THE 'PRO-CONTRA PROPAGANDA MACHINE': 'CONJECTURES, INNUENDOS AND DISTORTIONS'

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP99-00418R000100050034-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 11, 2012
• Sequence Number: 34
• Publication Date: October 1, 1988
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sl Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/11 :CIA-RDP99-004188000100050034-0
The `Pro-Contra Propaganda Machine':
`Conjectures, Innuendos and Distortions'
The article by Robert Parry and Peter Kornbluh entitled
"Reagan's Pro~Contra Propaganda Machine" [Outlook,
Sept. 4) is based on conjectures, innuendos and distortions,
with a smattering of facts, woven together in a conspiracy
theory that may make good fiction but it is not responsible
journalism.
The central thesis of the article is that the late CIA
director William Casey orchestrated the creation of a
domestic covert propaganda mechanism based at the
National Security Council to get around legal restrictions,
and I was the key. This is not true. Let me provide the
fads, all of which I have testified to under oath to the joint
congressional investigating corrrrrrittee:
? The Reagan administration sought to strengthen the
ability of the U.S. government to communicate openly and
more effectively its foreign policy views to foreign and
domestic audiences. The centralized public dipkmiacy
structure is a matter of public record and was designed to
accomplish this task. This is a legitimate and constructive
role of government which has been exercised by other
presidents and which any administration shook[ practice.
? Although one would rat know it from reading Parry and
Kornbluh, public diplomacy during the folbwing years was
focused on a broad range of subjects, from arms reduction
to Afghanistan. Last December. Secretary George Shultz
credited the successful placerrrent of 1NF missiles in
Europe, which led to the first reduction in American and
Soviet arms, in part to America's public dipkxnacy cam-
paign. This is not without precedent. I would remind the
reader of President Jimmy Carter's efforts concerning the
Panama Canal Treaty. Public informatan efforts were
especially important in the complex and often confusing
Central American situation. The Sanduustas sought to
influence this debate directly by fk~odirrg the works media
markets with propaganda. The U.S. government was
entitled to be heard. The administration produced solid
factual information to domestic and foreign audiences so
that Central American issues could be understood and the
policy debate could be conducted on a level playing field.
? Individuals assigned to the NSC are tat "moles" from
other departments. Each person reports exclusively to the
NSC and directly serves the president. The Parry/Korn-
bluh charge impugns the integrity of many fore individuals
who have served the NSC over the years, and in my case it
is totally in error.
Shortly after joining the NSC in July 1982, I cut all ties
with the CIA. At no time during my five years with the
NSC did I receive any instructions or orders from CIA
Director Casey or any other CIA official. My efforts were
to strengthen our country's ability to communicate openly
and effectively around the world. To suggest that I was
being used by Casey or the CIA is wrong on all counts.
^ Ambassador Otto Reich was selected not by me, al-
though Ihave ahigh regard for his professional compe-
tence. He was picked by National Security Adviser William
Clark, after having been initially recommended by Sen.
Richard Stone, the first duector of the Office of Public
Diplomacy for Latin America and the Caribbean. This office
was part of the Department of State, which, in turn,
reported periodically to the NSC, as it does on many issues.
The Washington Post ~~! -LL-_
The New York Times
The Washington Times
The Wall Street Journal
The Christian Science Monitor
New York daily News
USA Today _
The Chicago Tribune
Date
? Lt. Col. Oliver North was a very energetic felbw, but to
suggest he served as a chief operational officer for me is
sheer fantasy. The only purpose to be served by tying
North's activities to public diplomacy efforts would be to
tarnish the administration's public diplomacy structure.
Parry and Kornbluh base much of their story on
conclusions that had been presented to the Iran-contra
congressional committee by one staffer. but rejected by the
committee. The public is being asked to belieeve that a
Republican minority was successuu! in suppressing this
information. That makes no sense. The oDrnmittee showed
its professionalism by rejecting the thesis not on procedural
grounds but because it lacked credibility and substantiation.
One is drawn to the inevitable judgment that at least "one
unnamed congressional investigator" unable to convince
the committee of this conspiracy theory has decided to
persist regardless of due process or simple faicrress.
"Reagan's Pro-Contra Propaganda Machine" should
appeal to conspiracy theorists who choose to accept
innuendo, half-truths and outright falsehoods to but-
tress accusations of illegal U.S. governmental activi-
ties. The facts, however, do not support the unfounded
charges leveled by the authors.
The article claims that the Office of Public Diplomacy
"was housed at the State Department but actually
reported to the NSC" and then reports that "Reich and
[Walter] Raymond have since denied that the office
'reported' to the NSC." What we have denied-repeat-
edly and under oath-is that the office was controlled
by NSC staff. As an interagency office, the Office of
Public Diplomacy reported periodically to the NSC. But
it was part of the Department of State, and [, as head of
it, received daily guidance from the Department of
State only.
So many of the article's accusations are based on
twisted facts and half-truths that it is easy for a reader
not completely familiar with the whole story to be
shocked at its unsupported conclusion: that the U.S.
government set up a CIA-run, covert domestic propa-
ganda effort. In fact, one of the authors has made a
cottage industry of this story, obscuring one important
consideration: the U.S. government has a responsibility
to keep the public informed about its policy objectives
in Central America. The Office of Public Diplomacy met
its duty to inform the press and public honestly, openly
and as completely as possible given the difficulties
involved in dealing with frequently sensitive informa-
tion. If the authors, neither of whom bothered to
contact me, can offer proof-and not mere accusa-
tions-that this is not the case, then they should share
it with the appropriate congressional committees and
the administration.
-Walter Raymond Jr.
The writer was special assistant to the president for
national security ajjairs at the NSC from 192 to 19147.
Page _ 33
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2012/05/11 :CIA-RDP99-004188000100050034-0