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
the stand you are taking on part of the
American people being informed. Not mis-
informed. Our full support.
Mrs. ELEANOR SCHUSTER and, EMMA
BARNES.
WALKERSVILLE, MD.,
May, 9, 1966.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
God bless you on your stand war in Viet-
HARWICHPORT, MASS.,
May, 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Hearing Chambers,
Washington, D.C.:
Keep at it, please. With you.
M. N. PARSONS.
JANESVILLE, WIS.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Congratulations on your outstanding
speech of today keep up your strong' assira-
tion.
Mrs. CHARLENE KLIEFOTH.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senator from Oregon,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
You are wonderful. A concerned citizen.
There must be something I can do to help.
MARY JENKINS.
HAVERHILL, MASS.,
May, 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Thank God for a man like you in our Gov-
ernment.
Mrs. G. BALUKAS_
WALLED LAKE, MICH.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: Watching you this a.m, on
TV. We're with you 100 percent and we're
Republicans. This country needs more men
RICHARDSON, TEX.,
May 9,1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
Congratulations on your John F. Kennedy
view today, May 9. Keep up the good work,
MARTINA LANGLEY.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10184
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May ,16, 1 0'10i 6
DES MOINES, IOWA,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.:
I'm a Republican. I think you're doing a
good job. Listening to you now. Keep it up.
? DONNA MCCUEN.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 13, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Would this not be
a propitious time to renew our attack on the
administration's Vietnamese policy? It
seems so obvious that the people there don't
want our military forces there. Let us save
lives and not worry about saving face.
Please, help as you have in the past to cor-
rect the horrible mistake of the present war.
Thank you.
Mrs. RUTH ROPER.
TILLAMOOK, OREG.,
April 15, 1966.
Senator WAYNE L. MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Could this be our opportunity to get out
of Vietnam and save our apparent face. Re-
member opportunity strikes but once. Let
us get out of Vietnam now.
Respectfully,
BOYD B. HARTMAN.
MILWAUKIE, OREG.,
April 15, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thanks for your
continuing courageous efforts to bring home
to the administration the folloy and the
senseless tragedy of Vietnam. We need more
like you in Washington.
Yours respectfully,
FLOYD O. HARVEY,
Father of Two Boys.
EUGENE, OREG.,
May 6, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR WAYNE MORSE: I wish to
congratulate you'for your courage to stand
up for what you think is right. Especially
your stand on the Vietnam issue. I believe
if this was left to a vote by the people
whether or not, that all American troops be
withdrawn from Vietnam it would go over
by a big majority, as one very seldom talks
to anyone, but who thinks the U.S. should
withdraw all troops and should never of
been sent there in the first place.
Yours very truly,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
Heartily endorse your Vietnam position.
Urge continued vigorous pressure for intel-
ligent humane Asian policy.
ROBERT C. CROKETT.
want us out and the Buddhists and a lot of
the people of South Vietnam want us out.
So why in the name of God don't we get out
of Vietnam and stop being aggressors. Be-
cause aggressors is just what we are.
Sincerely yours,
DON NICKELSEN.
LAKE OSWEGO, OREG.,
April 14, 1966.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I wish to commend you for the
valiant stand you have taken to end this
futile strife and the slaughter of our fine
young men in Vietnam.
In the beginning of the war, I favored our
efforts to support the Vietnamese people, but
events have proven we are wrong in continu-
ing this war.
There is no doubt, in my mind that the
United States should not be fighting to sup-
port the Vietnamese people when they do
not want us there, they do not understand,
deserve, nor appreciate our fine young men
who are giving their lives to help them, when
even the Vietnamese women kill our wound-
ed soldiers.
This war is an outrage to thinking people.
If there is fear of the spread of Chinese Com-
munism, let us support the surrounding
countries that welcome our support and
efforts.
Most sincerely,
Mrs. GLADYS L. CRAWFORD,
Mrs. A. G. SIEBERTS.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 13, 1966.
Hon. Senator MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It Is ,a relief to knew
that we have a Senator from Oregon who
really works for what he believes is right.
My husband and I both agree wholeheart-
edly with you in regard to your views on
Vietnam, as opposed to those of President
Johnson.
I am expressing the views of many people
who feel as I do in regard to Lyndon John-
son's unfair treatment of our boys and grand-
sons. It is a disgrace that the leader of our
country would excuse his prospective son-in-
law from military service and give him a
plush job in Washington, D.C., and send our
loved ones to fight in Vietnam. I should
think that he would realize that this action
belittles him in the eyes of many.
When will his eyes be opened to the fact
that our boys are fighting for a country whose
people do not want our help or our presence
in their country?
Mothers and grandmothers represent a
sizable vote in this country. This I assure
you, will be felt at the next Presidential elec-
tion.
April 28, 1966. PORTLAND, OREG.,
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am typing this April 11, 1966.
letter to let you know of my dislike of our To Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
policy in Vietnam. I could, at the first of U.S. Senate Building,
the Vietnamese war, see some point of our Washington, D.C.
being over there. After all, the United DEAR SIR:I think it is about time for this
States of America stands itself out as a constituent. to let you know that I am defi-
Worldly protector of the underdog. But as nitely in favor of your actions regarding
of this last month or so I see no reason for our foreign aid and also our expressed
staying in Vietnam. The Vietnam conflict opinion of our action in Vietnam.
is going to accomplish the same thing the I am sorry we haven't another 50 senators
Korean conflict did and that is get a lot of like you in the senate. I am speaking as a
our boys killed and wounded and that's all. World War I veteran,
We accomplished nothing in Korea and we More power to you and I wish you every
will obtain the same thing in Vietnam. success.
As of lately I see less reason for being Sincerely,
over there because the North Vietnamese
CORVALLIS, OREG.,
April 21, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senator
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to commend
you for your stand on Viet Nam. It ,is a
wonderful thing that there are still some
legislators who have the courage and inde-
pendence of mind to speak out as their con-
science bids.
Sincerely,
CORVALLIS, OREG.,
April.19, 1966.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to thank you
for helping to bring these Senate Hearings
to the public. There are a lot of things I
didn't know about that was brought to my
attention.
Also I want to commend you on your stand
on this war and sticking with it. My hus-
band has fought 2 wars and has retired this
year. I am glad he is retired.
Good luck and keep up the work.
Thank you,
Mrs. ROBERT L. TEATER.
PRIMEVILLE, OREG.,
April 18, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I support your stand
on Vietnam.
Sincerely,
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: As an American citi-
zen and an Oregonian, I am greatly con-
cerned about the present situation in Viet-
nam.
After much consideration and study I am
convinced that you are definitely right in
your opinion and I fully support your views.
I hope that you and Senator FULBRIGHT
will be able to persuade the President and his
advisors that our foreign policy at this time
is not what it should be.
Please encourage all Members of the Senate
to oppose our position in Vietnam.
A concerned citizen with much displeasure
in our American foreign policy.
Truly yours,
Mrs. DELORES CROTTY,
PORTLAND, OREG.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: As an Oregonian and
a concerned American I want you to know
that I am actively supporting your opposition
to the present policy in Vietnam.
I hope that you and Senator FULBRIGHT
will be able to swing some of our Congress-
men and the President against our position
in much of our foreign policy.
I want you to know that I am proud of
your stands and am grateful for a leader such
as yourself.
Sincerely,
KLAMATH FALLS, OREG.,
April 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: We have followed your stand re-
garding Vietnam with keen interest and sin-
cere support. We feel, as do our friends,
that it is most urgent for those who rep-,
resent our State to speak out in no uncer-
tain terms about this terrible debacle in
which this Nation is now engaged. We con-
cur that Asia Is for the Asians.
It is the responsibility of our administra-
tion that was elected by the people to de-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 .. 9 Approved For 9 000400070010-0
May16, 1966~Q R 67 ~
vote itself to the immense and critical prob-
lems in `ou'r own country first and foremost.
We deplore its poor judgment and -resent
the high-handed manner of Secretary of De-
fense McNamara.
We commend you for stoutly supporting
your convictions and we depend on you to
continue to be the voice of those of us who
have the same ideas.
BUFORD E. BO~yYyD~
MARGARET A. ISO YD.
MILWAUKIE, OREG.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: As an interested and
concerned Oregonian and American, I want
you to know that I support your convic-
tions against our stand in Vietnam.
1 believe the time has come when we
should look more constructively at our own
foreign policy.
The efforts on behalf of yourself and Sen-
ator FULBRIGHT to stop the war have, in my
opinion, been of the highest concern and
concentration for world peace.
I wholeheartedly support your convictions
and your stands.
CECIL E. FITZELL,
GRANTS PASS, OREG.,
April 21, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Salem, Oreg.
DEAR SENATOR: Keep up the good work.
I Want you to know that you have my
support in your stand as regards the war
in Vietnam. Our presence there is obviously
illegal in respect to international law and
I believe that we must pull our troops out
before any lasting peace can be effected there.
You are one of the few people in our national
government who have my respect and my
vote.
JOHN JEDDELOH.
BEAVERTON, OREG.,
. April 20, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: "It requires a real
man or woman to stand alone on a moral
issue in the face of the crowd."-Eleanor
Roosevelt.
Our family want to let you know that
we admire your stand On the Vietnam issue.
It seems a sad commentary on the courage
of the President to deplore the bombing of
a church in Alabama, or the murder of per-
sons sympathetic to those deprived of their
civil rights, yet to condone, nay, to order
the wholesale bombing of villages in south-
eastern Asia., They are people, and they
suffer grief at the loss of loved ones just
as you and I.
And, why the precision, and seeming al-
most delight, in counting the Vietcong dead
while the euphemism, "American casualties
light"?
Respectfully yours,
ROBERT F. MYERS.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
March 15,1966.
U.S. Senator MORSE.
HONORABLE SIR: I would like you to know
that you have my utmost respect for your
great'effort and courage in trying to bring
this useless war to an end. I am with you
all the way. The great loss of our boys and
the great expense their home folks are put
to doesn't make sense to me. if you can
run for President in 1968, you may count on
my vote. I feel you are about the best
American left there in Washington.
Most sincerely,
MTS. KATHRYN MAYBERRY.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
March 5, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We want you to
know that we are very grateful for the stature
of your leadership at all times and particu-
larly in the Vietnam matter.
The copy of your Senate speech in January
on the subject gave us information we are
glad to have.
Sincerely yours,
RUTH BRUNER.
W. E. BRUNER.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: Congratulations, on the bold
stand you're taking on what is right and
not swayed by the large majority, on the
Vietnam situation and others.
In the last issue of U.S. News & World Re-
port of March 14, 1966, is a .very good article,
"What United States Can Expect From Allies
in Vietnam," and in this article, it seems the
whole world is against us. When the whole
world is against us, how come so few people in
our Government are so blinded by pride that
they cannot use good judgment? Also, quote
at top of page 32, "It's largely a U.S. show."
But, to this I can add, showoff of our might
and strength. How long?
Practically every person I talk to feels just
as you do. Keep up the good work. I'm be-
hind you.
Yours truly,
'MCMINNVILLE, OREG.,
January 31, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senator Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please keep up the
good work, and get us out of Vietnam if pos-
sible.. We are back of you 100 percent.
Yours sincerely,
JAMES S. GREEN.
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 18, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR: My wife and I back you 100
percent, re: Vietnam.
I would say 85 percent of the people agree
with you on this issue.
You next election, will, I feel sure, give
you, your largest majority of your distin-
guished career.
Cordially,
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for doing
all you can to expose what we are doing in
Vietnam and the Near East. I find it hard
to live with the guilt feelings I have over
our actions in the world and I worry for my
16 year old son. There must be something
that we common, ordinary citizens could and
should be doing to prevent escalation and to
change our direction. But what?
Again, thanks for being our spokesman and
may you continue to abound in health and
energy.
Sincerely,
PORTLAND, OREG.,
March 10, 1966.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I want to express my gratitude to
you for your integrity and courage, in the
face of great opposition and pressure, in lead-
ing the opposition to the foreign policy of
President Johnson. As a voting citizen, I
must share the responsibility of the conduct
of our country. The shame I feel over what
we are doing to the people of Vietnam is
somewhat alleviated by being represented by
a man who steadfastly upholds the constitu-
tion, our U.N. obligations, sanity, and human
decency. I feel that President Johnson has
betrayed the people, in that the people voted
for him and repudiated Goldwater, in the
belief that they were voting for a policy
against war. At least Goldwater was frank.
I resent the President's subversion of the
constitution; his fatuous assumption that he
can achieve a "consensus" by lies and mis-
representation; his phony peace offensive;
and his hypocritical concern for the people
of Vietnam.
I applaud your vote against the appropria-
tion to continue and escalate the war. I am
in favor of Senator GRUENING's bill to pro-
hibit sending draftees to Vietnam. I believe
in negotiating with the N.L.F., the legitimate
government of South Vietnam, and the force
we are fighting. I believe that the Only alter-
native to stopping this war by negotiation is
more escalation, leading to a war with China,
and probably the third world war.
Thank you for upholding legality, decency,
and sanity. I believe the tide is turning, and
I hope that by election time the vote will be
overwhelming to endorse your views.
Sincerely yours,
GLENN M. BLEVINS.
SALEM, OREG.
MARCH 26, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senator,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We wish to thank
you for your efforts in behalf of the American
people. Some friends of ours who were vis-
iting in New York, when introduced to some
VIP's in New York, were told, "You people
should be proud to be Oregonians, you have
the only Statesman in the Senate". There
may be a couple of others but for the most
part we feel as the people in New York ex-
pressed themselves.
We are proud of you, we feel terrible that
you have to stand alone and take so much
abuse from those politicians. Even people
who may not agree with you always, admire
you.
What Johnson doesn't seem to have caught
on to is that we didn't elect him-we voted
against Goldwater.
We are very disillusioned Americans-we
sent our son to college seven years for a good
education and so that he would be a good
citizen-now the army has him.
God bless you Senator MORSE as you stand
alone for decency in government.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. D. G. BAIRD.
PORTLAND, OREG.
ONTARIO, OREG.,
March 28, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
209 Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have always ad-
mired your deep convictions and your ability
to stick with them, whether I agreed with
you at the moment or not.
In the Vietnam issue, at first I found my-
self more or less unconcerned, later con-
cerned and wanting to fight quickly and get
it over, but the more I have studied the issue
I am wondering why we are involved in their
dispute. Daily the news seems to back up
your position that we are involved in a
squabble in which if peace were to come
quickly we. couldn't put our finger on any
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67BOQ446R000400070010-0
 10186
Approved For ff9 87 41WO00400070010 ay
particular group capable of calling them-
selves a. stable government or having any
control. In many ways it appears we are
fighting a war simply to satisfy the rich Viet-
namesemandarin who is doing all he can
to goad us into continuing because of the
rich profits he can derive therefrom. As for
the ordinary little people I am convinced the
majority do not want the present ruling class
they have in charge of their country in power
at all and will always continue to fight until
they are rid of them.
Its a puzzle to me how a President of the
United States can wage war, sacrificing our
men and Wealth due to his own personal
whim, without giving constitutional author-
ity to the Congress to debate and make this
decision. This I feel is for the Congress to
determine-not a power drunk group of ad-
versaries forcing their will upon the people.
Perhaps as these pine boxes arrive from
Vietnam carrying the remains of precious
loved ones, they should carry the inscription
stencilled thereon, "Compliments of Lyndon
B. and Lady Bird Johnson and their fellow
cohorts."
Just at this time it appears to me Lyndon
Johnspn and his friends are doing a magnifi-
cent job of building the Democratic party
image into one of a monster with the blood
and guts of little people spilling from its
jowls, paunch full of corruption.
You'll be in the Senate long after this
crowd of phonies are forgotten.
Sincerely,
DWIGHT L. JOHNSTON.
EUGENE, OREG.,
April 20, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
Senator from Oregon,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR. SENATOR MORSE: We want to assure
you that the National Commander of the
American Legion does not speak for all the
members concerning the esculation of the
Vietnam war. Members have been asked
to write the President, Senator FULBRIGI-IT
and our State Senators to back the war effort.
We have attended a number of different posts
where this letter was read, many without
comment. Comments after the meetings
leads us to believe more letters will be written
against the war than for it. We feel that
even if we could be sure that this is a war
against the Communists how sure can we
be that we have won the peace even if we
win the war, even if we destroy their country
completely? We certainly can't expect them
to love us for throwing our millions into their
country to build it up again. Money can't
pay for lives, theirs or ours.
We've already lost face all over the world
so we can't lose any more by staying in. If
we would put our own house in order and
show the world how a real democracy can
work we would have a good chance to win
the peace.
Thanks again for representing us so ably.
It is so easy to just nod and say we agree
with you without telling you, so please excuse
this belated, letter on this subject. We are
proud of you.
Sincerely,
16, 1966
This letter is of little help, I realize, but I
will, be, most willing to help whenever pos-
sible.
Very truly yours,
DAVIES CHEVROLET CO.,
JAMES R. DAVIES,
Owner, Democrat Committeeman, Pre-
cinct No. 4, Vernonia, Oreg.
MAY 1, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I think you should
know that the people of Oregon are behind
your stand on Vietnam. I have written a
letter to President Johnson pointing out that
I disagree with his policies, in the hopes that
this will show that not all Americans are sup-
porting our policy in Vietnam.
It is possible that your stand is a form of
political suicide. Be that as it may. I ad-
mire deeply a man who will stand up against
overwhelming odds because he believes some-
thing to be wrong. When a person stakes
his entire career and future on an unpopular
point of view, to me he qualifies as a true
hero.
Even if I disagreed with your stance about
Vietnam. I would vote for and support you,
now, because you have demonstrated beyond
any doubt that you are a man of the highest
form of integrity.
One hundred percent behind you (even
if I am a Republican).
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR: I am So happy that you
were right on the spot in asking that the
committee hold a public inquiry into the
legality of the American position in Vietnam.
Congratulations to you for continuing to
be a persistent foe of American involvement
in the Vietnamese struggle. I think you
would be surprised at the friends you have.
Sincerely yours,
RAINIER MANUFACTURING Co.,
Rainier, Oreg., May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR: Your appearance on
TV last night wherein you made your dis-
senting opinions known to Secretary of State
Dean Rusk regarding the Vietnam situation
was most gratifying to us, and to everyone
that saw you in action that we have spoken
to.
It is very gratifying to know we have one
representative from Oregon that has the
courage of his convictions, and hope that you
will soon "take on" Dean Rusk for allowing
the continuation of the excessive amounts of
our logs going to Japan to the detriment of
existing Oregon industries.
Please be assured of our continued support
in your efforts to convince the present ad-
ministration that the American people are
not a bunch of sheep to be bamboozled by
fancy phrases, and as a last resort, raise taxes
to cover misjudgments.
Kindest personal regards, and may you
long represent us.
Respectfully yours,
DON V. BELLAMY,
.Vice President.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C. 11 DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Despite biased, one-
sided newsapper editorials condemning your
views, you have many staunch supporters in
Oregon and the Nation. It is, gratifying to
peacO-loving citizens to see a Senator with
your courage expressing his convictions, de-
spite loud-mouthed opposition from those
who prefer war and slaughter.
I. like thousands of others, cannot supply
a satisfactory answer to the question, "Why
are we . in Vietnam?" The millions wasted
on this illegal, useless and undeclared war
could produce untold benefits if utiilzed
instead on worthwhile domestic projects.
Keep up the good work-we're with you.
Best regards,
LINCOLN CITY, OREG.
ANNA'S FLOWER SHOP,
Woodburn, Oreg., April 18, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR.SiR: We are very pleased with your
stand on the war.
Oregon has a great statesman in you.
The more we study the present administra-
tion, the more we realize you are right. We
feel it is a privilege to live in Oregon, more
so when we have a man in, Congress that
speaks his mind.
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT AWA FIELD.
PORTLAND, OREG.,
April 19, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have fought you
on other issues, but on
my 100 percent backing.
The administration gave us poor leader-
ship when they stopped being advisers in
Vietnam.
But the problem is getting us out of this
mess. God speed in this endeavor.
Yours very truly,
RON SYMONS.
RELIGIOUS . SOCIETY OF FRIENDS
(QUAKERS), PACIFIC YEARLY
MEETING,
Portland, Oreg., April 20, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: As Quakers we feel a real sense
of frustration and despair over our govern-
ment's present military involvement in Viet-
nam. We have continuing faith in the atti-
tudes and outlooks of yourself and Repre-
sentative EDITH GREEN toward the problems
in Vietnam. We are appalled at the reports
of atrocities committed on both sides and by
the saturation bombing committed by our
forces in Vietnam.
We cannot understand the position of the
Johnson administration which appears to ad-
vocate the liberation of people by taking their
lives and ravaging their land. Believing that
there is that of God in every man to which
we must minister, we fervently urge the
President to initiate negotiations for peace
including all factions which are a party to the
conflict and further urge an immediate ces-
sation of bombing as a first step toward peace.
Sincerely yours,
MULTNOMAH FRIENDS MEETING,
HOWARD J. RICHARD,
Presiding Clerk.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senator,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE! May r take a few mo-
ments to comment on your continuing strug-
gle in our foreign situation.
In my business in this small community of
Vernonia I. have yet to find anyone in agree-
ment with the administration's policy in
Vietnam.
I personally congratulate you for your hon-
estly and determination and feel certain jus-
tice will prevail when the American people
awaken to, the perils of where this present
situation will lead us.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I've just finished
viewing the last televised Senate Foreign
Relations Committee hearing. I've been
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May Y 6, 1966Approved For. uulffa ~ ~?L9,kj 67000400070010-0
10187
very pleased that they have been televised 'My husband and f, and my father-in-law WALDPORT, OREG.,
whenever possible. They have been ex- believe you to be right. March 17, 1966.
tremely helpful to myself and others in Once more Senator, more power to you, Senator WAYNE MORSE,
clarifying many situations which we found good luck, and God bless you. Salem, Oreg.:
confusing. Most importantly, the purpose Mr. and Mrs. OTTO KUHNHAUSEN. For time, have been going drop
your let t you know w that our
of the hearings has certainly become more PORTLAND, OREG. I you a line to
behind you you in and
understandable. Involvement in Asia. I admire your courage
I e am anxious that Defense Secretary Rob- LAKE OSWEGO, DREG?
ert McNamara would not indicate which 3 March 6, 1966. and I spunk know to be only right and honesty It
nations are giving us considerable assistance Senator WAYNE MORSE, and you It
in Vietnam. Why is this considered con- Washington, D.C. must that you have easy Job. want s
way.
fidential information? I can't imagine why SENATOR MoasE: There is no need to go know not toot w o for hav innocent, y s suI just port best all the luck you
the American people should not know which into details as to why I support your posi- My prayers
nations are really willing to help us. tion on The Viet Nam issue, but I do think you. Sincerely ours,
I agree with your stand on the Vietnam it necessary that the thousands of us who y yours,
MYRTLE BRADFORD.
war. I cannot see that any commitment agree with you let Our voices be heard so
was made that should have resulted in such that you will continue to raise your voice MOORESTOWN, N.J., May 14, 1966.
a tragedy. The United Nations should have for us. WAY MORSE,
been approached at the very onset. Without Sincerely, Senator Senate W AYNE Building,
their. approval and assistance we had no JACK RADOW.
Son, D.C.
right to take it upon ourselves to handle Washington,
.C MoftsE: We wish to com-
that volatile situation, almost entirely alone. INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S
I only pray that we can get out of that AND WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, mend you again most sincerely for your great
horrible situation before it's too late. LOCAL, 8, and determined work concerning this stupid,
I, and many others I know, also agree Portland, Oreg., March 4, 1966. insane, and evil war in Vietnam.
that military and other assistance to nations Hon. WAYNE MORSE, We are with you and working to awaken
that constantly throw vile accusations and U.S. Senator from Oregon, more people to see and understand what an
brickbats at the United States sh -ld be out Senate Office Building, insane stupid course this administration is
back altogether. The fact that Russia would Washington, D.C. taking.
then step in and fill the gap is certainly to DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The Executive Board Most sincerely yours,
be expected, I say-so what? They're doing of Local #8, I.L.W.U., Portland Oregon wish FRANK N. MORSE.
it anyway but with things as they now to extend their whole hearted support in
stand, we are actually helping them arm your effort to end the War in Viet Nam. KENELWORTH, May N.J., 11, 1966.
our enemies! Let Russia have the added Your courageous effort is indeed worthy MORSE,
burden of supplying the additional military of the support of every American. By end- Senator Washington, AYNE E
assistance to those nations we drop as a ing the War and settling the Viet Nam issue watching
result of their open animosity. By con- through the efforts of the United Nations, DEAyouR R T.V. SENATOR today MoftsEE: : I the have been Senate watchin
tinuing assistance, we're only two-faced and it will prevent the needless sacrifice of many Relations Committee.
playing both ends against the middle in the thousand of American boys. I state tI just burst into app lause
eyes of the world; and I might add, in the The billions spent on war can pay for May
at just position Into louse
after you stated that
Viet-
eyes of our own countrymen. By dropping help to improve the living standard of the nom to Secretary of Defense McNamara.
our aid, we move the responsibility to Rus- underprivileged through a realistic foreign This is one person who admires your
ale's shoulders for an added expense to their aid program. "idealism" immensely. I totally support
budget; and in the meantime, we can de- We hope that you and your friends in the your view twe indeed han obligation
peace in obligation
vote this money to better use-I hope. Senate will continue your fine effort in the you can we negotiate indeed have
south-
I'm sorry to say we were unable to attend cause of World Peace. to r view that
east do Aall
the rally at Benson High School last Sun- Very truly, It is too bad that today we are so severely
day, but my husband and I did attend a CARL H. ANDERSON, criticized when we uphold ideals and prin-
reception held Saturday night and met both Secretary, ILWU Local #8. ciples-therefore I just wanted you to know
f Howard Morgan and Robert Vaughn. I was that I heartily agree with your views.
quite disappointed at not seeing you per- GRESHAM, OREG., Sincerely yours,
sonally. March 6, 1966. MADELINE SAVULICH.
Thank you so much for your time. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Best regards from, Senate Office Building,
Mrs. VICTORIA (BEN L.) RUSSELL. Washington, D.C.
PORTLAND, ORG. DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I support your Viet
MEDFORD, OREG.,
May 12, 1966.
WAYNE MORSE,
Senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Keep up the good work. I am
behind you all the way. We wouldn't be in
the mess we are in if we had more men like
you working for us.
Sincerely yours,
HOOD RIVER, OREG.,
March 6, 1966.
Han. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for your
stand on Vietnam.
I am utterly opposed to this war.
Sincerely yours,
BETA P. HAUSEU.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: This is the first time, I have
ever written to a public official but I just
had to let you know, there is one family of
Oregonians, who is for you 100%.
I thank heavens there is somebody back
in Washington, who has'the courage of his
convictions and is not afraid to have them
known.
You are, as far as we are concerned, a
realist in the midst of this emotional up-
heaval concerning Viet Nam.
Nam policy 100 per cent. In fact more than
100 per cent for I feel we should get out of
there entirely.
The time has long since past when one
country, however powerful, can dictate to
another country, however weak, the form of
government the latter should have.
I admire your courage and urge you to
maintain your position. Speak out, our
country need you!
Sincerely yours,
ASTORIA, OREG.,
Mach 17, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: If only we had more men like
you and Governor Grunning in Washington.
We could look hopefully into the future, so
many of my friends who hear what you stand
for do admire your courage-to stand up
against the war hawks.
I wish you well and am for you and your
policies 100 percent.
Yours truly,
Mrs. J. D. WARILA.
PORTLAND, OREG.
Senator MORSE: The purpose of this letter
is extremely simple. I want you to know that
you are supported in your views on Viet-
nam-and I urge you to continue-and con-
gradulate you on your courage.
JANET DUTHELM PECK.
Mrs. WILLIAM PECK.
DOWNEY, CALIF.,
May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Your continued
efforts as a "dove" are strongly commended!
We plan to cast our votes for "doves"
wherever possible.
What can be done to outlaw napalm? Of
all the horrors of war, this seems one of the
most horrible.
Keep up your efforts, and never doubt that
you have strong support.
Sincerely yours,
NETTIE R. VAN RAAPHORST.
JOHN N. VAN RAAPHORST.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SENATOR: Thank you so much for
your forthright and courageous stand against
the illegal dirty war in which our country is
engaged. Your voice is the voice of the
conscience of our country.
There are many of us who are 100 percent
behind you. Keep up the good work.
Respectfully,
MARGARET GINSBURG.
CHEHALIS, WASH.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have listened
carefully-and I believe-understandingly-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10188
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE May 16, 1966
to your Ideas as regards our bloody war in
Vietnam. Every word you said made sense
as I understand it. You know-as do I-if
once. we took profit from war-war would
cease, What can we common citizens do?
tours truly,
Mrs. RoY LA DuE.
WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Sensate,
Washington, D.C.
MADISON, WIS.,
May 13, 1966.
DEAR WAYNE MORSE: I am 100 percent in
favor of your stand for a peaceful and moral
solution to the crisis in southeast Asia as
well as your hope that our country might re-
turn to a closer following of the principles of
the Constitution. A stronger voice for Con-
gress in determining foreign policy and more
control over the CIA also seem to be very
important aims.
Your talk here in Madison in February was
inspiring, Especially impressive is your be-
lief which you stated as something like, "The
only truly practical course of action is one
determined by strict application of principle.
Expedience defeats the aims it seeks to fur-
ther."
I hope that more and more Members of
the Senate and House will join you in the
bold stand you have taken. If I possessed
the aptitudes to be a politican, I would hope
to be one of your caliber.
For a better world,
CHARLES T. DEITZEL.
MAY 9, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR: As I watched the Commit-
tee hearings on T.V. today I wished to thank
you. Thank you for having them and for
saying what I would say if I could speak to
Dean Rusk or to the President. I truly
admire your courage.
Sincerely,
KATHRYN INCROCCi.
SAN RAFAEL, CALIF.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U,S, Senate,
Washington, D.C.
PEORIA, ILL?
May 12, 1966.
'SENATOR: I am writing to let you know that
I support you on the stand you are taking
about this terrible war in Viet Nam.
I was very pleased to watch you on TV on
Monday when you backed Secretary Rusk
down on the absence of a formal vote in
SEATO.
You men who are opposing this war are
doing a real service for this country and I for
one want to thank you.
I believe, like you, that if we could just
bring the Congress around to refusing to vote
the money to support this immoral war then
they would have to stop it.
In my opinion the best way to support our
boys in Viet Nam is to bring them home.
I am almost ashamed any more to say I am
American-I shudder to think what the rest
of the thinking world thinks of us.
It as a shame that our country has reached
such a low.
Thank you again, Senator MORSE, for what
you have already done and please continue
the good work.
I, too, love my country.
Hon, WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
IRVINGTON, N.J.,
May 15, 1966.
I recall that old, old saying "One on God's
side is,a majority." "We" have five in the
Senate, who speak out. Here's hoping. that
we can increase that "majority"-and some
day, make it for real.
More power to your elbow-and uncommon
sense.
Sincerely,
HOn. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for your
courageous stand on Viet Nam- We are in-
deed living in perilous times and I agree
with Senator FULBEIGHT that we are follow-
ing in the foot-steps of ancient Rome and
only honest, courageous men, such as you
and Senator FULBRIGHT, can save us-
May God strengthen and protect you in
your endeavors-
Sincerely
MISS MARY C. CALLAWAY.
MAY 11, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you sincerely
for your recent letter. I admire the things
that you say concerning our being in
Viet Nam.
I just wanted you to know that our only
son will be going to Okinawa and both you
and I know the destination from there.
what can a mother do? How can the truth
be told to his devoted little sister, only seven
years old?
May God forgive those in Washington who
are responsible for this entire mess. How
can they sleep at night? And why is there
not immediate action, instead of drawing
the debate out for so long while our boys are
dying or being maimed for the rest of their
life?
A cease-fire must be instituted at once
with no more killing. Please, please make
those others see that.
Thank you very sincerely.
A very worried and heartbroken mother,
Mrs. GENE GASSMAN.
PEARL CITY, ILL.
Thank you again, Mr. MORSE for your sin-
cere concern, and may God Bless you for
your efforts.
SANMATEO, CALIF.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I say your T.V.
arguments really touched us?
You were great.
Truly yours,
ALICE and AL REYNOLDS.
VINTON, IOWA,
May 14, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR: This is the first time I have
ever written a government official but I have
been watching you on TV and only wish we
had more men like you working for us.
I have lived beyond my three score and ten
and have always been a republican but that
party around here have only praise for you
and the work you are doing.
I sometimes wonder if this is only rotten
politics or the fullment of the scriptures.
Please keep up the good work.
Very sincerely,
MONTEREY, CALIF?
May 10, 1966.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Just a line to tell
you my gratitude for your courageous stands
in the senate against the horrible genocide in
Vietnam. I am very discouraged, disillu-
sioned, and ashamed of this country's actions
there.
Thank you. for helping me believe there is
some sanity remaining. When critical let-
ters to the president get turned over to the
F.B.I., when. protesting students get reclassil-
fled, and our answer to increasing criticism
at home and abroad is escalation of the
slaughter it is easy to lose faith in the demo-
cratic process.
Thank you for helping me maintain my
faith in America.
Respectfully,
UPLAND, CALIF.,
May, 11, 1966.
SENATOR MORSE: I have adopted you as my
Senator, even though I am a resident of tide
State of California. The purpose of this
letter is another vote of confidence for the
courage you are showing in trying to open
the doors of truth, that have been closed
by this administration.
The good Lord Himself is not on our side
in this modern tragedy we are responsible
for in Vietnam. We are not fighting the
Vietcong. We are fighting the people of
Vietnam itself. How else could they be so
very successful at resisting great, big, power-
ful, Uncle Sam? Future history books will
give credit to the great fight these people
have put up against overwhelming odds.
Yes, let's save face in Vietnam. Not the
face of our image, but the real faces of
thousands of men and women who will die
in the coming months. People who do not
want to fight or die for any cause.
Let's get on the Lord's side-we all need
Him badly. Let's get out, where we are not
wanted.
Respectfully,
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
CHICAGO, ILL.,
May 15, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thought you would
be Interested in reading my opinion about
our undeclared war in South Vietnam and
the Great Society.
. Sincerely yours,
[From the Chicago Tribune, May 15, 19661
ONE-MAN GOVERNMENT?
CHICAGO, May 11,-I fully agree with those
Senators who charged President Johnson
with mismanagement of our undeclared war
in South Vietnam. In my opinion this has
resulted from his failure to heed the sug-
gestions of our outstanding and experienced
military men.
Unfortunately, we elected a shrewd poli-
tician as President, and not a man of wide
executive qualifications. The Great Society's
major aim is to achieve one-man government
and, in my opinion, it appears to be making
great progress.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
SUMMIT, N.J.,
May 16,1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for send-
ing "Legal Issues of U.S. Position in Viet-
nam" which appeared in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD for February 25.
You are a true representative of the people
and the hope of America and the world. As
a citizen I am proud of you as a Senator.
The first consideration of every concerned
person should be the establishment of world
government and the prevention of a nuclear
war which would be a disastrous disgrace.
Thank you again for all your efforts toward
a world of progress and peace.
Sincerely yours,
ARPARD A.,FAZAILAS.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am in "your" cor-
ner re Viet Nam,
It Is with regret that I am unable to at-
tend the meeting tonight at Bloomfield Col-
lege.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May 16, 196'
6
pproved For PI. -p ' z3' /B' REC URll67Bg 1 1WO0400070010-0
NEW YORK, N.Y.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I must thank you so
much and pray that you continue to fight
against the frightening foreign policy cur-
rently practiced by that weird axis-White
House, Pentagon, State Department.
We believe that the military expeditions
under the guise of 'foreign aid is unconsti-
tutional and that such decisions must never
be left to them again. Perhaps only the
people-by vote-should render such deci-
sions. Washington's executive branch has
followed a criminal course. Our political
Idiom imposes itself as much as commu-
nism-It does not have to.
The White House is endangering the civili-
zation We created.
Regards,
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 10,1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I appreciate your
efforts to end the war in Vietnam and wish
you all success.
In connection with this it is fundamental
that we end our present policies toward
Asia and recognize that the Chinese are an
important factor which must be considered
in any Asian settlement.
Our present policy, if continued, will lead
to nuclear war.
Sincerely yours,
CHICAGO, ILL., ,
May 11, 1966.
I understand that Mr. Raborn of the CIA
Is to be replaced. I would like to see Lieu-
tenant General Gavin head that organiza-
tion while I am not usually in favor of the
military running anything but the military.
I do not consider Lieutenant General Gavin
just another military man. He appears to
be a very intelligent, thoughtful man with
a wonderful grasp of world affairs and the
role of the United States in them.
If you feel this suggestion has merit per-
haps you can give it some impetus.
Thank you for having the strength of your
convictions and the courage to speak out.
It is very reassuring to me to know that we
do have people like you in our Government.
Yours truly,
Mrs. LEO V. CORBETT.
ST. Louis, Mo.,
May 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We admire your
honesty and courage in the recent state-
ments you 'have made in the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee Hearings. We depend upon
you and others of like thinking to continue
to represent the American people, who voted
against this impossible war, and have been
hurt and disillusioned by the escalation.
Before it is too late-we must stop it.
More and more, the people are aware, and
as . they become so, they are against this
war.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I am fully In accord with the
views you expressed today on television as
opposed to Secretary McNamara.
I thank God that we have a Senator who
has the courage and convictions to stand up
and voice his opinion.
Sincerely,
Mrs. S. DAVIDSON.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to express my
appreciation for the .courageous and enlight-
ened leadership you are giving to the Ameri-
can people.
Sincerely,
Mrs. MIRIAM CAMP.
SOUTHAMPTON, MASS.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: With regard to your
stand on the Vietnam situation, I have only
a few things to say: You are being heard,
you are right, and may God bless you.
Sincerely,
Mrs. JOYCE M. CARNEY,
MAY 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Keep up the excel-
lent work you are doing.
I have been watching you and Senator
FULBRIGHT with tremendous interest and
appreciation. I trust you will continue un-
til the forces for peace in this country be-
come militant.
Sincerely,
FRANCES RANSOM LANE.
NEW ALBANY, IND., May 13, 1966.
Senator MORSE,
Foreign Relations Committee,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Thank you for expressing my
views on Vietnam so eloquently.
Bringing the committee hearings to the
public through television was a marvelous
idea and who ever is responsible Is certainly
to be commended.
BRILLIANT, OHIO,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: I just listened to the hearings on
TV also the ones before that and think we
should have more of the same. I agree with
you and Senator FULBRIGHT on everything
you say and hope you will keep on showing
the American people how wrong our govern-
ment has been in this war and the foreign aid
we have been so free with to nations who
couldn't care less if we win or lose.
I am ashamed of our leaders who try to
tell other nations how to run their countries
when we have such a mess here at home.
You take heart and keep on fighting be-
cause you are right and there are more people
for you than the rest of the Congress wants
you to think.
I am a Democrat but I will never vote for
one again till I am sure they are worth my
vote.
The people I talk to here are all very upset
over this war and are going to show it at the
polls.
Thank you again for being a truly great
American with courage and conviction.
Mrs. A. W. HAITHAWAY.
I am not a parent, just a good American
citizen.
P.S.-I also saw the film you referred to an
educational TV and I cried when I thought
of the position our country is taking to
create such hate and destruction. And why
can't the press and regular TV carry films
such as these so more people can really see
this? I will tell you, they are afraid to
really inform the people, but people are
smarter than they think and are learning
more and more about the true facts which
you are helping to bring out.
MAY 13, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: At a time when you
are being attacked from many quarters be-
Cause of your stand on our policy in south-
east Asia, I am writing to say I support you
In your constant questioning and criticism
of our 111-formed foreign policy in Vietnam-
a policy that Is becoming increasingly
dominated by military expediency rather
than any consideration of human rights.
10189
Our President speaks much about human
rights but his words sound hopelessly un-
realistic in this present situation. I write
this as a concerned and committed Catholic
and also as a graduate student in social work
at the University of Chicago, two areas in my
life in which my commitment to others
makes me regard our Nation's current self-
seeking foreign policy with great dismay and
profound regret and sorrow. I am praying
daily for you and for all our leaders, most
especially for our President, that God may
help us see our way out of this mess.
A supporter,
i AL MURDACH,
CHICAGO, ILL.
ALBUQUERQUE, N. MEX.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Good for you, Morse.
I hope you never die-God bless you and your
conscience.
ELSE FIRSCHEIN.
BROOKLYN, N.Y.,
May 14, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I hope you don't get
disheartened by the recent attacks the Presi-
dent has made against you and your policy
concerning the Vietnam war.
Believe me, the majority of the people
think as you and as a mother I pray that
you don't give up the fight.
The Vietnam war is stupid, senseless, and
immoral.
Sincerely yours,
NEW BRITAIN, CONN.,
May 13, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank God for men
of your caliber.
The stand you have taken with regard to
Vietnam shows you have the interest of our
country and precious boys at heart.
Keep up the good work, and may your en-
deavors soon bear fruit.
Sincerely,
(Mrs. Albert) CHARLOTTE B. HOFFMANN.
SEATTLE, WASH.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SIR: I am writing to express my grati-
tude and appreciation for your efforts with
regards the U.S. Involvement in Vietnam.
1. I am a 24-year-old college senior, an ex-
GI, hopefully a future doctor.
2. I am not a great respector of many of
the ideas which you have championed in the
past. On the Vietnam issue, however, I be-
lieve that you have been most honest, forth-
right, and I sincerely say, "courageous."
3. I encourage you in your efforts to bring
the truth to the American people.
4. Much of what you have publicly stated
has been either poorly reported, or not re-
ported, at all in the local Seattle papers.
Most importantly, anything that you have
advocated as an alternative to present U.S.
policy has not come through.
5. I suggest that you attempt in the future
to more explicitly state, and singly put forth
what you suggest the United States do about
our involvement in southeast Asia. I mean
that you should make your suggestions on
occasions separate from your criticisms, since
the papers seem to print the criticisms and
not the alternatives.
6. Please continue in your efforts as I am
in mind on a much smaller scale. I sincerely
believe that the tide In turning, though I
am most, apprehensive that it may be too
late.
Sincerely,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please accept my
hand in support of your stand that we, the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10190
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE May 16, 196 .
American people will show by our ballots that
we violently oppose 'our' war in Vietnam.
I devoted my time to the entire Senate
Foreign Relations proceedings over N.B.C.
T.V. on Monday, May 9th 'and, to say the
least, remembering our American heritage,
felt discouraged and mortified at the ruth-
less attitude toward the tiny country of
Vietnam ruled by a 'Hitler' oriented Prem-
ier Can Ky Whom we support! I know now
that elections in this torn, demoralized land
will be to no avail unless Cao Ky is re-
moved from his stand of absolute power.
As you repeat, and I agree, that our boys
are being slaughtered in this undeclared war
with no end in sight-except in world con-
flagration, that we make moves to end it
and follow the Geneva agreement of '54 which
we honored.
Thank you for your unstinting efforts on
behalf of humanity. May you be given good
health and strength to keep reminding the
administration their responsibility to the
people of our land and the world.
These public hearings are a healthy and
necessary service and we homemakers ap-
prove and listen I
Most respectfull yours,
Mrs. A. EPSTEIN.
RINDGE, N.H., May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR FRIEND: This Is just to express to you
my appreciation for your words and your
clear understanding of what is really the true
situation in southeast Asia-and Vietnam
in particular. It is so discouraging for some
of us to see this mistake of 1954 compounded
daily until we are deeply depressed-for
surely if our (U.S.) "powers that be" do
not soon see it is up to them to call an
honest-to-goodness halt-before we can
ever expect Hanoi to feel we are sincere about
negotiations-we are sure it is getting too
late fast.
Keep up talking.
Sincerely,
OAKLAND, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SIR: I just heard your remarks re-
garding the legality of our being in Vietnam.
I want to congratulate you and thank you for
having the courage to carry on the fight for
sanity in this chaotic world.
As a Democrat, a voter, a taxpayer, and a
mother, you have my wholehearted support.
My only regret is I don't live in your dis-
trict-keep up the good work-we will sup-
port you all the way.
Sincerely,
SAN JOSE, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I would like to say
that I am one of the many Americans who
admires you very much, and who supports
your views regarding Vietnam (among other
things).
It seems as if you are one of the few re-
maining bright lights of intellect and com-
monsense left burning in Washington, and
I wish you the best of luck in your fight.
Respectfully,
MISS CAROL CAMPBELL.
NEWTON CENTRE, MASS.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Killing is killing,
and it is a good idea to remind Secretary
McNamara of the human consequences of his
successful military operations, although it
appears that he is not to be reached by any-
thing but statistics.
Please do not let up your battering of
U.S. policy In Vietnam. Unless some funda-
mental changes are made in the direction
of peaceful settlement the outlook for the
world is terrifying.
Sincerely,
BROOKLYN, N.Y.,
May 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I agree with your
views on Vietnam. You deserve more sup-
port from the other Senators that you are
getting. I intend writing to Senators JAVITS
and KENNEDY On this subject.
Very truly yours,
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR: One hundred percent
approval of your stand.
Keep it up. You are gaining more sup-
porters every day, even though they may be
reluctant to speak out.
Help me to continue to be proud to be an
American.
Miss LILLIAN MEISTER.
EDMONDS, WASH.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Just a note of ap-
preciation and to thank you for just now
speaking out on TV. I hope and pray your
words will be heeded. God love you.
Sincerely,
Mrs. GRANT E. RILEY.
ALDON, OHIO,
May 13, 1966.
SENATOR MORSE.
DEAR SIR: I am glad you have the courage
to question our being in Vietnam. I wish I
could vote for you.
I think it is time for a change, we should
have a new draft law, draft everybody and
everything for the duration of any war de-
clared or not, pay all according to their rank
and service, and I am sure we would be able,
to get a way to get out.
Yours truly,
DARIEN, CONN.,
May 14, 1966.
SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: History's tragic error
is our "charge of the Light Brigade," in Viet-
nam.
You are so right.
MARGARET KOSTENBADER and FAMILY,
ROBERT A. SHERWOOD.
CHICAGO, ILL.,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I heard your re-
marks today on television during the Sen-
ate investigation of the war in Vietnam, and
I can't express too strongly my admiration
for your position and for your course of
action in general.
You are absolutely right: Our whole psy-
chological orientation toward war, toward
military power, and toward international po-
litical situations has got to be changed. I
am a native of Arkansas, a resident of 1111-
nols, and a voter; and you may count on
my support in whatever way it can be ex-
pressed.
Sincerely yours,
MARGARET DUGGAR.
SAN LEANDRO, CALIF.,
May 10, 1966.
M DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I fully support
the policy which you advocate for Vietnam.
And for everyone who writes, I am sure there
are thousands of others who are supporting
you but never let you know.
Sincerely,
BEVERLY HILLS, CALIF.,
May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: We congratulate you upon
your courage and vigor In prosecuting your
case against an unwanted war in Vietnam.
My wife and I want you to know how proud
we are of you and your forthright stand
against a most disastrous adventure.
Sincerely,
WILLIAM WANAMAKER, M.D.
SEATTLE, WASH.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Just to reaffirm my
complete support of your stand in regard to
the war in Vietnam. This as well as your
opposition to our interference in the internal
affairs of other countries.
You are, in my opinion, one of the few who
place the welfare of our country ahead of
their own ambitions for reelection to office.
You have my most sincere admiration.
Cordially,
LITTLE ROCK, ARK.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: It is most gratifying to hear
your concise and bold remarks challenging
policies we feel are not for the benefit of the
United States or humanity in general. I'm
sure that you stick your neck out often, and
that you take grave political risks in so doing;
but we want you to know that we are grate-
ful for It.
Our Government is in an awkward and
difficult position, and I'm sure there is no
really easy way out; but your statement
that our present course of action just is not
working seems so obviously apparent that
we wonder why there is not more opposition
to it (Government policy-not your state-
ment.) by other members of the Senate.
Please keep up the good work-and tell us
what to do to help.
Very sincerely,
JERRY AND KAY MCSPADDEN.
TOPEKA, KANS.,
May 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please continue your
unbiased analysis of the Vietnam problem.
Knowledge of the history of southeast Asia
makes our presence there illogical, the
centuries of exploitation. These peoples
thinking cannot be changed by force, or by
money.
Sincerely,
DOYON, N. DAK.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: YOU would be surprised
at how many Americans think like you do
about the war in Vietnam. The trouble is
we do not have the facts to back our
thoughts and we do love our country.
Just from the facts we can glean from the
news media, we were about 20 years too
late in stopping the spread of communism in
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 lt2'ay 16, X966 pproved For
GU g
Asia. It Is there and has been for along
time.. Supposing we did bring North Viet-
nam to her knees, would that end the war?
Wouldn't we have to go on killing and kill-
ing like the fast gun of the Old West? We
are told that we want nothing in South
Vietnam; that all we want is to stop the
killing and intimidation. And we do this by
killing and destruction. It just doesn't make
sense.
Is it a trait handed down from our found-
;era that we think we can stop a thing merely
by killing the person who does it? Can't
we learn that the way to stop a bad idea is
to make a better one work? It makes one
'wonder if democracy and freedom' can be
attained without a loaded gun to back us up.
Thank God for people like you and Sen-
ator FULBRIGHT. You speak'for those of us
who want to be free to live a Christian type
of life but do not want to have to carry a
gun to do it. You are most courageous. A
great many people would like to help you but
we can't even find out why we are fighting
a war `in Vietnam.
Sincerely yours,
Mrs. LORD, ITA E VANS.
FLUSHING, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE:. Congratulations, I
.have been listening to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee TV program with great
interest and congratulate you, dear sir, ^ on
speaking as I feel many, many of us would
voice our opinion if given the opportunity.
This Vietnam situation is in such confu-
sion and escalation it certainly has people
scared as .to where or how it may end. Two
wrongs do not make a right and this escala-
tion on both sides is only making things
Worse and the price of our best young men
giving up their lives in such great numbers,
In addition to dollars spent, is too high a
price to pay and for what? I do not feel we
are closer to peace-In fact, I think condi-
tions are worse with the Chinese, etc. Also,
we are creating a hate from most nations
and-instead of a warm feeling, we are creat-
ing one of fear and antagonism.
This is my first letter ever to Washington
as'I feel there are so many problems to be
settled by men much more brilliant than
most of us American citizens but this is so
serious that I am very grateful to you and
your committee for trying to get a settlement
of this very horrible, gruesome situation. -I
feel, so badly seeing pictures of these very
yong boys-17, 18, 19, 20, dying and severely
wounded-please it is very late and getting
Worse-if not too late already.
Thanks again, dear Senator MORSE.
Sincerely,
BERTHA GUCKENBERGER.
STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE,
New Paltz, N.Y., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I say once
again that were it not for men like you,_I
should despair for the future of our country
and for the integrity of our political in-
stitutions.
Your defense of the life of principle is
nothing less than courageous, and you al-
most persuade me that politics can be an
honorable profession.
My hope is that you prosper in health and
success and that the cause for which you have
lai orcd..o hard and so long will prevail in the
.end. Ispeak not only for myself but for all
-enlightened men, I hope, when I say that I
am, truly grateful that you are in a position
to defend those of us who love truth, human
decencx, and the democrat{c way of life.
JgRP6NAL : M 7 4AQ004000700 10-0
LANCASTER, OHIO,
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE, May 9,1966.
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.:
DEAR SIR: I am always pleased to know
America has such a brilliant man as yourself,
in our Government.
The rank and file of people I talk to are
opposed to our men fighting in Vietnam.
They say MORSE is a smart man. So don't
think you stand alone. You have lots of
friends.
Senaaor, you were positively Burkean in
tonight's announcement
that 7,200 pounds
your denunciation of this unjust, illegal, and
,
of nausea-inducing gas has been released in
immoral war, which 1s corroding the moral
an area in South Vietnam, how can we hold
fiber of our country.
our heads up as members of the human race?
Your sincerely,
We're sorry we cannot show our apprecia-
STANLEY C. RUSSELL,
tion by voting for you.
Associate Professor, -
Very truly yours,
CORNELL UNIVERSITY,
Ithaca, N.Y., May 13, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am writing to In-
form you that you have my wholehearted
support in your continuing efforts to bring
sanity to our Viet Nam policy. My con-
cern grows daily, and I fear that time is
running short, as I see, in the wake of sense-
less death and destruction on both sides,
our enchroachments creep closer to Hanoi,
Haiphong, and China.
Sincerely yours,
CHARLES K. SINCLAIR.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: It is impossible to express
my gratitude for all that you are doing to
draw the country's attention to the insanity
of the war in Vietnam.
Please continue in your efforts to bring
about a negotiated peace.
Again, my many thanks for your tireless
efforts.
Sincerely,
MTS. ABBIE KrASNE,
OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I had only a few
minutes' time to observe the Foreign Af-
fairs hearing on Monday morning, especially
that part dealing with Vietnam.
I certainly want to compliment you on
your good efforts and hope you will continue
to do everything you can to stop the murder
of our fine young men in a war where we
have no business being.
We can win nothing by continuing to,
fight.
We can lose nothing if we abandon our
war efforts in Vietnam but we can save the
lives of our good American boys.
Sincerely,
R. W. ROBBERSON.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
'Washington, D.C.
VENTURA, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We have been listen-
ing to the Senate Foreign Relations hearings
today on NBC. We certainly admire your
stand and only wish there were more men like
you in the Senate.
We are Republicans but Americans first.
Sincerely,
LAURA and ARTHUR ENDELL.
WICHITA FALLS, TEX.,
May 9, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We appreciate you
and your statesmanship. Thanks for all your
hard work.
HARL MANSUR, Jr., M.D.
FLUSHING, N. Y.,
May 9,1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please accept our
thanks and gratitude for your courageous
stand in questioning the morality and legal-
ity of our presence in southeast Asia. With
BERKELEY, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR: Thank you for your tele-
vision appearance today. I hope thousands
saw you and will carefully consider your bold
stand against sending our finest young men
to be killed thousands of miles away from
home in an action which is, as you state,
entirely illegal according to the fundamental
principles of this Nation.
Never before in our history of wars has
there been so much opposition by so many of
our people.
The 6oters of the Nation are against what
the President is doing to disturb other na-
tions by our superior attitude, and if Presi-
dent Johnson ever tries again for the White
House he will fail by a large majority. If
Stevenson could have been in the White
House, we would not now be in this unfor-
tunate situation before the world.
More power to you. I think I do not re-
member when you were ever wrong as a
public official.
Sincerely,
BERKELEY, CALIF.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE, May 12, 1966.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: It makes my heart turn
over to watch you courageously maintain
your position with regard to our involve-
ment in the Vietnamese war-always reason-
able, never deflected by the barrage of
doubletalk thrown at you. My faith in
American statesmanship is restored when I
watch you and Senator Fuibright at work in
these hearings.
Yours sincerely,
MALVINA REYNOLDS.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Capitol Building,
Washington, D.C.
10191
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Congratulations on
your remarks to Secretary McNamara and the
Foreign Relations Committee this morning,
especially your suggestion that the President
should go to the U.N. and press for the full
use of its help in a negotiated settlement in
Vietnam.
You are not alone in your sentiments. I
am sure there are many women like me who
feel the tragic bitterness of this war. I was
a Red Cross hospitals worker in American
field hospitals in Europe in World War II,
and saw considerable suffering there. Now
I have a 12-year-old son and a 16-year-old
daughter whose lives will be deeply affected
by decisions made in your committe room.
I think the televised hearings are good edu-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 :, CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10192
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE May 16, 19G6
if you and your like-minded colleagues
asked groups suchas"the social action sec-
tion of the National Council of Churches, the
League of Women Voters (who support the
U.N. activgly) and the American Association
of University Women to urge the President
to go to the United Nations as you suggested,
he just might do it. Who knows?
God bless you for your courage and con-
Hon. WAYNE L. MORSE,
U.S. Senator,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
nothing of our sinful sacrifice of our own
youth-then I am yet to hear it.
And we-supposedly-a Christian nation.
Sincerely
EDITH W. LACKEY.
POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This is to let you
know of another American who supports
your position as you stated it today at the
hearings.
There are many who agree with your views
and earnestly desire diminution rather than
escalation.
Sincerely yours,
ANNE S. CARROTHERS.
CHICAGO, ILL.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SIR: Never fear, Senator, there are
those of us in the American scene who not
only appreciate your efforts in the current
debate regarding the tragedy and debacle
which is Vietnam, but also take every oppor-
tunity to at least make known our dissent
concerning present U.S. policy in Vietnam.
Your good efforts on the national scene,
along with those of your colleague Senator
FULBRICHT, are of the utmost urgency as they
are the key to returning sanity and good sense
to the halls of our government.
Thank you and best wishes for gaining
the support sanity and good judgment de-
serve.
Sincerely yours,
BELLE, W. VA.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This is to advise you
that we are in full support of your stand on
the Vietnam situation. You and Senator
FuLHEIGHT seem to be standing alone against
heavy odds, and we want you to know that
the people that we have. talked with stand
ten to one in your favor.
Most people seem horrified at the adminis-
tration'0. tand and fear escalation to an even
greater degree. ` We are relying on men like
you and Senator PULBRIGHT to keep up the
good work, for we and many, many others
support you wholeheartedly.
Mr. and Mrs. D. B. RUNYON.
CLEVELAND, OHIO,
May 10, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: "Yes," on your posi-
tion on the war in Vietnam.
DOWNING N. MANN.
BELLE, W. VA.,
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This is to advise you
that we are in full support of your stand on
the Vietnam situation. You and Senator
FULBRIGHT seem to be standing alone against
heavy odds, and we want you to know that
the people that we have talked with stand
ten to one in your favor.. If only all our
leaders were so wise and brave.
)Keep up the good work, for we and many
others support you wholeheartedly.
Mr. and Mrs. JOHN R. HOFFMAN.
LINDEN, MICH.
DEAR SIR: Thank, you for your efforts in
enlightening us (the American people) on
the legal aspects of the Vietnam situation.
Your discussion on TV today was very im-
portant. Again thanks.
Yours truly,
ETHEL R. WELLS.
HILLSDALE, MICH.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It is not often that
I write a letter of this kind. But I am so
grateful to you for expressing my very own
feelings about this tragic mess in Vietnam,
that I am eager to say, "Thanks, and God
Bless You."
For if there is any real excuse for us being
over there-inflicting all that suffering and
destruction on a helpless people-to say
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The courage you
display in speaking the truth in the Senate
hearings makes me proud that we have such
a man as yourself in the Federal Govern-
ment.
Our boys are being slaughtered because of
the unwarranted intervention of our coun-
try in, Vietnam's internal problems, and I
thank God that you are raising your voice
so that this terrible bloodbath will come
to an end.
Those of us who stand up for the truth
are being persecuted. I am a true American,
an active Roman Catholic, and not in favor
of communism at all; but I say that if these
people want and vote in this kind of gov-
ernment we should allow them to have it,
and stop killing these Vietnamese people.
It is a crime that the cream of our young
manhood is being ,maimed and killed In an
Oriental war which was provoked by our
intervention with .a promise made to these
people that they would have free elections
in 1954.
Please keep up the fight for truth. God
bless you. You are wonderful.
In gratitude,
BUFFALO, N.Y.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please accept my
expression of appreciation for your courage
in vigorously questioning our Government
policy in Vietnam.
I definitely am in favor of preventing the
growth of communism throughout the
world, but it seems to me that our current
actions in southeast Asia are further alienat-
ing the very peoplewhom we wish to protect.
I have written to President Johnson ad-
vising him that as a member of the Demo-
cratic Party I will use my vote to protest the
escalation of the Vietnam war by either
voting for the Republican candidate or re-
fraining from casting my ballot in the next
election.
Please continue to use your influence to
persuade our Govermrent leaders to employ
methods other than the slaughter of inno-
cent peasants and tcie sacrifice of American
servicemen in bringing self-determination
to the people of Vietnam.
Respectfully,
ADRIENNE THIELE.
RED BANK, N.J.,
May 9, 1966.
Senator MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
HONORABLE SIR: I have been watching the
Senate hearings on our foreign aid andwhy
we are sending Our beautiful young men into
the Asian war.
It seems to me that you stand out as the
real statesman--a true American-a sincere
representative for your people and Americans
all over this land. Congratulations.
Thank God we have at least one American
who cares about the Constitution laid down
by the Founding Fathers. Return to it.
The Congress doesn't seem to control af-
fairs any more--what had happened?
No one questioned why the greatest general
of the Koren war was fired. Why?
There are many questions the American
people would like answered. Speak out.
Usurp the power that was taken away from
,you. Perhaps it's easier for most of our
Congressmen this way.
They should get to work.
Sincerely,
Mrs. MILDRED BROWN.
P.S.-I was watching you, I clapped real
loud, hurray Senator.
SUDBURY, MASS.,
May 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.:
I trust that your suggested session with
international lawyers will be held. I fear
that the testimony would overwhelming con-
demn our actions and thus they will never
be held.
Thank you, thank you for representing my
views
Mrs. C. STRAND.
ALLIANCE, OHIO,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SIR: We are behind you in your stand
100 percent. Keep up the good fight-you
are in the right.
Sincerely,
ELEANOR FULLMER
Mrs. Howard Fullmer.
P.S.-I am a citizen and a taxpayer.
BELLEFONTArNE, OHIO,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Character will out, high office
brings the pressures that reveal it. Your
stand is just and highly commendable.
A heartfelt thank you for your efforts.
Sincerely,
JACKSONVILLE, FLA.,
May 12, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I wonder how many of the
so-called hawks, put out on a scouting mis-
sion in Viet Oong territory, would turn out to
be chickens.
Thank God for your independent thought
and action. There is hope yet.
Yours very truly,
NORMAN SUPOVE.
ALEXANDRIA, VA.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I am writing to say that I am
in full agreement with your sound, knowl-
edgeable, and reasonable views on Vietnam.
The more I listen and watch the public dis-
cussions of your committee on TV the more
thankful I am that we have at least a few
courageous, broadminded, honest, brilliant,
eloquent men such as you left in our gov-
ernment. I am sure there must be many
others in Congress who share your views
which are so realistic, so understanding, so
reasonable and so right, but for some rea-
son or another they seem to lack the courage
to speak up.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May 6, Y96bApproved For ft1&C%WA /P Ry 67gWMA00400070010-0
X : -
:I would urge you to continue to do as you
are . now doing-hammer away again and
,again and yet again at your views until the
,American people become firmly convinced
of, the truth of, the situation in Vietnam.
Thank you for standing up for the right
and the truth against almost overwhelm-
ing odds, but please continue to preach the
truth again and again and again. Also, be
wary of any further bid for power by the
administration by anymore such emergen-
cies as the "Tonkin Gulf affair."
Thank. you.
Respectfully yours,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Capitol Hill,
Washington, D.C.
EVELYN REED.
MAY 11, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The ill wind of cur-
rent colds which prevented me from going
to work this week blew me the good of being
at home this morning for the TV Senate
hearings with our Secretary of Defense.
I cannot adequately express the gratitude
I feel (along with so many other Americans)
that in you we have a distinguished and
articulate spokesman. You said all the
things that are put up in our hearts and
thoughts concerning the intolerable situa-
tion in Vietnam.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
MISS ELLA ZIMMERMAN.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My husband and I
want to contgratulate you on your stand re-
garding the Vietnam war. We wholly agree
with you in regard to halting the slaughter
of American boys.
If our Government is suppose to be "gov-
ernment of the people, by the people, and for
the people," why don't they ask us if we want
to send our sons, -brothers, and fathers to
Viet Nam to be killed? Why are we not
consulted first before we become involved In
such a situation? After all, it is our sons
'who have to fight and be killed. This deci-
sion should be made by the people and not
any government official. It doesn't seem fair
that we have no recourse in this matter,
none whatsoever, except to turn over our
sons without a word.
We certainly would appreciate anything
you can do to terminate this horrible situa-
tion.
Sincerely,
I am writing my Senators and Congress-
man asking that they get strongly behind
you in insisting that the United Nations do
something about this miserable war now.
All my good wishes go to you, Senator
MORSE.
Sincerely,
THE MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL,
New York, N.Y., May 11, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I write a short
-letter of praise to you and your colleagues
for the fine job the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee Is doing in providing the American
people with detailed insight into the unfor-
tunate conflict In Vietnam.
Examples of sincere and well-founded dis-
sent are becoming harder to find in the
present political scene. Therefore, I com-
mend your motives and the sincere, direct
manner of the presentation of information.
Sincerely,
ROBERT S. APRIL, M.D.;
Laboratories of Clinical
Neurophysiology.
PHILADELPHIA, PA., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I address you with
a great deal of regret-regret that I am not
an Oregonian and therefore cannot support
you by ballot. Nevertheless, I write to thank
you for your persistent stand of incisive ques-
tioning and for your intelligent, brave criti-
ques of our government's Viet-nam policies.
My appreciation and respect are yours not
only for those policy changes you advocate.
As importantly, I thank you for having
thrust your doubts toward the public forum.
By having done so, you have helped great-
ly to re-create an atmosphere in which hon-
est statements of dissent, questioning, and
disapproval are once more tolerated, if not
yet welcomed with respect. As little as one
or two years ago-sadly-my family felt
constrained from discussing publicly such
issues as our Viet-nam policy. You have
done much to assure the public that anti-
Viet-nam involvement does not equal anti-
patriotism. Perhaps from the freer ques-
tioning you have helped foster, more en-
lightened and less rigid approaches to for-
eign situations may begin to emerge.
Respectfully,
TUCSON, ARIZ.,
May 10, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thanks for the
stand you are taking in regard to Vietnam.
I believe history will prove you right. I pray
we will not get into an atomic war. So keep
up the good work.
Sincerely, ,
Mr. and Mrs. G. A. HORACK.
AUSTIN, TEX.,
May 9, 1966.
,MILWAUKEE, WIS.,
-May 12,1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have been watching
with great interest the television coverage
of the meetings of the Foreign Relations
Committee.
I think the suggestion you made yester-
day that our President insist that the United
Nations take over and do something about
the Vietnam situation. I think this Is the
best plan that has been offered and wish to
tell you that there are many of us who be-
lieve. you are one of the few clear-thinking
;people in Conggress who is honest with the
Atneric people.
I am glad, too, that you said with so much
feeling that It is not easy for you to be
against the administration. I feel there are
many people who have been told that you
take a Stand against the administration be-
cause you"'fn y -being coi trovers`fa'l `I feel
that John F'. joy would have been glad
to include you in his "Profiles." _
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,.
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have hardly writ-
ten at all to any Congressmen. But I do so
now to express my support of your position
on Vietnam. If I may help to support your
views let me know how.
Respectfully yours,
MEREDITH D, TURNER.
ESCANABA, MICH.,
May 11, 1966.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Member of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: On. May 10, 1966, I wrote
a letter to Senator J. WM. FULBRIGHT, Chair-
10193
man of the Foreign Relations Committee,
thanking him for his efforts in promoting
peace in the world and specifically his at-
tempt to stop the useless slaughter in Viet
Nam. As I mentioned to him, I am a long
time student of political science and govern-
ment, going back more than forty years. I
want to thank you for your sincerity and
efforts in promoting world peace. I have
watched and listened to many of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee hearings, pub-
licly televised in recent weeks. I specifically
want to commend you on your effort at the
public hearing, which was televised today,
May 11, which I watched. Your extempora-
neous comments to Secretary McNamara, try-
ing to get necessary this whole Asian and
world problem to the United Nations, are
necessary for world peace, in my opinion and
seemingly in yours, and probably in the
opinion of the great majority of the people of
United States and the world. It was the
greatest unprepared speech for peace I have
heard in a long time.
Very truly yours,
MAY 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We watched you on
live T.V. yesterday, and are behind you 100%
in every thing you said.
It is too bad we don't have more wonder-
ful men like you who speak out, and work
for the good of the U.S,I
Best wishes for success.
Sincerely,
LEWIS AND EVELYN GRAY.
ST. PETERSBURG, FLA.
FREEPORT, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have been watch-
ing the Senate hearings on TV and felt I had
to somehow let you know how very deeply I,
and many many others, appreciate your
stand. Yours is the sanest word put forth.
Please do not become discouraged. Your
followers and supporters are legion.
Sincerely yours,
MARJORIE P. LUYCKX.
BRISTOLVILLE, OHIO,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: In my opinion, there
are very few men who have the courage and
fortitude, as you have, to stand up for their
convictions even though they may find them-
selves in the minority. Certainly these men
are the foundation of a strong democracy,
and I think these men should be commended.
Recently, you and your colleague, Senator
WILLIAM FULBRIGHT, have probably been the
most criticized Senators in the Senate, due,
primarily, to your opinions regarding the
Vietnam conflict. I share your deep concern
in our involvement there. I certainly admire
your questioning of the legality and actual
basis of our concern there, and I, also, admire
your great respect for the lives of American
men fighting and dying in Vietnam.
I wanted to let you know that there are
many Americans who are very proud to have
a man of your stature in their Government,
and I hope we will continue to have men in
our Government like you, who will question
and not just accept.
Sincerely yours,
Ns ssA,$. CITY, Mo.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE.: Thank, God we have
at least one man in ouF government who
has the courage to speak out and hold to
your convictions. I agree completely with
your views on our situation in Vietnam. May
God bless & keep you..
Most sincerely,
GERTRUDE WELTON.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10194
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 16, 1966
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank you for your
clear lucid arguments involving the legali-
ties of our position in Viet Nam in the Sen-
ate Foreign Relations Committee hearings.
Your sanity in a time of reckless abandon
and temptation of fate and the steps lead-
ing to global war are much appreciated. We
are in complete accord with your views on
Viet Nam and are grateful to you for speak-
ing out. Thank you also for your fine talk
here in Madison in February.
Yours truly,
Mrs. HUGH ILTIS.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Just a note to express our ap-
preciation for your courageous statements in
recent weeks.
We realize that certain forces seem to be
leading us towards a military dictatorship.
And we thank you for challenging those who
would lead us down the road to the destruc-
tion of true Democracy.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. DANIEL DEATON.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY,
May 11, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I wish to take this
opportunity to express my full support for
your position with respect to our military
Involvement in Vietnam. I greatly admire
your courage and hope you will be success-
ful in bringing about a change in administra-
tive policy on this crucial matter.
Sincerely.
ROBERT C. STEBBINS,
Professor of Zoology.
MONTEREY, CALIF.,
May 9, 1966.
He said that he enjoyed using the napalm
and strafing the human beings as they ran in
search.of safety. It was a horrifying experi-
ence to witness the torture and death of a
prisoner, the evident terror of a young lad
of fourteen or fifteen years of age, who was
thought to be a member of the Viet Cong,
as he was marched down the road and other
parts of the film. Have we reared our boys
to have no respect for life and no feeling for
the pain inflicted upon other human beings?
Even if I were convinced that our involve-
ment in Viet Nam were justified, I could not
condone such bestiality. I have failed, thus
far, to be convinced that this war in Viet
Nam is our affair and I deplore our involve-
ment.
Thank you for your forthright stand and
sane approach to this distressing war.
With sincere admiration and gratefulness,
SIMON IT. STEIN,
NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CALIF.
SANTA MONICA, CALIF.
DEAR MR. MORSE: I am in full agreement
with you in your stand on the Vietnam war.
I don't see how Rusk, McNamara, etc., can
utter the flimsy excuses which they do. All
these bombings, right in Saigon show that
we are not wanted. there.
Yours truly,
MAY 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I felt I must sit down and
write to you and express my thanks for your
stand against the horrible war my Govern-
ment is involved in.
I realize the ridicule and harassments you
are put to for your stand, as an ordinary
citizen. I see a very small sample of this by
simply stating that I am against our policy.
I am a young adult who has voted for
only one President and has never written to
any public official before, but after closely
following you and Senator FULBRIGHT on
television I felt compelled to write you and
thank you for your courage. I am fright-
ened to think that my husband and broth-
ers may have to die for a war I feel is sense-
less and which I believe in time will be
proven unnecessary.
Sir, to close, let me say I support you and
am heartily grateful that there are men like
you, however few in number, who rise above
politics to raise their voice when they feel
an issue Is wrong. You belong in President
Kennedy's "Profiles in Courage."
Sincerely,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate,Oice Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The opportunity to
view the televised hearings of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee this morning
prompts me to write this letter. You have
earned the gratitude of every American citi-
zen by your persistent and relentless ques-
tioning of the present administration's
foreign policy. Your outspoken refusal to
accept the fiction that our military action in
Vietnam Is In any way justified, and your
reference to our violation of the United Na-
tions Charter, give new hope to those of us
who earnestly desire a sane and sensitive
foreign policy for our nation.
Perhaps we may yet come to base our rela-
tions with other countries on an understand-
ing of the genuine desires of the people of
un-developed nations, rather than on a
sterile and self-defeating anti-communism.
Thank you for your continuing efforts in that
direction.
Very truly yours,
Mrs. B. L. JONES.
MAY 9, 1966.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE of Oregon,
The Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: This Is an expression
of admiration from a resident of California
for your courageous and honest stand against
the conflict in Viet Nam.
It was a most distressing experience to
watch a television program from Viet Nam
and listen to the pilot speaking of his bomb-
ing attack as if he were killing a few pests.
Mrs. JOANNE SARVER.
CUYAHOGA FALLS, OIIIO.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I wish to add my small voice to
the many who thank you for your rational
and courageous position with regard to the
immoral war being waged by the United
States in Vietnam.
Unfortunately, we are still living in a time
when to be rational demands courage.
For the good fight you are waging, I know
you will be remembered when others, pres-
ently more influential, will either be forgot-
ten or remembered with shame.
Please continue the good fight. My only
regret regarding you, sir, is that as a resident
of New Jersey, I am unable to vote for you
in Oregon.
Very truly yours,
BELLEVILLE, ILL.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I have been viewing
the foreign relation hearings and just want
to let you know how much I admire your
courage on the stand you are taking con-
cerning the war in Vietnam, and the effort
you are making in trying to get at the truth
of the matter.
Too many of our young men are taken into
the service as soon as they graduate from
high school age 18 to 19 years many of whom
have already been killed and are being killed
every day according to the reports in the
local newspapers, which is a very shocking
thing to anybody's mind.
Thank you for the good work you are do-
ing in the interest of our Government and
peace. I thank God for men like you who
have the wisdom and courage to fight for
the 'right of the people and work toward
peace and good will among the nations.
God bless you.
Mrs. H. BECKMAN.
NARBERTH, PA.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Please accept my
thanks for your efforts to bring some sanity
into the Vietnam situation. There are many
of us on the sidelines who applaud you.
Respectfully,
FRANCES P. BRODIE
Mrs. GEORGE IT. BRODIE.
MAY 13, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: YouI have always had
my general appreciation in your political
career-and your stand on Vietnam has done
nothing but magnify this. I sincerely hope
that you can prevail among your colleagues
and bring some sense to our country's ac-
tions.
Sincerely,
Senator WAYNE B. MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: You are absolutely right in
your viewpoint on Vietnam. A misadven-
ture by the United States of America. We
interposed in a civil war, backgrounded by a
religious strife, and corrupt political in-
fluences. The precedent we set there--could
be duplicated in Indonesia, Colombia,
Rhodesia, and Pakistan. The American peo-
ple are sick and tired of warmongering and
war. Keep strong, and solvent and chari-
table-but no more. Cut the foreign aid
by 50 percent.
GEORGE T. MEYERS.
BETHESDA, MD.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I cannot let another
day go by without telling you how greatly
I admire your stand, bravery, and integrity.
Keep up the magnificent work.
Gratefully,
FREEPORT, N.Y.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: As you can see I don't
live in the State you represent. I am writing
to you because I feel sure that you will ask
and try to get an answer to the question
I have on my mind.
Why are more Americans dying than Viet-
namese? This week three times as many
American boys died than Vietnamese.
Are these people going to sit down and let
my son and other Americans fight and die
for their freedom? I thought we went there
to help them, not to do the whole job while
they sit around and wait for a promised
election.
Why can't the Americans sit and wait, too?
Maybe that way, the war would go away.
I don't know how we can end it unless this
country is ready to fight an all-out war.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 _Mey16,19
9~
pproved For Re 5/8 ,: JkBJTf7_Bgi 1E p0400070010-0
-I object to my son fighting and maybe
dying while the Army of South Vietnam is
on vacation. if they want to be free, let them
fight; no fight, no freedom.
Bring our boys home so that they can
enjoy the freedom their fathers and grand-
fathers fought for.
.. Respectfully,
ROSE C. STONE.
MILWAUKEE, WIS.,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Your presentation of
your views on the conflict in southeast Asia
at today's Foreign Affairs Committee hear-
ings, was most impressive. At last we had a
clear idea of the alternatives that could be
followed. We appreciate your thoughtful
comments and hope that you will keep up
with your efforts and eloquence for the things
that you and many other people think right,
the smears and attacks on you notwith-
standing.
Very truly yours,
Dr, and Mrs. WALTER STRICKS.
DOUSMAN, Was.,
May 11, 1966.
The Honorable Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: The plan you ex-
pressed today while the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee was questioning Mr. Mc-
Namara was the most hopeful plan I've heard.
It had seemed to me that the U.N. Is failing
in its duty to work for peace and, since
they've done nothing in response to Presi-
dent Johnson's request for help, I had de-
cided that the.U.N. was about dead. Could
you not write out the plans you gave today
at the meeting and send copies to whomever
could do something about it? Just maybe
the United States can be got "off the hook."
I really believe that if the President de-
manded such action as you suggested we
might get results.
Always I have this fear: Since so many
countries for so long had urged us to get out
of Vietnam and we paid them no attention.
Maybe now those countries think we are get-
ting what we deserve and no one will help us.
I do hope we still have enough friends who
will go to bat for us by following the U.N.
plan you suggested. It seemed to hold hope
In what has looked like a hopeless situation.
God bless you.
Sincerely,
Mrs. EVA M. BARRY.
ST. PAUL, MINN.,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My wife and myself
have been very attentive in recent months to
the hearings in Washington relative to the
merits of the war in Vietnam.
We have taken notice of the fact that at
all times you have put the welfare. of the
Nation and the people ahead of any political
considerations even at the risk of splitting
party unity.
We are convinced that you have acted at
all times in accord with your conscience and
that you are one of the few people in Wash-
ington with the courage to speak the truth.
We have a son of military age who has dis-
charged his responsibility to the State and
Nation by completing training in the Na-
tional Guard and stands ready to defend his
State and his country in any emergency, but
we would feel frustrated indeed if he were
called to fight in an Asian jungle for a cause
he does not believe to exist.
In conclusion, we can only say that we
think, the billions of,. tax dollars that are
being expended to prolong the war in Viet
nam could be much better utilized to further
the needs of our own people.
We are indeed grateful that there are still
those in Washington who put the National
interest ahead of other selfish considerations.
Very sincerely,
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
The U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
JAMES H. PAIST.
ELLEN M. PAIST.
SCHENECTADY, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SIR: I should like to have my name
added to the list of millions of Americans
who applaud your efforts in the Vietnam di-
lemma. Out of every agonizing crisis In
America's history, there have come great men,
men of great vision. You, Senator MORSE,
are one of the great men to emerge in this
crisis. May the good Lord continue to give
you the courage to carry on your work.
Sincerely yours,
ERNEST R. BLAKE, Jr,
MAY.12, 1966.
The Honorable WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate.
SIR: Since you said yesterday that it was
hard 'to be in your position and misunder-
stood by many, I feel that I owe you a letter
of support and appreciation for your coura-
geous stand on Viet Nam.
Thanks for expressing my own views so
eloquently; it was thrilling to watch you On
T.V.
Congratulations on your passionate plea
for peace through the United Nations; I hope
and pray that your suggestions will be
followed.
I trust that this note of approval will be
encouraging to you, air.
Respectfully,
MARGUERITE PAULEY.
BOYNTON BEACH, FLA.
DEAR SIR: I have been seeing the telecast-
ing of the Senate rearing on the Viet Nam
affair or war. I will say, this that I sure agree
with you.
And I will only vote for the candidate that
is for peace. You know the news programs
show some of the fighting in Viet Nam but
to see the old women and children routed by
the American troops, 6 ft. boy and those
little and women crying just makes me sick.
We our supposed to be Christians so let's
act like one. We brag about killing 400 or
500 Viet Gongs a day with bombing and gun
fire these bombs must be killing a lot of
women and children. We see them crying on
television. I sure don't like it. To me It
looks like a giant picking on a baby. For
God sake there must be a better way to have
peace without killing all the people in Viet
Nam.
I agree with you, Mr. MORSE, that they
should have had elections in 1952 or 1954 as
you say.
So Senator, keep on with your good work.
I am sure for you and I tell everybody. hat
I talk to that I am for you would be sur-
prised how many agree with you. So God
bless you, Senator.
EDWARD G. TEAL.
SANTA MONICA, CALIF.
Hon. Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Since I am a resi-
dent of the state of Wisconsin I am sorry I
shall be unable to support you directly with
my vote, but you most certainly have my
moral support. The only reason I have now
10195
your good work. It is most refreshing to
hear your comments on the Vietnam war.
Sincerely
NORMAN C. RUSSELL.
SOMERSET, MASS.,
May 11, 1966.
DEAR SIR: I agree with you that the Presi-
dent should go to the United Nations and
ask assistance in this conflict. You are do-
ing a good job, please keep it up.
Sincerely
Mrs. JOHN RUSSELL.
CRYSTAL LAKE, ILL.,
May 10, 1966.
Senator WAYNE Moasz,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: My wife and I have
been encouraged by your position on a. num-
ber of national and international issues dur-
ing your tenure in the Senate. Particularly,
we now join in supporting you in your stand
related to our activities in Vietnam.
We feel that your efforts have contributed
enormously to grassroots participation in
this discussion. It is our strong conviction
that public participation is the key to a just
solution of this problem. We find that the
subject of Vietnam is no longer forbidden at
lunch with associates or during dinner with
friends.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
CHESTER and BETTY KEENEY.
WHEATON, ILL.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I want to. tell you,
as I have Senator FULBRIGHT, how grateful
I am, as an American citizen, to have the
unprecedented privilege of participating in
the Senate Foreign Relations hearings at this
crucial time in our history.
I am writing you particularly, because I
feel you have done such an outstanding serv-
ice to the American people in fighting so hard
and so intelligently to keep us from going
over the brink.
Yesterday, on May 11, in your exchange
with Secretary McNamara, there was a mo-
ment when it could be felt, by the viewers
that you and he were stripped of. all pre-
tense and protocol, and he honestly had no
defense against your passionate and lucid
honesty and logic.
What really takes courage and patriotism
is to think and study and agonize over our
infinitely complex problems, and then have
the intestinal fortitude to stand up against
the establishment and fight for reason and
light. God bless you.
Sincerely,
BUFFALO, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
MY DEAR SENATOR: I am writing you in ap-
preciation of your work on the Foreign In-
vestigation Committee.. I can't tell you how
much I agree with yours and Senator FUL-
BRIGHT'S views on this matter. In fact, if
either of you gentlemen were to run for Presi-
dent I should work endlessly for your victory.-
I believe that either you or Senator FUL-
BRIGHT would have if you were the President
today found a solution to this war. I don't"
believe that either of you would have gotten
us into such a state of affairs. Judging by
your convictions you are both solid Ameri-
can citizens who love America and the Amer-
ican people. With this sincere love you could
never lead us into a dangerous situation.
So I shall pray that both you tremendous
men can bring peace to our country. I have
a son in the Army who I fear will never re-
turn to me if soon this war does not end.
I have always worked, my husband and I
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10196
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070019 0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE 11 ay 16, 19 66
always paid our taxes. We were honored to
pay them because we're proud to be Amer-
icans.
1 would even give my sons and my own life
if anyone threatened our country. Yet I
feel that for this war is my son's life neces-
sary. Please end this war even if the people
who want it and seem to benefit from it
should be impeached. I admire you and
Senator FULBRIGHT. So with God's speed
shall your mission be successful.
Mrs. ANNA AQUALINA.
HOLLYWOOD, FLA.,
May 11, 1966.
it can happen because we are human beings
with a human relationship to all people on
this planet and it must happen if we are to
survive.
Twenty-five years ago I lifted my hand In
proud farwell to a husband off to war. Now
it may soon be necessary for our sons to go.
It will not be a proud occasion. My think-
Ing has changed. This has in no way changed
my loyalty or love of my country. Our sons
were taught to respect the right of all, to
turn the other cheek when necessary. They
know there are better ways of resolving con-
flict because they have practiced them.
We as a nation can find better ways. The
world will believe us when we erase our war-
like image. True humility and agony for all
is something not expressed in words but in
actions. But first we must be and believe.
Thank God that you and Senator FuLBRIGHT
are in Washington right now.
Sincerely yours,
WINF'RED S. ROBERTS
Mrs. Wilbert T. Roberts.
MAY 7, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Eugene, Oreg.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Your active partici-
pation in the Foreign Relations Committee
hearings is a real delight to me. We need
more meI} like you to Speak up and express
their views. Too many Government officials
worry too much about their own political
and social gains and too few have the in-
terest of the people at heart.
The hearings that are televised for the
public are a wonderful example of America's
right for freedom of speech and freedom to
question our policies.
Keep up the good work; the people want
the truth, and they want action.
Sincerely,
DARLENE SALL.
KIRKwo0D, Mo., May 13, 1966.
Ron. WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I wish to express my appre-
ciation of the work the Foreign Policy Com-
mittee is doing in behalf of enlightening
public opinion regarding the war in A.sia.
You and the chairman of this committee
stand 10 feet tall morally and judgmentwise
in this insane venture in Vietnam.
Sincerely,
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: May I thank you,
even though I do not live in your State, for
your magnificent stand against the war in
Vietnam, and the policy of this administra-
tion in that area. I have listened to most of
the broadcasts of the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee hearings. I have found that
your brilliant and courageous exposition of
the issues at stake there represent my own
views and feelings almost exactly. I am
aghast at the danger of our present course,
and have welcomed your repeated reference
to legal concepts, which are so lacking in the
justifications put forward by the members of
this administration. Thank you once again.
Sincerely yours,
JOSEPHINE BARCLAY.
ORANGE, TEx.,
May 11, 1966.
SENATOR MORSE,
Member of Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I thoroughly endorse your views
on the Vietnam war. Stop this war, as you
say. We are not doing any good, only killing
great numbers of our innocent young boys
and men.
I have listened to all of the public TV
Foreign Relations discussions and I appreci-
ate them very much. The public Is entitled
to know what is going on. We pay taxes to
help kill our boys. Why?
Senator, please keep expressing your candid
views and know that a great many, I would
say the great majority of people, endorse
your views.
It seems to me the majority of these people
we have tried to help detest us, as they are
displaying every day, so what is the'motive of
our leaders to keep it going?
I am wondering how many of those Sena-
tors share your views as they do not express
their views as candidly you do although I
can see there are doubts in their minds as to
the validity of our course in Vietnam.
I hope I am not out of place in expressing
my views to you, as, of course, I am only a
citizen and not cognizant of all the facts.
I am so interested in your meetings that I
just can't keep from expressing my views.
Thank you Senators for allowing us to see
and listen to your discussions.
DALLAS, TEX.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Thank Goa we have
a Senator MORSE in this beloved country of
ours. "Stick to your guns," Senator MORSE.
If we fail to have good, sensible, level headed
men like you speaking up (I've got to know-
ing you through the Foreign Relations Com-
mittee hearings). I think we will be in grave
danger. I know it's a lonely position. I feel
almost as lonely here in this largely con-
servative town (though there are thousands
of good people here who are prone toward
creative, broad thinking).
My sincere thanks to you.
Sincerely,
Mrs. OPAL LOVING CHRISTOPLE.
PENDLETON, IND., May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE.
DEAR SENATOR: I am in accordance with
your every comment on the situation we are
in, and I honor you for every thing I heard
you say on TV.
I have a son who served 51 months in
World War IT, now his 19 year old son, (our
only grandson) leaves May 18 for Training.
I thank God my son came home safely and
my prayers are for our precious grandson.
Our older son had four severe heart attacks
last summer, Doctor has not dismissed him
as yet, I thank God his lift has been spared.
I pray they will call our boys back before
things get worse.
If France and Russia, and smaller countries
will not help us, why are we sacrificing our
boys.
I Wish everyone would write you a letter,
telling what they think of it all.
Thanking you again for all you have said,
I remain your sincere friend.
Mrs. CHARLES E. COOPER.
ROCKPORT, MASS.,
May 12, 1966,
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Please accept my heartiest con-
gratulations on the way you have called
the bluff on the administration's policies in
South Vietnam during the recent Senate
hearings. Your exposure of the bankruptcy
of American foreign policy is a true service to
your country.
As a recently elected Democrat (planning
board) in a Republican town I feel I am one
of a growing number of disillusioned
Democrats.
Again sir; my congratulations, and please
keep at it.
Sincerely,
SAN DIEGO, CALIF.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Today I heard you.
speak, while Senator McNamara was being:
Interviewed. May I tell you that you spoke
so well. If only the powers to be would US-
ten. You are so right. We must end this
war. And we must, as you suggest take
this to the U.N. demand a vote on this.
Just as you worry about our becoming in-
volved in a larger war, so do many of us
Americans. Please Mr. Morse keep up your
good work. We, the people of this large
country are grateful to you. And I firmly be-
lieve history will prove you right. I wish
with all my heart we could wake up tomor-
row morning, and learn that the Vietnam
war was over. It must somehow be stopped,
we are losing too many men, and if they
persist it, we will lose many more.
Please do all in your power to convince our
government that this is; the wrong war at
the wrong time. I believe most of Ameri-
ca hopes we never never fight a war again.
Gratefully,
MILWAUKEE, WIS.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: God bless you, sir.
I know that millions of mothers support
your brilliant and courageous crusade for
peace.
Sincerely,
UTICA, N.Y.,
May 11, 1966.
Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
My DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We have been
thoughtful listeners to the Senate hearings
on television. Thank you for the energy and
commitment that you have put into these in-
vestigations.
Today when you spoke out so explicitly
I felt compelled to write to you. You have
put your finger on our dilemma. When we
as a nation proclaim that war is Immoral,
inhuman, contrary to our conviction on the
dignity and worth of all men, then and only
then will the world believe in the alternatives
that will evolve in such a climate. Many
people will need to change their thinking but
KIRKWOOD, MO.,
May 12, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: You and Senators
FULBRIGHT and GORE are to be commended
on your stand with regard to our position
in southeast Asia. The philosophies which
you upheld in yesterday's televised session
of the Senate caucus indicate a concern for
for present actions both with regard to the
historical context of U.S. policy and purpose
and to the light in which the future will view
the present decisions.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May 16, 19 Approved For R ee C ffffi8% .' J*B07BgJy 0400070010-0 10197
Your suggestion for the use of intervention
by the United Nations offers a constructive
and logical mode of action toward resolution
of the Vietnam conflict. I hope it will be
acted upon.
ST. PETERSBURG, FLA.,
May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
Capitol Hill,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: I am at this moment listening
to the televised account of the Senate For-
eign Relations Committee. I am in com-
plete accord with what you and Senator
FULBRIGHT are trying to do. I believe you are
realistic men attempting to do a very difficult
job.
Frankly, everyone (almost without excep-
tion) that I talk to about the war in Viet-
nam is against it.
Your idea of going before the United
Nations-particularly, the Security Council-
sound logical, sensible and certainly worth
a try.
Remember many, many people are behind
you. Doli't lose heart.
Yours truly,
Sir, I'm writing you, because I believe you
will give me a true answer to my questions
which I doubt I could receive from my own
representative.
Sincerely,
MASSACHUSETTS.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: Stay with it. There
are more Americans secretly behind you than
one can count. They d3 not quite dare say
so. What you say about "tyranny" and the
"slaughter of our American boys" hits truth
and maybe hurts in some spots I
Mrs. LUKE LEONARD.
GHENT, N.Y., May 11, 1966.
Senator WAYNE MORSE,
DEAR SIR: As a long time Democrat I take
my hat off to you and want you to know I
appreciate your voice in this wilderness of
deceit, lies, and confusion of today.
You spoke clearly, sincerely, and over-
whelmingly with truth and I am sorry every-
one in the country could not hear you. Do
not be discouraged as I am one of the little
people and so hear what little people think
and feel and they are with you.
To one who carries the Holy Grail of Peace
my best wishes for your health and success.
Sincerely,
Mrs. DOROTHEA CONNACHER.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I suggest
the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. BIBLE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
P.S.-I am a housewife, middle-aged,
mother of three.
FENTON, Mo.
Senator MORSE.
DEAR SENATOR: Have just finished watch-
ing your interview with McNamara. I want
you to know there are thousands of people
backing you. If there's anything the people
can do to help, besides write letters, be sure
and let us know.
We have sons, one in service. We've had
friends that lost sons in Vietnam. It is all
so useless for these young men to give their
lives for what? It seems like there are people
that think money can pay for these young
lives. But they don't seem to have sons over
there.
Keep the good work up. And I'm sure that
most of use will have to be Republicans next
election.
Mr. and Mrs. ROBERT C. MCDOWELL.
Los ANGELES, CALIF.,
May 12, 1966.
DEAR SENATOR MORSE: We always delight in
hearing your views on Vietnam. You some-
how reestablish reason as a possible tool in
ending this tragic war. We are sick of out-
right lies and admire your gumption for
speaking out against them.
Yours for Peace, -
CAROL DE'AK and WILLIAM DE'AK.
ST. JOSEPH, Mo., May 12, 1966.
HON. SENATOR WAYNE MORSE,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: Since I am an admirer of you
and your policies on our situation in Viet-
nam I think I can write you and get an
honest answer. First, what law of our land
gives authority to our Armed Forces to take
one's son, who is a draftee, and send him
to a combat zone which is an undeclared war
in a foreign country?
He is my only son, and I think Vietnam
is a civil war we have no business sticking
our nose in.
Because someone made a promise there,
some time ago is no sign they could not
remember the Biblical saying "A wise man
changes his mind, but a fool never does."
It seems our country is going more to a
dictatorship, ruled by a very few and Con-
gress has not much say, at least that is the
way it looks now, or is the challenge too
great-and politics gets in the eyes of too
many of our chosen senators and
representatives?
HISTORY WARNS THAT PROS-
PERITY PRECEDES A STORM
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, in the
March 27 issue of the Cedar Rapids
Gazette appears an article by the distin-
guished economist, J. A. Livingston, en-
titled "History Warns That Prosperity
Precedes a Storm."
In view of the events which have oc-
curred in the stock market subsequent
to the publication of this article, which
points up the accuracy of the statements
which were made, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the article be placed in the
RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE GREAT SOCIETY AND THE STOCK MARKET-
HISTORY WARNS THAT PROSPERITY PRECEDES
A STORM
(By J. A. Livingston)
Surely, it is no accident that literature,
history, and philosophy are laden with warn-
ings against prosperity.
"Everything in the world may be endured,"
said Goethe, "except a succession of pros-
perous days." A proverb says, "Prosperity
lets go the bridle." Tacitus asserted, "We
are corrupted by prosperity," and Washington
Irving counseled that in a "time of unexs,m-
pled prosperity" businessmen should "pre-
pare for the impending storm."
"Prosperity sows the seeds of its own de-
struction" has become a cliche. Why? Be-
cause prosperity fashions its own pathology:
The prospects of ever-rising profits develop a
Frankenstein dynamism toward over-expan-
sion.
President Johnson is aware of the danger.
In January 1965, he said in his economic
message to Congress: "A time of prosperity
with no recession in sight is the time to plan
our defenses against future dips in business
activity."
But he is caught up in his own propulsive
commitments. The Vietnam war keeps en.
larging. The Great Society program. ex-
pands. The President competes for men,
materials, machinery, and credit with the
City of New York, the State of California,
and such corporate giants as Ford, United
States Steel, General Electric, in a congested
marketplace. Result: Upward pressure on
prices.
NOT EMBARRASSED
This doesn't embarrass the President. He
is committed to full employment-to unem-
ployment of 3.5 percent or less. The poor
and underprivileged must find work. But
job opportunities will open only if manufac-
turing and service industries need workers.
Then, industry will be willing to provide on-
the-job training.
So this is the Washington trade-off, the
caluculated risk: A little price inflation in
exchange for big, broad social gains-for full
employment.
In the algebra of nice, round assumptions,
in inflation markup of $18-to-$23 billion on
total output of $710 billion is a small price
for social progress.
True, people who have savings accounts
will have less real purchasing power stored
away. True, also, persons who live on pen-
sions or other fixed incomes will be somewhat
less well off. However, if those who have
little are lifted far, far up, while those who
have enough lose only a little, the swap is
justified. It's for the greatest good of the
greatest number. But .
Anticipation-the velocity of the market-
place-is the algebraic unknown. Will the
2 percent-to-3 percent-a-year creep change
into a gallop?
The labor leader who expects prices to rise,
wants protection against increased living
costs. That's why George Meany, president
of the AFL-CIO, rejects the President's 3.2
percent guideposts. He doesn't want work-
ers shortchanged in advance.
EVERYONE JOINS
The businessman wants to increase prices
so as to obtain adequate profit margins after
paying higher wages and higher prices for _
raw materials. Everyone joins in the game
of buying ahead to beat the price rise and/or
possible shortages.
A plant bought today will be worth more
tomorrow. Ditto a housing project or shop-
ping center. Real estate developers pick up
land-by option or down payment. Business
men add to inventories. Corporate and other
borrowers make loans ahead, fearing conges-
tion in the money market. Fear of. inflation
lurks in every commitment, contract. and
purchase. It even pokes into the shopper's
cart in the super market.
Price indexes do not measure the inflation
fully. Firms drop discounts, discontinue
services, scant quality or treat as extras what
has been standard. Deliveries are often de-
layed, which adds to costs. Companies have
to increase inventories against slower re-
placement of stock.
Investors prefer stocks-capital gains-to
fixed income from bonds, in spite of the cur-
rent large discrepancy In yields-3 percent
against 5 percent.
Why not? The economy has been expand-
ing at a 4 percent to 5 percent annual rate.
A bumper crop of young men and women will
be going to the altar this year, next and the
year after-the legacy of the baby boom, just
before and after the war. This will bolster
demands of all kinds-for homes, for furni-
ture, for pots, pans and appliances. Dynam-
ic: He who buys something today will be
richer tomorrow. In a seller's market, owner-
ship is the first rule of profit.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10198
Approved For&l uW80 /? 8A-BDP6,7 R ?R00040007001May 16, 19&6
The President has Intervened in the mar-
ketplace to stay the process. He has rolled
back prices of aluminum, copper, steel and
cigarets. But, he hasn't stopped dozens of
other prices from advancing-chemicals,
plastics, 'I'V tubes, gasoline, newsprint, cop-
per tubing, aluminum light-poles, rubber
tires.
HITS SYMPTOMS
The President is tilting with symptoms.
The cause is overconsumption. The economy
lacks room at the top. Though production
rises, demand is rising even faster.
The father of the New Economics, John
Maynard Keynes, dissected the process in his
"General Theory of Employment, Interest
and Money". Even before full employment
is reached, he wrote, "money wages have to
rise in response to an increasing effective de-
mand" but the rise in wages will not be
"fully in proportion to the rise in the price
level." This Is true today, despite cost-of-
living clauses In wage contracts.
Keynes went on to describe the state we,
in the United States, may be entering:
"When a further increase in the quantity of
effective demand produces no further In-
crease in output ^ ? * we have reached a con-
dition which might be appropriately desig-
nated as one of true inflation."
In World war II, congress moderated in-
flation with wage-price-and-profits controls.
But that was an all-out war. This is only a
2 percent war. And controls would require
a no-strike pledge. Labor is unlikely to give
up Its chief bargaining weapon-the right to
strike-for Vietnam. It didn't during Korea.
So the President has these rather-not
alternatives: To cut government spending or
to ask congress to increase taxes.
In either, case, demand would be lowered.
Fewer jobs would be created. And economic
expectations would slip into a lower tra-
jectory. The up-spiral would become a
down-spiral. Negotiations for property
would be halted, corporate blueprints for ex-
pansion shelved, inventory policies shifted
downward.,
CHANGE INEVITABLE
Sooner or later, such change is inevitable.
The Vietnam war Isn't endless, The escala-
tion in requirements-for men and ma-
terials-will slow down. And peace, itself,
will eventually come.
A wise professor, I, L. Sharfman, of Michi-
gan, where Gardner Ackley got his PhD in
economics, told me again and again: "In
times of prosperity, it Is the function of the
business analyst to point out the danger of
excesses. And In times of depression, it is
his responsibility to point out the bright
spots. Thus he can temper over-exuber-
ance at the top and despair at the bottom."
The United States today is in the boom
phase-the capital-goods phase--of prosper-
ity. President Johnson and Ackley hope that
higher Social Security and other taxes will
slow up demand and "tame down" expecta-
tions.
The President doesn't want to apply the
brakes and chance a recession. This is
understandable-particularly in an'election
year.
Tye President and his advisers hope to
"slot" Great Society projects into the Viet-
nam gap. The backlog of social under-
maintenance Is unlimited-potholed and
cramped streets and highways; crowded air-
ports, polluted rivers and streams; contami-
nated air; shortage of educational facilities;
slums; inadequate water supplies; congested
hospitals; too much crime and too little
police protection.
Ideally, prosperity would flatten out and
forward into a plateau. But this happy hope
is not promised by history, as noted in the
second article.
Even If post-Vietnam projects are prepared
In advance, revival won't be instant. It takes
time for public expenditures to course
through the economy, revive anticipatory
purchases of inventories and reinitiate post-
poned corporate expenditures on plant and
equipment. Capital-goods booms evaporate
fast and reconstitute slowly.
Nor will Federal Reserve Board action be
immediately useful. Easy credit and lower
interest rates are only an invitation to bor-
row. The incentive comes from the prospect
of profit.
URGENT TO PLAN
Further, the nation's balance of payments
deficit does not allow full freedom of choice.
If interest rates come down too fast, gold
might flow out of the country. Indeed, a
recession might cause loss of confidence in
the dollar. So it is all the more urgent to
"plan our defenses against future dips in
business activity."
And fiscal activism will be possible then.
The President undoubtedly will urge, and
congress undoubtedly will pass, a bill reduc-
ing taxes. This will lift the purchasing
power of consumers, elevate the profit poten-
tial of corporations and renew confidence in
common stocks as long-term investments.
We--all of us-need to layer prosperity at
the top-to peel off projects not immediately
necessary-whether plans to build steel or
chemical plants, shopping centers, apart-
ment houses, public works, or to buy homes.
What isn't bought today will be deferred
demand for tomorrow.
The decline so far In the stock market has
been salubrious. It is a warning: All is not
up, up and up.
The drop in the bond market, similarly, is
salubrious. It has forced some states, some
local governments and some corporations to
review expansion plans.
Mortgage rates have risen. Home-building
Is falling. This may be salubrious, but it
could be a signal .. .
Yet, the view from the top of prosperity is
always upward. It takes periscopic vision to
see a downturn.
The national mood Is impatience, not mod-
eration. The President nurses the Great So-
ciety. He drives toward full employment
and Vietnam drives him on. Corporations,
speculators and householders fear higher
costs and shortages. So they buy now and
order ahead.
? Only a letdown in effective demand-to
use Keynes' term-will suppress inflation.
Prosperity is bruising Itself against a ceiling
of manpower and capacity. It is bloodied by
the war in Vietnam. But It's still very much
unbowed.
It is still progressing. It still possesses a
propulsive dynamism. And that's its trou-
ble.
And if, by pointing out this, these articles
cool off some exuberance and level down ex-
pectations, they will have served their pur-
pose. To temper a boom is to diminish the
velocity, depth and duration of its after-
math.
THE VIETNAM WAR: A COST
ACCOUNTING
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, in the
April issue of Fortune magazine appears
a very knowledgeable article entitled,
"The Vietnam War: A Cost Accounting."
There is much concern nowadays about
the cost of the commitments we have in
Vietnam. Various estimates have been
made, running in excess of $15 billion a
year.
This article points out that much more
is involved than merely adding up items.
Commitments against future appropria-
tions must be taken into account, and
when that is done the estimated costs run
to over $23 billion a year.
I ask unanimous consent that this
article be placed in the RECORD at this
point.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE VIETNAM WAR; A COST ACCOUNTING
(By William Bowen)
(NOTE.-The cost analysis for this article
was carried out by a team consisting of, in
addition to Mr. Bowen: Alan Greenspan,
president of Townsend-Greenspan & Co., con-
sultants; P. Bernard Nortman, independent
economic consultant; Sanford S. Parker, chief
of Fortune's economic staff; and research
associate Karin Cocuzzi.)
The Vietnam war Is peculiarly expensive,
far more so than is generally thought. Costs
are running above $13 billion a year, and are
headed up. Fortune's figures suggest that
we're }n for bigger defense budgets-and new
economic strains.
What happens in the U.S. economy over
the next year or two, what happens to de-
mand and production and prices and taxes,
will to a large extent depend upon the cost
of the Vietnam war. If anyone inside the
Pentagon knows the current cost, he is not
telling, nor, of course, is anyone there telling
about costs associated with future opera-
tions. Accordingly, Fortune has undertaken
on its own to figure out the cost-present
and prospective-of the Vietnam war. It is
already costing a lot more than almost any-
body outside the Pentagon imagines.
At present, with about 235,000 U.S. service-
men in South Vietnam, the U.S. costs are
running at a yearly rate of more than $13
billion. Costs, it should be observed at once,
cannot be translated mechanically Into ex-
penditures; a drawdown on inventories in-
volves a cost, but may not involve an expen-
diture for quite some time. Still, If the war
continues at only the present rate through
fiscal 1967 (the year beginning next July 1),
the resulting Defense Department expendi-
tures will probably exceed the $10 billion or
so that the hefty 1967 defense budget of-
ficially allows for the Vietnam war.
But the war, it appears, will get bigger.
U.S. Senators who know what Defense De-
partment witnesses say In closed congres-
sional hearings have predicted a U.S. buildup
to 400,000 men, or more. General William C.
Westmoreland, the U.S. commander in Viet-
nam, has reportedly requested a buildup to
400,000 by the end of December. With that
many U.S. servicemen in South Vietnam, the
cost of the war would run to $21 billion a
year-even more if bombing and tactical air
support increased in proportion to the build-
up on the ground. At any such level the
Vietnam war would bring on economic stains
beyond what most economists appear to fore-
see, and beyond what makers of public policy
appear to be anticipating. The strains would
surely add to the pressure for higher taxes.
In its Vietnam cost accounting, Fortune
had considerable help from outside econo-
mists, but no access to classified data. The
basic sources were public documents--fed-
eral budgets, Defense Department publica-
tions, transcripts of congressional hearings.
Defense Department officials interviewed
were persistently wary of discussing the costs
of the war, although the department proved
willing to provide some missing bits of fac-
tual information that would otherwise have
been unobtainable. It turned out that some
costs-of ammunition, for example-could be
easily calculated from published Defense De-
partment figures. But getting at some other
costs required elaborate calculations, and
still others could only be estimated. Esti-
mates and assumptions were in all cases con-
servative. The results, set forth by category
below, represent what is probably the first
serious effort outside the Defense Department
to analyze the costs of the war.
The purpose of the undertaking was not
to make a case against (or for) the fiscal
1967 defense budget, but to provide a basis
for looking beyond the budget and assessing
the potential economic effects of the war.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved Fo qRee~~ n 0 R 46R000400070010-0 10199
Mai .16, 1966 CA TGR g ~~ ~? ~=-
In wartime no defense budget can sensibly begins to wane. Deliveries of arms, ammu: tures go-a few billion dollars). But as de-
be viewed as a hard forecast of defense nition, and equipment rolling into military liveries roll in and the armed forces expand, Actual
will
nditures
he chew
matc
ore t
the
during
enditures
begin fiscal y ing ar will be determined by unfolding mt eots rielnin thehwar, and sotsome r plenish- wexp ares far from mode ate coststch up with the
events that no budgeter can foresee months ment of inventories takes place. Men are In numbers of U.S. servicemen deployed,
in advance, So far as the economy is con- moving out of training and into operating the Vietnam war is not as big as the Korean
cerned, then, what counts is not budget pro- units faster than forces are being sent over- war at its peak. But costs per man run much
jections but Defense Department orders and seas, and so there is a net buildup of higher than they did in the Korean war.
trained deployable military forces in the U.S. The pay that servicemen get has gone up
expenditures. more than 40 percent since then. Some
The icostsand expenditures resulting from Expenditures ActTheawar eu nds, The troop-off in materiel costs have risen very steeply since
a They rise not match atch up different the short runcontract awards and the collapse of infla- Korea. The F-86D fighters in Korea cost
They else and phases of different trajectories. h Defense expectations throughout about $340,000 each; the F-4C's in South
expenditures by the e economy. my. Par from falling steeply, ex- Vietnam cost nearly six times as much.
ent phcan ases d hold f any down war, the
Department the early
drawing upon existing forces and supplies, pplies, penditures continue to rise a bit before en- Ammunition u$e per combat soldier is very
just as a business firm can temporarily re- tering into a gradual decline: the incoming much higher than in the Korean war. The
duce cash outlays by letting inventories deliveries must be paid for, and the men M-14 rifle fires up to 150 rounds per minute,
dwindle, or a family can cut next month's brought into the armed forces must be pro- and ten rounds per minute at a sustained
grocery bill by eating up the contents of the vided for until they are mustered out. With rate. The M-16, carried by some Special
pantry. Later orr in the war, expenditures deliveries no longer partly offset by wartime Forces troops, can use up ammunition at a
catch up with costs. It must be kept in chew-up, inventories fill rapidly, and begin. full-automatic rate of 750 rounds per min-
mind that "expenditures," as used here to overflow. During the period of readjust- ute. The M-79 grenade launcher fires gre-
means incremental expenditures--those that ment, military manpower and military in- nades as, if they were bullets.
war. The nature of the war contributes to mak-
would not be required if it were not for the ventories exceed normal peacetime require-
ments. Expenditures for this excess reads- Ing it peculiarly expensive for its size. Tech-
ness largely make up for the expenditures Ing itipec rly expen ivd r its siz foec
itures sf and the mdefenseovements aers of , and and hnd their deferred through reduced readiness in the mnolog agna ally is ehuippa to mil and destroy,
pend Idea
cx
oc early phases of the war. - are inefficiently employed against meager or
fhangingnot economic effects, can be gathered In January, 1965, the Vietnam war was alusie tcigetl. In Korea, there we visible
scen v the a m followingedium-sizebed war-i.e., warwar still in Act I, and to all appearances nobody masses elusive enemy forces a, shoot at, and the
in the Administration expected an Act II.
riority in weapons could be exerted
Vietnam. The President's budget message declared U.S. supeof to
not very different from the one in n Vietnam. a
A WAR IN FIVE ACTS that, with the "gains already scheduled ,"o efficiently; in Vietnam the enemy hits and
Act I: It looks like a small war, and it U.S. military runs, moves under cover of darkness or folt-
forces would "be adequate t
requires only smallish incremental expends- their tasks for years to come." The new age. . U.S With . fighting their r mabundant nt South firepower, the
Vietnam superb tares. The forces sent overseas are members budget projected a decrease in defense spend- clobber the Vietcong men shooting encounters,
of the existing defense establishment, and ing in fiscal 1966, and a decline in total uni- in
helicopter costs-in
fuel, run up upc huge
the Defense Department would have had to formed personnel. Major General D. L. Crow, but troop the U.S. supplies, forces
pay, feed, and otherwise provide for them if then controller of the Air Force, subsequently nonce supplies, trying to find some gtt ainte-
they were doing peacetime duties in Georgia testified at a congressional hearing that "the that they can shoot at.
instead of fighting guerrillas in a tropical guidelines for the preparation of the budget
republic. The weapons, ammunition, and as they pertain to Vietnam were actually a FIRING INTO A CONTINENT
equipment come from existing stocks. The carry-forward of the guidelines that were There is an almost profligate disparity be-
extra expenses (hostile-fire pay, transports- used in the preparation of the 1965 budget, tween the huge quantities of U.S. bullets and
tion) can be temporarily absorbed in the and they did not anticipate increased activ- bombs poured from the air upon targets in
immensity.of the defense budget, and the ity, per se, in Vietnam." Vietnam and the military and economic dam-
gress stration does not have to ask Con- IT'S NOW ACT III age the bullets and bombs do, in the aggre-
de-
na the for supplemental appropriations to gate. In North Vietnam the U.S. has de-
fect, through war. a It is being financed, a eft Not Act II had May was but ntirely evident barred itself from attacking economically
valuable targets such as port facilities and
trained and smaller is, that Act II had begun, buJathere nuary, 1965, i after in-
fect, has "reduced
the U.S. has fewer rilnto men n smaller declining earlier. In cuts ry the manufacturing plants. From bases in Thai-
Board and index quarters, of "defense defense land, F-105's fly over North Vietnam and
contingencies. to deploy or use in declini Federal for Reserve four consecutive
dro their mighty payloads on or near roads,
any stocks of other war materiel
Act II: The struggle has expanded, and equipment" production turned upward, be- railplines, ferry facilities, bridges. The costs
the armed forces need extra inflows of men -ginning the precipitous climb depicted at the the enemy of repairing the damage are
and materiel to compensate for the unex- bottom of the page opposite. In February
pectedly large outflows to the war zone. The the U.S. began bombing targets in North picayune compared to the costs to the U.S.
Pentagon places contracts for additional Vietnam. In March the decline in Army of doing the damage. In South Vietnam the
arms, ammunition, equipment; it expands uniformed personnel came to a halt, though guerrillas seldom present concentrated tar-
draft calls and recruitment efforts. The Ad- the downtrend continued for a while in the gets. Machine guns mounted on helicopters
ministration asks Congress for supplemental other services. In April the U.S. buildup in and on A-47's (elderly C-47's, modified and
appropriations. War expenditures are still Vietnam accelerated. In May the Adminis- fitted with three guns) fire streams of bullets
only moderate, but with defense orders in- tration asked for, and Congress quickly into expanses of jungle and brush that are
creasing and inflationary expectations be- voted, a supplemental fiscal 1965 appropria- believed to conceal Vietcong guerrillas. The
ginning to stir, the war is already having tion of $700 million. In June the decline in thought of an A-47 firing up to 18,000 rounds
total uniformed military personnel turned per minute into treetops brings to mind that
noticeable Act upon the economy. bizarre image in Joseph Conrad's Heart of
Act III: The U.S. buildup in the war zone . into a steep The Vietnam ewar is now well along in Darkness, of the French warship off the
has continued. r large Administration has Act III of the budgetary-economic scenario. African coast: "There wasn't even a shed
p Congress for large sntal apt there, and she was shelling the bush
, firing into a continent."
propriations. Spending still ill lags behind Since that $700-million request in May, 1965
costs, but it is rising fast -the recruits in the Administration has asked for $14 billion firing into
operating at a cost of more than
training have to be paid, and so do the addi- in supplemental war appropriations. Soar- per hour per pfly a ten-hour
tional civilians hired. The war's economic ing orders for ammunition and uniforms $1,300 0 trip Guam plane, Sa ten to
effects, moreover, are expansionary out of all have contributed to shortages of copper and that has South u large ins m to
proportion to the actual increases in defense textiles for civilian use. So far, hwever, strike t stone at an encampments enemy visible from the air.
spending: the surge in defense orders has the costs of the war have been largely chan- Th Bor2encavebeen fitted with extra racks
increased demand for skilled workers, mate- neled into reduced readiness. The war re- that itheir payloads to more than
rials, components, and credit in advance of serve of "combat consumables" has been sand sir pa, about to moo worth
and
gone spare that increase ncr to of bombsp per plane. "The bomb tonnage
deliveries and payments. To some extent, drawn that odown. New therwise equipment
the Defense Department's materiel buildup Par that is resulting is literally unbelievable,"
is being temporarily financed by the funds units elsewhere have been diverted to Viet- said Secretary McNamara at a Senate he
contractors and subcontractors borrow nam-Iroquois helicopters, for example, that said M. Several weeks later, e a
t banks against future payments from would have gone to the Fixed-wing aircraft t to replace press conference, he said: "Our consumption
in February . . of air-delivered munitions
the he V.S. Treasury. Germany,
Act IV: The V.S. military buildup in the losses in Vietnam have been ordered, but not
war zone tops out. Defense production con- yet fully delivered and paid for. The war aalone lone in the South average m Vietnam onthly was rate t two on and the a three
half itinues to rise, but the rate of rise is much has required only moderate incremental ex- ears of the Koran way." But much of
less rapid than in Act III, and the expan- penditures (that must be understood, how- Y
sionary economic force exerted by the war ever, to mean "moderate" as war expends- that "literally unbelievable" bomb tonnage
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0-
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
- 7 -
merely smashes trees and blasts craters in (1) the 200,000 men In Vietnam, (2) the procurement resulting from the war. Am-
the earth. peripheral supporting forces in Southeast munition and aircraft losses together ac-
Only a rich nation can afford to wage war Asia, and (3) the required backup forces. count for more than 75 percent of Dateriel
at ratios so very adverse. But the U.S. is a The Defense Department defines personnel costs, and for both- categories the costs can
rich nation. If there is a great disparity costs as pay and allowances, subsistence be calculated with some statistical precision.
between the bomb power dropped and the (chow), personal clothing (the "clothing McNamara reported last January that U.S.
economic value of the targets, there is also bag" issued to each recruit), plus certain ground forces in South Vietnam, including
a great disparity between the wealth and other expenses. Average personnel costs In Army and Marine helicopter units, were
power of the U.S. and of the enemy. The the armed forces run to $5,100 per man per "consuming ammunition at the rate of about
cost of the bombs is small in relation to year, but the men in South Vietnam get $100 million per month," and that U.S. air
the G.N.P. of the U.S., and the damage they "hostile-fire pay" of $65 a month, and other forces were using up "air munitions"
do is sometimes substantial in relation to war costs boost the average to about $6,200. (mostly bombs) at a rate of about $1:10 mil-
the G.N.P. of North Vietnam, or to the re- So, 200,000 men at $6,200, or $1,240,000,000. lion per month. That works out to a com-
6ources available to the Vietcong. But the The peripheral supporting forces-mainly bined rate of $2.5 billion a year. At that
costs of winning are going to be unpleasantly aboard Seventh Fleet ships and at bases in time there were about 190,000 U.S. service-
large. Thailand-numbered at least 60,000 last men In South Vietnam, so for the calculation
The official position of the Defense Depart- winter, when the U.S. force level in South of costs at the 200,000-man level, the figure
went is that it does not know what the costs Vietnamreached 200,000. That's 50,000 men has to be adjusted upward a bit, to
of the war are, and that it does not even try at $6,200 a year, or $310 million.
to compute them. As a Pentagon official put Each thousand U.S. servicemen stationed $2 ,In 650,000,000.
testifying
it: "We have no intention of cost-accounting overseas under non-war conditions have on IN at cong hearings,
the war in Vietnam. Our business is to sup- the average about 600 other servirpn,a? h, ,'1r McNamara and d other Defense efense Department
wur nuslness is not
post accounting . We have no estimates of
costs. It's not practical to say the war has
cost x dollars to date."
The Defense Department argues that the
war costs are commingled with those of a
military establishment that existed before the
U.S. troop buildup in South Vietnam began.
And that, of course, is true. Still, a meaning-
ful total can be arrived at by analyzing and
adding up the various war costs, regardless
of whether they translate immediately into
added' expenditures. One way or another, we
may assume, all costs will result in either
added expenditures or reduced readiness, and
In the reckoning of the costs It does not mat-
ter which, or when, or how.
Fortune's first objective was to arrive at
an approximation of annual costs at the
early-1966 level of 200,000 U.S. servicemen in
South Vietnam. The results of that analysis
can serve, in turn, as a basis for calculating
costs at higher levels of buildup. In what
follows, costs are divided into standard cate-
gories-military personnel, operation and
maintenance, . and procurement-that the
Defense Department uses in its budgeting.
To outsiders, the department's assignment of
expenses to these categories sometimes seems
at bit arbitrary. Some clothing is funded
under personnel and some under operation
and maintenance; ordinary repair parts are
funded under O. and M., aircraft "spares"
under procurement.
INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE THEATRE
Military personnel. As noted, the fiscal 1966
defense budget, submitted in January, 1965,
projected a moderate decline in total uni-
formed military personnel ("active forces"),
from about 2,663,000 at that time to 2,640,000
as of June 30, 1966. Actually, the decline
proceeded so briskly that the total got down
to 2,641,000 in May, 1965. Since then the
Defense Department has announced plans
to increase military personnel to 2,987,000 by
next June 30, and to add on another 106,000
by June 30, 1967; by the latter date, the total
would be 452,000 above the May, 1965, low
point. In addition the department is ex-
panding the civilian payroll by about 100,000
during fiscal 1966, and many of these civi-
lians wil take over work previously done by
servicemen, freeing them for other duties.
It might appear that these figures could
serve as a basis for calculating the person-
nel costs attributable to the Vietnam war.
But it is impossible, without knowing the
Defense Department's classified plans and
assumptions, to relate the announced per-
sonnel increases to any particular force level
in South Vietnam. And to have any mean-
ing, statements about the cost of the Viet..
nam war must be related to specified force
levels. Here we are trying to get the cost
of the war at a particular level-200,000 U.S.
servicemen in South Vietnam. For this
reckoning, the war personnel costs may be
taken as the combined personnel costs of
ing them up: trainees, transients, men serv- formation about U.S.naircraft operations iin
ing in supply units or performing various the Vietnam war, including losses in 1965
auxiliary functions. But it takes far more and numbers of sorties over various periods
than 600 men to back up a thousand men
(one flight by one plane counts as one
deployed in South Vietnam. Additional sup- sortie). Sorties per month increased dra-
ply men are required to keep the huge quan- matically during 1965, and despite low loss
tities of arms, ammunition, equipment, and rates per 1,000 sorties, losses added up to
supplies moving Into the theatre of war. large numbers over the course of the year:
The men serving there are rotated home 275 fixed-wing aircraft lost as a result of
after a one-year tour (a three-year tour is "hostile action" alone, and 177 helicopters
normal for U.S. forces in Western Europe), lost, 76 as a result of "hostile action," :101 in
and additional trainees are needed to sup- accidental crashes and other mishaps,
port the rotation. Extra backup men are Assuming continuation of 1965 ratios be-
needed, also, to make up for the erosion re- tween sorties and losses, estimated annual
sulting from deaths, severe injuries, and attrition at a 200,000-man force level works
tropical ailments. In the course of a month, out, in rounded figures, like this:
large numbers of men spend some days or
weeks in transit to or from South Vietnam. 475 fixed-wing tactical planes
And additional men in training require ad- @$1,800,000------------ -- $855, 000, 000
ditional men to train them. With all the 165 other fixed-wing planes
additions, it works out that there is a ratio (transport, observation)
of one to one, or 1,000 to 1,000, between @$200, 000----------------- 33, 000, 000
servicemen in the theatre of war and service- - 320 helicopters @$250,000----- 80, 000, 000
the war as elements of cost. $968, 0010, 000
For the 250,000 men in Vietnam and A figure for aircraft spares was arrived at
vicinity, then, there will be 250,000 others by first calculating total flying costs of the
elsewhere. Since some of these are new re- aircraft operations (information on average
crusts, the average personnel cost Is taken flying costs per hour for various types of
to be only $4,700. That makes another military aircraft is available). That came
$1,175,000,000, bringing total personnel costs to $800 million a year. Spares represent, on
to $2,275,000,000. average, 20 percent of flying costs, which
KEEPING THEM FLYING comes to $160 million. With the addition of
Operation and maintenance. This category a minimal $25 million to allow for spares re-
is even more capacious than its name sug- quired to repair planes hit by enemy fire,
gests. It Includes everything that does not the total for aircraft spares comes to $185
fall into other categories-recruitment million.
training, medical care, repairs, operation of Little information is available about ma-
supply depots, transport of goods, and, in the tkriel chew-up, apart from ammunition and
official expression, `!care of the dead." A aircraft. In the absence of direct evidence,
great many of those additional civilians hired however
Defense De
artm
t
,
p
en
procurement
by the Defense Department in the last rev- orders provide a basis for rough estimates.
eral months are working in O. and M. It is assumed-and this is a bit of a leap-
In fiscal 1965, O. and M. for the entire that the annual attrition of weapons, ve-
armed forces averaged out to $4,630 per man. hicles, and equipment is equivalent to one-
For 500,000 men that would come to $2,315,- third of the increase in procurement orders
000,000. But the Vietnam war entails extra- in those categories (as measured by the in-
ordinary O. and M. expenses. Planes there crease in prime contract awards from the
fly a lot more hours per month than they second half of 1964 to the second half of
normally do, and the extra O. and M. in- 1965). From that procedure emerges a round
volved in keeping them flying runs at a rate figure of $600 million for attrition of hard
of more than $200 million a year. Extra re- goods other than aircraft, ammunition, and
pair and maintenance are required to keep ships (in effect, ship losses are assumed to
vehicles moving and equipment working. An be zero). That brings total procurement to
enormous logistic flow must be coped with- $4.4 billion.
more than 700,000 tons a month. The ship- The three categories together--military
ping costs to Vietnam amount to $225 mil- personnel, O. and M., procurement -add up
lion at a yearly rate. Combat clothing gets to $10,440,000,000. That Is the approximate
ripped up In the bush, deteriorates rapidly annual cost of the U.S. operations in the Viet-
in the moist tropical heat. And, of course, nam war at the 200,000-man level reached
extra medical care per man is needed in a early this year. To that figure must be added
tropical war. When all the extra O. and M. support for South Vietnamese military forces.
costs Involved are added together, the total, (For fiscal 1967, military assistance to South
by a-conservative reckoning, comes to $1 bil- Vietnam will be included in the defense
lion. That brings the over-all O. and M. budget.) Counting supplemental requests,
costs $3,315,000,000. total military aid to South Vietnam comes to
Procurement, i.e., materiel costs. As reck- more than $1 billion in the current fiscal
oned here, these are taken to be the chew-up year. In the early 1960's military aid to
in the war zone rather than the additional South Vietnam ran to something like $100
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Ma ', 1966 Approved FC~1V-ci"tZt?%fu1VA:.6/~?g~ DP ROA46R000400070010-0
y
million a- year; the $900-million difference
can be considered a Vietnam war cost: In
addition, the U.S. pays $50 million to help
support South Korean forces in South Viet-
nam:
Much of the $1.4 billion that Congress has
appropriated in fiscal 1966 for military con-
struction in Southeast Asia has to be counted
as part of the Vietnam war cost. According
to Secretary McNamara's testimony at a Sen-
ate hearing, all of the contemplated con-
struction "is associated with the operations
in South Vietnam." Some of the facilities
may have military value to the U.S. after
the war is over, but it seems reasonable to
suppose that at least $1 billion of the planned
construction would not have been under-
taken had it not been for the war. If that
is spread over two years, construction adds
$500 million a year to the cost of the war.
That brings the grand total to $11.9 billion
a-year. This figure does not allow for an im-
portant deferred cost, depreciation of equip-
ment. Since the Defense Department does
not pay taxes or operate in terms of profit
and loss, the business-accounting concept of
depreciation is hard to apply, but the wear-
ing out of equipment is a reality whether it is
cost-accounted or not. This wear-out is a
separate cost from the additional mainte-
nance and repair required to keep planes and
ground equipment operating in the Vietnam
war. Tactical planes and Military Airlift
Command planes involved in the war are fly-
ing 60 percent more hours per month than
they normally do in peacetime, and even with
extra maintenance their useful lives are being
shortened. The consequences will show up
in future defense budgets.
In addition, the war imposes substantial
nonmilitary costs that are not included in the
$11.9 billion (or in the other war-cost figures
that follow). U.S. economic aid to South
Vietnam, for example, leaped from $269 mil-
lion in fiscal 1965 to $621 million in the cur-
rent year.
TAORE MEN FOR PATROL, SEARCH, PURSUIT, ATTACK
The $11.9 billion may be taken as the an-
nual military cost of sustaining the war with
200,000 U.S. servicemen in South Vietnam-
the level reached around February 1. Given
that yardstick, it is a relatively simple matter
to cost out the present level (about 235,000
in South Vietnam). It can be assumed that
costs have increased since February in direct
proportion to the buildup, except that con-
struction costs and military aid to South
Vietnam remain unchanged. So calculated,
the current cost works out, at an annual rate,
to $13.7 billion-the "more than $13 billion"
mentioned at the beginning of this article.
Efforts to project costs at very much higher
levels of buildup run into some uncertainties.
Costs at the 400,000-man level-the level
General Westmoreland is reportedly aiming
for by the end of this year-would not be
double those at 200,000. For one thing, the
expansion of U.S. forces will itself tend to
alter the character of the war. Indeed, it has
already. The widening U.S. superiority in
firepower forced the enemy to cut down on
direct assaults by battalions and regiments
and revert pretty much to guerrilla warfare.
As the number of G.L's in South Vietnam in-
creases, the forces needed to guard the coastal
enclaves will not have to increase propor-
tionately, so a larger percentage of the total
combat-Battalion strength will be available
for patrol, search, pursuit, and attack opera-
tions. Some costs, as a result, will increase
faster than the number of U.S. servicemen in
South Vietnam-e.g., Fortune has assumed a
5 percent increase in the rates of ground and
helicopter ammunition use per 100,000 men,
But in some respects costs would not nearly
double as we built up to 400,000. The exist-
ing construction plans, for example, provide
for port facilities, roads and installations be-
yond current requirements. Costs of sup-
porting South Vietnamese forces would not
double either--South Vietnam's military and
paramilitary forces already number about
600,000 men, and kn increase of even 50 per-
cent could not be squeezed out of a total
population of 16 million. (An increase to
670,000 has been announced, however, and
some upgrading of the military equipment
and supplies furnished by the U.S. will un-
doubtedly occur.) Bombing and tactical air
support operations would probably not
double either: lack of runways would pre-
vent that large an expansion.
In Fortune's calculation it was assumed
that the 100 percent increase in U.S. service-
men in South Vietnam, from 200,000 to 400,-
000, would be accompanied by these less than
proportionate increases: 50 percent in bomb-
ing and tactical air-support operations; 10
percent a year in construction costs; 15 per-
cent in military aid to South Vietnam.
On these exceedingly conservative assump-
tions, the costs at 400,000 come to the re-
sounding total of $21 billion a year.
To calculate Vietnam war costs during
fiscal 1967 it Is necessary to make some as-
sumptions about the pace of the buildup.
Fortune assumed that U.S. forces in South
Vietnam would Increase to 250,000 men by
this June 30, expand steadily to reach 400,-
000 as of December 31, and then remain at
that level. On this basis the prospective
Vietnam war costs during fiscal 1967 work out
to $19.3 billion.
USED-UP OPTIONS
The $58.3 billion defense budget for fiscal
1967 Includes, by official reckoning, $10.3
billion in expenditures resulting from the
Vietnam war. With a buildup to 400,000 in
fiscal 1967, war expenditures during the year
would greatly exceed this figure, but would
not necessarily boost total defense spending
as much as $9 billion. For one thing, Secre-
tary McNamara can cut somewhat further
than he'already has into programs not di-
rectly connected with the war.
But not very far; McNamara's options for
deferring expenditures in fiscal 1967 have
been pretty well used up, The 1967 defense
budget shows a total of $1.5 billion in cut-
backs in military construction, strategic-
missile procurement, and other non-Vietnam
programs. In view of McNamara's economiz-
ing in recent years, there cannot be much
leeway left for deferrals. The Secretary him-
self said not long ago that in shaping the
1967 budget he had deferred "whatever can
be safely deferred," which suggests that there
is no leeway any more.
He has also largely used up the options for
restraining expenditures by drawing down
inventories and reducing trained forces out-
side the war theatre. McNamara has vigor-
ously insisted that "we have a great reservoir
of resources," and he Is undoubtedly right
about that, especially if "a great reservoir"
is interpreted to include the potential ca-
pacity of the U.S. economy to produce mili-
tary goods. But he has overstated his case
by arguing, in effect, that the Vietnam war
has not reduced readiness at all (". . . far
from overextending ourselves, we have actu-
ally strengthened our military position"),
Counting peripheral supporting forces, the
U.S. now has about 300,000 men deployed in
the Vietnam war theatre, and (in keeping
with this one-to-one ratio) another 300,000
men are committed to beefing them up. That
makes . 600,000 men unavailable for other
contingencies. Since the low point in May,
1965, U.S. military manpower has increased
by approximately 400,000 (this figure allows
for substitution of civilians for uniformed
personnel), and a lot of those 400,000 are
men still in training. It would be remark-
able Indeed if all this had somehow
"strengthened our military position."
Nor is there much left to draw down in
military inventories. As shown in the middle
row of chars on page 121, Defense Depart-
ment expenditures for procurement declined
sharply in fiscal-1965-by $3.5 billion, in fact.
This decline In procurement apparently con-
10201
tributed to the Army - shortages (of repair
parts, communication equipment, helicop-
ters, and trucks, among other -things) dis-
covered-early last year by investigators of the
U.S. Senate's Preparedness Investigating Sub-
committee, headed by Mississippi's Senator
JOHN STENNIS. Pentagon witnesses tried to
explain that the "shortages" were mere rou-
tine gaps between reality and ideal tables of
equipment. But at one point South Caro-
lina's Senator STRoM THURMOND pinned down
two Pentagon generals in this exchange:
Senator TnuRMOND. You have not denied
those shortages, have you, General Abrams?
General AsRAMs. No. -
Senator THURMOND. And you have not,
General.
General CHESAREKr. No.
Senator THURMOND, You do admit the
shortages? -
General CHESAREK. Yes. sir. -
The combination of rising Vietnam re-
quirements and thin, declining inventories
led last year to surges in military production
and orders far beyond what can be inferred
from the official estimates of- expenditures
attributable to the Vietnam war. In the
second half of calendar 1965, Defense De-
partment prime contract awards ran $3.3
billion ahead of the corresponding period of
1964-$6.6 billion at an annual rate. In con-
trast, the Defense Department estimates fis-
cal 1966 expenditures for the Vietnam war at
only $4.6 billion. Anyone trying to catch an
intimation of things to come might do well
to keep an eye on orders, rather than ex-
penditure estimates. Orders are for real: if
you want the stuff delievered in time, you've
got to order it in time. But expenditure
estimates are not binding upon anybody.
TRYING TO AVOID THE PILE-UP AT THE END
Since they are not for real, budgetary ex-
penditure estimate are an exceedingly un-
reliable guide to the future. A better guide
can be found in requests for appropriations.
For the fiscal years 1966 and 1967 combined,
the Defense Department has estimated Viet-
nam war expenditures at $15 billion, but for
the same two fiscal years the department has
already requested approximately $23 billion
in Vietnam war appropriations.
Big as they look, however, these requests
for war appropriations will almost certainly
be added to long before the end of fiscal 1967.
That probability can be inferred from on-
the-record statements by Secretary Mc-
Namara and other Defense Department wit-
nesses at congressional hearings.
The Defense Department has based its re-
quests for war appropriations not upon a
forecast of what will actually happen in the
Vietnam war, but upon what a Pentagon of-
ficial calls "calculated requirements." In
calculating the "requirements" for any pro-
curement item, the department considered
the lead time-how far ahead you have to
order the Item to have it when you need it.
For complex or precisely tooled military hard-
ware, lead times may run to a year or more,
and for such items-particularly aircraft
and aircraft spares-the department allowed
fully for expected losses and use-up to the
end of fiscal 1967. But for items with shorter
lead times, requirements were calculated
tightly, on the assumption that later'onthey
could be revised and McNamara could ask for
supplemental appropriations.
Supplemental appropriations have come to
be viewed as natural in wartime. And Mc-
Namara's policy of asking for funds "at the
last possible moments," as he puts it, has its
merits. By following that policy he hopes to
avoid "overbuying" and any pile-up of sur-
plus materiel at the end of the war. (When
the Korean war ended, the military establish-
ment had billions of dollars worth of excess
goods in stock or on order.) But the policy
implies that the Defense Department will
have to ask for more funds before the end
of fiscal 1967 - unless there- is some- unex-
pected abatement in the war.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10202
Approved For Release 005/06/29.: CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE May 16, ~'9 66
Of necessity, the 1967 defense budget was
constructed upon working assumptions about
how big the war will get and how long it
will last, and given all the uncertainties,
thee cannot be expected to coincide with the
realities. In estimating expenditures and
appropriations for fiscal 1967, the Defense
Department assumed that U.S. "combat op-
erations" in Vietnam will not continue be-
yond June 30, 1967. In keeping with that
assumption, the 1967 budget does not pro-
vide funds for orders of aircraft or other
military goods to replace combat losses after
that date. Here again the assumption im-
plies that the Defense Department will need
supplemental appropriations in fiscal 1967 if
the war continues at even the present rate.
McNamara has not said in public what
U.S. force level in South Vietnam is allowed
for in the 1967 budget, and the explanations
he has offered at congressional hearings have
been deleted by Pentagon censors. But at a
Senate hearing in January, General John P.
McConnell, the Air Force chief of staff, in-
dicated that, for the Air Force at least, the
appropriations requested so far allow for
little or no expansion of the war beyond the
200,000-man level. Said McConnell in reply
to a question concerning the adequacy of the
funds requested: "We don't have any problem
if the war continues at about the same rate
as now, Mr. Chairman."
These budgeting assumptions expressed
and implied by McNamara and other Penta-
gon witnesses lead to a strong inference: by
.hext January, if the war continues unabated
until then at even the present rate, the De-
fense Department will have to ask for sup-
plemental appropriations for long-lead-time
items required in fiscal 1968 and shorter-lead-
time items required in the last months of
fiscal 1967. Some months before next Jan-
uary, indeed, perhaps this summer, the de-
.partment will have to begin ordering very-
long-lead-time items in anticipation of fiscal
1968 Combat losses.
MOUNTING ASTONISHMENT AT THE BAD NEWS
It follows that if the U.S. buildup in South
Vietnam proceeds to a much higher level,
the supplemental requests will run Into many
billions before the end of fiscal 1967. And
since the military establishment will have
to procure a lot of additional equipment and
supplies and bring In a lot of additional men,
defense expenditures will rise billions of
dollars above the estimate submitted last
January.
So the 1967 budget barely begins to sug-
gest the level of Vietnam war spending that
probably lies ahead. The budget is not mis-
leading once its rather sophisticated under-
lying assumptions are understood; but the
assumptions are not widely understood, and
the Administration has not made much of an
effort to see that they are. There is likely
to be mounting astonishment this year and
next as the bad news about the war's costs
and the implied message about taxes and In,
flation sink in. It's a good bet that Ameri-
cans will still consider the war worth win-
ning. There is no reason for them not to
know its cost.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REVENUE
ACT OF 1966
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 11487) to provide rev-
enue for the District of Columbia, and
for other purposes, which had been re-
ported from the Committee on the Dis-
trict of Columbia with an amendment,
to strike out all after the enacting clause,
and insert:
That this Act may be cited as the "Dis-
trict of Columbia Revenue Act of 1966".
LUMBIA ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL ACT
SEC. 101. Clauses (4) and (5) of subsec-
tion (a) of section 23 of the District of Co-
lumbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, as
amended (D.C. Code, supp. V, 1968, sec. 25-
124), are each amended by striking out
"$1.50" and inserting In lieu thereof "$1.75".
SEC. 102. Subsection (a) of section 40 of
the District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage
Control Act, as amended (D.C. Code, 1961,
sec. 25-138), is amended by striking out
"$1.50" and inserting in lieu thereof "$3.50".
SEC. 103. The increase in tax upon spirits,
alcohol, and beer as provided by sections
101 and 102 of this title shall be applicable
to all such beverages in the possession on
the effective date of this title of the holder
of a retailer's license under said District of
Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Act.
SEC. 104. Within twenty days after the ef-
fective date of this title, every holder on
said effective date of a retailer's license un-
der said District of Columbia Alcoholic Bev-
erage Control Act shall file with the Com-
missioners a sworn statement on a form to
be prescribed by the Commissioners show-
ing the quantities of spirits, alcohol and
beer held or possessed by such licensee or
anyone for him as of the beginning of the
day on which this title becomes effective, or
as of the beginning of the following day if
the effective day be a Sunday, and shall,
within twenty days after the effective date
of this title, pay to the Commissioners the
difference between the amount of tax im-
posed by the District of Columbia Alcoholic
Beverage Control Act prior to the effective
date of this title and the amount of tax
imposed by sections 101 and 102 of this
title.
SEC. 105. Every holder of a retailer's license
under said District of Columbia Alcoholic
Beverage Control Act shall keep and preserve
for a period of twelve months after the effec-
tive date of this title, the inventories and
other records made which form the basis
for the information furnished on the sworn
statement required to be filed under this
title.
SEC. 106. Any violation of the provisions
of this title shall constitute a violation un-
der the District of Columbia Alcoholic Bev-
erage Control Act and regulations promul-
gated pursuant thereto.
SEc. 107. The provisions of this title shall
take effect on the first day of the first month
which begins on or after the thirtieth day
after the date of enactment of this Act.
TITLE II-AMENDMENTS TO THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA TRAFFIC ACT, 1925
SEC. 201. Subsection (j) of section 6 of the
District of Columbia Traffic Act, 1925 (43
Stat. 1119), as amended (D.C. Code 1961, see.
40-603 (j)) , Is further amended by striking
out the figure and words "2 per centum" and
inserting in lieu thereof the figure and word
"3 per centum".
SEc. 202. The provisions of this title shall
take effect on the first day of the first month
which begins on or after the thirtieth day
after the date of enactment of this Act.
TITLE III-AMENDMENTS TO THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA SALES TAX ACT
SEC. 301. Subsection (c) of section 127 of
the District of Columbia Sales Tax Act, as
amended (D.C. Code, supp. V, 1966, sec. 47-
2604(c) ), is amended by striking out the
figure "4" and inserting in lieu thereof the
figure "5".
SEC. 302. Paragraph (q) of section 128 of
said Act, as amended (D.C. Code 1961, sec.
47-2605(q)), is hereby repealed.
SEC. 303. The provisions of this title shall
take effect on the first day of the first month
which begins on or after the thirtieth day
TITLE IV-AMENDMENTS TO DISTRICT OF COLUM-
BIA CIGARETTE TAX ACT
SEC. 401. Subsection (a) of section 603 of
the District of Columbia Cigarette Tax Act
(63 Stat. 136, ch. 146. title VI), as amended
(D.C. Code 1961, sec. 47-2802(a) ), is amended
by striking out the figure and word "2 cents"
and inserting in lieu thereof the figure and
word "5 cents".
SEC. 402. The increase in tax upon ciga-
rettes. as provided by section 401 of this title,
shall be applicable to all packages of ciga-
rettes bearing District of Columbia tax
stamps, and to all stamps in the possession,
on the effective date of this title, of the holder
of a wholesaler's, retailer's, or vending ma-
chine operator's license under said District
of Columbia Cigarette Tax Act.
SEC. 403. Within twenty days after the ef-
fective date of this title every holder on said
effective date of a wholesaler's, retailer's, or
vending machine operator's license under
said District of Columbia Cigarette Tax Act
shall file with the Commissioners a sworn
statement on a form to be prescribed by the
Commissioners, showing, as of the beginning
of the day on which this title becomes ef-
fective, or as of the beginning of the follow-
ing day, if the effective date be a Sunday, the
number of each kind of stamps denoting pay-
ment of District of Columbia cigarette taxes,
held or possessed by such licensee or by any-
one for him, including stamps affixed to
packages of cigarettes.
The licensee, within twenty days after the
effective date of this title, shall pay to the
Commissioners the difference between the
amount of tax represented by such stamps
at the time of purchase and the amount of
tax Imposed by the District of Columbia
Cigarette Tax Act, as amended by section
401 of this title.
SEC. 404. Every holder of a wholesaler's,
retailer's, or vending machine operator's
license under said District of Columbia
Cigarette Tax Act shall keep and preserve for
a period of twelve months after the effective
date of this title, the inventories and other
records made which form the basis for the
information furnished on the sworn state-
ment required to be file under this title.
SEC. 405. Any violation of the provisions
of this title shall constitute a violation
under the District of Columbia Cigarette
Tax Act and regulations promulgated pur-
suant thereto.
SEC. 406. The provisions of this title shall
take effect on the first day of the first month
which begins on or after the thirtieth day
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
TITLE V-FEDERAL PAYMENT
SEC. 501. In recognition of the unique
character of the District of Columbia as the
Nation's Capital City, regular annual pay-
ments are hereby authorized to be appropri-
ated from revenues of the United States to
cover the proper Federal share of the ex-
penses of the government of the District, and
such annual payments, when appropriated,
shall be paid into the general fund Of the
District. The annual payment authorized
shall be an amount equal to 25 per centurp
of the sum of all tax revenues, including
that portion of the motor vehicle registra-
tion fees but excluding fees from licenses
and other charges, which the Commissioners
estimate will be credited during each fiscal
year to the general fund of the District of
Columbia, including, by way of illustration
and not as a limitation, revenues estimated
to be derived from those categories of taxes
(including penalties and interest thereon)
of which the following are representative:
Property taxes, both realty and personal
tangible; sales and gross receipts taxes; in-
come taxes-individual, corporation fran-
chise, and unincorporated business franchise;
the real estate deed recordation tax; in-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 May 16, 1966Approved For6R$1AW g6ZEQR000400070010-0
years from enactment. There may be occa-
sions when, upon special findings, the Secre-
tary should be authorized to act earlier. For
example, elimination of radiator and other
ornaments, which are hazardous to pedes-
trians. If an industry standard is not avail-
able, the Secretary should be authorized
to act in six months or less if he is ready to
'do so.
TITLE XI, H.R. 13228
This title authorizes Federal facilities to
conduct research and testing. The Council
endorses this proposal.
We desperately need more research infor-
mation on traffic safety problems, and the
research role is an especially fitting one for
the Federal government.
The size of the effort as projected in Title
II would appear to be in scale with the size
of the problem. In fact, it appears to be the
first time the Federal government has pro-
jected a research expenditure appropriate to
the size of the accident problem. As we
have repeatedly said before Congressional
committees the amounts appropriated for
Federal safety research should have the deci-
mal point moved one or two places to the
right.
Under the present form of Title II, it would
appear wise to amend Section 202 to author-
ize the Secretary to use appropriated funds
for the initial steps in site acquisition be-
cause decision on site or sites will be nec-
essary parts of the final stages of planning.
Comprehensive Program
Having now addressed myself to Titles I
and II of H.R. 13228, I return to my original
point that it is necessary to assess them and
place them in the context of a comprehen-
sive, balanced program. For this purpose,
I should like to make two major observa-
tions:
1. Title III of H.R. 13228
The NSC supports Title III of H.R. 13228
as being indispensable to a comprehensive
and balanced program to cape with traffic
accidents. However, we urge some amend-
ments which will strengthen and improve
Title III's effectiveness.
Yesterday we presented our views to these
ends on H.R. 13290 (which is, except in one
respect, identical with Title III of H.R.
13228) before the House Committee on Pub-
lic Works. For this Committee's attention,
I furnish a copy of that statement.
2, Additional 10-Point Program
The NSC recommends an additional 10-
point program, each of which recommenda-
tions is explained more fully in Appendix
No. 3.
(1) Action Program for Highway Safety:
The Congress should by Joint Resolution
adopt recommendations embodied in the
Action Program for Highway Safety as an,
interim, non-exclusive guide to national
policy.
(2) Congressional Review of National
Policy
(3) Coordination among Federal Agencies
(4) Increased Federal Support for Acci-
dent Research
(5) Federal Accident Costs and Preven-
tion Budgets
(6) Use of Seat Belts
(7) Federal Driver Improvement
(8) Federal Off-the-Job Safety
(9) Drinking Drivers
(10) Strengthening Voluntary Safety Or-
ganizations
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me again
say that the National Safety Council is
gratified that traffic safety is now so high on
the national action agenda. if congress
enacts an effective traffic safety bill-and
we have indicated what the NSC believes
such a bill would be-the nation will be
taking an enormous step forward toward
No. 80-11
coping with highway accidents. With the
President and Congress taking this initia-
tive, and with industry, the American driv-
ing public, the voluntary safety community
and the States and local governments each
being thus activated to do their utmost as
part of a comprehensive action program, the
NSC believes we can save 25,000 lives a year.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
KREBS). Under previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Louisiana
[Mr. MORRISON] is recognized for 30
minutes.
[Mr. MORRISON dressed the House.
His remarks will aar hereafter in the
ESCALATION AND ELECTIONS IN
VIETNAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from California [Mr. COHELAN] is
recognized for 5 minutes.
(Mr. COHELAN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Speaker, the war
in Vietnam continues to be escalated to
new levels by both sides.
In the 'last weeks new doubts have
been cast on the possibility of holding
early elections and on whether certain
outcomes of these elections would, in
fact, be honored.
Both of these developments,
Speaker, disturb me greatly.
ESCALATION QUESTIONED
I strongly question the wisdom of esca-
lating the war. I question whether such
action will not lead to a larger and much
more costly conflict, or to at least a new
stalemate at a higher and more danger-
ous level. I question, too, whether it
brings us any closer to the conference
table and a verified cease-fire.
The United States Is in Vietnam so
that the people of that war-torn country
may have an opportunity to determine
their own future, free from the outside
interference of those who would deter-
mine it for them. This purpose remains
valid so long as we honor that choice,
whatever it may be, and so long as we
encourage, in every way we know how
to, the day when free elections may be
held.
But preceding degrees of escalation
have not induced the other side to de-
sist, and I fail to see how an even higher
level of military effort can advance the
day when any meaningful form of self-
determination may be possible. 'I sus-
pect it may make its achievement that
much more difficult.
I also fail to see how any action that
would delay popular elections can be
condoned, or, how any action which
would jeopardize their result could be
tolerated.
OUR POLICY ON ELECTIONS IN DOUBT
Yet, the respected columnist, Joseph
Kraft, writing from Saigon, has con-
firmed what I felt on my own inspection
trip to Vietnam, and that is:
10111
The American mission here has yet to de-
velop a coherent program for dealing with
the elections and their predictable problems.
He has noted that:
Rightly or wrongly there is a widespread
impression among both Americans and Viet-
namese in Saigon that the United States is
opposed to free elections.
He has gone on to report that:
There is also a widespread impression that
if the United States does accept glections it
is only to provide a figleaf of legitimacy to
the present military regime.
There can be little question, Mr.
Speaker, that the majority, if not all, of
governments we have supported to date
in Saigon have been supported for the
simple expedients that they could func-
tion and that they were the most stable
that could then be achieved.
COMMITMENT TO ELECTIONS URGED
The time is past, however, when these
can be our standards. There is a ground
swell in South Vietnam that is properly
demanding a popularly elected govern-
ment, and we should be encouraging and
supporting its creation, if for no other
reason than that it is consistent with
our own national tradition.
What steps, then, can we properly
take? What actions can we pursue
which might hasten the time when nego-
tiations may be held, peace restored and
elections made possible?
First, I believe it is absolutely essential
that this country make clear, by word
and deed, its irrevocable commitment
to free elections. There must be no room
or reason for anyone to challenge our
sincerity.
Second, we should assist the govern-
ment in power in Saigon to move as
rapidly as possible toward the 'day when
these elections can and will be held. We
should plainly resist, with all of the ap-
propriate tools at our command, any un-
necessary or unreasonable delays in this
process.
Third, we should insist, and insist now,
that the results of free elections be re-
spected. Our continued support should
be conditioned on an acceptance of the
voters' will. And this includes immedi-
ate withdrawal on our part, if we should
be so asked by any government that
comes to power.
NEW EFFORTS TO END THE WAR
At the same time, we must make new
efforts to end a war which is destroying
the resources and devastating the people
of Vietnam. We must be unceasing in
our endeavors to bring this conflict to
the conference table and to achieve an
effective cease-fire.
There are, of course, no ready or easy
solutions to this task. But one or more
of the following initiatives on our part
might be considered as practical means
of further opening the door to negotia-
tions:
A call for a truce during the period of
the South Vietnamese elections.
A further pause, however limited, in
the bombing of North Vietnam, accom-
panied by aggressive diplomatic efforts
to substitute discussions for further
destruction.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10112
Approved For Efteft ffirWA : 67En000400070010 ay 16, 1966
A proposal for a mutual and super-
vised reduction of force levels, such as
the verified withdrawal of equal num-
bers of North Vietnamese and American
troops.
A call for a peace conference at a
specified time and place, to be open to all
parties, including the Vietcong.
A recommendation that the United
Nations, or a strengthened International
Control Commission, be called upon to
supervise elections open to all the people,
and to verify their results.
It may be, Mr. Speaker, that no efforts
on our part will induce the other side to
discuss a peaceful settlement. But with
the terrible loss of lives, with the danger
of an even larger and more costly war,
and the tremendous drain on otherwise
needed resources which this war has
caused, it is imperative that we make
every reasonable attempt.
The cause of peace must be pur-
sued with diligence, perseverance and
urgency.
It must be pursued with an awareness
that the people of Vietnam have known
little else than war for 2 dozen years.
And it must be pursued with the
knowledge that we still have wars to
complete at home against poverty, dis-
crimination and the other common
enemies of man. In winning those wars
we have no time to lose.
Mr. Speaker, these remarks were pre-
pared before the seizure of Da Nang by
the Ky government. If anything, I be-
lieve this action underscores the neces-
sity of pressing forward firmly and with-
out hesitation toward the day when free
elections are held.
I believe it also means that we must
be alert to the purposes for which our
own military forces are used. It may
even mean that we should withhold our
military support until assurances are
given that no delay will be imposed in the
election of a constituent assembly this
fall or in the orderly transition to a
popularly based civilian government.
As the New York Times states so cor-
rectly this morning:
The alternative to elections is chaos.
Premier Ky must realize this. So must
Washington. Whatever happens now, the
Anal goal still has to be elections.
Mr. Speaker, I include this timely edi-
torial from the New York Times and also
the perceptive article by Joseph Kraft
which I referred to earlier in my re-
marks, and which appeared in the Wash-
ington Post on May 11:
[From the New York Times, May 16, 19661
THE DANANG COUP
The seizure of Danang by the Ky Govern-
ment means a determination to fight it out
with the dissident political elements of the
Unified Buddhist Church. Unless the strug-
gle is quickly stopped, this would mean an
end to the hopes, expectations and promises
of an election by Sept. 15 for a constituent
assembly and later an elected government.
The gravity of the situation is obvious.
Civil war is one possibility. The South Viet-
namese struggle against the Vietcong is That is how such diverse figures as the late
bound to be seriously hampered. Worst of President Ngo Dinh Diem, former Premier
all would be the embarrassing and perhaps Nguyen Khanh, and, now, Marshal Nguyen
critical position of the American forces in Cao Ky all acquired virtually unconditional
Vietnam and the handicap to the war they American support.
are waging. By the same token, the focus on getting
Once again, Washington has been caught things done puts a'discount on uncertainty.
by surprise-even to the extent of Ambassa- But a free election is uncertainty writ large-
a leap in the dark. It Is thus precisely the
kind of thing the American mission in Saigon
does not like to think about.
Already the unease of the mission here in
the presence of an election prospect has
yielded two exceedingly damaging Impres-
sions.
And in large measure, Washington's work
during the consultations with Ambassador
Lodge should develop a means for dissipating
these bad impressions.
_ First, there is, rightly or wrongly, a wide-
spread impression among both Americans
and Vietnamese in Saigon that the United
States is opposed to free elections. This
feeling at this time is exceedingly danger-
ous. For insofar as they believe that the
United States has misgivings about elections,
by so much the Vietnamese military leaders
in office will be tempted to stage a coup or
phony coup designed to head off the elec-
tions.
There is also a widespread impression that
if the United States does accept elections, it
is only in order to provide a fig-leaf of Legiti-
macy to the present military regime. This
impression is reinforced by rumors of covert
American efforts to set up some political no-
table from Saigon or the delta region as a
front for the present military leaders. It is
further reinforced by rumors of American
efforts to line up a majority of refugee Cath-
olics, nationalist parties and members of
the Hao Hao and Cao Dal religious sects to
support the government against the Bud-
dhist militants under Bonze Tich Tri Quang.
The mere prevalence of these rumors,
whether they are true or not, works against
the American interest. For the rumors lend
color to the suspicion that the United States
is not in favor of a free choice in South Viet-
nam, that, instead, the United States only
wants a regime that will continue to spon-
sor the war.
Even if the schemes attributed to the
Americans here could be brought off, they
could not yield lasting results. For the
present government plus a politicalized front
would fence out not only the Buddhists but
the whole central region of South Vietnam.
And the center, which has been the source
of the present trouble, would react by mak-
ing even more trouble.
The true American interest, in fact, lies
in the one thing the American mission here
finds it most difficult to contemplate. It lies
in making a leap in the dark-in fostering a
process that will give free play to local po-
litical forces. And the starting point for
that process can be the coming elections.
But that means unrigged elections.
It means elections which hold out the pos-
sibility of a passage of power to a new gov-
ernment based on an alliance of the moder-
ate Catholics of the South and the militant
Buddhists of the Center.
It means elections from which there could
at least develop a meaningful political op-
position.
The consultations with Ambassador Lodge
can be a success only if they advance the
prospect for honest elections, only If they
make clear beyond any doubt the American
commitment to free choice in South Viet-
nam.
HEROIC ACTION BY AMY LA
FRANIERE, MEMBER OF SCHOOL
SAFETY PATROL
The SPEAKER pro tempore (]%Ar.
KREBS). Under previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
FEIGHAN] is recognized for 15 minutes.
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, on Fri-
day, May 13, 1966, Vice President HUBERT
H. HUMPHREY awarded the AAA Life-
saver Medal for heroic action to Amy La
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
dor Lodge being in the United States Instead
of in Saigon. When Marshal Ky calmly an-
nounced a few days ago that he intended to
keep his government in power for at least
another year, Secretary Rusk declared that
the Premier had been misunderstood and
really did not mean what he seemed to be
saying. He meant it all right, and this de-
velopment becomes another in the long
series of misunderstandings and miscalcula-
tions of the Vietnamese by the United States
Government.
As always when a sudden and unexpected
event of this sort explodes in Vietnam., it is
necessary to let the storm blow over. When
it does, every effort must be made to bring
the electoral position back to where it was,
if that is going to be possible.
The desirability and, indeed, necessity to
hold elections that would permit a broad-
based civilian government in South Vietnam
is as clear as ever. Washington's orders to
the American advisers in Saigon to urge a
peaceful settlement can only be a stopgap
move. The military may prove strong enough
to prevent the militant Buddhists from creat-
ing a chaotic situation in Danang, Hue and
Saigon. The damage is by no means beyond
repair. In South Vietnam the pessimists as
well as the optimists are often confounded.
But the coup emphasizes once again that
it has never been possible to interpret Viet-
namese events in terms of American ideas or
Western logic. Premier Ky obviously feels
strong enough to assert Saigon's authority
over the virtually rebellious northern prov-
inces. If, having done so, he then turns back
to the concept of constitutional and legisla-
tive elections, the harm can be held to a
minimum.
Once the situation has stabilized it is more
important than ever that the election be de-
monstrably fair. The very nature of the
American involvement in South Vietnam
makes it impossible for the United States to
operate with total detachment in this re-
spect. As Senator RIBICOFi' has suggested,
the United Nations would be the best possible
choice to exercise a supervisory function to
guarantee the fairness of a vote in a coun-
try with no democratic tradition.
The alternative to elections is chaos. Pre-
mier Ky must realize this. So must Wash-
ington. Whatever happens now, the final
goal still has to be elections.
[From the Washington Post, May 11, 1966]
THE VIETNAMESE CRISIS-IV
SAIGON.-Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge's
return to the United States is happily
timed. For the central theme of his con-
sultations will have to be the coming elec-
tions in Vietnam. And on that score Wash-
ington has a huge contribution to make to
American thinking here in Saigon.
Without outside help, indeed, the Ameri-
can mission here is almost incompetent to
frame a broad approach to the elections. For
one thing, the mission is preoccupied with
the day-to-.day, not to say minute-to-minute,
business of supporting the war effort.
The emphasis is on moving goods and
people, arranging appointments, making
telephone calls and other tedious adminis-
trative tasks. That emphasis leaves little,
if any, scope for thinking big. In conse-
quence, the American mission here has yet
to develop a coherent program for dealing
with the elections and their predictable
problems.
Precisely because the mission is so much
geared to doing business, It tends to favor
people in power who can get the job done.
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
United States
of America
Vol. 112
Zon~rcsBiona1 ,E:oti a( Rcrord
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89th CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
WASHINGTON, MONDAY, MAY 16, 1966
House of Representatives
The House met at 12 o'clock noon.
Rev. John W. Pressly, Westminster
Presbyterian Church, Sacramento, Calif.,
offered the following prayer:
God of our lives, Thou who art our
highest thought and our noblest aspira-
tion, we ask that Thou will free us from
a stubborn trust in ourselves. Enable us
to trust in Thy guiding providence. May
the mists of doubt be dispelled in the
light of a vigorous and confident faith.
Here today in this distinguished
Chamber of national deliberation, where
history has been made, where tradition
bespeaks Integrity, freedom, and justice
for all men, help these Representatives
of the people that they may not merely
represent their constituents, Important as
this is in our system of government, but
that they may truly seek the welfare and
security of all and be true to their own
ideals, integrity, and faith In Thee.
Bless each legislator in his unselfish
commitment and grant to each one so
committed the full measure of personal
satisfaction in their individual and pub-
lic life. Amen.
THE JOURNAL
The Journal of the proceedings of
Thursday, May 12, 1966, was read and
approved.
MESSAGE PROM THE SENATE
A message from the Senate by Mr.
Arrington, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate had passed, with amend-
ments in which the concurrence of the
House is requested, a bill of the House
of the following title:
H.R. 14216. An act making appropriations
for the Department of the interior and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1967, and for other purposes.
The message also announced that the
Senate insists upon its amendments to
the bill (H.R. 14215) entitled "An act
making appropriations for the Depart-
ment of the Interior and related agencies
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967,
and for other purposes," requests a con-
ference with the House on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses thereon, and
appoints Mr. HAYDEN, Mr. RUSSELL of
Georgia, Mr. MCCLELLAN, Mr. BIBLE, Mr.
BYRn of West Virginia, Mr. MUNDT, and
Mr. YOUNG of North Dakota to be the
conferees on the part of the Senate.
The message also announced that the
Senate had passed a joint resolution of
the following title, in which the concur-
rence of the House is requested:
S.J. Res. 108. Joint resolution to amend the
joint resolution providing for membership
of the United States in the Pan American
Institute of Geography and History and to
authorize appropriations therefor.
RESIGNATION AS MEMBER OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
The SPEAKER laid before the House
the following communication, which was
read:
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington D.C., May 11, 1966.
Hon. JOHN W. McCoRMACK,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SPEAKER: I have the duty to in-
form you that I have transmitted to the
Honorable George Romney,, Governor of
Michigan, my resignation as a Representa-
tive in the Congress of the United States
from the Ninth District of Michigan, effec-
tive at the close of business, May 10, 1966.
I leave the House of Representatives to
assume the office of U.S; Senator from
Michigan
With kind personal regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT P. GRIFFIN.
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington D.C., May 11, 1966.
Hon. GEORGE ROMNEY,
Governor of Michigan,
Lansing, Mich.
DEAR GOVERNOR ROMNEY! I hereby resign
my office as Representative in the Congress
of the United States from the Ninth Dis-
trict of Michigan, effective at the close of
business, May 10, 1966.
With kind personal regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT P. GRIFFIN.
DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIA-
TION BILL, 1967
Mr. DENTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from, the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 14215)
making appropriations for the Depart-
ment of the Interior and related agencies
for the fiscal, year ending June 30, 1967,
and for other purposes, with Senate
amendments thereto, disagree to the Sen-
ate amendments, and agree to the con-
ference requested by the Senate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Indiana?
The Chair hears none, and appoints
the following conferees: Mr. DENTON, Mr.
KIRWAN, Mrs. HANSEN of Washington,
Mess)r's. I itARSH, MAHON, REIFEL, MCDADE,
KY STATEMENT FRAUGHT WITH
INHERENT DANGERS
(Mr. WOLFF asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WOLFF. Mr. Speaker, last week
I warned of the dangers in the leader-
ship of South Vietnam by Premier Ky.
I was alarmed by statements which cast
doubt about whether free elections in
that country could ever be held while Ky
remains in power.
Yesterday my fears were realized as
Ky took ver Da Nang by force.
Through tactics similar to those em-
ployed by the Vietcong, Ky accomplished
by force that which he was unable to
accomplish by the democratic process.
The people of South Vietnam rely up-
on the United States to guarantee their
freedom from attacks from both within
and without. Premier Ky has abused our
protective assistance and is indeed com-
ing to exemplify that which we are
fighting against in Vietnam-a dictator-
ship of force.
With Ky's seizure of Da Nang, an overt
act of violence, how can we hope for free
elections?
I have supported Ky's government in
the past, not the man nor his intemperate
acts, but a caretaker government which I
hoped would provide some stability dur-
ing the emergency brought about by
Communist aggression. But Ky's action
endangers he faith. of the entire free
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 10032
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE May 16, 1966
world in the rightness of our cause in
Vietnam.
I call upon the ruling junta in Saigon
to remove Premier Ky from power.
The United States is paying an in-
creasingly steep price in the lives of our
young men that the South Vietnamese
people might have a chance to live in
freedom.
It Is intolerable that our Government
continues to support a man who more and
more is coming to represent what we are
fighting against-rule by force In de-
fiance of the will of the people.
THE MINIMUM WAGE BILL
(Mr. MORRIS asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute, to revise and extend his re-
marks, and to include a proposed amend-
ment to the minimum wage bill.)
Mr. MORRIS. Mr. Speaker, tomor-
row and Wednesday the House will be
considering H.R. 13712, the bill to raise
the minimum wage. I support this bill
and Intend to vote in favor of it. I urge
all my colleagues to do the same.
I am concerned, however, not with the
level at which the minimum will be set,
but with the speed with which we pro-
ceed to that level. I think we would do
the cause of full employment and decent
living standards a great disservice if we
move to the $1.60 level too rapidly. I in-
tend, therefore, to offer an amendment
which will bring the $1.60 minimum wage
into effect at a more reasonable time.
For the information of the House, I
Insert In the RECORD at this point the
text of my amendment. I intend to make
a more complete statement later when
the debate actually begins:
AMENDMENT TO H.R. 13712, AS REPORTED
OFFERED BY MR. MORRIS
Page 46, beginning in line 24, strike out
'kluring the first year" and insert in lieu
thereof the following: "during the first three
years".
SOIL, STEWARDSHIP WEK
(Mr. ALBERT asked and was given
permission to address. the House for 1
minute, to revise and extend his remarks,
and to include a letter.)
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, during
the period'of May 15 to 22 local churches
throughout the United Stat are ob-
serving Soil Stewardship Week's
ee This an-
nual observance Is sponsored by the Na-
tional Association of Soil and Water
Conservation Districts and the 3,000 lo-
cal soil and water conservation districts
which blanket the Nation.
The subject of this year's observance
is "Crisis In the Countryside." Ministers
of all faiths are carrying vital messages
to their followers to further God's
purpose.
I salute the thousands of clergy of all
faiths who use this observance to remind
us that soil stewardship is everyone's re-
sponsibility. It is a responsibility of
people who live in the towns and cities
as well as those who work the land.
The President of the Unft d States has
recognized Soil Stewardsh Week with
a special statement issu from the
White House, President Jo nson stated:
It is our responsibility to make certain
that our stewardship of the soil ensures prog-
ress and prosperity for the generations of
the future.
Under unanimous consent, I insert into
the RECORD the full text of President
Johnson's statement:
THE WHITE HOUSE,
Washington, May 2, 1966.
It is appropriate that we set aside a Solt
Stewardship Week each year to rededicate
our commitment to the preservation of our
precious natural heritage.
This observance reminds all responsible
Americans of our duty to protect our threat-
ened land and water resources, to restore
those which have been ill-used, and to de-
velop their rich potential for the benefit of
all of our people.
Much of the future of the country lies in
the wise and proper use of its rural lands.
It is our responsibility to make certain that
our stewardship of the soil ensures progress
and prosperity for the generations of the
future.
TIME FOR LESS EMOTIONAL LOOK
AT AUTO SAFETY
(Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute to revise and extend his re-
marks and to include extraneous re-
marks.)
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker,
the stock market closed last week in a
tailspin and amid reports of a decline in
automobile sales and production widely
attributed to the impact upon the public
of the congressional investigation of car
safety.
This disturbing chain of events,
underscoring again the bellwether posi-
tion of the automobile industry in our
economy, while not a cause for panic, is
certainly a cause for concern. At a time
when the economy is experiencing high
employment and prosperity, it is incred-
ible that right here under the Capitol
dome we can talk ourselves into a decline
such as this merely by the sensational
play given a few people who have been
acting like safety had just been discov-
ered.
While I feel very strongly that every
purchaser should have a safe automobile,
I do not believe that even the most vehe-
ment critic intended that concern over
safety should trigger a setback through-
out the entire economy. But whatever
the intentions, it is obviously time that
we start to look at the problem a lot less
emotionally and a lot more realistically.
The problem of safety on our highways
is hardly a new one. - People have been
working on it for years. If anyone
doubts this they should talk with the
automobile workers themselves to see
just how much safety is stressed within
the plants. I know from personal exper-
ience the pride that our craftsmen take
in what they are making.
Certainly cars can have more safety
features, but it is a fact, recognized by
the tests given for operators' licenses,
that it is the driver's attitude that is the
first cause of the overwhelming majority
of acciednts. It matters little what part
of the automobile the driver or his vic-
tim comes into contact with as far as the
real cause of the accident Is concerned.
It is a cruel deception to lead the Ameri-
can people to believe that Congress can
guarantee auto safety simply by legis-
lating.
Before we go about trying to write any
such Federal legislation, especially In an
election year, I believe, we should heed
the suggestion of Governor Romney, of
Michigan, and first take a long hard look
to see what could be realistically achieved
through the existing State and local
agencies which have the experience and
facilities to get closer to this problem.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The SPEAKER. This is Consent Cal-
endar day. The Clerk will call the first
bill on the Consent Calendar.
AUTHORIZING ADMINISTRATOR OF
VETERANS' AFFAIRS TO CON-
TRACT WITH MEDICAL SCHOOLS
The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 197) to
amend chapter 73 of title 38 of the
United States Code to authorize the Chief
Medical Director of the Veterans' Ad-
ministration to enter into contracts with
medical schools and clinics for scarce
technical services.
There being no objection, the Clerk
read the bill, as follows:
H.R. 197
Bt it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That (a)
chapter 73 of title 38, U-nited States Code, is
amended by adding at the end thereof the
following new section:
4116. Contracts for scarce technical eerv-
ices.
"The Chief Medical Director may enter into
contracts with medical schools and clinics to
provide scarce technical services at Veterans'
Administration facilities (including, but not
limited to, services of radiologists, pathol-
ogists, and psychiatrists)."
(b) The analysis of such chapter 73 is
amended by adding at the end thereof the
following:
"4116. Contracts for scarce technical serv-
ices.
With the following committee amend-
ments:
On page 1, line 6, strike out "? 4116." and
insert in lieu thereof "? 4117.".
On page 1, line 7, strike out "Chief Medical
Director" and Insert "Administrator"' and
strike out "technical" and insert "medical
specialist".
On page 1, line 9, strike out "technical"
and insert "medical specialist".
On page 2, after line 4, strike out "4116"
and insert in lieu thereof "4117" and strike
out "technical" and insert "medical special-
ist'..
On page 2, beginning on line 5 insert the
following:
"SEc. 2. That section 610 of title 38, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end
thereof the following new subsection:
"'(c) While any veteran is receiving hos-
pital care in any Veterans' Administration
facility, the Administrator may, within the
limits of Veterans' Administration facilities,
furnish medical services to correct or treat
any nonservice-connected disability of such
veteran, in addition to treatment incident to
the disability for which he is hospitalized, it
the veteran is willing, and the Administrator
determines that the furnishing of such medi-
cal services (1) would be in the interest of
the veteran, (2) would not prolong the lios-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -APPENDIX May 16, 1966
spike fastened to an endless chain. The
charred skins were then removed by
sprinkler washers and brushes, with the
final cleaning done by hand.
Finding the new roaster satisfactory,
the Riegels continued their research on
canning pimientos in a small shed on a
farm near Pomona, Ga., a few miles from
Griffin. During the summer of 1914 they
put up a small pack of pimientos in this
little plant, and the H. V. Kell Wholesale
Grocery Co. of Griffin marketed the
entire pack. '
Frank Patterson, who was associated
with the H. V. Kell Wholesale Grocery
Co. in Griffin, became interested in the
new pimiento cannery after his success
in selling the first canned pimientos. He
offered to provide financing for two addi-
tional roasters and a plant, to be built on
his farm. Plans were made, and Mark
Riegel, Frank and Bob Patterson, and
Frank Cook, Sr., built and equipped the
Pomona Products Co. This plant was an
extremely large food processing facility
according to the standards of that day
and probably the largest in Georgia. It
was located 3 miles west of Pomona and
About 6 miles north of Griffin.
Pimientos were first canned in the new
plant in 1916 and sold under the Sun-
shine brand name. The total crop that
year came from 75 acres, all located in
Spalding County, of which Griffin is the
county seat. Frank Patterson served as
president of the young organization. By
1918 the plant was processing the pi-
miento crop from 100 acres in the area.
It was in 1920 that Pomona Products
Co. began to assume the character and
the personality that have made it an out-
standing member of the American food
industry. In that year Walter L. Graefe
purchased a controlling interest in the
business and became president of the
pioneering company. He served as presi-
dent until 1955, when he became chair-
man of the board and was succeeded in
the presidency by W. Ennis Parker.
Walter L. Graefe was a native of Mary-
land and attended school at Western
Maryland College and Johns Hopkins
University. After serving as first lieu-
tenant in the Army during World
War I, he was discharged on
March 4, 1919, at Camp Gordon
near Atlanta. Liking Georgia, he
looked for a business connection in
that area. One night at a party a promi-
nent Atlanta business man suggested to
Graefe that the young Pomona operation
near Griffin might offer an opportunity.
Mr. Graefe visited the company and was
offered a job which he accepted.
During 1920 he decided that the busi-
ness offered a substantial future, so he
purchased control of the business and
became its president. His first major
action was to move the plant to Griffin
where gas was available to provide fuel
for the huge roasting ovens which
charred the skins so that they could be
removed from the pimientos.
In spite of the problems faced by a new
company processing a new product,
Pomona Products Co. grew and pros-
pered. There were bleak years-when all
the pimientos on contract could not be
processed because of lack of labor and fa-
cilities, but they still had to be paid for.
There were years when the pimiento crop
was too short to produce a profitable
pack. But the bad years were out-
numbered by the good years and pimiento
volume climed steadily. Pomona's suc-
cess led to the entry of other canners into
the Pimiento field and over, the years as
many as eighteen or twenty firms wererin
the business at one time. Growing of
pimientos by farmers, once limited
entirely to Georgia, now extends into
several adjoining States and California.
Pimiento growing added a new crop to
Georgia and southern agriculture. It
provided millions of dollars for farmers
and off-farm workers, but perhaps its
greatest economic contribution was the
growth it sparked for food processing in
Georgia and other Southern States.
Plants built and expanded to process
pimientos found themselves with suffi-
cient facilities to handle many other
products, thus providing further em-
ployment for southern workers and ad-
ditional income for the areas in which
they were located.
During the period of peak production
Pomona employs more than 1,000 work-
ers. About 20 different fruits and vege-
tatbles are processed and canned. All
of these are distributed and sold in the
Southeastern States and some carry the
Sunshine label throughout the United
States and parts of Canada.
The past 50 years have been full years
for Pomona Products Co. A new Amer-
ican-grown food was introduced to the
Nation, the complexities of processing it
and packing it were solved. Its growth
in acceptance and sales over the years
has been consistent. The future is not
ours to foretell, but Pomona will always
seek new products and constantly re-
search methods to improve them-to the
benefit of the American food industry
and America's grocers.
Mr. W. Ennis Parker, of Griffin, Ga.,
is now president of Pomona Products
Co., and is currently serving as president
of the National Canners Association.
Ky in Translation
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. WILLIAM F. RYAN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 1 6, 1966
Mr, RYAN. Mr. Speaker, as is clear
to anyone who reads the daily dispatches
from Saigon, Premier Ky needs a new
press officer. Either he should not say
what he thinks, or he should not think
what he says.
Now Clayton Fritchey, whose creden-
tials as a journalist and principal aid to
Ambassador Stevenson give him con-
siderable insight into such questions, has
suggested that Premier Ky at last has
found an interpreter. His name, says
Fritchey, is Dean Rusk.
Fritchey's witty, pungent column in
the New York Post of Friday, May 13,
follows:
KY IN TRANSLATION
(By Clayton Fritchey)
WASHINGTON. Dr. Johnson certainly owes
much to Boswell, as does John F. Kennedy to
Schlesinger. And where would Omar Khay-
yam and Proust be in the English world with-
out the translations of FitzGerald and Scott-
Moncrieff? Actually, many heroes of the
Anglo-Saxon domain would hardly exist
were it not for their eloquent and often un-
sung interpreters and translators.
But their debt is small indeed compared
to what Premier Ky of South Viet Nam owes
Secretary of State Dean Rusk. Few diplo-
mats in history have been able to make so
much out of so little, or, when necessary,
vice versa.
On the basis of deeds and words, the
world might think Premier Ky was: (1) a
Hitlerite; (2) a militarist; (3) opposed to
peaceful settlement of the Viet Nam war;
(4) determined to stay in office, constitu-
tionally or not; and (5) willing to accept the
results of an election only if his side wins.
Fortunately, with the aid of the State
Dept.'s special earphones and the Secretary's
instant translation and interpretation of all
that Ky says and does, we know that the
Premier at heart (1) hates Nazism; (2) is
civilian minded; (3) is dedicated to peace;
(4) is eager for elections; and (5) will cheer-
fully abide by the results no matter what
his own fate may be.
Houdini himself would be spellbound by
this feat of magic, but, as is often the case
in this perverse world, the beneficiary shows
little evidence of any gratitude. In fact, he
gives the impression of being rather annoyed
at having his forthright, if untactful, state-
ments constantly sterilized by Rusk.
According to dispatches from Saigon,
"Vietnamese in general appeared to be ap-
palled at the bluntness of Ky's remarks, and
insulted by what seemed to them a 'clarifica-
tion' by Secretary Rusk." One Viet Nam
official was quoted as saying, "Why should
the American Secretary of State have to
clarify the remarks of the Vietnamese Prime
Minister?"
It's a good question: why indeed? In
Saigon, no clarification was needed because
the military junta ordered the local press
to censor Ky's statements. But in Wash-
ington, Rusk simply had to clean them up
because they are not acceptable to the
American public.
The Administration is in the painful po-
sition of either liquidating Ky or white-
washing him. After embracing him so en-
thusiastically at the Honolulu meeting in
February, it now shrinks from disowning
him, so the alternative is to try to persuade
the U.S. public that he is misunderstood.
It is a thankless and losing task. Poor
Rusk has been at it almost since Ky took
office last year. The first shock came when
Ky in a famous interview suddenly made
known his admiration for Hitler. When the
State Dept. recovered from its shock, we
learned that Ky really meant he only admired
Hitler's efficiency.
In November came another shock when Ky
contradicted Rusk's repeated statement that
peace negotiations were being blocked sole-
ly by North Viet Nam's intransigence. Ky
said his government would never enter into
negotiations with Hanoi. The official spokes-
man for the State Dept., however, denied any
knowledge of this position, and said there
was no disagreement between Washington
and Saigon over peace talks. Also, within
24 hours the South Viet foreign minister,
Tran Van doe, publicly said the Ky gov-
ernment was flatly opposed either to a cease-
fire or peace negotiations.
And so it has gone. The embarrasing
statements of the last few days are nothing
new. When the pro-election demonstrations
broke out in Da Nang, Ky said they were
Communist inspired, but later retracted this
Approved For Release 2005106/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
May 16, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -APPENDIX
quest of western civilization and the enslave-
ment of free peoples.
This hospital is dedicated, in gratitude, to
those who were maimed and injured in the
cause of freedom, and who suffer from dis-
ease. It is dedicated to the veterans of our
country and it is a manifestation of the deep
gratitude of the American people.
Old Glory
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOE SKUBITZ
OF KANSAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. SKUBITZ. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to bring to the attention of my col-
leagues a resolution passed by the Lyon
County Barracks of the Veterans of
World War I.
It is with some concern that I have
noted the growing disrespect toward the
flag that has been demonstrated by cer-
tain segments of our population. In ad-
dition to disrespect there seems to be
mounting apathy toward the flag and
the traditions which it represents by
many unconcerned citizens.
The Veterans of World War I, the
schools and patriotic groups who are
working hard to teach the proper respect
for the flag deserve our wholehearted
support. On the other hand, those who
manifest their disrespect for our Nation
by desecrating the flag should be pun-
?ished' to the fulest extent of the law. I
support legislation designed to improve
respect for the flag and increase penal-
ties for improper treatment of this sym-
bol of our Nation.
In this connection Barracks No. 1111
of Emporia, Kans., has passed a notable
resolution which I hope will be read by
many of my colleagues. It deserves your
attention and support.
The resolution follows:
RESOLUTION OF VETERANS OF WORLD WAR 1,
LYON COUNTY BARRACKS No. 1111
Whereas there is a growing display of dis-
respect for our Flag, especially on the College
Campus of our Nation, and when the Flag is
carried in Parades, and by dissident groups
and individuals;
Whereas this is both repugnant and dis-
heartening to us as Veterans who have
fought under that Flag;
Whereas the memory of our Buddies who
fell on the field of honor in defense of that
flag has remained undimmed through the
years;
Whereas we believe this disrespect is moti-
vated in many instances by those who seek
to destroy our system of Government.
Whereas we believe that this cannot be al-
lowed to continue without jeopardizing our
National Honor.
One, working with the American Legion, the
VFW, and other patriotic organizations urge
our Government to institute a program of
education in our schools and that Congress
pass appropriate legislation, as ably stated
in H.R. 13492, for punishment of those who
would desecrate "Old Glory."
SETH HUMPHREYS,
Commander.
X LLOYD D. MILLARD,
Adjutant.
The Wrong Answer
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JAMES H. (JIMMY) QUILLEN
OF TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have
supported, from the very beginning, ef-
forts to rescind the Supreme Court's de-
cision so that voluntary prayers can be
permitted in our schools, and I will con-
tinue to do all that I can to see that this
is_ brought about.
Last week an editorial in the Kings-
port Times commented on recent ac-
tions taken by some schools to comply
with the ruling by the Supreme Court,
and I am inserting this article for the
benefit of all:
[From the Kingsport (Tenn.) Times, May 3,
1966]
THE WRONG ANSWER
The public school system of an eastern
city thinks it has the answer to the prayer
in school problem that has resulted from
the decision of the Supreme Court.
The answer is that instead of opening
each day's classes with a reading of verses
from the Bible as was done formerly, the
teacher now reads selections and quota-
tions from the writings of historical per-
sonages and well known names, calculated to
impress the young. These readings are in-
spirational, and as one person put it "may
prove meaningful to the children."
The superintendent of schools of the city,
who it may be assumed found this "an-
swer" is quoted as saying, "When all is said
and done, our opening exercises are con-
cerned with values. We can teach the broth-
erhood of man without actual use of the
Scriptures; and teach integrity without rit-
ual."
If this plan is quite satisfactory to the
people whose children attend public school
in that city-and they are the only ones
concerned-no one can object.
But we wonder how many people in this
country will take the reading of secular
statements as a satisfactory substitute for
Bible reading and prayer?
We have a feeling that many will be quick
to say that teaching the Fatherhood of God
is of more importance than teaching the
brotherhood of man, valuable as the latter
undoubtedly is.
Indeed it seems that the two statements
"the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood
of man are indivisible in the Judaic-
Christian philosophy by which most of the
American people live.
Surely no one will question the value of
readings from great words of the sages.
Such readings are helpful to children.
They do emphasize the real values in life.
Yet how many normal Americans regard this
as the be-all and end-all of spiritual
education?
To think that this is a complete substitute
for prayer and Bible reading is to miss the
heart of the problem. One has to under-
stand that to the average Christian who ad-
heres to a church, the fine ethical statements
in the Bible are good because they are in
the Bible; the Bible is not merely good be-
cause it contains these statements.
To most Christians the Bible is the unique
method of communication between each
individual and God Almighty. This spirit-
ual religious relationship is more important
to understand than teaching moral conduct,
in the view of most Christians.
A2637' -
Therefore, there is a vast difference be-
tween reading the Bible and reading Ralph
Waldo Emerson or Epictetus or any other
philosopher.
We know that many people will agree with
the school superintendent that moral stand-
ards can be taught and the brotherhood of
man can be inculcated without the Scrip-
tures and without ritual; but we must doubt
if many of those who have been loud in
their outcry against the Supreme Court
decision will agree with this idea.
To them that decision meant "taking God
out of the schools" and they would say there
is no substitute for God.
That is why we have to say that this
answer to the problem is not likely to be a
satisfactory answer to many people in this
country.
The 50th Anniversary of Pomona
Products Co.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN J. FLYNT, JR.
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. FLYNT. Mr. Speaker, 1966 marks
the 50th anniversary of the Pomona
Products Co. of Griffin, Ga., famous for
pioneering the cultivation packing and
marketing pimientos in America. Pi-
miento growing and processing is of con-
siderable importance to southern a?gri-
cultilre.
The story of pimientos in Georgia, and
probably in America, begins in 1911,
when a young man, George Riegel, saw
a can of Spanish pimientos on a grocery
shelf in Griffin. He and his brother and
father were commercial vegetable grow-
ers on a farm near Griffin and together
they had worked on improving the quality
of vegetable crops, particularly peppers.
Through the American consul in Spain
the Riegels secured 6 ounces of pimiento
seed and in 1912 grew enough plants to
set out 11/2 acres of pimiento plants on
the Riegel farm. From this planting a
single plant was selected which bore fruit
so perfect in shape, size, and color that
it was given the name "Perfection."
Subsequent plantings were made from
the seeds of this plant.
Attempts to sell pimientos on the fresh
market met with no success because of
the extreme toughtness of the pimiento
skins. George Riegel recalled that his
interest in pimientos had stemmed from
the canned Spanish product, so he de-
cided to attempt canning himself. Skins
were removed by immersing the pimien-
tos in a lye solution. After cleaning they
were canned with salt and vinegar.
The use of lye proved so tedious that
the help of the Spanish consul was again
sought, and he reported that the skins in
Spain were removed by roasting the
pimientos for several minutes in a hot
oven and wiping off the charred skins
with clean cloths.
The roasting operation proved far
more satisfactory, and by 1913 Mark
Riegel perfected a mechanical roaster.
It consisted of a coke-burning tunnel of
fire brick, through which the cored pi-
mientos passed, each placed over a steel
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
k ay 16, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
charge, which the U.S. embassy could not
support. Then he said he was going to exe-
cute the mayor of Da Nang, but he had to
back down on this, too.
Since then, the U.S. has pledged itself to
abide by the proposed elections no matter
what the outcome, but Ky upset the apple
cart by frankly speaking his own mind. If
the elections result in a neutralist or Com-
munist government, he says, "I and my
friends will flight it."
Moreover, he made it equally plain that
he intended to prolong the electoral process
as long as possible. "I expect," he blunt-
ly told the press, "to stay in power for at
least another year."
That is what brought Rusk so swiftly to
the microphones to explain that Ky was
once more being misunderstood. But in
Saigon, Ky was not being very helpful; as
of this writing, he had not yet joined Rusk
in the Orwellian job of purifying his own
remarks.
The fact is that ~Cy, personally a gay and
likely air force officer, is more candid than
his U.S. sponsors. He apparently has no
taste for dissemblind, and simply blurts.out
what is on his mind. This is a terrible
falling in a puppet, but where is the U.S. to
get a better one?
Cheers for U.S.S. "George Washington
Carver"
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JAMES G. FULTON
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 3, 1966
Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania. Mr.
Speaker, under leave to extend my re-
marks in the RECORD, I include the fol-
lowing letter:
U.S.S. GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER
(SSBN-656) ,
At Sea, North Atlantic, May 8, 1966.
Hon, JAMES G. FULTON,
U.S. House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. FULTON: We have just success-
fully completed the first sea trials of our
37th Polaris nuclear submarine. The U.S.S.
George Washington Carver was built by the
Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock
Company, Newport News, Virginia. We also
have in operation 22 attack type nuclear sub-
marines, making a total of 59.
This ship is named for George W. Carver, a
botanist and chemurgist renowned in the an-
nals of American scientific agriculture. The
child of slaves, he did not know the day of
his birth. Even the year is not certain, but
he thought it was 1860. Where he was born,
however, is not in doubt. In 1943, shortly
after he died at Tuskegee Institute, Alabama,
both houses of Congress passed, without a
dissenting vote, a bill authorizing erection of
a national monument at his birthplace in
Diamond Grove, Missouri. In fourscore
years, George W. Carver had come a long way
and accomplished a great deal.
'None of it had come easy. His start in life
was most inauspicious. A sickly infant, or-
phaned before he was a year old, it seemed
unlikely he would survive. He lost his father
in an accident and was soon after kidnaped,
together with his mother and sister, by ma-
rauding nightriders. Those were lawless
times, Stealing slaves for sale to plantations
in the' Deep South was not uncommon. But
George Carver was such a puny baby that
the kidnapers had no use for him, and so
his master was able to get him released in
return for a race horse valued at $300. Of
mother and sister nothing was ever heard.
Hard as it was to be a slave child with-
out kith or kin, by great good fortune his
master Moses Carver (from whom he took
his surname) was not a typical planter but
a plain farmer, one of the so-called "Black
Republican abolitionist Germans," or "lop-
eared Dutch," as they were contemptuously
called, who had migrated to Missouri in the
1830's. He was opposed to slavery, but he
and his wife were childless and middle-aged;
they needed help and servants were not to
be had. So Moses bought a slave girl from
a neighbor for $700. After she had been
abducted, he took it upon himself to raise
her small son. Slavery ended when the boy
was four years old but he remained with the
Carvers and was treated much as any other
farm boy. There was a lot of work to be done
and George was expected to do his share. He
was an especially apt pupil in all the do-
mestic chores around the house and showed
early that he had a way with growing things.
People called him "plant doctor" for he could
cure any ailing plant; he seemed to know
instinctivey what it needed in order to grow.
The boy was born with a keen mind,
fantastically clever hands and so great a
thirst for knowledge that no obstacle could
bar him from obtaining an education. Of
rebuffs he suffered many, but he was also
often given a helping hand. The free school
nearby was barred to him, whereupon Mrs.
Carver gave him an old blue-back Speller and
with her help he taught himself to read and
write. Thereafter he was hardly ever with-
out a book in his hand. He would prop it up
while he washed and ironed, these being
some of the chores that earned him a living
while he gradually accumulated school
credits. -
At 10 he decided he must find a school
and so he left the Carvers, all his possessions
in a small bundle over his shoulder. Thus
began an Odyssey that was to take him in
short stages northward geographically and
upward educationally.. At several critical
times during his 30-year quest for an edu-
cation, luck or his pleasing personality, or
perhaps a combination of both, brought him
into contact with warmhearted childless
couples-who gave him the concern and care
usually found only in one's own family.
With a few he stayed but he was never a
burden. He earned his keep for he was a
prodigious worker, determined never to ac-
cept charity.
George Carver literally inched himself up
the educational ladder, working his way not
just through college but through grade and
high school as well, working all the time to
support himself. He was 20 before he got to
high school, 25 when he graduated. High-
land University accepted his credentials but
when he presented himself, he was told ne-
groes were not admitted. He was 30 when he
finally entered Simpson College in Iowa. A
year later, he entered Iowa State University,
graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree
in 1894. Invited to become a member of the
staff in charge of systematic botany, the bac-
teriological laboratories and the greenhouse,
he continued his studies and received a
Master of Science degree in 1896. That year,
he was invited by Booker T. Washington to
organize and direct a new agriculture depart-
ment at Tuskegee Institute in Alabama.
There he remained the rest of his life.
From earliest childhood, Carver had the
habit of rising at four and walking about the
countryside for an hour or two. Soil, plants
and trees interested him intensely; he
wanted to know how they were put together,
what made them fruitful. Nature was both
a consolation and a challenge. In Tuske-
gee, he found the land exhausted from one-
crop cotton culture, robbed of its mineral
content, eroded from lack of plant cover,
treeless and sun parched. The campus was
A2639
bare earth, dusty in dry weather, a sea of
mud when it rained. He went about look-
ing for ways to restore the overworked earth
and found it in green manure and the grow-
ing of nitrogen-producing legumes-pod
bearers such as vetch, peas, clover, peanuts-
plants which enriched the soil. Crop rota-
tion which European peasants had practiced
for a thousand years had to be relearned by
Southern tenant farmers who knew no other
crop but cotton. Carver went among them
preaching diversification. He urged them to
grow peanuts and sweet potatoes; those who
heeded his advice rode out the disastrous in-
vasion of the boll weevil.
On the experimental farm he developed at
Tuskegee, he evolved a cross between the
short-stalk and tall-stalk cotton known as
"Carver Hybrid," besides three other new
strains. With green manuring, he grew
enormous potatoes, cabbages, onions, water-
melons and cantaloupes. He instituted a
visiting day each month for neighboring
farmers to show what could be grown with
scientific methods. They were most im-
pressed with his new cotton strain which car-
ried 275 huge bolls on a single bush, and
yielded nearly a bale and a quarter per acre,
in contrast to the usual one third of a bale
most tenant farmers produced.
To bring the message of scientific agricul-
ture to those who could not come to Tus-
kegee, Carver loaded a wagon with tools,
boxes, jars and packages of seed and set
out every Friday evening after class to give
demonstrations to meetings of farmers. In
1906, with money donated by Morris K.
Jesup, a member of the Slater Foundation,
he designed the so-called Jesup Wagon which
served as -a movable farmers school and was
adopted in other countries.
Carver's skill as soil scientist and plant
breeder was to him but a means to help raise
the standards of the Southern farmer, not
just in productivity, but in his whole way of
life. It was obvious to Carver that the prev-
alent diet of pork, meal and molasses lacked
the vitamins and minerals necessary for good
health and stamina. So he urged the farm-
ers to grow more vegetables and fruits,
showed them that many common weeds,
properly cooked, were edible and nutritious,
taught their women how to prepare them.
His own boyhood had been spent on a multi-
purpose farm where everything the family
needed was grown and processed, only sugar
and coffee being bought. He called this "liv-
ing at home" and preached it throughout the
land. By avoiding store purchases, a little
could be saved each week and eventually a
piece of land bought. This, he said, was the
way out of poverty. Tenant farmers lived
in drab cabins. Noticing the beautifully
colored clay in which Alabama abounded,
Carver developed a simple method for mak-
ing color wash and demonstrated how
much even the shabbiest cottage could be
improved by a paint that cost not a penny.
Carver is best known as a pioneer "chem-
urgist"-a word, coined by Dr. William J.
Hale in 1934, which means chemistry at work.
In his book "Pioneers of Plenty," Christy
Borth called Carver "the first and greatest
chemurgist." Carver made paper from
Southern pine "at least a quarter of a cen-
tury before Dr. Charles H. Herty tackled the
problem," and synthetic marble from wood
shavings "years before a rocklike plastic made
from wood waste became a chemurgic prom-
ise." He saw promise in the peanut when
it was still a lowly weed growing along fences
and tolerated by farmers only because their
children liked its taste. From the peanut
and the sweet potato, Carver developed more
than a hundred different products, includ-
ing plastics, lubricants, dyes, medicines, ink,
wood stains, face creams, tapioca and mo-
lasses. He developed these in his laboratory
at Tuskegee which he had put together out
of odds and ends salvaged from scrap heaps.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
 A2640
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -APPENDIX May 16, 196
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0
When he first arrived to take up his post,
he discovered there was no money to equip
a laboratory. In the course of his life, neces-
sity had made him a genius at making do
out of nothing. He and his students made
the rounds of the rubbish heaps on campus
and in town. They collected bottles, cut
their necks off evenly and turned them into
beakers. A thick, chipped teacup became a
mortar, a piece of pipe the pestle. An old
ink bottle with a wick made of string
stuck through a cork became a became a
Bunsen burner. Pieces of tin were punched
and became sifters. Reeds served as tubes
to transfer liquids. Carver had brought
with him the one indispensable and costly
thing not to be found on scrap heaps: a
microscope. It was a parting gift from
colleagues at Iowa State.
The products of his laboratory made his
name known and brought him tempting
offers of positions in industry, and checks
for advice that had been sought from him.
He politely declined the positions and re-
turned the checks. He had no interest
whatsoever in money and could not be
bothered with the problem of marketing
his inventions. His head was too full of
ideas for new products. Advice, he thought,
should always be free. He hoped it would re-
fleet favorably on people's attitude toward
his race, if he helped others with their prob-
lems. His own needs were minimal. In-
deed, out of a salary of $1,500 a year at
Tuskegee, he saved $33,000 which he donated
to the Carver Foundation for creative re-
search in chemistry.
Many people from all over the world
sought out this shy and retiring man, want-
ing to talk to him and to observe his work.
Edison, Henry Ford, Theodore Roosevelt, and
other important men became his friends.
Honors and honorary degrees came his way.
One was the Roosevelt Medal for distin-
guished service in the field of science (1939).
He was introduced to the dinner guests in
Theodore Roosevelt's New York home with
these words which are a summing up: "I
have the honor to present not a man Only,
but a life, transfused with passion for the
enlarging and enriching of the living of his
'
fellowman.
Respectfully,
The two reactions are directly related.
They sum up the fundamental problem in
Vietnam-and wherever else we may face
this type of aggression: Are we going to be
able to out-bleed and out-wait the Commu-
nists?
It is already obvious that many Americans
are not willing to go the length. Indications
are that the Communists will. Militarily,
we can hold off the Communists indefinitely
in Vietnam. But the Communists are openly
banking on the conviction that we will lose
the war right here in the United States.
UNITED STATES HAS ROLE OF ROME
This is a war we have to fight. It is not,
however, a war we have to win. This is no
contradiction. Our war in Vietnam is the
type of war waged successfully, by the legions
of Rome for some four centuries-the Pax
Romana during which the legionnaires
manned the ramparts of civilization against
the constant encroachments of the Bar-
barians.
Rome decayed, her will weakened, the Bar-
barians overran the ramparts and a thousand
years of darkness descended. Today, we are
faced with the same prospect.
For 20 years we have been trying to man
the walls against the new barbarians. Until
now, we have been protecting civilisation at
remarkably little cost in human life. Now,
as in Korea, we must pay for our values in
blood. And loss of this war could be infi-
nitely more disastrous than would have been
defeat in Korea.
In Vietnam, there is no final victory re-
motely in sight. There rarely is in guerrilla
warfare. Once a guerrilla movement has
eaten to the core of a country it seems almost
impossible to eradicate. In our own hemi-
sphere, guerrilla warfare has ravaged the
Colombian backlands since 1948, taking some
300,000 lives. Algeria, Malaya, the Philip-
pines, and Vietnam itself are examples of
guerrilla insurrections which dragged on year
after bloody year.
ONE GUERRILLA VERSUS 10 GIs
Nor is our technological supremacy likely
to bring the present struggle to a quick con-
clusion. Manpower as well as machines is
vital in guerrilla warfare. Statistics of a
score of such wars show that a ratio of 10
regulars to one guerrilla is needed to smother
a. guerrilla movement.
North Viet Nam's military strategists say
the proportion could have been halved to five
regulars to one guerrilla and they would still
win. They point out that both sides place
Communist strength in South Viet Nam at
about 200,000 men-meaning that at least a
million regulars would be needed to cope
with them effectively.
Here is the great weakness of our pres-
ent effort. Such a vast army means sending
hundreds of thousands of citizen soldiers,
the draftees and Reservists. And it is pre-
cisely the citizen soldier who is least suitable
for anti-guerrilla war. Military professionals
are needed-highly trained specialists like
the Marines, Special Forces, the paratroops.
There is even a more fundamental weak-
ness to fielding a mass army. For the pro-
fessional soldier, death is an occupational
hazard, but combat is not the chosen occupa-
tion of the citizen soldier. Anti-war pres-
sures will inevitably mount with the soaring
casualty lists of citizen soldiers until the wail
of "what price victory?" becomes deafening.
FUMBLING IN POLICY
Is there a solution to the dilemma? Per-
haps not. However, the White House and
Pentagon should realize that the real struggle
for South Viet Nam is being fought right
here in the United States. Public opinion in
a democracy is as vitally important as any
strategic military consideration. Unfortu-
nately, the present heavy-handed policy of
managed news, manipulated casualty lists
and official optimism simply isn't. effective
in an otherwise open society.
The government should emphasize and
re-emphasize that this is going to be a long
war. There should be no sudden elation over
victories, no clumsy efforts to conceal d.e-
`feats. Instead government spokesmen
should settle down to a calm and even stolid
systematic dissemination of the facts.
We should resist the temptation to pour
a million men into Viet Nam and seek a
quick, decisive solution-which has always
been an American characteristic as well as a
military tradition. Instead, our manpower
commitment there should be held to a bare
minimum, mainly professionals. Let them
dig in, set up a military meat-grinder to chew
up guerrillas for as long as necessary.
This may not bring peace to Viet Nam in
our time. But perhaps our children will
see it. At least, that should be our attitude.
The Blind Man and the Elephant
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. GEORGE P. MILLER
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 5, 1966
Mr. MILLER. Mr. Speaker, during
my 22 years in the U.S. Congress, I have
had the honor and privilege of serving a
portion of that time with the Merchant
Marine and Fisheries Committee. This
term of service gave me a great appre-
ciation for our Nation's merchant
marine, its abilities and its potential.
At the present time, the endeavors of
our merchant marine to compete with
the other nations of the world in their
respective maritime efforts is a subject of
current discussion. An article entitled
"The Blind Men and the Elephant" ap-
pears in the May issue of Pilot, the ofi5-
cial organ of the National Maritime
Union of America, AFL-CIO. This arti-
cle gives some cogent reasons why we are
slipping in our efforts to compete in this
international undertaking to provide the
free world with proper maritime service.
I am pleased to insert this article in
the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD as an exposi-
tion of what is facing our Nation in
meeting the challenges of the future.
THE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT
"It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined
Who went to see the elephant
(Though all of them were blind)
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind."
That old Hindu tale by John Godfrey Saxe
about the blind men and the elephant has a
very modern application. It epitomizes the
effort of six government agencies to "under-
stand" the American merchant marine, an
effort which resulted in the notorious Inter-
agency Task Force Report.
The Task Force group had representatives
of nine agencies but three of them can be
excluded from this fable: the Council of Eco-
nomic Advisors is not an administrative
agency, but purely advisory; the Federal
Maritime Commission is solely regulatory;
and the Department of Labor made clear it
was not a party to the report which the Task
Force produced.
11
uld Face Facts About
United States Sho
War in Vietnam
HON. BOB WILSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. BOB WILSON. Mr. Speaker, un-
der leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I insert the following column by
Robert Jones:
[From the Indianapolis (Ind.) Star, Dec. 18,
1965]
UNITED STATES SHOULD FACE FACTS ABOUT WAR
IN VIETNAM
(By Robert Jones)
NEW YoRx.-"What price victory?" was the
editorial lament of The New York Times re-
garding the recent bloody clashes in South
Vietnam. In Hanoi, at the same time, a
North Vietnamese staff officer confidently
predicted eventual American withdrawal.
"I may not live to see the end myself,"
he told a British newsman, "but I expect my
children will."
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070010-0