Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4525774
label
Defense, Fountain Street Church, April 4, 1962
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525774
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Defense, Fountain Street Church, April 4, 1962
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Speeches
subjects
Soviet Union
Communism
Nuclear test ban treaties
Nuclear testing
Nuclear weapons
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525774
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1962-04-30
month
4
year
1962
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1962-04-01
month
4
year
1962
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
b833efd2369a8d67
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D15, folder "Defense, Fountain Street Church,
April 4, 1962" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the
Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Fountain sh. Church
1962 1). Play to win
April4,1962
2) appreciate views 8 others
I.
INTRODUCTION
3) Desapre without buy dragruable
A.
Personal comments
B.
Refer to Dr. Pauling's speech of two weeks ago; have read and studied
his address and have had it analyzed by competent scientists and other
responsible officials in the Department of Defense and with the Atomic
Energy Commission.
II. My first responsibility this evening is to DELINIATE THE ISSUES.
A. Dr. Pauling touched on a large number of subjects and topics, some of
which are essential to a consideration of this problem under discussion
and others which are not at issue tonight.
B.
Some topics mentioned by Dr. Pauling which are NOT Issues:
1.
We are not debating the irrationality of war.
potentrally
2. We have no dispute on the horrors of war and especially the dreddful
results of atomic warfare.
have the ability
3. Our issue is not whether the ability of Russians to inflict untold
damage on us and whether we have the ability to retaliate. Nor are
with findation results
we in disagreement on the fact that hundreds of thousands of people
will die in an all-out atomic war.
4.
The issue tonight is not whether disarmament is desirable or even
possible of attainment.
5. We have no dispute with Dr. Pauling on the desirability of eliminating
war.
"
Pankings opening statement 1 "We live in a wonderful
world Y 2 like it."
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
Digitized from Box D15 of The Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
2.
C. Dr. Pauling gave a great deal of attention to the effects of radiation
and radio-active fallout on human beings and mutations in newly formed
children. Not being a geneticist nor a physicist, I can't personally
dispute Dr. Pauling's statements on radiation and the effects of radio-
active fallout, but I do know that many equally competent and patriotic
scientists DO TAKE ISSUE with Dr. Pauling and do DISAGREE with the
of conclusions
information he presented here as factual two weeks ago.
1. On Page 11 of the copy of his speech I have, Dr. Pauling said,
"There is no dispute about these matters. The bombs that the Soviet
Union exploded last fall will, if the human race survives, cause
1,900,000 children to be born with gross physical or mental defects...."
BUT Dr. Gerald W. Johnson, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Atomic
Energy says this about Dr. Pauling's contention: "There is no dispute
on the qualitative statement that carbon-14 causes genetic effects.
There is, however, a great deal of dispute on the quantitative
consequences. The computations of 1,900,000 children to be born
with gross physical or mental defects is based on Pauling's estimate
that future birth rate will be about five times the present one.
I believe he uses a value of 300,000,000 per year, a genetic proportion
that includes both ionization and transmutation and the influence of
carbon-14 exposure to all future generations. He doesn't point out at
this stage that these cases, if they occur, would be distributed over
a period of 60,000 to 100,000 years."
GERALD FORD VIBRARY
3.
Docent Panky
2. Dr. Leonard Reiffel, Director of Physics Research at the Armour
Research Foundation in Chicago said on March 9th: "The President's
excellent speech of last Friday made clear that the tests we've now
planned will add only one percent to the natural background of
radioactivity in the world. To do the complete job would not bring
the figure up to even two percent. The President stated that the
exposure due to our currently planned tests "will be less than 1/50
of the difference which can be experienced, due to variations in
natural radioactivity simply by living in different locations in
this country.' Suppose the figure was 1/25? with survival at
stake, I at least would state that that would be acceptable to say
the least! especially in the context of all the other sources of
radiation in modern civilization: x-rays, flying at high altitude
in jets, living in masonry buildings, etc."
Dem. J Cally. Calif.
3. Rep. Chet Holifield, Chairman of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
told the House of Representatives on March 5th that "The Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy has been assured that the amounts of radioactive
fallout from any atmospheric tests which the United States may carry
on will be substantially less than the amounts produced in the last
Soviet series of tests, and will not constitute a significant
population hazard." (Page 3140 of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD)
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
4.
4. On March 25th the American Medical Association released the results
of a study on the effects of radiation on health by top American
specialists in radiation medicine. Among other things this REPORT
said: "Also wrapped up in the study of this 'chronic' radiation--
as opposed to 'acute' radiation from atomic accidents--is the question
of damaged genes. In other words, are we now irradiating ourselves
to such an extent that in a few, (or a hundred) generations,
radiation-induced mutations will change the hhape of the human race?
"Scientific 'purists' on the subject maintain that we are; that
any radiation, no matter the amount, is damaging to the genes.
"An equally-eminent group maintains that up to a certain point
radiation produces no noticeable effects; that there is a 'threshold'
and only after the level of radiation crosses this threshold does it
become dangerous.
"Although proof is lacking either way--it will take studies of
several generations to produce any meaningful statistics--the
threshold theory appears to be gaining."
"Of all the radiation hazards produced by man, none has
stirred more fear than fallout.
"The firey upsurge of an atomic blast sucks dirt and rocks into
the boiling maelstrom where it is vaporized by the heat and carried
miles into the sky by the mushroom cloud.
"Some of these dust particles, only 1/10,000 of an inch, soon
condense into sand-size granules which fall downwind from the blast
for a distance up to several hundred miles. This heavy fallout is
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
5.
extremely 'hot' and can deliver a killing dose of radiation. However,
under standard bomb testing conditions, and barring accidents, it
presentsno great immediate problems.
"Of far more concern to public health officials and scientists
is the microscopic debris that does not condense. This can hang in
the atmosphere for as long as ten years."
"The Russian series probably will not boost overall
radiation levels any higher this spring than they were in 1958 when
the three-year moratorium on nuclear testing began. If this proves
to be true, then there's probably not much to worry about. No
harmful effects from the pre-1958 fallout have ever been objectively
astrated.
"Perhaps the best way to put fallout into perspective is to
consider it in relation to all sources of radiation.
"According to Dr. Lauriston S. Taylor, chairman of the National
Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements, about half of the
total radiation delivered to our reproductive systems comes from
medical sources--almost exclusively X-rays---and 40 percent comes
from background radiation. The remaining 10 percent is delivered
in about equal amounts by (1) luminous watches, buttons and other
such devices; (2) nuclear power plants and engines, atomic wastes, etc.;
(3) fallout.
"The mere fact that man is essentially an earthbound creature
subjects him to four times as much radiation as the fallout from all
the nuclear devices exploded since 1945. A square mile of dirt and
6.
rock a foot deep contains about three tons of uranium and six tons
of thorium--both radiactive materials. In comparison, bomb testing
by all nations up to 1958 produced about four and a half tons of
fission products."
5. It appears, therefore, that I am completely justified in pointing out
that competent scientists disagree with Dr. Pauling's analysis of the
effects of radiation and fallout from nuclear testing on human
physical development.
D. Before setting forth the ISSUES in this debate, I must also set the record
straight in one more respect. P. 15 - old saying, people who live in
glass houses to
On Page 20 of Dr. Pauling's speech he quotes testimony of Drs. Everett
and Pugh of the Weapons Evaluation Division of the Institute of Defense
Analysis of the Pentagon.
Dr. Pauling said, "They ought to be reliable" in their discussion of various
nuclear attacks on the U.S. under different conditions. But Dr. Pauling
wasn't so reliable in quoting Drs. Everett and Pugh.
1. Page 20 of his speech was personally reviewed by Dr. George Pugh of
the Weapons System Evaluation Group and he indicates that Dr. Pauling
has extracted data carelessly from his report. Dr. Pugh could verify
none of the numbers given by Dr. Pauling and for the specific figure
of 2 million uninjured, Dr. Pugh states that this figure should read
12 million úninjured. Dr. Pugh also indicated that if one were to
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
7.
direct nuclear attacks against a military target system, that the
total casualty estimates would be reduced to 50% of the indicated
figures in the report. The careless handling of figures by Dr.
Pauling also suggests an intellectual dishonesty 2th the work of
abring
the original authors, Dr. Pugh and Dr. Everett.
2.
On Page 26 of Dr. Paulang's speech where he discussed an atomic
attack on the U.S. with fallout shelters and with people prepared,
he quotes Drs. Everett and Pugh as saying, "Only 130,000,000
Americans would be dead in sixty days; thirty million injured and
twenty million uninjured. So they were saying that 40,000,000 instead
of 170,000,000 -- 130,000,000 dead, what would happen to the injured
after sixty days. Many of them -- well -- many of them -- perhaps
everybody would die anyway, but at any rate there is the forty million."
3. Dr. Pugh read this and stated again that Dr. Pauling had distorted
the figures in the basic report. For the extremely heavy attack
16
smith
condition described, 130 million should have read 114 million. The
30 million figure for injured should have read 22 million and the
20 million uninjured should have read 44 million. These are examples
24"
of Dr. Pauling's carelessness with the data.
4.
It is not pleasant to point out these inaccuracies, but we must set
the record straight.
FORD LIBRARY
8.
E. Having pointed out what are NOT the issues in our discussion and
having explained the disagreements which other competent scientists have
with Dr. Pauling on two subjects he discussed, we now must set forth the
ISSUES to be considered this evening. An analysis of Dr. Pauling's address
would demonstrate that we have two principle issues this evening:
1. The immediate question is whether the United States should carry out
a program of nuclear testing in the atmosphere this spring in a manner
and under the circumstances as proposed by President Kennedy. To that
question I answer, "Yes;" Dr. Pauling said "No."
2. The other question, possibly more basic, certainly more philosophical,
involves Dr. Pauling's contention that the way to achieve disarmament
and to eliminate war from the world is for the citizens of the United
States to write the President, Senators, and Representatives and to
"apply more pressure on Washington" to "make the bomb test agreement."
3. Because Dr. Pauling implies that the major responsibility for dis-
armament and peace rests with the U.S., I want to consider this second
issue first and then conclude by explaining why I am supporting
President Kennedy on nuclear testing.
III. Dr. Pauling on IMMORALITY and other sins of U.S. and free nations:
In his address two weeks ago Dr. Pauling used the term 'immoral' on a number
of occasions and was critical of certain individuals and of certain American
policies.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
9.
Dr. Pauling found that nations are immoral, that war is immoral, that Dr.
Teller is immoral, and that LIFE MAGAZINE in one of its articles represents the
heighth of immorality.
Dr. Pauling also described the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Mr. Gilpatrick,
as "this fellow who keeps speaking up." He said that Dr. Libby is a man whom he
couldn't understand, that Adenauer was an old militarist. He noted approvingly
a statement that the defense industries of this country are more interested in
increasing their payrolls than in defense, the safety of this nation.
Dr. Pauling insisted that President Kennedy's decision to resume atmos-
pheric testing came about because of pressures of the defense contractors, the
military complex.
Superfactly
also stated here two weeks ago that the United States has always lead
the Soviet Union in "increased militarism" and then said, "we are compemplating
another unilateral action in direction of greater militarism" and "right in the
middle of a conference in Geneva."
But I have read and re-read Dr. Pauling's address, and I saw not one word
about the immorality of atheistic dialectic materialism. Nor about the
immorality of the Communist revolutions. Not a word on the immorality of murder
and carnage in Hungary, nor about the immorality of the dictatorship of the
Kremlin. I saw noghing in the address of two weeks ago about 'this fellow
Khrushchev who keeps speaking up' and, incidentally, pounding the desk with
his shoe. I saw nothing about this man Gromyko who few of us can understand.
I read not a word about Stalin, the old militarist.
Dr. Pauling didn't mention the political commissars who are more interested
in their doctrine and power than in the freedom of the world. I could find no
reference to the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Supreme Soutet who
LIBRARY
10.
is a slave of the Communist doctrine and under constant pressure to expand
Communist power and influence and has even threatened to bury us.
Dr. Pauling laid little stress on the fact that the Soviet Union, not the
vidated the Test monatornan
United States, exploded about fifty atomic devices in the atmosphere against
1
the desires of all mankind and while talks at Geneva were stalmated.
Nor did Dr. Pauling remind you of the militarism of the Soviet Union
which is not only apparent but real -- ask the Russians, the Poles, the Latvians,
the Làthuanians, the Hungarians, the East Germans.
IV. COMMUNISM, its principles and manifestations, must be understood in any dis-
cussion today relative to war and peace.
A. J. Edgar Hoover wrote on October 10, 1960 in "Christianity Today":
"Communism is today literally a violent hurricane, rocking not only the
chanceries of the world but seeking to capture the bodies, minds, and
souls of men and women everywhere."
"Hence, there arises the ugly manifestation of Communist 'ethics'
--namely, the Communist belief that morality must be subordinated to the
class struggle, the inevitable conflict between communism and its opponents.
What is moral? Anything which serves to destroy the enemy and promote
communism. Lenin was most explicit: 'Morality is that which serves to
destroy the old exploiting society and to unite all the toilers around
the proletariat, which is creating a new Communist society.' Communist
morality, of course, is rooted in total rejection of a bel ief in God and
in the values of the Christian moral code.
BERALD FORD LIBRARY
11.
"This rejection of God gives communism a demonic aspect--transforming
it into a fanatical, Satanic, brutal phenomenon. Morality is not determined
by ethical standards grounded in an Absolute, but in the expedient inter-
pretations of the Party--meaning, in actual practice, the whims and desires
of the ruling clique or Party leader. This leads to the terrifying
déctrine that 'the end justifies the means.'"
P.34 WAR
On January 6,1961 Mr. Khrushchev delivered a speech entitled, "For New
Victories of the World Communist Movement." He analyzed three categories
of wars: "world wars, local wars, and liberation wars or popular up-
risings." This breakdown, he said, "is necessary to work out the correct
Baulell
tactics with regard to these wars."
As to world wars, he declared that "Communists are the most determined
oppoments" of such wars, and he asserted that "we can forestall the
outbreak of a world war." Local wars, he thought, were more likely to
occur in the future, but he rejected them also because a local war "may
grow into a thermonuclear rocket war." But "liberation wars and popular
uprisings," he predicted, "will continue to exist as long as imperialism
exists." "Such wars," he asserted, "are not only admissable but inevitable
..." "We recognize such wars. We help and willihelp the people striving
for their independente." Chairman Khrushchev then asked and answered a
series of rhetorical questions about these wars of liberation. "Can such
wars flare up in the future? They can. Can there be such uprisings?
There can
... In other words, can conditions be created where a people
will lose their patience and rise in arms? They can. What is the attitude
of the Marxists toward such uprimings? A most positive one
"
12.
Then after a description of the horrors of a thermonuclear war,
Khrushchev stated a significant conclusion. "The victory of socialism
throughout the world," he announced, "is now near." But "for this victory,
wars among states are not necessary."
Khrushchev is saying here that a major war in the nuclear age has become
too dangerous to play the role of "midwife to revolution" which Communist
leaders before him had always preached. At the same time, the Soviets
wish to keep alive the threat of nuclear war as a means of intimidation,
a form of blackmail intended to discourage the Free World from resisting
Communist encroachment at other levels.
C. Robert Strausz-Hupd, Director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute of
the University of Pennsylvania, points out in the NATO Journal for March
1962 that "according to Khrushchev, 'wars of national liberation' are
'good' wars. They can be fought without escalating into more violent
types of international hostility. Since, according to Khrushchev,
'limited wars' escalate inevitably into big nuclear wars which the West
cannot win because of Soviet nuclear power, the West has no other choice
but to meet the communists on their own chosen terrain, i.e., the colonial
and ex-colonial world, and leave to the communists the choice of weapons:
guerrilla war, war-by-proxy, psycho-political warfare, subversion, and
conspiracy."
Dr. Strausz-Hupe also said "(the Communist) accepts the totality and
irreconcilability of the conflect as a fundamental fact, whereas to us it is
QERALD FORD LIBRARY
13.
still a surprising notion." He concludes that "the balance of nuclear
forces determines the feasibility and scope of non-nuclear conflicts."
D. We must never forget it was Khrushchev, not Eisenhower or Kennedy, who
shouted "we will bury you" and "your grandchildren will live under
communism."
E. It is not sufficient to pressure our government into disarmament or a test
ban; our world isn't that simple; we must reckon with the forces of the
atheistic Communist conspiracy.
either
V. Contrary to Dr. Pauling's intimations, the U. S. is not wholly or primarily
1
responsible for the breakdown at Geneva.
A. On Page 29 of Dr. Pauling's address he said, "You know you can get a report
from a Senate Committee on the negotiations in Geneva. This report says,
'The U.S. has seemed to vaccillate between the objective of wanting to
conclude a treaty as soon as possible and the belief that constant progress
in the negotiations is to our disadvantage.' Why? And the Kennedy govern-
ment did not change. The Kennedy government too did not change in such a
way as to cause us to believe that there was an honest effort being made
for a treaty for both sides."
conderable.
2t would have been mand helpful specifically he identified had
1. After some effort we were able to locate the document. It is a report
1
of the Subcommittee on Disarmament of the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations, dated October 1960. Dr. Pauling quoted a sentence from the
Preface by Senator Humphrey. The quotation is accurate but it is only
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
14
one sentence from a 2½ page statement. Senator Humphrey also said, "If
the United States is plagued with ambivalence of purpose, the Soviet Union
suffers from a rigidity of stance and an attitude of suspicion. The
Soviet objective, moreover, has been to resist in every way the inclusion of
control and inspection measures. Each step the Soviets have taken toward
control and inspection and toward the admission of foreigners into the
U.S.S.R. has been done so only after prolonged haggling.
"In this summary one glaring inconsistency appears in the Soviet
position. With respect to the number of inspections and to the financial
contribution to the establishment of the control system, the Soviet Union
wants the West, i.e., the United States and the United Kingdom, to concede
or pay twice as much. The Soviet Union demands two imppections in the West
for every inspection in the Soviet Union. For every dollar or ruble con-
tributed by the Soviet Union to the operation of the control system the
Soviets want two dollars or two rubles to be contributed by the United
States and the United Kingdom together. Yet, when it comes to the composition
of the Control Commission or to the staffing of the control posts, the
Soviet Union wants the ratio between the Soviet Union and the West to be
equal."
B. On Page 29 of Dr. Pauling's address he said, "The Soviet Union had agreed
to allow international inspections stations on Soviet soil and said that
she would allow fifteen manned by international inspectors. And we asked
for nineteen. And month after month, year after year, in fact two years
went by with no solution between these numbers fifteen and nineteen."
FORD (TBRAR)
15
1. Unfortunately this is not the only issue, as shall be pointed out.
2. The U. S. had already compromised in arriving at the figure 19.
3. The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy reported in its list of
"significant dates" that on "August 21, 1958: Conference of
Experts adopted a final report for consideration by Governments.
"Conference of Experts recommended the so-called "Geneva System"
of detecting nuclear explosions. This sytem recommended a network
of 180 control points. It should be noted that the American
representatives, during this conference, had taken the position that
650 control points would be necessary to have adequate protection
down to 1 káloton. Through comprémise with the Soviets, they settled
on the 180 stations, but then had to point out the weakness between
the area of 1 káloton and 5 kálotons."
C.
Secretary of State Rusk in an address at the Geneva Disarmament Conference
on March 23, 1962 outlined in detail our difficulties in dealing with the
Soviets.
(use such quotations from his speech as seem appropriate)
VI.
NUCLEAR TESTING in atmosphere is necessary to insure that we stay ahead in
nuclear capability.
Smits respect only strength.
A. We must keep ahead to preserve the peace.
B. Dr. Pauling stated that Dr. Glen Seaborg, Chairman of the Atomic Energy
Commission, said that we are ahead of the Soviet Union in nuclear weapons
technology and that we do not need to carry out tests.
LIBRAR,
16
1. Dr. Seaborg has always insisted this is a political decision to be
made by the President.
2. His last public statement was on "Meet The Press" (Oct. 29, 1961).
One question was: "Would you say that eventually they would pull
ahead of us if this situation continued?" Dr. Seaborg answered,
"I think within the limit, if we tested indefinitely underground and
if the Russians tested indefinitely in the atmosphere, they would pull
ahead of us, particularly in the weapons-effects area, the area of
the effect of weapons on weapons, which is eventually going to become
a very important area--in the anti-ICBM problem as it has been termed."
C. President Kennedy in his TV address stressed this need when he said, "In
many areas of nuclear weapons research, we have reached the point where
our progress is stifled without experiments in every environment."
D. Ralph McGill in his syndicated column for March 31st concludes by saying:
"To forgo tests is to turn control of the world over to the Russians.
This will not be done, for reasons obvious to all except those who somehow
believe that if we don't test, the Russians would give up their weapons.
The prospect of a Russian-ruled world is one that simply cannot be accepted.
The anti-test pickets could use a bit of intellectual reality--or honesty."
VII. Nuclear testing as recommended by President Kennedy is essential to our
national defense and the security of the free world.
FORD is LIBRARY GERALD
17
A. Anti-missile missile
B. Weapons Development
C. Proof testing or system testing of operational weapons.
VIII.
President set sáfeguards.
A.
Conducted under conditions to restrict the radioactive fallout
to minimum.
B. Will cancel tests if Soviets agree to acceptable disarament treaty.
IX.
Concluding Statement.
A. Recognize and understand the existence of the Communistic conspiracy in the
world.
B. By every means at our disposal:
1. Support the President in his decision on nuclear testing.
2. Demonstrate to the Communists that public opinion in the U.S. is
behind our government in a determination to be militarily strong.
3. Prove to the world that there will be no undermining of the President's
efforts to safeguard the security of our country and of the free world.
C.
Critical times demand hard decisions, calculated risks, and unselfish dedication.
Such are the times, such are the demands, and I'm confident that Americans
will respond with unselfish dedication.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY