Letter from Laurence Jaeger to President Harry S. Truman

X 506 MCDONALD AVENUE BROOKLYN 18, N. Y. Pro August 14, 1951 THE TRUMAN WASHINAL AND LIBRARY Dear President Truman: state I have just listened to the rebroadcast of your talk today before the American Legion in Washington. I agreed with a great many of the things you had to say about how our country is being turned into a spineless, hysterical land by people who prey upon fears and use slander, guilt by associa- tion and character assassination to build suspicion and close- mindedness. And I agree with you that unless people of strength and character get up the nerve to put a stop to this we'll have no democracy left to defend against possible ag- gressors. As I listened, however, there were several things that disturbed me. There seemed to be inconsistencies. Be- cause I've always considered that you are an honest man (per- haps this is in itself an indication of how much all of us -- even supporters -- are infected with the disease of suspicion of the people we would ordinarily never think of doubting), I've decided to take them up with you directly. In all sincerity, this is what bothered me. (I am impatient with myself for having to apologize for daring to differ with my President -- how effective is the fear of being called a Red because I exercise my right, even my duty, to ex- press honestly the things I wonder about!). As I listened, I asked myself, "Where did all these things start? How did we get sucked into this whirlpool of fear and doubt and slander?" And I realized, of course, that it started right in Washington. Not in the halls of Congress, where it has been nursed into such a prosperous, vicious handyman, but in the executive branch. What set the pattern for the test of guilt or innocence by association but the loyalty programs? Where did the conclusive evidence of a man's Americanism ori- ginate but in the Attorney General's list of subversive organi- zations? This is a touchy situation, I know. I do not question the necessity of a government's setting up standards to weed out people who work their way into sensitive positions to do spying or sabotage for a foreign power. But how can I reconcile this reasonable necessity with the sweeping, all- pervading snooping into the lives and thoughts of decent people who are as remote from sensitive jobs as a truckdriver? And how can I reconcile a valid security check with the wild-eyed