COLBY NOSTALGICALLY RECALLS DAYS WITHOUT TESTIMONY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP99-00418R000100100030-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 11, 2012
• Sequence Number: 30
• Publication Date: June 29, 1975
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/11 : CIA-RDP99-00418R000100100030-8
THE WASHINGTON 'STAR
29 JUNE 1975
Colby Nostalgically Recalls
Days'Without Testimony.
By Norman Kempster
Washington Star Staff Writer
Careful -to maintain his.
cool facade, CIA Director
William E. Colby cheerfully
answered the questions
posed by the man with the
day-old beard and the open
sport shirt.
No, he was saying in ef-
fect, the CIA is not engaged
in a conspiracy with multi-
national corporations.
The exchange between
Colby and the inquisitive
man took place during a re-
cess in Coby's testimony to
a public meeting of a House
subcommittee last week. It
passed virtually unnoticed
although it was symbolic of
an almost revolutionary
change within the nation's
intelligence community.
It is impossible to conjure
up a picture of Allen Dulles,
the super spy of the Cold
.War years, rapping with
whoever wanted to get his
ear. It is almost as difficult
to picture Dulles - or most
of his successors - testify-
ing in public to a congres-
sional committee...
BUT TIMES ARE chang-
ing. , ...._ -:
Although he. admits he
isn't very happy about it,
Colby has been forced to
change the focus of his job.
He spends more time on
public relations these days
than he does on
intelligence-gathering.
During another recess of
the House hearing, Colby
told reporters that he de-
votes between 60 and 80
percent of his time to de-
fending the CIA in talks to
congressional committees
or public forums.
In the earlier days of the
28-year history of the CIA,
people just didn't talk about
it. Members of Congress
didn't want to know what
the agency was doing and
most of the public was
awed.
Colby talks about that
period with a trace of nos-
talgia.
talgia.
"IN 1947, WHEN the CIA
was established, it was re-
sponsive to American opin-
ion which accepted the old
tradition that nations con-
duct but do not talk about
intelligence," he told the
House subcomittee headed
byYRep. Bella Abzug, D-
N "External supervision in
those years was sporadic
and sympathetic in tune
with the consensus on for-
eign policy ' which marked
the times," he said.
By now, almost everyone
knows that as a result of
that anything-goes atti-
tude, the CIA broke the law.
The staunchly establish-
ment Rockefeller Commis-
sion said that some CIA
activities were "plainly
unlawful and constituted
improper invasions upon
the rights of Americans."
Colby concedes that laws
were broken. His objective
is to convince the public
that the breaches were
trivial in comparison to the
value of ire agency to the
nation.
Colby seems well-suited
to the task. A medium-sized
and middle-aged man who
wears glasses with flesh-
colored plastic frames,
Colbyypseems most notable
for `his unflappable self-
control. The casual observ-
er would take him for a bu-
reaucrat - which, of
course, he is - rather than
a professional spy - which,
despite appearances, he
also is.
He does not look danger-
ous. It is easy to believe
him when he says that the
abuses spotlighted by the
Rockefeller Commission
have been corrected and.
will not happen again.
BUT SOME CIA critics
are urging Congress and
the public to look carefully
at Colby's reassurances.
These critics say Colby an-
swers only the question he
is asked, volunteering noth
ing more. These responses!
can be -misleading unless
the questioner knows just
what to ask.
Members of the Abzug'
committee complained fre
quently during their most:
recent hearing that Colby's
answers given at an earlier
session in March were widei
of the mark. The director
contended that he had said
nothing untruthful in
March.
For example: At the
earlier hearing, Colby de-;
scribed in_ general terms;
some of the events which
the Rockefeller Commis-1
sion identified as Operation
Chaos. As part of that dis
cussion he was asked how 1
many members of Congress
were subjects of CIA files.:
He said four. i
In his appearance last;
week, Colby said the CIA1
has files on about 75 mem-
bers of Congress. Commit-
tee members demanded tol,
know how the list had'
grown so fast in such al
short time. Colby explained!
the number collected asl
part of Operation Chaos
was still four. The other 711
or so lawmakers were in-
cluded in other parts of thet
agency's file system.
Of course, there is noth-
ing inherently "wrong with a -
person choosing his words
with care and saying no,
more than necessary. But if ;
Congress is determined to;
reverse 28 years of "I
don't-want-to-know-about
it" philosophy and learn'
just what the CIA is doing,,
the lawmakers will have to,
spend more time. on their
homework.
THE TASK of overseeing)
the CIA is made many
times more difficult by the
complex bureaucratic,'
structure of the agency.;
Few people outside "the
company" have anything
more than the vaguest idea
of its organizational chart.
For instance, the CIA has
between 45 and 50 separate;
filing systems. A question
about files could be answer-
ed for one system, leaving
out 44 to 49 others.
The CIA has several)
overlapping and interlock-i
ing directorates and;
components. In theory, at'
least, one segment of the
agency may have ended a?
controversial practice while
another segment is still
engaging in it.
Once during his appear-
ance before the Abzug com-,
mittee, Colby gave an indi-
cation of the precision with
which he uses the language.
When a questioner asked
about interception of mi-
crowave telephone)
transmissions and referred
to it as a "telephone tap,"
Colby replied, "That was
not a telephone tap - it was
an interception of conver-
sation by a mechanical
means but it was not a tele-Yi
phone tap."
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/05/11 : CIA-RDP99-00418R000100100030-8 , ? , low,