CIA PAPERS MISSING: PIKE PANEL ASSAILED

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 51
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 25, 2001
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: March 5, 1976
• Content Type: NSPR

--Apprroved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
CONFIDENTIAL
INTERNAL USE ONLY
This publication contains clippings from the
domestic and foreign press for YOUR
BACKGROUND INFORMATION. Further use
of selected items would rarely be advisable.
5 MARCH 1976
NO. 4
GOVERNMEMAFFAIRS
GENERAL
EASTERN EUROPE
PAGE
1
31
35
WEST EUROPE
38
NEA:, EAST
42
AFRICA
44
EAST. ASIA
25X1A
47
LATIN AMERICA
50
-Dost-roy-aftc.,,r bac its purpose
_ or :60 Wly5;
Approved For Release 2001e1W4DM*RLDP77-00432R000100410002-0
Applroved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410062-0 ?
WAStraNGTON POST
5 MAR 1976
CIA Papers Missing;
Pike Panel Assailed
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
The House intelligence counselor John 0. Marsh Jr.
committee, which is out of Pike said yesterday he
was "suspicious" about the
' business and under invest'- new charge against the corn-
: gation itself for past leaks, mittee, saying "they really
? came under a new attack are out to get ? me." He
yesterday for allegedly los- added that he believed some
ing 232 classified CIA docu- missing documents could
have been destroyed or
ments. transferred to the archives.
In'a Feb. 27 letter to Rep. When the Pike committee
! Otis G. Pike (D-N.Y.), who concluded its investigation
chaired the committee, Mite- last month, all documents
hell Rogovin, special coun- belonging to intelligence
? sel to CIA Director George Agencies were returned.
, Bush, listed six categories of ? At the request of Bush,
? documents "that are pre- 'Pike agreed to store the
? sumed missing," including committee's own files at
top secret material on :CIA headquarters. It is from
SALT, the coup in Portugal,
these files that
procurement by the CIA
and 'the agency's budgeting
process.
The allegedly missing doc-
uments had, according to
Central Intelligence Agency
records, been turned over to
the committee and cannot
be located among committee committee "with the inven-?
files now being stored at tory of documents receiVed
FIA headquarters. for storage at CIA
Pike has asked the CIA to headquarters. . ."
provide him with details on At that point, according to
when the documents were the Bush letter, "a number
turned over to the commit- of documents were unac-
tee and the name of the counted for."
committee staff member The day after Bush's let-
who signed for them. In a ter was sent, CIA counsel
letter to Bush last Monday, Rogovin spoke with Rep.
Pike wrote: "I will certainly Robert McClory (R-Ill.), who
do what I can to help you was the ranking Republican
find them." ? on Pike's committee. Mc-
Yesterday, Pike said a Clory, according to a later
quick check with his staff Rogovin letter, voiced
showed that in the case of "concern regarding the
the budget documents, some missing documents.
103 .were alleged by CIA to . Pike received Rogovin's
'have been on a single micro- list of missing documents on
film strip that "no one has March 1 and the same day
.any record as having got- sent Bush a letter asking for
.ten." more specific information.
The lost documents were The matter rested there
,discussed at the White until news reports yesterday
House last week, according quoted CIA sources saying
:to a presidential aide, and ?inaccurately?the missing
?copies of the Rogovin, letter, documents were loaned to
to Pike were sent to White the cotritriittee And had to be
House Counsel Philip W. returned to CIA.
:Buchen and presidential
NEW YORK TIMES
29 Feb. 1976
Rep. Abzug Wants Persons I
Told of U.S. Files on Them
-
WASHINGTON, Feb. 28 (UPI)
?Government agencies will be
required to notify individuals
of all files maintained on them
if a bill proposed by Represent-
ative Bella Abzug.?Democrat of
Manhattan. becomes law.
"There are thousands of peo-
ple who may not men be
the docu--
ments are missing.
According to a Feb. 25 let-
ter to Pike from Bush, the
agency "attempted to recon-
cile our records of docu-
ments delivered" to the
. Thursday, March 4, 1976
The Washington Star
House Panel
Can't Locate
CIA Papers
Associated Press
The House intelligence committee
is unable to account for some 230
documents, at least some of them se-
cret, which the CIA says it turned
, over to the committee to use in its
investigation of spy agencies, Chair-
.man Otis G. Pike said today.
But Pike, a New York Democrat,
discounted the possibility that the
'documents have been stolen. "I think
it's a nothing, frankly," Pike said.
The documents are "either in the
ar-
chives or were destroyed," he said.
PIKE ALSO SAID some of the
documents might have been returned
'to the State Department by mistake.
"We returned to the State Depart-
ment more documents than they had
any record of having given us, the
chairman said.
The committee, which had about 35
employes, went out of business after
writing a secret report, which was
leaked to CBS correspondent Daniel
Schorr, who in turn released it to the
weekly Village Voice in New York
for publication. ?
The Schorr?matter has resulted in
an investigation by the House Ethics
'Committee, which plans public hear-
ings to find out who gave Schorr the
report. There is no indication that the
leak to Schorr is related in any way
to the missing documents.
Pike said most of the documents
concern CIA budgetary information.
Others, he said, concern CIA opera-
tions in Cyprus. The CIA always has
regarded information about its bud-
get to be highly classified.
Government opered their mail
or tapped their phone cr other-
wise had them under surveil-
lance for doing nothing more
than exercising their constitu-
tional rights," Mrs. Abzug said.
? The bill ?she introduced Tues-
day Would require Government
agen-:ies to advise persons and
organizations that files are
belly:: kept on them and would
perni't ?those under surveillance
to have the files, destroyed.
aware of the fact4fit._
-p ved For Release 2001/08/08
WASHENGTOkl POST
5 MAR 1976
THE COMMITTEE
chairman said he received
a letter Monday from
Mitchell Rogovin, special
counsel to CIA Director
George Bush, saying the
agency could not account
for the 230 documents.
Pike said he sent a letter
to Bush in reply asking for
more specific information
about the documents, such
as when they were deliver-
ed and who on the commit-
tee received them.
"If they will tell me what
documents they are talking
about," Pike said, "I will
help them finl them."
If the documents were
papers which the commit-
tee had made no agreement
to return, Pike said, they
either would be in the ar-
chives or would have been
destroyed.
NEW YORK
1 MARCFI 1976
Wit at the
. ? White House
At presidential functions.
,it's SOP for Ford's staff
to position the 011-,:.e televi-
sion networks' camera crews
by putting up signs reading
."CBS," "ABC," and "NBC."
Last week, though, when
Ford talked at Fort Myers,
Florida, there was a slight
change in routine?the signs
read: "ABC," "NBC," and ,
"CBS/Village Voice."
Brit's Paper Names
60 Americans in CIA
LONDON, March 4 (AP) ?
? A radical. British paper
has published a. list of 60
names and addresses of Per-
ons it says are CIA employ-
ees in Britain, presenting
-U.S. Ambassador Anne'Acin;
strong with a problem on
her first day in office.
. ? .
. The Paper, Red Weekly,
saidthe list, from ;embassy
sources, included virtually
all Central Intell4xnce
'Agency employees -attazhed
to Armstrong's' embassy_ ?
The embassy refused 'to
;comment on the publication
Red Weekly Said?it iti:-
tended,to disrupt CIA oper-
ations in Britain.. The re-
porter who compiled the list
said: "By publishing their
names and addresses were
giving the -U.S. an opportu-
nity to take these people
back to the U.S."
Ambassador. Armstrong, a
former aide to ex-President
Nixon, and her husband, To-
bin Armstrong, arrived in
Britain last night. She met
the.embasSy staff today and
toured the ; building on.
Grosvenor; Square. She sue-%
ceeds Elliot Rii?hariNon,
miloppsTio,u2N6bb citykadotry . of Com-
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
NET YORK TIMES
4 MAR 1976
!House VotesWide Power .
For Spy Report Inquiry
By RICHARD a LYONS
Special to The New York Times
name of the ethics committee?
the right "to require, by sub-
poena or otherwise, the atten-
dance and testimony of such
witnesses and the production
;of such books, records, corre-
?Ispondence. memorandums, pa-
pers and documents as it deems
necessary."
The adopted resolution also
stated that "the chairman of
the committee, or any member
designated by such chairman,
may administer oaths to any
such witness."
An attempt by House liberals!
to debate the resolution was'
blocked, first by a misunder-
standing of the parliamentary
procedure under which it. was.
brought up, then by a formal
vote of 306 to 99.
! Liberal Democrats angrily!
swarmed around the floor man-
ager of the resolution, Repre-
sentative John Young, Demo-
crat of Texas, demanding that
he give them time for debate.
Mr. Young asked that the rules
be waived to allow an hour's
debate, but conservatives?led
by Representative F. Edward
Hebert, Democrat of Louisiana
?objected to the waiver, and
the debate was cut off.
The result left many liberals
unhappy with the use to which
the expanded subpoena power
could be used, a portent of
what may end up as an ideolo-
gical battle between left and
right over freedom of the press
and the depth to which the
investigation might go.
Representative Phillip Burton
of California, a liberal spokes-
man who is chairman of the
House Democratic Caucus, said
the result could be the subpoen-
ing of "each and everY staff
member whether or not he had
anything to do with the affair,
and I think this is an outrage."
Other members, such as Re-
presentative John B. Anderson
of Illinois, the third ranking
Republican, have expressed re-
servations about having news-
men connected with the Pike,
committee leak questioned un-
der oath about their sources
by agents of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.
Representative John J. Flynt
Jr., the Georgia Democrat who
is chairman of the ethics com-
mittee, announced yesterday
that he would appoint a former
F.B.I. inspector. David Bowers,
as director of the investigation.,
Mr. Flynt also formally re-
quested $350,000 to conduct
the inquiry, an amount some
liberals believe is far too much.
The investigation itself, which
may start in several weeks,
will attempt to find out who
was involved in the leaking
of the report. The document
covered a detailed investigation
9nd contained a critique of
the operations of the Central
Intelligence Agency. Represen-
tative Otis G. Pike, Democrat
of Long Island, is the chairman
? WASHINGTON, March 3--
The House investigation into
the leaking of the Pike com-
mittee's intelligence report
gained momentum today as re-
presentatives voted- overwhel-
mingly to broaden the subpoe-
na powers that will be used
during the inquiry.
By 321 to 85, the House
voted to let its ethics committe
subpoena and question under
,oath persons not directly con-
.nected with the Government.
The committee already had
power to subpoena "members,
officers and employees" of the
House.
Moderate and conservative
representatives easily brushed
aside objections of liberals that
the scope of the investigation
was expanding and that the
inquiry itself was senseless.
The vote spread today was
82 votes more than the margin
of 269 to 115 by which the
House, two weeks ago, had
ordered the ethicw s committee
to conduct the investigation.
Representative James H.
Quillen of Tennessee, the rank-
ing Republican on the commit-
tee, summed up the view of
the majority by saying that
it was necessary "for the House
to give the broadest subpoena
power to the committee to car-
ry out the mandate of the
House," , . ?
"It's important for the ethics
committee to go full speed
? ahead in this investigation
without delay," he added. ?
Representative Stewart B.
McKinney, Republican of Cori-
!necticut, said that publication
of the repor t iHa,etfeotshrue
of the report, after the House
had voted to keep it secret,
had jeopardized "the credibility
of a Congress that wants to
.have more to do with foreign
This is the real issue, Mr.
McKinney said, adding that,
in the minds of the press, the
issue "had been Mr. Schorr."
He was "referring to Daniel-
Schorr, the CBS News corre-
spondent here who has admit-
ted giving a copy of the report
of the House Select Committee
on Intelligence to the Village
Voic( , a weekly newspaper in
New York City that published
excerpts from the report last
month.
"I don't think the question
is really about a newscaster,"
Mr. McKinney continued. "It
seems to me the problem right
now is how did that newscaster
get that information. It's for
us te show that we can clean
our own house."
The vote today gave the
Committee on Standards of Of-
ficial Conduct tImrsi
WASHINGTON POST
5 MAR 1976
BI Is Ruled Out
Of Hilt Schorr Probe
By Richard L. Lyons
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wbe House ethics' Commit- Democratic regional whips
tee has followed the advice yesterday morning, Flynt re-
of; Speaker Carl Albert and
decided against using FBI
'agents to investigate the
;leak of the secret house CIA
;
report.
Instead, Committee Chair-
' mlin John J. Flynt (D.-Ga-)
said yesterday, a staff of 10
investigators will be assem-
!bled from private sources?
, laleyers and accountants?to
find out how the report of
the House intelligence corn-
; mtttee, which the House or-
dered not be released,
reached CBS correspondent
Daniel Schorr, who passed it
orito the New York weekly,
TI:ie Village Voice.
:We would rather have
someone responsible to the
committee alone, not some-
?tie else," conduct the inves-
tieation; Flynt said. He said
no pressure had been put on
the committee not to use
F131: agents. But Albert ex-
pr/pe;Sed reservations last
week about using an execu-
ti e branch agency to con-
d ct an investigation for
C ngress.,
Flynt has requested
$350,000 to make the investi-
g4tion and is expected to
girt a hearing on the sum
next week before a House
A4ministration subcommit-
tet, Some members have
criticized the figure as high.
;Reps. Otis G. Pike (D-
N,X.), chairman of the intel-
lieence committee whose re-
port was leaked, said he had
told Flynt he could save the
taiepayers a lot of money by
cilling up Schorr and ask-
ink where he got it. Flynt
said the committee had dis-
missed doing that, but Rep.
Tomas S. Foley (D-Wasee,
another member of the eth-
ics committee, said they
didn't think Schorr would
tell teitm.
ported on what his commit-
tee was doing. One who was
Present said Flynt's focus is
more on who leaked the re-
port to Schorr than on pun-
ishing Schorr for passing it
along.
Later Flynt told reporters,
"The House wants to know
what happened to one or
more copies of the prelimi-
nary draft of the report of ,
the, select committee on in-
telligence. This will be nei-
ther an inquisition nor a
witch hunt. There is no in-
tention to go after one per-
son."
Pike has offered to coop-
erate fully with the investi-
gation, Flynt said, and Pike
said he wants to find out
where the leak began. He
had suggested earlier that
the source might have been
the CIA, which was given a
copy-of his committee's re-
port:
Flynt told 'reporters he
hasn't any idea how much
time or ? money will be
needed to complete the as-
signment. In drafting a
budget he asked for $110,000
for investigators?which
means paying 10 persons
$100 per day for 110 days, or
an ? investigation that would
last through July 31.
The investigation could
take two weeks or 10
months, he said, declaring
that the committee did the
best it could in estimating
money needs on the basis of
the experience of other
House investigations. The
ethics committee has never
conducted such an inquiry.
Flynt also plans a staff of
three attorneys and secre-
taries and security person-
nel. He has budgeted a total
of $185,000 for personnel
and $163,000 for travel,
equipment, telephones and
At- a meeting of House supplies.
WASHINGTON POST
5 MAR 1976
Han Named as Spy
Leaves Sweden
STOCKHOAL March 4?
An American diplomat ac-
cused by an African journal-.
1st here of having tried to
recruit him as e spy for the
Central Intelligence Agency,
in Angola, has left Sweden,
the Foreign Ministry said to..
day. ;
Bruce Ttutehins. second'
eecretery at , tile U.S. em-
bassy in Stockholm, left the
cuuntre two days ago with
taDaage CiftkNO??1)82231M10Y404 1 00V10g in Angola-
leftist magazine accused .
him of using veiled threats
.against relatives of Kenyan
journalist Arthur Opot in an
attempt to recruit him as a
CIA agent.
In a 12-page article, the
magazine Fib-Kulturfront
said ?pot. a free-lance jour-
nalist at the Swedish Broad-
casting Corp., had accepted
money from Hutchins to
travel twice to Angola. and
had fed him false ieforma-
? tion about the Soviet-hacked
Popular Movement for tee
Liberation of Angola and
. about Swedish journalists
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
BALTIMORE SUN
1 March 1976
Secrets law should apply to press, spy figure
By CHARLES W. CORDDRY
Washington Bureau of The Sun
Washington ?Lt. Gen. Dan-
iel 0 Graham. former director
f the Defense Intelligence
Agency, says new laws protect-
ing intelligence secrets should
apply to the press as well as to
federal employees.
His proposals on a contro-
versial issue. published by an
organization of retired officers
and others promoting defense
studies, appeared to go beyond
those President Ford made 10
days ago in connection with in--
telligence reforms requiring
legislation. ? ?
"Legislation is required '
which recognizes the right of
the United States government
to have a I secret and which
rirovides priactical means to ;
apply Criminal sanctions to
those persons entrusted with se- I
Crets who abuse their trusts,"
General Graham wrote.
"This means that the public
media must not remain im-
mune from responsibility for
' publication of national secrets
and from protecting the insider
who has provided the informa-
tion and violated his trust."
Elaborating in a telephone
interview, General Graham
Said: "I don't want a law that
says put newsmen in jail." But
he opposed a right not to reveal
sources of information that the i
government has labeled secret.
If legitimately classified infor-
mation is published, he said,
"you shouldn't expect protec-
tion from. the law." Reporters
should be required to name
their sources in such circum-
stances, General Graham said.
William E., Colby, former
director of the Central Intern-
,
Ilence.Agency, who also has ex-
pressed deep concern about
spillage of secrets during the
past year of spying investiga-
tions, has a different view from
that of General Graham, who
retired as head of the Penta-
gon's intelligence agency (DIA)
after Mr. Colby and James R:
Schlesinger, the former secre-
tary of defense, were dis-.
missed.
Mr. Colby told reporters at a I
February 20 press conference
that he had sympathy for their
desire to protect news sources
and would not oppose a federal
law assuring that right. -
The secrecy issue has been a
matter of growing debate since
President Ford proposed, as
one of his intelligence, reforms,
legislation to impose criminal
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
JANUARY 12, 1976
A MAN CALLED INTREPID:
The Secret War. William Stevenson.
Foreword by "Intrepid" (Sir William
Stephenson). Harcourt Brace Jovano-
vich, $12.95 ISBN 0-15-156795-6
What makes this book difficult to put
down is the excitement of the story and
the importance of the events dealt with.
In 1940 Churchill confronted the possi-
bility of a successful Nazi invasion of
Britain: he provided against it by locat-
ing the HQ of his intelligence and dirty-
tricks organizations in New York. This
was possible only because the man in
charge was already known to FDR and
trusted by him. He was 'William S.
Stephenson (code name "Intrepid"), a
Canadian scientist and self-made mil-
lionaire. Before the illegalities of his
operation the recent activities of the
CIA pale in comparison. The book
makes a good case that this "secret
war" was as effective as the war fought
by the more visible armies. Parts of the
story have already been told in "Room
3606," "The Code Breakers," etc; but
without doubt this book, the first writ-
ten with full access to the records,
gives more of an overall picture,
though some readers will wish it were
written from a less conventional World
War II viewpoint. Author Stevenson
("The Yellow Wind." etc.) is no kin to
his subject, Sir William Stephenson.
Photos, maps. 8OMC featured alter-
nate. May selection History Book
Club, [March 12]
and civil sanctions for unau-
thorized disclosure of intelli-
gence secrets.
Mr. Ford said the legislation
"would affect only those who
improperly disclose secrets, not
those to whom secrets are dis-
closed." There have been asser-
tions, however, that reporters
could be called before grand ju-
ries as witnesses to felonies, un-
der such laws, and be ordered
to name sources.
General Graham, a. long-
time intelligence officer who
served in both the CIA and DIA,
gave his views in the course of
a lengthy article. "U.S. Intelli-
gence at the Crossroads," pub-
lished here by the United States
Strategic Institute, which de-
scribes itself as a non-partisan
organization promoting study
of national security problems.
? The article was written be
fore Mr. Ford announced the in-
telligence reorganization,
which, among other things, put
George Bush, new head of the
CIA, in general charge of U.S.
intelligence activities as chair-
man of a foreign intelligence.
' committee.
Analyzing several possibili-
ties for reorganizing U.S. intel-
ligence, which is spread over
several agencies with differing
NEWSDAY
14 FEBRUARY 1976
says
and overlapping functions, Gen-
eral Graham indicated little
confidence in a "dual-hat" ar-
rangement under which One
man serves- as both CIA direc-
tor and general overseer. That
appears to be Mr. Bush's new
position, and he has told report-
ers he expects some conflicts to,
develop. ?
General Graham said it
would be too much to expect
objectivity from such . an offi-
cer, in examining various agen-
cies' intelligence programs,
given the pressures on him or
his own agency, the CIA.
The general urged establish-
ment at White House level, of a
"coordinator of U.S. intelli-
gence," independent of the var-
ious agencies and principal in-
telligence adviser to the Presi-
dent and the National Security
Council.
This officer would have an
inspector general for intelli-
gence, outside any agency's
chain of command and respon-
sible both for protecting
against abuses and for seeing
that "disgruntled individuals"
had no excuse to 'take their
complaints outside the secret
channels of the intelligence sys- ,
tern to the public.
lfi!e CIA's I3y113a
?-? ? Representative Otis. Pike ? says :that . the - hal-nes ..of
eporters who wOrked. CIA -would sen.iee.nO :Useful Pui?pose.
j'Maybe ? not; but we think the .reporters who didn't?and the PeOple
who.read their reporting?would rest 'easier' it :-"tire'stiiilixl-we're'
iemoed from the many and 'attached.solelk:to the:few..whe;.ea.rned
New. laa' a.' free society 'aia--MoSt-'elfeCiiVe7:-.N:VaverV: People
some degree of.faithin-their independence:That dependencein
. .
"doesn't come easy, and it doesn't take inuch...to:shake sOme..). ear els
. ..
; -media ;have . little ;_ en(1 ou ciedibility. as i)eqpie:
fel:eat many joilinaliiiiieCeilied:Part of their salaries
..,frani the CIA; that credibility Woidd:-be-damaged,"everi inoie. The
, ?
piss as much as any government the -appear,
-?. ? . " ? ?
?zene.e. Of fairness. So long as a cloud hangs oVei.pai-t. of it, everyone's
.:.b---1; - . .. .7....i.s ' ?? - ? ? -..----- .------- zi?--3...-?-? ::::?..T.a..,-.....,:-.:" ..-.... ..-, - - . ?
?..... , ..,............ -........ . '. ?".-....?", ? -., Nttl ,,,?,_.?,-......,.-:-..,..
? -.- --
,.., The announcement by the new 01.A.'''direCtor' 0 eel* ' Bush,
-,t;h:ais'ileither journalists-,' nor missionariesLivili..., re.-.4.n1.1,--ite. 4 1...o, -?iiatIlei,.
---intell- igenC?eiS welcome, but it does nothing tO.remOVe':the:u.s
, piciOn
?;against past or present naponlighting?.agents::The7.,ag6pcy should
iiialieublic the names, not Only for its own sake but'for the sake
i!o-i"a1/41.1-66.. :p_s_i.-. In' ills cpuna-y.:,- -.--- ,....;.z-f..r4-",..,......,::::_:: ..,..4-,,,,,ei.--,-.-
- ? ? ? - ? ? ? - - ,_? ? ??,.: .?.--7.:.?:,:17 ??????;??-; 0,--?,...-:,,..t ?::,,,???-???.,,,-;:-..,.;.-.... ....:..f....,
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 :121A-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
THE NEW YORK TIMES, THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1976
Inside Church's B er
. . . .. .. ., .. _. . .., . ., . ,, , .,.... assassinate him, had a :hand In the as death,' death,' Senator Church wrote ?Attor-
.
-By William Safire . : , sassination of one or more Kennedys. ney General Levi r on ? Jan.- 29 'of this
? ? . . ? ? ' ? ^ - ? ? - -.?, ? ' - ? .--Then come the eleven:"appe.ndiees"- year, 'Mr/ Epstein met with Justice
WASHINGTON, . March . 3?The it- ,,.. to the report . . , . - . Department' officials- to ?? determine
90peratian. CHAdS,,-, the ' CI,A.'s. "whether :there ^was any relationship
m os subconiniittee is that - phere in Senator Frank' Chtireli's ' - '
illegal domestic intelligence operation." fietween ' this 'otimmitteels ? desire to
intelligence ? iof ?
? *
bunker under siege Senators arid ,4. first exposed .by, . 8 emoF IYrs4, in _examine Mr. Giancana and his mur-
.
, .
staffers furtively dart about, clutching '. The New Yerk. Times. , , . ,
.: Th C.I.A.,. mail covers, Or'. :I:i,:....... ,-.,
parts . of the forthcoming ,three-Vol- ' ".."Shortly," my, foot: ..According, to,
drug tests;.,.,. , . . . ' . , William Lynch, chief of the Organized
tune .report to their - palpitating '
bow*, ' worried lest 'leaks make the ?, fiDefense intelligence practice's and , Crime Section, the Church staffer did
Senate appear ' as unable to ' keep ' Abuses, as seen by Rohert MdNainara'S ?
?...,? not show, up at Justice 'until 21 days
. - --- ;?-?. - former son-inlaw; . '' .?
secrets AS the House. , ? after the inah had wiped out Giancana.
Since you cannot tell' the ?heroed.:. ,,-. 9The Internal ReVenue Service's in ' -
,.? Mr. EpStein, in that strange .meeting,
from 'the. Villains in program . a Senate rePort. telligence_actiViiy; tfliS is a subject tint : ttd not . ask Justice to investigate a
previously investigated' by the Rocke-
withont 'a? , :here are 'seine . ,, possible 'obstruction of jUStice. With
Items to loo} for , - :- - :, ; : : :. feller COmmiSsion - or '' Heise Intetli-. lAitt a request; ?'not one F.E.I. agent '
The comttilttee Will net recommend:, ? gence Committee and is isidtion that s, could. A assigned ..t.o. the Case:- ' ? ":
.,
a spo'cial. prosecutor. to ,prosecute , ? Senator Chita. May ' hatte reason,. to- ;?
_iTo.apcotninodate :the Senat.or.ii.rieed':
C.I.P.,..4'.B.I.' abuses ; 'Senates"' Chnith", , be proud Of.: "-.;; ? - ? l' .-. ;? '.' ' -
,for the appearance of diligence. :Crim- ?
has Called' for this, secure 'in r?the-. , ,?.. cOne append z' oh, the' F.B.Ifs' use: f
Ina' Division. chief, Richard Thbrii-.
Imoveliedge that. ?it has no 'chance, 4 :Pr infcirmers;' another on wiretaps and :.-
7-lurgli.(a Pittsburgh protegepf Senator':
Senators Tower and GoldWater oppose ' ? electronic SUrveiilance, and -another om
..? , .. ... _Hugh, Scott) sent the requested. reply .
it, and 'Senator Galy 'Hart-iskplain- ? .. the Fan COINTELPRO.. , - n
all the..iriferinr;tion" at Justice :
Ing why he;too, sees nothing wrong ongille '1967''''Dpar.'Plan t"5.13Y on "dis'' saying
ted that the ?gmgland Afaying ?
having the F.R.I: Investigate itself: sidents, which Ramsey Clark put into
rely `.:intended to settle2rob-
informed me: "We intend to 'address effect,'-will--be-gtossed-crver; whilethe----w-44---
leraS within the syndicaf.e?' arthil-
the tieestioti of how' to &A With'. 1S70', Huston 11`4.n, ,. whit. . J..? Edgar,
.: itiiiied. itn.-Jdri.'Tharriburgh, could say that with a
illegal actiVities, including:'thoSe' that . ,.HooVer blocked, ?wili- be-'e-sei
--.--.--,:. --ii straig.ht face because all the informa-
. ..lenoth. .
occurred in the past, in Our report." - .,.. -T..; 6V'. was ?sparse and second-hand,
That Church report will open with ` ? . sii .ilie section about ,: the :.Wiretap7:??7,-;
the result Of no, Federal investigation;
some zingy rhetoric about preserving - ? P---??' -
nig of Dr..,M, rt i,.t,hier. Kin ?J ?
.. 1 - - Jr ''-'?-; and thils'is 'A criminal division politi-
civil -liberty while preserving national ' :? :tile 'worst abuse of pp ice -power. iipii-, - ?
ed- td sa.Ve a!:Senate face.
security, then go into long and sepa- . Our ;time, which: was . ordered v
- :,.--.:Why?i: can the Church report_claiin
rate 'Sections on foreign and' domestic ,,Robert Kennedy and ' chntinued "
' -7.-.'"716FOLr-,' indication" of a connection?
intelligence. The reason : Republican Nicholas Katzenbach?was written.bk,
ilecailde,fliere Was no Federal inVesti-
Senator Tower has made ? a-doormat Michael T. Epstein, a hatchetman on..
gation of. a. connectien...Why was .the
out of himself, acquiescing in the most Attorney Genera -"Ieni.i.ed.y's .. "get.-..' 1.13.1:. not Put on the case? 13'icause
flagrant cover-ups of the Democratic Hoffa" squad in those.clays, and lately,,. Mr. 'Church' and Mr. Epstein decided
abuses of power, will become apparent: a staffer for Ted Kennedy., Not '.sur, -notta ptit thetn),on the case. Why not?
Mr. Tower has traded this to Senators prisingly, the Epstein version heaps all Beeatise Frank Church did not want
Church and Hart in return for 'their the blame on the F.B.I.. and pictures to know anything more abautthe first
support of a strong executive C.I.A. Messrs. Kennedy and Katzenbach as . murder of witness and the
covert capability in the future. , ? :-.. babes in the wood. - ,... .., ?: ,
"-Mafia'. penetration of the Kennedy
? A- fascinating part of the report -- Mr, Epstein was also used by Send- '.- White- House ? ,
will deal - with Senator Richard tor Church to inveigle jaWnierif into. .". -. ?
In protest this space will accept no
Schweiker's "retaliation theory." This giving the impression that the murder,. more -leaks-,froin anybody inside the
holds 'that. Fidel Castro, irritated at of Sani-Giancana_lad =thing: to AO- -chnrch-Senate_himker until the_renort
the C.I.A.-supported efforts of Mafia with his impen "ing testimony. is issued. In the Duke of Wellington's
Mobster Sam Giancana and friends to "Shortly af r Mr. Giancana's wards: "Publish and be damned!"
DAILY L6LEGRAPH, London
23 February 1976
. 65 MORE C I A
; AGENTS NAMED
?1.1- ?
',BY MAGAZINE
By Our Washington Staff'
;?? Fifth, Estate, the group of
Leftists and former, American
intelligence officers who oppose
the Central Intelligence Agency,
has carried out its threat, to
name more CIA agents
stationed abroad. The latest
issue of its magazine CounterspO,
names 65 men stationed in
Canada, Finland. Italy, Spain,
Denmark. Zaire and Sweden.
?- Includee are men said to he
station chiefs in each country
except Denmark and Finland.
Mr Richard Welch, indentified
in the magazine as the CIA?
chief in Greece, was murdered
last December: .
.Those who run Fifth, Estate
from a small office in Washing-fl have been widely denounced
since the killing.. President 'Ford
has proposed legislation ;to make
it illegal for a former intelli-
gence -officer to name ; agents
but for the moment, there Is. no
Jaw. _tp _stop ...the practice,____
ST. LOUIS GLOBE-DEMOCRAT
20 February 1976
- Revamping U.S. Intelligence _
? The three-part plan to reorganize and"
upgrade the United States' Intelligence gath-
' ering.operations announced Tuesday night by
President Ford appears to be constructive
1 and well thought out.. ? ? ? . -
j It calls for placing all policy direction for.
foreign intelligence under four officials ? the
I President, the Vice President, and the
ISecretaries of State and Defense.
It calls for combining all the operations of -
the Central Intelligance Agency, the Penta-
gon's Defense Intelligence Agency and the
? National Security Agency and other intelli-
gence units under one command structure
headed by the new director of the CIA,
George Bush.? ,
".,t, also would create a new Oversight
Board made. up of private citizens "to
. monitor the performance of our intelligence
operations." ? ??
To prevent possible abuses, Mr. Ford said
, his office would propose "a comprehensive
' set of public guidelines" to safeguard civil
?_ rights, plus eventual legislation "to provide
judicial safeguards, against electronic sur-
4
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
r-
veillance and mail openings."' ?
President Ford said he also seeks a law
against peacetime, assassination. attempts,
- and laws that would make it illegal for a
?government employe "who has access to
certain highly classified information to re-
veal that information properly."
Adoption of this plan should go a Icing way
toward rebuilding the effectiveness of U.S.
intelligence operations and restoring cola.'
dence in the CIA and other agencies engaged
. in this activity. ??
Congress should carry out its eild of the
bargain to help restore the greatly dimin-
ished effectiveness of government agencies
that,have been hampered by non-stop con-
gressional probes and constant leaking of
damaging information. Certainly a law is
needed as soon as possible to prevent the
` Improper disclosure of classified informa-
tion. Unless Congress acts to protect secret
Intelligence information, It shouldn't be
trusted with secret information whose re-
lease could hurt U.S. intelligence operations. I
?1,
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410602-0
THE NEW YORK TIMES, MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1976
Bill Paley's .Big Secret
The Village Voice, and did not reveal
this to? him. And it is safe to assume
that a reporter, looking for a place to
get a document into print, first offers
it to his own employer, who happens
to have a book subsidiary.
Soon the truth will dawn: Mr.
Schorr's "last straw" was not in pub-
lishing Mr. Pike's report in The Voice,
but in exploring Mr. Paley's big secret
on CBS.
Here's that story: A few weeks ago.
former CBS News president Sig Mick-
elson told reporters of a time Mr.
Paley called him into a meeting with
two C.I.A. men to discuss C.I.A.-CBS
, cooperation. That was it? sensitive
story; Mr. Schorr did not turn dis-
creetly away, but directed a query to
the chairman of the board for his
reaction.
Walter Cronkite, to his credit, put
. the Schorr report on his evening news
program, including the Paley reply
calling Mr. Mickelson's statement
"absolutely untrue" and, in Mr.
Schorr's words, "Mr. Paley said he
never called news personnel into his
office for any discussion with C.I.A.
officials."
To me, that little-noticed report was
one of the great moments of tele-
vision news. But the airing of the
? charge, and the daring of the reporter
to penetrate his privacy, must have
caused Mr. Paley to burn. It is my
guess that from that moment, Mr.
Schorr's future at CBS was decided;
SUN?TIMES, Chicago
16 Feb. 1976
By William Saf ire
? WASHINGTON?CBS board chair-
man William Paley has been looking
for an excuse to discipline correspond-
ent Daniel Schorr for two years.
Mr. Schorr may be the best tele-
vision newsman in the field today,
figures Mr. Paley, but he is not a
"team player." Not only does be re-
fuse to follow the news judgments
laid down by the major morning
newspapers, but he has been known
to criticize network actions at college
lectures.
More important, Mr. Paley needs
Ms own Big Enchilada to toss to local
affiliate owners who reflect the re-
sentment of what used to be known
as the silent majority.
Does the opinion persist that CBS
was the fiercest pursuer of Mr. Nixon
and even today has a distinct liberal
ESSAY
salant to its campaign coverage? If
so, figures Mr. Paley, getting rid of
Daniel Schorr will help the network
"get well" with Middle America,
while removing a burr from under the
CBS saddle.
As usual, Mr. Paley is out of touch
with the way a great many people on
the right really feel. When Mr. Nixon
was riding high, it is true that cor-
respondent Schorr was a vigorous
inquisitor, but after the Nixon power
began to wane, and many other re-
porters rushed in savagely when it
became the journalistic fashion, Mr.
Schorr was regarded by most of the
"Nixon people" as eminently fair in
his reports. With no need to suddenly
establish anti-Nixon credentials, he
covered the neWs hard, straight and
clean.
Conservatives have also noted how
Mr. Schorr's curiosity does not desert
him, as it does so many others, when
it comes to the power abuses of lib-
erals. He has a way of following a
story wherever it leads.
I suspect that CBS plans to use
the current furor over the publication
of the Pike committee report in The
Village Voice as its excuse to publicly.
chastise Mr. Schorr.
Other journalists have provided Mr.
Paley with necessary cover. The Wash-
ington Post (which stilt preserves its
"Deep Throat" fiction about sources)
smoked out The Voice's source, and
covered its embarrassment about being
beaten by making the story about the
story more important than the story
itself. And a New York Times editorial
unfairI3 accused Mr. Schorr of "laun-
dering" funds?when, as it turns out,
he was trying to prevent any com-
mercial publisher from profiting in the
publication of the suppressed report.
But wait: Mr. Paley's apparent ex-
cuse may evaporate. Reporters have
learned that the attorney recommend-
ed to Mr. Schorr by the Reporters'
Committee was also the attorney for
next day, the Pike report was printed,
- and soon CBS News made it ominous-
Ay clear that after its press freedom
Issue had been defended, it would
deal with the impertinent Mr. Schorr
in its own way.
That's Mr. Paley's privilege, since
he owns the controlling stock. If he
should censure Mr. Schorr, he would
be following his grand tradition of
forcing out Edward R. MurrOw and
? Howard K. Smith, other CBS newsmen
who became too uppity.
A pity, though; a prickly conscience
is useful for a news organization. We
cannot expect Roger Mudd, Dan
Rather or Bob Sheiffer?each one
carefully picking his way through the
corporate minefield to become the
(successor to Mr. Cronkite?to burst
into the board chairman's office with
an imaginary question like this:
"Look, Mr. Paley, we all know that
? Sig Mickelson is not crazy, and sooner
or later the whole story of any in-
volvement CBS has had with the C.I.A.
will come to light. The only way we'll
lift this cloud that now hangs over
every CS reporter is for us to dig
the story out ourselves and lay it out
in front of our viewers. Now, how
about it, Mr. Paley?on the record and
in detail, what did the C.I.A. want us
to do and what did we do and who
did It?"
Fat chance of that If and when
Daniel Schorr gets Mr. Paley's heat,
every newsman in every network will
get the message: Rock all the boats,
except your own boat; tell the people
the truth, except when the truth
hurts.
, ?._
Minus e dismembered_.:,
Twi . weeks ago we ran an editorial= calling tion). Committee members would .be penal-
for the virtual dismemberment of -the Central ? rized for leaking secrets. ,
t Intelligence Agency,' the abolishment of -all '7 We don't think congressional. oversight Is
I goveim.mente capability to . carry- out -.."dirty 'enough to Canti-01 the intelligence- community:
tricksabroad and the parceling out' of- most , Neither do we- think-there is any, justifiable
; CIA activities "to the State and-Defense de- 'role for noninformatioe-gathering..-covert
op-
partments. argued. that-only. a very small erations the agency has conducted in the-past
? CIA should - maintained AO; co-ordinate and:. and. would ccntinue to. conduce in .the future..
monitor the worleepf information gatherers . If the United States is going to succeed as a
? elsewhere_ in the government' and 'make cer- World leader, it will. not- be through adopting
I fain: that Objective information finds its way ? . the worst: aspects of -a . totalitarian, nation's
to the-President and other policymakers.. . - foreign policy.- It _will: succeed because of the
:.Since
record it sets. as. cpen, democratic,. tree-.
the ? House. intelligence corn-
dom-loving, opportunity-granting nation that
tnittee his issued its recommendations for re-
? form, - which,: while welcome,: do-nots'go far practices the moralityit preaches.
'enough. -Also,- one of the most respected in-
;Assassination, secret war-making; bribery,
telligence experts -in the .cOuntry,-..Ray. s. . dissemination of .en isinformati on, and
Cline; has taken issue with out views. e . clandestine government-shaking do not befit
We reorin: the full text of Cline's response
on the CIA on this page today, and commend
it to our readers. At the same time we dis-
agree with him. ?
,. judgments. We think the small CIA- staff of .
?? Cline ? Is. critical Of congressional in- monitors outside the departments could guard
vestigatorsef the intelligence community, but ..: against that.. -? _ 1 .
he appears- to agree with the proposed House More importantly,' this new setup .would
Committee reforms , ..protect against abuse of the CIA ? by Presi-
One is.that the CIA be split into. two-- organie, dents.-, The House" committee report,' we are
means, to . and. analyze in-- -etold; -indicts the - White House under -Presi-
.
telligence information and the ?thereto carry.. ,dents since the early 1960s for instigating the
out espionage and dirty tricks.: These organi; worst excesses:a the CIA. Breaking up-the:
zations would be watched over br,a beefed-up - agency-would add an important check against
House Intelligerke oversight committee with such abuse anct3.:_no.tFy%-. in this area ,is
a rotating enembership? (to - prevent co-opta- ,.emore important.%lks-,-
. ?
this country's professed moral standards. .
Cline says the danger ? of splitting ? up the
CIA is that State and Defense Department
analysts could be too easily corrupted in their
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA5RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
FIE NEW YORK TIMES, TIIURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1976
'Senate Panel Likely to Urge Strong Curbs on Domestic
By NICHOLAS M. HORROcK
Special to The New York Times
WASHINGTON, March 3?The
draft of the final report of the
Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence will contain strong-
ly worded recommendations to
control the domestic intelligence
activities of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and the elec-
tronic eavesdropping capabili-
ties of the National Sectirity
Agency, Congressional sources
familiar with the draft Said
today.
Two subcommittees of the
select committee are putting
the final touche on sections
covering the committee's find-
ings and recommendations that
will be placed before the full
committee for approval next
week.
The final report of the com-
mittee's year-long investigation
into abuses by United States,
intelligence agencies is expected
to be about 1,500 pages in three
separate volumes. One volume,
PORTLAND OREC.102TIAN
15 FEBRUARY 1976
IA recruitinci booms
'
the findings and recommenda-
tions, is expected to be made
public by mid-March, according
to committee sources.
' Two other sections, one on
foreign and military intelligence
and the other on domestic
intelligence activities, will be
made public later, committee
sources said.
Comment by Church
Senator Frank Church, the
Idaho Democrat ?who has led
the committee through its ex-
haustive inquiry into the intel-
ligence activities, declined to
confirm whether the subcom-
mittees preparing the draft
would offer strong language on
either the F.B.I. or the N.S.A.
He said, however, that he
would support such recommen-
dations and he hoped the other
members would.
Mr. Church also said that he
would urge his committee to
support legislation 0 bar the
Central Intelligence Agency or
any intelligence arm from co-
vertly intervening in the do-
mestic affairs of democratical-
ly elected foreign governments.
The select committee, of which
,he is chairman, issued a report
last year in which it detailed
the C.I.A.'s efforts to manipu-
late the internal affairs of Chile
t after a democratic election
brought a Marxist Dr. Salvador
I Allende Gossens, to the Presi-
dency in 1970.
Senator Church said he would
also "personally favor" laws to
keep the C.I.A. from infiltrat-
ing American educational, reli-
gious and news media institu-
tions to conduct secret foreign
!operations.
I His committee and the press
lhave uncovered evidence that
the C.I.A. used the news media
and religious institutions as a
"cover" for agents and intelli-
gence officers.
Earlier this year the Director
of Central Intelligence, George
Bush, ordered the C.I.A. to stop
irecruiting agents from or in-
filtrating religious groups qr
news organizations that are
owned or, generally circulated
3
es its critics
To es
By STEVEN CARTER
of Th? Ortionian staff
The Central Intelligence A-gency
may be under attack in Congress and
the press for alleged misdeeds abroad,
? but the attacks haven't hurt recruiting.
? ' "On the contrary, it's increased it,"
said Tom Culhane, the CIA's man in
,Portlarid. "The average number of writ-
ten inquiries ("about employment) was
about 800 'a month' before the congres-
sional investigations: Since then, it has.
almost doubled-We're getting any-
:where from 1,500 to 1,700 inquiries a
Month now." :
Those are the national figures, he
said in a recent interview, but the local
Statistics are just as 'good. ,
fT%si...!;;.Why should interest in working for.
America's spy agency increase just
when- it is under some of the heaviest
criticism it has faced? ? ? -
Culhane thinks it is because there
are many. Americans who are inclined.
to defend the agency at a time when it
is under siege.
"I think underneath some place -in
the American character there is a reser-
voir of patriotism," he said. "There are
still people who want to serve their
country. They don't say so but you can:.
tell .in their manner of presentation:
They feel there's a moment of crisis for.
the agency.":,: ,
Culhane has been with the CIA for
almost 25 years, .most of that time in
personnel, work. From Portland. he is
responsible for CIA recruiting in Ore-
gon, Washington; Idaho, Montana and
Alaska. Occasionally he pitches in in
California to, help his colleague based in
LOS' Angeles ? wh6:. covers the whole
state.: His is, one Of six CIA recruiting
offices in the country, and he is on the
road a great deal.
?Anyone looking :for: a cloak-and-
"dagger career, he said, can forget about
;the 'CIA.. Self7styled James Bonds need;
? not apply:
."the individual who is seeking the
adventurous agent life is largely misled
because that isn't what we are looking
for." '
What is needed, Culhane said, are
accountants, chemists, economists, elec-
trical engineers, foreign language spe-
cialists, journalists, PhDs in psychology
and other skilled ? if less glamorous ?
applicants
The CIA recruiter Said he has had no
trouble in employment visits to colleges
and universities in Oregon ? a recent
flap about advertising in the Portland
State University Vanguard notwith-
standing. (Editors Kathleen. Hawkins
and Ray Worden face possible dismissal
from their posts for refusing to accept
recruitment ads from the CIA and mili-
tary in the student newspaper.) ?
Culhane's downtown Portland
CHICAGO TRIBUNE
2 MARCH 1976
Spying
in the United Statei. An execu-,,
tive order by President Johnson
in 1967 barred the C.I.A. from
infiltrating educational groups.
Mr. Church said, however,
that he believed these prohibi-
tions would be more effective
if they were solidified by legis-
lation.
The Senator said he would
urge members of his committee
to back recommendations in the
deaft calling for legislation to
set limits* on the term of serv-
ice of the directors of the C.I.A.
and the F.B.I. According to
committee sources, they -are
weighing recommendations that
would set terms of office and
appointment dates for these
two posts that would remove
them from the normal political
patronage of changing Presi-
dential administrations.
The committee, the Congres-
sional sources said, is not ex-
pected to make public any new
information about C.I.A. covert
operations. In addition to its
investigation of Chile opera-
tions it looked at activities in
six freign countries.
address is not listed in the telephone-
directory and the Federal Information
Center will not give it out. A call to the
listed number will get you a taped voice
telling you to call back tomorrow as
often as not. :
That's all right with Culhane. Seri-
ous applicantS will not be deterred, he
said, and a measure of inaccessibility is
not out of order when you work for the
CIA. - : ?
. "In intelligence, yon attract all
kinds of peculiar people," he said. There
are about three crank calls a week and
some of them, he said, are from people
who think the CIA can pull strings-in
any federal agency to help the caller get
what he wants. ?
- .."The other day some one Called us
about a problem with his Veterans
Administration pension. 'You fellas are ,
supposed to know everything,' he said. I
said I couldn't help him.'!
.1
Culhane said most applicants fail
into two groups: Those just getting out
of college and those seeking a change in 1
mid-career; such as military personnel
leaving the service. .The agency is
actively seeking inquiries from women
and minorities, he said, and recruitment
figures are up in these categories. 2
. ,
"We're getting more- minorities
because more Minorities are thinking of
us as being able to use their talents," he
said. "And cur most productive recruit-
er isa woman.". .,,? ,
?...1.--People:-.1
...,....,..: . . .....,. ?,ertired on the task force that. helped .set' .
'Ord . "tie: n .eareer ''' federal ,..eimloye,
t
-.... ,. ? -
Up 'ACTION,'?tho - agency for,. which, ho'
..A .former. CIA 'agent Is now? a central: how .works .- ,Ho , has been told to find .
? .:::ligtire in' what Promises tn. be a land-.. ,,another. job because,'his.former eniploy-,
- :hierk:fliserimination..Case with touches. ? meat by the intelligence. agency .Makes;.
? of '.4,`Catch-2.2.P: /VW& District: Court has' him persona' non grate.;.Biddle and his
'.....ardered.the. Civil Service Commission to '?attorney;!Irwin aIln1Pherg.:?call:.it .11";y1S:,.
hold on open hearing :in early April, on .lation of hi constitutional -righlsi'l.4.f.;:t'
.,
11M complaint of-Erie .. ).'-, ?,-? ..
. : ;:-, .? %::? '*.? : - -'?-:.:;..1
6 'a Harvard graduatif With. fiviOlor rec Margaret Carroll..
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
/cif Zngeltt lEintet
ApOroved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-R0P77-00432R000100410002-0
Sun., Feb. 29,4976.
Ford's Intelligence Ecf6rm-
Modest Changes at Top I documents, and book-length exposes,
he understandably wants to tighten
? the federal sieve. Is he going too far?
Even though equating secrecy
with abuses has been fortified by the
Watergate espisode and by some of
the revelations in the intelligence
hearings, it is an impossible equation
for the citizens of a democracy to ac-
cept. If everything their government
does in secret is ipso facto suspect,
that spells the end of its effectiveness
:in secret diplomacy, espionage and
Counterespionage, advanced military
teSearch, and coded communications.
?Aline must be drawn somewhere be-
tween good and bad secrets, and only
the President, checked by Congress,
, 'can draw that line.
He has drawn that line in his pre-
sent ' proposal. Government employes
with access to highly classified infor-
rnation, particularly those in the in-
telligence community, must take an
oath of secrecy (as many of them
now do) and be subject to punish-
ment if they violate it. The oath will
;be a condition of their employment
' in sensitive agencies. If they are un-
willing, for moral or other reasons, to
take an oath of secrecy, they need
; not take a sensitive job. If they give
their word, let them keep it.
I I don't not find this too much for a
chief executive to ask of his em-
ployes. Yet the alarms have already
rung. The President is trying to im-
pose a British-style Official Secrets
Act, some say; he is violating the
'First Amendment; he is clearly
, trying to muzzle the press.
This is nonsense. The law would
affect only federal employes who
leak information related to intel-
ligence sources and methods. It
would not affect congressmen who
receive the same information from
the executive and decide to leak it to
the press?and it is worth noting
that almost all the leaks of the past
year have come out of congressional
committees and their staffs. It would
affect the media only in those histori-
cally rare cases when their sources
are federal employes. Nor would any
newsman or other citizen be liable
for receiving the information.
What the law would do for the in-
telligence operators. for example, is
to prevent an intelligence profession-
al from exposing acts or operations
he happens personally to disapprove
of, or publicizing the names of intel-
ligence officers and agents he has
learned about in his career. If the ex-
ample of Victor Marchetti, chief au-
thor of "CIA and the Cult of Intel-
ligence," or of Philip Agee, author of
"Inside the Company," were to be fol-
lowed by a dozen others, however
noble or patriotic their reasons, that
would spell the end of our secret in-
telligence capability.
There now are on the books feder-
al laws forbidding the unauthorized
disclosure .of classified atomic energy
information and of communications
intelligence, the product of the Na-
-o
BY HARRY
After an almost solid year of con-
gressional inquiry into the "abuses"
of the President's intelligence com-
munity, the President beat Congress
to the draw 10 days ago with his
own proposals for "reform." He? did
not solve "the CIA problem" or any
other problem, for the main issues,
such as they are, lie between the
Congress and the executive, not
within the executive itself.
What the President has done is
make some modest changes in his top
intelligence hierarchy, propose public
guideliness and legislation to provide
Harry Rositzlce retired in 1970 after
23 years with the CIA. His book on
CIA secret operations will be published
next winter.
"'stringent protections for the rights
of American citizens"?which no one
will argue with?and sponsor a law
"to safeguard critical intelligence se-
crets"?which many will argue with.
The President's reorganization of
the intelligence community focuses
on the role of the Director of Central
Intelligence. The CIA director has al-
ways worn two hats: head of the in-
telligence community and head of his
own agency. In practice, no director
has been able to carry out his first
role with any clout. Presidents Ken-
nedy and Nixon formally instructed
him to do so, but he faced an impos-
sible task: to tell the secretary of de-
fense what to do with his intelligence
agencies. Military intelligence, in-
cluding the Defense Intelligence,
Agency, service intelligence and the
National Security Agency, has five
times as many people and more than
10 times the .budget of CIA and State
Department intelligence combined.
The CIA director could coordinate.
and cajole. He could not give orders
to the community. ? ? -
The President now proposes tO
place the management of intelligence
in a high-level Committee on Foreign
Intelligence chaired by CIA Director
George Bush and including a deputy
secretary of defense. He has rightly
rejected the notion of an "intelligence
czar" sitting in the White House and
giving orders to the intelligence
chiefs. Neither Congress nor the pub-
lic would be likely to go along with a
further concentration of power in the
White House itself.
It remains to be seen what effect
the new arrangement will have. One
test will conic up with the next
budget: Can Chairman Bush do what
most needs to be done?cut down
the overgrown intelligence bureauc-
racy to a more economical and effi-
cient size? Will he examine the rec-
ommendations of the leaked Pike
Committee report that the Defense
Intelligence Agency be tifiplickd
ROSITZKE
Will he review and possibly curtail
the enormous scope of electronic in-
terception carried out by the Nation-
al Security Agency? These are
among the larger issues a director
with clout should deal with.
There remains a basic weakness in
the present command structure. If
the director of CIA is to spend most
or all of his time running the intel-
ligence community as a whole, his
deputy must take on the task of run-
ning the CIA itself. That deputy, by
long-term practice, has been a senior
general or admiral when the director
is a civilian?as he has been for
many years.
Perhaps it is time to give the No. 2
job to a civilian intelligence profes-
sional who will simply run the shop,
and not get into the high-level Wash-
ington politics that diverted both di-
rectors Richard Helms and William
E. Colby from their intelligence job
and ended their CIA careers.
The President had little to say
about the handling of covert action
proposals, a major issue in Washing-
ton ever since the exposure of CIA
activities in Chile. He has simply
raised the level at which such propo-
sals will be considered within the ex-
ecutive?by the secretaries of State
and Defense. and no longer by their
deputies, as in the 40 Committee.
No one will cavil at any laws de-
signed to limit domestic surveillance.
The judicial review of proposed inter-
cept and monitoring operetions even
in "national security" cases is an in-
dispensable check on our sometimes
overzealous guardians. The time may
even come when all forms of "pre-
ventive counterintelligence" like
searches and surveillance will be
banned and employed solely in cri-
minal investigations.
Nor, apparently, will anyone in the
present climate object to a law prohi-.
' biting the U.S. government from kill-
ing, foreign leaders. Yet I find it an
affront to our nation's dignity. It is
triggered, of course, by the aberra-
tion that led two Presidents to au-
thorize or condone attempts on the
life of former Congolese leader Pa-
trice Lumumba and Cuban Premier
Fidel Castro. We will now, almost 15
years later, tell our Presidents not to
assassinate anyone in peacetime?as
though killing their foreign col-
leagues were a natural impulse to be
curbed by criminal sanctions. In a
cooler time a law like this would ap-
pear ridiculous.
In another item of his proposed
legislation the President abruptly
turns the tables on the many vigor-
ous opponents of government secre-
cy. He wants to make it a crime for
federal employes with access to high-
ly classified information to reveal
that information "improperly." After.
F9rIV re 6qt1 ird6st
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
tee?and he will get at least two.
What Congress will or can do on
its own for reform of the intelligence
community is an open question. It is
unlikely to do much more than set
up two separate oversight commit-
tees and possibly act on the Pres-
ident's proposed legislation.
Time is running short for the pre-
sent Congress, and the election cam-
paign is upon us. After a year of hard
committee work, dramatic open hear-
ings, and televised expressions of
shock and indignation, its first exa-
mination of federal intelligence in 30
years may end up as so many con-
gressional investigations have in the
?
past: a rich record of past sins, a
sheet empty of concrete remedies.
"official secrets," and no one has pub-
licly challenged them as hiding
abuses.
The President's wide-ranging pack-
age probably will do more to stimu-
late than pacify congressional de-
mands for "reform." He has not wait-
ed for the congressional intelligence
committees to come up with their
proposals. He has not made any con-
cessions to congressional review of
covert political operations. His ap-
pointment of a three-man oversight
committee of senior citizens, headed
by Robert D. Murphy, will not, justi-
fiably, convince the Congress that
the President now has "abuses" un-
der control. He has requested a sin-
gle congressional oversight commit-
A License for Abuses
BY MORTON H. HALPERIN
With all of the abuses by the CIA
that have been brought to light in re-
!cent months, it might have been ex-
pected that the President would take
the lead in overhauling the U.S. in-
telligence machine.
? Instead, President Ford prophses to
tinker a little with the tuning, squirt
in some oil, polish up the outside, and
make sure that disquieting squeaks
do not reach the public's ears. As a
used-car cleanup, this would be a
fraud.
A look at how the President's Ex-
ecutive Order to control the Intel-
Morton Halperin, director of the
Project on National Security and Civil
Liberties, sponsored by the ACLU and
the Center for National Security Stud-
ies, formerly was a deputy assistant
secretary of defense, and on the staff
of the National Security Council.
Terence agencies was written will
help to understand its implications.
The White House decided to act af-
.ter months of procrastination in the
wake. of publication of the Rockefel-
ler Commission report. Congress ap-
peared to be in disarray over the fi-
asco of the leaked report of the Pike
Committee, and the President's politi-
cal advisors thought it would be good
to have the President do something.
So the heads of the intelligence
agencies were called in and told that
an Executive Order would be issued
restricting and regularizing their ac-
tivities. Good bureaucrats all, they
sensed that the President did not
want them, just before the New
Hampshire and Florida primaries, to
complain that he had undercut their
ability to protect the nation by giv-
ing in to those who would undermine
our security.
The bureaucrats were prepared to
accept the limitations proposed by
the White House, subject only to a
few "reasonable" exceptions to per-
mit them to get on with the job. And
in return they asked for and got the
criminal and injunctive powers they
had long sought and a promise that
'their past misdeeds would not bring
criminal indictments or other correc-
? tive actions. ?
, The opening comments of the Pres-
ident's public remarks set the tone. ,
One year of intelligence investiga-
tions, he said, was enough; just as his
predecessor had told us that one year
of Watergate was enough. We must
not become obsessed with the past,
Ford warned. His hope, as Richard
Nixon's had been, was that the
crimes of the past would be buried.
It was no accident that on the next
-day the Justice Department decided
that former CIA director Richard
Helms would not be indicted for bur-
glary. We now can expect that if the
President has his way, the perjury,
break-ins, mail openings, wiretaps,
cable interceptions amd other crimes
will remain unpunished.
If past abuses were buried, future
abuses would not occur, the Pres-
ident assured us, and if they did they
would be ferreted out by inspectors
general and general counsels of the
various agencies supervised by a
three-man Oversight Board.
The third plank in the President's
program was in many ways the most
remarkable. It was a 32-page Execu-
tive Order which restructured the
management of the intelligence
agencies and appeared to put restric-
tions on what the agencies could do.
In his nationally televised press con-
ference the President referred to the
order as providing "stringent protec-
tions of the rights of American citi-
zens." Only the next day when the ,
order was released did it become
clear that far from providing protec-
tions for constitutional rights, it ac-
tually authorizes most of the abuses -
of the past.
As the order was being written,
each intelligence agency was repre-
sented around the table, and each,
managed to protect its interests.
.Atty. Gen. Edward H. Levi and
FBI Director Clarence M. Kelley,
were the most successful. The re-)
strictions in the order apply to,
"foreign intelligence" agencies. The;
definition of such agencies concludes,
as follows: ". . . Nor shall it include
in any case the Federal Bureau of In-:.
vestigation." Thus the restrictions or
intelligence operations at home, such
as they are, do not apply to the agen-
cy which most of us thought was 0.4
only such agency legally free t.
operate at home. --a
The other agencies fared almost as
Well and in some cases better, since
they secured explicit approval for
their operations. ,4
The order includes a remarkable;
section which says in so many words:
that electronic surveillance, burgle-
ries (described as "unconsented phys-
ical searches," examination of tax rem
turns, and opening mail or examining
of envelopes "in United States postal
channels" shall be carried out only
according to existing regulations and*
only as "lawful." One can only, con:'
dude that other techniques are nef-
limited to "lawful" methods or appli-
cable regulations.
The National Security Agency
lustrates-very well the real effects -of -
the Executive Order. Responding to
the demand for public charters, there
is for the first time a full-page de-
scription of the functions of thii
agency. It is gobbledygook of an ad4
, vanced kind which tells the reader
only that the agency has responsibili-
ty for "signals intelligence." What
the agency in fact does is to make,
and break codes and to intercept all
other messages in the air, includie
those connected with Soviet misslie.
tests.
So far-so good, but NSA like tlie:
other intelligence agencies was une
able to resist intruding on communi-
cations within the . United StateS::
Since the end of World War II, NSA:
with the cooperation of the cable',
companies has been scanning all ofi
the cable traffic leaving the United',
States. NSA, claims that the coopera:,;
tion of the cable companies ended',
last year, but NSA is still intercept-,
ing cable traffic.
This raised two problems. First:
there was a presidential directive' in'
1967 limiting electronic surveillance,
in the United States to the FBI. The',
, Ford order changes that, authorizing'
other agencies, except the CIA, tee
conduct electronic surveillance with
! the approval of the attorney generale,
The second problem seemed morec
serious. NSA of late has concentrated:
on searching the cable traffic for;
what is called economic intelligence:1,
The agency was reading cables sent
abroad by American business firm.%
to learn what it could about econom-
ic conditions in foreign countries, ine,
,cluding their plans for purchasing
American goods.
Ford's Executive Order, in a care;
fully written paragraph, seeks to au-
thorize such interceptions without!'
anyone realizing what is going on.
? careful look is instructive, since it::
gives an knight into what is going on
in every line of the new order.
The key paragraph appears in the
section labeled "Restrictions on Cole!.
lection" which begins as follows:
"Foreign intelligence agencies shall,
not engage in any of the following
activities." Item No. 7 in the list,
reads: 'Collection of information,.
however acquired, concerning the:
domestic activities of United States
persons except.. . ." And then in the
first exception comes the authority:.
sought by NSA: ". . information)
; concerning corporations or other':
commercial organizations which core:e.,
stitutes foreign intelligence or touneet
terintelligence." A look back to the:.:
list of definitions reveals that.
"foreign intelligence" means "infori,?
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIASZDP77-00432R000100410002-0
" Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
Nryl YORiC TINES
29 Feb. 1976
/nation concerning the capabilitiet;
intentions and activities of any,
foreign power, or of any non-United
States person, whether within or out-
side the United States, or concerning
areas outside the United States."
? Put all that together and translate
it into English and one learns that
NSA is authorized to monitor the
overseas cable traffic of Americans
for the purpose of learning about
their dealings with foreign govern-
ments or companies, their activities
in foreign countries, and the informa-
tion that they may have obtained
about foreign countries.
CIA also receives authority from
the President in the Executive Order
to continue carrying on many pro-
grams in the United States. The
agency intended by Congress to oper-
ate abroad, if at all, is given permis-
sion to conduct clandestine opera-
tions in the United States to gather
information from foreigners and from
Americans in a wide variety of cir-
cumstances and to conduct Cointel-
pro-type operations against organiza-
tions in the United States whose
members are primarily foreigners as-
sociated with a foreign government. .
Most of the rationales used by the
CIA to justify domestic spying in the
past are specifically endorsed. Thus
the agency is authorized to investi-
gate present and former CIA em-
ployes, people who come in contact
with them, those who threaten the
security of its installations, and those
who are potential sources of informa-
tion. Americans abroad may come
under CIA surveillance if they
threaten national security.
The CIA's much-debated covert
operations come off almost un-
scathed. They are specifically author-
ized and new procedures are institut-
ed for their approval. The only limit
put on them is a ban on political as-
sassinations. Bribery, kidnaping,
creating false . propaganda, interfer-
ing in free elections, all activities car-
ried on in the past by the CIA are
unmentioned and hence unrestricted.
? If the Executive Order puts few re-
straints on the intelligence agencies,
the fourth part of the President's
package is designed to ensure that,
information about abuses will not
again leak to the Congress or the
public. The President proposes a sta-
tute making it a crime for a member
of an intelligence organization or a
former employe to disclose informa-
tion about intelligence sources and.
methods to an? unauthorized person.
Disclosure to a member of Congress
is included unless it is pursuant to a
lawful demand of a regular commit-
tee.
As the phrase "sources and meth-
ods" is defined by the intelligence
community, the individuals who re-
leased each of the following pieces of
:information would have been guilty
if the proposed law were on the,
books: the Pentagon Papers, the se-
cret war in Laos. the American inter-
vention in Angola, the plots to assas-
sinate foreign leaders, the CIA.
CHAOS program, the NSA cable-
reading program, the budgets of the
intelligence agencies, and the failure
to destroy biological toxins. Basically,
no former or present official of the
U.S. government could talk about
any activities of the intelligence
agencies or any information learned
by them about foreign governments,
without running a grave risk of vio-
lating the statute.
Nor would members of the press
who ran the leaked stories be free
from ? prosecution. It is true, as the
Administration emphasizes, that the
journalist would not be subject to the
criminal penalties? in the bill. Howev-
er, a reporter who ran a story expos-
ing intelligence sources or methods
could be called before a grand jury
and asked to reveal the source of the
story. A refusal could lead to a con-
tempt citation.
The President sought to tie up his
package by persuading the Congress
to leave the intelligence agencies
alone. His proposed solution was a
small joint committee which would
replace all existing oversight com-
mittees. The joint committee would
receive information in secret and
agree not to make it public without
the consent of the President.
The Ford program is well designed
to accomplish its objective of freeing
the intelligence agencies from any
supervision but that of the President.
Ford assures us that he Ind future
Presidents will prevent abuse, but his
own conduct in putting forward this
plan. not to speak of the activities of
his predecessors, argues forcefully
? for the need for outside controls.
The Senate Government Opera-
tions Committee took the first step
forward last week by reporting out a
resolution setting up a Senate intel-
? ligence committee with control over
the budgets of all intelligence organi-
zations and with the right to make
information public. The full Senate
ought. to support the creation of this
committee, and the House should set
up a similar body.
Much more remains to be done:
?A special prosecutor should be
appointed to examine the crimes of
the intelligence agencies which the
President seeks to sweep under the
, rug. ? .
?Those who have been subject to
surveillance in the past must be noti-
fied of their rights.
?Congress should establish clear
charters for each intelligence agency
which restricts them to activities
consistent with the Bill of Rights.
?Congress should make it a crime
for officials of intelligence agencies
willfully to violate their charters or
to lie about the activities of their
agencies.
President Ford has put the country
on notice that he is unwilling to
bring the intelligence agencies under
control. Now Congress must act.
eform of
Intelligenc9
Is No Longer
Certainty
By NICHOLAS M. HORROCK
WASHINGTON- There has been a perceptible
change in the political atmosphere here which has.
left Congressional critics of the intelligence agencies
in confusion and disarray and which threatens to
,materially hamper an .effort to legislate new controls
of intelligence activities. - ? ?
? The turning- point In public opinion, or at least
In the Washington . view of the public's opinion,
appears to have been shortly after the murder of
Richard S. Welch, a Central. Intelligence Agency of-
ficial, in Athens last Dec. 23e
. From the beginning of the Investigations of the
Intelligence agencies, nearly 15 months 'ago, the
then director of Intelligence, William E. Colby Jr.,
had warned that injudicious disclosure of opera-
tional information might endanger ;the lives of the
agencies' officers. The warning was part, of the
strategy of the Ford Administration and the intelli-
gence "community" at fending. off critics and
Congressional investigators. .?
There is no evidence that Mr. Welch's death re-
stilted- directly or indirectly from the investigations.
But neither Mr. Colby nor President Ford chose to
rule this possibility out, and some executive branch
officials were saying privately that "the dismantling"
of the intelligence agencies had somehow been re-
sponsible for the killing.
With or without justification, Mr. Welch's death
remained associated with the inquiry into -intelli-
gence methods. His death was followed shortly by
unauthorized disclosures of information on C.I.A.
activity in Angola and Italy and then by what Mr.
Colby called a deluge of leaks when the news media
published the findings of the House Select Committee
? ?on Intelligence. For more than 60 days the drumf ire
of these events has kept the two Congressional in-
vestigating committees on the defensive. Indeed, in
the case of the House committee, it has become the
investigated rather than the investigator,
Mr. Ford and his advisers sensed the Congressional
' disarray two weeks ago and chose that moment to
publish a conservative plan for reorganization and
' reform of the intelligence community. The plan would
have been far less palatable six month earlier. He
also proposed a law against intelligence leaks which
? alarmed many civil libertarians because it appeared
to drape even more secrecy over government.
'Evidence Ignored
' What many on Capitol Hill find most dismaying
? is that the change in atmosphere has obscured the
extensive evidence of abuse and wrongdoing un-
earthed by the investigations, at a time when this
information should be generating pressure for leg-
islative controls on the intelligence agencies. In late
1974 and early 1975, they argue, there was strong
public support for stopping secret-police activities.
L While the investigations of the agencies never
amounted to a Watergate nor attracted that level
of public attention, several Representatives and
Senators said they believed that the public strongly
disapproved of unregulated wire-tapping, break-ins
and other intrusions on privacy.
"I think there was a substantial reservoir for sup-
? port of this investigation," one senior aide on the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said. "But
I think that this committeeend the frionse ccomittee
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA7R11f77-00432R000100410002-0
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
have squandered a good deal of it away." He and
several others argue that both should 121.aye completed
their jobs more quickly and passed the authority to
permanent oversight committees. Senate and 'House
aides condemned the leaks and said that if they
did come from Congress they have irreparably
lessened the chances that the legislative branch
share in national security information.
There is also considerable opinion on the Hill that
both Senator Frank Church, Idaho Democrat, and
Representative Otis G. Pike, Democrat of Suffolk
County, LI., directed the investigations with their
Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence
organizations. The belief is that this may well have
eyes on their political careers as well as On the
resulted in delays or direction changes. - . ?
Reformers Worry
,The Senate Select Committee is now expected to
:ittakOts report and recommendations public in mid-
THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS
27 February 1976
;winging Pendulumi
Ifiraff. Most infertile& s6tfrces, both in the Adminds-
4ation and on the comMittee,. see little chance of
,reform legislation before .1977 except for creating
, oversight committees. Some members of, Congress
fear that laws to regulate wiretapping, prohibit
burglaries, limit computerized dossiers, and ,other-.
wise control the government's ability to spy on '
American citizens_ will fall entirely by the wayside.
"It would be the final irony," one Capitol Hill
aide said, "if all that -resulted from this year of
Investigations is a new secrecy law."
The main hope, one critic of the Intelligence'
agencies suggests, is that President Ford will prove
to have overstepped himself by offering such a
limited program for reform and reorganization,
provoking enough new debate to return the public's
attention to the abuses rather than the leaks.
Nicholas M. Horrock is a reporter in the Washing-
ton bureau of The New York Times. _ _
? "I" GOT bit," says Daniel Schorr,
"by a swinging pendulum." He may.
be. right. If so, it was high time the
pendulum got to swinging.
Schorr, of 'course, is the CBS
correspondent who turned over to
the Village Voice' the officially sup- -
pressed report of the House Intelli-
gence Committee, for which act he -
is under investigation by the House.
The investigation led to his suspen-
sion by CBS. . : " ?
"There have 'always been in-our
country two great urges," ,Schorr
said in a news conference apologia
Wednesday, "one toward security,
one toward liberty. The pendulum
constantly swings- between them
. . .But security always - comes -
back. And. thependulum appears to
have started its return course. . ."
The veteran correspondent aches
where the pendulum struck him.
? One reason for the violence of the
blow is the vast distance the pendu-
lum had to travel for it to find
Daniel Schorr. For months the two
congressional committees investi-
gating the U.S. intelligence estab-
lishment?aided and egged on by
much of the media?have thought
fit to tell national security secrets
that only. a few years ago would
never have been let out.
Disclosure after disclosure has
?eroded- the prestige and effective-
ness of once-respected. organiza-
tions like the FBI and CIA. Not only
has their effectiveness been dam-
aged here at home but also abroad.
All too little thought has been 'given
to the rather fundamental proposi-
'don that' the American public's
"right to know" means, by exten-
sion, the world's "right to know."
, We have hung our dirty laundry out
in view of the whole planet, Sand the
?
sight " has been - manifestly
unappealing. -- ? - -
But now the pendulum has begun
swinging back. The House overrode
its ? intelligence committee chair-,
man's objections and voted to keep
secret the committee's report until
it could be edited with a.view to the
national .safety. - '
Enter Schorr at this point. He
has a copy of the report. The House
will not publish the report, will it?
Very well; Daniel -Schorr will see
that the Truth Comes Out. The Vil-
lage Voice, a somewhat seamy
Greenwich Village publication, is
eager to strike a blow for liberty.
And so the Truth Comes Out.
One point in Schorr's analysis of
the ensuing flap is regrettable.
He poses a dichotomy between
freedom and security. There need
be no such dichotomy?not if re-
sponsible freedom is what is aimed
at and not the brand of who-cares-
let-it-all-hang-out freedom espoused
by Schorr. - -
There most- assuredly exists a
right to know. But as The News has
observed before, that right is far
from absolute. The safety and se-
curity of the nation is a considera-
tion. that matters, if. only because ,
without public safety, there can be'
no real freedom?something Schorr
? would know had he ever read
Thomas Hobbes.
Ideally, the pendulum ought to
dangle somewhere midway between
liberty and security; between the
right- to know all and the right to
know nothing. By no means
ought security to become a secular
deity'. Balance is what we need; bal-
ance, sad to say, is what we have so
conspicuously lacked for so many
months now. - ?
NEW YORK TIMES
-20 Feb.. 1976
lb Obbsom
The C.I.A.'s Helpers
To the Editor:
I am absolutely appalled at the furor
being created in the 'media and in
the Congress over revelations that
certain journalists, missionaries and
other Americans traveling overseas in
years past assisted the C.I.A. by re-
porting to that agency certain of their
observations overseas. I am appalled
that the rendering of such assistance
to our Government is described as an
act of wrongdoing, the perpetrators of
which must be exposed and humili-
ated. In my judgment, those who have
assisted our Government by serving
as its eyes and ears overseas should
be honored, and the practice should
be encouraged. Equally appalling is
that reporting of the discourse
respecting this matter does not even
include reference to the possibility?
however ridiculous the arbiters of dis-
course might view it?that in the cold,
cruel world in which we live, a world
in which our adversaries don't com-
port themselves according to any law
other than the law of the jungle, it
might just not be immoral for an
American citizen to have the temerity
to tell the American Government what
he saw and heard overseas.
STANLEY W. KALLMANN
Morristown, N. J., Feb. 11, 1976
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-Et0P77-00432R000100410002-0
' ApProved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R0001004101502-0
THE NEW YORK TIMES, SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1976
Senate Panel Acts to Prevent Leaks in Spy Study
By NICHOLAS M. HORR.DCK
'special to The New Yon"k Timei
WASHINGTON, Feb. 291 ?
The Senate Select Commatee
on,? Inetlligence will take ex-
traordinary precautions next
week to prevent its final report
from being leaked to the nows
media,committee sources say.
The chapters of the draft re-
port, which have been prepared
separated, will be put together
in closed session as the com-
mittee begins editing its find-
ings on abuses by intelligence-
gathering agencies.
It was in a similar editingl
period that portions of the
House Intelligence Committee's
report were leaked to the press
in late January. That report
has not yet been officially re-
leased, and the disclosures have
touched off a controversy over
security.
To avoid any leaks this time,
the sources said, the Senate
Committee will mark each page
of each draft chapter with the
name of the Senator who is to
receive it. The name will be
emblazoned across the text to
make it difficult to photocopy
the material without revealing
the original recipient of the
document.
Copies to Be Restricted
Unlike the Senators on the
committee, who will be able to
keep the report in their posses-
sion at all times, the staff will
be issued copies of the report
on a restricted basis and all i
staff copies will be retrieved!
each night.
The Committee has agreed
not to issue advance copies of
the report to the Ford Admin-
istration or the intelligence
agencies, but it will permit Ad-
ministration and intelligence
officials to read the report on
the Senate's premises.
The committee also plans to
control sternly all document-
copying machines in its offices,
perhaps placing guards at the
machines, and guards are ex-
pected to spot-check packages
of employees as they leave the
offices.
"We simply cannat let hap-
pen to us what happened to
the House committee," one
senior staff member. said. "It
have them selectively leaked
into the news media."
Other commitee sources
also obscure the committee's
work by creating controversy
over the security of the docu-
ments and could lend credence
to the view that Congressional
Conversations Also Limited
The committe has also
warned staff members not to
have any unauthorized con-
versations with reporters and
not to discuss the substance
of their work with outsiders..
Some of these security pre-
cautions have already affected
the give and take between the
committee and reporters.
The committee security offi-
cer, Benjamin Marshall, said
through a committee spokes-
man that he would not even
discuss the security proposals
for fear of compromising them.
Other committee sources urged
reporters to publish the pre-
cautions so as to deter un-
authorized disclosres.
Part of the problem has
been the committee's apparent
confusion over when and how
to bring its investigation to a
close. Recent interviews with
committee sources indicated
the tentative but likely sched-
ule.
The committee hopes to pre-
pare, a full report and turn it
over to the full Senate around
March 15. This report will
carry a wide range of "recom-
mendations" to reform and re-
organize the inteligence
agencies, but the committee
will not actually submit any
bills.
Oversight Panel Proposed
The committee has already
recommended that the Senate
form a new 11-member com-
mittee to oversee the intelli-
gence apparatus. This bill is
wending its way through the
legislative process.
The committee's final report
is not expected to expose newt
covert operations by the Cen-
tral Intelligence Agency or
break unusual new ground in
the areas of domestic surveil-
lance, but the final report will
contain new detail and explana-
tion on both C.I.A. and Federal
Bureau of Investigation activi-
ties.
- It is also expected to make
some fresh disclosures about
the C.I.A.'s manipllation of for-
eign and domestic news media.
'Committee sources said that
i
the staff do not yet know the
names of major American news
media that were infiltrated by
the C.I.A. These sources that
said even if the committee ob-
tained these names, it would be
nlikely that they would be
made public.
THE NEW YORK TIMES, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1976
Several staff studies may noti
be ready by the mid-March
date and will be published in
the subsequent weeks. Tho
procedure is similar to that
adopted by the Senate Water-
gate Committee.
National Security Data
The committee is expected
to have less difficulty than the
House Intelligence Committee
did on the question of
whether its report contains
national security data. It has
worked closely with the White
House and the intelligence
agencies over the last two
months to iron out questions
on national security data in
the report.
Interviews with members
and staff members have dis-
closed that many are deeply
concerned that the yearlong
'investigation would, in the end,
have little effect on the intel-
ligence agencies. One aide said
that the investigation "estab-
lished that Congress coul make
'inquiries into these areas and
get answers" but he wondered
out loud, as have others,
whether the investigation should
have established "something
far more concrete."
Several sources said that un-
less the committee's final re-
port touched off new debate
and discussion, the responsi-
bility for reform and reorgan-
ization would rest mainly upon
the new Congressional over-
sight committees.
Even if those committees are
created by Congress before the
coming election, these sources
said that there was little
chance they could get down
to serious business before 1977.
After Investigating U.S. Intelligence
By William E. Colby
;.
WASHINGTON?A ? year of unpre-
cedented investigation of United States
intelligence has ended. It has not been
the first investigation. 'Others fol--
lowed Pearl Harbor, the Bay of Pigs.
and; the exposure of Central Intelli-
gence Agency assistance to founda-
tions and voluntary, associations. But
those were conducted, as other na-
tions do, by special boards of inquiry
that made their investigations and
took testimony in secret.
'this year's investigations looked
into the secret recesses. But they also
brought the kleig lights of television
to them as they probed. They did not
result only in a final set of conclu-
sions and recommendations:
Were they necessary? Were they
effective? Were they damaging? Did
something new emerge? The final as-
sessment cannot yet be made, but I
believe they have provided the founds-
tion for a new meaning for the much.
abused initials C.I.A. ? constitutional
intelligence for America.
Necessary? After Vietnam. Water-
gate and sensational allegations that
a rogue elephant was loose threaten-
ing put citizens and our good name?
certainly. The public would. no longer
"shut your eyes" (as one member of
Congress once suggested) to intelli-
genc.m.:?And it would not be satisfied
witha-covering of "national seeurity.".
Some public review and exposure was
,indeed necessary.
Effective? Yes. The investigation
wai' facilitated by intelligence's own
looks at itself. In 1973 it looked back
for any "questionable activities" in
its past, and directed that they be cor-
rected for the future. On several occa-
sions it criticized its own performance.
to find ways to improve itself. These
self-examinations were made available
to the investigating committees, which
then checked them independently, and
with sworn testimony, to find that in-
deed they were comprehensive.
Damaging? Yes, to a degree. The
sensational 7 atmosphere -frightened
many foreign friends of American in-
telligence. It caused a number of
sources to withhold their cooperation.
Leaks and even formally published re-
ports of activities long since cor-
rected provided enemies of America.
with a cornucopia of- details with
which to .assail our country and., its
friends for years to come.
And selective exposure of some of
a totally false impression of American
intelligence as a whole.
But intelligence did essentially suc-
ceed in protecting its individual
sources and its sensitive relationships
with foreign intelligence services from
exposure, at the . price pf running
battle with committees and stiff
members.
Did something new -emerge? Yes.
Intelligence has traditionally existed
in a shadowy field outside the law.
This year's excitement has made clear
that the rule of law applies to all parts
of the American Government, includ-
ing intelligence. In fact, this will ?
strengthen American intelligence. Its
secrets will be understood to be neces-
sary ones for the protection of our
democracy in tomorrow's world, not
covers for mistake or misdeed. The
guidelines within which it should, and
should not, operate will be clarified
for those in intelligence and those con-
cerned about it. Improved supervision
will insure that the intelligence
agencies will remain within the new,
guidelines.
The American people will under-
stand and support their intelligence
services and press their elected repre'-'
sentatives to give intelligence and its
officers better protection from irre-:
Antitlligence's CoVal self-criticism gays sponsible exposure and harassment.
Approved Floir le lease 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-062132Retti1ftebtOVIEOwer?
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, Tuesday, February 24, 1976.'
but they will be exceeded by the value
of this strengthening of what was
already the best intelligence service
In the :world.
William E. Colby was Director of
Central Intelligence. .
NEW YORK TINES
23 Feb. 1976
SCHORR 'LEAK' HURT
SECURITY, BUSH SAYS
WASHINGTON, Feb. 22 (um)
?George Bush, Director of Cen-
tral Intelligence, said today that
national security had been
harmed by a leak of parts of a
report by the House Select
Committee , on Intelligence .to
The Village Voice newspaper,
but he did not know if damage
could be proved "in a c.gurt of
law." '
Asked' if there was' anything
damaging in the report pur-
chased-from Daniel Schorr CBS
newsman by the New 'York
weekly newsp.aper, Mr. 'Bush
said that. there are certain
things in there, . bat, if ,1 told
you those specifics that would
highlight those andmake things
worse." , - - ,
He said on NBC's "Meet the
Press," that "the fundamental
question is that Congress voted
by.almost 2-to-ifl that the report
not he made public,- and it was
made public . . . That's just
plain wring:" - - ,
Mr. Bush acknowledged .that
"there were clearly abuses,
there were awful- abuses": in
the C.I:A. involving both domes.
tic spying -and foreign tactics,
but he praised-President Ford's
proposals for- tightening. C.I.A.
oversight, in_ the -legislative and
executive branches and new
laws making it a crime for a
Government employee to. leak
secret information." .,
"There will be, think,. a
better and-more responsive sys-
tem for people [within Govern-
ment] . .. to safeguard the peo-
ple of this country from the
kinds of abuses that offended
me and offend you," Mr. Bush
said.
TheWAington Star
Monday, D-7
March 1, 1976
'I never fingered
Richard Welch...'
The comment accompanying your
front-page photograph of me on
Jan. 16 was in error. I never "fin-
gered" Richard Welch to Counter-
spy, the Athens News or to any
other publication or person. How-
ever, I continue to help other jour-
nalists, and would have helped the
Athens News in identifying the CIA
people if asked.
Welch was identified in print as a
CIA officer as early as 1968, and
several times thereafter. The view
that I am behind the rash of identi-
fications is inaccurate. Increasing-
ly, journalists and others opposed to
the CIA's promotion of repression
are determined that CIA people ac-
cept personal responsibility for
their acts and those of the institu-
tion to which they belong.
Exposing CIA pitypererilidcfroe
Wrong Problem. at the CIA
Given the type of attention that that covert operations "have been
has been focused on the Central In- forced' on a reluctant CIA." It con-
telligence Agency over the last year eludes, "All evidence in hand sug-
or so, it has been predictable gests that the CIA, far from being
enough that efforts at "reform" out of control, has been utterly re-
would center on greater centraliza- sponsive to the instructions of the
? tion of the intelligence function. No President and the Assistant to the
type of reform could do more harm. President for National Security Af-
The attention has defined "the fairs."
CIA problem" as "dirty tricks.' Even more importantly, the Pike
This problem has been real enough, Committee report provides plenty of
and a tighter scrutiny of covert evidence that such responsiveness
operations is clearly in order. The by various intelligence agencies ex-
tends not merely to covert opera-
tions, but to the shaping of intelli-
gence itself. In Vietnam, for exam-
ple, "pressure from policy-making
officials to produce positive intelli-
gence indicators reinforced erro-
neous assessment of allied progress
and enemy capabilities." On the
current dispute over possible Soviet
violations of the strategic arms
agreements, similarly, it remarks
on "Dr. Kissinger, with his passion
for secrecy and his efforts to consol-
idate ultimate control of important
intelligence functions, through his
various bureaucratic roles."
" This, not dirty tricks, is the clas-
sical problem of intelligence. In de-
bating what later proved to be de-
liberate German violations of the
naval disarmament treaties in 1935,
Winston Churchill complained,
"somewhere between the Intelli-
gence Service and the ministerial
chief there has been some watering
down or whittling down of the
facts." Prime Minister Baldwin de-
fended his policies by explaining
that in any event rearmament was
not politically realistic, especially
since the pacifist issue had just cost
the government the by-election at
Fulham.
Intelligence indicators are al-
ways murky and subject to different
interpretations, after all, and intelli-
gence communities are by nature
inbred. The danger is that what will
prevail in the murk, consciously or
not, are subtle pressures for con-
formity and above all the political
needs of policymakers to win public
support for their policies or simply
to get past the next election.
This problem can never be
wholly solved, but clearly it will be
exacerbated by abolishing some of
the present intelligence agencies, or
even by centralizing the budget con-
trol crucial in any bureaucracy.
Quite the contrary, the real solution
to the problem of the CIA would
concentrate on ways ot keep the
analysis of intelligence decentral-
ized and as independent as possible.
?,.
committee supervising such opera-
tions ought not to authorize them
without holding a real meeting, for
example. No doubt the attention
and debate will sensitize officials to
the danger of excesses, and a com-
mittee specifically charged with
oversight is a prudent idea. But be-
yond that, proposals to solve the
dirty tricks problem are bound to
have a certain cosmetic quality.,
This is because no one has any
solution. Aside from a few newspa-
per columnists still rioting against
Vietnam, no one really wants to out-
law all covert operations. And no
one has any very good suggestions
about which to outlaw and which to
sanction. The truth is that there is
no way to program a computer to
make such- decisions; some things
still must be left to the judgment of
responsible officials. No doubt they
have made and will make mistakes,
but taken as a whole -the revelations
of the last year do not lead us to
believe that the dirty tricks problem
is a crisis for American society, or
even the chief problem of the intelli-
gence services.
Yet in trying to frame cosmetic
solutions to this problem, nothing is
more natural than to centralize. The
notion is that dirty tricks result
from loose controls, and can be
prevented by more centralized con-
trol. Thus the main feature of Presi-
dent Ford's reforms is to give the
Director of Central Intelligence
"resource control" over all intelli-
gence services, or in other words,
budget authority over not only the
CIA but intelligence functions in the
Pentagon and elsewhere. Otis Pike's
House Select Committee on Intelli-
gence has proposed going even fur-
ther, entirely abolishing the Defense
Intelligence Agency.
Representative Pike's committee
ought to read its own report. At
least in the, version leaked and now
in the public domain, it is in many
ways a sloppy and shallow report,
but it does show some sense of the
real problem. It notes for example,
untimely and continual personnel
change-overs, with no danger of vio-
lence if exposed people return to
Langley, Va. Thus, the policy
underlying the CIA's work ? which
shows no possibility for change until
fundamental internal changes occur
? can be blunted, to some degree at
least, by weakening the instrument
through which the policy is applied.
Philip Agee
Cambridge, England
(NOTE ? Mr. Agee, a former
Re IngoEtagpc13/0/3/0;8 aiiitfiCIP7a-00432R000100410002-0
"C.I.A. Diary.") 12
- Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
Monday, Feb. 23, 1976 THE WASHINGTON POST
Out of the Shadows
Proposals Clarify CIA's Role
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
"The American :, intern- Intelligence
gence service," former Di- committees.
rector William E. Colby of ? ' The Rockefeller commis-
the Central Intelligence sion's report confirmed that
Agency said in a speech last illegal mail' openings had
week, "will now come out of taken place, and that the
the shadows on the edge of CIA violated its own charter
the law." .- in a six-year program called ?
Operation CHAOS, a project
The shadows were cast by "to collect, coordinate, eval-
the National Security Act of uate and report on foreign
contacts with American dis-
sidents.
CIA's amassing of 7,200
files on Americans, infiltra-
tion of domestic groups, wire-
At the same time, how- tapping, bugging, break-ins,
ever, it provided that thes a
CIA director "shall be re-. and using reviews of tax re-
turns all were listed by the
sponsible for protecting in- Rockefeller - panel as being
telligence sources and meth- outside the CIA charter.
ods from unauthorized dis- Indicative of the CIA's
closure."
? ? ? own concerns were several
- The shadowy area was actions described in? the
thus created. What actions, Rockefeller report.
could a CIA director take in In November, 1974, ac-
the United States to protect cording to the report, the
his agency's sources and CIA "turned to the National
methods, without undertak- Security Agency 1100 pages
ing police and internal sects- of reports of interceptions.
rity functions from which he of international communicag
is legally barred? ? tions of Americans "because
President Ford attempted a.;review of the materials
last Wednesday to remove ? had apparently raised a
the law's ambiguity by an question of as to the legality
executive order. o& their being held by CIA."
Sen. Frank Church (D- ,,. In a footnote, the Rocke-
f
Idaho), chairman of the Sen-
eller report noted that the
CJA's security director in
'ate intelligence committee,
said of the Ford action:
pip early 1970s warned at
"I .
think the President reaches :meetings that "surveillance
beyond his powers . . . you of newsmen was improper
cannot change law by execu- though surveillances . were'
tive order."being carried out. ? in 1971,
and. 1972 .at the direction: of
, ... ,.,
Church's committee imme- ?
-
diately began to plan hear- 'filen CIA Director Richard.
, Hnis in an 'attempt ' US
ings for early March to re- ; -el , 0 '? .
track-down
view the Ford order. . .. .
- The Rockefeller :?commis4
The public, and most .
? sion found "a great majorg
members of Congress before - , CIA's domestic _ great major-.
December, 1974, believed :' ity" of ctomestic activ-
ities permissible under the
that the CIA did not operate '
ambiguous law.
g. It noted,
-
Inside the United States. ambig g
',:hoWever, that .by giving the
Presidents and intelli- 'CIA the task of determining
gence officials knew other foreign influence on 'domes--
wise, but because they had tic groups, the agency inevi-
"doubts about how far the ..
tably ."on some occasions
agency could go, they wrap-
(would) exceed the legista-
ped CIA domestic opera- five restrictions."
' tions in a cloak of secrecy. . The commission recom-
On Dec. 22, 1974, The New mended that the CIA de.
York Times published a stroy files "which have no
storydescribing "a massive, foreign intelligence value"
illegal domestic operation" from programs such as
against the antiwar move- CHAOS and its own security
ment and other dissident office's infiltration of dissi-
groups. Ainong the opera- dent groups.
- tiens described were the President Ford's order
maintaining of .;files on 10,g dealing with he issues
000 U.S. citizens, -.break-inss raised by news reports and
wiretapping, . covert ? :Mail:, the Rockefeller commission
openings, .physical surveil-, about syping on Americans
? lances and infiltrations* Of ? . has the following effects:
? dissident groups.- :-- ? gg- - ? Wiretaps. The CIA is
Public ceneern ' sparked barred from any wiretap-
immediate action. The Prcsfs ping inside the Un it ed
dent appointed. a commis- States except to test equip-
sten headed by Vice .Pregg: ment under procedures ap-
dent Rockefeller to look into proved by the Attorney Gen--
are still permitted to inter-
cept international communi-
cations to or from the
United States and of Ameri-
cans abroad, though only
'under new procedures ap-
proved by the Attorney Gen-
eral. A . Justice Department
, official said these, proce-
investigating idures are classified.
Within the United States,
according to the Justice
spokesman, only the FBI is
permitted to carry on for-
? eign-intelligence wiretaps.
The President will seek leg-
.islation to require warrants
for such taps. In the in
terim, a procedure has been
established by Attorney
General Edward H. ?Levi
that requires written. re4,
quests and approval by an
advisory panel as well as the,
Attorney General. -
,
? Break-ins. The ?order'
bars all break-ins within the:
'United States. However, it
permits break-ins "directed
against United States per-
sons abroad" by the CIA nu;
der "procedures approved
by the Attorney General".
Those procedures, according
to a Justice spokesman, are
classified.
? Physical surveillance.
Such surveillances can be
undertaken in the United
States without warrant by
CIA against present or for-
mer agency employees, and
present or former contrac-
tors but only for the pur-
pose of preventing unau-
thorized disclosure of
"foreign intelligence, or
counterintelligence sources
or methods or national secu-
rity information." The last
category includes almost all
classified material.
The agency is also permit-
ted to maintain surveillance
of U.S. citizens "who con-
tact" present and former
CIA personnel or foreigners
who are the subject of cIA
investigations. A -limitation
is that the surveillance may
continue "only to the extent
necessary to identify such
U.S. person."
White House aides my
that under this provision
surveillance may unknow-
ingly include a journalist,
but would cease once the
Person under surveillance is
identified as a journalist.
The aides said there are
classified guidelines applica-
ble to investigations involv-
ing journalists.
Overseas. the CIA is Der..
mitted to carry on investa.' a-
dons, including surveillance
of Americans who are
"reasonably believed to be
acting on behalf of a fomign
power or engaging in inter-
national terrorist or narcot-
ics activities or activities
threatening to the national
security."
In the 1960s antiwar and
black groups were presumed
by the Johnson and Nixon
administrations to have re-
ceived support, from North
the charges. The Senate and m al. Vietnam. Cuba and siling
later the House o
1947. It established the CIA
and forbade it to exercise
"police, subpoena or law-en-
forcement powers or inter-
nal security functions."
rA t elf& e d MitlataSiek2kividi08 :telgiiikerrieltlatiArkb1
13
Carrying on activities that
threatened the security of
the United States. .
? Mail openings. The CIA
is barred from opening any
mail "in the United States
postal channels." The order
floes not carry any prohi-
bition against the CIA open-
ing mail to or from Ameri-
cans in other countries?a
practice it carries out, ac-
cording to intelligence
sources..
? Tax returns. The CIA is
not: allowed to inspect tax
returns except with Treas-
ury Department approval.
? Infiltration of domestic
groups. The CIA is prohib-
ited from covert infiltration
; of U.S. organiz,ations except -
those "composed primarily
of non-United States per-
sons which (are) reasonably
believed to be acting on be-
half of a foreign power."
? Domestic Activities of
U.S. citizens. The CIA is
permitted to collect, under
the umbrella of protecting
classified material, informa-
tion on the domestic activi-
- ties of American citizens
. who are present or former
' CIA employees, ? contractors
(including their former
employees,) applicants for
CIA employment and the
much wider category of
"persons in contact with the
foregoing." ?
The agency is also permit-
ted to gather such in-
formation on individuals
"reasonably believed to be
potential sources or ? con-
tads" for CIA, but only to
determine their "suitability
or credibility," apparently to
work for the agency.
The CIA can also collect
information on domestic
actiyities- of Americans if. it
is derie-:overseaigni ifofle
frOin US.
sources as part of foreign-in-
telligence gathering.
NSA is specifically author-
ized to collect information
on - domestic activities of
Americans through its inter-
national communications in-
tercepts.
CIA is permitted to
gather---s information .On
Amerigans who "poses, a
clear threat" to its facilities
or .personnel?an authoriza-
tion that could have covered
questioned actions in the
past, and apparently would
permit inquiry into Counter-
Spy, the publication that re-
cently has listed names of
CIA employees.
The President's order per-
mits a category not publicly
mentioned before. It specifi-
cally allows collection of in-
formation on the domestic
activities of American cor-
porations and other com-
mercial organizations
"which constitutes foreign
intelligence or counterintel-
ligence."
I ? Maintaining files. The
? CIA is permitted to main-
thin files on Americans ---
even those files developed
0041901120:1ntercepts which in
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
THE NEW YORK TIMES, SATURDAY: FEERUARY 21, 1976?
? 1974 were considered so pro-
blematical that they were
returned to NSA.
The President's order, in
the field of .files, creates an
ambiguity. At one point it
specifically prohibits distri-
bution of information on in-
dividuals who present "a
clear threat" to a CIA 'facil-
ity outside the agency. But
in the next section of the or-
der, it states that nothing
shall prohibit dissemination
of just such information to
all other agencies gathering
foreign intelligence.
? Dissemination, Agencies
are permitted to dissemi-
nate to "appropriate la* en-
forcement agencies," ;infor-
mation picked up
"incidentally" to any opera-
tion when there may be "a,
violation of law." ? .
There is no prohibition on .
distributing - incidentally.
.gathered -"information '
..pocal
NEW YORK YORK TIMES
23 Feb. 1976
Laws, Men
And the
C. I. A.
By Anthony Lewis
-7' WASHINGTON, Feb. 22?The C.I.A.
activities brought to light during the
last year?domestic spying, assassina-
tion plots and the rest?troubled many
Americans as not only immoral but
illegal. It concerned people, it fright-
ened them, that a powerful secret
agency seemingly operated in large
areas without any authority in law.
, For example, the National Security
Act of 1947, the C.I.A.'s basic charter,
had been generally understood to bar
it from any domestic activities. Yet
the Rockefeller commission fotind that
the agency had run a massive domestic
probe of antiwar groups, Operation
Chaos, that "unlawfully exceeded the
C.I.A.'s statutory authority."
Seen against that background, Presi-
dent Ford's intelligence reorganization
plan is disturbing. For it does not try
to establish a clear basis in law?in '
statutes?for what the intelligence
agencies can and cannot do. It leaves
most of the controls to executive
orders, and it even purports to
authorize by order some things that
had been considered unlawful.
Mr. Ford's order says that foreign
intelligence agencies generally may
not operate inside the country. But
then follows a long list of exceptions.
One exception is that the agencies
may conduct "physical surveillance"
of present or former employees, or
employees of contracting firms to stop
unauthorized disclosure of "national
security information." In other words,
the C.I.A. can spy on a former official,
'Cherne Unit Not Tied to C.I.A. Fund
By JOHN M. CREWDSON
Special to The New York Times
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20?
Frank Weil, president of the
Manhattan- based Norman
Foundation, said today that he
erred in his assertion yesterday
that the Central Intelligence
'Agency had passed about $15,-
000 through his organization
-to the International Rescue
Committee in the mid-1960's.
Adfr. Well said in a telephone
linterrview that on checking the
',,iounda.tion's records, he had
s diacovered that none of the
$27,000 it gave to the I.R.C.
Afforn 19il1 to 1965 had been
:Atrovided by the intelligence
? agency.
He said that the $50,000 in
funds passed through the
foundation in that period had
gone instead to four other orga-
nizatiotis ?the American So-
ciety. of African Culture, the
;African-American Institute, the
Pan American Foundation and
the International Development
Foundation.
Leo Cherne, one of President
Ford's three appointees to a
new intelligence oversight
board set up to check for pos-
sible abuses of authority by
the C.I.A. -and other intelligence
agencies, is board chairman of
the I.R.C.
Mr. Cherne, a professional
'--c mist, said the I.R.C.'s
work involves assistance to
political refugees round the
world. The I.R.C. project funded
a medical-service unit set up
in the Belgian Congo to aid
Angolan refugees and others.
. Mr. Weil said today that he
"misrecalled" himself yester-
day in recollecting that "a mys-
terious gentleman" from the
C.I.A. had approached him in
1963 or 1964 with a specific
request to pass agency money
to the Congo medical project.
He said he had also erred
in recalling that the foundation
had agreed to serve as a pass-
through for the funds only after
deciding that the I.R.C. project
would have been worthy of
a contribution from its own
endowment.
'I Was Wrong'
"Let me make it very clear,"
he said in the interview, -"I
made a mistake. I was wrong."
Although he spoke to Mr.
Cherne last night and again
this morning, he said, Mr.
Cherne "did not ask me to
do anything" with respect to
setting the record straight. He
is amending his earlier state-
ments because "harm has been
done," he emphasized.
Mr. cherne was appointed
in 1973 to sit on the President's
Foreign Intelligence Advisory
Board, which The New York
Time reported erroneously to-
day was abolished by Mr. Ford
this week. It was the United
States Intelligence Board that
was abolished by executive or-
der on Wednesday.
by. the Norman Foundation was The President's Intelligence
to keep him from disclosing that the
United States is running a secret war
in Laos or intervening in Angola.
Another exception indicates that the
C.I.A. may on occasion examine
Americans' tax returns. Another al-
lows it to infiltrate organizations in
this country if they are made up large-
ly of foreigners and are "reasonably
believed to be acting on behalf of a
foreign power." Another allows col-
lection of corporate information when
it "constitutes foreign intelligence or
counterintelligence."
Now it may be that some or all of
those things have to be done. But is it
clear that they should be done by our,
foreign intelligence agencies rather
than by a domestic police organiza-
tion?
An even more Important question
Is whether the C.I.A. should?or can?
be given such powers by executive
order. This is not just a narrow ques-
tion of law. It is a fundamental
question of constitutional legitimacy.
In the American system of govern-
ment, the exercise of power must
always be linked to some authority in
law. We do not, like the British, put
our faith in individuals and unwritten
? traditions: we believe in formal rules
and institutions.
? When President Truman seized the
nation's steel mills to stop a strike
during the Korean War, the Supreme
Court reflected a deep public instinct
in ' deciding that such a step went?
beyond any "inherent powers" of the
President. Siniilarly here, political wis-
dom as well as the Constitution coun-
Board, created by President
Eisenhower in 1956, is a group
of private citizens responsible
for reviewing the functions of
the Federal intelligence coin-,
munity and reporting to the
President on the conduct of
those agencies.
The United States Intelligence
Board was a high-level coordi-
nating group within the intel-
ligence community, presided
over by the director of Central
Intelligence. In the past it met
as often as each week to co-
ordinate intelligence data avail-
able from all members of the
community.
In a related development
Freedom House, an organiza-
tion with which Mr. Cherne
has also been closely associated
for many years, asked George
Bush, director of Central Intel-
ligence, whether the C.I.A. had
ever given it funds "directly
or through any other entity."
The request was in a letter
sent to Mr. Bush that men-
tioned a report, also in today's
Times, that Freedom House re-
ceived $3,500 from the J. M.
Kaplan Fund between 1962 and
1964.
The Times article quoted exe-
cutives of the Kaplan Fund
as having said that while they
had passed C.I.A. money to
the now-defunct Institute for
International Labor Research,
all the funds paid by them
to Freedom House or to the
I.R.C. had been their own.
sels that President Ford go'to COngress
for legislation. Otherwise he will ap-
pear to be saying that the way to deal
? with intelligence illegalities is to de-
clare them legal.
What the intelligence community
needs above.all is to restore the pub?
-
lic confidence that has broken down.
The legislative process, whatever its
faults, is a powerful way to build
consensus in this country. An order,
imposed suddenly by a President,
without public debate, and subject to
sudden change by future Presidents,
is .never going to restore a sense of
. legitimacy.
It is just as important to establish
rules of law for covert action abroad
as for the domestic side. Relying on
"inherent powers" of the President for
legal authority, as Mr. Ford has done,
is too uncertain and too dangerous.
There has been real doubt that the
1974 act authorized any covert ac-
tion aside from intelligence-gathering.
Those doubts can only be settled, and
legitimacy established, by carefully
drawn legislative limits.
Legitimacy should also be an aim in
planning oversight of the C.I.A. and
the other agencies. That the Executive
should scrutinize its own operations
is fine, but experience has shown the
foolishness of relying entirely on any
institution to police itself, especially
when shielded from public scrutiny.
As a major reform after the Bay of
Pigs, President Kennedy reconstituted
the President's Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board. It failed utterly to
stop abuses and illegalities. Now Presl-
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP7744432R000100410002-0
' Approved For Release 2001/08/08: CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
WASHINGTON POST
2 3 FE8 1976
-.-.The President's Secrecy Legislation.
TrY,OU AGREE with Philip Agee, whose letter appears
on this page today, you will find the reforms of the
Central Intelligence Agency and the secrecy legislation
proposed by President Ford wholly inadequate. Mr. Agee
?and some others?believe the CIA is an organization
whose agents and activities should be publicly identified
and exposed because, in their view, its operations are
? wholly inimical to our true national interest. On the
other hand, if you believe, as we do, that there is a
place in this imperfect world for secret government ac-
tivities?as long as they are properly directed and con-
trolled?you may find the President's proposals a rea-
sonable starting point. We have already expressed some
views on those reorganization proposals. Today we in-
tend to focus on the details of the President's secrecy
legislation which is aimed?rather precisely?at people
? like Mr. Agee.
'The secrecy legislation, as we understand it (it is
printed on the opposite ?page so that you can judge
fer yourself how narrowly it is drawn) attempts
to deter or discourage leaks of information relating only
to the sources and methods of collecting foreign intelli-
gence and the methods and techniques used to evaluate
it. It is not a proposal to create an Official Secrets Act
(which would punish anyone for revealing any govern-
ment secrets) or, even, to protect the general run of
secret intelligence information, as Mr. Ford seemed to
suggest in his press conference. It is not, for example,
directed at the content of foreign intelligence or infor-
mation that relates to past or future government policies
(except as the publication of a specific piece of intelli-
gence might, by itself, reveal the method by which the
information was obtained). Thus, it does not appear to
cover such material as the nation's negotiating position
? on tlie SALT talks or most of the contents of the Pen-
tagon Papers. It would cover, however, such information
as the names of CIA officers and agents, the ways in
which they gather information, and such techniques as
the ' use of submarines for intelligence purposes. As
fascinating as this kind of information is, it is informa-
tion we think the government has a legitimate need
and, . as far as secret agents are concerned, a moral
obligation to keep secret. The public identification of
such an agent, as in the case of Richard Welch, not
onlY destroys his effectiveness but also may endanger
his life. This is a point which Mr. Agee disputes in his
letter but which he seems to concede tacitly by sug-
gesting that l?lr. Welch should have come in from the
cold once his cover,was bloWn. In any case, ,in, a dem-
ocratic system there is a better way, we think, to work
out one's antipathy toward CIA operatives, and that is
for Congress to bring them home by outlawing their
activities and/or refusing to vote the necessary funds.
In many wayS, President. Ford's proposal can be
regarded as the modernization of a law that went on
the books 25 years ago to protect the government's
. dent Ford has appointed a new over-
sight board: three private citizens,
average age just under 70, who will
be , available part-time. Pollyanna
would have trouble finding any , hope
in that.
In sum, the Ford intelligence plan
Cried out for Congressional attention.
The Senate, at least, appears likely to
set up a meaningful oversight corn- 1 cbi)onst.
mittee. That committee should have- There was no "invitation to kill lihn" is no less required of CIA people. But
jurisdiction over intelligence budgets: nor was his death inevitable once he as long as they operate with impunity
had been identfied. In my view his under cover, their accountability will
? the key to making. the Executive listen,
identification, as well as all the others, be restricted to bureaucratic channels
And its first duty thould be to start
should be taken as an invitation to subject to the same cover-ups that
through the legislative process the
Corn-
return to Langley. No harm win occur have dominated the ilockefeller Corn-
t.here. mission's report and the reports of the
laws by which the intelligence com-
munity will iive.Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP577 00482R000100410002-0
- 1
WASHINGTON POST
2 3 FEB 1976
, .
cryptographic and communication intelligence activities.
That law made it a crime for anyone?in or out of the
government?knowingly to communicate to unauthor-
ized persons any information concerning codes, ciphers
and methods of intercepting communications and analyz-
ing them. Mr. Ford's proposal puts other ways of gather-
ing intelligence on an equal footing with code-breaking
and communications interception, but with some differ-
ences. The most important of these is that Mr. Ford
does not propose to try to punish private citizens, such
as journalists, who have no relationship with govern-
ment, for revealing this kind of information; the old
code statute does.
Once this much is said about the general thrust of
Mr. Ford's secrecy legislation, some specific problems
need to be recognized. One is that, while agencies like
the CIA need to protect legitimate sources and methods,
they should not be able to hide illegitimate secrets under
so stringent a secrecy statute. Missing from the Presi-
dent's proposal is anything to make legal, indeed to
encourage, low level personnel's revealing information
concerning illegal or unauthorized activities, such as
some of those undertaken by the CIA in the past. Con-
gress should put such a provision into the statute and,
to make it workable, spell out in more detail than does
the new executive order, what the limits are to be on
intelligence-gathering methods.
A second troublesome area that the proposed legisla-
tion does not address is the old bureaucratic trick of
placing a small amount of highly classified material in
a document made up mostly of unclassifiable but em-
barrassing information?and giving the whole package
the highest classification. That can perhaps be best
handled in terms of this statute by broadening the scope
of judicial review of the legitimacy of the classification
? of the specific information that was or is about to be
revealed. Similarly, Congress needs to broaden some-
what, and clarify, the part of this proposal that says
revelation of information already in the public domain
cannot be punished.
Unlike most other secrecy statutes that have been
proposed in recent years or adopted in the past, the
President's version, if modified as we have suggested,
would balance reasonably well the conflicting needs for
some secrecy and much freedom of information. It is
sharply limited in the kind of information that can be
kept secret and it avoids First Amendment problems
by placing its barriers on those who chose in the first
? place to engage in secret work. There may come a time
in the history of the world when distrust and aggression
among nations diminish so much that the need for gov-
? ernment secrecy will disappear. But that time is not
yet. And until it arrives, the government can quite
properly ? take stringent steps to protect at least the
sources and methods by which it learns what is going
on elsewhere in the world.
? Philip Agee on Exposing CIA'
? Agents,
The Washington Post's indignant ac- By what right does the CIA promote
cusation that I or others engaged in Political ,repression and subvert the .
exposing the CIA were responsible for . institutions of other countries in the
the death of Richard Welch suffers the first place? That personal accounta-
. inadequacies of many a first, emotional bility of government officials found so
lacking during Vietnam and Watergate
Approved For Release 2001/08/08 : CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0
THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE
22 February 1976
? -? ? ,
congressional committees.
No one can deny the family tragedy.
But what about the other families
whose members have been lost to the
CIA - supported security services in
South Korea, Indonesia, Iran, Brazil,
Chile? Need ,Greece be mentioned?
The Post is concerned with "extra-legal
punishment" of Welch who was "ac-
cused of no crime" but where is The
Post's call for details of his work and
others' that would provoke such vio-
lence? Did The Post call for "congres-
sional processes of review" of the
CIA's work in Greece? Does The Post
for one minute think Congress or any
other reviewing authority would dare
investigate the CIA's work with the
security services of these countries in
the interests of "freedom, democracy
and national security"?
The CIA is a secret political police
that protects the interests of The
Washington Post's owners and those
of every other American company. The
Agency's operations in Chile were
necessary, as they were in Greece and
many other countries, given the tradi-
ditional definition of American na-
tional interests. Until fundamental
change comes within the United States,
political repression will continue to be
the work of Mr. Welch's colleagues.
We ought to know who they are.
PHILIP AGEE.
Cambridge, England.
The writer is the author of the re-
cently published book, "Inside the Com-
pany?A CIA Diary."
(See editorial)
NE'd YORK TIMES
22 Feb. 1976
'Ineffective' Oversight
To the Editor:
If any of the much-needed proposals
to control the United States intel-
ligence agencies are to succeed, they
must be accompanied by one revision:
a regular rotating committee member-
ship. Failure to include this revision-
will lead inevitably to cronyism be-
tween Congressmen and the intel-
ligence agencies and to ineffective
oversight. EDWARD S. DERMON
Roslyn Heights, N.Y., Feb. 11, 1976
anjessT
'T 4." SF1-%74:1'.,