Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date: 
October 22, 2004
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
September 13, 1974
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP88-01315R000200010008-7.pdf2.67 MB
Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Center ~nr National SeCUrity Studies 122 tviaryland Avenue, N.E. 4'Vashington. D.C. 20002. f 2021 544-5380 (Preced.ed by prepared speech, Friday, 1.3 September 1970 ColG~y: l~Iith respect to Chile; Mr. Chairman, since my testimony on Chile z~ras given ir_ executive session fro!rl ;~rhich it has unfortunately leaked, I do not propose to discuss the details of our activity there, other than to point out that they fall S~rithin the genes principles I outlined above. I repeat what I have previously said that CIA had no connection with the military coup there i.r_ 1973. We did look forward to a change in governraeilt.(Audience laughter) But,. in the elections of 1976 by the democ=ratio political forces. I would add that, in my review of the transcript; of that testimony, there is no reference to prototype, nor the term "de-stabilize." The latter, especially, is not a fair descrip- tion of ov_r national policy from! 1971 on of encouraging continued existence of democratic forces looking to~,rard future elections. I tirould also comment that this unfortunate leak, once again, raises the delima of hotiJ we are to provide the Congress such delicate information without its exposure and consequent adverse impact ors those who put their faith in our secrecy and those tirho raight be conterr!platino such a relati on- ship i_n.the future. This is a matter, of course, for thz Congress to decide; and. I have every confidence that a fully satisfactory solution .gill eventualate. I think with that, NLr. Chairman, I wou7_d be very happy to answer any questions. Abourezk: Thank you, l~u^. Colby. Before I call on Mr. Borosage, I have a cyuest:i.on that I s~rould like to ask of you. Your statement is that "covert action! reflects national policy." TvoT~r, since all covert action is done Approved For Release ~rb4e~t of/~~ fu~i~oR~c~ac~e8-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Relea~Se~Q(~4/a 1/01 :CIA- DP 8-0~~15R00~20A0100D~8-7 i_,:, ;_ ',~}?"'-~, _~:nd ~nc~n zt is .revea .e L , l.s de.~~-ed y t e x, anc s_~_nce ~. ~ .is nc i_ i.rei, disclosed nor ac'_.~~?oS,:led~;ed to the pli~lic, how can it reflect na,tior~a,7_ -_ c r . C: ~~l bv: i,~ecause, f{17~~. Chairman, i t i s g i ven to us by the established elected autl,or~ities o-; the united States government, the President and the National Security Cou~~cil and is reported to the Congress. Abo~..crezk: I migi?t say, i t is not reported to me. Colby: That may b~ true, Mr. Chairman, and as I have indicated, I believe these matters should be reported to the Congress in the ma~iier that the Congress establishes. That is up to the Congress to determine hoer it shall be done. You are correct that tf~e~e covert actions, by definition, are secret. But> they are not denied. Some years agc, there was a phrase called "plausible denial" used. We -- I have proscribed that phrase, because I do not believe that we can tell the American people an untruth. I .it i nk ~fre can tel l the American peopl e a true statement and keep other rnatters G~rhich have to be secret, secret. But I do not believe we can tell them an untruth. P,bo!crezk: I'd like to call on Mr. Bob Borosage. Borosage: I don't have much to say. In your speech you say that it is a strange anomaly that the United States has so much information that it makes public, whereas ou~~ potential adversaries do not. It seems to me that the title of that strange anocraly, or the reason for it, is called democracy. Tf~e strange anomaly is that this is supposed to be a society in which the leg-isla.ture and the people decide what are the policies that we undertake, and I tr;-ink that that example of what is national policy exemplifies my point. National policti1 on matters of war-making or acts of war by the Constitution is supposed to be done at least in conjunction with the legislature. It is not defined simply by the executive. And the easy assumption that national policy is an executive matter is e~:actly d-chat has taken us into ail of the wars we've fought and all the agony we've had over the last decade. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 I Guess, if T can add a personal note, which my be somewhat out of order, it's very difficult for m~ to be here.. Partly, because I'm very pleased that you've agreed za ram::.. I think it's a ti~ronderfui thing that you have decided to face your critics. Or. }.i1e other hand, I grew up in your world. A 4vorld of CIA interventions and of A~~erica trying to maintain a world order and I was of the generation that +,vas directed to fight in the war in Indochina. I had friends who fought there. I had friends ~frho resisted. I had friends who were drafted. All of my friends and myself i-!enT, through that agony. For many of us, a lot of these questions got out of the real;n of being policy or something that you would argue about and were seen as crimi;?al activities. For many of us, it wasn't any longer a question of what the Uii i:.ed States ~~aas doing, but i t was a question of crimes that tivere being cammi teed i n oar n~.me that we had no way of controlling, no way of stating. Now there tivere five years of struggle in this country because of that, of demonstrations of agony. And or,e of the great problems for people of my generation was that there were very good people urho ran those policies. Robert P~1acnamara was a member of the ACLU and many of us saw ourselves in their positions, and wanted to be in their positions, and were agonized at the not-ien that good people could be doing these things in our name. I guess the question than I t~rould like to ask you is to get some notion of the fears that you have, or the fears that you did have in your youth, because, for me and for at least many of mar friends, ire have a totally di~FFerent wormview. lde have a totally different set of fears and of aspirations arhich at least include some minimal principles of behavior that 4ve would like our country to follo~r abroad. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Colby: I think, if r. Borosage, the answer to that is that, like every other c~o~~~ernment employez, I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the l~nited States. hiy concept of the Constitution of the United States is one expressed tti-~rough the duly established legislative, judicial, and executive bodies represented b~~ it. The various policies of the United States, national policy is not an executive ma~~ter. It is one which depends upon an annual appropriation. It depends upon the judicial revietiv of the Constitutionality of both the legislation and of the executive actions. At one occasion, you point out the anomaly. I had the occasion to follow the suggestion of one of the individuals tivho spoke at this panel of attempting to negotiate an end to that anomaly. I had the occasion last summer of being in the receE~tion line when Mr. Breshnev was over here. And President Nixon presented me to Mr. Breshnev as the new head of the CIA. ~^r. Breshnev recoiled in some mock horror and asked if I was a dangerous man. The President reassured him that I agreed tirith the treaty on the limitations on nuclear wa.r that had just been signed, and I commented to Mr. Breshnev, in my first effort to~,rard summit diplomacy, that the more we knovr of each other the safer we both will be. I believe that. That`s e~dhy I believe in working in the intelligence profession to hopefully increase the kno~~rledge of our leadership about the problems in the world. It is clear that, thanks to some of the intelligence work of the past ten or fifteen years, yve now have a self-agreement ~vhich depends upon the fact that we can ~ronitor whether the Soviets are complying with it or not. A situation we v~rere unable to do when our intelligence was so sneak that we had to ask for on-the-ground inspections. I think that the fears that I had in my youth are very similar to the ones you had, fir. Borosage. We probably faced the problem of a national threat Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ar~d ~;;ar at about the same age, and I -Faced it again in the Vietnam situation and I s~,eirc three and a half years there working on that problem in the best way that I could for my country. ~~nidentified member of the audience: ~io~7 many did you kill? Colby: I'd like to answer that question. I didn't kill any. (Audience laughter) I'll tell you the answer to that question.. The Phoenix program was one part of the total pacification program of the government of Vietnam. There were se~,~eral other parts: The development of local security forces in the neighborhood -to protect the villages; the distribution of a half a million weapons to the people of South Vietnam to use in unpaid self-defense groups. A venture that I doubt that many oi:her governments would try or would meet with the success that the Vietnamese did. It also included a program of developing local village and provincial elections and giving authority to the elected officials thereof. It gave decisions about economic development programs in the localities to the local officials. There were a variety of programs of this nature, including the inducement, reception, and. resettlement of over 200,000 Vietnamese who had served with the Viet Cong and decided to core over to the government's side and were received and not punished for whatever they had done. It involved the reception and resettlement and eventual return to village, as security improved, of hundreds of thousands of refugees.. And it included tha Phoenix program which was designed to identify the leaders of the Communist apparatus that was bringing terror and invasion to the population of South Vietnam. The Pi~oenix program was designed and started in about 19fi8 in order to bring some degree of order and regularity to a very unpleasant, nasty war that had preceded it. It did a variety of things to improve the procedures by which that was run. It provided procedures by which the identification of the leaders, rather than the Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 follo~:vers, became the objective of the operation. By vahich the objective was to capture, rat,~er than to kill, the members of the appar~t!~s. By which there were limits placed on the length of time of detentions and the procedures for interrogation. Unidentified m^mber of the audience: Ho4~r many were killed. while you ~vere over the~~e? Colby: I have testified on that and I said that over two and a half years of the Phoenix progi?am there were 29,000 captured; there were 17,000 defected; and there ~~re?z~e 20, 500 ki 11 ed, of ~rrhi ch 87% of those ki 11 ed were ki 11 ed by regular and para- military forces and 12% by police and similar elements. The vast majority of those killed ti?,~ere killed in military combat, fire fights or ambushes, and most of .the r~r~ainder were killed in police actions attempting to capture them. The major stress of the Phoenix program was to encourage the capture for very sensible easy reasons. First, or.rr respect, not the Communists, our respect for human life where it can be gained (audience 1aughter), and secondly because a live captive has information and a dead body has none. (Paul Sakwa) Unidentified member of the audience: Bill, I was a former colleague of yours. P-gay I ask you a few questions? Chairman: Excuse me just a minute, please. If I might -- it makes it tougher to shut you off if you say that -- I ~~ronder -- what I would like to do is allow the parol?ists their chance to question and then following that I arould like to offer the audience an opportunity. Unidentified member of the audience: Per. Senator, I ~7ork in clandestine services. Chairman: I know that. If you'd permit me to do that I'd be very grateful Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ''.~~sr,~:", ~y~r. chairman, I'd 1i're to ask Mr. Corby to co;r;ment further on this question o,- file statutory authority of the Central Intelligence Agency to engage in covert o~:er%~tions. I read that statute over and over and over, and it does say what you said it says tivith regard to other duties and functions related to intelligence affecting the nt~ional security, but it seems to me you find a lot more flexibility in that and particularly the word "intelligence" than I as a user of the English language would finU in it. ~~Jill you comment further on whether you think that is really an ideal statement of statutory authority that does not leave any ambiguity? Colby; I think that history over the years has given that deliberately general ph;,ase a great deal of content. A great deal of content that has been ratified by the Congress and ratified by the executive and has come to, shall ure say, not a little public attention, and without any change being made in it. Chairman: Congressman Harrington first; the woman here the second from the er~d, I don't know your name; and then Mort Halperin and then Mark Raskin, and Din Ellsberg. Harrington: Mr. Colby, if I could, let's turn to the country of the week. My problem basically is in a couple of broad areas, and let me say at the outset that I'll stand by a memory that I have of two readings of your testimony, and obviously not Finding it as a.ccesible as you do day to day, it is very hard to have more than a rr:mory. The term "political destabilization" was indeed used and I think, to go t0 th,e Credit given you, was very candid discourse as far as the CIA operation in Chile. Let me also say, and I say this only because I don't want to be deterred from !~v~hat I think the central concern that I had with this all along is, that your historic ir~t?1ligence gathering and evaluation role is one that I not only endorse but, in a sense, accept as a legitimate facet of agency operations and one I might, from a Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 T ~;~,-r?~s~~ ~~ t~ers!~e~.ti"e o` a~tatching this unravel suggest that maybe it is thr only place that you people should be going unless you want to witness the continued d-i s ~i nt~ grati on of your cred~i b-i i i ty overal 1 because of what i s going on. But s i nce you have already indicated in your addendum to your prepared remarks, your intention not to address speci~ics raised in your testimony to Lucien Nedzi on April 2?_, lei: m-` at least get into the question of what I think is the fiction of congressional o~~~.rsight. Was Lucien Nedzi, or were the informal members of the Armed Services Ccrr.rnittee structure that oversaw, at least theoretically the CIA role with specific reference to Chile, informed with that degree of specificity before April 22 of this year? Golby: I believe i`lr. Nedzi is a rather recent appointee to that-'chairmanship, but over the years since 1964 a variety of congressiotaal committees and individual congressmen ar~d senators have been -- were made aware at appropriate times in the period of our covert action activity. This Uaas done according to the procedure set up at that period -- at each period -- and as you knoVa we have a round-up recap every now and again and the April 22nd one tivas one for the House committee. There had been previous total round-up recaps for other committees of the Congress well prior to -that time, and, in fact, right after the coup in 1973. Harrington: tilell, if it was as substantive as my effort to obtain information fre~~i you on the Inter-American Affairs Sub-Committee before which you testified, I skill question whether or not there was the kind of language you have chosen to use indicating frank and substantive information being given to the committee. But let me make the point that Lucien Nedzi, I believe, in late 1972, was first given tine designation as Chairman of the apparently-prior loosely structured apparatus Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 9 at she Armed Services Committee level on the House side, and it was apparent to me, in tfie forf:y eight pages of your testimony, that the information being given him that day ~:~;as unquestianably being given to hm for the first time by the very nature of the r?osporrses and by the very absence of anything really short of what 14,~ould paraphrase a> being Colby monologue to a certainly interested and to a degree and on occasion ~r;credulous and rather small audience. In fact, the audience as far as that particular testimony consisted frankly of f~1r. Taedzi as a member of the Congress, yourself, T~1r. Phillips and f?9r. Slatinger, and I arould say that that really even falls rather short o~= Y~hat ~;ould pass for the dimension of Armed Services Sub-Committee oversight. You've indicated in general, too, that your efforts, at least as they were reflected in Chile and I can infer from that generally, e~~ere to keep the State Department informed at all times of activities that were conducted in the carrying out or .ghat yora characterized again today as a directive given you by the executive;lbranch in the course of their Constitutional mandate. Was this particular situation that you have described in detail, either going back to the 1960's or with more relevance to the 1910 Allende period through the latter part of last summer, followed as a matter of practice in keeping informed various embassy department personnel in Chile during that period of time? I make specific reference to former Ambassador Davis, to former Assistant or Deputy Ambassador Slatterman, and to a variety of other people ~~rho might be loosely in the category of those who would be,-as a part of their S~f;ate Department discipline, responsible for Latin American affairs in general -- Jack Coupage, Ambassador Designate to Greece; Charles Meyer, who I think was his predecessor in that role; and Mr. Cory who aaas the former Ambassador to that country. Do they fit within the purvue of what you have indicated? teas an effort to keep State Department personnel informed of these operations that you were mandated Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01: CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ~.o carry out by the National Security Council? Colby: If I may answer several questions, Mr. Harrington, on the question of reporting to the committees and particularly your reference to my reporting to-the Latin American Sub-Committee of the Foreign Affairs Committee, as I outlined in some detail at that time where we discussed it at some length, our reports to Congress run on three levels: The one is an open session, of tivhich this one is a comparable example, where we can, without divulging our operational methods and secrets; we also report broadly in executive session on the substance of what is going on in the world, and that particular hearing that day tivas arranged for that purpose, to try to report generally on what was happening, and as I said at that time, I vas not prepared to discuss our operational activities in Chile at that particular hearing. I was prepared, and so indicated in our conversation, that I was prepared to discuss any operational detail with the constituted sub-committees of the Armed Services Committee or the Appropriations Committee, and I did so. As I recall it, Mr. Harrington, I think there were a couple other of the members present on the April 22 event. I've forgotten precisely who they were and how long they spent there. But with. respect to the question about clearance with State, the Department of State through the Deputy Secretary of State, is a member of the Forty Committee who considers and approves the various covert action directions that we get or approvals that we get. The State Department, as do the rest of us, handle this on a very strictly compartmented basis offering the need-to-know principle for the reason for limiting sharply who should and tivho should not know. Weil, obviously, each department determines. that for itself. There are occasions in which these matters are held extremely tightly and made available only perhaps to the principal concerned. There are other occasions Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 .Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 in which a broader group of people, including the Ambassador and including others in tr;~ State Department, are made available. I really am not prepared, I just can't say right now, which item avas made available to which State Department officer at this particular point. Harrington: Let me, if I can, just try to get a little bit further into that question. Perhaps the more interesting part of your discussion 4vith h1r. Nedzi and those other members whose names you don't remember this afternoon, urho made up the sub-committee on intelligence oversight -- Colby: I remember their names. I'm not sure if they were there. Harrington: -- ran to the method you used to operate in the furtherance of this kind o~f an activity where I believe, if I could roughly paraphrase it without being held to exactness in langugage, you indicated that it vas usually or customarily the case to inform and to include State Department personnel, and I assume from that at the reasonably ranking level, in the country in which the operation was to ba carried out, first because it made relationships easier; second, to a degree it avoided problems of attempting to of necessity go around them; and third, and because I can infer that the method of operation as far as getting approvals usually ran apparently some sort of joint chain of command though I a~ould suspect that the CIA could take, at least as you described it, a great deal by Jay of credit in the initiation area rather than necessarily just being at the execution or the furtherance level. I say that because I want to read, just for the sake of not expecting that I am going to get any more directness than I have had, statements made on three occasions by three separate individuals all of whom were directly concerned with Chilean policy on the part of this country's government before congressional committees over the course of the last Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 year. The first was before our sub-committee, the ?nter-American Sub-Committee, on June 12th of this year by Deputy Ambassador or Deputy Chief Slatterman. "Despite pressures to the contrary,".and I'm quoting notiv, "the United States government adhered to a policy of non-intervention in Chile's internal affairs during the Allende period. That policy remains in force today." Let me read secondly from testit,i~~ny given to the Church sub-committee last spring. Again, given by former Ambassador Cory, quoting, "I said it was obvious from the historical record that Ure did not act in any manner that reflected a hard line." This is a~ith reference to Chile. "The United States gave no support to and electoral candidate. The United States had maintained the most total Bands off the military policy from 1969 to 1971 conceivable." And so on, but the -- and let me read one more significant paragraph in view of your testimony. "The United States did not seek to pressure, subvert, in-`luence a single member of the Chilean congress at any time in the entire four years of my stay. All of my instructions came from State in that no hard line toward Chile was carried out at any time." I could read the last of former Inter-American Ambassador Meyer's but it runs along the same lines. "The policy of the government, Mr. Chairman, was that there would be no intervention in the political affairs of Chile. We were consistent in that eve financed no candidates, no political parties before or after September 8 or September 4th rather." I think it is obvious that there is an apparen~ discrepancy between what they are stating as officials of the United States government, and what you have testified to -in a session before, as you calf it, relevant House sub-committee, and I r~rould also as a backdrop to this quote, if needed, the comments from Senator Symington that 4vere dttr~e~pFbi~tlReil~a~~i2~~drF-1~Or~~~11dPi88,I.Odti1E3~Dld'b2llU~i1~$ta~ that as Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 a member of the Senate structure for oversight, statements made by yourself came as a surprise to him as to the d?gree of involvement in this country. I say it because I think it does tend to make the point both of the fiction of oversight and of the, at least, casual use of the truth on the part of a variety of State Qepartment officials that have appeared before congressional committees over the course of the last year. Colby: f~1r. Harrington, I am prepared to go into the CIA there in detail before the proper committees. I am prepared to go into the CIA operations in detail before any other members who are brought into the matter by the proper committees. I am prepared to change our procedure if the Congress decides to set up the structure in another way. Until one of those happens, I respectfully must not get into a further discussion about the details of our activities there. Abourezk: I wonder if I might raise a quick point before G,ae go on to a quick question by Fred Uranfman. It seems that CIP, covert activities are never discussed in advance with anyone that I know of. Now, if it is discussed with Lucien P~edzi or Stuart Symington, I'm not aware of it. I think this most recent Chilean thing indicates that is the case. You say, Mr. Colby, that you are prepared to discuss the Chilean operation before any appropriate committee -- that's over with. We are always talking about ~?hat the CIA has done tine or three years, four or five years in the past. Do you think it might not be a good idea to discuss what you are doing new, at this-time, even before the apprcpriate committees? And I, personally, would like to see you go further than that if you are prepared to call what you do in covert activities national policy, then shouldn't the nation be brought in, if not on specific matters, at least on the general principle of whether the nation approves of assassinations (a~idience applause) -- does the nation approve of CIA sponsored governtrent coups, many things of which I personally (slight applause) -- please hold it -- of many things Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 that I a.nd I know a lot of Americans personally disappro~re of. If you don`t want to talk about the specific activity, the CIA will not even talk about the general principle of these things. I mean 4~rouldn't that be an appropriate matter for public debate to establish whether or not then a specific Chilean operation or the Cuban operation might be then national policy? Colby: I beg your pardon, Mr. Chairman. I think that my presence here demon- strates that I am prepared to talk about covert actions, and I`ve talked about a bunch of them. Abourezk: If I can just impose on the time of the panel and follow this up -- Colby: As for discussing future events, many of them cannot be predicted in the future but a number of our covert activities have gone on over a number of years and during that number of years there have been periodic appropriations, some of ~vhich is used for same of these operations, and ti}rhen they get significant enough, they must be covered in the appropriations process. I did state that to Mr. Nedzi in an open hearing a few weeks ago that there are no secrets from that particular sub- committee or the corresponding sub-committee of the Appropriations Committee. PJone. And that beyond a responsibility to respond to his questions, I have a positive respon- sibility to bring to his attention things that he might be interested in; and I hav e undertaken to bring to the various committees our current activities so that they will be informed of what we are. doing. Abourezk: Let me ask you this. Did the Chairman of the oversight committee know in advance of your Chilean operation? Colby: Various of our individual actions in Chile over the years were reported at that time and in some cases before the funds ~~rere expended to the appropriate chairmen of the committees involved. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Abourezk: Now, are you responding specifically to the recent disclosure over the weekend? Colby: No, I'm riot responding specifically because I don't vrant to talk about the individual operations. Sut I am giving you a general principle. I can't say that every dollar that CIA spent in Chile aras individually approved by a chairman, but I can say that the major efforts were known to the senior officials of the Congress as established. Abourezk: I would like to refer to the ~~~eekend disclosures of the Chilean action, the Chilean operation by the CIA, was that specific action, vvas the knovrledge of that action provided in advance to the supervising committees of the Congress? Colby: The action disclosed by Mr. Harrington's letter over the weekend covered the period from 1964 to 1973. I believe that I have ansvrered that question in my earlier ansvrer. Abourezk: I wonder if you vrould repeat it and capsulize it so that -- Colby: That at various times during that period, the major steps vrere brought to the attention of the chairman or appropriate members of various of these committees. Novr, I cannot say that every individual instance was brought to them, but there were a series of discussions between CIA and senior members of Congress which brought them up to date vrith the fact that this occurred, and was occurring. Abourezk: I want to have one more specific question. In the nevrspaper story by Lawrence Stern in the "4Jashington Post," it states that $350,000 vras authorized to bribe the Chilean Congress which at that time was faced with deciding a run-off election between Allende and the opposition candidate. Just for example, did the committees, were they aware of that? Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Colby: Mr. Chairman, -vith great respect, that fails a~rithin the category of the details that I'm not going to talk about. Abourezk: Is there anything in this story that you urould be able to either admit or deny? Colby: I can't remember every detail of the story, but I, right at the moment, but I think I've made my position clear that I do not grant to talk about the details of our operation in Chile outside of the duly constituted committees of the Congress. Chairman: Mr. Fred Branfman. Branfman: Mr. Colby, putting aside various arguments over what actually happened in operation Phoenix and given your understanding of what did happen under? it, if you were ordered by the President of the United States and the National Security Council to engage in such actions against either Americans or other people in other third arorld countries, I'd like to know if you would have any moral objections to it? I under- stand where you might have some legal or you don't-think it is within your charter, but from a moral point of view, what -- would you have any moral objections to it? I am particularly intrigued by a statement you made when you testified before Congress in '71 about the An Tri sentencing procedure whereby Vietnamese are sentenced to two years Vrithout a lawyer, and you said you wouldn't want to see these legal standards applied to Americans, although they were being applied to Vietnamese. Ghat moral distinctions -- from a moral point of view notiv, I understand that could mean different things -- but are there any moral implications to that? From a moral point of view what are the distinctions between arhat we do to Americans and Vietnamese and other countries? Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Secondly, I'd like to kno~~~ whether, since Senator Symington told you at your confirmation hearing that "we are getting pretty sick of being lied to" -- he's on the oversight committee, do you -- if we don't want to take your ~vord that there are nor example the CIA is not now involved in paramilitary activities in Cambodia, if ti~ae don't want to rely simply on your testimony, nothing personal here but there is a lot of feeling that over tL~~enty years CIA directors have lied to Congress, even by people like Symington, do we have any means to discover this? Do we have any way of finding out avhat you people are up to other than having to take your word for it? And thirdly, I just want to know if you -- what your understanding is of the fact that so many Americans are sick and tired of what they understand tine Vietnamese -- the CIA is up to. Whether it is your understanding, as mine, that millions of Americans are opposed to any kind of assassination programs, any kind of police programs, any kind of attempts to overthrow foreign countries or influence the political practices in foreig;~ countries in that if and when .the GIA does this, is it your understanding as it is mine that this is repugnant to most Americans and, in fact, is being carried out against the will of most Americans? Colby: Mr. Branfman, I have a considerable degree of modesty as to whether anyone has a monopoly of morality. (outbreak from the audience) Chairman: I'd like to ask the audience, please, it does slow down the proceedings here. It`s all right to be happy and everything, but please don't interrupt the question or the answer. I would be very grateful. It would help a great deal. Please proceed. Colby: With respect to the question about the due process under Vietnamese law and the advice of counsel, I do stand by the fact that I would hope that Americans Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ti~dill have the benefit of due process including the a}vice of counsel. As a former member of the Bar myself, maybe that is a professional promotional device, but I think it is a very useful one. However, in Vietnam there were only two hundred lawyers, and it tivas a little hard to get advice of counsel for ever?y persan arrested in Vietr;am under those circumstances, and therefore a variety of other activities were conducted to try to' improve the legal and procedural aspects of the Phoenix program. As for the question of how to check on CIA, I think the front benches here of the press do a superlative job of showing us and catching us whenever they can. I think that the various members of Congress and the various staff members as they travel around, they have a chance to ask our people what's going on. They get a feel of these people. There are a lot of other people who are quite willing to bring to the attention of the public or to the appropriate authorities any wrongdoing by the agency or any contradiction between ghat 4ve are duly authorized to do under our constitution and what we are not duly authorized to do. And, therefore, I think that any exceptional effort to use CIA in an improper ~vay will come out, and I have talked to our oGVn employees, and I have told them that it is my conviction that if anybody tried to misuse CIA against the American people that CIA ~vould explode from within and I would think it a good thing. Chairman: Nancy Stein. Stein: I knov~r that I speak for a lot of people here when we say that we really appreciate the effort of Senator Harrington to get a full investigation into the Chilean thing, and eve really encourage him to continue with that. Harrington: Thank you for the promotion, Nancy. Stein: I ~pprovedtFo~Re~ease 2fOPb~4/11~t1em~lASF~DP8$e0'1315R00v200~1v0o8m~rica have suffered first hand the consequences of U.S. foreign poi icy and covert operations. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 CIA activities have led to the overthro~,v of governments in Guatemala, Brazil, Bolivia, and now Chile, the details of arhich you knotiv better than any of us, Mr. Colby. To achieve its goal, the CIA has infiltrated, distorted, and attempted to destroy the political, social, and economic lives of the people of the third world. They have resorted to terror and genocide. We kno~rr that the CIA conducted the training of foreign police in Texas under the auspices of the Office of Public Safety so that they learned to make bombs and conduct terrorists actions against their otivn people. U!e know about your operation Phoenix in Vietnam which resulted in, you said yourself, 20,500 people murdered, and similar programs else~vhere. but all of these programs Gvon't work, because we are talking here about the struggle of the people for their o~rvn independence and self-determination. In Vietnam, the people are continuing to defeat the United States military and CIA apparatus; and, despite setbacks, the people in Latin America are gaining strength every day. The United States, in fact, has had to resort to the imposition of Facist governments around the world because of the strength of the peoples movement. I want to read a brief portion of a document written by some organizations in Latin America that I think represent the interests of the majority of the people there, and they are leading the struggle against you and the CIA apparatu.; that you represent. "The peoples of the world live under the permanent threat of the most aggressive imperialism that has ever existed. They have not been indifferent to the organized genocide directed by yankee imperialism against the heroic people of Vietnam. this unequal war, -vhose flames are still not extinguished, the belligerent and treacherous character of U.S. imperialism has been fully exposed. But in this war it has once agai n been show~a?~re~c~Fg~~le~~e~0~0~~1/~1ey ~I~iI~Q.~O~~,~r~~0~~f~00~~~0~~7 i s weak Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ti?,nen con-~=rooted by a people prepared to fight and be free whatever the price. The Latin American people from the last century until today have suffered a string of military interventions and unjust wars executed and fermented either by tF~e 1`lorth L^_ult inat i onal American armed forces or the ~ monopolies. There 4vas the plunder of Mexico, the occupation of Puerto Pico, the intervention in the Oom;nican Republic, tt~e Bay of Pigs, and many other acts that our America does not forget and will never forgive. There is Sheli, Esso and Standard Oil, United Fruit, and ITT, the money of h1r. titi*hich, with Papy Shel ton,1!~iitrioue and Siracusa, Rockefeller and hlr. Ford, ar,d there is the CIA ~ and nodjl you, Mr. Colby, have left indelible evidence of the oppressive ar,d overpowering policies of the United States against the popular movement in Latin America. There is now the conclusive awakening of our people that is setting into motion millions and millions of people and is moving toarard our true independence ~~or the definitive illumination for the unjust capital system and the establishment of our true revolu- tionary socialism." I just want to say to you, Mr. Colby, that the best ar?swer to all of your policies, the policies of the CIA, it is going to be the vrill of the people who are going to .win and that we know that you ~~rill suffer eventual defeat. (audience applause) Chairman: Mort Halperin. Colby: Play I, as a point of personal privilege, Mr. Chairman. Miss Stein, you said that I said that 20,000 people were murdered. I did not. You justified apparently the murder of Mr..Mitrione. I don't see how you can. You said that the CIA conducts genocide. It does not. You said that you hoped that the people urould win. I agree with ,you because I think the foundation of our country is in its people, and I think the people of this United States deserve to have their freedom protected..: Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Chairman: Before going to Mort Halperin ~rrho is next, I want to follow up on that with one question. Is there anything that the CIA has done overseas that you would not do in the United States? (audience outburst) Colby: Mr. Chairman, of course. Ede are engaged everyday overseas in trying. to learn through secret, clandestine operations. ~+atters aahich are kept secret and are illegal. In the closed societies and countries that tive work in and in some of the other countries that eve share this world with, there are a lot of illegal things, according to our standards, done overseas, and I think this is a natural aspect of the fact that we live in a world of sovereign nations, each one of wi~ich must protect its own security. Chairman: I wonder i f you woul d anst~rer the question, ~ti?hat things aroul d you do overseas -- what things would you do here that you would do overseas and vice versa? Colby: In the United States we do a lot of things which are perfectly proper and legal. We have a large number of employees out at Langley who do research, who study, who learn what is going on in the v~rorld and try to make the best assessment they can out of it. Chairman: Excuse me. In the context of what we are talking about -- illegal activities, tivhat activities in the covert operation do you engage in overseas that you would approve of in this United States, is a better way to phrase the question? Colby: I believe I said that, in my prepared statement, that CIA must do those things .that are lawful in the United States. I did not say that we had any authority to commit crimes in the United States and I deny that tive do have any such authority and we have given very strict directions to our people that they will not. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Chairman: But you do undertake activities overseas that would be crimes in this country? Colby: Of course. Espionage is a crime in this country. Chairman: Other than espionage? Colby: Of course. Chairman: Mort Halperin. Halperin: Mr. Colby, I was encouraged by your statement that you now think. it is a legitimate question whether we should, given our correct perception of our interests, engage in any covert operations. And then your additional statement that you do not think abolishing such operations, if I understood you correctly, would have a major impact either on current activities or on the correct security of the United States. ? 4vonder whether we can assume that that statement was made tivith, among other things, the correct situation in Greece in mind. Specifically if, as appears to be the case, Greece may well be getting a government which decides to withdrativ from NATO and eliminate American bases, would your statement sti17 hold that elimination of covert actions would not affect the current security of the United States? Do you believe that American security interests require or justify American covert intervention to prevent a Greek withdrawal frorn NATO and has the CIA proposed to the Forte Committee or do you expect that it arould propose to the Forve~Committee operations designed to prevent a Greek government from coming to power which would seek to withdraw from NATO and close American bases? Colby: As I said in my statement, I do not think that covert actions -- the elimination of covert actions -- would have a major effect on our current activities because it is such a small portion of our total activity. Secondly, I did not think it would have an immediate adverse effect on the security of the United States. That i s a di ff'~~~~iQv~~~s~i~rl~aefl~~~~~~r~1a'n~l~-~~~~1?~~3~~i~8?~g~r8R?~4~4~~ 7be i n the net Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 interest of the United States. On that, I really do not ~hin~: it is very userul ';or me to discuss in this forum vrhether any particular proposal should be made or should not be made about an individual covert action. I think that exactly -falls vrithin the category of those things that I believe, if we are to conduct covert actions, should be conducted within those very restricted circles in the executive and reported to those very restricted circles in the legislate'.~e which can enable *t~em to be done and still be kept secret. Halperin: hay I just follow that up with one point. Did I understand you correctly to say that vahile there might be a net advantage for the intervention in Greece 'that you were not prepared to discuss, but nevertheless the staternent that t~ere would not be any major impact on American security if vae did not conduct covert operations would apply to all of the world including Greece? Colby: Well, I'm thinking, fir. Halperin, of the fact that the current st~~tus of the world is such that it does not look that eve are on the brin~C of any serious damage to our country at the moment. The capitol, I think, vaill still stand whether any particular covert action takes place or not, at this time. Chairman: Mark Raskin. Raskin: Mr. Colby, I was puzzled by some conceptual questions. One 4vas what you thoughta "threat" avas, whose interests were really being served in your view, and how you defined them; and along those lines, in the last generation as'you know, the Rockefeller family, the Nelson Rockefeller family, has been very much involved in different forms of intelligence activities of the United States. Is it going to be the case that the CIA, under your direction, will continue to be involved or use various of the Rockefeller-owned corporations abroad either as covers or be involved with Approvec~~r~elease ~~4/11%~~:' C~~=R~~8=8~3~~R~~~2~~~0O~~~hov~ does Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 the agency intend to deal with the question of conflict of interest? l~Jill that be made public to Congress and the American people? Colby: If Mr. Rockefeller is confirmed as the Vice President o~F the United States, the CIA ~;~ill respond to him as the Vice President of the United States. 4,lhatever the authority that suggests something to us, we are restricted by our legal authorities in vrhat we can do, and eve are not given any privilege to engage in conflict of interests with anybody. And I did indicate in my confirmation hearings, and I believe I'm still bound by it, that if anybody asks me to do something which is improper and outside the proper lines of authority of my responsibilities, I am quite prepared to resign and leave it. Raskin: Does that mean then that the Central Intelligence Agency will not use various of the corporations, of the Rockefeller corporations,. as covers around the world? Colby: I don't believe that is a useful subject to discuss, Mr. Raskin; ,because I get back to my responsibility not to talk about the operational details of my agency. Raskin: Let me just add one more question to that, then. Did the Central Intelligence Agency use ITT as a cover in Chile? Colby: Again, I would say that I do not propose to discuss the details of our operations. I do not want to get in a situation where I say, no, no, no to a series of questions and then have to say no comment because the answer is pretty obvious at that point. I think it much more useful if I just say no to the ~vhole run of such questions. Chairman: Daniel Ellsberg. Ellsberg: I have two brief questions that do not relate to your operations, Mr. Colby, and the~pipfro~e~~or~2eG@~~~~f}04/~~~1F? 1~~--14~SL9~315Fd~0~20~r'Ir0~13-xhat you Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 have testified publicly that the Central Intelligence Agency did have information about the imminent overthrow of constitutional government in Chile which the U.S. government failed to pass on to the constituted government of Chile? Colby: I doubt that I testified to that publicly. Ellsberg: Would that be correct? Colby: tJhat leaked I'm not quite sure right now. It's hard to keep up with them. (audience laughter} Ellsberg: Would you tell us that no~v, if that's the case, sir? Colby: What I will tell you is that since so much has leaked I don't have much problem saying it, we had a general appreciation of the deterioration of the economy and political situation in Chile running throughout 1973. The situation was getting worse and worse, in a variety of ways -- politically, economically, socially and all the rest, and that at varying times during that year, we had information which indicated that a coup might take place. One did take place as you remember in about the end of June, I think it tivas, which was an aborted effort and which was put do~rrn right aGVay. We had a series of other reports indicating various steps toward such a coup. We i~rere not involved with the people who were leading any of those efforts, but we did have information about them. Ellsberg: Did you pass that information, sir, to the elected government of Chile the constitutional government might be about to be destroyed by the methods you had information on? Colby: It's my responsibility to report such information to the authorities of my country. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Ellsberg: UJas it passed on to youur knowledge? Colby: It is a political action tivhether to pass that on to another country or not. That is a policy decision for the policy leaders of our country. E1isberg: To your knowledge tivas that policy decision made -- was it passed on? Colby: I do not think so, but I cannot say for sure. Ellsberg: h1y next question, sir, is -- this should rely on open information in your capacity as director of intelligence, I'm sure -- what is your best estimate of the number of people who have been killed by the present regime ~rhich replaced constitutional government over the last year? Your estimate of the number that have been imprisoned, and of the number that have been tortured in that period? Colby: I would rather not use exact numbers, because I'm not sure of them. Our estimate at the time was that in the fighting that -took place at the time of the coup there was somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 people killed. It is also our impression that there were very few what you might call executions -- very few. There were some, I admit that. It is not my responsibility, but that is a fact that happened. It's the military government that brought it about. Ho~v many I cannot tell you for sure. As for the number tortured, I have no idea. Ellsberg: No idea? Colby: I do not have an idea of the number that were tortured. Ellsberg: slave you read estimates, for example by "Amnesty International." Colby: I have read various papers on this subject. Ellsberg: But your agency has not given you an estimate? Colby: There may ~vell be one but I just can't recall it here at this moment. Ellsberg: Finally, on this train, have you asked for such an estimate? Colby: I asked for estimates about the other two matters; I have not asked Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 fc,~ tha.t particularly. I don't z,sk for. a lot of question; i:hat core up in our intelligence business . +rJe have a rather 1 arge and efficient group of analys ~s l~1ho serve up the answers to the obvious questions around the urorld. T>ere there tiger cages on Kan San Island, the answer is yes. Were there shackles in the tiger cages? Yes. Those tiger cages were built during the French time and have been used ever since. Branfma.nn: Mr. Colby, you have just violated what you just said a little ti?~hile ago that you weren't going to lie as Director of the CIA and I think that this can now be perfectly avell demonstrated to your or anybody else's satisfaction that it was common practice to be tortured in Vietnam, and more that you know it and you have just lied after saying just a minute ago that you wouldn't. I think it's disgraceful. (audience applause) Colby: I respectfully disagree. Chairman: Before we go to Mort Halperin, Congressman Harrington has asked permission to be excused. He has to catch an airplane to his district. I want to thank him very much for his appearance here. (audience applause) Chairman: Mort Halperin. Halperin: Mr. Colby, I wonder if you could explain to us by what authority and by what criteria you decide what a properly constituted body of the United States Congress is to tivhich you have to answer questions. The Senate Watergate Committee tivas established by an overwhelming if not unanimous vote of the Senate of the United States and directed to investigate 4atergate and related matters. As a member of that committee, a member of that committee asked your agency for information, and yet you have told us that you gave him what you wanted to give ,him and drew the line at information that you would only provide to duly constituted and authorized committees of the United States Senate. Now, as far as I can tell, that was a duly authorized committee authorized to receive that information. As far as I am aware, the Senate cif the United States has never voted that the Armed Services Committee or the Appropriations'~c~~~eeora~gl~~~e~y4/~a~1i;t~~sRP~.~~0~~o5~R~Oge~O~hatO$ formation,. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 50 and I wonder if you could explain what it 'is that gives you the right to say that this committee is authorized and that the !~!atergate Committee is not. Colby: I am merely follo~;ping the precedent established by the House and Senate .over some 25 years. Halperin: But if you'll excuse me, the Senate !datergate Cormittee was never established before. Colby: You are correct that there is no specific resolution of either the Nouse or the Senate that sets up those particular committees, but in the early 1950's those subcommittees of the Appropriations Committee and the Armed Services Committee of the House and of the Senate were established as our proper oversight and revietiv committees. And the practice grew up, over those 25 years, that tre would only speak to those and not to the others. There were a series of recommendations presented to the Senate and to the House over those years recommending a change in that procedure. Each of those suggestions was turned down, so that the standing arrangement then continued. Halperin: But, with all respect, that's for the general policy of what you have to tell them generally about your operations, but I don't understand why that isn't superseded in a particular area by an overwhelming vote of the Senate requiring them to answer. By your logic, the FBI and every other agency of the government -- in many cases only answering to their appropriations committee or their authorizations committee -- would have said to the Irlatergate Committee, tive're sorry, we're the FBI and Ure only answer to our standing committees. These other groups understood that this is an extraordinary situation; that the Senate had overwhelmingly authorized this extraordinary investigation, and that seems to me to supersede twenty five years of practices without a vote of the United States Senate, in requiring the agency to Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 respond to the questions of that committee. Colby: Excuse me. It is 25 years with a number of votes recommending change which were never got. Halperin: But never authorizing the practice, simply failing to change it. Colby: That's right. The fact is, however, that I am prepared at any time to change this process. At any time the Senate and the House direct me to do so. I`m not giving anything aaray; I'm merely reflecting the Constitution. Halperin: But the Senate directed every member -- every part of the executive branch -- to answer the questions of the ~Jatergate Committee. And now you are saying, no, you want a specific resolution telling you to ans~ver them. Colby: I am merely saying that I will comply to the way the Senate wants to arrange the oversight of the operational aspects of the intelligence business. There is special legislation which indicates that the intelligence business is a very special business. I am charged in statute with the protection of intelligence sources and methods against unauthorized disclosure, and I am prepared to change my procedure at any time the Senate and the House determine to do it. Until that time, I think I have to follow bath the tradition of the House and the Senate and the specific directives.bf the statute itself. Chairman:- One more -- Dick Barnet -- on the panel. Barnet ~ Per. Colby, do you consider the covert operations in Chile to have been a success? Colby: I think that that falls into the category of not talking about our operations. It is hard (audience laughter) to say whether it is successful or unsuccessful without talking about ti~~hat they were. If they were one thing, they were successful. If they were another thing they were not. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 : CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Barnett: I'm not asking you to comment on the operations. I'm asking you to comment on the results. Let me put to you what I think based on information that I have the results were, and then I would like your evaluation as to 4~lhether that was a success. Colby: I would perhaps save you the time, Mr. Barnett, by saying that I reiterate that our policy at that time was to look forward to a victory in 1976 of the democratic forces through elections. Barnet': Well, as a result of the activities -- Colby: No, not as a result of our activities. The coup had nothing to do ~~rith our agency. Barnet The failure to withhold information which you had from the constitutionally elected government, we have a military dictatorship which has repealed two generations of reforms in Chile, has obliterated a system of reform which has evolved under conservative and Christian democrat government. We have a situation today in Chile where large parts of the middle class are considerably worse off than under the regime that succeeded it. We have a regime so incompetent that we have tens of thousands of people literally that are on the brink of starvation, for which I think the United States and your agency in particular, must bear some responsibility. Colby: 4Jith due respect, I disagree with you because our appreciation of the situation in Chile and the analysis of the situation in Chile was that the coup in Chile, the military coup in Chile, was brought about by the policies of the Allende government,. which so mixed up the situation in Chile that the military decided to act against the government. Now, we did not have anything to do with the military Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 cc~a;~ i;. Chile, and therefore I dr, not think that you can say that the result today is the result of either CIA or the United States. Halperin: Are you really saying, in line with the policy of candor that you say that the agency is attempting to folloyv, to tell us that the activities o~F the agency in support of hostile press, in support of strikes, in support of di?r~ct support of armed nationalist groups in Chile, did not have a direct effect on the atmosphere which produced the coup? Colby: I said that our policy 4vas to encourage the democratic forces in Chile to sustain themselves in looking toward a victory in the elections of 1976. That is what our policy was and that was what our activities were aimed at. Halperin: Have you, as a result of what happened in Chile, ordered a review of that part of the agency that develops plans for encouraging democracy in foreign countries? Colby: 4Je have not given any assistance to Chile since the coup. Chairman: h}r. Peck. Colby: Other than certain funds -- let me correct that (audience laughter) -- other than very limited items that were committments made prior to the coup and have nothing to do with the period after the coup and will have nothing to do with the period after the coup. Peck: Mr. Colby, your statement was the CIA was not directly involved in the coup, however, you have admitted that there were activities before that, but isn't it true that the Central Intelligence Agency is not the only agency of our government involved in covert activities? Isn't it true that agents of the Defense Intelligence Agency were directly involved in the overthro~v of that government? Isn't it true that military officers of the United States government held a party several tiveeks Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP$8-013158000200010008-7 before the coup at an Air Force base in Argentina, ,lust across the mountains, in Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ~vhich they did toast to the success of the coup? Isn't it true that agents of the Defense Intelligence Agency were acting in the Port of Valparaiso during tl?e coup, helping to direct the police and military operations and rounding up suspects for internment during that period? And isn't it true that these same agents of the Defense Intelligence Agency, undercover as Defense attaches in Santiago throughout the period of destabilization in Chile, were actively working for. the Central Intelligence agency? Colby: Our attaches of any foreign country are known as attaches. They, by reason of the structure of the Defense Department, they report to the DIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency. That doesn't make them agents. It makes them officers in the United States Army or Navy or whatever it is. Peck: Just the same as agents of the Central Intelligence Agency? Colby: I think they are officers or enlisted men in their respective services. That's what they are. There are some civilian employees of the Department of the Army, Defense, the Navy and so forth. They are overtly known as that, and that the anstiver to your basic question is that the other agencies do not conduct covert actions. Chairman: Now, from the audience. I'd like to ask if you would ask one question. Please be brief because there are a great many peapie who 4vant to ask but state your name before you ask the question and go ahead and ask it. Paul Sacklow, go ahead. Sacklow: My name is Paul Sacklow, and I'm sort of unique here, I think, because Bill Colby and I are from the DEP in the clandestine services. It used to be called DEP. There were a~couple of gentlemen here yesterday from the DEP area, my old friend Bob Meyers and Tom McCoy. Bob used to be in charge of operations in Vietnam, Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 55 Cambodia, and Laos, years ago. Tom P~cCoy was out in Vietnam with Colby with Phoenix and other programs, both were very brilliantguys, and the conference has invited them in and I think very politely and usefully to present the CIA attitude on a~hat we are trying to do here, to clarify this. But, in looking over 'the record, I did not identify any other person from CIA and the clandestine services tivho had a opposing position on Vietnam and what went an in Indochina. I happen to repre-sent that, and I oppose Mr. Colby, and I respectfully ask him again to please declassify all of the documents I've asked him to declassify including five of my own memos to Richard Bissell, Jr., the Deputy Director for the clandestine services and about forty other documents,. intelligence disseminations, in which you, Bill, are deeply involved and sent insyourself. I want those unclassified. You have desanitized them. You have butchered them. You have destroyed them, and you have made me look like a fool. I will not permit that, sir. And I think this conference has made an unfair evaluation in the kind of invitee that it has made. You have not -- I have not been invited -- I came here. I found out about it by accident. Colby has been invited; Tom McCoy has been invited; Bill Pleyers has been invited. Some other spooks have walked in .here -- Chairman: Paul, please. If you have a question, go ahead and ask it. If you want to make a speech, do it somewhere else. We've got many people who want to ask questions here. It is unfair to all of these other people. Seriously, I don't think that you ought to be unfair to them. Sacklow: All right, sir. Do you want me to stop now? Chairman':: GJould you please ask your question or stop, one or the other. Sacklow: I want, under the Nuremburg thing that has been worked out by the judicial system, international and U.S., I wonder how Mr. Colby uses moral actions, Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 ho~.~ you respond, not just according to the Constitution and not just according to the laws that have been passed, but as a moral human being under the Nuremburg thing, how does he as a human being respond to the tremendous butchering and murder and destruction in Vietnam, South Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. How does he as a human being respond to that? I'd like to know. That's my question, sir. Colby: I respond as I indicated at one point a~ith great concern for the human life sacrificed in southeast Asia and which I believe was started by the attempt of the North Vietnamese and their Communist Allies to take over South Vietnam. Chairman: Next. Porter: I'm Gary Porter. Per. Colby, you addressed yourself early on to the question of American CIA involvement in Laos and justified it by referring. to the allegation that the North Vietnamese refused to have the troops leave Laos after the eras established secret arir~y country / in 1962. This would imply that the United States CIA was not / involved with supplying viith guns and other equipment and material to Armee' Clandestine. Laos before. Now, I'd like to lay out these facts and have you either confirm or deny them. First of all, is it not true that the CIA forces were already supplying (inaudible) at the time of the cease fire in Laos at the time of the Geneva meetings in 1962? And in that period following the same, the Pathet Lao as a member of the tri-particle coalition government demanded it as was their right under the arrangement and that the United States ceased its military and economic aid through the ( inaudible ) who were ensconced in bases within the classified (inaudible). consulted on That under the agreement the Pathet Lao had a right to be /all major questions of defense and foreign policy. And that, in fact the U.S. continued those supply Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 P arthet ~, ao ~,u~~ly operations against the de!~ands of the / chat they end them. This took place over 90 days and that the U.S. in continuing that supply operation had P arthet L_ao a plane shot do1,~n by the / That the Chinese government, itself, made it clear that they would personally help the Vietnamese to maintain their troops in Laos until the U.S. ti?rithdrew Now, do you confirm or deny these facts? Colby: I will say that CIA did begin a program of assistance to the tribesmen in Laos in, I believe, 1960. This was a program which was run by CIA and was also participated in by the U.S. military. At the time of the Geneva Accords in 1962, CIA ceased i is supply and tivi thdrew i is people. The mi 1 i tary wi thdreav its people. lrle did leave some people in Laos for intelligence purposes but not for paramilitary purposes. After -- when we were through -- I've forgotten the number but it was in the neighborhood of 1,000 people who checked out through the international control checkpoint. The North Vietnamese withdrew, if I remember, it was something on the order of 40 or 50 people, leaving some 5,000 behind. That in itself did not change things until they began to attack some of the people of the Maos up in the country. At that point, in order to respond to the attacks made by those forces illegally -in Laos, CIA was asked to and did begin a program of covert supply to those forces to protect themselves against the North Vietnamese incursion. L`Armee Clandestine Porter: Are you saying that the United States did not supply ~ g0 days after the Geneva meeting? Colby: I deny that CIA did anything before they were provoked to it and requested by the people in Laos to help defend themselves against the North Vietnamese incursions against them. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7 Porter: It is on the record admitted by US officials that the US did, in Pathet Lao military aid fact, supply the ~ ti~~ith ~ 90 days after the Geneva meeting. Colby: 1~1e respected the Geneva agreement provisions. I'm not sure what the 90 days is right at the moment. We respected the Geneva Accords agreement at that time and were only led to a violation of them by a greater violation by the North Vietnamese. Porter: Can you answer yes or no. U1as the CIA carrying on the supply operation against the Pathet Lao? Colby: Yes. Against the demands of the Pathet Lao., certainly, and their North Vietnamese allies because they ~vere North Vietnamese allies and they were attacking the Mao tribesmen. Porter: Did you say we did carry on the operation? Colby: As a defensive measure against violations of the Geneva Records by the Pathet Lao and the North Vietnamese. Cantor: I'm Susan Cantor. Mr. Colby, you said that the CIA was nat involved in the military coup that took place in Chile. Approved For Release 2004/11/01 :CIA-RDP88-013158000200010008-7