REPRESENTATIVE ICHORD SPEAKS ON ANTIWAR DEMONSTRATIONS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 15
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 21, 2005
• Sequence Number: 6
• Publication Date: August 24, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

August 24, 19 pproved For el ~et?ppa~l/?9,i]GLL~-PB 67flaVIPR000400100006-1
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I desire
to associate myself with the remarks of
my colleague. I have found no disin-
clination on the part of the Governor of
Oklahoma to go into any county which
he desires to go into, despite the fact
that he is a lameduck, and that this is
an election year.
Mr. EDMONDSON. I thank the gen-
tleman, I agree wholeheartedly with
him.
(Mr. HAYS asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr, HAYS. Mr. Speaker, I read an
article in the Washington Post this
morning relative to the rock-throwing
riot that occurred in Northeast Washing-
ton on Monday night. Capt. Vernon Cul-
pepper, of the Washington Police De-
partment, was quoted as saying:
The biggest contributing fad-tor was the
heat (85 degrees), the humidity (87 per-
cent), and the fact that the youths live in
hot, crowded public housing where some-
times you have as many roaches as people,
in some of those places.
I should just like to point out that
when this public housing was built it did
not come equipped with roaches.
We cannot do anything about theheat
and the humidity, but the people who live
in this housing, which was new when
they,moved into it, can do something
about the sanitary conditions.
Probably what this city needs, instead
of a lot of people apologizing for riots, is
an administrator of public housing such
as we have in my district, who inspects
it periodically. If the people do not keep
- it in proper shape, they find somewhere
else to live.
I do not know what the people who go
around apologizing want us to do next.
I suppose they would like to get Congress
to get a detail to go out and clean up for
thhpm. I for one am not going to
u EPRESENTATIVE ICHORD SPEAKS
ON ANTIWAR DEMONSTRATIONS
Mr. ICHORD. Mr. Speaker, the Mem-
bers received in their mail printed ma-
terial from SANE in which my name,
and alleged statements that I made,
have received prominent attention. The
material states:
In a radio interview broadcast by the
American, Broadcasting Company on August
12 one of the committee's more 'liberal'
members, Representative RICHARD ICHCRD of
Missouri, linked the hearings to antiwar
"demonstrations" and made the unprovable
assertion that such demonstrations lepgth-
ened the war.
I do not have a tape of that interview,
Mr. Speaker, but since I was not quoted
directly by SANE, I am certain that no
statement I made was in error.
Let me make it clear, Mr. Speaker,
that the hearings just, completed by the
committee were not aimed at legitimate
dissent. I may not agree with any par-
ticular demonstration but as long as it
is a lawful exercise of freedom of assem-
bly protected by the first amendment I
will defend it as a legal right. However,
the act of raising money, blood, and sup-
plies for the Vietcong now killing the
flower of our youth in Vietnam is not
legitimate dissent.
The bill as reported by the full com-
mittee today contains no provision that
has even the most remote connection to
any right guaranteed a person under the
first amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, such as freedom of
speech, freedom of thought, and so forth.
I introduced in the committee amend-
ments to remove any language that could
possibly be criticized as violating the
first amendment guarantees and these
amendments were accepted by unani-
mous vote.
It has been the position of the Depart-
ment of Justice that the present Depart-
ment regulations and statutory legisla-
tion are sufficient to contxol and prohibit
aid by certain American citizens to the
Vietcong and the North Vietnamese.
But standing out like a "sore thumb" in
the Department's argument is the fact
that certain "hard core" Communist
groups have sent money to a Czechoslo-
vakian bank on two occasions to aid the
Vietcong and there have been no prose-
cutions-and a decision has been made
not to prosecute. The record of the
hearings will show that under question-
ning, by me during the hearing, the De-
partment has specifically admitted that
under the present law any individual or
group of individuals can repeatedly so-
licit and collect funds and blood for the
use of the Vietcong, the North Vietna-
mese, or any American enemy and there
is no violation of law until there is an
actual transmission. The present law
is absolutely ineffectual as an examina-
tion of the statutes and the record of the
Department clearly reveals. Under the
present law there is no effective way of
prohibiting transmission once the money
has been raised. H.R. 12047 will effec-
tively stop such activity in the very
beginnng by prescribing criminal penal-
ties for the process of soliciting and col-
lecting. I urge and I think I can safely
predict the overwhelming passage of this
legislation when it reaches the floor.
RURAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BILL SHOULD NOW BE BURIED
(Mr. DAGUE asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute and to" revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. DAGUE. Mr. Speaker, yesterday
the House held preliminary funeral serv-
ices for S. 2934, the rural community de-
velopment district bill.
Although not being privy to the rea-
sons why the bill was suddenly removed
from consideration by the House yester-
day, I strongly suspect the main reason
was simply that there are not enough
votes in the Homo pass it.
Strong bipartisan opposition has been
in evidence since this bill was reported
by the Committee on Agriculture on June
25 by a slim four-vote margin. The bill
did not clear the Rules Committee until
July 25 and then reportedly by a one-
vote margin. It, was then scheduled for
floor action 1 t week and then postponed
until yestery, when it was postponed
19501
again for what the gentleman from
North Carolina [Mr. COOLEY] described
as "good and sufficient reasons."
Yesterday the Committee on Appro-
priations also filed its conference report
on H.R. 14596, the fiscal year 1967 Agri-
culture Department appropriation bill.
In its report on this bill-House Report
No. 1867-the conferees agreed to pro-
vide $637,000 for the Rural Community
Development Service instead of the $2.5
million proposed by the Senate and the
$3.4 million proposed by the administra-
tion. The conference report goes on to
state:
Expansion of this agency has not been ap-
proved by Congress.
Certainly these two actions yester-
day-the House postponement of S. 2934
and the Appropriations Committee con-
ference report-should be a clear mes-
sage to the administration that the
House does not and will not approve of
the duplicating, overlapping, unneces-
sary, inflationary, bureaucracy-building
rural community development legislation
incorporated in S. 2934.
I take this occasion then to sincerely
urge the leadership of the House to let
S. 2934 rest in peace until next year.
IS THIS THE COUP DE GRACE?
(Mr. MONAGAN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Speaker, I
should like to give the House notice of
the hearings which the Special Subcom-
mittee on Donable Property of the House
Committee on Government Operations
is presently conducting.
With these hearings, our subcommit-
tee is trying to evaluate the accomplish-
ments and effectiveness of the donable
surplus property program of our Gov-
ernment. Under this vast program,
Federal personal property which the
Government no longer needs may be
donated to qualified educational, public
health, and civil defense agencies and
organizations.
The magnitude of this program is re-
flected in the fact that in fiscal year 1966
more than $429 million in acquisition
costs of property was approved for do-
nation to the various eligible donees. It
is safe to say that very few educational
and public health institutions of signi-
ficance in the country do not benefit
from this program, and it is certain that
many vocational and training facilities
would be unable to conduct their present
programs without the assistance of this
donated property.
For this reason, and also because the
Congress has frequently asserted its de-
sire to keep this program vigorous and
viable, the subcommittee has been great-
ly disturbed to learn of a recently de-
clared policy change by the Department
of Defense which generates approxi-
mately 90 percent of the donable prop-
erty. This change bids fair to gravely
restrict, if not strangle, the donable
property program. The policy being
changed concerns the use of the so-
called exchange/sale authority of the
Federal Property Act. Under this
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 19502
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE August 24, 1966
By unanimous consent, further pro-
ceedings under the call was dispensed
with.
change, which by the way, the General
Services Administration's new Govern-
mentwide regulations on exchange/sale
authority did not require the Defense
Department to make, the Department
will no longer make the bulk of its prop-
erty available for donation prior to pro-
cessing it for exchange/sale. There is
much evidence that under the new DOD
procedure, many common-use items
which have been the backbone of the
donable program will be sold or ex-
changed rather than donated to public
institutions.
Testimony already received at the
hearings of the Special Subcommittee
demonstrates that many types of prop-
erty which will now be sold or exchanged
by the Department of Defense but which
are needed by donee institutions, may
bring less than a 10- or 1.5-percent return
to the Government. When it is realized
that in fiscal year 1965 expenses of sale
of military surplus property amounted
to 72.5 percent of the gross amount re-
covered, the desirability of this pro-
cedure must be seriously questioned.
It is true that hearings on the dona-
tion program have not been concluded
and that information developed to date
must continue to be evaluated. But it
did seem to be desirable that the impor-
tance of these questions to institutions
located in the districts of every Member
of Congress, did warrant some notice to
my colleagues in the House.
I hope that Members will reflect on
these remarks and follow these hearings
so that they can give the subcommittee
the benefit of any suggestions, or advice,
that they may have.
CALL OF THE HOUSE
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I make the
point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is
not present.
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a
call of the House.
A call of the House was ordered.,
The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names:
[Roll No. 2371
Adams
Hagan, Ga.
Purcell
Ashley
Halleck
Reid, N.Y.
Baring
Hansen, Iowa
Resnick
Blatnik
Hansen, Wash.
Rivers, Alaska
Brock
Hathaway
Rooney, N.Y.
Cahill
Helstoski
Roudebush
Callaway
Horton
St. Onge
Celler
Irwin
Scheuer
Cohelan
Kartli
Schisler
Conable
King, N.Y.
Schmidhauser
Conte
Landrum
Scptt
Conyers
Long, Md.
Senner
Craley
Love
Sickles
Davis, Ga.
McCarthy
Stratton
Denton
McEwen
Sweeney
Diggs
McMillan
Thomas
Duncan, Oreg.
Martin, Ala.
Toll
Evins, Tenn.
Martin, Maas.
Tuten
Flynt
May
Ullman
Ford,
Morrison
Walker, Was.
William D.
Murray
White, Idaho
Fulton, Tenn.
O'Brien
Willis
Giaimo
Pepper
Wolff
Greigg
Pike
Zablocki
Grider
Poage
Griffiths
Powell
The SPEAKER, On this rollcall 357
Members have answered to their names,
a quorum.
AUTHORITY T) FILE CONFERENCE
REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DE-
FENSE APPROPRIATION BILL, 1967
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the managers on
the part of the House may have until
midnight tonight to file a conference re-
port on H.R. 15941, the Department of
Defense appropriation bill for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1967.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. KEPT, No. 1885)
The committee of conference on the dis-
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the
amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R.
15941) "making appropriations for the De-
partment of Defense for the fiscal year end-
ing June 30, 1967, and for other purposes,"
having met, after full and free conference,
have agreed to recommend and do recom-
mend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the Senate recede from its amend-
ments. numbered 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26,
and 31.
That the House recede from its disagree-
ment to the amendments of the Senate num-
bered 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, 20, 22, 23, 28,
30, 32, and 33; and agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 9: That the House
recede, from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the Senate numbered 9, and agree to
the stone with an amendment, as follows:
In lieu of the sum proposed by said amend-
ment insert "$4,943,100,000"; and the Sen-
ate agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 17: That the House
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the Senate numbered 17, and agree
to the same with an amendment, as follows:
In lieu of the sum proposed by said amend-
ment insert "$4,017,300,000"; and the Senate
agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 21: That the House
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the Senate numbered 21, and agree
to the same with an amendment, as follows:
In lieu of the sum proposed by said amend-
ment insert "$24,000,000"; and the Senate
agree to the same.
The committee of conference report in dis-
agreement amendments numbered 5, 10, 11,
13,24, 27 and 29.
GEORGE MAHoIf,
ROBERT L. F. SIKEs,
JAMIE L. WRITTEN,
GEORGE W. ANDREws,
DANIEL J. FLOOD,
GLENARn P. LssseoMD (except
amendments 1, 2, 3, and 1),
MaLvIN R. LAIRD (except
amendments 1, 2, 3, and 4),
WILLIAM E. MINSHALL,
FRANK T. Bow (except
amendments 1, 2, 3, and 4),
Managers on the Part of the House.
RICHARD B. RUSSELL,
LISTER HILL,
ALLEN J, ELLENDER,
JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,
JOHN STENNIS,
STt}ART SYMINGTON,
LEVERETT SALTONSTALL,
MILTON R. YOUNG,
MARGARET CHASE SMITH,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House at
the conference on the disagreeing votes of
the two Souses on the amendments of the
Senate to the bill (H.R. 15841) making ap-
propriations for the Department of Defense
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, and
for other purposes, submit the following
statement in explanation of the effect of the
action agreed upon and recommended in the
accompanying conference report as to each
of such amendments, namely:
TITLE I-MILITARY PERSONNEL
Military personnel, Army
Amendment No. 1: Appropriates $6,164,-
400,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of
$6,429,400,000 as proposed by the House.
Military personnel, Navy
Amendment No. 2: Appropriates $3,652,-
100,000 as proposed by the Senate instead. of
$3,736,100,000 as proposed by the House.
Military personnel, Marine Corps
Amendment No. 3: Appropriates $1,183,-
200,000 as proposed by the Senate instead, of
$1,214,200,000 as proposed by the House.
Military personnel, Air Force
Amendment No. 4: Appropriates $5,015,-
800,000 as proposed by the Senate instead, of
$5,204,800,000 as proposed by the House.
Reserve personnel, Army
Amendment No. 5: Reported in technical
disagreement. It is the intention of the
managers on the part of the House to offer a
motion to recede and concur with an amend-
ment. The amendment of the Senate with
this further amendment will read: ": Pro-
vided further, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, until June 30, 1968,
the President may order any member in the
Ready Reserve of an armed force, who has
not served on active duty other than for
training, to active duty for not more than
twenty-four consecutive months less the
number of months such member has previ-
ously served on active duty for training:
Provided further, That in order to achieve
fair treatment as between members in the
Ready Reserve who are being considered for
active duty under this section consideration
shall be given to-
"(a) family responsibilities; and
"(b) employment necessary to maintain
the national health, safety, or interest:
Provided further, That in selecting individ-
uals to be called to active duty under this
authority consideration shall be given to the
preservation of the identity and maintenance
of individual units of the Reserve Com.po-
Iienta."
Reserve personnel, Navy
Amendment No. 6: Appropriates $112,600,-
000 as proposed by the Senate instead of
$111,900,000 as proposed by the House.
TITLE II-OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Operation and maintenance, Army
Amendment No. 7: Appropriates $5,122,-
427,000 as proposed by the Senate instead. of
$5,132,200,000 as proposed by the House.
Operation and maintenance, Navy
Amendment No. 8: Appropriates $3,980,-
300,000 as proposed by the Senate instead. of
$3,982,900,000 as proposed by the House.
Operation and maintenance, Air Force
Amendment No. 9: Appropriates $4,943,-
100,000 instead of $4,948,600,000 as proposed
by the Hotlse and $4,937,100,000 as proposed
by the Senate. It is the intent of the con-
ferees that the $6,000,000 addition to the
amount proposed by the Senate be used to
keep the total current active number of B-52
aircraft in operation through June 30, 1967,
as proposed by the House.
Operation and maintenance, Defense
agencies
Amendment No. 10: Reported in technical
disagreement. It is the intention of the
managers on the part of the House to offer a
motion to recede and concur with an
amendment to appropriate $806,500,000 in-
stead of $808,100,000 as proposed by the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 ,1pproved F / DP 6R000400100006-1
August 2 , 1966 d rft (RJ VE T ~ 19557.
an antidumping agreement. This latter pa-
per is intended to facilitate consideration by
the participating countries of the possibility
of negotiating such an agreement. It has
been expressly agreed by all that this paper
would in no sense represent a draft agree-
ment. It should be noted that, under GATT
procedures, none of these papers is available
for public circulation.
Third, we believe that the terms of the
notice of the TIC hearing do provide an
adequate frame of reference for meaningful
contributions by interested persons. Para-
graphs (1)-(v) of section 2 of the TIC no-
tice (31 F.R. 9619-July 15, 1966) identify
all of the basic areas which have been dealt
with to date in the discussions in Geneva.
In addition, these paragraphs set out some of
the major subsidiary questions which must
be dealt with in considering a possible anti-
dumping agreement and which may lead to
a modification of existing antidumping
standards or procedures. Moreover, section 8
of the TIC notice expressly provides that
additional information regarding the cover-
age of the hearing may be requested from
the TIC. Finally, the staff of this Office
is available to meet at any time with inter-
ested persons to discuss the issues which will
be the subject of any possible negotiation of
an antidumping agreement.
CEMENT INDUSTRY COMMITTEE ON TARIFF AND
ANTIDUMPING, 1966
Allentown Portland Cement Co.
Alpha Portland Cement Co.
American Cement Corp.
Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.
Atlantic Cement Co., Inc.
California Portland Cement Co.
Columbia Cement Corp.
Coplay Cement Manufacturing Co.
Diamond Alkali Co.
The Flintkote Co.
General Portland Cement Co.
Giant Portland Cement Co.
Gulf Coast Portland Cement Co.
Huron Portland Cement Co.
Ideal Cement Co.
Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Co.
Keystone Portland Cement Co.
Lehigh Portland Cement Co.
Lone Star Cement Corp.
Marquette Cement Manufacturing Co.
Martin Marietta Corp.
Medusa Portland Cement Co.
Missouri Portland Cement Co.
National Cement Co.
National Portland Cement Co.
Nazareth Cement Co.
Northwestern States Portland Cement Co.
Oklahoma Cement Co.
Oregon Portland Cement Co.
Penn-Dixie Cement Corp.
Puerto Rican Cement Co., Inc.
San Antonio Portland Cement Co.
Southwestern Portland Cement Co.
Whitehall Cement Manufacturing Co.
Wyandotte Chemicals Corp.
ADVICE AND DISSENT
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the re-
quest of Mr. DEL CLAWSON) was granted
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD, and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
the soaring prices under the Johnson-
Humphrey Democratic administration
have become a serious matter for mil-
lions of our people. We cannot dismiss
this problem with the "slip, slide, and
duck" technique recommended by Sec-
retary of Agriculture Orville Freeman.
An editorial in the Detroit News for
August 17, 1966, entitled "Advice and
Dissent," emphasizes that current high
prices deserve .greater and more sincere
consideration by Mr. Johnson and his
administration.
Under leave to extend my remarks I
include the editorial:
ADVICE AND DISSENT
If a "Politician's Almanac" is ever written,
Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman
should be assigned to write the chapter on
consumer prices. The secretary has given
some fascinating advice on the subject to
Democratic congressional candidates:
"Slip, slide and duck any question of high-
er consumer prices if you possibly can. Don't
get caught in a debate over higher prices be-
,,tween housewives and farmers. If you do,
and have to choose a side take the farmer's
side. It's the right side and, besides, house-
wives aren't nearly so well organized."
Freeman practices what he preaches. He
is an excellent "slip, slide and duck" man.
He has called on the Federal Trade Commis-
sion to investigate soaring food prices in
order to keep his own department out of the
cross-fire. Freeman has also prejudged the
investigation by blaming the middleman for
rising prices and, of course, this is good
politics because middlemen are not very well
organized either.
But Freeman may be in for a jolt if house-
wives remember that "organization" is not
necessary in a voting booth. Congressmen
who follow Freeman's slippery tactics can be
voted out of office with a mere flip of a lever.
When politicians try to make political hay
out of the housewives' soaring food budget,
they deserve no better fate.
i
V
i
of Mr. DEL CLAWSON) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, a
little over a week ago a self-appointed
group calling itself "Americans Want To
Know" returned from a tour conducted
by the Cambodian Government of areas
bordering on South Vietnam. To no
ones surprise the group found no evi-
dence of Vietcong or North Vietnamese
units in Cambodia. Many have taken
the same guided tour with the same re-
sults in the past. Unlike this particular
group, some others have been genuinely
concerned enough to check the situation
from the other side of the border by ask-
ing the troops who are doing the fighting.
A columnist who has recently ex-
amined the evidence, Richard Fryklund,
has joined a growing group of journalists
who are convinced that Cambodia is
being used by the Vietcong irrespective
of the diplomatic,protests of that coun-
try as to its "strict neutrality." In an
article appearing in the Washington
Evening Star, August 23, Mr. Fryklund
writes :
Despite State Department and Pentagon
efforts to question the existence of Viet Cong
and North Vietnamese bases in Cambodia,
the evidence is overwhelming.
They are there. They are immensely val-
uable to the enemy. The only question re-
maining is what to do about them. The
evidence of the use of Cambodia has come
from all of the traditional and a few new
means of intelligence. But any visitor to
South Viet Nam can find his own evidence.
He can question prisoners of war at great
length, listen to their descriptions of their
movements in and out of Cambodia and
decide for. himself whether the men know
where they have been and what they have
done. This reporter has checked on the scene
and is convinced that the intelligence re-
ports are accurate.
I will include the entire article entitled
"Cambodian Sanctuary Prolongs War,"
in the RECORD following my remarks.
Mr. Speaker, the handling of the Cam-
bodian situation may very well hold the
key to the success of our efforts in South
Vietnam. It is becoming increasingly
clear to everyone that until the Cambo-
dian border is sealed, the Vietcong can
carry on the war indefinitely.
To date the efforts of the administra-
tion with regard to Cambodia have been
clearly ineffective. Official tolerance of
use of Cambodian soil by the Vietcong
has done nothing to end the Cambodian
Government's courtship of Communist
China, North Vietnam, and the National
Liberation Front.. The great optimism
that Prince Sihanouk was at last ready
to take some real steps toward tighter
border surveillance now appears to have
been a false hope. Sihanouk continues
to act on the assumption that the Viet-
cong will ultimately win, and we con-
tinue to stand ineffectually by and offi-
cially pretend to believe in Cambodian
neutrality while at the same time finding
it necessary to send hundreds of thou-
sands of American boys to fight for South
Vietnam's freedom.
The situation cannot be permitted to
drift. The Vietcong's back-door source
of supply must be closed and it is time
the administration faced up to it.
The complete article follows:
CAMBODIA SANCTUARY PROLONGS WAR
(By Richard Fryklund)
There can be no doubt now that Cam-
bodia is being used as a privileged sanctuary
by the Communist armies and that contin-
ued use of the rest and resupply areas there
puts a heavy handicap on allied forces fight-
ing in South Viet Nam.
Despite State Department and Pentagon
efforts to question the existence of Viet Cong
and North Vietnamese bases in Cambodia,
the evidence is overwhelming.
They are there. They are immensely valu-
able to the enemy. The only question re-
maining is what to do about them.
The evidence of the use of Cambodia has
come from all of the traditional and a few
new means of intelligence. But any visitor
to South Viet Nam can find his own evidence.
He can question prisoners of war at great
length, listen to their descriptions of their
movements in and out of Cambodia and de-
cide for himself whether the men know where
they have been and what they have done.
This reporter has checked on the scene and
is convinced that the intelligence reports are
accurate.
The military men in South Viet Nam may
not know on a precise day which enemy units
are infiltrating through Cambodia or resting
and being resupplied in the primitive jungle
camps there, but they do know that they
cannot corner an enemy who keeps his back
to the border and slips across, sometimes on
rocket signal from outside Cambodia, when
the going gets too hot.
The sanctuary is prolonging the war. If
the guerrilla war is won eventually without
closing the border, this well be the first such
success in the recent history of counter-
insurgency.
But how to close it?
There are many proposals, some efforts and
no progress.
The State Department is trying to get the
Cambodian ruler, Prince Norodom Sihanouk,
to close his own borders or cooperate in a
joint effort. He does not concede that the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 19558
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE August 24, 1966
Communists side uses his territory for infil-
tration or as a sanctuary, but he has said that
he will cooperate with the International Con-
trol Commission that probably could super-
vise the border under terms of the 1954
Geneva Convention.
But one of the ICC members is Poland, and
Poland will not permit a border check.
There are suggestions in Washington that
the United Nations do the job, financed by
the United States; but there are some haz-
ards, in the U.S. government view, in intro-
ducing the United Nations and its vetoes
and neutralists and Communists into this
struggle.
So military leaders in South Viet Nam and
Washington are looking for ways to seal the
border by force-or at least to reduce the
movement back and forth.
Allied land and air forces are trying now
to find and destroy large enemy units in the
border area.
But it's a long border, wooded through
most of its length, and enemy soldiers have
plenty of trails and waterways to choose
from. Operations by scores of thousands of
allied soldiers probably have forced the
enemy to work harder, but they haven't
slowed him down.
Some military men in Viet Nam would like
to extend their operations across the border.
From a simple military point of view, with-
out consideration of diplomatic complica-
tions, it would be logical to harass and
destroy in the storage and trail areas of
Cambodia.
The allies might sow mine fields; they
might put outposts in the Cambodian jungle.
But these efforts still would not stop the
movement.
So there are many proposals also to seal
the border.
France put fences and mine fields along
much of the Algerian border In the late
1950's, and that proved to be fairly effective
in containing a war that was hopeless any-
how.
Some American officers would like to try
this along the Cambodian border.
They would start in the areas where the
infiltration is the greatest, say in the la
Drang River Valley near Pleiku.
First they would get rid of the trees in a
strip several hundreds yards wide. Present
defoliating chemicals take the leaves off the
trees and kill most of them, but they do not
hold the lush jungle undergrowth in check
for long. So better chemicals are needed.
Or modern "tree-crusher" machinery could
grind up the forest.
The clearing job would be a vast one, but
some military leaders point out that huge
construction jobs can be completed in Asia
with the slow application of massive man-
power.
The cleared area could be fenced, mined,
patrolled and watched by various electronic,
infra-red and acoustic devices.
However difficult the job, it does not seem
nearly as slow or as tiring as the job of find-
ing all the enemy soldiers who use the
sanctuary.
(Mr. BROOMFIELD (at the request of
Mr. DEL CLAWSON) was granted permis-
sion to extend his remarks at this point
in the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
[Mr. BROOMFIELD'S remarks will
appear hereafter in the Appendix.]
ATTACK OF THE TAIL-FIN PEOPLE
(Mr. NELSEN (at the request of Mr.
DEL CL.AwsoN) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Speaker, an article
which appeared in the August 15th issue
of NAM Reports has been brought to my
attention. Since this article is concerned
with. the so-called truth-in-packaging
bill which is presently under considera-
tion in our Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, I include it in the
RECORD at this point in my remarks:
ArrAox OF THE TAIL-FIN PEOPLE--Ola, AFTER
THE HART BILL, WHAT?
(NoTE.-A few years ago, the tail fins on
cars, like the dachshunds in World. War I,
became targets of inexplicable attacks by
anti-industry groups. Some of the same
people, with new allies, today are just as up-
set by a pacakage that says "giant size," or
a sticker that says "10 Cents Off." Here is
explored the question of what such peole
will be upset about tomorrow, an'i what they
may do about it that will affect American
industry.)
Anyone who markets anything and falls
to concern himself about the progress of the
Hart Packaging and Labeling Bill through
the House must be unaware of the nature of
the pressures for consumer legislation of all
kinds.
When Senator HART (D., Mich.) resisted
addition of other commodities to the ones
covered by his bill, he made perfectly plain
that he favored such legislation--but in ad-
ditional bills. The Senate passed the bill,
leaving other commodities for later.
This was wise strategy on the part of the
supporters of consumer legislation. If all
the regulation they favor had been wrapped
in a single package and honestly labeled all
businessmen would have been alarmed into
action.
The food and grocery products manufac-
turers, alone, have considerable resources,
and have deployed them well in their effort
to defend their marketing freedom. Hart
Bill supporters are confident that the food
industry, alone, can't defeat the bill. After
all, in the Senate they were proved right.
If the Hart Bill (H.R. 15440) passes, then,
the food industry may be expected to be on
the sidelines when the next regulatory bill
comes along, and the divide and conquer
tactics will have worked. The strategy of
the consumerists evidently is never to en-
gage all industries at one time.
If the Truth in Lending Bill should come
up next, in the present Congress or the im-
pending one, the food companies will have
no direct interest (who buys oleo on time?)
and the consumerists will again be facing
with their entire force only a fragment of the
resources that all industry and business are
capable of putting into the field.
A swift survey of consumer protection pro-
posals now in varying stages of incubation
should convince nearly anyone that addi-
tional regulation is certain for every industry
if the Hart Bill gives the consumerists the
start they need. From then on, industry
will be faced with such proposals as:
1. Truth in Lending (S. 2275) -a bill by
Sen. DoucLAs of Illinois. This one could
adversely affect every company whose prod-
ucts are sold on credit at retail, regardless
of who extends the credit. The bill offers no
way in which credit may be made less expen-
sive, and actually might tend to frighten
consumers away from credit by pinning a
warning label on it as the Government has
finally succeeded in doing with cigarettes.
(Sales are up since.)
A customer could conceivably boggle at
learning that he will pay an effective "in-
terest rate" of 111/2 percent by charging an
air conditioner he can't now pay cash for.
But whether he will, in fact, choose to
swelter through a summer rather than pay
all the costs that someone must meet if
credit sales are to be arranged is it matter
that only he is prepared to answer?
He may, with some consumerists, feel that
six percent is somehow a maximum moral
figure, whether it covers the expenses of.
credit checks, paperwork and the company's
own interest payments, and refuse to buy.
Or, he may be bright enough to say that
51/2 percent of $200 Is $11, or a few cents a
day for beating the heat all summer, and
please deliver as soon as possible. It costs
more to rent an air conditioner.
The Douglas Bill could affect sales, but
certainly it will add to the cost of extending
credit by adding clerical and paperwork and
printing.
2. Grade labeling: This veteran proposal
has been resurrected by the Food Marketing
Commission.
Its companion in kind is the proposal to
force physicians to write prescriptions in
generic, rather than in brand, terms. (Ex-
cuse for the latter, of course, is that the
Government now pays for some prescriptions
under ,Medicare, and earlier assurances that
Medicare would not affect the practice of the
doctor are already forgotten.)
3. Design standards: The auto safety bill
(H.R. 13228) is an example of this, but once
this one passes consumerists will be encour-
aged to remove the designing of additional
products from the engineering departments
of companies to the committees of Congress
and the staffs of the regulatory agencies and
Federal departments.
4. Publicized comparisons of products on
the market: One official has suggested that
the Government subsidize such outfits as
Consumer Reports and Consumers Union in
their product tests, and broadcast the out-
comes.
Another suggestion is that the Govern-
ment's purchasing agents be required to
make publicly available the results of their
studies for purposes of making Federal pur-
chases.
Perhaps one needn't concern the grocery
items producers much, because it would
work like this: The housewife draws up a list
of 35 or 40 grocery items. First is, say,
canned peaches. So, she goes to the public
library and reads through the technical data
on the hundred or five hundred brands of
canned peaches that are offered in the U. S.,
plus the sublistings for halves and slices,
and the packs in heavy syrup and dietary
mixtures, cling and freestone, Elberta and
other varieties. Fine, this is the one (if the
store has it.) Now for the canned tomatoes.
And so on. By the time she gets to the store,
it is closed.
But what about consumer durables?
The private consumer testing outfits do
some meticulous tests, and adulterate their
reports with all sorts of subjective comments.
One or two units of a product run in hun-
dreds of thousands are tested, if the items
are expensive, and a squeak in one unit could
be amplified so it could be heard around the
nation. Often the most important features
of a product (like the sound of a radio) must
be judged subjectively, and are. The panels
are relatively small, and the opinions seldom
unanimous. But tiny differences from unit
to unit, slight edges in panel approval and
such could give disproportionate boosts to
the products of some firms and spell disaster
to others, once such mixtures of test and
opinion bore the Federal cachet.
Then, with millions at stake, the tempta-
tion to bribery would be present, and the
suspicion of bribery pervasive.
The findings of Federal purchasers would
be largely irrelevant to the needs of the con-
sumer. The purchasing agent, convinced an
office chair will last 50 years without main-
tenance and is low priced, is satisfied. He
doesn't have to sit in it.
His taste standards, likely, will run to Ray-
burn Building neo-classic, and he will seldom
make an error in calculating costs larger than
was made in estimating that building--say
100 percent.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 August 24., 1960%pproved FdE SDONM2REC P6 SE6R000400100006-1 19559
5. Limitations on advertising: When the
Federal Government wants to enlist the pub-
lic in the interest of Savings Bonds, beautifi-
cation, employment of the handicapped or
prevention of forest fires, it garners free space
in all the media and free service from all the
advertising agencies. But many in the Capi-
tal are on record as feeling that any other
advertising is, somehow, evil.
Assistant Attorney General Donald F. Tur-
ner has proposed that the advertising ex-
penditures of large companies be controlled
as a novel anti-trust measure to prevent
concentration.
His support from the consumerists, who
would prefer to do away with all advertising,
will be strong.
This is a matter of concern, of course, to
the largest companies, who would be directly
affected.
It is also a direct threat to every TV and
radio station, every newspaper, every maga-
zine, every outdoor advertising company,
every printer and every direct mail house.
It is, consequently, a threat to our entire
expensive and intricate system of gathering
and disseminating information independent
of Government sources and subsidies, known
collectively as the "free press," and now
including the broadcast media.
6. Regulation of volume discounts of ad-
vertising media: This is an idea that would
raise costs to every regular, substantial user
of advertising space and time, and conse-
quently raise costs to consumers, or it would
reduce the use of advertising, and raise cain
with the media and with sales.,
7. Federal sponsorship of consumer educa-
tion classes in the public schools: The NAM
and other businesses and business organiza-
tions have no objection to consumer educa-
tion, as such. Woe to business in general if
its success ever depended upon ignorance.
In such a case, all research and development
to improve consumer products would be sheer
waste.
The danger of this proposal is that its ad-
ministration surely would wind up in the
hands of the consumerists, whose mistrust
of business is notorious.
It might be that such classes would not
recommend bulk cracked wheat as less ex-
pensive and just as nutritious as wheat cereal
pre-sweetened and made in the shape of
kangaroos, but would you want to bet?
And the young homemakers who follow such
advice are, take it from the father of a 3-
year-old, going to have woes inducing con-
sumption of such chicken feed by willful
toddlers.
Such classes are nearly certain to reflect
the consumerists' strange set of values that
people are more important than money, but
nothing is more important to people in what
they buy than money. The theme song can
hardly be other than "cents per ounce, and
forget the differences."
As our Government consumerists presently
are oriented, we may reasonably expect the
classes to bear some resemblance to the
"make your wedding dress out of flour sacks"
approach recalled from the Federal advisories
to consumers in the 1930's.
Austerity is traditionally the keynote in
such classes-a hair shirt lasts longer than a
cotton one. Best Buy.
8. A "Hart Bill" for consumer durables:
This will require legislative ingenuity and
will lead to an administrative monstrosity,
but a full wave of consumerism must lead
here. If, as some lawmakers now contend,
your wife is hopelessly baffled choosing be-
tween two boxes of corn flakes, can the Gov-
ernment, from which all blessings flow, fail
her when she must choose between two elec-
tric floor polishers, which last longer than
corn flakes in most cases, and which make
a bigger dent in the family budget? No,
customer "confusion" was the reason for the
Hart Bill, and Steinmetz might have been
confused by the wealth of competing virtues
and features offered by today's manufac-
turers of hard goods.
So any Hart approach to consumer dur-
ables probably would have to take the sajne
line as the Hart Bill on packaged goods.
You can eliminate the confusion, by elimi-
nating the choices.
9. Federal supervision of warranties and
guarantees: This would simply make a Fed-
eral case out of each dissatisfied, customer.
Today, the manufacturer's interest in such a
customer is in making an adjustment that
will keep the customer. The new approach
would make the manufacturer and the cus-
tomer adversaries before a third party, and
likely dash any such hope. The customer,
then?could expect less interest-because the
manufacturer's attention would be centered
on getting Uncle Sam rather than the cus-
tomer calmed down.
10. Licensing: NAM has had two reports
from separate sources that the White House
is actively seeking a workable plan for the
Federal licensing of businesses in the interest
of assuring consumer satisfaction. The
licenses would be suspendable and revokable,
and are intended to be designed for deterrent
effect like atomic bombs.
Where is the support for such measures?
Labor unions and credit unions long have
had consumer programs, although not neces-
sarily pro-regulation, anti-business programs.
A few individuals had made precarious liv-
ings as executives of "consumer" organiza-
tions. There were some consumer magazines,
which evaluated products for audiences of
college instructors and ladies with no make-
up.
When politics discovered the consumer-
whom Congress had been representing all
along under the impression they were con-
stituents-these venerable institutions were
shaken up by unwonted attentions, the call-
ing of conferences coast-to-coast, the ap-
pointment of commissions and committees
and groups and panels and boards, all with
mandates to forget the roses and search for
thorns.
Business, which had habitually kept prices
down through competition and development
of new manufacturing and marketing meth-
ods, was accused of riling the customer's
pocketbooks, and Government, which had for
years boosted prices with farm programs,
commodity stabilization agreements abroad,
excise and other taxes, minimum wage laws,
etc., was quickly sketched in as the guardian
of the purchaser's pennies.
A public, concerned with its own affairs and
larger issues like Viet Nam and inflation,
learns of a "bill to help consumers," and pays
little note, save to be flattered by the atten-
tion and hopeful that results may be good.
Backing the consumerists now are the
White House (with Esther Peterson as Presi-
dential Advisor on Consumer Affairs and a
full-blown, report-issuing "Consumer's Ad-
visory Council"; the majority of the Food
Marketing Commission, majorities of the
Democratic majorities in both houses, minor-
ities of the Republican minorities in both
houses, a host of organizations that have
been. set up with Office of Economic Oppor-
tunity cash, some academicians, some anti-
trusters, a horde of Federal employees in
regulatory agencies that are already years
behind on their cases, and a dear lady in our
block whose Chalmers Touring Car once de-
veloped a crack in the ising glass after dealer
had gone out of business.
Broad-scale public support is not in evi-
dence.
But the strength to pass the bills is enough,
provided businesses and industries can be
picked off, one by one, each unaware of the
general trend and not even bothering to send
to ask for whom the bell tolls.
Observers feel that any businessman who
thinks he is not affected by the Hart Bill
cannot be fully aware of what a Hart Bill suc-
cess would release upon other industries.
And, in these days diversification may lead
any business into an area covered by the
Packaging and Labeling bill, anyway.
They feel that this bill, now pending in the
House, is the foundation upon which a vast
regulatory structure will be based, and that
it will be nearly impossible to stop the con-
struction once the foundation is in place.
TO PERMIT TEACHERS TO DE-
DUCT EDUCATION EXPENSE
FROM FEDERAL TAXES
(Mr. BROCK (at the request of Mr.
DEL CLAWSON) wds granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.) '
Mr. BROCK. Mr. Speaker, I am today
introducing a bill amending the Internal
Revenue Code to permit teachers to de-
duct the expense of their own education
from Federal taxes.
Excellence in education is of para-
mount importance to our children and
to the future welfare of our country. The
purpose of my bill is to offer our teachers
an incentive to continue to upgrade their
own abilities and thereby improve the
quality of education generally.
A teacher's pay is often dependent
upon his or her educational attainment.
Students, parents and the whole Nation
benefit by encouraging teachers to im-
prove themselves by keeping up with the
latest and most modern techniques while
at the same time giving our dedicated
educators an opportunity to increase
their own salaries.
Businessmen are allowed tax deduc-
tions for legitimate expenses relating to
their business, and it seems only fair that
teachers be given similar treatment un-
der the law.
The greatest investment our Nation
can make is to provide our youth with
the best possible education, and tax help
for teachers would be a giant step for-
GISLATION TO CURB ANTIWAR
ACTIVITIES
(Mr. WATSON (at the request of Mr.
DEL CLAWSON) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. WATSON. Mr. Speaker, it
should be perfectly obvious to the Mem-
bers of this body after a week of hear-
ings
before the Un-American Activities
Committee that the international Com-
munist movement has successfully in-
filtrated the antiwar groups in this
country. In fact, one could reasonably
conclude that these groups are actually
dominated by the Communist conspir-
acy. The committee has heard testi-
mony from avowed Communists who are
proud of their role in obstructing and in-
terfering with the movement of men and
supplies to South Vietnam.
I- have been shocked and appalled by
the extent of Communist subversion be-
hind these peace groups which has come
to light during these hearings. The
witnesses called upon to testify are not
simply leftist-oriented idealists seeking
a just peace in Vietnam. They are
hard-core Communists who advocate the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 19560
Approved For F g6sRb-f~WMMMAQ: fkftiZB4 0004001000 just 24, 1966
overthrow of this Government by vio-
lence or'any other means to attain this
end. They are just as dangerous to the
survival of freedom as a Communist ag-
gressor locked in a life and death
struggle with an American soldier at this
very moment in Vietnam.
They are actively engaged in attempts
to thwart the war effort. This sort of
activity is in no way related to the right
of American citizens to peacefully dis-
sent from Government activities. They
are the perpetrators of organized at-
tempts to block troop movements involv-
ing our military personnel. They are
burning draft cards and contributing
financial support to the Vietcong.
Make no doubts about it, these pro-
testers are giving aid and comfort to the
enemy at a time when this Nation is at
war. Their actions border on treason,
and actually would be treason were we
in a declared state of war. It is up to
Congress to see that such revolutionary
tactics by these anarchists are dealt
with by severe penalties under the law.
I urge my colleagues to give over-
whelming support to the measure ap-
proved by the Un-American Activities
Committee today to deal with this criti-
cal problem. My friend, the gentleman
from Texas, who has so ably conducted
these hearings, introduced this legisla-
tion which would curb the activities of
these "peacenik" groups. His bill would
amend the Internal Security Act of 1950
by providing a fine of not more than
$10,000 or a prison sentence of not less
than 5 years, or both, for persons con-
victed of obstructing our military effort
or giving assistance to enemy forces.
We must not let this Congress ad-
journ without passing a measure of this
type. It is our obligation to American
fighting men who are.dying to preserve
our way of life. It is incredible to me
that while our young men are giving
their lives for freedom in a faraway
land, youth of a comparable age in this
country are joining ranks with the forces
of oppression. They are indeed plung-
ing the dagger into the backs of our
fighting men. Now is the time to deal
with these acts of treason. I think a
long-term period of incarceration might
tend to curtail this seditious activity,
and it is up to us to provide such a
penalty.
COMBINED GREEK ORTHODOX
SERVICES IN TRIBUTE TO WAR
DEAD AT CATHEDRAL OF THE
PINES, RINDGE, N.H., JULY 10,
1966
(Mr. CLEVELAND (at the request of
Mr. DEL CLAWSON) was granted permis-
sion to extend his remarks at this point
in the RECORD- and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, on
Sunday, July 10, I was privileged to par-
ticipate in a portion of the ceremonies
at the Cathedral of the Pines in which
the faithful of the Greek Orthodox
Church from throughout New England
assembled to witness a very special event
during the annual combined services at
the cathedral.
The beautiful Cathedral of the Pines,
in T indge, in my district, is an interna-
tional shrine to war dead. It is the site
of the Altar of the Nation, - which is the
only memorial which pays tribute to all
of America's war dead.
This special event was the result of a
truly responsible attitude within the
Greek community of New England.
Realizing that many personal sacrifices
are being made daily in Vietnam., they
wanted to honor the memory of the
members of their church who have died
in the defense of liberty. And this is
very understandable because these sons
of Greece in America today have ances-
tral lines running back to the homeland
of Western democracy. The blood that
they have now shed is mingled with the
blood of earlier heroes who have like-
wise fallen throughout the centuries of
conflict in defense of human liberty.
The ancient Greeks were peace-lovers;
so too were these young Americans be-
ing honored. The ancient Greeks were
men of freedom; so too were these young
men. The ancient Greeks were mighty
warriors who were not afraid to give their
lives for their ideals; so too were these
young men. The ancient Greeks loved
and worshipped the Creator as the source'
of all their blessings; so too did these
young men. Now they are joined in one
company of heroes and the Greek com-
munity of New England assembled on
this day to be in the spiritual presence
of these men.
BISHOP GERASIMOS OFFICIATES
Officiating at this archieratical divine
liturgy was His Grace, Bishop Gerasimos
of the New England Diocese. He was
assisted by various clergy from through-
out New England. Liturgical responses
were provided by the Byzantine Male
Choir of Lowell, led by Dr. Christos J.
Bentas.
As part of the memorial services, a
large wreath was presented by New Eng-
land members of the AHEPA, a nation-
wide fraternal organization of Greek-
Americans.
These Ahepan members passed three
separate resolutions at three separate
conventions of the three districts com-
prising the New England area. These
resolutions made possible the attendance
at this event of the three separate dis-
trict lodges. Leading their respective
districts was attorney Harold Demopou-
los, district governor No. 7, James
Tzellas, district governor No. 8, and
Attorney John Pappas, district governor
No. 9. More than 5,000 persons wor-
shipped and prayed at this mountaintop
Cathedral of the Pines.
Following the services the Greek com-
munity of Keene, N.H., provided an out-
door barbecue for those attending. This
barbecue was held on the campus of
nearby Franklin Pierce College, which
had donated its complete facilities for
this occasion.
This day's events truly depicted the
tradition of responsibility and coopera-
tion so prevalent in the ancient Greek
culture that has now become a signifi-
cant part of our American society. For
just as the ancient Greeks respected
honor, -liberty, and justice, so too do
today's Americans of Greek descent
cherish these ideals and use them to
guide their everyday conduct. Let us
salute the valor of these young men who
have given their lives, and live so as to
be worthy of the sacrifices made. Let us
also salute the responsible spirit of the
Greek community that makes possible
events such as those that took place
on July 10.
INSTITUTION BUILDING IN THE
PACIFIC COMMUNITY A PACIFIC
BANKERS' ASSOCIATION
The SPEAKER. Under previous order
of the House, the gentleman from Cali-
fornia [Mr. HANNA] is recognized for 60
minutes.
Mr. HANNA. Mr. Speaker, we have
entered the era of institution building in
the Pacific community. Within the past
few years we have seen many institutions
begin to take form pulling Pacific neigh-
bors ever closer together. Among the
more well known have been the recently
formed Asian and Pacific Cooperation
Council, the Asian Development Bank,
and the Mekong River project. Among
the less publicized, but equally significant
in their own way, have been such insti-
tutions as the Australia-Japan Business
Cooperation Committee -and the Trans-
Tasman Trade Agreement. These are
the sure signs, the first light of the dawn-
ing of the Pacific era, Mr. Speaker, and I
am glad that our President has so as-
tutely recognized this critical, dynamic
factor of international relations today.
If I read his momentous speech of July
12, 1966, correctly, the President of the
United States has given our foreign
policy new luster and new energy to meet
the challenges and opportunities that lie
in the Pacific. He has said that our
policy shall be to encourage, to help cul-
tivate; and to help protect the bright
future of a dynamic new Asia that is now
blossoming in the Western Pacific.
The war, of course, is a great and
poignant tragedy as war always is. It
is tragic for the Vietnamese people.
It is tragic for us and for our President.
It is tragic for all men who hope for last-
ing peace. However, in the recognition of
such tragedies let us not be so absorbed
by the pall of war that we fail to see that
elsewhere in the Pacific community,
Asians are on the move, vigorously ad-
vancing toward a better life for them-
selves and a progressive and prosperous
future for their children.
Mr. Speaker, the President has set the
tone for constructive action in the Pa-
cific. He has created an enlivened en-
vironment for positive thinking about
the Pacific community. But setting the
environment, as our President well
knows, is not enough. A community
does not spring forth whole, as Minerva
did from the head of Zeus, merely be-
cause of the environment. It must be
built by hard work, one brick at a time
and, Mr. Speaker, institutions are the
bricks of any community.
It has been long evident to the stu-
dents of society and its governments that
you must build institutions to bring to-
gether a people and enable them to have
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 1.9584
Approved For CeNGSRESSIO?AL9 ~E&AD6714W0004001000~6-1
ugust 24, 1966.
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION
BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT
OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA CONCERNING
CIVIL USES OF ATOMIC ENERGY
The Government of the, United States of
America and the Government of the Republic
of China,
Desiring to amend the Agreement for Co-
operation Concerning Civil Uses of Atomic
Energy Between the Government of the
United States of America and the Govern-
ment of the Republic of China, signed at
Washington on July 18, 1955 (hereinafter
referred to as the "Agreement for Coopera-
tion"), as amended by the Agreements
signed at Washington on December 8, 1958,
June 11, 1960, May 31, 1962, and June 8, 1964,
Agree as follows:
ARTICLE I
Article I, Paragraph A of the Agreement for
Cooperation, as amended, is amended to read
as follows:
"A. Subject to the limitations of Article V,
the Parties hereto will exchange information
in the following fields:
"1. design, construction, operation, and
use of research reactors, materials testing
reactors, and reactor experiments;
"2. the use of radioactive isotope and
source, special nuclear, or byproduct material
in physical and biological research, medical
therapy, agriculture, and industry; and
"3. health and safety problems related to
the foregoing."
ARTICLE II
A. Article IT, Paragraph A of the Agree-
ment for Cooperation, as amended, is amend-
ed to read as follows:
"A. The Commission will transfer to the
Government of the Republic of China ura-
nium enriched in the isotope U-235, subject
to the terms and conditions herein, as may
be required as initial and replacement fuel
in the operation of research reactors, mate-
rials testing reactors, and reactor experi-
ments which the Government of the Repub-
lic of China, in consultation with the Com-
mission, decides to construct or operate or
decides to authorize private individuals and
private organizations under its jurisdiction to
construct or operate."
B. Article II, Paragraph B of the Agree-
ment for Cooperation, as amended, is amend-
ed as follows:
1. The number, "six (6)", is deleted wher-
ever it appears and the number, "eight (8) ",
Is substituted in lieu thereof.
2. The last sentence thereof is deleted and
the following is substituted in lieu thereof;
"The Commission may, however, upon re-
quest, make all or a portion of the fore-
going special nuclear material available as
uranium enriched to more than twenty per-
cent (20%) by weight in the isotope U-235
when there is a technical or economic justi-
fication for such a transfer for use in research
reactors, materials testing reactorss, and re-
actor experiments, each capable of operating
with a fuel load not to exceed eight (8) kilo-
grams of the isotope U-235 contained in such
uranium."
ARTICLE III
Article IV of the Agreement for Coopera-
tion is amended to read as follows:
"With respect to the subjects of agreed ex-
change of information referred to in Article
I, it is understood that arrangements may
be made between either Party, or authorized
persons under its ' jurisdiction. and author:
ized persons under the jurisdiction of the
other for the transfer of materials, including
special nuclear material, and equipment and
devices, and for the performance of services.
Such arrangements shall be subject to:
"1. the limitations applicable to transac-
tions between the Parties under Article II;
~12, Article V; and
3. applicable laws, regulations, policies, and
license requirements of the Parties."
ARTICLE IV
Paragraphs A, B, and C of Article VI of
the Agreement for Cooperation, as amended,
are amended to read as follows:
"A. The Government of the United States
of America and the Government of the Re-
public of China emphasize their common in-
terest in assuring that any material, equip-
ment, or device made available to the Gov-
ernment of the Republic of China or any
person under its jurisdiction pursuant to
this Agreement shall be used solely for civil
purposes.
"B. Except to the extent that the safe-
guards provided for in this Agreement are
supplanted, by agreement of the Parties as
provided in Article VII(A), by safeguards
of the International Atomic Energy Agency,
the Government of the United States of
America, nowithstanding any other provi-
sions of this agreement, shall have the fol-
lowing rights:
(1) With the objective of assuring design
and operation for civil purposes and per-
mitting effective application of safeguards,
to review the design of any (a) reactor, and
(b) other equipment and devices, the de-
sign of which the Commission determines
to be relevant to the effective application of
safeguards, which are, or have been, made
available to the Government of the Repub-
lic of China or any person under its juris-
diction under this Agreement, or which are
to use, fabricate, or process any of the fol-
lowing materials so made available: source
material, special nuclear material, moderator
material, or other material designated by the
Commission;
(2) With respect to any source or special
nuclear material made available under this
Agreement to the Government of the Repub-
lic of China or any person under its jurisdic-
tion by the Government of the United States
of America or any person under its jurisdic-
tion and any source or special nuclear mate-
rial utilized in, recovered from, or produced
as a result of the use of any of the following
materials, equipment or devices so made
available :
(a) source material, special nuclear mate-
rial, moderator material, or other material
designated by the Commission,
(b) reactors,
(c) any other equipment or device desig-
nated by the Commission as an item to be
made available on the condition that the pro-
visions of this subparagraph B(2) will apply,
(i) to require the maintenance and pro-
duction of operating records and to request
and receive reports for the purpose of assist-
ing in ensuring accountability for such mate-
rials; and
(1i) to require that any such material in
the custody of the Government of the Re-
are subject to subparagraph B(2) of this
Article, to determine whether there is com-
pliance with this Agreement, and to make
such independent measurements as may be
deemed necessary;
(5) In the event of non-compliance with
the provisions of this Article or the guaran-
ties set forth in Article VII and the failure of
the Government of the Republic of China to
carry out the provisions of this Article within
a reasonable time, to suspend or terminate
this Agreement and to require the return of
any materials, equipment, and devices re-
ferred to in subparagraph B(2) of this Arti-
cle
(6) To consult with the Government of
the Republic of China in the matter of health
and safety.
"C. The Government of the Republic of
China undertakes to facilitate the applica-,
tion of the safeguards provided for in this
Article."
ARTICLE V
Article VII, Paragraph B of the Agreement
for Cooperation is amended by adding the
words, "or group of nations", following the
word, "nation", wherever it appears.
ARTICLE VI
Article VII(A) I of the Agreement for Co-
operation, as amended, is amended by delet-
ing the reference, "paragraph C", and the
commas preceding and following such refer-
ence.
ARTICLE VII
This Amendment shall enter into force on
the date on which each Government shall
have received from the other Government
written notification that it has complied with
all statutory and constitutional requirements
for the entry into force of such Amendment
and shall remain in force for the period of
the Agreement for Cooperation, as amended.
In Witness Whereof, the undersigned, duly
authorized, have signed this Amendment.
Done at Washington, in duplicate, this -
day of , 1966.
For the Government of the United States
of America:
(DZ)
DONOVAN Q. ZOOK,
Director, Office of Atomic Energy Affairs,
International Scientific and Techno-
logical Affairs, Department of State.
(BHT)
BARBARA H. THOMAS,
Foreign Affairs Officer, Division of Inter-
national Affairs, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission.
For the Government of the Republic of
China:
(MW)
MARTIN WONG,
Economic Minister Counselor, Chinese
Embassy, Washington, D.C.
public of China or any person under its jur- \I 1 VIETNAM-DE-ESCALATION OR
isdiction be subject to all of the safeguards V COMPLETE VICTORY
provided for in this Article and the guar-
anties set forth in Article VII; Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, on
(3) To require the deposit in storage facil- Monday, according to the New York
ities designated by the Commission of any Times, the Secretary of State visited U
of the special nuclear material referred to in Thant. He also spoke to the Veterans of
subparagraph B(2) of this Article which is Foreign Wars.
not currently utilized for civil purposes in In the conversation with Mr. U Thant-
the Republic of China and which is not re- according to the Times-the Secretary
tained or purchased by the Government of
the United States of America pursuant to asserted that the "United States wanted
Paragraphs E or F, respectively, of Article IT, to de-escalate the Vietnam war" but said
or otherwise disposed of pursuant to an ar- there was lack of interest on the part of
rangement mutually acceptable to the Hanoi and its allies.
Parties; Speaking to the Veterans of Foreign
(4) To designate, after consultation with Wars, however, the Secretary of State
the Government of the Republic of China, said that a premature pullout from Viet-
personnel who, accompanied, if either Party nom would surely. lead to world war III.
so requests, by personnel designated by the
Government of the Republic of China, shall According to the paper, Mr. Rusk said:
have access in the Republic of China to all Any withdrawal before complete victory
places and data necessary to account for the over Communist aggression would be *
source and special nuclear materials which fatal.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400100006-1
 Augus 24, 1