IS LYNDON LAROUCHE USING YOUR NAME?

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 5, 2010
• Sequence Number: 19
• Publication Date: April 1, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00866R000100640019-0
p,PTri' F;PPEARtU
COLUMBIA JOURNALISM REVIEW
March/April 1985
Is Lyndon LaRouche using
your name?
How the LaRouchians masquerade as journalists to gain information
by PATRICIA LYNCH
ast fall, presidential candidate Lyn-
don H. LaRouche, Jr., suffered a
double defeat at the hands of a
federal jury in Alexandria, Virginia. His
$150 million libel suit against NBC -
which had aired two reports that
charged, among other things, that
LaRouche was the leader of a violence-
prone, anti-Semitic cult that smeared its
opponents and sued its critics - was
rejected. Perhaps more significant, the
jury ordered LaRouche to pay $3 million
to NBC on the network's counterclaim
that LaRouche and his followers had
played "dirty tricks" on the network and
had interfered with its newsgathering ac-
tivities by, for example, impersonating
NBC reporters and producers. While this
was by no means the first time that the
LaRouchians, as his followers are com-
monly called, had been detected posing
as reporters and members of TV camera
crews, it was the first time that a jury
had weighed the evidence regarding
such activities and imposed punitive
damages on LaRouche. (LaRouche has
appealed the libel verdict in LaRouche
v. NBC, and has moved to set aside the
counterclaim.)
As I testified at the trial, my first en-
counter with LaRouchian dirty tricks oc-
curred on January 30, 1984. As the
producer of a report on LaRouche for
NBC's now-defunct First Camera pro-
gram, I was filming LaRouche's resi-
dence in Leesburg, Virginia. While
correspondent Mark Nykanen was doing
a "stand up," my associate producer,
Kathleen Paterno, and I saw one of
LaRouche's security guards reach
through the window of our crew car,
remove our work schedule from the
dashboard, read it, return it, then stroll
away. Later that afternoon, back in
Washington. Paterno was telephoned by
a man representing himself as an aide of
New York Senator Daniel P. Moynihan.
whom we were scheduled to interview
at 5:00 P.m. The caller said that the sen-
ator was having "second thoughts"
about doing the interview because he and
his family had been subjected to harass-
ment by LaRouchians in the past. Half
an hour later the "aide" called back,
raising questions about how thorough
our report would be. Had we talked to
the FBI, the CIA. the IRS? Paterno and
I assured him that we had. After this call.
Paterno looked worried. The man we
had just spoken to, she said, sounded
very different from the one with whom
she had set up the appointment. I called
Senator Moynihan's office and, to my
surprise, learned that the interview had
been cancelled by someone purporting
to be from NBC.
The interview was rescheduled for
5:30 P.m. When I and my associates ar-
rived at Moynihan's office, the senator
Leader LaRouche and guarded estate:
LaRouche, shown here speaking in a 1982
NBC interview, lives in Leesburg,
Virginia. Guards are reportedhv armed:
securin? on the estate is strict.
showed me a press release that had just
arrived from LaRouche's political or-
ganization, the National Democratic
Policy Committee. It stated: "Fat [sic]
Lynch to interview Moynihan today" -
information that could only have been
obtained from the work schedule pe-
rused by the security guard. (The video-
tape of this interview was admitted into
evidence at the Virginia trial and por-
tions of it were played for the jury.)
After the interview I called an NBC
lawyer in New York. NBC Nightl ' News
was airing a report that evening on
LaRouche and the lawyers were facing
problems of their own. They had re-
ceived a hand-delivered letter from
LaRouche's lawyer in Boston threaten-
ing legal action if the network aired its
segment that night and went ahead with
its plan to air the longer report I was
preparing, which was scheduled to be
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
- v
hown on March 4. The letter contained
good deal of information that reflected
nowledge of what Paterno and I had
Ad "Senator Moynihan's aide" earlier
nat afternoon. (This letter was also in-
roduced as evidence at the trial.)
This use of a bogus phone call to elicit
information that the LaRouchians could
ase for ends of their own reminded me
)f what Sara Fritz had told me earlier
hat week in a taped interview. Fritz,
vho was then White House correspond-
,nt for US Net's & World Report and
'ho now covers Congress for the Los
Ingeles Times, had told me how in 1981
.1 LaRouchian woman had impersonated
ter to obtain important interviews,
,vhich then appeared under that woman's
)y-line in various LaRouche publica-
:ions. US News & World Report sued
.ind won an injunction against the of-
fending publications. I suggested to our
lawyers that, should LaRouche follow
through on his threat to sue NBC, the
network should countersue - which is
what happened.
(Asked for comment about the prac-
ices described in this article, LaRouche
-eplied through an aide that he would
;peak only about the US News & World
Report case. What he said was: "I don't
:now anything about it and I never
looked into it, but I do know that the
liberal press uses undercover press prac-
Jces that are abhorrent and beneath de-
.cription. ")
From January 30 on, several people
,vho had served as sources for my First
Camera report began to receive strange
phone calls. One was Lynn Cutler, vice-
:hair of the Democratic National Com-
-nittee. Her caller identified himself as
'Scott Lewis," my researcher.
"Lewis" told her that I was concerned
:hat NBC was "slanting" my story by
suppressing information about the Rea-
_an administration's links to LaRouche.
Cutler believes that the imposter was
trying to get her to file a complaint
against the network for biased news re-
-toning so as "to create problems for the
Zepublicans and the Democrats."
A few days later, Cutler received an-
,ther phone call, which she found
.aguely menacing since the caller
,eemed to have inside information about
:ier daily schedule. "We know you are
,oing to be interviewed by Pat Lynch,"
he caller said, and then hung up.
(LaRouche and his followers have tar-
geted prominent Democrats for harass-
ment and vilification for several years,
although LaRouche himself is at least
nominally a Democrat. Portions of vi-
deotapes showing LaRouchian harass-
ment of Mondale, which I had obtained
for my broadcast, were played for the
federal jury.)
Another source of mine contacted by
the LaRouchians was Ken Paff. national
organizer for Teamsters for a Demo-
cratic Union, a reform group that has
often been smeared by LaRouche pub-
lications. Once again the caller claimed
to work for me. He said he needed to
know more about the tactics LaRouche
organizations used to discredit the TDU.
Paff says that he provided the caller with
some information but was suspicious. In
this case, apparently, the LaRouchians
were simply fishing for information
about the scope of my report.
A third source was Ken Lawrence. a
Mississippi-based authority on extremist
groups of the far right. Lawrence con-
fesses, ruefully, to having been com-
pletely "taken in" by a caller who
claimed to be "Rick Winslow, who
works for NBC and the program First
Camera." "Winslow" wanted infor-
mation about LaRouche's ties to various
right-wing groups in the South, as well
as information about anti-Klan activists.
Eager to be of help, Lawrence gave
"Winslow" the names of several
sources, some of them very sensitive, as
well as a good deal of background in-
formation.
Still another of my sources was Lenny
Zeskind, a Missouri-based expert on the
far right. Zeskind. who says he has been
pestered by LaRouchians for years, was
suspicious almost from the start when,
in February of last year, he received a
call from a man who claimed to be my
boss. This fictitious executive producer
confided to Zeskind that I had become
"a worry" as a result of the libel threat,
adding that my work was often marred
by inaccuracies. Zeskind played along
with the man, who went on to call my
journalistic ethics into question by ask-
ing Zeskind - a source, not a contracted
researcher - whether he had been paid
yet for his services. (NBC guidelines
prohibit paying sources for information.)
"Prepare a bill," the caller urged after
learning that Zeskind had not been paid.
(A few days later Zeskind informed me
of this curious conversation.)
The thoroughness with which the
LaRouchians pursued their tactics was
impressive. Gem Gable, for example,
is chairman of the London-based com-
pany that publishes Searchlight, an in-
vestigative monthly that focuses on the
activities of extreme right-wing groups;
Shimon Samuels is the director of the
Anti-Defamation League's European
office in Paris. Gable says that, starting
in March 1984, he received a number of
calls from "Pat Lynch of NBC," asking
for the names of contacts who could help
her do a follow-up piece on LaRouche
and his anti-Semitism. One name Gable
provided was that of Shimon Samuels,
who subsequently received calls from
"Pat Lynch." (It was when this caller
asked Gable for contacts in the U.S. that
his suspicion was aroused. As he said in
a sworn affidavit: "I thought this was
rather strange as she is an American cor-
respondent for an American television
network who . . . presumably had more
than adequate sources of her own in
America. ")
Many other journalists have
found themselves the vic-
tims of LaRouchian trick-
ery, the purpose of which in most
instances is to make people reveal in-
formation they would not normally di-
vulge or to gain access to people who
might not speak to a LaRouchian. Ac-
cording to several defectors from La-
Rouche organizations, much of the
gossip and information that is either pub-
lished or sold to foreign intelligence
agencies or passed on to high-level U.S.
bureaucrats and intelligence officials for
political reasons is gained by interviews
in which the caller poses as a journalist.
The results are sometimes striking. Dr.
Norman Bailey, who until December
1983 was a special assistant to the pres-
ident and the National Security Coun-
cil's senior director of international
economic affairs, has called the La-
Rouche operation "one of the best pri-
vate intelligence services in the world."
(Asked on my First Camera program if
LaRouche had any influence on Presi-
dent Reagan or on his policymakers,
Bailey replied: "Well, I think that some
people other than myself used him be-
fore and continue to use his organization
'"(Iuulled
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
a source of information, yes.")
Among the journalists who report
wing had unpleasant experiences with
e LaRouchians are:
Free-lance journalist Dan E. Moldea.
loldea is the author of The Hoffa Wars,
critical look at the Teamsters Union,
ith which the LaRouche organization
;portedly has close ties. In 1981, Mol-
ca recalls, he was called by a "jour-
alist" whom he was led to believe
orked for Time magazine. On the basis
I 'this belief, he provided the caller with
uite specific information about "orga-
ized crime ties to members of the Rea-
an administration." Later, Moldea
ays, "that interview appeared word for
vord in a LaRouche publication."
John Rees. an ultraconservative who
)ublishes Information Digest (where the
charge was first made that the nuclear-
:reeze movement was orchestrated by
:he KGB). Rees says that he provided
the names of several law-enforcement
contacts, as well as background infor-
mation about terrorism, to callers he
later concluded must have been La-
Rouchians. "They would call and say
:hey represented the International Press
Service at the National Press Building."
Rees recalls. "It sounded so authentic.
Anyone would be fooled." (Rees is one
of scores of Americans who, according
to the LaRouchians, have links to the
KGB.)
Arnaud deBorchgrave, a former sen-
ior editor and chief correspondent at
Newsweek; the co-author of The Spike,
among other books: and a partner, with
Rees, in the publication of a confidential
intelligence newsletter called Early
Warning. For several years, de-
Borchgrave says, he has been the victim
of bogus phone calls which he attributes
to the LaRouchians. (LaRouche publi-
cations routinely call him "a KGB agent
of influence.") Recently, deBorchgrave
says, he received a call from a woman
who claimed she worked for the Rand
Corporation. "She was seeking infor-
mation on the Bulgarian-KGB connec-
tion in the attempted assassination of the
pope," he recalls. When he invited her
to come to Washington and show her
credentials, adding that he believed she
was a LaRouchian, she hung up. Later,
he says, several people representing
themselves as Arnaud deBorchgrave
used the name as an entree "all over the
Mark Aral, formerh? with n., Baltimore
Sun, now with the Los Angeles Times
'Several
journalists
unpleasant
experiences John Rees, publisher
with the of Information Digest
LaRouchians'
world." And, for years, he adds, some-
one has been running up large bills in
his name in France - a piece of intel-
ligence passed on to deBorchgrave by
the French police.
D Ed Kayatt, publisher of a New York
weekly called Our Town. "In 1979,"
Kayatt says, "I gave out background in-
formation on a hard-hitting series we did
about LaRouche to a man who said he
was counsel for The New York Times."
When Kayatt tried to reach the lawyer
at the Times he learned that, while the
Times did employ a lawyer whose name
was that used by the caller. the lawyer
had not telephoned Kayatt. "I have no
doubt it was a LaRouchie who tricked
me," says Kayatt, who had been twice
sued, unsuccessfully. by LaRouche and
his followers for S85 million.
D Jerome Watson, White House corre-
spondent for the Chicago Sun-Times.
Watson succeeded in tracking down the
caller who impersonated him. He says
that Hal Levy, then press secretary for
Senator Adlai Stevenson 111. received a
phone call from "Jerome Watson"
around 1979. "Levy knew my voice so
he called me right away," Watson re-
calls. "I called the number the imposter
gave Levy and asked for myself. A man
picked up and said. 'Hi, I'm Jerome
Watson.' No. you're not.' I told him,
and he hung up." Watson traced the
number to a LaRouche organization.
Sometimes the Larouchians' tactics
can damage a journalist's career. Free-
lance journalist Charles Fager is a case
in point. He became a target of the
LaRouchians. he says, while he was pre-
paring an article about LaRouche for
Boston's The Real Paper in the early
1970s. Falter believes that a combination
of physical and legal threats caused the
paper to spike his article. Then. around
1980. by which time he was working for
Congressman Paul McCloskey of Cali-
fornia, he began receiving what turned
out to be bogus phone calls. One caller
identified himself as a researcher for a
think tank that was seeking information
about LaRouche: another identified
himself as a reporter for Allied Features
"with offices in the National Press
Building." Falter says that soon after he
had given these callers information both
about LaRouche and about himself, a
"dossier" labeling him a "KGB mole"
started circulating around Capitol Hill.
"It was embarrassing." says Falter. "1
found myself on the defensive." An FBI
investigation carried out at Falter and
McCloskey's request cleared Fager. but.
says Fager, who no longer works for
government, the smear hurt because it
made him "controversial."
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
4,
Sometimes the tactics show a sophis-
ticated sense of newsroom realities,
seeking to discredit a reporter in the eyes
of his editor and his sources as well.
Consider the case of Mark Arax, which,
like that of Charles Fager, was put before
the federal jury. In 1982, Arax was
doing the reporting for a series of articles
critical of Lyndon LaRouche's campaign
financing for the Baltimore Evening Sun.
Arax, who is now with the Los Angeles
Times, recalls: "My managing editor be-
gan to get telegrams and phone calls
from my sources claiming that I had
treated them poorly." Managing editor
John M. Lemmon, who did not believe
that a trusted reporter could have acted
in the way described by the callers, dis-
cussed the problem with Arax. Subse-
quently, both reporter and editor started
calling Arax's sources and discovered
that, in some cases, people whose voices
did not resemble Arax's had been calling
his sources and speaking in an abusive
manner while, in other cases, bogus
sources had called Lemmon to complain
of precisely such abusive behavior.
"Fortunately," says Arax, "I had an
editor who trusted me."
Occasionally, LaRouchian "actors"
meet their victims face to face. In Feb-
ruary 1984, Terry Dalton. state editor of
the Centre Daily Times in State College,
Pennsylvania, was visited by a La-
Rouche camera crew. Members of the
crew implied that they worked for NBC
and came into the Dalton house with
cameras rolling. "I was subjected to a
series of accusations and increasingly
hostile questions from the man holding
the microphone," Dalton recalls. (Dal-
ton had written two stories about a local
woman who had been persuaded to run
for Congress as a LaRouche candidate
but had withdrawn from the race.) Dal-
ton says that the reporter, who identified
himself as Stanley Ezrol. accused him
of making "abusive" phone calls to the
candidate, then interrogated him about
why he had written "negative" stories
about Lyndon LaRouche. Dalton says
that the question he found most "chill-
ing" came at the end of Ezrol's inter-
view: "Have you ever feared for your
personal safety?" Before the La-
Rouchians left. D::'.ton persuaded Ezrol
to produce a business card. It bore the
name of a LaRouche publication: Ex-
ecutive Intelligence Review.
One month after Dalton's encounter
with the LaRouchian camera crew, Arch
Puddington of the League for Industrial
Democracy was ambushed by a three-
person crew that arrived uninvited at his
office in New York City. A woman
asked why he was "undermining"
LaRouche's presidential campaign.
Members of the crew raised questions
about his having written for National Re-
view, a publication the LaRouchians de-
test. "They asked me whether I had
participated in pot parties on [publisher)
William Buckley's yacht," Puddington
recalls. "Then they spent a lot of time
impugning the reputation of free-lance
writer Dennis King, saying he had 'low
moral character' and was a member of
the illegal drug lobby."
Dennis King, who has written ex-
tensively about LaRouche and
his followers, has been har-
assed by them for six years and has been
sued three times. King recalls two face-
to-face encounters with LaRouchians.
"A man who introduced himself as
David Feingold from the AFL-CIO
struck up a conversation with me on a
shuttle flight down to Washington,"
says King, who edits New America. a
bimonthly published by the Social Dem-
ocrats, USA. After telling King that he
was concerned about the LaRouche
"menace," the man tried to draw him
out. King later called AFL-CIO head-
quarters and learned that no such man
worked for the organization. He was
subsequently able to identify the man as
a LaRouche follower named Herbert
Quinde from photographs supplied by
The Hartford Courant.
Quinde also tried to fool NBC cor-
respondent Brian Ross and producer Bob
Windrem. Using the alias Herb Kurtz -
who described himself as a reporter for
the Newark. New Jersey. Star-Ledger
- Quinde tried to find out if Ross and
Windrem planned to investigate the
LaRouche organization. Windrem later
identified "Kurtz" as a LaRouchian -
again from a newspaper photograph.
Another LaRouchian, who called
himself Jean Claude Adam and some-
times identified himself as a French de-
fense ministry official, succeeded in
duping reporters from coast to coast for
several years because he looked and
sounded so convincing. Dennis King.
who arranged to have a photographer
snap Adam's picture. was able to iden-
tify him as Laurent Murawiec. a fol-
lower of LaRouche since the early
1970s. In an Our Town article published
four years ago, King stated that at least
two foreign policy experts of some dis-
tinction, accepting "Adam's" bona
fides. had granted him interviews.
"These guys are great imposters,"
says John Greenfield, a Boise, Idaho,
labor lawyer and former state chairman
of the Democratic Party who was also
duped by a LaRouchian. "They ought
to be in show business." Greenfield's
brush with the LaRouchians occurred in
June 1984. One day, he recalls, he got
a call from a man who identified himself
as "an L.A. Times reporter." The caller
asked him to describe his views on the
party's arms control plank. The next
day, says Greenfield. a LaRouchian was
handing out leaflets at Boise State Uni-
versity that contained all the information
he had given the "reporter."
Rick Shaughnessy, a reporter for the
Times-News in Twin Falls, Idaho,
tracked down the person who had dis-
tributed the leaflets. The man said his
name was Don Pilson. Pilson admitted
to having written the text of the leaflet
but denied having impersonated a Los
Angeles Tithes reporter. Asked why the
LaRouchians used deception to obtain
information. Pilson told Shaughnessy:
"They probably would say 'Get lost' if
we identified ourselves."
One former LaRouchian whom I in-
terviewed last winter (and whose infor-
mation was admitted into evidence) took
a more sinister view of the practice.
"We use our phones as weapons: to har-
ass. to intimidate, to probe. to interro
gate. You'd be amazed the kinds of
things you learn by pretending to be
someone important." ^
C:,7nt AU;-,1,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0
J
Far left, far right - far out
Over the years, Lyndon LaRouche, who
is sixty-two, would appear to have
moved from the political left to the po-
litical right. Conservative publisher John
Rees is one observer who thinks La-
Rouche has merely disguised his polit-
ical beliefs to gain adherents and power.
In a videotaped interview that was
shown at the trial. Rees called LaRouche
"a roast-beef Nazi: brown on the out-
side, red on the inside."
LaRouche certainly started out on the
left. In 1948, he joined the Trotskyist
Socialist Workers Party and adopted the
name of Lyn Marcus, said by some to
be a play on the names of Lenin and
Marx. In the mid-1960s, he formed a
group of his own, the New York Labor
Committee, which became a faction of
Students for a Democratic Society and
played a part in the 1968 student uprising
at Columbia University. Splitting off
from the SDS, the group took a new
Presidential candidate LaRouche: He has
run three times, on three different tickets.
name - the National Caucus of Labor
Committees - and preached the demise
of capitalism. The name stuck; La-
Rouche's tactics changed.
In 1973, still claiming to be a leftist,
LaRouche launched a campaign "to
finish off the Communist Party." It was
called Operation Mop-Up and it was vi-
olent. Squads of, NCLC members beat
up Communist Party activists, many of
whom required hospital treatment. By
the mid-1970s LaRouche's move to the
right was well under way. In 1976, when
conservative Republicans were voicing
their contempt for Nelson Rockefeller,
LaRouche discovered that he had "allies
in the capitalist classes." It was in this
period that he and his followers report-
edly established ties with such right-
wing groups as the Ku Klux Klan and
Willis Carto's Liberty Lobby. Some
LaRouchians underwent paramilitary
training. Anti-Semitic rhetoric began to
appear in LaRouche's publications.
Nineteen seventy-six was the year
LaRouche made his first bid for the pres-
idency. He ran on the U.S. Labor Party
ticket. Four years later he ran as a Dem-
ocrat. In 1984, after losing out in the
primaries as a Democrat, he ran as an
independent - and became much more
visible than in the past. Candidate
LaRouche obtained a total of more than
$1 million in Federal Election Commis-
sion matching funds for the 1980 and
1984 campaigns. (His 1984 vote total
was 78.773). Defectors from LaRouche
organizations and experts who monitor
the organizations' activities estimate that
LaRouche and the NCLC may have
spent as much as $20 million during the
campaign year of 1984. The candidate
kicked off his TV campaign in January
1984 with a $210,000 Saturday-night
political commercial: the party subse-
quently purchased several half-hours of
prime-time television.
LaRouche presently has about 450
hard-core followers in this country and
some 600 abroad. In the past four years,
his political beliefs have won him many
more, if less fanatically committed. fol-
lowers. This new constituency, sources
say. includes farmers, union members.
businessmen, clergy, legislators and
government officials, and some law en-
forcement officers and intelligence
buffs. While the National Democratic
Policy Committee works to promote
LaRouche's political ideas - these in-
clude a return to the gold standard, low
interest rates, and rapid development of
nuclear power and "Star Wars" tech-
nology - such groups as the Fusion En-
ergy Foundation help to recruit new
members attracted by its pro-nuclear
stance and, in some cases, ignorant of
other aspects of LaRouche's operation.
Among the various groups here and
abroad that draw new members are: the
International Caucus of Labor Commit-
tees; the Schiller Institute, ostensibly set
up to promote German-American unity;
the Lafayette Foundation for the Arts
and Sciences; and the Club of Life, an
international political organization that
started up as an anti-environmentalist
and anti-population-control group.
Where does all the money come from?
At trial, LaRouche claimed to know
nothing about his organizations' fi-
nancial activities. Some of the money
comes from donations, some from the
sale of intelligence reports to foreign
countries. And some of the money
comes from the sale of publications.
Among them are Executive Intelligence
Review, a weekly that costs $399 a year;
Investigative Leads, a newsletter sent to
police chiefs and members of law en-
forcement agencies; New Solidarity, the
LaRouche newspaper, which comes out
twice a week; and The Campaigner, a
monthly theoretical journal. The Fusion
Energy Foundation also publishes a
glossy monthly, Fusion.
The NCLC also operates a book pub-
lishing company (the New Benjamin
Franklin Publishing House), a commer-
cial typesetting firm (World Composi-
tion Services), and a printing company
(PMR). Another printing plant is being
built, in Leesburg, Virginia.
Last fall, during the libel trial of Lyn-
don LaRouche v. NBC. LaRouche was
asked about his financial empire. He re-
plied, in part. "I have not made a pur-
chase of anything greater than a five-
dollar haircut in the last ten years. add-'
ing that he hadn't filed an income tax
return for twelve years. P.L.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100640019-0