Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 122]
Mr. Miller. That's because he hasn't heard the recommendations that this be done by others. It's just an idea to be considered.Mr. Kirbow. He's read it. I reserve on this.Mr. diGenova. I'm not sure that's --Mr. Inderfurth. Well, the military intelligence services should be added to this FBI, CIA and military intelligence.Mr. Aaron. If you're going to consolidate that function, it ought to be consolidated all the way around.Mr. Miller. They're slightly different activities on the part of the military because they're involved in base protection. Isn't that correct?Mr. Snider. Well, that counter-espionage operation involves their own personnel world-wide.Mr. Miller. But in connection with bases, that's their connection.Mr. Snider. Not necessarily based, but information, military information. As long as you are consolidating that function, I don't see why you shouldn't include the military services. It's just a small point.Senator Hart. Mr. Chairman, I certainly favor the concept that if there's any one area where we see even a little rogue elements, they were in the counter-intelligence areas.And I am, as you know, opposed to further complication of> [Figure] Image of the words TOP SECRET
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 123]
the hiding places for responsibility or accountability. But I think creation of a separate unit here and consolidation would enhance accountability rather than make it more difficult. We have found out in our look at the Kennedy assassination and I think in a number of other instances, COINTELPRO and so on there was duplication and overlap and abuse and poor performance and misperformance and about everything you can think of going on here between the FBI and the CIA and maybe even the military.So I think we have to look at something and not just a mandate on counter-intelligence. I think this is a sound recommendation to make.Mr. Miller. It doesn't have to be into a new agency. It may be a relationship that is less than an agency.Mr. Aaron. Is it the concept here that this organization would conduct all the counter-intelligence activities abroad? I mean in other words, the counter-intelligence functions that every station has to, in effect, conduct, for example that establishes, perhaps puts an agent in a local security service to make sure that local security service is cooperating with us and not cooperating with the Soviets.That is the counter intelligence action. Is that something this organization would do as well, or would there be departmental counter intelligence permitted?Mr. Kirbow. If we're talking about duplicating in majorTOP SECRET
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 124]
proportions. major aspects of the FBI because they use theiragents for dual purposes if he isn't out here law enforcingon a Friday afternoon, then he's doing whatever else he'squalified to do in this field.Mr. Miller. That's part of the reason perhaps thatsome of the abuses have occurred. The grey area becomes verymurky indeed because of the dual nature of the agent's activities,whereas the pursuit of foreign enemies, and rather than havingthe hand-offs of the situation that we've had in the past.that consolidation might remove that problem and it might uponexamination lead to clarification of role and remove thekinds of grey areas that existed in the past. But it's onlya suggestion to look into more thoroughly. It's nothing morethan that and I think it has merit to at least look intoit thoroughly.Mr. diGenova. That's a specific recommendation that thenew oversight committee consider that question.Mr. Kirbow. I was just reminded by my colleagues thatthat recommendation is rather innocuous. They can do anythingor not do anything.I do think here again. as we suggested earlier we shouldremove the words during the next year because if they doeverything that we have recommended, they won't have time togo to lunch the way things are going. Why don't we say thatthe oversight committee should consider this?. I think that> [Figure] Top Secret stampNW 50955. DocId:32423509 Page 125
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 125]
you're now directing another committee to do many things within a short perid of time and they may have more important recommendations that they consider too.Mr. Aaron. NowSenator Huddleston. I would like for our recommendations to be more specific, but I recognize that there are times when we can't.The natural question is going to be to us as members what about recommending this study? Are you for it? Do you recommend it's a good thing or a bad thing? And our only response can be. well, we don't know. We just think we ought to look at it.Mr. Aaron. Well. I think in some cases we're really talking about some ideas that deserve a measure of legitimacy to be seriously considered. I mean, for example, we were talking earlier about the DCT being separated from the Agency. I think the way the Committee came out it was essentially to give legitimacy to the idea and its practicality or wisdom one might well question and look at further with the oversight committee.I think that sort of falls in that same category.Senator Huddleston. Hon'd it help any to say that because of the nature of this kind of activity or the fact that it does land itself to specific abuses. Pat they to de this?
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 126]
Mr. Kirbow. Senator, the individuals, we don't have any great big record that there were rogue agents out there in the FBI doing this. There were rogue policies down at the headquarter. Now if you have the same kind of rogue policy in a new agency, you'll have the same end result. So it doesn't accomplish anything for us to do this and point at the individuals because it was a principal.Senator Huddleston. I didn't specify individuals. I just said it has happened and it's the area where it is susceptible.Mr. Kirbow. Certainly the potential for abuse is great in this area and it should be studied carefully and probably urgently by the Subcommittee. I mean the new oversight committee.Senator Hart. It wasn't potential; it was actual. I'd like to see the committee recommend strongly that they go in this direction on the basis of our 13 months of looking at the damn thing.I don't know how long you have to study some problem before you do something about it.Senator Huddleston. Well. I'm content to leave it as it is, taking out during the next year.Ms. Culbreth. Did we add military service?Mr. Miller. That's a good point.Mr. Kirbow. All counter intelligence functions and lead> TOP SECRETNW 50955 DocId:32423509 Page 127
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 127]
out the agencies individually. Leave out the FBI and the CIA.Mr. Miller. I think naming them is a good idea.Senator Huddleston. I guess this gets into the domestic task force also.Mr. Aaron. Yes. The Committee will want to look at that.Now if we go on to our next set of recommendations for covert action. we can be halfway through the report. That would be moving to page 48. where we will take up a number of recommendations related to covert action and paramilitary activities, which relate to what the stated purpose in law of these activities ought to be. what restrictions might be placed upon them. what review and accountability procedures might apply to them and what kind of controls from the Congress's standpoint might be placed on them from the standpoint of either the budget or some other aspects, particularly the paramilitary activities.If we start with the first one on page 48 --Senator Mathias. Mr. Chairman, don't you think we ought to skim lightly. Much as we are all desirous to get to that halfway mark. I think we had better look at the text very lightly beginning on page 42. It wouldn't take very long to do that.(Pause)Senator Mathias. Any problem with the Angola reference? What kind of controversy are we going to raise?Do we have a record to support the.![TOP SECRET]
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 128]
1 Indonesian reference?2 Mr. Bader. Yes. have a maior study to support that.3 In fact, one of our biggest studies.4 Mr. diGenova. That raises the issue. if I might say,5 of a question that I just want to know as a matter of6 information.7 Have we resolved the question of whether or not the8 Agency agrees to the releas of a second covert action paper9 when there was an agreement apparently reached before that there10 would be only one covert action paper and that was or Chile?11 What's the status of negotiations now to release the12 Indonesia paper? The one you're talking about.13 Wasn't there another detailed paper on a covert action14 paper that we were considering?15 Mr. Aaron. There was a paramilitary paper on Laos16 which the Agency would like us to release and they are now17 reviewing with the view toward permitting us to do so.18 Senator Mathias. What about the Indonesian?19 Mr. Miller. That's classified.20 Mr. Kirhov. And the one on Greece?21 Mr. Miller. That's classified, too.22 Mr. Kirhov. There is a classified record that will23 support this comment. There will not be a public record, but24 if you read this Here, you could at it in our other25 report.![TOP SECRET]
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 129]
Senator Huddleston. Could we make some kind of a footnoteMr. Pader. Senator, on the result of the Indonesian operation. the '57 operation is widely known but it was a failure. We want to support the Sumatra rebels and they failed and so did we.This was when Pope was shot down.Senator Huddleston, Back on page 44. this term sheepdin is that sufficient?Mr, Aaron. We had a long discussion of that, as a matter of fact. We'll be guided by the Committee.Senator Huddleston, Sterilized equipment, what does that mean?Mr. Aaron. That's equipment whose origin cannot be traced.Senator Mathias. Whoever is the editor, I hope that some of these howevers that are used to begin sentences with will be put following the first verb instead of at the beginning of the sentence.At the top of page 48 I think you should make that a little stronger, effective Congressional oversight, too, if they have the guts to use it. I mean if they don't use it, it isn't worth anything.Mr. digenova. Senator would you move to put that language in thereSenator Mathias. I'm serious about it, although
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 130]
I would like to be a little bit more literal.Mr. Aaron. If there is the will to exercise it.Senator Mathias. Because you know, you head into the Executive Branch and there's an emotional appeal with the flag waving and the Star Spangled Banner being played on the Capitol steps and all that kind of thing. It takes some courage, and I don't think we ought to downplay the fact that, just the mere fact that you hold the power of the purse, that it makes it an easy power to exercise.Senator Huddleston. All right, we're ready for recommendation number 1 on page 49.Mr. Aaron. I'm going to ask Bill Bader to speak to these recommendations. He has done the major work on this. I'll just simply make one point with regard to the first one, and that is that in giving the Agency a charter and writing down some of the things that it is to do, including the conduct of covert operations, the concept would be to use the Title I device of trying to also set forth some of the purposes of these missions that the Agency would be given and in that context the general injunctions of --The first recommendation would arise to be supplemented by the specifics that follow.Mr. Bader. I trust the language is clear here. It is intended in the first instance to underline the view of the Committee that the use of covert action should be an exception![Image of TOP SECRET, with WARD PAUL written below]
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 131]
act and not a routine procedure. It is also intended tounderline the Committee position that covert action again in the exceptional nature should be used only when other means will not do.And then it goes on to talk about that there should be procedures for seeing that there is both careful and thoughtful and thorough consideration of the general policies governing covert action and that these procedures include participation of policy makers at the highest level and be marked by accountability.What we're intending to do here is to underline these various points: the exceptional nature, full accountability, thorough systematic review.Mr. Inderfurth. The first is legislation authorizing the conduct of covert actions makes clear. That seems to be sort of present legislation. There is none.Mr. Aaron. It should say, recommendation 1, that the legislation authorizing the conduct of covert actions make clear that its purpose is to respond.Mr. Maxwell. The problem is there isn't following from the charter section in the first set of recommendations the recommendation other than the very early one about NSC that a charter for the CIA authorizing the following functions should be drawn and that because there is not that recommendation in this section. I think it's comment is appropriate.
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 132]
Mr. Inderfurth. Yudhe fust adda line that that charter should state that and then an into this.Mr. Kirbhow. Are you recommending a revision of the 1947 Act to change the charter of the CIA or to make it clearer or more specific. or do you want to simply indicate here that the Committee recommends that by statute, covert operations or covert action be authorized?Mr. Inderfurth. Thin it should all be in one piece in the omnibus legislation.Mr. Aaron. Yes. I think that in fact in the beginning and also in the section it simply says that the CIA is authorized to conduct. if you will. espionage and that it also ought to authorize. It also suggests that they're authorized to conduct a certain amount of counter-intelligence.Mr. Rader. We can de now to page 49 where we have attempted here to lay out for the Subcommittee's consideration.Mr. Maxwell. Just one comment on 48. The first clause after the semicolon, there may be a more artful way of saying that legislation should make sure that procedures be developed within the Executive Branch..Is that designed to do that by legislation or is that a recommendation? We made some recommendations by statute to set un a rachanism, and there may be a more artful way of saying that.Mr. Rader. Corps we can just an from that procedure.TOP SECRET
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 133]
131. be developed within the Executive Branch.Mr. Miller. You can do this in various ways by requirement of reporting to the Congress.Mr. Bader. On page 19, top of the page, we come to the hard problems here, and this section is addressed to the question of specific prohibitions on varieties of covert action. It notes that the Committee has after its investigation of alleged assassination attempts has recommended a statute to forbid such activities.What we put before the Committee for consideration is a staff list of other possible recommendations. You can see the first bracketed one where there is some dispute as to whether that should be so included is all political assassinationsThat is to move from foreign leaders to all political assassinations, and we can come back to that. The others you can see are clear, and we would welcome comment.Senator Mathias. What about religious assassinations?Mr. Bader. That seems to be part of the problem, Senator, with using all political assassinations. It becomes a bit hard at that stage to be limited.Mr. Davis: The Executive Order has all political assassinations. They are ahead of us.Senator Huddleston. In the bill that we have prepared and introduced what does it say?Mr. Bader. It does note that the Executive Order doesTOP SECRETNW 50955 DocId: 32423509 Page 134
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 134]
take us a step further.Senator Huddleston. No. we introduced an anti-assassina- tion bill. didn't we?Mr. Bader. Yes. That spoke to foreign leaders.Mr. Maxwell. The hill itself, I think, would have covered foreign individuals as well as, because leadership was so broadly defined.Part of the problem in the recommendation that came out at the staff level was that anything that we said about non- foreign leaders or domestic assassinations or the like implied that the Committee had investigated allegations about that and might imply that some credence should be given to charges that the Agency had been involved in attempts to assassinate people in the United States, and that was the problem of trying to word some prohibition that went beyond the bill that has already been introduced by the Senators.Mr. Kirbow. Or of some lesser military-type individual in a foreign country. You know, assassinating a sergeant is pretty bad as far as he is concerned but it would not necessarily be political.Senator Huddleston. What about peace time? Should that be in there?Mr. Kirbow. I think our bill distinguished between peace time and war time Mr. Chairman.I question whether or not having done that before, that> TOP SECRETNW 50955 DocId:32423509 Page 135
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 135]
political assassinations need to be discussed forther as a prohibition at all.Mr. Maxwell. Perhaps if the Senators think it is desirable to say something, the staff could get language which would not imply in any way that the Committee has found credible evidence that the CIA was engaged in activities beyond this, but which would reflect their desire not to: their desire to make clear that the CIA cou'd not do that.Mr. Kirbow. It's a moral finding that it isn't necessarily based on wrongdoing in the past.Senator Mathias. It's restitive but that's all right for emphasis.Mr. Kirbow. We could work on the language and show it to you again.Senator Mathias. What about the second one?Mr. Aaron. I'm not quite clear on this first one. We will draft some language that makes clear that we did not find any evidence of anything other than what welve found?Mr. Kirbow. That we didn't find any evidence that would indicate that they had engaged in these other types of assassination activities but that we could prohibit it anyway, other than political leaders. In that, though, ve considered that major or colonelover in one of, in the health iteration committee thing. Te considered that. We can make this clear and show won the additional lanow as because I thi that the> [Figure] A "TOP SECRET" watermark is visible at the bottom of the image.
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 136]
concern that it not indicate that we had found some evidence that we had just not revealed.Mr. Bader. Perhaps it would be helpful. Senator, but at the same time the Administration has come forward with language of all political assassinations. which seems to me would indicate that it's not a question of a finding.Senator Huddleston. We ought to recommend passage of the bill that we have submitted. if nothing Ise.Mr. Kirbow. And continues to support that legislation.I think you could just add right on to this. We recommended it then and the Committee continues to support enactment of such legislation.Mr. Aaron. Number 2 begins the Committee has already recommended following its investigation of alleged assassination attempts, a statute to forbid such activities. The Committee continues to endorse that.Mr. Maxwell. It could say the Committee also endorses or recommends that by statute the present Executive Order in regard to permitting any political assassination be enacted in peace time.Senator Huddleston. What about democratically elected governments?Senator Mathias. Why don't we do both? Why don't we say the Committee reiterates its support of that position and the Presidential directives? They may not be exactly parallel, butTOP SECRET
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 137]
Mr. Aaron. Would that include supporting the Executive Order provision being in the law or just supporting?Senator Mathias. And the Presidential -- why don't we be ambiguous?Mr. Kirbow. We endorse the concept.Mr. Davis. If they're not different.Mr. AiGenova. There is a recommendation here that other times of covert action which should be banned, nd since we're talking about a statute which we have submitted which bans it we would then han by statute, recommend banning by statute all political assassinations which would enlarge the President's Executive order into a law and then the rest of these. just assuming for the sake of argument that the Committee wanted to do that, it would be a recommendation for legislation which would ban all peacetime political assassinations.Mr. Kirbow. The staff could work on that language a little and get it back to you.I think we know what you want to do here, don't you David?Mr. Aaron. Yes. I think we can make a fix, just make the point that the political assassinations point is putting in law what the Executive Order is as proposed by the Executive Order or as provided by the Executive Order.Senator Huddleston. All right. It's then to overthrow
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 138]
136democratically elected rements.Mr. Inderfurth. I might mention that Cyrus Vance went beyond this. Jle said all interference in the electoral processes of a country should be banned, which goes beyond this.Senator Mathias. Perhaps that was some subliminal influence on me. but I've written down efforts to subvert a valid electoral process.It seems to me that that is better because when you talk about overthrowing a depocratically electe: government,God knows what that is. And I don't know that you're really going to know what a valid electoral process is. The Republic of Venice, where they have a very limited electorate, elected those. But nonetheless, it was their constitution and it wasn't very democratic. But whatever it is, and this would be in line with George Cannon's testimony also.We finally have acknowledged that the Soviet Union has a legislature of sorts and we acknowledge their electcral process. although we don't think much of it.Ms. Culbreth. Would your use of the term subvert, would you intend to include within that preventing the CIA from any kind of political or propaganda in connection with the elections in another country or any kind of support to one of the candidates that we might think was a better endd.date?Mr Kirbow Holl woo said results ofMs. Culbreth. Pist could von pot subvert the results byTOP SECRET
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 139]
influencing the carrying out of the election?Senator Huddleston. Well we subvert our own elections every time we run.Senator Mathias. The original suggestion was efforts to overthrow democratically elected governments. I mean both of these -- efforts to subvert the results of a valid electoral process.Senator Huddleston. I think that's a'l right.Mr. Inderfurth. In a sense what is a democratically elected government?Movnihan says that in the U.N. there are 24, so in a sense we could actually list them.Mr. diGenova. What about, what is a valid electoral process? Whatever it is in each country? I mean the communists have one party and that's a valid electoral process in that country.Senator Mathias. This would be Cannon's advice.Senator Huddleston. Well, I think we have to recognize the right of another country to have their electoral process and it would be valid if someone in that country were attempting to circumvent their established constitutional processes.Mr. Maxwell. The qualifier in the Senator's proposal was democratic, so that at least in some way it restricts the notion of a dictaler.Senator Huddleston. Salf-determination meche should be
[157-10014-10121.pdf — page 140]
in there.Mr. Miller. What cages would this brohibit? In our actions in the past it would prohibit Chile. Izan –Mr. Kirbow. That stare.of the Chile oreration.Mr. Miller. Guatemala.Senator Huddleston. I would not prohibit Angola..Mr. Aaron. It would prohibit some thirrs that transpired in Laort.Nr: Millor. It would prohibit the actions in Italy, wouldn't it and France?Sepator Huddleston. It depends on the term subversion.Ho vore just assisting one 10,Mr. Sirhow. Assisting the head of an election during the election process does not appear to be the futert of the Committee.Mr. Aaron. I wouldn't think that what is going on in Portugal Lusofar as we know that that is pould come under this prohibition.Mr. Miller. So it would really affect the cases like Iran, Guatemala, and Chile.Mr. Aaron. And Indonesia...Senator Huddleston: Caba?Conator Link a little bit but I think that![TOP SECRET]