File #: oO NOT DESTROY FOIPA# NI /05 - (0- TIS Serial Scope:
NRO46 WA CODE 8:48PM NITEL 3-24-75 DEB TO ALL sacs FROM DIRECTOR “SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES SENATOR FRANK CHURCH, CHAIRMAN OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE TO STUDY GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES HAS MADE AN INITIAL REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM THE FBI. AMONG THE ITEMS REQUESTED IS A BREAKDOWN OF FIELD AGENT PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO INTERNAL SECURITY AND COU .NTERINTELLIGENCE MATTERS. ACCORDINGLY, WITHIN FOUR EIGHT HOURS EACH SAC SHOULD SUTEL TO FBIHQ, ATTENTION: BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING SECTION, SETTING FORTH SEPARATELY THE NUMBER OF SACS, ASACS, SUPERVISORS AND AGENTS ASSIGNED TO INTERNAL SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MATTERS. PERCENTAGES OF AN AGENTS TIME, WHEN NOT ASSIGNED FULL-TIME TO. THESE ACTIVITIES, SHOULD BE USED IF APPROPRIATE, PARTICULARLY IN THE SUPERVISORY CATEGORIES. THIS INFORMATION SHOULD BE BROKEN DOWN SEPARATELY BETWEEN INTERNAL SECURITY AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE. YOUR RESPONSE SHOULD (05-775 -/ SFAROHED nS! als 76 Pel ~ GUiduee wt y yy $ ving a BE LIMITED TO AGENT PERSONNEL ONLY. -!) END ako’ i
FD-36 (Rey. 5-22-64) @ 6 FBI Date: MARCH 25, 1975 Transmit the following in CODED . : (Type in plaintext or code) TELETYPE NITEL (Priority) H TO DIRECTOR, FBI ATTENTION: BUDGET AND ACCOUNTING SECTION FROM COLUMBIA (105-NEW) SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES. RE BUREAU NITEL TO ALL SACS, MARCH 24, 1975. COLUMBIA PRESENTLY HAS ZERO AGENTS ASSIGNED COUNTER INTELLIGENCE MATTERS. IN INTERNAL SECURITY MATTERS COLUMBIA HAS THE FOLLOWING NUMBER OF AGENTS AND SUPERVISORS ASSIGNED THE FOLLOWING PERCENTAGES OF TIME: AGENTS 1 - 75%, 1 - 30%, 3 - 20%, 1 ~ 103%, 3 - 5% OR LESS SUPERVISORS 1 - 20% END. (@)- coLuMBra JWA:spr (1) OpY M5-795 -A Indexed Piss fn Sent WASH. bc, » _ Wea Approved: pecial Agent in Charge overnment Printing Office: 1972 — 455-574 MW 54931 Doold: 32989479 Page 3 mw
Re'vling Slip . 0-7 (Rev. 12-17-73) TO: SAC: . CJ Albany (<] Albuquerque ("} Alexandria (_} Anchorage [-} Avanta {_]} Baltimore (~] Birmingham (3 Houston (_] Indianapolis (_]} Jackson {_] Jacksonville (_) Kansas City (_] Knoxville {_} Las Vegas DT a ok 4 {—_] Boston (C] Little Rock i (—) Buffalo [_] Los Angeles i [}] Butte [_) Louisville f"} Charlotte {_] Memphis {_] Chicago (_j Miami [| Milwaukee (_] Cincinnati () Minneapolis (j Cleveland, {_} Columbia (_] Mobile {_]} Dallas (__] Newark (__] Denver New Haven {_] Detroit (_} New Orleans {_] El Paso (_] New York City (—} Honolulu {_]} Norfolk iad tid etalec bine iiateieninn ameie, Wan A ak ene Hak ents any 8 ~ baller nal OS - 79S RE; aca Retention ([) For infomation ~] optional Te Apes . sources, [__] paraphrase contents. a dated 3 Remarks: SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES: (C) action ([) The enclosed is for your information. If used in a future report, [7] conceal all f (Copies re Checked) [—) Oklahoma City (Cj Omaha . {__] Philadelphia [~] Phoenix (] Pittsburgh {_j Portland ~~} Richmond Sacramento = Si. Louis C_} Salt Lake City (_} San Antonio TO LEGAT: (-] Beirut C} Bem (7j Bonn C_] Brasilia (_j] Buenos Aires C_] Caracas (_) Hong Kong {3} London {__] Madrid E2] Manila (__] Mexico City {_] San Diego L_} Ottawa (] San Francisco ([) Paris (_] San Juan C_]} Rome {_] Savannah {_] Singapore [_| Seattle {_] Tel Aviv (_] Springfield {_] Tokyo Tampa . (1 Washington Field {_] Quantico Date 11/21/75 _ For appropriate (C] Surep, by —— ([] Enclosed are corrected pages from report of SA Enclosed for your information an article by Mr. William Safire Church's Cover-Up" that appeared November 20, 1975, issue of "The PANTS aOw =) ht PN EASES Bufile Urtile SEMANA ae tnd iki oe WS 3 MW 34931 Doold: 32889473 Page 4 , 123, ee ae NAKED Wor 221 ee ER Oa a ml R Ere ae reborn is a copy of entitled "Mr. in the | New York Times. P97S- 3 ae .
mewn . wenrr tet eves FR orn ge tI meee ~ Nor, Mr. Church’@ Cover Up % . ~ By William Safire WASHINGON, Nov. 19—On Oct. 10, 1963, the then-Attorney General of the United States put his personal signa- ture on a document that launched and legitimatized one of the most horren- dous abuses of Federal police power in this century. In Senator Frank Church’s subcom- mittee hearing room this week, the authorized wiretapping and  subse- quent unauthorized bugging and at- tempted blackmailing of Martin Luther King Jr. is being gingerly examined, with the “investigation” conducted in such a way as not to unduly em- barrass officials of the Kennedy or Johnson Administrations. With great care, the committee has focused on the F.B.I. Yesterday, when* the committee counsel first set forth the result of shuffling through press clips, it seemed as if no Justice De-: partment had existed in 1962; today,” an F.B.I. witness pointed out that it was Robert Kennedy who authorized the wiretap of Dr. King, and that “the President of the United States and the Attorney General specifically discussed their concern of Communist influence with Dr, King.” But the Church committee showed no zest for getting further to the Ken- nedy root of this precedent to Water- gate eavesdropping. If Senator Church were willing to let the chips fall where they may, he would call some knowl- edgeable witnesses into the glare of the camera lights and ask them some questions that have gone unasked for thirteen years. For example, he could call Nicholas Katzenbach, Attorney General Ken- nedy’s deputy and successor, and ask what he knows of the Kennedy de- cision to wiretap Dr. King. Who at Justice concurred in the recommenda- tion? How does the F.B.I. know the President was consulted or informed? + After Mr. Katzenbach assumed of- ' fice, and the wiretapping continued, . he was told by angry newsmen that * the F.B.I. was leaking scurrilous in- formation about Dr. King. Why did he wait for four months, and for a thou- sand telephonic interceptions, to dis~ continue the officially approved tap? Of course, this sort of testimony would erode Senator Church's political base. That is why we do not see for- mer Assistant F.B.I. director Cartha (Deke) Deloach, Lyndon Johnson's personal contact with the F.B.I. in the witness chair. What did President Johnson know about the character- assassination plot and when did he know it? What conversations took place hetween Mr. Deloach and Presi- dent Johnson on the tapping of Dr. King, or aloul the use of the F.B.1. in any other intrusions into the lives of bea far See! Sh oota: 32989479 “The committee is not asking em embar- rassing questions even when answers are readily available. A. couple of ° weeks ago, at an open hearing, an F.B.I, man inadvertently staried to blurt out an episode about newsmen who were weritapping in 1962 wit the apparent knowledge of Attorney General Kennedy. The too-willing wit! ness was promptly shooshed into Sig lence, and told that such informatio would be developed only in executive session. Nobody raised an eyebrow. That pattern ot containment by the- Church committee is vividly shown by the handling of the buggings at the 1964 Republican and Democratic con- ESSAY en ventions which were ordered by Lyn- don Johnson. Such invasions of politi- cal headquarters were worse than the crime committed at Watergate, since they involved the use of the F.B.L, but the Church investigators seem to be determineti not to probe too deeply. If F.B.I. documents say that reports were made to specific Johnson aides, why are those men not given the same opportunity to publicly tell their story so avidly given the next Presi- dent’s men? If Lyndon Johnson com- mitted this impeachable high crime of using the F.B.I, to spy cn political opponents, who can’ be brouglit for-° ward to tell us all about it? But that. would cause embarrass- and Senator * ment to Democrats, Church wants to embarrass profes- sional employees of investigatory agencies only. A new sense of Con- gressional decorum exists, far from the sense of outrage expressed in the Senate Watergate committee’s hear- ing room. When it is revealed that the management of NBC News gave press credentials to L.B.J.’s spies at the 1964 convention, everybody blushes demure-, ly—-and nobody demands to know! which network executive made what! decision under what pressure. I have been haranguing patient’ readers for years about the double standard applied to Democratic and’ Republican political crimes, and had hoped the day would come when the hardball precedents set by the Ken- nedy and Johnson men would be laid before the public in damning detail. Obviously, Democrat Frank Church is not the man to do it. His. jowl- shaking indignation is all too selec- tive; the trail of high-level responsi- bility for the crimes committed against Dr. King and others is evidently going to be allowed to cool. Pity, ‘You'd think that after all the nation has been through in the past few years, our political leaders would have learned that the one thing that brings you down is the act of cover- ing up. ester Page 5 THE NEW YCRK TIMES THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20th,1975 PAGE C-41