Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955
File 010
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 010. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. October 29, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/9.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 010. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/9

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955 - File 010, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed October 29, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/69/show/9.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 4, No. 9, October 1955
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. IV, No. 9, October 1955
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date unknown
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 4 1955; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States
Item Description
Title File 010
Transcript President Eisenhower's announcement that our government has made friends with the Kremlin leaders would have a precedent if the mayor of Chicago had publicly proclaimed in the earlv thirties that his administration had made friends with the Capone mob. The moral implications of Geneva are shocking enough; but its practical consequences are just as grave. The Geneva friendship pact has already caused complacency and a false sense of security here at home. It is only natural that we relax our vigilance when we are told that our enemies are not such bad folk after all. Today the disintegration of the anti-Communist front the spirit. Before long it will affect armament and mobilization. Why foot huge tax bills, the American people mav begin to ask, when the Communists bene' abandoned their plans for world conquest? Whether the majority of thc American people have accepted the verdict on Geneva certified by the administration and the press. I cannot say. But if it has and if it continues to accept that verdict, then the Geneva Big Four meeting will have written a permanent black page in the history book of the human race. The Geneva Conference will begin lhe last chapter on western civilization—as the event that ushered in its era of delusion and decline. It is not enough to say that administration leaders and the press, when they interpret Geneva as a success, are ill-ad- vi-eel. In my judgment, they are guilty of something far more serious than having made a mistake. They have perpetrated a fraud on the American people. Their judgment is. no doubt, bad; but it is not that bad. As I see it, the primary concern of the administration and the majority of the press has been to vindicate their original judgment that Geneva was a good idea, and their sec- ondarv concern has been to disclose what they think is the truth about Geneva. The fraud is the more serious because, in a very real sense, the American people are at the mercy of the administration and the press. The ordinary citizen is in a very poor position to form independent judgments on this subject. For one thing, he is dependent for information—almost ex- clusively —upon his national leaders who participated in the conference, and upon the press which reported it. If they mislead him. where can he turn? For another, the ordinary citizen usually does not concern himself with the details of such matters. Because of the demands of his private affairs and problems, his knowledge of international affairs is often confined to general impressions. When the decision was made to attend the Big Four meeting, the public's general impression was that the purpose of the meeting was to discover whether there was sufficient evidence that communism had changed its mind about conquering the world, to justify a new American foreign policy—including the relaxation of our pressures on the Communists, abandonment of a hostile attitude, disarmament, negotiations, concessions, and the like. .After the conference, the general impression conveyed to the public was that a favorable answer had been given to that question—that there was enough evidence that communism had changed to justify a new policy of reconciliation and friendship. The only way the public could avoid getting that impression was for the administration and the press to tell the truth about Geneva. The truth about Geneva is that it did not produce one scrap of evidence that the Communists had budged from their objective of world conquest. Every proposal made by the West, the Communists either rejected or ignored. Every proposal made by the Communists had been made, in substance, a hundred times before—and a hundred times had been unacceptable lo the West. Let us go down the list. On Germany: We insisted on German unification, and on Germany's right to remain in the western defense alliance if she so chose; the Communists refused to agree to unification, and demanded that Germany withdraw from NATO. On European security: We said we would not join the Russians in an overall European security pact until Germany had been unified; the Communists demanded such a pact immediately and refused to proceed with German unification. On disarmament: The West once again asked for a reliable system of inspection; the Communisls refused to agree to such guaranties, and insisted that both sides disarm, each side trusting the other to play fair. On East-West contacts: The West requested, in effect, that the Soviets haul down the Iron Curtain; the Iron Curtain is still there and shows every sign of being permanent. On freedom for the satellite countries: The President said he would like to discuss the question; the Communists refused, denying even the existence of a problem. On international communism: Tin- President brought up the subject; the Communists scoffed at the idea, called it an internal matter and. therefore, an inappropriate subject for discussion. On the Far East: While the American people were led to believe the subject did not come up at Geneva, we now know it was discussed in secret meetings. where—let us hope—the United States argued that Communist agression should cease; the Communists, we mav be sure. renewed their demands for Red China's admission to the United Nations and for the surrender of Quemoy, the \leit- sus and Formosa to the Communists. And on this subject, it is beginning to look as though the Communists not only stood firm, but that we gave ground. So where is the evidence that Communist intentions have changed? Thc Communists said, as they have said, for Western consumption, ever since the Russian revolution, that they wanted peace. On the basis of words, and of words alone, the President led the American people to believe that there is sufficient evidence of Communist sincerity to go ahead with a new policy of reconciliation and friendship. In handing down that verdict on the conference, the President betrayed the trust that so many Americans place in him. I repeat: In handing down that verdict on the conference, the President betrayed the trust that so many Americans place in him. The vast majority of the nation s newspapers also gave that verdict. Thus, the press, too, betrayed any confidence the American people may still repose in it. We still have a free press in this country, but its reporting of Geneva confirms the fact that, for the most part, we have an irresponsible press. Thank God this does not include' all the press. A small segment of the press has accurately reported the Geneva conference. Let us now turn from the question of whether Geneva was accurately reported and examine more closely the question of who won at Geneva. The best way to answer that question is to recall the aims, first of the Communists, and then of the United States. Russia's aim was as simple as it was ambitious; and from the day the Communists began agitating for a summit meeting, it was understandable by all who wanted to understand it. The Communists' objective was nothing less than to destroy the West's will to resist. They would, of course, appreciate any concessions we offered them. But for the moment, in Communist eyes, this was not important. If the West's spirit could be broken, the territories would fall in good time. The Communists appreciated that while pursuing an aggressive policy during ihe preceding fifteen years they had won tremendous victories. But Western defenses were now firming up, and thus future progress promised to be slower and perhaps costly. This prospect could be changed if only the West could be persuaded to hate communism a litt'e iess, fear communism a little less, and be less suspicious of Communist objectives. So the Kremlin leaders decided to turn Page 8 FACTS FORUM NEWS, October, 1955
File Name uhlib_1352973_v004_n009_010.jpg