SOVIET ANTI-SEMITISM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00403R000200190033-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 4, 2005
• Sequence Number: 33
• Publication Date: April 7, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN

1964
Approved
purposes. Soil conservationists want to re-
claim prairie wetlands; duck hunters want
to save them. Tree. lovers spray poisons to
protect their trees * * * and in so doing
kill birds. Congress is not above reproach;
we authorize expenditures for conservation
but sometimes fail to appropriate the money.
We'll lose our outdoor heritage for sure,
unless that interested minority learn to pull
together-and in the right direction.
It works. Perhaps the first good example
of group conservation action overcoming leg-
islative inertia was the American Buffalo
Society's successful fight to save the van-
ishing bison. It established the refuges and
herds that saved the species from extinction,
Other historic successes include the Audu-
bon Society's work to save the egrets and
eagles. Several State groups have won their
fights to create nonpolitical conservation
agencies,
Conservation groups have united to pur-
chase lands to protest the Key deer, prairie
chickens, waterfowl and other endangered
wildlife. They have bought lands for parks,
forests and unique ecological areas. Wom-
en's organizations, health associations, and
civic groups have been invited to join in
supporting bond issues to clean up polluted
waters.
Coordination is the key. Your own Na-
tional Wildlife Federation makes outstand-
ing efforts, sponsoring national conferences
and other forums.
The antilitter, campaign is a fine example
of successful coordination between conser-
vationists, civic groups, and the packaging
industry.
Should not this approach be equally suc-
cessful in wilderness preservation? In water
pollution control? In providing waterfowl
habitat?
One of the most intriguing case histories
of conservation frustration is the attempt to
establish a national wilderness preservation
program. For at least 7 years now, this pro-
posal has undergone a series of refinements.
Since these bills apply only to lands already
owned by the Federal Government, in some
classification of wilderness, cost was not a
factor. Yet, not until conservation and re-
source groups got together did the wilder-
ness bill move.
It was passed by the Senate in the 87th
and 88th Congresses. But continued opposi-
tion from some commercial interests, using
highly skilled professionals, has thus far kept
the House from voting on it. Are conserva-
tionists still united? Your opponents are
No Government official likes to be "pres-
sured." But coordinated public opinion can
help stop mining on a wildlife sanctuary, the
construction of roads through wilderness, or
dams on a stream. Organization is the key.
Many conservation battles are fought in
the legislative halls, and nowhere is the
united front more important.
If you have a pet project, get a responsible
Organization to draft a proposal, backed up
with facts. Get a sponsor in your State leg-
islature or in Congress who is interested
enough to see it through. When the bill has
been introduced and referred to a committee,
let your legislator know that you want action.
I know that conservationists essentially
are individualists. They resist organization
and discipline. They argue among them-
selves about everything from bass lures to
methods of controlling the use of pesticides.
But when the chips are down, it's time to
put aside minor differences and unite on the
major issues-or nothing will get done.
The late President Kennedy observed:
"United there is little we cannot do; divided,
there is, little we can do." Let this be your
guiding principle.
(A former park ranger, Mr. DINGELL (Michi-
gan) is one of the House of Representatives
outstanding conservationists.)
So vie Anti-Sem hf
F~1~26~QOb40190033-2 Al-695
they kept together. So he , began by false
whispers and malictousphints to foment jeal-
ousiesand distrust among them. This strat-
agem succeeded so well that ere long the
bulls grew cold and unfriendly, and finally
avoided each. other and fed each one by him-
self apart. No sooner did the lion see'this
than he fell upon them one by one and killed
them in turn.
"Moral: The quarrels of friends are the
opportunities of foes."
Conservationists who fight among them-
selves may win battles-but they will lose
the war.
This is my considered judgment as an in-
terested citizen and a Member of the Con-
gress who constantly deals with conservation
legislation. Your opponents like nothing
better than to see conservationists bloody
each others' noses.
Why do you fight among yourselves? Why
do you waste your strength on internal
struggles?
Let's face it. People who belong to con-
servation groups-and you are one of them-
are far outnumbered by the million who
couldn't care less. In spite of these odds,
you, can be heard, and you can get things
done. But if you aren't all on the same
side of major issues, and aren't well-enough
organized to drive your point home, you
don't stand a chance. Railroad spikes aren't
driven with tack hammers.
And by you, I mean you both as an in-
dividual and as a member of your organiza-
tion. '
Members of the Congress usually know
what people think. We hear constantly
from folks back home about every subject
under the sun. Sometimes, general opinion
jells and things happen. However, when
opinions are badly splintered, nothing hap-
pens-nothing good, at least.
A good example of a bad job by. well-
meaning conservationists is the duck story.
The great flights of ducks and geese which
thrilled us in spring and fall are dwindling.
The situation has been critical now for sev-
eral years. Why? The wetlands needed by
these magnicent birds were-and are-going.
And where have the conservationists been?
Birdwatchers have been fighting hunters.
Hunters have been' fighting each other-and
game commissions about bag limits and
lengths of open seasons.
Hunters, birders, game biologists, sporting
goods manufacturers, outdoor writers-all
rallied to "save the ducks." But, while they
argued among themselves on what to save
them for, the battle was lost-lost to the
real villains: Federal subsidies, agricultural
drainage experts, real estate developers,
water polluters, and so forth.
By the time conservationists began work-
ing together to preserve some of that dis-
appearing habitat, it was too late. Poor
flights made poor hunting. Poor hunting
resulted in poor duck stamp sales. Funds
for habitat preservation, earmarked from
duck stamp sales income, didn't. materialize.
Congress authorized a loan of $105 million
against future stamp sales, but has actually
appropriated only $17 million of it. And
the draining, filling, and pollution still goes
on and on.
There is too much to be done for conser-
vationists who believe in preservation and
wise' use of our natural resources to bicker
among themselves. Our Pacific salmon are
dwindling, our wilderness disappearing.
Everything from trout streams to redwoods
are being sacrificed to road builders. Litter
and billboards clutter our highways and.
byways. Water pollution is reaching new,
and dangerous, levels. There are a dozen
major issues, and a hundred small (but no
less important) ones before us.
. To lick them, we must quit pulling at cross
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SEYMOUR HALPERN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 7, 1964
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, today I
have introduced a resolution urging that.
the United States, through its delegation
at the United Nations, take forthright
steps in securing a world condemnation
of anti-Semitism.
This resolution specifies that this uni-
versal ban must be in treaty form, and
that all signatory states must pledge
themselves to eradicate anti-Semitism.
within their territories and establish mu-
tual enforcement measures.
I believe such an achievement will con-
tribute much toward our goal of ending
the overt and covert manifestations of
anti-Semitism which still fester in the
world.
I should like to congratulate the dis-
tinguished . participants of the Ameri-
can Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry,
which met earlier this week here in
Washington. This meeting has served
us all in drawing attention to the flagrant
abuses prevailing in the Soviet Union.
The able and distinguished Senator
from New York, JACOB K. JAVITS, spoke
to the gathering only yesterday, and his
timely comments on the situation are
crucially relevant.
-Under unanimous consent, I include
the speech of Senator JAVITS, given at the
Hotel Willard in Washington on April
6, be inserted at this point in the RECORD,
as follows:
SILENT DIPLOMACY WILL NOT SAVE SOVIET
JEws
(By Senator JACOB JAvrrs)
Events over the Passover holiday demon-
strate'the relentless character of the Soviet
Union's campaign of repression against the
Jewish minority in the U.S.S.R. But they
also show that the regime in the U.S.S.R. is
not impervious to the protests of the world
on this issue. Both are vitally important
conclusions.
That anti-Jewish repression continues was
shown when on the eve of the Passover holi-
day the Kremlin went out of its way to pre-
vent Jews from obtaining matzoth in time
by impounding 2,000, 10-pound packages of
matzoth paid for and sent with full import
clearances prepaid by Americans in New
York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Los Angeles
to relatives and friends in the Soviet Union.
In response to representations by the U.S.
Embassy in Moscow made at my request, the.
Soviets explained that packages from individ-
uals to individuals were delivered and only
those sent by organizations were returned; it
was also claimed that matzoth were avail-
able in the U.S.S.R. to all who wanted them.
But this explanation was contradicted by re-
ports in the Soviet press itself before the
beginning of the Passover festival on March
27 on the nondelivery of the parcels and
the advice of Moscow's chief rabbi allowing
Jews to use peas and beans in place of-
matzoth.
It is hard to believe that in this decade, a
major world power like the Soviet Union with
its nuclear capability and space exploration
achievements would stoop to this kind of
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200190033-2
 A1696 Approved 1W&Je
" *p?~I Q 1 f&C RDPA6 0 000200190033-2 April 7
petty but cruel and repressive official bar-
rassment of a helpless minority. Against
such calculated disrespect for elementary
human rights as welt as for world opinion.
there must be general and universal protest.
The fact that the Soviet regime listens
was shown when the Soviet official news
agency Tass reported a partial recantation
of the scandalous and libelous. anti-Semitic
book published In Kiev under the title "Ju-
daism Without Embellishment." The Krem-
lin's leaders should 3e made aware that a
great wave of indignation from all parts of
the world is rising up over the Soviet Union's
continued campaign of anti-Jewish
repression.
All of us must hen a resolve that we will
not remain silent of permit the world to
remain silent while the scope and intensity
of Soviet actions against the Jewish minority
grows and becomes more deliberate.
In the name of humanity not only our
voices but the voices of free men and women
everywhere as well mist be raised above the
Iron Curtain in protest.
This conference must demand that the
Soviet Union halt these oppressive acts forth-
with and restore to Jews the elementary
human rights to practice their religion, to
be free of discrimination and to rejoin their
families in other lands;.
There Is no doubt that the Soviet Union
is very sensitive to charges of anti-Semitism.
The Communists pride themselves on the
law which makes an~i-Semitiam a criminal
offense. Indeed, they tried to deny its exist-
ence when the poet `tevtushenko published
his famous poem "Babi Yar" as a protest
against Russian anti-Semitism. But when
89 out of 163 sentenced to death by Soviet
courts between July 1961 and October 1963
for alleged economic n'imes-almost 80 per-
cent-are publicly reported to be Jews and
their names are held up for ridicule and
contempt in the official Soviet press: when
the Soviet regime cl_ses down synagogues
and Jewish cemeteries;, crushes every vestige
of Jewish culture and deports Jews to Kaz-
akhstan while simultaneously telling the
outside world that Jews enjoy religious free-
dom; and when there is distributed an offi-
cially published edition of 12,000 copies of
the blatantly anti-Semitic book by Troflm
Kiohko, entitled, "Judaism Without Embel-
lishment," under the auspices of the Ukrain-
ian Academy of Sciences--then it is time to
rip off the false mask from the Soviet claim
that there is no "Jewish question". under
communism and to expose the hypocrisy
behind official denials of anti-Jewish actions.
The Kremlin would like us to believe that
anti-Jewish repressive acts are cold war lies
spread by capitalists and imperialists, but
the facts give this explanation the lie.
I have asked the Soviet authorities to ex-
plain why there is such a sharp difference
between the way Jews are described in Soviet
publications for external distribution and the
way they are vilified and made objects of sus-
picion in books and periodicals distributed
inside the U.S.S.R. The crude racist hate-
mongering of the Kichko book has brought
forth protests even from Communists them-
selves in France, Italy and the United States
who have condemned its Hitlerite propaganda
and called for its suppression.
In the Soviet press for the first time, the
Jewish nationality of the accused in the show
trials is openly flaunted. This was not done
even under Stalin with his 'Doctors' Plot"
when Jews were identified only through eu-
phemisms like cosmopolitans, and the shock
and significance of this departure from Com-
lnuniet ideological prectice has not been lost
on Jews. Add to all this the fact that propa-
ganda against Israel has been stepped up,
and you can readily appreciate the mounting
fears of Jews the world over for the safety of
our coreligionists in the U.S.S.R.
Khrushchev and other Soviet leaders from
time to time have triad to insist that Soviet
treatment of religious minorities is an in-
ternal matter and that protests constitute In-
terference in the Soviet Union's domestic af-
fairs. Over a century ago, the U.S. Govern-
ment provided an answer to this kind of
rebuttal, and formulated a policy that re-
mains valid to this day.
Since 1840. the United States, while recog-
nizing the principle nonintervention in
the internal affairs of soother state, never-
theless has protested the persecution of op-
pressed minorities by foreign governments
and justified these protests in the name of
our moral duty toward humanity. The United
States has done so alone and also In concert
with other nations. Our country has never
been silent In the face of persecution.
We have lodged these protests and reg-
istered our disapproval in a variety of ways,
among them, through direct communication
to the governments concerned, by recalling
the U.B. diplomatic representative for con-
sultation, by direct references In the Presi-
dent's annual message to the Congress, by
the termination of a commercial treaty, and
by the use of indirect acts such as joining
in multilateral acts of disapproval as a means
of protest.
The list of such protests on behalf of Jews
is long and honorable. In 1840 the United
States condemned the persecution of Jews
in Damascus.
In 1870 we urged the Ottoman government
to halt the killing of Jews in Rumania.
In 1877 the United States granted protec-
tion to Russian Jews settled In or near
Jerusalem, and emphasized that "the sym-
pathy of the United States for all oppressed
peoples in foreign countries has been freely
manifested in all cases where It could be done
In accordance with the spirit of Interna-
tional courtesy and diplomatic usage."
In the next two decades the United States
protested nofewer than nine times against
the Czarist Russian Government's repressive
acts and persecution of Jews. These pro-
tests, backed by the American people and
by resolutions of the Congress culminated In
1911 when President Taft terminated the
treaty of commerce with Russia which had
been in effect since 1832. President Taft
took this action over the advice of the State
Department which warned that abrogation of
the treaty would have serious effects on the
Nation's commercial relations with the Rus-
sian Empire In addition to larger political
considerations.
The United States has protested action
gainst Jews by Rumania, the Austro-Hun-
garian Empire, Italy, and Poland. The record
of U.S. protests to the Nazi government
should still be fresh in our minds. Secre-
tary Cordell Hull recorded in his memoirs
that "I found myself calling in the German
Ambassador time after time to protest
against violations of the rights of our cit!-
zens, against persecution of the Jews, and
against mistreatment of Americans by Nazi
bullies."
No policy is more firmly fixed in the con-
duct of U.S. foreign affairs than this moral
imperative to come to the aid of oppressed
peoples. American public opinion must be
roused to the danger that this Soviet cam-
paign presents not only to Jews-though
they are the first victims-but to all religious
minorities in the U.S.S.R. Moscow has every
reason to be concerned over the bad name
that its anti-Jewish policy is creating for it
in the world, and our protest must be inten-
sified In every way possible. Only then will
we be able to convince the Kremlin that the
price It must pay for its anti-Jewish policy
is too high and too costly in terms of Its
International image.
This Is no time for counsels of caution
and fear-or of silence-on the part of Amer-
ican Jewry. Each great wave of indignation
will serve to ultimately alleviate, and will
help prevent aggravation of the plight of the
Jews In the Soviet Union. Each protest by
individuals, by organizations, and by the
free nations of the world will serve to make
the Kremlin realize how sterile and harmful
Is its anti-Jewish policy. ,
Private Power Gets Subsidy
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. AL ULLMAN
or OREGON
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, April 6, 1964
Mr. ULLMAN. Mr. Speaker, once
again we are seeing an example of the
Machiavellian activities of the private
power combines. Consistent with their
position of nearly one-half a century, an
important element of the so-called in-
vestor+owned utilities, better known as
the IOU's, the Idaho Power Co. is
doing everything it can to stir up unin-
formed opposition to the extension of the
Bonneville Power Administration into
southwestern Idaho and southeastern
Oregon.
The IOU's are very fond of pointing
to themselves as great examples of free
enterprise. Walter Wells, of the Oregon
State group, writing in the Oregon
Grange Bulletin of April 6, makes an ex-
cellent statement which points out the
real position of private power companies
In comparison to true free enterprise.
Mr. Well's article is Included at this
point:
PRIvATE Pow#a Grrs SUBSIDY-C0MPETrrxoN
LACK, HiaH RATES PROTECT MONOPOLIES IN
STATE
(By Walter Wells)
Private power companies spend millions
of dollars of the ratepayers' money adver-
tising in local papers and national magazines
to convince the reading public that they have
a free enterprise. irusinese managed, taxpay-
ing operation.
Actually they have the special privilege
of an exclusive franchise and monopoly
granted by the city and State and have no
competition at all in most areas they serve.
This. In effect, is a very'valuable subsidy
they enjoy, because the State law allows
them to set rates high enough to earn 5 per-
cent on their investment and almost all
money they have ever put into the system -
is still on -their books for ratemaking, even
the money spent for lines and equipment
now obsolete and no longer in use.
DEBTS STAY ON BOOKS
Private power companies almost never re-
duce their Indebtedness and their electric
consumers will always be paying rates based
on this high value, yet they will never have
any measure of control and will always have
to buy from an exclusive monopoly.
Is this free enterprise? No.
Public power systems require and have the
best business management, because they have
lower rates, and out of their income they
pay interest on their investments, pay Bon-
neville or some other source for their electric
energy.
They hire their employees from the same
unions as does the private power company
and pay the same wages.
Each year they pay on their bonded in-
debtedness, and as the debt is paid off, lower
rates for electricity will follow since public
power systems are l,n business not to make a
profit but to serve their electric users at the
lowest possible rates.
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000200190033-2