THE CIA AND NATIONAL SECURITY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00845R000100430001-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 8, 2010
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: October 3, 1980
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/08: CIA-RDP90-00845R000100430001-9
INDIANAPOLIS MEWS
3 OCTOBER 1980
The C : and national security
To the Editor of The News: because the subject matter may
Your Aug. 25 editorial, "The CIA and embarrassing to or critical of the
cy 11
censorship" has just been called to my agency.
attention. It contains errors of fact, Your opinion that CIA's exercise of
misses the- main point and distorts an this function has been "more arbitrary
important issue. than effective," and your implication
Snepp's book does not charge that that CIA will not perform that function
CIA "botched" the evacuation of with fairness an discretion are gratuit-
Saigon. One cannot botch what one is ous. The men and women of the Central
not responsible: for. Snepp was not pros- Intelligence Agency - all of whom have
ecuted for writing the book or because voluntarily taken the same oath of
the CIA didn't like it,. but for not secrecy and who live by it - deserve
submitting it for security review- as he better of The Indianapolis News.
had promised- in writing to doi `Snepp r. `. HERBERT E. HETU
did not sign a- contract with CIA "to CIA, Director of P ubli' Affairs.
submit anything he wrote," 'only to . Washingfon,D.6'
submit for security review what hel
writes` about intelligence. .- I :; `' _i
Nor did' the Supreme Court affirm
the "CIA's-right to censor what any
former employe says for the rest of his
life." .Such a sentence could not have
been written by someone who had read
what the Supreme Court had to say
about the matter. John Marks is not a
"former CIA agent," but a former
Department of State employe.
You assert that the book "disclosed"
no secrets: This is a false inference. We
have never said that it disclosed no
secrets. He was sued for breach of
contract (his signed secrecy
agreement). The purpose of the secrecy
agreement Is to protect the govern-
ment's secrets. The method of assuring
this is to-have the agency's employes
and ex-employes who write about intel-
ligence submit their writings for securi-
ty review before publication.,
Our review procedures. are subject to
congressional oversight and judicial re-
view. We do not delete criticisms of the-
agency, fair or unfair, true or false, but
only that which is, and should. remain, a
secret of- your government.-We* could
have reviewed Snepp's book with very: few deletions which would not have
changed the- sense of the book. or. its
criticism of the.CIA in any way.
One- of niy, duties. is to chair the
Publications Review Board, that body
which reviews -submissions for securitys
review.- It should, interest your readers
to know that since that. board was
established- in 1977, we: have reviewed
294 manuscripts, of which-only four
have been disapproved. The regulation
under which we operate states in part.
that "approval will not be denied solely
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/06/08: CIA-RDP90-00845R000100430001-9