THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. MILTON R. YOUNG

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00149R000800150017-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 19, 1999
• Sequence Number: 17
• Content Type: OPEN

r-Releaser --C
to accomplish: the slandering of American
students and scholars abroad and the dis-
crediting of much of the good work done by
our private foundations,
Carl Rowan, who was, like me, a Kennedy-
appointed ambassador, recently asked In his
newspaper column: , . (are] the benefits
to 'freedom' accruing from these exposes of
the CIA ... groat enough to balance out the
damage done to our security"?
I don't believe that anybody should answer
Appendix
"yes" to this question without first taking
the following Insufficiently appreciated facts
into consideration:
1. The CIA Is primarily concerned with the
'collection and evaluation of intelligence
from a variety of sources. Its 15,000 em-
ployees are neither spooks, jackasses nor
supermen, as they are so often and so vari-
ously depicted In fiction; they are for the
most part calm, studious. deskbound profes-
sionals who never do the kind of things
James Bond does. Nor Is the Agency by any
stretch of the Imagination "an invisible gov-
ernment." Abroad, CIA people assigned to
our overseas missions are under the juris
diction of our ambassadors. In Washington,
CIA activities are cleared, approved and
supervised by the Interdepartmental National
Security Council. which meets in the White
House.
2. The CIA is also in the business of watch-
ing and countering the actions of the Soviet
KGB and other Communist Intelligence
services. Unhappily, the cold war is by no
means over. I have seen at firsthand and
close range In Africa how much effort and
money is spent by our adversaries to bribe,
deceive, subvert and undermine the potential
leaders of these new young nations. And I
have been gratified, as an American, that we
have been able to alert our friends and help
protect African Independence and nonalign-
ment-thanks in part to the CIA. The in-
formation we have been able to furnish free
governments about the identity and activities
of KGB agents among others has been in-
valuable. For the latter's activities are both
far-flung and intensive. Between 60 and 70
percent of all Soviet-bloc diplomatic per-
sonnel in Asia and Africa are Intelligence
agents in disguise. And among Communist
newsmen, the proportion is even higher.
Compared to the opposition, we are quite
thin on the ground; but then, our mission In
these countries is not to subvert but to help
prevent subversion.
3. Indirect CIA financing of student and
cultural activity has been negligible com-
pared to what the other side has been doing.
The Russians alone are estimated to be
spending $10 million a year in recruiting and
proselytizing youth groups. Total CIA sub-
.sidles to counter this campaign since the
.early 1950's have been less than a third of
this sum. The beneficiaries of funding have
not-aa implied in the recent exposes-been
bought, badgered or corrupted by the CIA.
In fact, most of them didn't even know where
the money was coming from. Unlike their'
fellow students from the East, they were not
expected to take orders, perform espionage
functions or even promote official U.S. views
on foreign policy.
Then why all the fuss? I think part of
the reason is that the CIA has both an un-
deservedly sinister reputation and the wrong
kind of name to be In the business of sup-
porting activities that are peripheral to its
intelligence-gathering mission. The British
perform this function more discreetly. Stu-
dent, youth and cultural affairs are handled
by the British Council, a privately run
but government-supported institution. The
French work through their Ministry of Edu-
cation and the Alliance Frangaise, Their
-CIA counterparts manage to keep far away
and out of sight-which Is where they be-
long.' This Is not to may that Britain or
France are "Closed" societies, It. just that.
being more .experienced and sophlaticated,
.
A 10,33
Sanitized - Approved For Release CIA-RDP75-00149R000800150017-3
The Central Intelligence Agency
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. MILTON R. YOUNG
OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thursday, April 6, 1967
Mr. YOUNG of North Dakota. Mr.
President, I ask unanimous consent to
have printed in the Appendix of the REC-
ORD a signed editorial entitled "A Few
Kind Words for the CIA,' written by
former Ambassador William Attwood,
and published III the April 18, 1967, Issue
of Look magazine.
The New York Times of April 6 carries
an article entitled "Look, in a' Signed
Editorial, Supports CIA Subsidies for
Students' Organization," written by
Henry Raymont.
Since both the editorial and the news
story make a marked contribution to-
ward making a little sense out of all of
this adverse publicity regarding the CIA,
I ask unanimous consent that they be
printed in the Appendix of the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
and article were ordered to be printed In
the RECORD, as follows:
[From Look, Apr. 1B, 19671
A FORMER AMBASSADOR SAYS A FEW KIND
WORDS FOR THE CIA
It's open season on the Central Intelligence
Agency. Just about everybody, from the
California New Left to the Arizona Old Right,
has been taking potshots at one agency of
our Government that can't talk back. The
revelation that it has helped finance through
foundations some cultural and student
groups seems to have aroused even more In?
dignation than the Bay of Pigs fiasco six
years ago. Editorial-page cartoonists are
again caricaturing the foxy-faced little men
in trench coats with CIA on their hatbands,
and any mention of the Agency is good for a
snicker on the cocktail-party circuit. CIA is
once more a dirty initial.
And as usual, the CIA has had to keep.
quiet. It's the silent' service that is never
able to brag about its frequent successes nor
confess its occasional failures. Even its
friends on the outside have to be careful
about what they say for fear of violating
security. And yet, having seen quite a bit of
CIA operations during my five years as a U.S.
Ambassador, from 1961 to 1966, I feel like
saying that I'm sorry about the recent furore
and sorrier still about its possible conse-
quences. For the expose in Ramparts maga-
zine has succeeded in doing what Communist
propagandists have tried for years, in vain,
they appreciate the importance of self-im-
posed restraint on publicizing Intelligence
operations.
We Americans don't-perhaps because we
feel guilty about the CIA. ; don't think we
have any reason to, but then I've had more
chance than most of my fellow citizens to
see how the Agency works.
So what do we do now? Admitting that
the CIA and' our top Government officials
were naive In thinking that these Indirect
subsidies could be Indefinitely hushed up.
we still should not jettison the activities
they made possible-not If we care about
enlarging worldwide understanding of Amer-
Ica and what we stand for.
I believe that it's up to the Congress: which
holds the purse strings, to repair the damage.
You can hear plenty of patriotic cold-war
oratory on Capital Hill, but when it comes
to appropriating funds needed to wage the
cold war, our representatives don't always
suit their actions to their word ~, except
where military expenditures are concerned.
Let's hope the recent furore will Impel our
elected representatives to realize that Viet-
nam is only one front in this war-and by no
means the most important-and that being
niggardly about foreign economic assistance.
about USIA operations and about the kind
of activities that should be handled by the
State Department's Bureau of Educational
and Cultural Affairs 1s the most shortsighted
kind of economy at this time in history.
The job the CIA has been doing covertly
needs to be done overtly, perhaps by an
agency with a less cloak-and-dagger-sound-
ing title. Otherwise, we will only make It
easier for our determined and unscrupulous
opponents to convert and subvert a new gen-
eration of leadership Ip this revolutionary
world.
And while we ponder how to do it, let's also
hope the muckrakers get on a new tack.
We've done ourselves enough damage already.
WILLIAM Arrwo',D,
Editor ire. Chief.
[From the New York Times, Apr. 4. 13671
LOOK, IN A SIGNED EDITORIAL, Supp.,fTs CIA
SUBSIDIES FOR STUDENTS' ORGANIZATIONS
(By Henry Raymont)
In its first signed editorial, Look magazine
has defended the financial support by the
Central Intelligence Agency of stud' nt orga-
nizations here and abroad and urged that it
be carried on openly by the State Depart-
ment.
The magazine moved into the national
debate over the recent disclosures of covert
aid to the National Student Association with
a two-page article in Its April 18 Issue, which
went on sale yesterday. The article, by
William Attwood, Look's editor in chief, was
the first signed statement of editorial opin-
ion published by the magazine In its 30
years of existence.
Deploring the acute distrust expressed for
some of the Intelligence agency's activities,
Mr. Attwood wrote:
"Just about everybody, from the California
New. Left to the Arizona Old Right, has been
taking potshots 'at one agency of our Gov-
ernment that can't talk back . Its the
silent service that Is never able to brag about
Its frequent successes nor confess its oc-
cosional failures."
Mr. Attwood's chief target was Eamparts,
the Bad Francisco-based magazine that ex-