that they will continue to engage in all of the above activities until their demands are met?

General YARBOROUGH. We have gathered such statements; yes, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. So you cannot say you are not on notice of what they have said they plan to do and intend to do?

General YARBOROUGH. We cannot say that.

The CHAIRMAN. You are on notice?

General YARBOROUGH. We are on notice.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you one or two other questions. Does your intelligence information also reveal that there have been meetings of known black militants-I will, for the moment, ask you generally, and if necessary I will confine it to the State-in which meetings they have discussed that the militant and revolutionaries, that is, the most radical and extremists of these groups, are preparing and ready to take over and support a different leader once they get to Washington and get started?

General YARBOROUGH. Senator, I have no intention of trying to evade the question but I must say, sir, that the primary agency for gathering this information and the one that has the entire responsibility is the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

If I were to report what has been passed to me along that line, I would naturally have to get a release from the Attorney General.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, I will ask the same question of the Attorney General. Do you have that information now in your sources of intelligence?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, we would like to have any intelligence or information you have. I am sure you would be anxious to give it.

The CHAIRMAN. I am asking for yours at the moment.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. We have a lot of information. We have a lot of rumors. We sift it. We have a lot of statements that people make, some of which they have obviously no capability of carrying out and others which they may.

But it would be, I am afraid, meaningless for me to try to generalize as to what all of this intelligence shows.

We will be prepared for what may arise.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me put it this way then: I think I am entitled to know. I am not asking you from what source you got it, who gave you the report, who made the statement. I will say to you that the committee has information that in meetings of militant groups they have discussed and have made the statement that once this march reaches Washington, Abernathy cannot control it and that he will be pushed aside and that two very radical and extremist leaders whom I will not name now, are to take his place and lead the demonstration and take over.

Do you have that information?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I am not familiar with any information that we have that would coincide with what you have just indicated. I am familar with the fact that over the years we have had a constant flow of statements that can be characterized very much, very much in the nature of what you have just read.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Mr. Attorney General, I am trying to concentrate on the immediate problem at hand, not over the years, of what is happening now, in the last 2 or 3 weeks.

Do you have information that these things are occurring now in meetings of the extreme militant groups?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I think I have answered you, Senator, but I will try again.

I have no information which has come to me that would fit specifically what you have just read. We have a constant flow of rumor and information of this sort. We have it in connection with Washington now and every other city of any size in the country.

We look through it constantly and sort through it constantly. Sometimes we act on the basis of it. It depends on how much credibility we give to it.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you say there is no credence in what I have just said to you on the basis of the information you have?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. From what you have said it would be impossible to make a judgment as to the peoples' capability, whoever they are, and whether it is just talk or is an actual plan.

I can imagine any sort of person saying that. I imagine police officers around the country have said that. There may be Congressmen, there may be members of the executive branch of the Government that have said that. I don't know whether it is speculation or actual planning from what you have said.

The CHAIRMAN. I said in meetings of militant groups. I will name the State if you want me to. In Alabama.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. We would like to have all the information you have.

The CHAIRMAN. In Alabama, there was a recent meeting of militant groups who intend to attach themselves to and participate in this march and in this demonstration. In their meetings they have discussed that once they get to Washington, Mr. Abernathy or Reverend Abernathy will not be able to control it and they will be able to take it over and then it is to be led by two of their leaders.

I don't want to name them at this point. Do you have that information?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I have already said we do not have information that I am aware of at this time that specifically fits what you just read. We would like to have any intelligence you have. The CHAIRMAN. I would like you to check it out with your intelligence sources and advise us, if you will.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Yes. If you can give me what you have we will be very anxious to do that. We have information from many, many States about this. I am sure you would want us to have all the information you have.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir. I want to find out. I am perfectly willing to give you this information at the right time. I am trying to find out. I know you have greater sources than I have, greater opportunity, and means of getting it.

If this is going on as represented to us, I am sure the FBI must have the same information and you must have it in your files.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, we have information of hundreds of meetings all the time of this type and other types. Some of them amount to nothing. Some of them amount to something.

If you want us to check this out I would be very anxious to. I would like to know where and when and who was there.

The CHAIRMAN. I am asking you to check it out in your files and see if you have that information.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I will be anxious to. I hope you will give us the names and places so that we can identify it.

The CHAIRMAN. I said Alabama. You don't give out your sources, do you? You don't permit the FBI to say who gave you the information. You don't permit them to give it to us, do you?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. It depends on the circumstances. Very frequently we do.

The CHAIRMAN. I don't think you give out the names of your informers.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I am not asking for the identity of any confidential informant the committee may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have information in your files that extreme militant individuals in organizations which have advocated the necessity and desirability of the use of violence have attached themselves to the planning and the organization of this poor peoples' campaign and march on Washington?

Do you have that information from your intelligence sources?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, the situation regarding the planning and organization of this march is much too vague to lend itself to the specificity of your statement. Who is attached to it, who is involved, is a highly fluid thing. We talked to people this morning who don't know about telegrams others sent yesterday.

I think it would be harmful for me to try to be specific about something that is not in fact specific.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. This is just a conference to try to get information you can give. Maybe I am in error, maybe I expect too much, maybe I have an exaggerated confidence in the ability of the FBI to get information of this kind, maybe I am wrong, but I can't help but believe that if we get it, if they are alert, and I am confident that they are in this matter, that they must have gathered the same information. Maybe they wouldn't get it from the same individual but if it is going on I think they know it and I think it would be a matter of record in your intelligence information.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I think that is right, too. It may well be that we have checked it out and there is nothing to it or we have checked it out and we are continuing the investigation.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you considered that in a civil disobedience march or demonstration, as has been discussed in public by the leaders, to block traffic and to have sit-ins in buildings, and so forth, Government buildings, and to disrupt the processes of Governmenthave you considered that in such a situation it would be almost inevitable that incidents between the demonstrators and police or nonparticipating citizens would likely occur and which could be fanned by the militant agitators such as Carmichael and others to cause the present SCLC leadership to lose control of the demonstrations and thus create a critical condition with respect to violence and rioting?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, we consider every aspect and ramification of the situation that our intelligence and judgment lead us to. I don't know whether I could fairly characterize things as inevitable. There are some things that are inevitable and there are some that are not.

It is difficult to foresee the future. We plan for contingencies. The CHAIRMAN. On the basis of your intelligence information, do you think that is highly probable, based on the intelligence information. you have, that it will occur?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. On the basis of our present intelligence. I don't think it would be characterized as highly probable; no, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Would it be characterized as probable?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Probable means different things to different people.

The CHAIRMAN. Let us take what it means in Webster's Dictionary, on that basis.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. It is certainly possible, Senator. These are very tense

The CHAIRMAN. It is possible?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. It is possible.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you consider it probable-you know what I mean by probable, that it is likely to occur and you need to be ready for it?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, all life tells me that that question is not one that I could fairly or meaningfully answer in a single word. It depends on what happens. It depends on how many people come. It depends on what the people do, not on what the press say they have said over a period of many months.

The CHAIRMAN. What people have said over a period of many months and what they can do is not such as to make that seem probable in your mind?

You are saying it does not impress you to the point that you would conclude that it is probable?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, we will be prepared whether it is probable or possible or very unlikely. We will be prepared. But it is absolutely meaningless for me to sit here and try to conjure up how many people will be here and what they will be doing on May 12 or any other time.

The future will tell us.

The CHAIRMAN. I didn't ask that question how many people would be here.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Don't you think the probability would depend on that?

The CHAIRMAN. To some extent, yes. But I think you know from the information, based on the information you have as to the number, at least 3,000 are coming.

I think 3,000 are enough to block the bridges. I think 3,000 are enough to come into these buildings and obstruct the processes of Government if they propose to do it.

Don't you?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. There will be no blocking of the bridges and there will be no obstruction of Government buildings.

The CHAIRMAN. You are talking about numbers. Don't you think that number would be adequate to do it if they set out to do it?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. I don't think that number or greater number would be adequate to do it if they set out to do it because we are not going to let it happen.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what I would like to get. I would like to get that assurance, if we can have it, that you are not going to permit it to happen.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Any unlawfulness will be met with adequate law enforcement to control it.

The CHAIRMAN. How will it be met?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. That is a pretty big question. How many varieties of conduct do we want to look at. How many people, where and under what circumstances. If the people sit on the bridges they will be removed. If people endeavor to unlawfully enter Federal buildings they will be prevented from entering Federal buildings.

The CHAIRMAN. You can't know at the minute they enter that is what they are going to do.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. It is hypothetical. We don't know what their intentions are, what they will do.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you considered any court action to prevent the civil disobedience and the obstruction of the orderly community and the processes of government such as have been threatened?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, it is easier for you to assume the fact than for us to prove one. We have looked at the law on this in connection with a dozen similar instances. We have briefed the law from one end to another. We are prepared on any occasion, if we have the facts, to move to secure injunctive relief but we cannot move without facts adequate to seek relief and the probabilities in this area are not high.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean to say as the chief legal officer of this Nation-I am trying to get this so that the public can understand it, we are asked about it all the time-do you mean to say that threats by leaders of an organization, open threats, public declarations, that they are coming to this city with the intention of disrupting the processes of government, of obstructing traffic, and moving into buildings and sit-ins, and so forth, so as to prevent the normal function and operation of the personnel and the agencies of government-you mean to say on the basis of that, their own statements and their organizing and planning, that you could not ask for an injunction to prevent it?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Senator, if we had the facts that would support the proposition that there was an intention to violate the law and a capability of carrying out the intention, we could under those circumstances move to secure an injunction.

The CHAIRMAN. What does it take to declare an intention, to prove intention? If a man says he is going to do it and they are organizing to do it, does that not prove intention?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL. Some evidence of intention depends on circumstances, as you well know, Senator. I think it difficult to try to characterize a vague and general statement that appears in the press from time to time as clear intention.

We are in communication with them. They are talking to us. They are talking to the press every day. The last statement I have seen is that there will be no civil disobedience. What do you tell a judge today about what will happen 3 weeks from now?

The CHAIRMAN. What do you think this means? Only yesterday the Reverend A. D. King, the brother of Martin Luther King, said, "We are going to Washington and disrupt Washington so it cannot function unless it does something about black folks."

That is not a long time ago, He is one of the leaders, I think, and I think you know that. He belongs to the organization. He certainly is within the know, I would think.

Do you mean to say that that has no import as proving intent?