The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1941-11-19
BY "UNCENSORED"


To what extent the belligerent out
bursts of various presidential appoint
ees represent the views of the adj
ministration usually remains mys-
terry which is solved only after the
public reaction is in. Recently, great
est speculation has centered around
the address of Secretary Knox on Oc-
tober l before the American Bar As
sociation in which he said: 1T is
the hope of the world that sea power
for the next hundred years at least
will reside in the hands of the two
great nations which now possess that
power, the United States and Great
Britain"
Shortly after Knox spoke, letter
was sent to the President asking
whether he shared this particular
thought. The letter pointed out that
% Knox's hope appeared to be in
direct contradiction to point one of
| the eight points which disavows any
intention of Anglo-American aggrand-
izement; (2) 100 years of Anglo-Amer-
lean naval policing implies a general
condemnation of the German people
rather than of the nazi regime: 90
Knocks speech was reminiscent of the
kind of nazi and Japanese statements
which bring immediate condemnation
from the u S.
The reply from the White House.
dated October 81, and signed by
Stephen Early, Secretary to the Presi-
dent, reads: "You will, | am sure,
realize that 1t would not be possible
to pass upon every Interpretation
given to the statements of cabinet
officers but l wish to state emphatic
ally that Secretary Knox's actual
speech before the American Bar AS
ISOLATION on October first does rep
resent the views of the administra-
ton"
More defense"
The amendment emasculating the
Neutrality act was passed in the SEN
ate Friday night by a vote of so to
81; the Lend-Lease bill was enacted |
by a vote of so to 81. One of the |
iuCidChtdl lulllCtCu ny lnC
vote is the credibility of columnists |
who, during the past few weeks, free
ly predicted the disintegration of the |
Neutrality-suspicious. bloc.
Sheer revulsion at the hypocrisy of |
spokesman contributed
to the Strengthening of senatorial OPP
position. Proponents of the Neutral
ity amendment still talked in terms
of defense and keeping out of war.
The term defense" has completely
lost its meaning. Unsophisticated
Americans who think that defense
means military protection of the U. S.
or even of the Western hemisphere
are living in a dream world. Proof
is provided in the testimony of Adj
miral Harold r. Stark, chief of naval
operations, at the secret hearings of
the senate foreign relations commit
tee on October Fl. Referring to the
to arm merchantmen, Sen
ator Murray asked Admiral Stark:
y You think it is a defense measure
Stark replied: Eyes, |
do" Immediately after this, Stark
was questioned by Senator Shipstead:
Shipstead: when asked you about
the battles of Narvik and Crete, you
said you thought it was very hazard
ous to get ashore with troops. Do you
-hink that those experiences have
ninimized the danger Of invasion of
he United States?"
Stark: PROFESSIONALLY; yes, sir.
They would minimize it anywhere. If
England could maintain distinct air J
it would make any landing l
very hazardous"
Shipstead: do you mean in Eng
and" I
Stark: Anywhere"
Shipstead: But it would also apply {
o the United States?" '
Stark: Eyes, sir"
Shipstead: "The invasion of the
United States has been put far in the
background from where it was before
hat was demonstrated at Crete and 6
Iarvik?" [
Stark: Yes; but | think it was /
Pretty far in the background anyhow,
because they have got to come long
distance by sea. 1t would take a per- {
I