FC: Bill Mandel's firsthand report of testifying before Sen. McCarthy

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Wed May 07 2003 - 15:19:28 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Critique of "TRIPOLI" authenticated email proposal"

    ---
    
    Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:04:21 -0700
    From: William Mandel <wmmmandelat_private>
    Subject: [Fwd: 50 year old McCarthy records released]
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    
     >      I don't want to write an essay to parse this, so as I go down it
     > (have never read it before, obviously), I'll write brief notes. For
     > example, in the public hearing the next day McCarthy tried to make hay
     > of the fact that I took the 5th on sabotage and espionage. But what he
     > did gave away the whole game. He said: "If a man has committed sabotage,
     > espionage, his employer should know that." In plain English: there's
     > nothing to convict him with, but he's a Red, so fire him from his job.
     >      I murdered him on that one. I stalled on responding to the $64
     > question: "Are you now or have you ever been...", saying  "eventually,
     > you'll get your answer." Cohn plaintively asked McC whether he had to
     > wait till eventually for an answer. McCarthy committed suicide. He said:
     > "First you will answer the question, then you may make any speech you
     > like."
     >      The whole goddam country was glued to its TV sets, and McC couldn't
     > wriggle out of that. So, after I took the 5th on Party membership, I
     > made my speech, saying the committee had arrogated to itself the right
     > to be prosecutor, judge and jury although it was not a court of law, and
     > levying punishments "of thousands of dollars in the case of people
     > dismissed, up to the fact that you, Senator McCarthy, murdered Major
     > Raymond Kaplan by driving him to the point at which he jumped under a
     > truck, although everyone knows that there was nothing" for which to hold
     > him to account. That made the front page of the NY Times, as did my
     > accusations of bookburning, of anti-Semitism, etc.
     >       Farther along, when I answer that I'll raise hell if they
     > publicize where I work and I lose my job, Cohn asks me if that's a
     > threat. It was that which caused McCarthy to make the very stupid
     > mistake of calling me back for a public hearing the next day, at which
     > he said to the committee and the country that it was because I had
     > threatened them if I lost my job that he had me up in public. I lost my
     > job, but I broke the fear of McCarthy, as is evident from the fan mail
     > from strangers across the country I quote in my book. Once again, even
     > writing such letters was an act of courage in that situation.
     >    Continuing. Note Sen. Jackson (same guy responsible for the
     > Jackson-Vanik Amendment that still hampers Russian trade even though
     > Jews have long been able to emigrate freely) actually saying right out
     > loud that losing my livelihood is the price I have to pay for being a
     > member of the CP.
     >    WOW! My god -- look at the end of this thing. The State Department's
     > note on the investigation, describing it for readers, chooses to end
     > with my most powerful and damning statement -- the one about McCarthy
     > committing murder!
     >                 Bill Mandel
     >
     > Simon Strelchik wrote:
     > >
     > > Socialist Register:
     > >
     > > Today, most of the testimony that was provided behind closed doors to the
     > > McCarthy hearings has finally been released. It had been kept secret 
    for 50
     > > years.
     > >
     > > Our own Bill Mandel's testimony is included in the released documents. I
     > > have attached the full transcript of his testimony below.
     > >
     > > Bill's testimony is derived from the following URL:
     > > http://www.gpo.gov/congress/senate/mccarthy/83870.txt
     > >
     > > To see the overview of the newly released documents, click here:
     > > http://www.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate12cp107.html
     > >
     > > To read Yahoo's coverage of the story, click here:
     > > 
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030505/ts_nm/congress_mccarthy_dc_1
     > >
     > > Below is the full portion of the testimony, unedited. I read it and 
    found it
     > > very interesting. So Bill, tell me, did you end up losing your job at that
     > > advertising company?
     > >
     > > Simon Strelchik
     > >
     > > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     > > The Chairman. Will, you raise your right hand, sir?
     > >     In this matter now in hearing before the committee, do you
     > > solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
     > > but the truth, so help you God?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I do.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Give us your full name, please.
     > >
     > > TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM MARX MANDEL (ACCOMPANIED BY HIS COUNSEL,
     > >                          JOSEPH FORER)
     > >
     > >     Mr. Mandel. William Marx Mandel.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Is that M-a-r-x?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. And where do you reside?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. 545 West 164th Street, New York City.
     > >     The Chairman. Is that the name you have always gone under?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I refuse to answer that question, under my
     > > privilege within the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, not
     > > to testify against myself.
     > >     The Chairman. May I ask this question? Is that the name
     > > that you bore when you were, we will say, one year old? If you
     > > think it will incriminate you, you may refuse to answer.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I will stick to the Fifth Amendment.
     > >     The Chairman. In other words, you say if you tell us what
     > > your name was when you were a year old, it might tend to
     > > incriminate you?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Well, it is quite obvious that carried up to
     > > the present day, it may lead to something which might tend to
     > > incriminate me.
     > >     The Chairman. Well, it is a broad privilege.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Is this your true name, that you gave the
     > > committee?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is my true name.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Your true name. And what was your full
     > > name, again?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. William Marx Mandel, M-a-n-d-e-l.
     > >     The Chairman. Let me ask you this: Have you written under
     > > pseudonyms?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I will have to give the same reply.
     > >     The Chairman. You refuse to answer on the ground that it
     > > might incriminate you?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Are you the author of Soviet Far East and Central
     > > Asia, Mr. Mandel \2\
     > > 
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     > >     \2\ William Mandel, The Soviet Far East and Central Asia (New York,
     > > International Secretariat, Institute of Pacific Relations, 1944).
     > > 
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I am.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. When did you write that book?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Well, I think I wrote most of it in 1942, and I
     > > think some of the additional material came in 1943, '42-'43.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Were you a member of the Communist party in 1942-
     > > 43?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I must refuse to answer that question, under my
     > > privilege within the Fifth Amendment not to be a witness
     > > against myself.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Have you ever engaged in espionage?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Do you know of any Communists who ever did engage
     > > in espionage or any related activity?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I don't understand ``related activity.''
     > >     Mr. Cohn. I will withdraw that. Did you know of any
     > > Communists who have engaged in espionage?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Are you a member of the Communist party today?
     > >     The Chairman. The question is: Are you a member of the
     > > Communist party as of today?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I refuse to answer under the Fifth Amendment.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Have you ever engaged in sabotage or any other
     > > illegal act against the United States?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I refuse to answer under the Fifth Amendment.
     > >     The Chairman. Will you separate the question?
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Have you ever engaged in sabotage against the
     > > United States?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I refuse to answer under the Fifth Amendment.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Have you ever violated any law of the United
     > > States?
     > >     The Chairman. I don't think that is a proper question.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Beyond the scope of the committee.
     > >     The Chairman. Mr. Mandel, have you ever been convicted of
     > > any crime?
     > >     [Mr. Mandel confers with Mr. Forer.]
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Will you repeat the question, please?
     > >     The Chairman. The question was: Were you ever convicted of
     > > a crime?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. If disorderly conduct be regarded as such--I
     > > think it is a misdemeanor--the answer is ``yes.''
     > >     Mr. Cohn. In connection with what? That is a matter of
     > > public record, I suppose. In connection with a demonstration or
     > > riot or something?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No, the answer is that I was selling a
     > > pamphlet, about twenty-odd years ago, or perhaps not that long
     > > ago.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. What was the pamphlet?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. The pamphlet was called ``The Truth about
     > > Father Coughlin.''
     > >     The Chairman. And you were arrested at that time and
     > > convicted of disorderly conduct?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is my recollection.
     > >     The Chairman. And that is the only time that you were
     > > either arrested and convicted of any crime?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Other than traffic violations, or things of
     > > that kind. That is the best of my recollection.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Do you know Louis F. Budenz.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Fifth Amendment.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Would you fight for the United States against the
     > > Soviet Union in the event the United States Congress declared
     > > war against the Soviet Union?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Under any circumstances?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. If the United States Congress declared war,
     > > yes.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. You would. Do you believe that our cause in Korea
     > > is a just cause?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. You do not?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Would you fight on the side of the United States
     > > and the United Nations in Korea?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Under the laws of the country, if required to,
     > > yes.
     > >     The Chairman. Do you think the cause of the North Koreans
     > > and the Chinese Communists is a just cause in Korea?
     > >     [Mr. Mandel confers with Mr. Forer.]
     > >     Mr. Mandel. The answer is ``yes.''
     > >     The Chairman. It is a just cause?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is correct.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. That is very interesting. What did you say your
     > > occupation was at the present time?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Let me preface my reply, and I will answer the
     > > question if you insist. My occupation at the present time has,
     > > as will be evident if you press me, no conceivable relation to
     > > any business before this committee. Therefore, to request
     > > this--and I will answer it if you press me--can only have the
     > > effect, if this is later made public, of causing me to lose my
     > > livelihood, something which I will make the most of, I state
     > > quite candidly.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Is that a threat?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is not a threat. That is simply a
     > > statement.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Where are you going to make the most of it?
     > >     The Chairman. On the reason for calling you, or not, you
     > > said the question of your occupation would have nothing to do
     > > with what is before the committee. We are checking into the
     > > information program, which has been costing us, oh, $125 mill
     > > or $135 million a year. And we have been checking into the
     > > background, the activities, on some of the individuals who are
     > > being used in this fight against communism. That is the
     > > announced objective of the information program. And I think
     > > under the circumstances it is a pertinent question to ask you
     > > about your background, what you are doing today.
     > >     I do not know what you are doing today, you see, until you
     > > answer the question.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I am a writer of medical advertising copy to
     > > the profession.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. How long have you been doing that kind of work?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Oh, since shortly after the last time I was
     > > before a committee hearing here in Washington.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. What were you doing before that?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Before that I was in the furniture business for
     > > a year.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. And what were you doing between then and the time
     > > you were before some other committee?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I have been before one previous committee. Let
     > > me see, now. I have been in this work for a year. I was in the
     > > furniture business for just about a year, I would imagine. And
     > > last prior to that, I was employed as a translator for the
     > > Stefansson Library at 14 St. Luke's Place, New York City.
     > >     The Chairman. Is that Vilhjalmur Stefannson?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Vilhjalmur, yes.
     > >     The Chairman. I would like to get your thought on this. You
     > > seem to think that we should not inquire as to your occupation
     > > as of today. If you have any valid grounds on which you want to
     > > urge that, we would be glad to hear them.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes. The advertising business is a very public
     > > relations-conscious business, and the firm by which I am
     > > employed has important concerns as its clients, and they are
     > > probably more public relations-conscious than is necessary.
     > > That is the situation in the industry. So that if it became
     > > public knowledge that someone employed by that firm had been
     > > before this committee, that, in itself, would probably--it is a
     > > guess; I think a sound guess--would probably be cause for my
     > > losing my employment.
     > >     The Chairman. Well, now, I do not want to argue this point
     > > with you, but I would like to get the thought of the other
     > > senators on this.
     > >     My thought is, Senator Jackson, that here you have a man
     > > who says, ``If I tell you the truth about whether I am a
     > > Communist today, that might incriminate me.'' It creates a
     > > strong inference, certainly, that he is a member of the
     > > Communist party. Otherwise, it could not very well incriminate
     > > him. His works are being used to fight communism. He is now
     > > writing advertising copy, material being read by the general
     > > public. I can't think of any reason why his occupation should
     > > not be known. Do you?
     > >     Senator Jackson. Well, I think that the committee has a
     > > right, on the basis of asking the routine questions incident to
     > > an over-all investigation, to ask what a man is doing and where
     > > he lives. On that basis also, I think we have the right to ask.
     > >     Might I say to the witness: I am sure you are realistic
     > > enough to know that when you come before a committee in open
     > > session it will be known in time whether you have answered, and
     > > maybe in a way that might confuse the public; it will be known
     > > that you have appeared, and it will be brought out through the
     > > press that you worked for such and such a company. And it would
     > > occur to me that in order to keep the record straight, you
     > > should simply state it. You are in that situation, and
     > > apparently that is the price you have to pay as a member of the
     > > Communist party.
     > >     The Chairman. And as a country, we are apparently dedicated
     > > to the idea that communism is wrong, that it is set to destroy
     > > us, that it is a conspiracy, that it is a crime to be a member
     > > if you are aware of the conspiracy. Therefore, when a man comes
     > > before the committee and says, ``I will not tell whether I am a
     > > Communist or not,'' he, I believe, forfeits any right or any
     > > privilege or special protection by the committee. I think he
     > > should answer all the questions. Under the circumstances, the
     > > answer will stay in the record.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Will you give us the name and address of your
     > > business, and telephone number, at the present time?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes. The only point I want to make before
     > > answering it is that I claim no privilege on this matter, and I
     > > simply want to point out that if the committee wishes to face
     > > the onus of causing loss of a job, not in any abstract sense--I
     > > don't think that concerns the committee at all--but in the
     > > practical sense of the impression that might be created upon
     > > the public, if that is the case, I will, since I am aware of no
     > > privilege on this matter, be happy to give you the information.
     > >     The Chairman. May I say that I get the impression from what
     > > you said that you were threatening the committee. When you are
     > > outside the committee room, you can say anything you like about
     > > this committee, and if you are a member of the Communist party,
     > > as you indicate by your answer, you are dedicated, of course,
     > > to attacking this committee, regardless of whether you lose
     > > your job. I have been a subject of attacks by every Communist
     > > writer, every Communist in the country. None of them, as far as
     > > I know, have been supporting me or this committee. So that you
     > > are not impressing us at all by any threat to attack it. You
     > > will be just one of a long line, if you do answer the question.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. The firm I am employed by is L. W. Frohlich, F-
     > > r-o-h-l-i-c-h, and Company, and I don't know at the moment--
     > > they are in three buildings. I suppose the legal address is 76
     > > East 52nd Street, New York City.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. What kind of a firm did you say this was?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. They advertise medical products to the
     > > profession solely. That is their business.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Do they have any connection with the government
     > > in any way, any government work?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. None whatever, to the best of my knowledge.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. I have no further questions of this witness, Mr.
     > > Chairman.
     > >     You have told us you are the author of Soviet Far East and
     > > Central Asia?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is right.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. You decline to tell us whether or not you were a
     > > member of the Communist party at the time you wrote that book?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is correct, for the reason stated.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Is there anything in that book unfavorable to the
     > > Soviet Union?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I haven't read the book in quite a while.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Can you give us your best recollection on it?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. As far as that book is concerned, I cannot say
     > > offhand. I can state that, as I stated to a committee last
     > > year, I am aware of injustices, errors, and more of them than I
     > > have described in things that I have written, and have no
     > > hesitation discussing them, and I simply don't know, frankly,
     > > whether in that work at that time I discussed that or not.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Have you written anything unfavorable to
     > > the Soviet Union at any time?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. In the first place, you would have to define
     > > the term. In short, if one describes the term ``favorable'' as
     > > meaning that everything that happens there is good and nothing
     > > that happens there is bad, then I would say that I certainly
     > > have written unfavorable things. I just don't recall. The book
     > > was written ten years ago, is on a specialized subject, and I
     > > just don't recall.
     > >     Senator Jackson. What is your opinion of the anti-Semitism
     > > in the Soviet Union?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Being a Jew, I have certain standards on the
     > > basis of which to judge that. I have never encountered an anti-
     > > Semitic government in history that had a Jewish member of its
     > > cabinet.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Who is the member of the Jewish Cabinet?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Kaganovich, K-a-g-a-n-o-v-i-c-h.
     > >     The Chairman. What is his position?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. He is one of the vice premiers, one of the
     > > members of the five inner cabinet under the present
     > > administration.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. I think Senator Jackson's question was addressed
     > > to these purges. Do you approve of the anti-Semitic purges?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I think that is utter nonsense.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. That is just counter-revolutionary propaganda?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. It is not counter-revolutionary propaganda. It
     > > is nonsense. I went down and bought a copy of True, Soviet
     > > Labor party. I bought copies of Pravda at the library next to
     > > the main public library on 42nd Street. Four days after this
     > > thing happened, that comes over by air mail, when our post
     > > office doesn't stop it.
     > >     And on the same front page of the same paper which
     > > presented the indictment of these physicians, there was an
     > > announcement of the meeting the previous evening of the
     > > committee of Judges for Stalin prize awards in the literature
     > > and science for this coming year.
     > >     Among the eleven judges are two men who are well-known to
     > > be Jewish.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. And that is that?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. And many similar things. If you want a lecture
     > > for an hour and a half, I would be glad to give it to you.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Do you know a man named Aaron Berg, who is a very
     > > high functionary in the Soviet Union at the present time?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. He is a very prominent writer. I don't know
     > > that he has a function of any kind.
     > >     The Chairman. Just one question. As I read the account of
     > > the trials in the Slansky and other cases, the news stories
     > > were to the effect that some of the individuals confessed to
     > > being Zionists. They were hung. That apparently was a major
     > > part of their alleged crime.
     > >     Would you agree that it would be a crime to be a Zionist?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Their crimes under the indictment were military
     > > treason, economic treason, murder, and a fourth which I don't
     > > recall at the moment. You may have whatever opinion you care to
     > > about the confessions and the evidence. The fact is that they
     > > describe at great length the crimes which they committed. And
     > > it is a rather interesting fact to me that the New York Herald
     > > Tribune correspondent reported from Washington a couple of days
     > > later that informed anti-Communists in Washington apparently
     > > feel that these men were a little inept and stupid, and more
     > > able men will have to be gotten into that job next time.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Well, let me ask you this: You do not
     > > think it is unusual that simultaneously, at least, leaders of
     > > the Communist party in the Soviet Union and the satellite areas
     > > of Jewish origin were all brought to trial at once?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. The United States government is openly and
     > > publicly engaged in a program of espionage against the Soviet
     > > Union. In order to do this kind of thing, you have got to have
     > > people who are going to be able to get inside of those
     > > countries. Now, the State Department, which you gentlemen seem
     > > to have differences with, has pursued a policy of cutting off
     > > trade with those countries. Therefore you cannot possibly use a
     > > businessman as cover for that kind of operation. The other side
     > > has cut down the number of journalists which they admit in to a
     > > very small number. Therefore, it is very difficult to find more
     > > people like Oatis to do that kind of job. And so what you are
     > > left with is the possibility of using whoever can get in. Now,
     > > the allegedly anti-Semitic governments of the east European
     > > countries permitted only Jewish organizations, and particularly
     > > this Joint Distribution Committee, to function within their
     > > territories after World War II, despite the fact that there are
     > > similar Ukranian organizations.
     > >     Pardon me just one moment.
     > >     And apparently they did so on the grounds that the Jews had
     > > suffered special persecution. So that it would seem entirely
     > > logical to me that a government which is by open proclamation
     > > engaged in espionage in their countries as our government is
     > > would utilize whatever organization comes to hand that has
     > > access to those countries.
     > >     Therefore, it is not at all surprising that certain people
     > > with that kind of connection were brought to trial.
     > >     Senator Jackson. You said the Ukrainian organizations were
     > > not allowed to function.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. To the best of my knowledge. Remember, I am
     > > speaking of foreign non-Soviet and east European organizations.
     > >     Senator Jackson. What did you say about a Ukrainian
     > > organization?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I said Ukrainian organizations existing in the
     > > United States and Canada were not permitted to function on a
     > > parallel relief basis as the Joint Distribution Committee was.
     > >     Senator Jackson. Well, the Ukrainians have never been very
     > > reliable so far as the Soviets are concerned.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That is a matter of opinion. I would say the
     > > record of World War II is that the overwhelming majority of the
     > > Ukrainians were entirely loyal. Hitler put up a puppet
     > > government which fell to pieces in a few weeks.
     > >     Senator Jackson. When they are fighting for their home that
     > > is something else; but I am talking about reliable from an
     > > ideological standpoint.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. My opinion, since it is a matter of opinion, is
     > > that the overwhelming majority of the Ukrainians have been
     > > loyal to the Soviet Union during the vast bulk of this thirty-
     > > five-year period.
     > >     Senator Jackson. So you do not think it is unusual that
     > > Anna Pauker has been removed?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Anna Pauker's successor is a man named Simon
     > > Bugitch, who is also a Jew.
     > >     Senator Jackson. You do not think that the Jewish leaders
     > > in the Czechoslovakian government, that were all purged at the
     > > same time, and the doctors in the Kremlin, provide any
     > > significant pattern? You think that is totally unrelated to any
     > > anti-Semitism within the Soviet Union?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. The foreign minister of Czechoslovakia, who is
     > > here at the present time, is Jewish, and so forth, on down the
     > > line.
     > >     Senator Jackson. I am glad you said that.
     > >     Would you like to assure the committee that their tenure is
     > > going to be pretty certain for the future, so we can check on
     > > this?
     > >     The Chairman. I am afraid he could not do that.
     > >     Let me ask you this question: Do you think the Communist
     > > society is superior to our society in this country?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That would be an interesting question to
     > > debate. But there again, circumstances being what they are, and
     > > legislation being what it is, I am afraid that I would have to
     > > rely upon the Fifth Amendment and refuse to reply to that
     > > question.
     > >     The Chairman. Let us rephrase the question. Do you think
     > > the present type of Communist government as it exists in Russia
     > > is superior to the present form of government as it exists in
     > > the United States of America?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. That I am afraid is governed by exactly the
     > > same privilege, in view of legislation and prosecutions that
     > > have taken place, with which Mr. Cohn is quite familiar.
     > >     Mr. Cohn. Thank you.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. So that I am afraid I am unable to answer that
     > > question.
     > >     The Chairman. In other words, is it your answer that if you
     > > told us the truth in answer to that question, you think that
     > > that answer might tend to incriminate you?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. No, sir. I think that the Fifth Amendment has
     > > as its purpose to protect the innocent, and I think that the
     > > origin of the Fifth Amendment lies in the protection of
     > > political dissent.
     > >     The Chairman. You will then be ordered to answer the
     > > question.
     > >     [Mr. Mandel confers with Mr. Forer.]
     > >     The Chairman. May I say to counsel that I do not want to
     > > interrupt the consultation, but----
     > >     Mr. Forer. I think he misunderstood the preceding question,
     > > and his answer to that led to your direction. That is what I
     > > think is the situation.
     > >     But I understand the chair's position.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. What was the question prior to the last
     > > question?
     > >     The Chairman. Maybe I should rephrase the question.
     > >     The question originally asked was: Do you consider the
     > > present Communist government in Russia more desirable than the
     > > present government which we have in the United States?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. And to that question I will reply that I refuse
     > > to answer under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
     > >     The Chairman. Now my question to you is, do you feel that
     > > if you told the truth in answer to that question, your answer
     > > might tend to incriminate you?
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Yes. Let me make this clear----
     > >     The Chairman. First, just so you will understand us fully:
     > > You see, you are not entitled to claim privilege if you
     > > incriminate yourself by committing perjury. It is only when a
     > > truthful answer will incriminate you that you are entitled to
     > > claim privilege.
     > >     Before we can determine whether you are entitled to claim
     > > privilege, we must know whether or not you honestly feel that a
     > > truthful answer might tend to incriminate you.
     > >     That is the purpose of that question.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. I would say that a truthful answer might tend
     > > to incriminate me.
     > >     The Chairman. Okay. Then you are entitled to the privilege.
     > >     Mr. Mandel. Fine.
     > >     The Chairman. We will excuse you until 10:15 tomorrow
     > > morning.
     > >     [Whereupon, at 4:45 p.m., a recess was taken until 10:30
     > > a.m., Tuesday, March 24, 1953.]
     > >
     > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
     > >
     > > (Simon: The editor's note to this above testimony is attached below, for
     > > your convenience)
     > >
     > >        STATE DEPARTMENT INFORMATION PROGRAM--INFORMATION CENTERS
     > >
     > >     [Editor's note.--The United States Information Service
     > > initially established a ``balanced presentation'' policy under
     > > which books by controversial authors, including Communists,
     > > would be stocked by its overseas libraries to reflect the
     > > diversity of opinion in the United States and to preserve the
     > > intellectual credibility of the collections. In 1952, the
     > > Truman administration judged several books by the novelist
     > > Howard Fast to be Communist propaganda and removed them from
     > > the shelves although his other works remained. In January 1953,
     > > the Eisenhower administration upheld the policy of balanced
     > > collections but set criteria for defining books that might be
     > > excluded.
     > >     Between March and July 1953, the Permanent Subcommittee on
     > > Investigations held extensive hearings, in both executive and
     > > public session, that focused on the U.S. Information Libraries
     > > worldwide. It examined the books that the libraries stocked,
     > > and called some of the authors--including Howard Fast--to
     > > testify. During the course of the investigation, chief counsel
     > > Roy Cohn, and chief consultant David Schine, embarked on a
     > > highly-publicized tour of the overseas libraries in major
     > > European capitals, from April 4 to 21. Simultaneously, the
     > > State Department ordered the removal of any books by Communist
     > > authors or Communist sympathizers from the Information
     > > Libraries' shelves. Hundreds of works of fiction and non-
     > > fiction were discarded, and some were burned. In his
     > > commencement address at Dartmouth College on June 13, President
     > > Eisenhower told the students: ``Don't join the book burners.
     > > Don't think you are going to conceal faults by concealing
     > > evidence that they ever existed. Don't be afraid to go in your
     > > library and read every book as long as any document does not
     > > offend our own ideas of decency. That should be the only
     > > censorship.''
     > >     Mary M. Kaufman did not testify in public. Sol Auerbach
     > > (who wrote as James S. Allen) and William Marx Mandel appeared
     > > before the subcommittee in a televised public hearing on the
     > > following day. During the open session, the chairman ordered
     > > Mandel to identify publicly his current employer, information
     > > that the witness had provided in executive session with the
     > > request that it be kept confidential. Mandel complained that
     > > the subcommittee had ``arrogated itself the right to exact
     > > punishment, although it is not a court of law and deprives one
     > > of due process of law. That punishment has ranged from fines
     > > ranging from several thousand dollars in the case of people
     > > dismissed up to the fact that you, Senator McCarthy, murdered
     > > Raymond Kaplan by forcing him, driving him to the point where
     > > he jumped under a truck. . . .'']
     > >
     > > _________________________________________________________________
     > > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
     > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
     >
     > --
     >
     > ========================================================
     >
     > My autobiography, SAYING NO TO POWER (Introduction by Howard Zinn), is
     > a history of how the American people fought to defend and expand its
     > rights since the 1920s (I'm 85) employing the form of the life of a 30s
     > AND 60s activist, one who was involved in most serious movements:
     > student, labor, 45 years of efforts to prevent war with the USSR and
     > Cuba, civil rights South and North, women's liberation [my late wife
     > appears on 50 pages], 37 years on Pacifica Radio [where I reinvented
     > talk radio, of whose previous existence I had been unaware], civil
     > liberties. You may hear/see my testimony before the three different
     > McCarthy-Cold-War-Era witch-hunting committees [used in six films and a
     > play]) on my website, http://www.billmandel.net  I am the author of five
     > books in my academic field, have taught at UC Berkeley, and earlier held
     > a postdoctoral fellowship, by invitation, at Stanford's Hoover
     > Institution.
     >  The book may be ordered through all normal sources. For an autographed
     > copy, send me $24 at 4466 View Pl.,#106, Oakland, CA. 94611
     > ========================================================
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 07 2003 - 15:33:40 PDT