"war now," thinking, or his "hitting below the belt" ideas was voiced by his Pentagon superiors. And the reason for this seems rather plain. For many of Grow's superiors thought that way themselves. PEACE CAN WIN The war can be prevented, however. All but the maddest warmongers are afraid of the terrible counterblows that would fall upon them. But those maddest warmongers are influential. And the fight for peace is the No. 1 fight today. Senator THURMOND. Mr. Sylvester, you pointed out that the Communist Party propaganda machine is poised to distort, and I quote: "any inadvertent statement of high Government officials." Now, is it your opinion that the Communist propaganda machine within and without the country can only distort an inadvertent statement of high Government officials rather than any statement by a Government official? Mr. SYLVESTER. No indeed. I think they can-anything is grist to their mill, Senator. POLICY REVIEW IS DESIGNED TO IDENTIFY EXPRESSIONS OF PERSONAL OPINION Senator THURMOND. On page 5 of your opening remarks you stated that the policy review is designed to identify expressions of personal opinion as such. Could you give me examples where in the policy review of specific speeches changes have been made to identify personal opinion, sir? Mr. SYLVESTER. I think the one which you called to my attention this morning, and I would have to look back in the book-if you will recall, it was a change which resulted from the reclamas from two others of our agencies, two others of the Services against what was being said which seemed to arrogate to one agency rather than the other. What we are getting at there is an attempt to reduce if possible interservice rivalry and to identify under certain conditions and certain publications where the views are those of the speaker and not necessarily the views of the Service. I am speaking of that sort of thing. Senator THURMOND. Have there been very many statements of that kind that you have had to censor? Mr. SYLVESTER. Well, in terms Senator THURMOND. I would like for you to tell us about the others. Mr. SYLVESTER. In terms of 2,000 speeches, offhand I can't think of too many. I would have to go back and try and get a list for you. Senator THURMOND. Well, would you say it is negligible or would you say it is sizable or Mr. SYLVESTER. I think it is on the whole on the minor side. Senator THURMOND. Now, you said your review is designed to identify expressions of personal opinion as such. In your statement I believe on page 5, as I just stated to you Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes, sir. I did say that. Senator THURMOND. You stated it is designed to identify expressions of personal opinion. What was your answer to that question? AUTHORITY FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PERSONAL OPINION Senator THURMOND. Well, Mr. Sylvester, from what directive or instruction do you derive authority to identify personal opinions as such or for that matter, permit personal opinions of military officials to be cleared, particularly if the personal opinions expressed are not consistent with, and I quote, "well established national policies"? Mr. SYLVESTER. Well, of course, any speech is a personal opinion and where it is in conflict with established policy, the function of the Security Review is to try to make them conform. Senator THURMOND. Would you cite your policy for such action. Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes. I think Senator THURMOND. The authority for your policy. Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes. My basic charter and the charter for Security Review, I would say. Senator THURMOND. As I understood, you follow policy. You just don't exercise your judgment, as I understood a few moments ago. You follow policy. You are now saying you exercise your discretion, aren't you? Mr. SYLVESTER. What I am trying to say is Senator THURMOND. I understood that you followed policy. Now, what is the policy if you take an action of the kind you just described? Mr. SYLVESTER. As to individual opinions, you mean? Senator THURMOND. That is right. Mr. SYLVESTER. Here what we are trying to do is in the event, let us say, of an evaluation of a weapon system on which there is no policy at that time, an emergent weapon system, the identification of the speaker and his opinions on that as his own and not necessarily those of his service or the Department is one of the things that takes place in Security Review. Now, this may also happen in the case of the service itself in which there is still a discussion going on about a particular development, particular weapon system, particular strategy. And that will emerge from the service clearance in the first place. ACTION OF REVIEWERS WHEN POLICY IS UNAVAILABLE Senator THURMOND. Well, how are you going to know or the people under you or those down in the services going to know if you don't have a policy? I understood they followed policy. I understood they followed policy and didn't use their discretion or judgment or caprice. In other words, they had a policy for what they did and they followed it. Mr. SYLVESTER. I tried to say in my statement, Senator, that I know of no way of putting a stencil over a speech and checking it off, this is policy, and this isn't. I think as I tried to say you review speeches in the light of the policy that you can obtain from all available sources and then, of course, in the last analysis if there is a dispute or if there is no resolution, then judgment does have to be used. Senator THURMOND. Well, can you cite us a directive number or the memorandum or the paper that you send out for the guidance of the censors so that they will know that they are following policy when they censor such statements that might be questionable about some Mr. SYLVESTER. That I can get you the citation on, which has been in effect for many years, to be wary of statements which develop interservice rivalry, but there is no difficulty about that since if you have an interservice problem, the speeches go to the various services and they are quick to point it out. So we have no problem on that. Senator THURMOND. Is there any authority for one to use their personal opinion on these matters? Mr. SYLVESTER. I have seen no evidence that they use their personal opinion. Senator THURMOND. In other words, you think they always follow policy. Mr. SYLVESTER. I did not mean to say that. I don't think that you can divide it as simply into black and white as that, Senator, and I don't know what policy you are talking about, whether it is on weapons, or intelligence. Senator THURMOND. No matter what policy there has been, it depends on whatever speech they are reviewing. Are they authorized to substitute their personal judgment at any time or do they follow the policy? And if there is no policy, then what do they do? Mr. SYLVESTER. Well, they do not substitute capricious judgments. They seek out the best available means of policy, the source of policy. This will depend on what the subject is in the speech. If it is policy on the Atlas, that would go to the Air Force, and there you would get the policy on it. Senator THURMOND. Mr. Sylvester, you stated that the formation of policy is reserved under the Constitution exclusively to the President and the Secretary of State. Do you consider a treaty a matter of formation of foreign policy? Mr. SYLVESTER. I think if you will read my statement I said so far as the executive branch is concerned. Obviously the Senate has a share, a very important share in foreign policy in such matters as treaties, but I tried to make that clear in my statement by saying so far as the executive branch is concerned. DEFENSE REVIEWERS DO NOT REVIEW FOR FOREIGN POLICY Senator THURMOND. In answer to a question by Senator Symington you stated you applied a broad general statement of foreign policy which you received from the State Department. Does the Department of Security Review actually attempt themselves to review for foreign policy, and if so, would you state whether your source of foreign policy is written or oral and how is it communicated to individuals who do the actual review in the Directorate of Security Review? Mr. SYLVESTER. Senator, would you break that down and go a little slower for me. I frankly did not follow. Senator THURMOND. All right. In answer to a question by Senator Symington, you stated you applied a broad general statement of foreign policy which you received from the State Department. Mr. SYLVESTER. I had received a broad general statement of policy from the State Department? I don't recall that. Senator THURMOND. Didn't you say that you applied a broad gen Mr. SYLVESTER. I think the record would show exactly what I said. Senator THURMOND. Broad general directive may have been the words that you used. Mr. SYLVESTER. I would prefer, if you wouldn't mind, to comment on exactly what the record said. Senator THURMOND. How is that? Mr. SYLVESTER. I would prefer to comment on what the record shows I said. Senator THURMOND. Counsel wrote the words-Mr. Kendall, the counsel, wrote the words down as you said it. Well, at any rate, I will ask you again, and you answer it any way you want to, in answer to a question by Senator Symington, you stated you applied a broad general directive of foreign policy which you received from the State Department. Does the Department of Defense for Security Review actually attempt themselves to review for foreign policy? Mr. SYLVESTER. The answer is no. Senator THURMOND. And if so, would you state whether-well, if you don't that ends it. STATE DELETION OF REFERENCE TO COMMUNIST STRATEGY Now, Mr. Sylvester, you get your red book there. I want to ask you about 12 different speeches in here. The first one I am going to take up is No. 1, page 7, and I want to call your attention to this as we go along. I will give you the tenor of what all these speeches hold. Anything about the Communist design to dominate the world is censored and I want to ask you whether your department, the Defense Department, did this censoring or whether the State Department did it. Mr. SYLVESTER. Speech No. 1? Senator THURMOND. Speech No. 1, page 7. That is Mr. SYLVESTER. Mr. Powell Pierpont, June 8, 1961. Senator THURMOND. That is right. The last sentence down there: There is no reason to doubt that such situations will continue as communism exercises its strategy for world domination. Who censored that speech, the Defense or State Department? Delete. If said too often it sounds like a foregone conclusion. Senator THURMOND. Will you read that comment again, please? Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes. This is a State Department deletion. Marginal comment is— Delete. If said too often it sounds like a foregone conclusion. Senator THURMOND. Sounds like a foregone conclusion if said too often. Why do you think they would object to it? If an officer wanted to say it, even if it had been said before, why did they object? What do you know of the objection? Do you know of any objection Mr. SYLVESTER. I am afraid you will have to ask them, Senator. Senator THURMOND. I am asking you if you know of any objection. Mr. SYLVESTER. I think we should look through the speech to see if it has been said several times. Senator THURMOND. Suppose it has been said several times. Are they there to correct English or are they there to correct policy? Mr. SYLVESTER. Senator, you will have to ask them on that. Senator THURMOND. I am asking you what you think about it. STATE DELETION OF REFERENCE TO SOVIET DETERMINATION TO DOMINATE THE WORLD Senator THURMOND. I see. All right, now. Would you turn to speech 17, page 5. This is a speech made by Lieutenant General Trudeau, Chief of Research and Development, Department of the Army, on January 29, 1960, in which he made this statement: I, for one, do not believe that the Soviets have relented in the slightest in their determination to dominate the world and to destroy our way of life. Would you tell us who censored that speech? Mr. SYLVESTER. I'm sorry, Senator. That was Speech No. 17? Mr. SYLVESTER. I beg your pardon. Senator THURMOND. That is the first sentence. Mr. SYLVESTER. Oh, yes, page 5. Senator THURMOND. The first sentence. Would you tell us who censored that speech and what notes you have on that?" Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes, sir. A mandatory deletion by the State Department. No notes. Senator THURMOND. No notes. It doesn't have it subject to State Department amendment? Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes. Subject to State Department amendment, page 5. Senator THURMOND. Page 5. It has that on it. Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes. This was January 29, 1960. Now, would you turn over to Speech No. 31. Mr. SYLVESTER. Yes, Senator. STATE DELETION OF "THE COMMUNIST CHALLENGE IS THE CHALLENGE OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNIST WORLD TO THE ENTIRE FREE WORLD" Senator THURMOND. Page 3. That is the speech by Gen. Herbert B. Powell, commanding general, U.S. Continental Army Command, to the University of Oregon Alumni Association, New York, N.Y., April 13, 1961, in which he proposed to make this statement: The Communist challenge is the challenge of the entire Communist world to the entire free world. Would you tell us who censored that speech? |