OCR Text |
Show Page 6 The Utah Independent June The Paper That Dares To Take A Stand 2,' 1977 The Paper That Dares To Take A Stand TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS Continued from page opposite of that adopted in 1950. Continued from page 1 NCS makes clear that the aggression of Communism is not because of hostility on the part of the U.S. which the Soviets seek to counteract, but is due to their own world view. Communism's drive for world conquest; its establishment of a slave society means that it cannot tolerate the existence of free societies. To the Kremlin the most mild and inoffensive free society is an affront, a challenge and a subversive influence. Given the nature of the Kremlin, the evidence at hand, it seems clear that the ends toward which their policy is directed are the same as those where its control has already been established. 1 In event you wish to skim quote from Top Secret Documents. through the quotes, they are in italics. The means employed by the Kremlin in pursuit of this 68 policy are limited only by considerations of expendiency. Doctrine is not a limiting factor; rather it dictates the employment of violence, subversion and deceit, and rejects rioral considerations. In any event, the Kremlin s conviction of its own infallibility has made its devotion to theory so subjective that past or present pronouncements as to doctrine offer no reliable guide to future action. The only apparent restraints on resort to war are, therefore, calculations of practicality.' (13) Since we are the only power which can keep the Kremlin from world conquest the Kremlins policy toward us is consequently animated by a peculiarly virulant blend of hatred and fear. Its strategy has been one of attempting to undermine the complex forces, in this country and in the rest of the free world, on which our power is based. In this it has both adhered to doctrine and followed the sound principle of seeking maximum results with minimum risks and commitments. The present application ofthis strategy is a new form of expression of traditional Russian caution. However, there is no justification in Soviet theory or practice for predicting that, should the Kremlin become convinced that it could cause our downfall by one conclusive blow, it would not seek that solution. (14) It is also important for us to recognize that the Communists can do more with less than we can It has a lower standard of living, its economy requires less to keep functioning and its military machine operated effectively with less elaborate equipment and organization. (14) Aik! we must add to it a very vital factor; that is, the Communist world has received aid of various sorts from the United States since the beginning of the Soviet Union. At this very moment we are extending them vital aid through trade and through credits. The document continued by saying: The capabilities of the Soviet world are being exploited to the foil because the Kremlin is inescapably militant. It is inescapably militant because it possesses and is possessed by a world-wid- e revolutionary movement, because it is the inheritor of Russian imperialism and because it is a totalitarian dictatorship. Persistent crisis, conflict and expansion are the essence of the Kremlins militancy. This dynamism serves to intensify all Soviet capabilities. Communism has gained strength through its claims of being for peace," and pretending to be the scientific model" for industrial and economical colonial, and former development of the colonial countries. Any aid and industrial know-howhich we have sent to the Soviets have enabled them to polish up their image as the model. Furthermore, we have failed in our duty to be the voice of truth which keeps before the world continually the fact that they are the most successful imperialists of all time, and that they are for war and conquest. While the world has been freeing colonies the Communist world has been collecting colonies.. anti-colonia- l," so-call- under-develope- ed d, w non-Commun- ist Goodwill F These things show that it is a dangerous myth to assume that the U.S.S.R. will be changed for the better by goodwill and aid. We should be people of goodwill but goodwill by itself will no more defeat Communists than it wiU defeat the Mafia. Experience proves that the Soviets will not respond to goodwill with goodwill, or even with a measure of conciliation. For instance, the United States signed an agreement with the Soviet Union in the early 1930s whereby we extended recognition to its government. Among other things it was agreed that the Soviet Union would cease her subversive activities in the United States. We continued to recognize her even though we knew that she was violating the agreement at the very time she signed it, and continued to violate it. We saved the Soviets' from defeat in the war with Hitler, which war they had helped to precipitate. We sent her much aid and we made agreements with her which gave her certain advantages after World War II was over, and there was a great reservoir of goodwill in this country toward the Soviet Union after World War II. Instead of responding to this goodwill with conciliation, she continued to prepare for world conquest. Even during World War II she was stealing military, industrial, and atomic secrets from America. Goodwill no more changes the nature and intentions of the Soviet Union than it did Hitler. After all, Communism is Red Fascism. It is atheism, determined upon world conquest. The Soviet Intentions: Our Defeat and World Conquest In spite of the fact that the intentions of the Communists are clear there are still those who deny that they seek to overthrow the United States and to conquer the world. The NSC 68 document spelled out the intentions of the Soviet Union with crystal clarity, and the evidence today proves that their intentions have not changed. Those who think that we cannot know, with certainty, the intentions of the U.S.S.R. need to listen to the following quotations. the Soviet Union .. .is animated by a new fanatic faith antithetical to our own, and seeks to impose its absolute authority over the rest of the world. Conflict has, therefore, become endemic and is waged, on the part of the Soviet Union, by violent or methods in accordance with the dictates of expediency. Although people in the world yearn for peace, any substantial further extension of the areas under the domination of the Kremlin would raise the possibility that no coalition adequate to confront the Kremlin with greater strength could be assembled. It is in this context that this Republic and its citizens in the ascendency of their strength stand in their non-viole- nt deepest peril The issues that face us are momentous, involving the fulfillment or destruction not only of this Republic but of civilization itself. (p. 4) The document makes clear that the U.S. "is the principal enemy whose integrity and vitality must be subverted or destroyed by one means or another if the Kremlin is to achieve its fundamental design. (6) "The Kremlin regards the United States as the only major threat to the achievement of its fundamental design. There is a basic conflict between the ideas offreedom under a government of laws, and the idea of slavery under the grim oligarcy of the Kremlin "(7) What does the Soviet Union mean by peace? . . . the peace policy of the Soviet Union, described at a Party Congress as a most advantageous form offighting capitalism, is a device to divide and immobilize the world, and the peace the Soviet Union seeks is the peace of total conformity to Soviet policy. The Soviets demand "total power over all men within the Soviet state without a single exception . . . "(8) The assault on flee institutions is world-wid- e now, and in ist the context of the present polarization ofpower a deflat offree institutions anywhere is a defeat everywhere. (8) This being true how concerned we ought to be today over the increasing spread of Communism in Asia, Africa, and South America. Instead of recognizing and aiding Castros Cuba, we should be intensifying our efforts to limit his influence in Latin America and Africa. Furthermore, we should be rejoicing that a pro-Commun- 9) Greatest Threat Is USSR NSC 68 endorsed as still valid the statement in NSC 20-- 4 (signed by the President, Nov. 24, 1948) that: "The gravest threat to the security of the United States within the foreseeable future stems from the hostile designs and formidable power of the U.S.SR., and from the nature of the Soviet system." (60) This threat has not changed. Instead it has increased. Anyone who knows what has happened since 1948 knows how the Soviet Union has consolidated its powers, increased its might, and has helped to establish Communsim since that time in such countries as China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Angola. It has waged hot war against us through its fellow Communists in Korea and Vietnam. It is now much involved in some African countries, in Central America, Mexico and South America. Since the intentions of the Soviet Union were clear in 1948, and long before, why should anyone wonder about their intentions today when they are now even clearer, and when our own country is seriously affected by infiltration. Atomic War NSC 68 warned that by 1954 or 1955 the Soviet Union would have the power to deliver an atomic attack on the U.S. and that the U.S. must be prepared and if possible to avert such a war, but if not so that she could survive and attain her obTo be continued next week SURGEONS & At a time when the American people are having their confidence in the political process of shaken to its very roots, it is unbelievable that a proposal for embarking on a spendthrift program of unimaginable billions for socialized medicine would be seriously advanced at this time, based on the assumption that all Americans should be dependent on government employees for medical care. All of these proposals for politicalized medicine are based on an assumption which is fraudulent. The assumption conself-governm- free-choic- With your permission, Mr. Chairman, we will present a Summary Statement today and file for the record later on a more detailed analysis of the health care proposals and issues before the Com- First: That all citizens, not just people over 65 years of age and people with low incomes, are incompetent to contract effectively, efficiently, and satisfacwith other torily private citizens DECEPTION AND FRAUD One of- the less admirable aspects of the debate over nationalizing medicine is that the arguments are often laced with fraud, deceit and mi- for the medical and hospital services they want. (This is not only a fraud but an insult to the millions of Americans who produce the goods and services upon which govern- srepresentations. self-relia- protagonists of government interference in the private relationship proclaim government programs are needed because there is a crisis in health care. The doctor-patient-hospit- al They loudly trumpet that health care is nt Second: That only government employees are competent to choose the proper and appropriate physician and hospital for any citizen and determine what is And they assert they are moved to act in response to public clamor for a change in the medically necessary for him. furthermore, that substituting the choices of government clerks will result in more health care system. There is no health care crisis in the United States. There is no public outcry for change. There is no public demand for Congress to dismantle our present system and build a European-styl- e system on the wreckage. and better service at less cost. In other words, the assumption is that politicalized medical care, with control by government employees, is better than private care. widespread despair over the bureaucratic bungling and rising costs that characterize Medicare and Medicaid. But there is The proponents of this scheme cannot point to this country pr abroad that their assumption is valid. The tactic of proponents is to compare medical care in the U.S. with Utopia they dare not make an overall comparison with any other country. Of course, we do not have Utopia, but private medicine is far better and less expensive than government medicine. In fact, there is not a medical crisis but there is definitely a dollar crisis. Government is spending more than it takes in in taxes and is creating inflation. more for Housewives are being forced to pay 15 groceries and other supplies this pionth than they were in the same month a year ago. And who has piled this inflationary problem squarely upon the American housewife - the bureaucracy of the federal government which these proposals ;:before you would empower to spend even more money. Huge additional spending through "government when any proof either in -- We are appalled that Congress is now considering further political interference into the private lives of citizens in the form of socialization of medical care for all patterned after the failures of Europe. Stripped of the excess legalistic language the proponents of socialized medicine in America seek'; to use the power of Congress to force everyone to pay more to government and get less due to bureaucratic interference, and all because of a "crisis" in health care. There is no trumped-u- p crisis in medical care in America except to the extent that it has been created artificially by government intervention and propaganda. We V hope this Committee will dig for the facts. Pjor example: How many of the witnesses who will appear before this Committee promoting more political direction and control of medical care are government employees? How many are being subsidized by the Federal Government or are seeking of money out of the Federal Treasury? With 40 . t-' everyone's earnings in the United States already being confiscated and spent through the political process someone has to stop the plunder. And you, the members of Congress, can do it. ft1 . government spending is the source of grinding inflation which hurts low and fixed income citizens is is no public demand for change. A public opinion poll conducted last fall by the Louis Harris organization for the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations of the Senate Committee on Government Operations demonstrated that the American people have more confidence by far in their doctors than they have in politicians. And only 3 per cent repeat, 3 per cent - - of the people according to that poll considered health care among the two or three biggest problems facing the country. But 43 per cent cited integrity in government as one of the top three problems and 72 per cent cited inflation, which is a product of government profligacy. absurd. HEW is scheduled to spend On April 11th, Stuart Auerbach of the Washington Post wrote an article for his paper which emphasized that there is no public demand for health care change. He quoted Max Fine of the committee propagandizing for the bill to socialize medicine that Kennedy-Griffit- h for the past 5 years at least one speech a day hqs been made in a futile effort to drum up public support for that bill. Mr. Auerbach noted that Senator Kennedy and labor leaders also had tried and failed to generate public enthusiasm for their proposal. labor-dominat- ment depends.) a right. repeat: There I -- 1 sists of two parts: mittee. 1960. Such wild spending, not doctors, is the basis of inflation. ent ist government was overthrown in Chile. How chilling to listen to the document when it says: Thus unwillingingfy our free society finds itself mortally challenged by the Soviet system. No other value system is so wholly irreconcilable with ours, so implacable in its purpose to destroy ours, so capable of turning to its own uses the most dangerous and divisive trends in our own society, no other so skillfully and powerfully evokes the elements of irrationality in human nature everywhere, and no other has the support of a great and growing center of military power. (8-- jectives. (60) PHYSICIANS 1 purpose of analyzing the profession's problems and formulating actions to improve medical care for all Americans, preserve freedom of choice for patient and doctor, protect the practice of private medicine, and educate physicians and the public to recognize and resist schemes that would e weaken or destroy our system of medical care. ... non-Commun- June 2, 1977 The Utah Independent Page 7 $111 billions in 1975 without any more authority. That is more than all spending for defense - more than all the profits of all corporations after taxes and more than all the government spent for everything in ed "Despite this effort," said Mr. Auerbach, "polls show that Americans are not unduly concerned about health legislation and medical care unless they are sick. Health failed to emerge as a major issue in four surveys taken this year and last year by the Gallup Poll . . . Furthermore a Washington Post poll last month showed that people are generally satisfied with their medical care - - again indicating no strong grass roots pressure for health care reform." has been made so health care is a right that it has cliche.- No one endeavors to define it is just solemnly intoned as one of truths of mankind. The assertion - What it is is a clever-b- it often that become a the term; the eternal of demagoguery. clearly intended to whip up an emotional response and, since it is used in the context of government medicine, it is intended to evoke the feeling in people that (1) a right is being denied to them and (2) the government will guarantee that right by nationalizing medicine. You kriow know that no one has a claim against the and services of a physician unless the physician agrees to it. Uhder normal circumstances, a contract between a patient and a doctor can be terminated by the doctor with notice and by the patient at any time. No one, not even the government, can constitutionally interfere in that contract. If anyone has the right to my services, it must be enforceable by law even against my wishes. Ob- It is ' k 4 I Continurd on page 8 |