Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 9, 2016
Document Release Date: 
June 25, 2001
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
March 5, 1976
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP77-00432R000100410002-0.pdf8.56 MB
--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 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 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 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.:? .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- 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'.,