In supporting this Army public information program we are meeting our obligation to advance the Army's R. & D. program and improve the national image of our Army, which is a vital part of our national security effort, and, in my opinion, a key to our hope for the future. At a time when the horrible maelstrom of world communism-now engulfing large segments of the world's population— seeks to suck our Nation and the rest of the free world into the vortex of death and destruction, I would be faithless to my trust and recreant in my duty if I did not speak out.

My personal experiences against the Communists, on the battlefields of Korea and during my assignment as Chief of Army Intelligence, have given me a knowledge and awareness of the insidious and vicious threat of world communism cloaked in the garments of Russian imperialism that, while not unique, may be considered exceptionally comprehensive. These dangers lie within our borders as well as beyond our national boundaries, as Mr. J. Edgar Hoover and others have so clearly shown. We must "know our enemy" if we are to defeat his challenge. There can be no determination to resist disaster if we are unaware, and hence unprepared, to resist it.

My public appearances, as any examination of the record will show, have all been for the purpose of enlightening the public mind, both military and civilian, regarding Army R. & D. To do this, it has been necessary to say, in part, why we must be strong militarily, and spiritually, to arm for the future. It is necessary to remind ourselves of the struggle of our forefathers from time to time. We are so proud of our heritage that we get careless of our destiny.

You Senators clearly understand that we, as a nation, face the greatest threat of our times in the multifaceted challenge of world communism. Not all of our people do. Telling them the facts of the situation is part of the story of explaining why it is necessary to spend billions of their dollars for defense of their own freedom and liberty, and why we must be determined to defend those things we hold dear, with our very lives if necessary.

As the President has said:

Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger no war ever posed a greater threat to our security.

In all my public addresses I have supported the national policy. I have also followed guidance from my superiors and the dictates of my conscience in the preparation of those remarks. There is no directive, to my knowledge, prohibiting members of the Defense Establishment from speaking out clearly and forthrightly against communism or challenging our people to stand fast on those great principles that are the keystone in the arch of American policy and freedom of men everywhere.

My speeches have all been submitted through established channels to the Department of Defense for policy review. I know the record will show that many of my speeches have been amended. The amendments in my speeches, however, even though substantial in number, have not prevented me from getting across my basic message. Some changes were of a mandatory nature; some were suggestive in nature;

them. The sources of all these changes in my speeches are not known to me. Only occasionally have the sources of change been indicated on the copy returned to me.

I mentioned cause for wonder. Let me illustrate :

On November 19, 1959, when I addressed the American Ordnance Association here in Washington, it was suggested by the Department of State that I not say, and I quote:

The tenets of Marx and Engels and Lenin are as firm a part of the Communist doctrine as when they were announced.

The Department of State's comment to this suggested change was, and again I quote:

They [the Communists] have jettisoned many of these tenets, unfortunately, because some tenets were retarding industrial expansion.

The change was suggested. I did not follow it. I left it in my speech.

Again, in the same American Ordnance Association speech, I was not permitted to say:

The three sputniks satellites lend substance to * * * [Communists] claims [of an intercontinental ballistic missile] and their lunar probes should clinch them. The Department of State's comment on this mandatory change was, and I quote:

Policy is to separate military from scientific achievement of U.S.S.R. It is much easier for Soviets to hit the moon than to hit the Pentagon. Such remarks tend to frighten our friends.

In these instances, as I stated, the source was clearly marked "State Department." However, there were other such changes, with the source unidentified, which gave my staff and me equal cause for wonder about the motivation involved.

When considering the aspects of changes to my speeches, I am always mindful of my solder's duty. A soldier does not question the policies and decisions of higher governmental authority. He accepts them.

I do not recall ever officially protesting changes to my speeches. I studied them, seeking guidance relative to preparation of my future speeches. As I could determine it, I applied it, but I still continued forthright expression of the things I deeply believe in. In essence, in this regard, I limited myself. This is in keeping with my soldier's faith and my sense of duty. I took this position of my own accord, comforted by an awareness that a growing number of Americans shared my concern and would finally bring it into focus.

Now, I have made certain observations regarding public and other information addresses by military officials.

First, it appears apparent to me that there has been little difference in policy review procedures between this administration and the last, despite a change in the very top-level officials.

Next, I know of no military officer who questions the historically accepted principle of civilian control of the military, or the responsibility and authority of the Secretary of Defense and higher officials to review, for policy and propriety, the statements of military spokes

Last, there is a manifest need for public addresses by responsible civilian and military officials, within the framework of national policy and in the best interests of our country.

This last point specifically was endorsed by the President when recently he said:

** the military have the right and the necessity to express their educated views on some of the great problems that face us around the world.

On June 7, 1961, in an address to the graduating class of the U.S. Naval Academy-and I was present-President Kennedy clearly defined the more demanding role of the responsible American military

officer in these times of crisis:

to make great determinations which affect the survival of this country. The President went on to explain:

The revolution in the technology of war makes it necessary in order that you (the young Naval Academy graduates), when you hold positions of command, may make an educated judgment between various techniques, that you also be a scientist and an engineer and a physicist, and your responsibilities go far beyond the classic problems of tactics and strategy.

Continuing this quote:

You must know something about strategy and tactics and logistics, but also economics and politics and diplomacy and history. You must know everything you can about military power, and you must also understand the limits of military power. You must understand that few of the important problems of our time have, in the final analysis, been finally solved by military power alone. When I say that officers today must go far beyond the official curriculum, I say it not because I do not believe in the traditional relationship between the civilian and the military, but you must be more than servants of policy. You must be prepared to play a constructive role in the development of national policy, a policy which protects our interests and our security and the peace of the world.

Now, I believe I share with members of this committee the view that our people must be informed-better informed concerning the fact that a peace-loving nation like ours finds it necessary to arm so heavily if we, and other freedom-loving people, are going to conquer eventually the Commuinst threat to our survival and our civilization. I am sure that to you it is obvious that this fact cannot be most effectively or adequately explained in such simple terms as— "more guns, less butter."

In preparing my remarks for this session, I recalled an illustration of this point which I learned over 40 years ago as a cadet at West Point at the beginning of my long career as a professional soldier. During our American Revolution, when the English Minister of War urged Parliament to increase the number of troops in Boston, so as to make English guns outnumber the American, that far-seeing statesman, William Pitt, observed:

We must reckon not so much with their guns-as with their sentiments of liberty.

I submit to this committee that Pitt's statement rings strikingly clear and true today.

I ask the indulgence of this committee to include here, near the end of my statement, the following extract from the commencement address I made to the 1960 National Defense Seminar at the National

extension of remarks of Hon. Frank E. Moss of Utah, page A60196021, Appendix to Congressional Record, August 8, 1960:

The need of the hour, above all else, is a dynamic awakening of American public opinion in support of worthy, clearcut, comprehensive national goals. As a people we must more meaningfully define our national goals and objectives and again fire the fuel that brightens the uplifted torch of liberty, but it can only come from within the heart and soul and body politic of an awakened America.

There can be no doubt in any well-informed mind that a rapidly expanding Soviet technology with all its sinister facets, poses the greatest threat of our day to the peaceful and productive evolution of mankind. With all our energy and resourcefulness we must counter this threat but it can't be done by ignoring it.

Now, in this life there are few certainties, but one of them is that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty-and today, even of survival-and great as our problems are, their solutions are not beyond the genius of the American people. Informed and dedicated-alive to the stark reality of our time-we can prepare to sacrifice and know it is better to give freely of our treasure and sweat now, than our blood and tears later.

The powerful material forces arrayed in this struggle, while of vital importance, are still secondary, for this worldwide battle will be won or lost primarily on the windswept crags of the spirit-in the hearts and minds of men. * * *

The American way of life, based on a belief in the dignity of man, faith in God, free enterprise, and freedom and justice for all, was clearly spelled out by our Founders. To enjoy these blessings, millions of people sought, and still seek, the protective arm and guiding light of the Statue of Liberty. Today, though less than 200 years old as a nation, we stand as the patriarch of all freedom-loving peoples everywhere. This is why we must lead; this is what we have to protect. Quality is more important than quantity. If democracy is only the triumph of mediocrity, we are doomed. We must not tarry in the mirage of material comforts when there are bolder and brighter horizons worthy of our struggle. * * *

We must never, never forget that the real capstone of all strength lies in firm advancement of the spiritual values that have made America the leading Nation on this earth-that infatuation with things material can destroy usthat the true strength of free men and nations everywhere comes from faith in a Supreme Being-dedication to a just cause and courage to live, or if necessary to die, for it.

Thus, the heavy mantle of free world leadership, now resting precariously on our shoulders, will drape itself more securely and more gracefully about us if we not only guard it against the ominous pressures of today but guide our Nation to an enlightened and happier tomorrow. * * * The need for courage on the battlefield was never greater than in the mortal combat in which we are now locked to the finish.

The great days of America must not lie shrouded in past glories. We have but glimpsed the dawn of national achievement. Unlimited is our future if we have the courage to seek it. A glimpse of the coming years burns bright with promise for those who dare. Our heritage bespeaks our greater destiny, and free men everywhere pray that we will find the wisdom and the strength to gain it for all mankind.

Distinguished members of this committee, in closing I submit that our power for security in peace-and victory in war if necessary-depends not alone upon the production of necessary hardware for defense; rather, it more truly depends upon the execution of dynamic and forward-looking policies fully supported by those sentiments cherished deep in the hearts of all free men and informed citizens, including all the professional and citizen soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines of the Republic. Every American must be spiritually and heroically motivated to live and work-and fight, if necessary-to preserve, defend, and extend those priceless attributes of our American

Mr. Chairman, I am sorry I have not had more time to prepare for this particular meeting here. As you said, I arrived from Athens after midnight. Yesterday morning, as the light was breaking over Athens, I went out on the balcony of the King George Hotel where I was staying.

Senator STENNIS. Pull the microphone a little closer to you, General please.

General TRUDEAU. And I looked at the hill on which stands the Parthenon. In somber contemplation I realized that it was more than 20 centuries since Greece gave us so much of our culture. Here the city state of Athens rested. But it was common to all of the other communities in the Peloponnesian Peninsula that the art of debate and the right of freedom of speech was so greatly advanced, and here much of our Western culture was born, and here Leonidas, Alexander, Pericles and a host of great human beings made their great contributions.

The marble gods in the buildings that you could see there have witnessed much over these centuries in the way of exultation in victory and bitterness in defeat, and in those areas much blood has run freely and invaders (as little as 20 years ago) overran that country during these centuries from north and south and east and west, by land and by sea, and partly by air.

But here in the rocky hills and fields of Greece I found a keen awareness of communism and the determination that the Greek people would rather be dead than Red. In that sentiment I was very proud to associate myself as I addressed the Greek general staff yesterday morning and visited their research center later in the day, around

noon.

So, in adding these sentiments that come from a personal visit to an area that holds so much of history, I want to unqualifiedly endorse the President's determination that it is worth any sacrifice to preserve this Nation, its institutions, and the spiritual values that are its underpinning.

It is my conviction that we must soberly and steadily advance the cause of freedom and progress to a victorious conclusion around this world in the coming years and not be deluded by the tranquilizers of peaceful coexistence and containment.

I know I stand with members of this committee in my resolution that we must prevent erosion of our country's institutions and objectives by Communists and fellow travelers.

These views constitute true patriotism in my book. I embrace them with my whole heart, and I know the overwhelming majority of my countrymen stand with me.

Within these limitations, Mr. Chairman, as regards lack of preparation, I am prepared to answer any questions the committee asks, and I thank you for the privilege of making this presentation.

Senator STENNIS. We thank you, General. Thank you for being here, especially since you accommodated us in getting here a day earlier. Now, if you are ready, we will proceed with Mr. Kendall, who is the chief counsel for the subcommittee, for his examination of you with reference to some matters that he has.