Page images
PDF
EPUB

our lives or our security, should not be subjected to the harshest kind of fire power?

Could you understand a young person who had rather serious reservations about that?

Mr. KERNS. I certainly can, Mr. Chairman, and I can certainly have compassion for people who have convictions. But like I mentioned before, we do not live in an arbitrary system; we live in a system of laws. We live in a very great country that has made provisions for people to disagree.

Senator KENNEDY. But take, since you mention the laws, take before 1970, for example. People who had a sincere reservation, but it was not based upon a religious belief, but was based upon a moral and an ethical belief, the Supreme Court did not recognize that before 1970. So they left the country.

Now, in effect, the Supreme Court has caught up to them and still they are outside of the Nation. And they are fugitives from justice.

What are you going to do about those people? You see, they would have qualified after 1970 as a conscientious objector.

Mr. KERNS. I realize that.

Senator KENNEDY. Now, they are either in jail or outside the country.

Mr. KERNS. Mr. Chairman, I would compare this with Prohibition. A lot of people went to jail during Prohibition and they are not jailing people for drinking now. It is the system. It is a system of laws and, I am sure, Senator, you realize this as well as I do. We have to abide by the law. That is why I went to Vietnam.

Senator KENNEDY. Is it not really the interpretation given the law? I mean, the Supreme Court interprets it-it might be the same law. It did not change between 1969 and 1970, except the Supreme Court said it had changed its interpretation.

Mr. KERNS. Mr. Chairman, I cannot believe that we are in a debate here between subjective reality and objective reality. I am sure that everyone in this room knows that laws are not made by the individual. We make our decisions, and if we are men, we stand by them.

Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much. I appreciate your appearance here.

Mr. KERNS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator KENNEDY. Mrs. Valerie Kushner?

Mrs. Kushner is a graduate of the University of North Carolina. Her husband is also a graduate of the University of North Carolina. He has been a prisoner of war for 4 years. Mrs. Kushner represents one of the thousands of families who have suffered in this war because of the impact on a husband or son.

We are pleased to have you with us today to help us resolve some of these differences, Mrs. Kushner.

STATEMENT OF MRS. VALERIE M. KUSHNER

Mrs. KUSHNER. Thank you, Senator Kennedy. I greatly appreciate the opportunity you have given me today to testify before this body on the question of amnesty. I am not directly or by personal knowl

edge involved in the problems of those young Americans, who for a variety of reasons, decided not to serve in Vietnam. I am even more gratified to be here after hearing the previous testimony; over half of which purported to speak in my husband's name.

For I come to you as the wife of a man who voluntarily enlisted in the Army in 1966, who in 1967 chose to serve in Vietnam, and who has spent the last 4 years as a prisoner of war. But there is something to be said for the platitude which insists that the best teacher of compassion is personal grief.

The Americans who have been imprisoned by the enemy in Indochina and the draft dodgers and deserters share a certain area in common. Most noticeably, they are all unwilling exiles. There is not one among them who wanted to be presented with the choices which had to be made. In all cases, families have been separated and suffering has occurred. The lives of the men have been abruptly changed, and in many cases, rendered nonproductive. I am not here to debate the wisdom of decisions already made, but rather to encourage an attitude of tolerance toward the men who made them. As a country, we are also young and prone to error.

I would ask you to open your hearts to the words of Ecclesiastes : "To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: .. a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;". We have had our time of killing and now we must prepare ourselves for the time of healing. We cannot expect to make whole the Body America if we amputate from her flesh so many of her sons.

The last decade has seen a tragic breakdown in many of our societal structures. If we are to begin the task of building up, we cannot deny ourselves the contribution of all who would participate.

The vast majority of the exiles still consider themselves to be Americans. Several years' residency in Montreal should not involve loss of citizenship any more than the same period of time spent in the "Hanoi Hilton." The refugees wish, as does my husband, the soonest possible return to the land which nurtured them and the memories of which sustain them in exile.

I've heard, again today in this room, it said that no amnesty can be given until the prisoners of war have been repatriated. I agree that neither will come to pass until first this terrible war is ended. But just as the Pentagon has formulated contingency plans for the return of the POW's, Congress must give thought to preparing the structure by which amnesty will be granted. It would be terrible, indeed, if the return of one young man was delayed because of bureaucratic unpreparedness.

I can only hope that such a plan will not seek punishment or retribution, but has as its guide, compassion. For compassion is the most soothing balm for healing and the strongest bond for building

up.

Finally, it has been said that the young men who chose exile in other lands have betrayed their heritage and rights as Americans. I can only remind you of a passage by Stephen Vincent Benet. It is a favorite of my husband's and one he marked long ago:

Remember that when you say, "I will have none of this exile and this stranger for his face is not like my face and his speech is strange", you have denied America with that word.

Gentlemen, the question before this Committee and this Congress should not be whether or not these young men who departed from the majority have betrayed America. In all humility, we must ask ourselves, "Will America, by refusing amnesty, betray itself?"

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Applause.]

Senator KENNEDY. That is a very moving statement, Mrs. Kushner. You have said a lot in a very short period of time. I just wish all the members of not only the committee but the Senate could have heard you. It was a very moving comment.

There is probably very little elaboration needed on any of your statement. I think that, realistically, it is highly unlikely that anything will be done until the end of the war and until the prisoners of war are back.

But how do you feel as the wife of a prisoner of war that the Congress and the Senate should even be thinking in these terms at a time when your husband is in a prison?

Mrs. KUSHNER. I am very glad, frankly, that the committee, that the Congress, and hopefully the people of this country are now thinking in these terms. I, like everyone in this country, am anticipating at some point a peace. When that peace comes, I do not think it will be meaningful in any way unless it is also accompanied by that necessary ingredient, good will. I think it is something for which we must prepare ourselves, and something which we must anticipate.

If, at the time when the end of this war comes, the people of this country go from area to area pointing accusatory fingers at each other, charging either betrayal on the one side or war crimes on the other, then it will indeed be something which will have destroyed the essence of America.

The war has been detrimental. It has hurt our country. But I would hope that embodied in the concept of our people and our Government still remains that spirit of good will which will unite us, permit us to rededicate ourselves, and to go on to better and higher destinies.

Senator KENNEDY. Does it bother you that the Senate is considering amnesty for young people who have, as has been stated here, violated the law of this country, are outside of the United States, but have escaped service in the Armed Forces of the United States at a time when your husband, who has served the country bravely, is separated from you in a prison camp?

Do you see inequities in this which have been pointed out, quite frankly, by a number of witnesses?

Mrs. KUSHNER. I do not see any inequity at all. I think my husband in a prisoner of war camp and a young man who has gone to Canada are equally victims of this war. My husband enlisted in the Army and went willingly to Vietnam because of a sincere belief in a certain obligation to this country, a sincere desire in some way to serve the country. Yet, I have to ask myself during these last 4 years that he has spent in captivity, of what service has he been to this country?

Senator KENNEDY. I think all of us can ask that from time to time. The people who voted to send him there should be asking

themselves that, too. It is not just a question that those who have lost loved ones in Vietnam should ask themselves, but I think the country ought to be asking itself that.

Do you have children?

Mrs. KUSHNER. Yes. I have a daughter who is 8, a son who will be 4 in April. He was born after his father's capture. Senator KENNEDY. Are they well?

Mrs. KUSHNER. Yes.

You know, when Mr. Kerns speaks about telling his grandchildren all about the glorious day in Vietnam, the camaraderie and the fighting, and probably how many kills he had that day, I think of my children who have been scarred by this war through the loss of their father, and I can only hope and pray that when my grandchildren come around, I can say, yes; that existed, but this sort of thing does not happen any more.

Again, if any type of peace comes without the good will, the forgiveness, that we should have at that time, I am afraid my grandchildren, too, will be going to war.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, you have demonstrated an enormous sense of magnanimity and generosity and compassion about those who have been affected by the war. I think if the country or the people involved in public policy could share that compassion, our greatest days are still ahead of us.

I want to thank you. You are a very courageous woman.

[Applause.]

Senator KENNEDY. I next introduce Mr. and Mrs. Sam Kendall. Mr. Kendall is originally from Massachusetts, now resides in Richmond, Va. The Kendalls' son, the eldest of 13 children, Timothy, is now serving 4 years at Allenwood Federal Prison.

He was indicted for violating the selective service law.

I appreciate very much your willingness to come here and testify before the committee, Mr. Kendall.

STATEMENT OF SAM KENDALL, RICHMOND, VA.

Mr. KENDALL. I think it is important that we first try to understand what motivated so many thousands of young Americans to resist the draft laws. It is important that we do not make a predetermined judgment that these are impetuous children, acting on hasty decisions and bad advice. What decisionmaking process did they follow? How sincere are they?

Obviously, I cannot speak for all of them. I can, however, speak for one. My oldest son, Timothy Kendall, is a draft resister. He is now serving a sentence at Allenwood Federal Prison Camp in Pennsylvania.

Tim is 23 years old, the oldest of 13 children, and is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame with a degree in theology. During his senior year, Tim decided that he could not participate in any war, in any way-in the taking of human life. At this time, he intended to apply for the status of conscientious objector. However, for reasons which will be explained later, he changed his mind about this and made the decision to simply not cooperate with the Selective Service System at all.

His noncooperation consisted of the following steps:

1. He did not apply for renewal of his student deferment, thereby becoming classified as 1-A.

2. When ordered to report for his preinduction physical, he did

not.

3. When order to report for his induction, he did not.

Tim continued on with his studies at Notre Dame. For reasons which are still not clear, he was not taken into custody. At the end of his senior year, his mother and I attended his graduation ceremonies, and when they were over, we drove home to Richmond and went directly to the Federal Marshal's office, where Tim turned himself in. Judge Robert R. Merhige set a trial date and released Tim without requiring bond.

Tim spent the next month writing a paper to be read at his trial. This paper set forth very clearly why he felt he had to do what he did.

Many of his friends, and members of the Notre Dame faculty, came to the trial to testify as to his character and sincerity. Tim was given the opportunity to read his paper in court. He was found guilty and sentenced to 412 years in Federal prison. Three months later, Judge Merhige reduced his sentence to 2 years.

After Tim was taken to prison we made copies of his paper and sent them to many people in Government-in the church-and in the press. We wanted people to be interested enough to start asking questions, to start looking for answers and, hopefully, to start finding solutions.

We knew of Senator Kennedy's interest in the matter of the draft and draft resistance and amnesty. My wife, fearing that her letter to him might be overlooked in the press of urgent Government business, used a typical woman's approach and sent her letter to the Senator's mother with the request that she see that he got it and read it. Well, he got it, and here we are.

Senator KENNEDY. That is Mother for you.

Mr. KENDALL. Never underestimate the power of a woman.
Senator KENNEDY. Or of Mother.

Mr. KENDALL. Why did Tim and so many thousands like him, choose to ignore the orders of their Government? I repeat, these are not children. These are responsible young citizens deeply concerned with the future of America, anxious to make our world a better place in which to live and bring up their children. They want a world free of war, free of fear, free of poverty. They do not believe it is necessary to kill in order to create peace. They do not believe that it is necessary to first destroy in order to build. And who are we to say that they are wrong?

What have we given these young people? They were brought into a world full of tension, a world in which the threat of total nuclear annihilation is an accepted fact, a world in which white man is pitted against black man, rich against poor, the powerful against the helpless.

They protest, and we ignore them. "They're children," we say to ourselves. "They'll grow up." But maybe they are the ones who are mature. Maybe we ought to grow up.

« PreviousContinue »