LETTER TO (SANITIZED) FROM (SANITIZED)

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP83M00914R001800110046-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 20, 2016
• Sequence Number: 46
• Content Type: LETTER

Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Denied
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
 Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
MaR I 8 32 8 oft AM '83
SUBJECT: FOIA Appeal, U.S.S. Liberty
FOIA Coordinator
CIA
Washington, DC 20505
22 February 1983
~~.ova
orr'.i
Dear CIA:
On 23 July 1981, I made an FOIA request for the following
documents:
a. All documents relative to the attack on the U.S.S.
Liberty on 8 June 1967.
b. Any documents which demonstrate that this attack wasn't
deliberate.
c. Any documents relative to the role of Moshe Dayan in
this attack.
The CIA response dated 5 August 1981 provided six "selected"
documents plus the CIA public position that the attack was made
without knowledge that the U.S.S. Liberty was a U.S. ship.
On 23 February 1982 I appealed the response of 5 August 1981
based on the following:
a. The CIA was withholding additional documents which could
be released or sanitized.
b. The CIA failed to provide any documents which demonstrate
the attack wasn't deliberate.
c. The CIA failed to provide an index with explanation for
the withheld documents.
d. My appeal requested all documents on Moshe Dayan,
specifically any CIA documents which show Moshe Dayan didn't
order the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty.
It is significant that your agency is willing to release raw
intelligence data incriminating Moshe Dayan as ordering the attack
and knowing the U.S.S. Liberty's identity. However, the CIA to
date is unwilling to release any documents showing Moshe Dayan
(i.e. Israel) is not responsible for a deliberate attack on the
U.S.S. Liberty. Then the CIA publicly states the attack was a
good faith error. My appeal specifically attempts to clarify this
confusion about Moshe Dayan and the attack. To date, the CIA hasn't
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
 Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
explained the incompatibility between the "raw intelligence" data
on Moshe Dayan and the CIA's public position that the attack was
in error. Therefore, is there any reason why it can't be concluded
that the CIA is not only willing to tolerate having the American
public confused but, in fact, is contributing to the confusion on
this attack. I repeat my appeal that your agency explain the
confusion on Israeli knowledge on the U.S.S. Liberty's identity
prior to the attack.
My appeal of 23 February 1982 was acknowledged on 12 March
1982 advising me that approximately 220 appeals were ahead of
mine.
On 13 May 1982, after waiting 60 days, I requested that the
CIA process my appeal by 15 June 1982 or provide a firm date for
an appeal decision. I also requested my status on the appeal
waiting list (i.e. queue). The CIA response dated 18 May 1982
provided no meaningful information on when the appeal would be
processed or its status.
The CIA's last words to me on 18 May 1982 were, "Your
continued patience and understanding is greatly appreciated".
I will cooperate with my Government in every possible and reason-
able way. It is, however, difficult to accept your 15 month
delay in providing either the documents or an index of withheld
documents or a response to my appeal or any status on my appeal.
I wonder if the CIA is making a good faith effort to comply with
the laws of this country.
In summary, my FOIA request of 23 July 1981 and its appeal of
23 February 1982 have not been legally satisfied nor can I accept
the CIA response of 18 May 1982 as responsive.
Please don't interpret my patience as concurrence in your non-
compliance with the FOIA or as forbearance of my legal rights. Your
cooperation in complying with my FOIA request and appeal is requested
without further delay.
Sincerely,
6 Incl
1. FOIA Request 23 Jul 8~
2. CIA Ltr 5 Aug 82
3. FOIA Appeal 23 Feb 82
L. CIA Ltr 12 Mar 82
5. FOIA Appeal:Follow-up Ltr 13 May 82
6. CIA Ltr 18 May 82
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5 ,
 Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
Next 4 Page(s) In Document Denied
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
 Approved For Release 2007/06/14
f/1. ? r`,O/ "9.J*N
.QW r of VI .i cid
23 February 1982
SUBJECT: Attack on the U.S.S. Liberty, FOIA Appeal
Freedom of Information Act Coordinator
Central Intelligence Agency...
Washington, DC 20505
O
W
This is an appeal pursuant to subsection (a) (6)'of the Freedom of Informativ-
Act as amended (SU.S.C.552).
Part b. of my request was for any documents demonstrating this wasn't a deliberate--,
attack. Your response referenced Mr.. Stanfield Turner's conclusion that Israel
has no knowledge that it was attacking an American ship. Mr. Turner's statement
was based on pages 4 and 5 of the CIA Intelligence Memorandum of 13 June 1967.
However, pages 4 and 5 repeat 'this same conclusion of innocence without support
or explanation. Therefore I am appealing your-response because it provides. only
conclusions and repeat my request for any documents demonstrating this attack
wasn't deliberate.
On part c. of my request on Moshe Dayan, you provided a dramatic document considered
raw information which described Moshe Dayan ordering this attack. Therefore, I
must appeal my request and repeat my request for any data raw or processed which
shows Moshe Dayan didn't order the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty.
Your response included six documents, three of which are almost totally illegible.
Would you please provide readable copies of these documents which are: 00-B-3211/
33404; 00-B-3211/20396; TDCSDB-313/02297/67.
?requesting this document or sanitized portions thereof.
a
ex=Up ions
report sent to the White House concluding this attack was deliberate. I am hereby
o
aN
a. All documents relative to the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty on 8, June 1967.'
b. Any documentary evidence which demonstrates that this attack wasn't
deliberate.
C. Any data relative to the role of Moshe Dayan in this attack.
I received your resp nse of 5 Augus s response25X1
states that additional information ence sourc....
and methods. The FOIA provides that "any reasonable segregable portion of a record
shall be provided to any person requesting such record after deletion of the por-
tions which are exempt". I believe the CIA has not complied with the FOIA and I'
believe there are additional segregable portions which don't fall within the FOIA
nd which must be released. A specific unreleased document is the CIA
t
In my FOIA request of 23 July 1981, I requested the following:
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5
 ssume ou are invoking exemption (b)(1) to withhold
y
s
e
From your respon
information which I believe is of importance to public debate. Section 3-303
of Executive order 12065 states that, in order to withhold information, a
senior agency official must "determine whether the public interest in dis-
closure outweighs the damage to national security that might reasonably be
expected from disclosure". In this attack, the importance of withheld informa-
tion outweighs such possible damage. To demonstrate public interest and the
controversy on this attack I am enclosing the following most recent newspaper
articles:
a. Minneapolis Tribune - 19 December 1980.
b. Washington Star - 2 March 1980.
e. Washington Post - 25 December 1980.
f. People Magazine - 10 March 1980.
g. Proceedings U.S. Naval Institute - December 1980.
All of the above describe this attack as controversial and unresolved. Additional
information on this.public controversy can be found in magazine articles in
Penthouse (May 76, mine 76), U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings (June 1978). Two
books have been written by Mr. Ennes and also by Mr. Pearson. I haven't included
or referred any newspaper or magazine articles in June 1967 as they are numerous,
but again almost all raise questions or suggest the possibility of a deliberate
attack. I have also excluded the many books and articles which claim Israel's
innocence on this matter. I hope to write a book on this attack and contribute
to public discussion on this attack.
If you choose to continue withholding same or all of the material desired in my
initial request, I then ask you to provide me an index of such material, together
with the justification for the denial of each item which is still withheld.
As provided in the FOIA, I will expect a reply to my appeal letter within twenty
working days. If you deny this appeal and do not adequately explain why this
withheld material is properly exempt, I intend to initiate a lawsuit to compel
its disclosure.
c. WashingtoriPost - 10 June 1980.
d. New York Times - 19 December 1980.
2 Encl
1. CIA Ltr 5 Aug 81
2. Newspaper Articles as
Approved For Release 2007/06/14: CIA-RDP83M00914RO01800110046-5