Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

That is a terrific example of the garrison state, if you want facts. Senator GURNEY. Are you talking about wiretapping on Senators and Congressmen?

Mr. WULF. I did not have that particularly in mind.

Senator GURNEY. I had that in mind, because we hear a lot of talk that that is uppermost in our minds.

Do you have any examples of that?

Mr. WULF. No.

Senator GURNEY. You do not? Neither do I.

Mr. WULF. No. No.

Senator GURNEY. I thought that was what you were going to talk about.

Mr. WULF. No.

Senator GURNEY. Let us turn to something else.

Mr. WULF. Do you not want to talk about the Attorney General's program for free and unregulated wiretaps for evidence?

Senator GURNEY. Let us talk about the employment of Communists in defense plants. Do you think that would turn the country into a garrison state?

Mr. WULF. The employment of Communists?

Senator GURNEY. Yes.

Mr. WULF. I think it would turn this into a free nation, a freer nation.

Senator GURNEY. How would that occur?

Mr. WULF. I do not think that people ought to be penalized by losing their job or being put in jail or penalized in any way simply because of their political beliefs and associations or simply because they are members of the Communist Party.

That does not mean that they are going to go out and bomb the Boeing plant next week; does it?

Senator GURNEY. Let me ask you to respond to the question.

Mr. WULF. I do not know that there is any proof, as a matter of fact, that any member of the Communist Party in recent years has engaged in any act of sabotage. I do not know that there is. Do you have any evidence about that, Senator?

I do not.

Senator GURNEY. If we were to prohibit the employment of Communists in defense plants, would that turn our country into a garrison state?

Mr. WULF. I think it would be a step along the way.
Senator GURNEY. Your statement was that it would.

Do you have anything to back it up?

Mr. WULF. I have my opinion. I think what it would do would be to further cut back on the authority of the first amendment and what the first amendment means, and what it would do would be to partially repeal the first amendment by authorizing penalties, serious penalties, as far as the loss of employment is concerned. You can drive a man to starvation, you can drive his family to starvation, and you can even put him on the welfare rolls, Senator. And I know you do not want that-I am sure.

Senator GURNEY. How many Communists were employed in the defense industry prior to the Supreme Court's decision?

Mr. WULF. The only one I know about is Archie Brown.

Senator GURNEY. Is this going to starve the country because Archie Brown has to seek employment somewhere else?

Mr. WULF. He may have to go on the welfare rolls, and I know you know what a problem that is, and you do not want him on the welfare rolls; do you?

Senator GURNEY. Well, he might be able to find a job somewhere else?

Mr. WULF. As I recall it, he wanted to work in that shipyard out there, and if he could not work in that shipyard out there

Senator GURNEY. Would that turn this into a garrison state? Mr. WULF. Sure, like wiretapping, and the prosecutions at Chicago, and all of those things, they turn it into a garrison state. Senator GURNEY. How would it do that?

Mr. WULF. For instance, it might be I would be apprehensive about speaking on the phone. Now, that is evidence of a garrison state as far as I am concerned; that is one ingredient when you are afraid to pick up your phone and talk to your friends on the telephone, because when you do, you do not know if you are going to be thrown out of your job; or if you join a political party

Senator GURNEY. We have been talking about shipyards, and now you are talking about the telephone

Mr. WULF. Of course, they are all related; they are all links in the garrison state chain, if I may coin a phrase.

Senator GURNEY. Let us pursue the telephone business.
What is your fear there?

Mr. WULF. Well, because the Attorney General has asserted the power, and he is asserting it in the Supreme Court right now, as of a week ago; he is asserting that he has a right, uncontrolled by any judicial review whatsoever, to tap the conversation of anyone at all on the telephone if, on his good word, he thinks the domestic security is involved.

Senator GURNEY. Is this connected with this particular piece of legislation we have here to prevent Communists from working in defense plants?

Mr. WULF. Sure, it is all a part of it.

Senator GURNEY. What area

Mr. WULF. You wanted to know what a garrison state is. I mean this subcommittee did not propose the entire garrison state; it only proposed part of the garrison state, and I am trying to show you what the other pieces might be.

Senator GURNEY. Who proposed the rest of the garrison state? Mr. WULF. That has been a combination of legislative and administrative actions.

Senator GURNEY. We did not propose the whole garrison state? Mr. WULF. No; but given time you may.

Senator GURNEY. I am afraid that

Mr. WULF. Do you not want to talk about the bill that you and I both support, Senator?

It does not happen very often.

Senator GURNEY. Thank you, Mr. Wulf. We have had a healthy and spirited exchange.

Mr. WULF. Thank you, Senator.

Senator GURNEY. The meeting is adjourned. We will reconvene at 10:30 tomorrow.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., an adjournment was taken until 10:30 a.m., Wednesday, May 12, 1971.)

о

INDEX

Abshier, James A..

(Note. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee attaches no significance
to the mere fact of the appearance of the name of an individual or organization
in this index.)

A

Act of October 3, 1965 (Public Law 89-236)

Page

138

150

[blocks in formation]

Albertson v. Subversive Activities Control Board_.

American Committee for Protection of the Foreign Born v. Subversive

162, 166

Activities Control Board_.

147

[blocks in formation]

Kawapita v. United States-

149

Keyishian v. Board of Regents _ _

Labor Youth League v. Subversive Activities Control Board_.

149, 163

Lambert v. California__

Lynd v. Rusk

Maisenberg v. United States.

Matles v. United States-

N.A.A.C.P. v. Button_.

164

145, 149
154, 156

National Council of American-Soviet Friendship, Inc. v. Subversive

Activities Control Board__

153

153

162, 168

164

[blocks in formation]

Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade v. Subversive Activities Control
Board -

[blocks in formation]

157 151, 152 153

146, 147

142, 148, 163, 168, 171, 172, 177

154

160

137

186, 188

186

139

1, 2

136, 137, 145

Czechoslovakia_

D

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

National Committee Against Repressive Legislation.

National Labor Relations Act__

National Security Agency

NLF (National Liberation Front)
North Vietnam__

140

163

167

180

144, 156

[blocks in formation]

S. 1499. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, with respect to certain offenses against the security of the United States..

1, 3, 99, 136, 138, 139, 144, 145, 176, 177 S. 1500. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for other purposes-1, 12, 102, 136, 144, 145 S. 1501. A bill to amend titles 18 and 28, United States Code, with respect to proceedings before committees of the Congress, and for other purposes1, 27, 112, 136, 143-145, 157, 182 S. 1502. A bill to amend the Internal Security Act of 1950, and for other purposes 1, 37, 117, 136, 144, 145, 160, 162, 164 S. 1503. A bill to amend the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 1, 57, 128, 136, 140

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »