Mr. Chairman, on February 2, 1978, two men showed up at the Unification Church located at 16th Street and Columbia Road in Washington, D.C. One said they were architects who wanted to see the inside of the church. There was nothing unusual about the request since our church is an historical landmark. So the girl at the front desk asked them to wait a moment while she called for someone to give them a tour. They insisted they did not have time to wait for someone and said they wanted to tour the building alone. The receptionist told them to wait anyway and asked them to sign the guest book, which they did hesitantly. Then someone came and gave them a tour.

Along with other members of the Unification Church, the same receptionist attended my April 20, 1978, testimony here. You can imagine her surprise when she saw the two men who had come to the church posing as architects seated among the staff of the subcommittee-among your staff, Mr. Chairman. She wondered, "What use could architects be to an investigation of Korean-American relations?" After the hearing adjourned, she along with another member of the church confronted these two men, first separately, then together. One totally denied ever having been to the Unification Church, and the other, confronted by the very person he had spoken with at the church, admitted he had indeed misrepresented himself to her in order to get in. Once the cat was out of the bag, the one who at first had lied also admitted he had been to the church. They are investigators Edward Gragert and Martin Lewin.

Mr. Chairman, at the outset of the investigation, on June 22, 1976, you, the Hon. Donald Fraser, stated:

Many people have contacted my office regarding this hearing and seem to have the impression that the subcommittee is investigating the Unification Church, which Sun Myung Moon heads. Let me say at the outset that this is not the case. This hearing is not concerned with the religious philosophy or practices of the Unification Church. Those are protected by the First Amendment and those rights are inviolable.

On February 15, 1978, Mr. Chairman, you also told me, in executive session:

Let me say, first, that I hope it will turn out that the subcommittee is not inquiring into protected rights under the First Amendment... It has never been our intention to inquire into anyone's religious beliefs or practices. We hope we will be scrupulous in avoiding that.

Mr. Chairman, why did you then send your investigators prowling around the Unification Church premises? Why did your two staff members misrepresent themselves? Why did they hide their identity when they came to our church? Why did one of them lie about it later? Mr. Chairman, you don't have to lie to get into our church. If you really think that KCIA agents or stashes of KCIA money are hidden at the Unification Church, come over at any time.

Is this the kind of scrupulous regard you intend to offer to protect our right to the free practice of our religion, sending undercover agents to prowl around the church? You have indeed been investigating the Unification Church all along. We have no way of knowing how many other undercover operations you have launched against us. Your conduct of these hearings has been a wholesale invasion of the First Amendment of the Constitution. This one episode that we stumbled upon, even without finding the others that surely preceded it, is characteristic of this subcommittee's investigation. We see in this episode the following three distinct characteristics:

1. Deception of purpose.

2. Ruthless disregard of the law and regulations of Congress.

3. Cover-up of abuses.

You have played a game of deception in this investigation from the start. Like your two investigators who hid their purpose for visiting our church, you have hidden from the Congress and people your true purposes in this investigation-namely, to discredit Reverend Moon and the Unification Church and to undermine Korean-American relations. How do I know that these are your ulterior aims? Just look at the facts.

I have already referred to the February 2 incident. Why would two of your staff lie about their identities in order to snoop around in our church unless they were encouraged to do so by you? They are part of an official investigation. You are certainly responsible for how they conduct themselves.

On May 16, 1978, according to a Washington Post article on the following day, four of your staff attended a reception here in Washington for Daphne Greene, a well-known advocate of deprogramming and active opponent of the Unification Church. Daphne Greene has been involved in kidnapping and forcibly detaining, verbally harassing and physically abusing Unification Church members. The kinds of activities in which she is involved have been condemned by the ACLU and held illegal by several courts. Yet your staff was reported to be associating with her in public. What does this prove? The only reasonable conclusion is that your staff supports her work against our church. These people are on your payroll, Mr. Chairman, and they must be acting on your instructions. You cannot be so naive or unprofessional as to think that Daphne Greene could contribute any worthwhile or reliable information to an investigation of Korean-American relations. Therefore, you must be investigating the Unification Church, or worse, working with people like Daphne Greene in order to destroy it.

The New York Times on January 14, 1978, reported that you accepted an invitation to attend a meeting organized to press for legal and legislative action against the Unification Church. So much for your pretense of honesty and objectivity.

These are only the most recent and blatant examples of your secret campaign against the Unification Church. They are not the only ones.

Let us look at your efforts to undermine Korean-American relations and destroy the Republic of Korea. In my last testimony I documented some of your efforts aside from this investigation, for example, your "Dear Colleague" memo calling for a reassessment of American's commitment to South Korea; your support for the anti-South Korea activities of Father James Sinnott; and your involvement with several communist-front organizations, including one with ties to the pro-North Korea U.S. Out of North Korea Committee. Indeed, the evidence of your philosophical sympathies and close associational ties with far-left, pro-communist and outright Marxist-Leninist organizations raises serious questions that go beyond even this investigation.

What is the common denominator between Korea and the Unification Church? Both are dedicated to the struggle against the forces of international communism. Korea has become a symbol around the world of resolute opposition to communist tyranny. The absolute commitment of the Unification Church, based on our religious principles, to the defeat of communism is also well-known. Destroying either Korea or the Unification Church will inestimably aid the cause of international communism, which stands for everything America is against and the ultimate aim of which is nothing short of the very destruction of these United States. Whether or not you understand this and realize the consequences of what you are doing doesn't matter. This will surely be the result.

Mr. Chairman, judging from your actions, you believe that if you can prove any of your allegations or even give to the press and public the impression that you have, no one will object to how you have gone about doing so. You have simply adopted the classic formula, The end justifies the means. You have shown no regard for the law or regulations of Congress in the ruthless pursuit of your ends.

I first began to suspect that something foul was afoot when I learned how the investigative staff had initially been assembled. No attempt was made to obtain a balance of political opinions or viewpoints on the subcommittee staff. Quite the contrary. Every effort was made to ensure that the staff would reflect the political views and anti-Korea bias of its chairman.

Common House practice requires allocation of one-third of committee staff positions to the minority. In this investigation only 1 of 13 positions was assigned to the Republican minority. The ranking minority member of this very subcommittee has charged:

Although assurances have been given that this investigation will be handled in an even-handed and dispassionate manner, I call your attention to the lopsided staffing arrangement proposed for the special inquiry. Only one of the 13 staff positions is slated for the minority. Such a ratio makes a mockery of any pretensions of objectivity.

According to a recent article in The News World, May 15, 1978, the sole minority staff consultant, Lawrence Sulc, said it was impossible for him to oversee the staff's activities.

The implications of this lopsided staff arrangement become even more ominous when we realize that almost all of the majority staff members, particularly those with experience or expertise in Korean affairs, exhibit pronounced anti-South Korea prejudices. Mr. Chairman, only those who share your anti-Korea bias were brought aboard. You have put together a team well-suited to undertake the "get Korea" task.

For example, all the staff members with backgrounds in Korean affairs, Ed Gregart, Sue Slotnick, and Edward Baker, had already demonstrated their bias. They published anti-Republic of Korea (ROK) material, made anti-ROK statements to the press, or had been involved in anti-ROK activities.

Journalist Walter Riley wrote of the staffing procedures in an article that appeared in the Crookstan Daily Times, Minnesota, on June 13, 1978, entitled "Cronyism Surfaces in House Probe Unit."

Casual conversation with the majority of the subcommittee staff members revealed only two of those interviewed had an open mind and unbiased view toward South Korea. When Chairman Fraser and the clear majority of his own hand-picked subcommittee staff are openly prejudiced against South Korea, how can taxpayers expect a fair and honest full and complete investigation of Korean-American relations?

The answer is, of course, that they cannot. A conspiracy, after all, requires co-conspirators. In public statements the staff insists on their objectivity; privately they continually degrade the Unification Church and express scorn for the Republic of Korea.

Moreover, can you seriously expect the world to believe you are objective when you have hired an all-white staff to investigate an Oriental nation and minority religion?

Not satisfied with a stacked investigative staff, you have perpetrated what may become known as a reverse Korean payoff scandal. I have recently learned that you actually paid witnesses who have the kind of anti-South Korea testimony you wanted to hear, by awarding them special consultant contracts. In order to investigate Korean influence-buying here in America, you paid witnesses who testified the way you wanted them to. What a joke.

The details of the payoff scheme were reported by Walter Riley in Dateline Washington, Trans-World News Feature, June 1978:

Four star witnesses who served up the bulk of the anti-South Korean testimony collected by a House investigating committee have each been rewarded with a $2,000 consulting contract by the subcommittee. A fifth $2,000 consulting fee was awarded to a former committee staff member. All four were paraded before the Subcommittee on International Organizations headed by the ultra-liberal Donald Fraser, the Democrat Farm Labor Congressman from Minnesota. They camethey cooperated-they collected. No witness who presented testimony favorable to South Korea was awarded one of the two-grand consulting contracts.

This column has obtained a copy of the minutes of an April 5, 1977, meeting of the House Subcommittee on Contracts, which lists, in black and white, the awarding of five contracts to favored witnesses. The winners were: Donald Ranard, former head of the Korean Desk at the State Department and a fierce critic of the Park government; Jai Hyon Lee, a former officer at the South Korean Embassy in Washington who defected to the United States; Jerome A. Cohen, Gregory Henderson, and Richard Mauzy, a former staff member.

It has all the appearances of a payoff to people who have testified the way Fraser wanted them to, admitted a well-connected Capitol Hill insider. Everybody around here knows Fraser's out to get South Korea. He's made no bones about it in his statements. Just look at his record! A spokesman for the justice Department confirmed that it is illegal to reward a witness in any legal proceeding .... I do not approve of influence buying, Mr. Chairman. Several Koreans have been accused of buying influence of U.S. congressmen by giving them campaign contributions. You have bought the testimony you wanted by awarding your witnesses consulting contracts. What is the difference?

Don't misunderstand me. I am not saying this because I didn't get one of your $2,000 contracts. Only people who tell you what you want to hear get paid. I would have to betray my country like jai Hyon Lee did. I would have to betray my spiritual leader like Judas Iscariot did. I will not do that-not for 30 pieces of silver, not for $2,000, not even for $1 million. I would rather die telling the truth than live with lies. I would rather suffer slander, abuse, even imprisonment at your hands than compromise my conscience. I don't want your blood money.

In the worst tradition of a few tragic and sordid congressional investigations that have tarnished the otherwise distinguished tradition of this great Congress, you have abused the power of this subcommittee, violating the First Amendment rights of freedom of religion. Yet you have tried to cover it up and keep it from becoming well-known. You have substituted allegations for facts in your attack on Reverend Moon, hoping that if the allegations are repeated often enough they will be accepted as fact. Your June 6, 1978, "Statement Regarding Reverend Sun Myung Moon" is the latest example of this subcommittee's deception, ruthless application of the "end justifies the means" ethic, and cover-up of abuses. Let me deal with it now.

You indicated to the press that the subpoena issued by the subcommittee called for Reverend Moon to appear on June 13. You intentionally led the reporters to believe Reverend Moon had been expecting the subpoena, and you implied he might have gone to England to avoid being served.

Yet previously, your attorneys had told my attorney that there was a very good chance that it would be unnecessary to call Reverend Moon. They promised my attorney that you would not make any decision about calling Reverend Moon as a witness and would not issue a subpoena for Reverend Moon until after the completion of my testimony. Why should Reverend Moon expect that he would be subpoenaed for June 13 when I was scheduled to testify on June 20? We understood from your promise that Reverend Moon was not to be issued a subpoena until after I had finished testifying. You broke that agreement as callously as you have broken so many other agreements with us.

Reverend Moon has planned for a long time to conduct an evangelistic tour in Europe, ever since the completion of his American tour at the Washington Monument God Bless America Rally on September 18, 1976. You imply he hurried off after hearing a subpoena might be served. Do you think he also found 118 couples to get married on the spur of the moment because of your subpoena? Reverend Moon was scheduled to officiate, as he did, at the marriage of 118 couples on May 21, 1978.

What really happened is this. When you heard Reverend Moon was in London, you issued a subpoena and quickly held a press conference to wave that subpoena around to make it look like he was skipping the country to avoid being served.

Reverend Moon was in the United States for two years while you were holding these hearings. You could have subpoenaed him anytime. You did not. You waited until you could make the most political capital. Korea is in the news again. Your Senate campaign is under way. Reverend Moon left the country and you seized the chance to make a grandstand play.

Recently I saw several of your Senate campaign brochures. In all of them the key word is trust. You are asking the people to trust Fraser. One of them even says: "The best example of the trust Don Fraser has earned in Congress is this: In 1975 he was selected to head the International Relations Committee investigations of Korean CIA influence in the United States."

If this is your best example of trust, those who decide to trust you are in big trouble. Why should the people of Minnesota trust you, when in Congress you break your own rules and the rules of the House of Representatives and you break your promises to people like myself and Reverend Moon?

For these four lines in your campaign brochure you have spent $685,000 of the taxpayers' money, ruined the reputations and livelihoods of innocent people, needlessly hurt America's Korean ally, and besmirched the image of the United States Congress in the eyes of the world. That is a very expensive campaign plug. It is one that most taxpayers would not be pleased to know that they have contributed to.

In the June 6 "Statement Regarding Reverend Sun Myung Moon" you recited several allegations and claimed that only Reverend Moon could respond to them. You made it sound as though you had exhausted all other avenues of investigation and only Reverend Moon could provide the information you need. You did this without asking me about most of these matters, most notably the Diplomat National Bank.

In my appearance on April 20 I asked you to allow me to clear up the questions surrounding the Diplomat National Bank. You refused, indicating it was getting late. You know that you don't have to call Reverend Moon on this subject to learn what he might know about it. You carefully avoided telling the press that Reverend Moon has already testified concerning the Diplomat National Bank before the Securities and Exchange Commission and that you have a complete transcript of his testimony.

Why don't you ask me about the church's Korean industries? How can you say only Reverend Moon can answer these questions when you have never bothered to ask me about them? You know what my answers will be. You know that I am not an anti-Korean, two-thousand dollar witness, and you know that you will not like what I have to say. I think it is quite clear that you are not interested in truth. Only one thing will satisfy you: To put Reverend Moon in your dock and hold him up to the camera lights for ridicule. You want to try to trick him, too. You want to pull out financial records of a decade ago and ask him how can it possibly be that he does not remember all the details. From notes you want to read accusations from faceless accusers whom you will not identify. You also want to use what should be called the Fraser Special-the unsigned summary of an unevaluated intelligence report of an unnamed agency.

I will tell you openly and honestly that Reverend Moon will not cooperate with such a sordid investigation. Would Pope Paul dash to Washington to answer questions by you about the extent and sources of Catholic wealth or charges that Catholics in America had lobbied against abortion? Would Catholics stand for it after you had slandered and criticized the pope?

Would Billy Graham abandon his evangelistic schedule to answer your malicious, slanderous charges after you had secretly conspired against him, broken your promises to him, and tried to trick him?

Our fight is a fight for principle. Reverend Moon is not a private person. He is a symbol of our church and religion. Once a religious leader becomes prey to a political opportunist, then every religion is threatened, not just Reverend Moon's church but Christian churches, Jewish synagogues, and Buddhist temples. We will not permit our religious leader to be accused and humiliated by you. At stake is not only Reverend Moon's honor, but America's honor. If Reverend Moon is made to go through this farce then America, and not Reverend Moon, will have been demeaned. What lies before us is a fundamental constitutional question. This is a question that perhaps only the Supreme Court should decide. It is not a question of the Unification Church versus Congress, but rather a question of the Constitution versus a misguided Congress.

Is Reverend Moon trying to hide from giving testimony? Just reflect for a moment. Would he have voluntarily testified before the Securities and Exchange Commission if he were hiding from giving testimony? No, it is this subcommittee and its biased and intolerable abuses that Reverend Moon must oppose. We will nest permit you to stage your Senate campaign at the expense of our religion. A memorandum dated May 12, 1978 from Charles A. Stillman, attorney for Reverend Moon, to the subcommittee, set forth that the subcommittee had failed to provide real evidence supporting its claims of links between organizations founded by Reverend Moon and the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA). It stated:

In the absence of any real evidence... the subcommittee and its investigative staff have attempted to substitute what can only be described as the crudest form of guilt by association. No one would ever seriously suggest, for example, that because of their reverence and... support for the State of Israel, American Jews are agents of the Israeli government.

Nor would anyone challenge the right of Roman Catholics in this country to undertake vigorous political action concerning abortion and other matters perceived by them to be of religious significance. Does doing so make them agents of the Vatican?

...Did anyone ever suggest that the activities of those religious organizations and individuals could or should be subjected to scrutiny by Congress? Does the Constitution permit any different treatment of the Unification Church because of the unpopularity of both its spiritual leader and the country which occupies a special place in its theology?

If the First Amendment were only intended to protect popular causes, it would be meaningless.

Also, the Supreme Court of the United States rightfully stated in regard to the spirit of the First Amendment:

While, of course, all legitimate organizations are the beneficiaries of these protections, they are all the more essential... where the challenged privacy is that of persons espousing beliefs already unpopular with their neighbors and the deterrent and chilling effect on the free exercise of constitutionally enshrined rights of freedom of speech, expression, and association is consequently the more immediate and substantial. (Gibson v. Florida Legislation Commission, 372 U.S. 539, 1962)

We will fight the injustices and abuses of power of this subcommittee. We will fight to protect the good name and honor of our religious leader. We will fight for the principle of religious freedom and for the honor of America in the courts and in the Congress. We will take our case to the American people if we have to. Even then, if the law and goodwill of our fellow man fail us, we will fight on until God Himself comes down from His throne in Heaven to vindicate our cause.

Reverend Moon just might consider accepting your subpoena under one condition: You issue a subpoena to Pope Paul, Billy Graham, Oral Roberts, Robert Schuller, Spenser Kimball (president of the Mormon Church), the heads of the Baptists, the Jews, Methodists, and Lutherans. Why? Because Reverend Moon has done nothing more to deserve a subpoena than any of these great religious leaders. If you think they deserve a subpoena, then perhaps Reverend Moon will consider your subpoena of him. In fact, then he would insist on one because he would not allow these great religious leaders to be persecuted by you without coming to their aid. Yet if you call Reverend Moon because his activities are political, you must call each of them.

Reverend Moon's activities are far less political than many of these great religious leaders, if you choose to use the word political. If you call Reverend Moon because his church is engaged in business, then you must call each of them. Reverend Moon's church has invested far less in business than these religious organizations. The book titled The Religious Empire describes church businesses worth multi-billions of dollars. In this book Reverend Moon's Unification Church received one paragraph consisting of five lines, a fraction of the space devoted to other churches.

A minority is safe only if the majority protects it. Reverend Moon stands for principles that he knows to be more important than life itself. And he does not stand alone. We stand with him. We will fight with our lives, and we do not stand alone. Men of principle are our allies.

In the first paragraph of your statement you said: U.S. Intelligence reports from the early 1960s have alleged that the Unification Church was used by high Korean officials for political purposes, and that the Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation, ostensibly an independent cultural organization, was actually formed to advance the interests of Reverend Moon and the Unification Church.

State Department and intelligence agency documents later in the 1960s allege that certain projects of the Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation were subsidized and controlled by the Korean Government.

You failed to mention, however, that these were unevaluated reports. This means, in plain English, that even the agency whose memo it is will not vouch for the accuracy of the information in it. After all this expense, you still have no competent proof that the Unification Church was used by the Korean government for political purposes. There is no such evidence. Anyone knows that without the five Ws of What, When, Where, Who, and Why being answered, the intelligence report is not very intelligent. It is innuendo based upon a rumor, gossip, and misinformation. You were, however, quick to use it in a clumsy attempt at character assassination.

One of these so-called intelligence reports released by this subcommittee asserted that Kim Jong Pil, former director of the KCIA, founded the Unification Church in 1961. Mr. Chairman, I was a full-fledged member of the Unification Church in 1957. I could bring before this subcommittee thousands of people who belonged to the Unification Church in the 1950s. The first missionary from our church to America arrived here in 1959. It is well known in Korea that Reverend Moon founded the Unification Church in 1954. Even little children know this. That is how reliable these intelligence reports of yours are.

Since the hearings began, we repeatedly requested that you produce whatever evidence that you have. I repeat that request now. Instead you have told us that we must wait for some mythical date when the evidence will finally be laid out.

Even as recently as last month, May 12, 1978, The Minnesota Daily quoted an anonymous source "close to the investigation" as saying that after June 1 the hearing will establish "more conclusive ties" between the KCIA and the Unification Church. Well, it is after June 1, Mr. Chairman, and we are still waiting.

I think the best evidence you have can be found in your own June 6 statement. You said: "[T]he testimony and statements of persons formally associated with the Korean Cultural and Freedom Foundation have tended to corroborate these allegations."

After 34 months and $685,000, shouldn't you have evidence that does more than tend to prove something?

The most important point I must make is that we never at any time planned an anti-Japanese demonstration. The planned demonstration of September 14, 1974, was against the murderous deeds of communist North Korea and their puppets, the North Korea Communist Association in Japan. Our church members wanted to register that sentiment and urge the Japanese government to help answer the questions surrounding the assassination of Mrs. Park Chung Hee.

Reverend Moon did not plan or instruct that demonstration; the Freedom Leadership Foundation (FLF) did, under the leadership of Mr. Neil A. Salonen. FLF has sponsored demonstrations on many occasions concerning many different issues to register its feelings and beliefs about the inhumanity of communism. It was this kind of demonstration that was planned for September 14, 1974. The Freedom Leadership Foundation was completely and solely responsible for the demonstration. They went to Reverend Moon for his blessing as they often do, but this demonstration, according to Mr. Salonen, was planned totally by FLF independent of any knowledge of KCIA activities and without the cooperation of the Korean Embassy.

Reverend Moon did not even know the demonstration had been canceled. He assumed it had been held until Mr. Salonen reported that he had canceled the demonstration at the last minute. The decision was solely Mr. Salonen's as president of FLF Why did he cancel it? The best thing to do is ask Mr. Salonen; he is the best person in the world to answer that question.

I was with the Little Angels on August 15, 1974, at the World's Fair in Seattle, Washington, the day Mrs. Park Chung Hee was assassinated. We were scheduled to do a Korea Night performance in commemoration of Independence Day in Korea. When we heard the news that President Park's wife had been shot to death by a communist assassin from Japan, we were shocked. The Little Angels, children ages 8 to 14 years, were completely overwhelmed; they burst into tears and cried in anguish for about one hour. It was as if their mother had died. The late Mrs. Park Chung Hee was a great lady and indeed the mother of our country. That day all Koreans lost a mother. The whole nation mourned, not out of courtesy but from a deep heartfelt sadness and heartbreak. Our hatred of communism became even more bitter.

When the Japanese government took only a lukewarm attitude toward the investigation of the causes and accomplices of this crime, the Korean people were enraged and the Unification Church members all over the world sympathized with us. The Freedom Leadership Foundation probably wanted to convey this feeling to the visiting prime minister of Japan. I was personally very sad that Mr. Salonen called off the demonstration, but then he had every right to do so. At any rate, Mr. Salonen is the person to call and testify on this matter, certainly not Reverend Moon.

This is one allegation so ridiculous that certainly it does not require a rebuttal. Before you talk about a subpoena for Reverend Moon, you must show cause for believing that Reverend Moon received money from the KCIA. The insinuations you have made are based upon summaries of so-called intelligence reports you summarized. Why did you have to summarize them? Why can't the press have originals? They are, after all, declassified. The reason, I am sure, is that you do not want the press to see that these are unevaluated, tentative reports. After all, it is the only evidence you have despite 34 months of searching. If Reverend Moon received money from the Korean government, prove it. When, where, how much, and from whom? Why can't you give this information to the press?

Reverend Moon has never received money from the KCIA, not one red cent. Do you think the KCIA is so virtuous as to want to help to finance religious work in America? Our budget comes from God. We earned every dollar with our own sweat and blood for the glory of God's Kingdom on Earth.

If anybody gave money to Reverend Moon from the KCIA, the logical person would be former KCIA officer Kim Sang Keun who defected to the United States. He seems to be the money man from KCIA. He is said to have delivered $600,000 cash to Mr. Kim Han Cho, and he testified to this subcommittee on June 6, 1978, that he delivered $400,000 to Mr. Choi Young Che. He also apparently gave some Korean resident $500 for an anti-Japanese demonstration. When you asked whether he knew if any money had been given to Reverend Moon, he said loudly and clearly-No!

Why don't you ask him whether or not I, Bo Hi Pak, was a KCIA agent? If anyone should know, he should. I know you would not dare to ask him that question because you can not afford to hear the same answer again after Kim Hyung Wook, former KCIA director, already told you I am not.

On page six of your statement you again quoted from a summary of a so-called intelligence report, saying:

In 1975, the ROK mission in New York was again having problems with members of Reverend Moon's group. As a result, in the fall, the Ambassador in Washington instructed the KCIA chief and one other KCIA officer to travel to New York to discuss with Reverend Moon, or available Unification Church officials, the fact that the ROK Mission in New York had received a number of complaints about the lobbying for South Korea in the U.N. performed by some of Moon's followers.

If you are trying to prove that Reverend Moon and the Unification Church are not working for the KCIA or the Korean government, you certainly chose the right intelligence report. If we had been, why did they have problems with members of the Unification Church in 1975? Indeed, in 1975 a KCIA official did come to New York to speak with me. He pressured us to stop our activities at the United Nations that were being conducted on behalf of humanitarian causes. Later I brought this message to Reverend Moon, and he asked me to convey the following sentence to the same KCIA official in reply: "Please mind your own business. I will mind mine."

I did convey that message to him. On page seven of your statement you again quote a summary of U.S. intelligence reports: "By the end of 1975 the KCIA station chief in Washington was instructed by KCIA director in Seoul that he was to cooperate with Moon and stop trying to destroy him."

What does this really mean? Logically, it implies that until the end of 1975 the KCIA station chief in Washington had been trying to destroy Reverend Moon. If Reverend Moon or the Unification Church had been working for the Korean government, then why was the KCIA trying to destroy Reverend Moon all those years up to 1975? This supports what I have said, yet you mock me in your June 6 statement, saying, "...Pak Bo Hi went so far as to state that Reverend Moon and the Unification Church have been persecuted by the Korean government."

All along, the Unification Church has been trying to receive fair treatment from the Korean government, the same as every church is entitled to. It has been a long and difficult struggle. Jesus once said, "By their fruits you will know them." As the fruits of Reverend Moon's work have become better known-his teachings, his spirit, the character of his members and their deep desire to contribute to the well-being of the community, country, and world-our church has been better received by the people and government of Korea. I trust that will happen in America too. I do not want to spend the rest of my life testifying at hearings like these.

You impute some sinister meaning to the statement that "Moon was viewed [by the ROK] as a positive factor in building relations with the U.S." Most U.S. government and congressional leaders-yourself excepted if you wish-view the religious work of American churches in foreign countries as a positive factor in building relations with those countries. What could be better public relations for any nation than for others to see that their citizens are law-abiding, God-fearing, compassionate, and righteous?

You quote from the same report: "By mid-1976 it was noted that the Unification Church's influence was seen to be growing at home and abroad."

That is true. Our influence has been growing at home and abroad not with help from KCIA, but by the help of God and by the blood, sweat, tears, and hard work of our worldwide membership.

In regard to the Diplomat National Bank, I have prepared a full, separate statement. You knew this before you issued your statement on June 6, 1978. In fact, you knew it as early as April 20, 1978. How could you have known that you could only get the answers you need from Reverend Moon when you had not even heard my answers yet? I am still ready to give you full testimony on this subject. Names of people whom I assisted to obtain loans in order to purchase stock in the Diplomat National Bank have already been submitted to you through my attorney.

Concerning the source of funds, I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, not one penny came from either the KCIA or the Korean government or any other government for that matter. The source of funds was the Unification Church Pension Fund International, which had money here in this country for a long time prior to the birth of the Diplomat National Bank. These funds had been accumulated over many years by the contributions of visiting Unification Church members from around the world. These funds have been set aside for the purpose of settling aged or dedicated members of the Unification Church who served many years without pay.

Control of the bank as has been alleged was never our aim. None of our members ever attended a stockholder's meeting. I hope this bank will succeed because it is the first Asian-American minority bank established to benefit many suffering Asian citizens in this country. I also wish the bank well so that it will accrue due benefits for our members who invested. The objective was simple: By making this investment we hoped to enable older and dedicated members to have security for their families in the future.

What is wrong with that? You seem to assume, or wish the world to believe, that the fact that the members of the Unification Church bought in the Diplomat National Bank necessarily implies some impropriety.

Why can everyone else in the religious world buy stock and nobody bother them? Why have we been singled out by this subcommittee? Millions of Jews, Catholics, Mormons, and other church people own stock in banks, and I am sure more than one owns stock in the same bank. Are Unification Church members to be persecuted and excluded from these rights because their religion began in the Orient?

Let me refer to The Religious Empire, a book by Martin A. Larson and C. Stanley Lowell, page 200:

Der Spiegel also alleged that A.P Giannini, founder of the Bank of America [originally the Bank of Italy and later the Bank of California], the largest bank in the world, was acting as an agent for the Society of Jesus. To our knowledge this has never been denied by the Jesuit Fathers. It is worth noting, too, that securities may be held under assumed names, or by individuals of the Order.

Have you ever bothered to investigate the Bank of America for its possible ties to or affiliation with the Vatican, which is, after all, a foreign government?

You made the following allegation in your statement:

It is widely reported that Tong-il is engaged in armament production in Korea, and that it helps produce and sell such weapons as M-16 rifles, machine guns and grenade launchers. We are especially interested in the question of whether Reverend Moon's business has been engaged in the export or attempted export of weaponry form Korea to other parts of the world.

Before I answer that allegation directly, I want to give some background information regarding Korea today.

The first and foremost duty of every Korean citizen is to contribute to the defense of the country from attack from North Korea. The Korean peninsula is no less volatile than the Middle East. The danger to South Korea from an attack by the North is no less than the threat Israel faces from hostile Arab countries. In Korea, as in Israel, everyone, including women, is the defense industry.

Farmers are in the defense industry because they produce the crops for food. The first priority is to feed our soldiers on the front lines. Engineers and road builders are in the defense industry because their first priority is to make sure the roads are adequate for military transportation in case of war. Cement factory workers are in the defense industry because their first priority is to reinforce our trenches and foxholes in the war zones. Commerce and business people are in the defense industry because their taxes are paying for the planes, ships, and cannons that will equip our armed forces.

Tong-il Industries is no exception. The Tong-il company is certainly one of the finest machine manufacturers, and it produces everything metal, from needles to sophisticated military instruments. It is required by law to accept government contracts to produce hardware and parts as requested. It has nothing to do with Reverend Moon's teaching. In fact, he has no control over the situation. He does not even know what has been produced. However, I have checked and I can confirm that Tong- it has nothing to do with the production of M-16 rifles. Even so, I am glad we are contributing something to the national defense. You must remember that Korea is still at war. The guns are silent now, but for how long? Korea must do everything possible to deter North Korean aggression

When I went back to Korea recently, I told a school assembly of over 1,500 children who attended our Little Angels School: "I will dash back to Korea and stand side by side with you at the first sign of hostilities of North Korea." This is the spirit in which we Koreans live.

If there is something inherently wrong with a church investing in the defense industry, you had better begin by investigating American churches.

It is reported in The Religious Empire on page 196 that in 1970 the following churches had invested the stated amount in defense industry stocks:

United Methodist Church 14.1% of $59,751,899
United Presbyterian Church 12.8% of $57,871,381
American Baptist unknown percent of $30,558,371
Disciples of Christ 41.4% of $8,690,821
National Council of Churches 11.7% of $332,831

Finally you asked about allegations that the Unification Church has engaged in exporting arms. You will be disappointed to know there is no truth to the allegation, outside of fantasies of whoever has been feeding you the allegations to begin with.

In the 1950s there was a senator who wanted to become famous. His name was Joe McCarthy. At one time he made everyone in government tremble. Innocent people were charged with being communists. He destroyed their honor, fame, and livelihood. He bluntly asked everyone the same question: "Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?" He imputed guilt by association. He abused enormous government power to intimidate the powerless. He exploited popular and sensitive issues for personal political gain. In the name of fighting communism he launched an inquisition, a witch-hunt. Most people think McCarthyism has been laid to rest. Not so! Joe McCarthy may yet have to share his place in history.

In 1978 the pendulum has swung to the other side. The same tactics and methods are being used under a different name. Another congressman wants to make his fame. Like Joe McCarthy, he is using the technique of the big lie and guilt by association to make headlines for himself while destroying the lives of hundreds of powerless people. He is abusing the enormous power of a congressional subcommittee. His name is Congressman Donald Fraser of Minnesota. Fraserism is McCarthyism of the left. But whereas Senator McCarthy was ostensibly fighting communists, Congressman Fraser is fighting anti-communists. Now the question is, "Are you now or have you ever been an agent of the KCIA?"

That is why Reverend Moon and Col. Bo Hi Pak are targets. They are both Korean and anti-communist. Congressman Fraser's ultimate target is not any single person, however. Congressman Fraser wants even bigger game, and Reverend Moon and Col. Bo Hi Pak are only stepping stones; he wants the foremost anti-communist nation-South Korea.

It has been said that when Joe McCarthy went hunting for subversives he should have started with himself. The idea is that in so freely violating the constitutional guarantees of freedom of others, he became the real enemy of America. Indeed, America finally stopped him.

America will stop you, Mr. Chairman. For a long time I thought I was alone in this fight. But I have learned I am not. In early June of this year you were endorsed by your party on the third ballot for the nomination for senator from Minnesota. At the convention there were over 1,000 Minnesota residents demonstrating against you. They were shouting "No Fraser, No Fraser." You were the only candidate who aroused such fury. A friend sent me some pictures of the demonstrations. The demonstrators were carrying signs. One slogan read, "In God We Trust-With Fraser We Bust." Others said, "Tip a Canoe and Fraser Too," and one American was holding the sign, "Fraser Is the Enemy of the People." I do not know any of these people, but I understand them. You must face them in November. Good luck, Mr. Chairman. I recently returned to Korea. I saw that my country is booming and determined. Bubbling enthusiasm and optimism are filling the land. Our people are determined to survive. They are moving toward unparalleled prosperity. It is a miracle in the making.

On the other hand, I saw that my country and people are absolutely disillusioned and disheartened by Koreagate. They were troubled and sad. They feel they have been bombarded in a surprise attack. They have no defenses, especially against the distorted image of Korea that is being communicated by the media. It has been a trying time, not just for President Park and the Korean government, but for all the Korean people. Mostly they are disheartened that the trust between Korea and America, built over these many years and sanctified by the sacrifice of American soldiers, could be shattered so easily. They do not understand why America wants to abandon them.

Ever since 1945 when America delivered Korea to freedom and liberation, Korea has been in love with America. Korea has been loving America unconditionally. Korea has been faithful and steadfast. Korea has bent over backwards to comply with America's wishes. In order to say thank you for your defending Korea in the Korean War, we went to Vietnam and fought and died with you, even though we knew it was a losing battle. We did not want America to suffer alone-America is our lover. After a love affair of 33 years, we suddenly learn that you will not return our love. All along we thought America loved Korea as Korea loves America. Now we are being told it is a marriage of convenience. Instead of being treated as a loving partner, Koreagate made us painfully aware that we have been treated as a servant or, at best, a colony.

After Tongsun Park testified in Congress, Koreans thought their ordeal was over. The time had come at last to heal the wounds, we thought. Then another shock came. When the House of Representatives voted on March 31, 1978, to cut off aid to Korea unless former Ambassador Kim Dong Jo was delivered for questioning, the Korean people were dumbfounded. This is indeed foolish blackmail. It is almost like a husband saying to his longtime faithful wife, "Unless you tell me of a plot of how you planned to hurt me, I am going to cut your throat!" How can America have done this to Korea! This is unprecedented in the relations between nations. It is an act of someone without self-esteem or respect for others. America's own diplomatic service, the Department of State, has reacted to this request with shock and disapproval.

Koreans can take any amount of hardship, any amount of suffering. Yet we cannot take one thing-humiliation. Millions of dollars in aid cannot make Korea surrender its heart. In the long run I know the loser will be America. You seem bent on self-destruction. On the day of the voting, one of the distinguished congressmen from New York said, "We are going to move closer to war in Asia."

He said precisely what all Koreans felt in their hearts. America will be the ultimate loser. Korea cannot afford to lose America, but how long can America do without Korea?

Yet Koreans do not resent the desire of the Congress and American people to get to the bottom of Korean influence buying. Some Koreans may have acted overzealously or violated the law. Some congressmen may have compromised the integrity of the United States government. The people have the right to know the facts so they can correct any abuses and avoid making similar mistakes in the future.

However, Koreans do resent the way some people have tried to make headlines out of these investigations at the expense of the truth. Some people have used these investigations to paint Korea as an enemy of America rather than a friend. You and this subcommittee labeled Korea "subversive." How can Korea be subversive? Korea never has and never will betray America. On the other hand, Koreans feel they have been betrayed by America.

That is why in Korea the name "Fraser" has become a notorious household word. When they think of the Korea investigation they think of you. They think you are the one subverting Korea. Why? Let me tell you a story about a famous American whom all Koreans admire. He is John Wayne.

From my very early days I have been a dedicated fan of John Wayne not because he is anti-communist, but because of his Western cowboy movies. He was my hero. He is the hero of many Koreans. I have watched dozens of his movies. For most Koreans he is the embodiment of the American character: good, rugged, and fair. He shot a lot of people, but never ruthlessly. As far as I could tell, he would only shoot someone to protect the lives of others, or to protect his own life. Most importantly, he never shot anyone in the back in cold blood. I always thought this was the American character.

Mr. Chairman, you betrayed this good American character. You have shot Korea in the back in an attempt at cold-blooded political murder. Korea was already wounded and staggering. Korea had been beaten and hurt by the media and other harsh critics. We might envision it as a person terribly wounded with much loss of blood but still standing with what little energy he has left, trying to survive with dignity. Korea needed a Good Samaritan. You have decided to take advantage of Korea's travails and shoot her in the back. How cruel you are! It is indeed cold-blooded political murder.

Let me close, Mr. Chairman, with a world of advice. Remember the fate of Joe McCarthy. Remember the virtue of John Wayne. And please remember God lives and reigns. I tell you, you will not succeed in shooting down my country of Korea. God will not let you. He cannot afford to let that fate befall Korea or America.

You have worked behind closed doors to keep the truth from getting out. Eventually, the truth will win out. It may seem naive of us to believe this. In many places, over many long, dark centuries, lies reigned supreme. Jesus was killed by a lie. Many before and since, known and unknown, have been silenced by lies. What else is communism but lies on top of lies, lies that hold sway over half the world. But we believe the truth will triumph in the end because God will triumph.

Jesus promised that one day everyone would know the truth of God. We believe that day is at hand. This is why we oppose your investigation and everything it represents. That is why we will never cease to speak the truth, no matter what the cost. God's message is clear. Jesus said: "Know the truth and the truth will set you free." Amen.

 Download entire page and pages related to it in ZIP format
Table of Contents
Information
Tparents Home