WHO GOOFED?

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP99-00498R000200020117-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 23, 2007
• Sequence Number: 117
• Publication Date: March 15, 1981
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

STAT
Approved For Release 2007/03/23: CIA-RDP99-00498Rgnn?on020117-9
0 i FAGS. /
PARADE MAGAZINE
THE WASHINGTON POST
15 March 1981
PARADE, 3 IEIAA.
BECAUSE OF VOLUME OF MAIL RECEIVED,'PARADE REGRETS IT CANNOT ANSWER QUERIES
by LLOYD SHEARER 01981
unable to learn or detect the
Who Goofed?"
that
our 52 hostages have been home
nearly two months, Congres-
about U.S.-Iran relations. For
starters, here are two,
Question No. 1: Why did Jim-
my Carter succumb to the ap-
peals of Henry Kissinger and
David Rockefeller and permit
the late Shah to enter this coun-
try on Oct. 22, 1979-especially
when he had previously been
cautioned not to do so by Charge
d'Affaires Bruce Laingen, our
man on-the-spot in Tehran?
"We should not take any steps
in the direction of admitting.the ~?
Shah until such time as we have
been able to prepare an effective
and essential force for the pro-
tection of the embassy," Lain-
gen reported. "We have the im-
pression that the threat to U.S.
personnel is less now than it
was in the spring... Neverthe-
less, the danger of hostages be-
ing taken in Iran will persist."
Did Jimmy Carter goof when
his humanitarian considera-
tions for the medical care of the
Shah overruled his huznanitari-
. ' `asking some key questions
sional committees will surely be
A nnrc v rl Fnr Release 2007/03/23 ? IA-Rf1P99-004988000 0 0 0117 _
an considerations for the safety
of our embassy staff in Tehran?
Question No. 2: Who during
the Nixon-Kissinger and Ford-_.
Kissinger Administrations was
responsible for the inexcusable
intelligence failure to discover
the Shah's cancer? In retro-
spect, that may have been the
single most glaring sin of omis-
sion in the entire tragedy.
Under four different direc-
tors-Richard Helms, James :
Schlesinger, William Colby and
Stansfield Turer-our CIA was
.truth about the Shah's health.
In 1972, when this reporter
was in Tehran with Nixon and
Vi sin
!?,?.
- --- - ....
er
e
Shah's malady was rife. A year
later, Cynthia. Helms, wife of
then-U.S. Ambassador to Iran
Richard Helms, heard the
gossip: "I remember it well, but {
none of us could verify it. I sate.
the Shah on numerous occa-
sions. To my eyes, he looked . ' .;l
well and fit, and he
kept deny
-
ing the rumors of his illness. .
It's incredible that our govern- ;
ment couldn't learn the truth.". }
As far back as 1973, French
doctors diagnosed the Shah's illI
ness as a form of blood cancer
and began to treat him. The
French intelligence service is
notorious for wiretapping, and '
it is difficult to believe that if
Henry Kissinger and Richard
Nixon-men also not averse to
the use of wiretaps---had seri-
ously wanted a valid report on
the state of the Shah's health,
they could not have obtained it l
For years we backed a Shah j
who knew he was terminally ill.
but refused to tell us.
At this stage of the game, the
American public is entitled to
learn the truth about the Ameri-
can experience in Iran. Hope-' .'~
fully, a Congressional committee,
will supply it.