December 12, 1969

MEMORANDUM FOR TOD HULLIN

FROM: Tony Lake

SUBJECT: Tax Exemption for the University Centers for Rational Alternatives, Inc. (Prof. Sidney Hook)

REF: Mr. Kissinger's December 9 Memo to Mr. Ehrlichman on the above subject

Attached is a further communication from Professor Hook, which cites the IRS case number on his organization's application for a tax exemption. I thought this might be helpful to you in connection with our request for any assistance you can provide.

Attachment

December 9, 1969

HAK:

You received a letter from Sidney Hook of
University Centers for Rational Alternatives,
Inc., seeking whatever help you could give
on that organization's tax exemption request
submitted to Washington on August 22.

At Tab A is an interim response to Sidney
Hook.

At Tab B is a memorandum to John Ehrlichman
for your signature asking for any assistance
or information which could be furnished to
Sidney Hook.

T.L.

MEMORANDUM

THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON

DEC 9 1969

MEMORANDUM FOR JOHN EHRLICHMAN

FROM: Henry A. Kissinger

Professor Sidney Hook has sent me the attached letter (Tab A) asking for assistance in getting a tax exemption for University Centers for Rational Alternatives, Inc. I really have no competence in judging the technicalities involved, but his general argument seems to me to make sense. The Board of Directors and Sponsors seem highly reputable.

I would appreciate any help your people could give to Hook. I have left open in my response to him (Tab B) the question of who would be in touch with him further. I would be glad to pass along any information you wish.

Attachments

ROCKFORD
COLLEGE

HORIZONS

Vol. 6, No. 2

Rockford, Illinois

May, 1970

# Common Sense and Academic Freedom

## Address Delivered at the One Hundred Sixteenth
Rockford College Commencement

May 17, 1970

by Dr. Sidney Hook

I wish to thank the members of the Graduating Class of Rockford College for extending an invitation to me through Dean Wattles to address them on this memorable occasion. It is a memorable occasion for various reasons, not only for you but also for the larger community, academic and non-academic, of which you are a part. It is especially memorable in that it is among the first commencements in this area of the nation, if not the first, to be held since the tragic events at Kent State College and Jackson State College, catastrophic occurrences for which we must all grieve and within our power alone.

As we live through these anguished days, it is difficult to think about anything except the tragedies, heart-breaking blunders and "might-have-beens" of the past. But if these tragedies and blunders are not to recur, we must turn our thoughts to the future. If we think about the future as citizens concerned with and about education, the overriding priority in the order of our concern, must go to the future of our colleges and universities. For on their development, the direction in which they move, much in our culture, in our very way of life — in your own way of life — depends. For the fate of our institutions of higher learning both reflects and helps redetermine the society in which they are found.

American colleges and universities today face the gravest crisis in their history — a crisis in their governance, their curriculum, their structure, their philosophy of education — to the extent that they have one — and, above all, in their freedom to inquire and to teach. From one end of the country to another, they are being subjected to unprecedented attacks from within their own academic communities that may close them down intermittently as they become transformed into centers of political action.

## Academic Freedom Eclipsed

There is a serious danger that unless this trend is resisted and reversed, colleges and universities will no longer be dedicated to the primary educational task of the discovery, publication and teaching of the truth but to the furtherance of ideological goals imposed by political activists among the faculties with the aid of student forces they have inspired and helped organize. The unshock may well be the

development of free institutions of higher education in the United States has been a matter of slow but sure growth from the early days when they were the instruments of religious denominations and parochial political groups. Until yesterday, so to speak, the struggle for their liberation from these extraneous controls might have been considered won. One might have said with confidence that the faculties of our colleges and universities have been free to inquire into and teach the truth as they saw it in their respective fields of competence in complete independence. They were not compelled to subscribe to any ecclesiastical, economic or political dogmas to win or retain their posts. Occasionally, to be sure, there were episodic violations of these principles of academic freedom. But their very infrequency and the public outcry these violations evoked, testified to the strength of the tradition of freedom.

All this is under attack today; but no longer by the traditional enemies of academic freedom. During the last few years academic freedom has been threatened often openly and directly by political fanatics among students, and sometimes, with greater subtlety, by their faculty allies. On some campuses student extremists have set themselves up as arbiters of what may be taught in certain controversial fields. They have with relative impunity disrupted the classes of professors of whom they disapprove, and even threatened them with bodily harm. In some places they have reinforced their demands for unilateral concessions by faculties and administrations with fire-bombs and widespread vandalism. In other places they have refused to permit student bodies to choose freely among curricular options offered them with respect to subjects connected with national defense, or to abide by the majority decision once it was expressed. They have invaded the laboratories of scientists whose projects they have declared to be not in the public interest as they have conceived it, destroyed apparatus, ransacked and scattered files. And since the latest turn in foreign affairs, some of these elements have seized the opportunities and facilities, provided by institutions for all students, to further their own political interests and programs. The result has been chronic and serious interference with normal educational

Townsend Hoopes

December 6, 1968

Mr. Robert Bowie
Director
Center for International Affairs
Harvard University
6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Dear Bob:

At Adam Yarmolinsky's suggestion, and in your absence, I had a chat on December 2 with Benjamin Brown. My purpose was to discuss the prospect of an arrangement under which I might become associated with Harvard for a period of six to eight months, beginning in February or March, primarily for the purpose of reflection and writing, but secondarily to make available my particular experience of the past four years to students, fellows and faculty-- through seminars and other familiar devices. I have assumed that such a reciprocal arrangement would be conducted within the loose confederation of the Institute, the Kennedy School, and your own Center.

I told Mr. Brown that I had in mind a series of articles rather than a book. These are outlined in the attachment, and would draw directly on my firsthand experience with the problems over the past four years. I believe they could be published in magazines ranging from the Saturday Evening Post to Harper's, Atlantic and Foreign Affairs. An underlying assumption of course is that they would be of professional interest and value to the sponsoring institution. Also attached is a brief biographical resume on which I have cited several previously published articles.

Townsend Hoopes

- 2 -

I told Mr. Brown that, while I would not be prepared to reside in Cambridge, owing to the problems of rather young children in school here, I would be able to spend three days each week in Cambridge, and more time than that during periods of particular importance. Mr. Brown said that, while the proposal was somewhat outside the framework of your usual Fellowship arrangement, he thought it worth pursuing, and suggested that I write this letter to you. I told him I would need a grant of about $8000 for the proposed project.

I should mention in addition a brief talk the same day with Professor A. J. Meyer. We had a good exchange and he expressed serious interest in providing some portion of the grant money on the understanding that one or more of the articles would relate to the Middle East.

As you will no doubt sense, my purpose is to arrange an interval of serious reflection after an intensive four-year tour in Government and before taking a definitive next step. I shall hope that we can find mutual interest in this proposal.

With warm regards,

Enclosures

Copy for: Dr. Henry A. Kissinger

PROPOSED ARTICLES - TOWNSEND HOOPES

I. The Decisive Shift in Our Vietnam Policy Following
   The Tet Offensive

I happen to believe that a small group of higher civilian officials in the Pentagon were decisive in achieving the fundamental shift in scale and direction of the US war effort last March, in the reappraisal that took place after the Tet offensive. I have in mind a "What happened" article which would explain how the combination of Secretary McNamara's departure and the severity of the enemy attacks flung open to serious challenge a set of assumptions that had been tightly held within a narrow circle of presidential advisers. The story would relate the successful effort by Pentagon civilians to convince the incoming Secretary that continued escalation would lead only to disaster; it would deal also, although at some greater remove, with the new Secretary's subsequent, masterful efforts to turn the President around.

II. The Need to Re-think the US Response to Insurgencies
   in Underdeveloped Countries

We face a major intellectual task in this area. It is to re-think the whole equation of liberation wars and our response to them. Vietnam has revealed the practical limits for the US of fighting a "limited war." It has called into question the theory of controlled escalation. No doubt, we can initiate a response at a low level and go up to a certain point of intensity without incurring economic or political strain. But if stalemate persists at a high level, our capacity to sustain the effort begins to depend decisively on a popularly supported finding that the national interest is vitally engaged. We have discovered that the original theory of counterinsurgent response did not take into adequate account this factor of US political interest (it was merely assumed), or the political viability of the government we are purporting to defend, or the cost of sustaining the counter-effort.

It is now evident, seven years after the famous Khrushchev speech of 1961, that US mistakes have included an overreaction to the threat of liberation wars. For it is clearer now that the Khrushchev pronouncement was an attempt to adjust Soviet policy to the hard fact of Western nuclear deterrence (i.e., the newly discovered dangers for the Soviet homeland implicit in a nuclear exchange), while at the same time keeping open some channel for the militant expansion of Soviet influence. I think we failed to see that Khrushchev's emphasis on "wars of liberation" was less a threat (although it was certainly a threat) and more a rationalization for Soviet acceptance of the fact that the main channels of advance by military means had already been blocked. Our perception failed because we were still looking out at the world through our bipolar Cold War glasses. Our response was to organize most of the foreign-military establishment under the banner of counterinsurgency.

One aspect of the task posed by our self-reinforcing miscalculations regarding Vietnam is to sort out the truths and myths of the generational gap in the US Government (and outside intellectual circles) with respect to assessment of the world Communist movement, the likelihood of Chinese aggression, the domino theory, etc. Another task is to determine whether "liberation wars" are a global or regional phenomenon and, if global, whether they are likely to be conducted in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East with the same skill and tenacity demonstrated by North Vietnam and the Viet Cong.

### III. An Assessment of Tactical Bombing

I have in mind an attempt to achieve a balanced analysis of tactical bombing in its various aspects -- strikes against industrial installations; interdiction of ports, railheads and truck routes; and close support of ground forces. The assessment would include a historical comparison not only of the US efforts in Vietnam and Korea, but also of both US efforts with the Israeli

2

performance against the Arabs in June 1967. The
impact on tactical bombing developments caused by
the official preoccupation with strategic air forces
and strategic bombing theory during the 1950's would
be explored.

IV. A Reflective Look at Organizational Arrangements in
the Defense Department

Secretary McNamara was unique in his mastery of detail. It was his aggressive coordination of powerful staff elements within an enlarged Office of the Secretary (OSD) that generated and sustained a dynamic intellectual and analytical effort over seven years. The chief result was an unprecedented degree of centralized civilian control at the Pentagon.

It is doubtful whether successors, however able,
will possess McNamara's particular talents. In the
nature of things they will delegate more, and greater
delegation will risk loss of centralized control, but
not only of the Military Departments. For major
philosophical and doctrinal disputes exist within and
between the major OSD offices, and greater delegation
will encourage the centrifugal tendencies. From the
standpoint of a Military Department, a principal
difficulty in dealing with OSD today arises from the
babel of voices and viewpoints in Systems Analysis,
DDR&E, and the Comptroller's shop. Each has, on a
definable range of basic issues, a distinctive view
of strategy and military requirements, and each presses
its view without scrupulous regard for its prescribed
jurisdictional boundaries. Any Secretary of Defense
lacking McNamara's mastery of technical issues will
have difficulty in unifying or synthesizing these
differences in a consistent pattern of strategic
decisions. Accordingly, the period ahead may well re-
quire important changes in organizational and procedural
arrangements if a serious breakdown of coherence is to
be avoided.

One organizational change might be to move toward a concept of collective management already familiar to major corporations. This could take the form of an executive committee comprising the SecDef, the Deputy SecDef, and the three Service Secretaries. A principal purpose would be to draw the Service Secretaries into consideration of and responsibility for the broadest policy and technical issues, in contrast to the McNamara practice of dealing bilaterally with each on matters of concern primarily to one Service. An expanded role of that kind for Service Secretaries would tend to provide a more effective counterweight to the increasingly large and powerful OSD offices.

Another matter requiring attention is the gradual erosion of the McNamara concept of separate force structure and budgetary considerations. In the early 60's, defense spending was low enough in relation to GNP to make feasible the idea that military requirements could be developed without direct reference to budgetary implications. Force structure requests were analyzed to determine "cost-effectiveness" and this was followed by a separate budgetary decision "to buy what was really needed."

The combination of spiraling costs for the development and procurement of new weapons systems, the heavy financial burden represented by the Vietnam War, and the strong pressures for a shift to larger domestic welfare programs has placed the McNamara concept in grave jeopardy. Moreover, the integrity of the concept is currently threatened (in the development of President Johnson's final budget) by a tendency on the part of OSD offices to develop fine-spun, strategic justifications for program reductions which are plainly forced by purely budgetary considerations.

## V. The Middle East

For three of the past four years, from the vantage point of ISA, I was responsible for Defense Department

4

policy interests in the Middle East. This involved
me in wide and intensive relations with leaders of the
Arab world and Israel, including negotiations for the
sale of military equipment with King Hussein, the
Israeli Defense Minister, and the Shah of Iran. I was
closely involved, as a member of the State-Defense
Steering Group, in following the tensions of the spring
of 1967 that culminated in the third Arab-Israeli War,
and in dealing with the aftermath.

The pervasive Arab-Israeli bitterness, the refusal
or inability of both sides to reach a political accom-
modation, the ambiguity of Soviet objectives and com-
mitments in arming and backing the UAR and Syria, the
basic Arab irrationality, the gradual emergence of the
US as the principal arms supplier of Israel, the Israeli
resistance to signing the NPT amid signs that missile
development is being pressed -- all these developments
combine to make the Middle East the area of greatest
international danger in the period immediately before
us -- in part because it would involve the distinct
possibility of a US-Soviet confrontation.

The problem needs more inspired intellectual
attention than it is getting in official Washington.
The article I have in mind would trace events since
the war of June 1967, and would attempt to illuminate
certain key aspects of the immensely tortured and com-
plicated set of problems facing the US in the Middle
East. I would hope to suggest courses of action that
might contain or reduce the dangers.

Townsend Hoopes

December 6, 1968

October 2, 1967

TOWNSEND HOOPES

Present Under Secretary of the Air Force

1966-67 Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Affairs)

1965-66 Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense/ISA (Near East-South Asia)

1958-64 Partner: Cresap, McCormick and Paget

1955-57 Associate: J. H. Whitney and Company

1953-55 Assistant to the President, Spencer Chemical Company

1948-53 Assistant to the Secretary of Defense

1947-48 Assistant to the Chairman: Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

1946 Editorial Writer, *Buffalo Evening News*

1943-46 United States Marine Corps

Born: April 28, 1922

Education:

Phillips Academy, Andover, 1940

Yale University, 1944

National War College, 1951

Other:

Member, Council on Foreign Relations

Consultant to the White House on organization of the National Security Council, 1954

Consultant to the State and Defense Departments on overseas military bases, 1957

Secretary of the Military Panel, Rockefeller Brothers Fund Special Studies Project, 1957-58

Consultant to the President's Committee on United States Information Activities Abroad, 1960

Publications: Various articles in *Foreign Affairs* and *The Yale Review*, 1954-1960, in *Business Horizons* and other publications, 1962-1964

秋 1958
Fall 1956
Winter 1954
Spring 1960
- winter 1962
- winter 1963

EDWARD J. HART, Principal

Tel. (914) 238-3911 Ext. 250

HORACE GREELEY HIGH SCHOOL

70 Roaring Brook Road • Chappaqua, New York 10514

January 3, 1973

Mr. Henry Kissinger
2527 Waterside Dr., N.W.
Washington, D. C. 20008

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

A big favor, please!

Will you speak briefly by telephone to a few students here at Horace Greeley High School?

So far this year students in classrooms here have conversed with such respected people in their fields as Dr. Jesse Steinfeld (U.S. Surgeon General), B. F. Skinner, Rod Serling and Gordon Parks.

Reaction to this program has been so enthusiastic that we are attempting to compile a list of "experts" willing at their convenience to answer by phone questions organized by students in our various courses. We hope this way to encourage even greater use of this resource by our student body and faculty.

It works this way: -- at a mutually convenient time determined in advance, you will receive a call from a teacher and students in one of our classrooms. Special equipment will amplify your voice in the room. Students will speak into extension microphones. Most calls last between twenty and thirty minutes.

We hope it will be convenient for you to participate in what we feel is a most worthwhile educational program.

Yes, I will speak by telephone once this year to students at Horace Greeley High School.

Telephone number

I will supply my telephone number when a call has been arranged.

Sorry, I cannot participate.

Signed:

INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AND TRAINING

OUR REF.

1650-3, Kamiide, Fujinomiya-shi
Shizuoka-ken, Japan

Cable : FJIIST
Phone : (054401-211)

September 30, 1971

Dr. Henry Kissinger
Executive Office of the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.

My dear Dr. Kissinger:

I am writing to express my thanks to you and to your staff for the very kind arrangements you made for our trainees to be briefed on the occasion of their visit to Washington on September 3rd.

The men were very enthusiastic about the meeting, and we are especially grateful to Messrs. Guthrie, Froebe, and Hormatz for the time they took from a busy morning to meet them. I do not need to dwell on the present delicate relationship between the United States and Japan, but I do want to say that informal exchanges such as took place at the meeting can go far toward easing tensions and building deeper understanding.

I trust that in future years when we send our young men abroad for summer training we shall again have an opportunity to meet you and your staff.

With many thanks and all best wishes,

SH:AH

Horner, May 6 (Today)

(Last name and pending date)

KISSINGER, HENRY A. / 11*

KISSINGER, HENRY A. / 11*

Name: Jack Horner, Washington Star and George Sherman

Request: Would like to see HAK today sometime to discuss process of decision-making on the Cambodian thing - how the decision was made.

I told him someone would call him back.

543-5000, ext 254 (White House press number for Wash Star)

MS

DRY

XXXXXXXXXX Recommendation:

HAK's Answer: Yes 5/19

Date and Time:

Party Contacted:

Additional Information: Sherman called again 5/22 to say that HAK (owes) him an interview because once Sherman was left sitting for hours & HAK indicated he would see him again whenever Sherman wanted. We now want to take up that option.

Resolution: 11/16 OBE (1)

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETIES
FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DES ASSOCIATIONS DE LA SCLEROSE EN PLAQUES
INTERNATIONALE VEREINIGUNG DER MULTIPILEN SKLEROSE GESELLSCHAFTEN

Interim Address: 257 Park Avenue South, New York, N.Y. 10010, U.S.A. • (212) 674-4100

DEC 30 1968

[ic]

John E. Horner
Secretary General

Seilergasse 15,
A-1010 Vienna, Austria.

December 22, 1968.

Dear Professor Kissinger:

I have no doubt but that you will be receiving reams of unsolicited advice on the future conduct of our foreign concerns. My own interest in the subject are fairly practical, I think, being based upon thirty years of experience as a career Foreign Service Officer. I served in many areas, and was a specialist in both Soviet and Middle Eastern affairs. You may possibly remember me as Counselor of Embassy in Athens; we together visited one evening the son et lumière at the Parthenon.

There are, to my mind, three main things wrong with the Department of
Department which reflect on the conduct of our foreign relations.

1. The Department is now too large and too cumbersome. A reduction in numbers alone - provided it can be carried out on a qualitative basis - would be conducive to greater efficiency. How can this be accomplished? Preferably by knowledgeable "insiders". Efficiency experts, businessmen, and the like simply do not have the background on the way in which this somewhat peculiar department operates. A reduction in manpower, carried out overseas as well, could reduce the lengthy "committee" process which now tends to substitute for decision-making.

2. Administration of the Department is chaotic. For a long time, there has been no rapport between the "seventh floor" and the one-feather Indians. "Administration" is carried on by "administrators", these being persons with little or no knowledge of foreign affairs as such. Much of this stems from a conspicuous lack of interest in such metters as personnel on the part of the top leadership. During the regime of Mr. Rusk, who was always complaining of "layering", the situation worsened, and more layers were created. Interest in people, and listening to the ideas of subordinates (especially area specialists), seems to me crucial if an organization is going to function properly.

3. Over the past decade or so, Foreign Service Officers have tended to become more and more conditioned to accept orders handed down by superiors whose knowledge of foreign affairs has been minimal; doing so unorthically and even cynically. Many, constitutionally incapable of operating in this fashion, have left the Foreign Service. Desparately few Foreign Service Officers today are innovators. A willingness to dispute decisions arrived at at a higher level is deplorably lacking. There are, of course, various historical reasons for this. Unless some backbone is instilled into the professional Foreign Service - which once was excellent, and still has great potential - we'll continue to make mistakes which are not all necessary. Reasonable and well-based dissent, within certain defined limits, seems to me to be an essential part of the process of making and implementing foreign policy.

William C. Breed, Jr., (U.S.A.), Honorary Chairman • Harold W. Comfort, (U.S.A.), President • Richard Cave, K.S.C., (U.K.), Vice President
A. M. Wilson, (Australia), Vice President • Nathan Mobley, (U.S.A.), Vice President • Baron Pierre de Bonvoisin, (Belgium), Vice President
John M. Lovejoy, (U.S.A.), Treasurer
Sylvia Lawry, (U.S.A.), Secretary

TWENTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL

Back Mountain Memorial Library Auction

69 MAIN STREET
DALLAS, PENNSYLVANIA 18612

Chairman:
WILLIAM J. UMPHRED

1973 Dates
JULY 6, 7, 8

May 22, 1973

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

I am sure you are "deluged" with request letters but believe me, this one is different -- so PLEASE give it your consideration because when you read it, I know you will agree that our need is great.

You are well aware, I know, of the HURRICANE AGNES DISASTER that hit Wyoming Valley and the Wilkes-Barre area last summer. Among other things, the libraries in the entire area were 'wiped out.' Fortunately, we reside in what is known as the 'Back Mountain' area -- practically a suburb of Wilkes-Barre and we were not affected by the flood waters but our people were able to offer their homes (and all facilities) to the thousands of flood evacuees. And that is where our library comes in -- and this request. The Back Mountain Library was in a position to offer its volumes to the colleges, schools, hospitals, etc. in the Wyoming Valley in addition to supplying books and all reading materials to the evacuees who were sheltered in the evacuation centers. We are a small library and did an outstanding service. We don't mean to boast but we are proud that we were able to help. And we were able to do this primarily because of our annual LIBRARY AUCTION that provides the necessary funds for the maintenance of our library.

And this is why I am writing to you... At the Auction this year (in the early part of July) we plan to auction "Celebrity Items." Will you donate something? I am certain that if we have ANY item from you, we will be able to realize a generous amount for it. Whatever you care to send will be most appreciated but will you PLEASE send something? Your name means a lot to us -- and your gift will be desired by many. Will you help us?

Thank you!!!

GENERAL
FC 6-11/Kissinger, Henry
KISSINGER, HENRY A.

[4]

Dear Dr. Houmanidis:

Thank you for your recent letter and for
your interest in meeting with me while you
are in the United States. I have delayed
writing to you in the hopes that we would be
able to get together.

Unfortunately, the heavy demands of my
official obligations and Presidential travels
away from Washington make it impossible
for me to schedule any additional appoint-
ments during the remainder of your stay here.

I am sorry to miss this opportunity to see
you and hope that your visit here has been
profitable and enjoyable.

Dr. Lazaros Th. Houmanidis
Clinton Visiting International Professor
Wichita State University
College of Business Administration
Department of Administration
Wichita, Kansas 67208

jlp:9/22/71

RECEIVED
SEP 24 1971
CENTRAL

Norman O. Houston

KISSINGER, HENRY

1999 WEST ADAMS BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90018 (213) 731 1131

July 10, 1973

Honorable Henry Kissinger
Special Advisor to the President
on Foreign Affairs
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Doctor Kissinger:

This letter is to express my appreciation to you for including
my wife and me on your invitation list for the dinner honoring
Ambassador and Mrs. Huang Chen at the Bistro Restaurant on
July 6. It was a pleasure to meet you personally and the
other White House dignitaries who were in attendance.

The Ambassador and his wife are both charming personalities
and will do much to cement relations now developing between
the United States of America and the People's Republic of
China.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

mc

RECEIVED

JUL 19 1973

CENTRAL FILES

Address Information For
BAILEY K. HOWARD

During the months of October, November, December, January, February and March:

Home: 13741-1/4 Mulholland Drive
Beverly Hills, California 90210
Telephone - (213) 784-5670

Office: 507 Financial Center Building
14545 Victory Boulevard
Van Nuys, California 91401
Telephone - (213) 785-3338

During the months of April, May, June, July, August and September:

Home: 1550 Lake Shore Drive
Apt. 10G
Chicago, Illinois 60610
Telephone - (312) 943-0485

Office: Sun-Times/Daily News Bldg.
401 N. Wabash Avenue
Room 700
Chicago, Illinois 60611
Telephone - (312) 321-2622

Mobile Telephones - Chicago:
Limousine - (312) 322-3280
Private Car - (312) 322-3270

Please send all mail to me in care of my office address
—California or Illinois—as indicated above.

RECEIVED

NOV 7 971

CENTRAL FILE

HAWAII

closer than
you think . . .
lovelier than
you've dreamed

BUDD HOWARD

425 ENA RD., APT. 1007-A
HONOLULU, HAWAII 96815

October 12, 1973

Mr. Henry Kissinger
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. Kissinger:

I am compiling a Celebrity Cook Book with favorite recipes covering soups, salads, entrees, desserts, and special sandwiches. Would you please send me a favorite recipe and a photo of yourself along with permission to use same in my cook book. I would also appreciate a few words on how you discovered the recipe and whether you personally prepare it.

My payment to you will be a copy of "The Celebrity Cook Book" upon publication.

The White House
Washington

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

1970 APR 15 AM 6 00

ITT 3 15 APRIL 1970

OXFORD 22 14 1536

LT TF WASHINGTONDC4562235 KISSENGER

WASHINGTONDC

AFRAID FLIGHT ONLY ARRIVES WASHINGTON 1645 HOURS 16TH STOP
STAYING WINDSOR PARK HOTEL SHALL RING ON ARRIVAL

³ MICHAEL HOWARD

2

PRINTED BY THE STANDARD REGISTER COMPANY, U. S. A.

FOR

HOWARD

STAYING WINDSOR PARK HOTEL SHAFT RING ON ARRIVAL

AFRAID FLIGHT ONLY ARRIVES WASHINGTON 1642 HOURS 16TH STOP

WASHINGTONDC

LT FL WASHINGTONDC4265522 KISSENGER

OXFORD SS 14 1232

ITL 3 12 APRIL 1970

TO: Michael Howard
All Sould College
Oxford, England

Mr. Kissinger hopes to see you April 16 at 5:00 p.m. I would appreciate a call to confirm the time and date, after your arrival in Washington.

The office phone is 456-2235.

David R. Young
Assistant

RECEIVED
JUL 22 1970

CENTRAL FILES

CENTENNIAL FILES
JULY 1, 1900
RECEIVED

The office phone is 426-5535.

Mr. Kieisinger hopes to see you April 16 at 5:00 p.m. I would appreciate

TO: Michael Howard

Oxford, England
All Soul College

Assistant
David R. Young