SCIENTISTS DEBATE GUMSHOE WORK

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP73-00475R000100510003-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 6, 2014
• Sequence Number: 3
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

;TAT, ? -
Declassified in Part Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/01/06: CIA-RDP73-00475R000100510003-8
WASHINGTON CLOSE-UP
a
urashoe Vicric%:.'1. ?
'
:By. WILLIAM 1-11NES
? A subject not officially on . fund-granting agency's black-,
?the program gripped . the ? list; ?. ? ?
, attention of many scientists' The ? question of scientific,.
:? 'attending the annual meeting funding is a vexing one in this ..
' of the. American 'Association- :connection, since the 'vast.
for ?'the ? Advancement of.' 'preponderance of scientific Y?
Science- here last week. It research and Study money,,
Vrelated. to the propriety of these days comes from the :-
t? undercover intelligence activi- federal treasury. Not all this.
? ties in foreign countries in the money ? is -channeled through
guise of legitimate scientific agencies which scientists..
?? research. ? would normally regard as,.?
? A deplorable amount of CIA- scientifically responsible. .
tyne gumshoe work apparent- "Research grants from the.,
ly goes. on *abroad, camou- National Institute of :Mental
flaged?with varying degrees Health, the National Science ,
r. of authenticity? as anthro-. Foundation and the Smithson-1'
pological investigation, botani- .i.an Institution (are) less sus-
cal ? or zoological: field 're- ? pect abroad than ... research.
;? search, geological exploration,'" grants from the U.S. Informa-. .
and whatnot. The situation has tion (Agency), the CIA and the
become so notorious overseas Defense and State Depart- .
; that traveling ?.:Itmerican ments, and . . . most anthrov.,
scientists, dre worried about pologists would prefer governr?
their future' effectiveness and ment support from the three.
' their rapport with". foreign. first-named a gencie
? F???? colleagues. ? ? Science said.
'It was probably "'more than The statement-was based on
mere coincidence that the' findings :of a panel of scien..
? AAAS' official magazine, ' tists headed by Ralph L. Beals.
"Science,". featured in the .,? of the University of California ?
'?,? issue current at the meeting a (Los Angeles), a former?
, lengthy article on the science-', 'president of the American.,
,'vs.-espionage controversy. ? . Anthropplogical Association.
- The, article focused ? Beals'study was instituted,.
problems ?faced-bi.arithropolO:c, '''after -the -?"Camelot" fiasco, a'1'
gists, using as its news peg.a;,' purportedly scientific research ?
;??? repOrt of!. a .meeting, of. they,?project ,Chile which was
Americ an Anthropological ? unmasked as . a psychological
? Association a few weeks warfare exercise, to the horror
J, earlier at Pittsburgh. of the Chilean government.
-/
? The difficulty arising when
? government snoops invade the
Pcientifid: field breaks down
l'into:three broa4 areas:'
? 1., Spies ,posing as.sCientists
? r usuilly perfore?so ineptly in
? . .
As 'it 'does abroad with false-
front "private businesses"
(which fool nobody in the, ..,; .
countries concerned), the CIA
apparently maintains dummy. ?
"educational foundations" at ?:i
, home,. equipped to disburse ,4 .?
money to young scientists? .4
and to do little else. ? ?
A Loren EiseIey or a Marga,-;
ret Mead, loaded with prestige .
and ?too busy for cloak-and-
dagger foolishness, can thumb
- his or ber?nose at these ques-
tionable. sources of funds. But ;
as long as the academic rule
of "publish or perish" hangs .? t ? ?
over young' men and women, '1,?
the scientific bucket-shops of
the "intelligence community" ?
....are likely to flourish. ?
Typical of k) much of the
ham-handed spy work of U.S. ;
gumshoes, this sort of hanky- ,1
panky backfires on the nation ??',
' whose tax money supports it.' ."
A former executive secretary :1
of the Anthropological Assoc.':
?ation complained? to a Senate ?
committee last 'summer about '
discourtesy and worse on the ?
part of some anthropologists;
operating abroad.
Quite frequently, Science
' magazine noted, U.S. scholars
Tail to co-operate with fellow,
scientists in "host" countries, ,), ?
even to the extent of neglect- ? '
ing to send back reports of '?
their work. There may be *.
more than just bad manners
? involved here,?however; there ,
, is always the possibility that.
? some spy-master may have .
slapped a "Top Secret" stamp
on the grantee's research,', ,
thus preventing his fulfilling a ..
? .basic nicety of science. I '
Another was later revealed in
the Republic of Colombia. , ?
It seems? to be shockingly
easy for an anthropologist? ,
for example?to get a "Scien-
tific" grant these days, even '
;' the-scientific role that Amen-. after reputable public and
? 1. can science is disgraced private foundations turn him :
thereby. down,- Beals' report, quoted in
2. Scientists, succumbing to Science,' said:'
the blandishments and. pres- "S o m e anthropologists,
sures of spy-procurers; usual- particularly younger anthro-
.:. ly perform so ineptly. in 'the '?:,.pologists, 'who have encoun?
't espionage role that their good tered difficulties securing
faith as scientists is shattered. 5. financing for legitimate
3: Scientists: rebuffing t'h e,,',:,-research undertakings, have
? appeals of 'the spy-hus- .been approached by obscure
' tiers' often find their patriot- foundations ... only to discov-*
? ?ism called into question, With er later they were expected to
the implied possibility -that provide intelligence informa-
,. they, may ,end up on OM% tion, usually to the CIA.
Although' no vote was taken '?
or formal consensus reached ?
at the AAAS?meeting here last ,
? week, there is little doubt'
-where' most U.S. scientists j
stand on the issue of science-?'..?
. vs.-spying. The world image of
American science is so good?
and of American intelligence'
? work so bad?that the gum- ';
..shoes should desist.before they
ruin the former without, im-
proving the latter. .
?
IThme-laccifiimr1 in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 201-4761/66 CIA-RDP73-00475R000100510003-8