Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-30

ZAP Photo.
OPPENHEIMER.
whether DR.. Oppenheimer may
continue to carry out this func-
ton and whether scientists may
continue to call upon him as they
have in the past in regard to
highly classified material.
Top Level Advice.
In addition, the scope of DR..
Oppenheimer'S activities as top
adviser to \ various agencies of
Government on national secu-
rity policies make imperative a
determination Nof his security
status.
After the development of the
atomic bomb and the end of
World War II, DR.. Oppenheimer
was quite suddenly projected into
a far more important capacity
than he had held as a scientist
and laboratory director at Los
AlamoS. He was given RESPONSE
bilities for the formulation of
intentional controls of atomic
energy. His post as chairman of
the General Advisory Committee
and a host of other committees
in the defense establishment
made his an adviser on national
security problems at the top level
OF Government. His advice was
sought on many matters in which
science or technical aspects of
atomic energy were important,
but important as incidentalS and
background. With his unique ex-
perience, his intellect, his breadth
OF interests and his articulate-
ness, 1t was almost inevitable
that he was consulted on a grow
ing number of national security
policy matters. AS a result, his
degree of access to the detailed
essentials of our most secret in
formation was, in my opinion,
among the greatest of any indi-
vidualS in our Government. I
doubt that there have been con-
temporaneously more than
handful of people at the highest
levels who have possessed the
amount of sensitive information
which was given to DR.. Oppen-
heimer. :.
No Alternative Found.
I believe that the outlined facts
concerning DR.. Oppenheimer's
activities in the scientific profess
sion and employment by the
Government demonstrate that
the Commission could not decide
the matter on any other basis
than to grant or deny clearance.
Any other action would merely
postpone the problem. His activ-
tiles cannot be compartmented
to some particular area of scien-
tiflc effort. 1t is only reasonable
to expect that he would be used
IN connection with broad assign
mentS such as he has had in the
past. Inevitably the question
would arise whether he should
be given access to the most SEN
sitive restricted data which is
under the Commissions jurisdic-
ton.
Therefore. there must be q
determination as to His security
status with respect to this data.
All of the facts concerning
DR.. Oppenheimer's activities sci
entif1c and governmental, and
the consequent access to vital
information emphasize the de-
gree of his security responsibility.
For the reasons outlined in
the first paragraph of these
comments, I conclude that he
falls substantially below the
standard required by that re-
Sponsibility. There seems to me
no possible alternative to deny
ing DR.. Oppenheimer clearance.
thermometer Controversy.
There is one final comment
which I should add. My decision
in this matter was Influenced
neither by the actions nor by
the attitudes of DR.. Oppenheimer
concerning the development of
thermometer weapons. Nor did
I consider material any advice
given by DR.. Oppenheimer in his
capacity as a top level consultant
on national security affairs.
In my judgment. it was proper
to include DR.. Oppenheimer's
activities regarding the thermo-
nuclear program as part of the
derogatory allegations that ini-
tiated these proceedings. Ale
cations had been made that DR.. !
Oppenheimer was Improperly
motivated.
The Gray board, although
doubling the complete veracity
of DR.. Oppenheimer's explana-
tions. found that these most |
serious allegations were not sub |
stantiated. ] have carefully re-