EX-C.I.A. DEPUTY IS VIEWED AS LACKING PROFESSIONALISM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00901R000500150041-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 20, 2005
• Sequence Number: 41
• Publication Date: July 15, 1981
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2006/01/12: CIA-RDP91-00901R
ARTICLE APPEARED NOW YORK TIMES
ON PAGE 1-5 JULY 1981
-10 0
Lcck ing Fcnd;s72
By RDBERT PEAa
Sp _ialtotheNewYorkTirnee
WASHINGTON, July 1-1 - Before his I author of a recent biography of - Mr.
resignation today, Max C. Hugel was in , helms. "That's certainly never hap-
charge of the largest directorate in the pened before. That's one position where
Central Intelligence Agency, the branch. you want a professional. That's where
responsible for covert action and clan- the heart of the agency always was, and
destine counterintelligence overseas-
Mr. Hugel did not fit the mold for that
job i n two respects: He had not had a ca-
_eer in professional' intelligence work,.
instead, he had beoit'a businessman in
-New Hampshire and worked on the Rea
gi campaign staff in last year's Presi-
dential election: And'.tu litre most of his'
predecessors, he did not come from an
Ivy League-sty' le "gentlemen's -club"
background. ~..._.., . -.._ ,_ ..._.M -
Mr. Hugel's title was Deputy Director
for Operations. Before March 1973, the
job bore the title of Deputy Director. for
plans. Wiillam..E.:.Colby, who held the,
position in 1973 before ire became Direc-
tor of Central Intelligence, said in an in-
terview today that he had asked James
R. Schlesinger, then Director of Central
Intelligence, to change the name be.
cause "plans"' was a euphemism for
what that part of the agency really did: --
Besides Mr. Colby; two other men who
had previously: been in charge of the di- what was needed to rebuild the Glandes-
rectorate for plans., or operations, were tine service. Some agency officials had
promoted from ,within the, agency to Di= become extremely cautious about con-
rectors of. Central Intelligence. They ducting covert operations after years of
were Allen W. Dulles and Richard . Congressional investigations exposing
Helms. Mr. Dulles.and Mr. Colby were unsuccessful and aborted projects, in-
graduates of Princeton, and'Mr. Helms clud.ing plans to. assassinate- foreign
was a graduate of Williams College, an- leaders. , .. _ , ? . ..
old liberal arts college in northwestern
Massachusetts.
`Tbe Heart of the Ageneyk: - m r
"It would be:very unusual to have a -
ronprofessional,' a,businessman an or
Binary civilian running the directorate
for operations,' said?'Thomas Powers;s
that's the office in which -Presidents
were always most interested:" -
Presidents took an Interest in'the of-
fice because its covert agents could, at
the Presiden_'s behest, foment unrest in
foreign' countries. In addition,: the
Deputy.Director for' Operations super-
=vised the recruitment of skies overseas,
collecting' minutely detailed informa-
tion about low-level clerks in Soviet em-
bassies abroad.
The Deputy Director also had author-
ity over counterintelligence. operations
'designed to learn about Soviet activities
in, general, and supervised. all; forms of
psychological warfare conducted and
information disseminated by the agency
overseas.
Officials in the Reaga,7 Administrtion
said that W311iam S. Casey, the Director
of Central Intelligence; had recruited
Mr. Hugel because Mr. Casey thought
his rough-and-tumble style was exactly
t
at
rn
er
tip
Ti'V1"x " LUnXU mm to reS iS~Z
All of Mr...Hugel's, predecessors had
experience-in, intelligence 'work before;
they tools charge of clandestine opera.
Lions. Those who have held the position
since.Mr. Dulles are Frank G. Wisner,
from 19-52 to 1958; Richard M. Bissell
Sr., 1953 to 1962; Mr. Helms, 1962 to 1965;
-Desmond FitzGerald, -1965 to 1167;
Thomas Karatnessines;1.967 to 1973;lr.4
Colby, 1973; William E. Nelson, 2-973 ? 4
1976; William Wells, 1975-77, and J chn I
Mc afarn,1977 to 19F.() _
STAT
Approved For Release 2006/01/12 : CIA-RDP91-00901R000500150641-5
 ::T: CL~~'~'~ Approved For Releaserm~41a,;fIPi
RE
E- T
JULYIAUGUST 1981
by KAREN ROTHMYER
ive years ago,' George Mair was bored with his job as
editorial director of KNX, the CBS radio affiliate in
Los Angeles. As Mair recalls it now, he and John E.
Cox, Jr., an aide to Republican congressman Barry
Goldwater, Jr., hit on the idea, of starting a nonprofit
organization aimed primarily at improving relations be-
tween business and the media. The one-thing they didn't
have was money, so when they heard that Richard Larry, an
administrative agent of the Scaife Family Charitable Trusts,
was coming to town, they called up to see if they could talk
to him.
"The only reason he agreed to have dinner with us is- that
he thought Jack was another man named Cox he was sup-
posed to be meeting," Mair, now an editorial columnist for
the Los Angeles Times Syndicate, says with a laugh. "But
he was very polite and listened to our ideas. He came again I
a few months later and we had lunch. He gave us a check.
When we opened it, it was far, far beyond our wildest]
dreams - one hundred thousand dollars."
Thus was born the Foundation for American Communi-
cations,' one of a large number of. organizations that owe,
their existence to the generosity of one'of the richest men in
America, Richard Mellon Scaife. Scaife, a great-grandson
of the founder of the Mellon empire, has made the forma-
tion of public opinion both his business and his avocation.
Over the past twelve years, Scaife; whose personal for-
tune is conservatively estimated at $150 million, has bought
or started a variety of publications, mainly in the Pittsburgh
area. But he has increasingly turned his attention from jour-
nalism to other, more ambitious efforts to shape public opin-
ion, in the form of $100 million or so in grants from Scaife
charities to conservative, particularly New Right, causes.
These efforts have been dramatically successful. Indeed,
Scaife could claim to have done more than any other indi-
vidual in the past five or six years to influence the way in
which Americans think about their country and the.world.
Since 1973, Scaife charitable entities have given $1 mil-
lion or more to each of nearly a score of organizations that
are closely linked to the New Right movement. These range
from the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, a Massachu-
setts think-tank-that examines political and military issues,
to California's Pacific Legal Foundation, the oldest and
largest of a dozen conservative legal groups, all Scaife ben-
eficiaries, which funAlagrgygA xr 0-1 gg t P(AQL1
inspired public-interest law groups.
The press has generally overlooked Scaife, even when
reporting on organizations that are financially dependent on
him. For example, Scaife is the single largest donor to the
Mountain States Legal Foundation - $200,000 toward a
$1-million budget in 1980- as acknowledged by Mountain
States officials. Yet, earlier this year, when James Watt,
then-president of Mountain States, was up for Senate
confirmation as Interior Secretary in the Reagan cabinet, the
press reported - on the basis of available information -
that Mountain States was primarily funded by timber, util-
ity, and mining interests.
Similarly, officials of The Heritage Foundation (see
sidebar, page 44), a conservative think-tank that supplied
eleven members of the Reagan transition team, acknowl-
edge that Scaife is a far larger contributor than Joseph
Coors, whose name has been the only one mentioned in
most press reports on the group. Scaife, who joined with
Coors to launch Heritage seven years ago, gave close to
$900,000 - three times Coors's gift - to help meet the
current $5.3-million Heritage budget.
-They're playing all sides of the street: media, politics -
the soft approach and the hard," says George Mair, refer-
ring to Scaife and his advisers. Mair left the Foundation for
American Communications just over a year ago, forced out,
he claims, over the issue of what he regarded as the group's
increasingly conservative bias. FACS president Jack Cox
says, "The decision was made by the board of trustees to
sever Mr. Mair's relationship with the foundation and that
decision was not based on any political or ideological
disputes."
caife himself has never publicly discussed his
motivations or goals. Indeed, he has repeatedly de-
clined requests for interviews, as he did in the case
of this article. (See sidebar, ri
ght.) Officials of most
organizations that receive money from Scaife
charities say they rarely if ever see Scaife himself, but deal
instead with aides like Richard Larry, who has also been
unavailable for comment. Most of the more sensitive Scaife
donations are made through a family trust that is not legally
required to make any public accounting of its donations, and
most institutions that receive money from Scaife, like their
CIA-RDP91-00901
D+fbJ1-5