Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-02-01
INQUIRY
INQUIRY
!: Names of Censors
:: Remoin on Issue
Continued From Page Al

-
Continued From Page Al
either by the Secretary on in
voking the privilege or by the
subcommittee in insisting on
obtaining Identification of par
ocular censors.
Senator Thurmond said it
was necessary to know the
Identity of particular censors
In order to determine whether
they are exercising their own
Judgment or carrying out pol
Icy.
another question before the
subcommittee was whether the
privilege could be invoked by
any one as far down the line
as the Pentagon reviewer. In
the past congressional commit
tees have acknowledged their
inability to require testimony
involving presidential discus
sions and decisions.
Sylvester Quizzcd
Mr.. Sylvester was questioned
by Senator Thurmond on a
series of changes and deletions
in speeches in which references
to- victory" were taken out.
In some of the speeches Mr..
Sylvester testified that the
changes were directed by the
State Department. In others
he said they were deleted or
changed in line with avoiding
any expressions reflecting
interservice rivalry. In some
cases Mr.. Sylvester said, he
was unable to say Immediately
who directed changes and why
some were made, but said he
would supply the information
if 1t could be determined.
Senator Thurmond cited the
deletion in a 1860 speech of
Gen. Curtis E. LeMay which
said that the Strategic Air
Command had the capability
to destroy the war-making ca
pacity of any aggressor and
achieve victory"
Mr.. Sylvester, noting that
this involved the previous adj
ministration, said the records
showed that the deletion was
made at behest of the Army
and Navy branches in the re-
view sections. He added that
this was done to counter the
IMPRESSION that the Air Force
had the capability by itself to
achieve victory, thereby making
the other services unnecessary.
Inconsistency Noted
The subcommittee counsel
noted that Mr.. Sylvester, in his
prepared statement, spoke of
the grave challenge posed by
the relentless Communist drive
for world domination" and
similar references which have
been stricken from speeches Of
military leaders. He suggested
this reflected an inconsistency
in the review system.
MIR. Sylvester replied that
matters of timing and the con-
text of a whole speech might
determine whether certain ex-
pressions were left in or taken
out of a speech. His own state
ment, Mr.. Sylvester said, was
reviewed by the State Depart
ment. If this passage had been
deleted, he added, he would
have appealed it.
-"At a time when the Com
munist propaganda machine
within and without this coun-
try is poised to use and viciously
distort any inadvertent state
ment of high Government Of
ficials, military and civilian"
Mr.. Sylvester said, II consider
the function of reviewing
speeches for policy probably as
important to our national Sc
curity as the protection Of
classified information.
Communists Listen
cit is no secret that the Com
munists listen with particular
care to the statements of oul
civilian and military leaders
They try to exploit statement.
by top officials to split us fro2
our allies, to mislead neutra
countries into a belief that We
are the perpetrators of tension
in the world and to make
plausible the absurd fiction tina
we are an .imperialist natior
bent on dominating them. The!
erdeavor to capitalize on an!
appearance of confusion in oul
policy"
Review Of speeches, Mr.. Syl
vester said, in no way reflect
on the competence or judgmen
of defense officials The re
view, he explained, is designe'
to make them more effectiv