CyJ

Jared Stern (NY Post) asks your response to article by Christopher Hitchens which will appear in Harper's Magazine week of 1/8. TC

Christopher Hitchens sends e-mail requesting interview. TC

Bill Rogers sends memo re conversation with Christopher Hitchens over weekend. TC

Bill Rogers sends draft of response from Rogers to Christopher Hitchens. File
Christopher Hitchens e-mails copy of his letter to Rogers in which he criticizes

Rogers recent letter. [SENT TO HOTEL EARLIER] TC
Vicki Halliday saw Hitchens' article and reports her "blood is boiling" and hopes you

know "you are adored". TC
Bill Buckley informs he read Hitchens' article and trusts you will "pay it ZERO attention, which is more than it deserves." Informs he is on his way to Switzerland

and sends his love to NK. TC
Peter Rodman sends rough draft of response to Hitchens article. Informs it is not ready for circulation and should be kept confidential. *Sent to RH last night.* Also send outline of the main issues ion the US-European agenda. *Sent to RH this*

Barbara Black sends summary of Eddie Greenspan's summary re selective prosecution. *Sent to RH last night.* Sends her edits to page 169, as you requested. *Sent to RH earlier.* Also sends copy of George Jonas' column in response to the

Hitchens article. *Sent to RH*. TC
Marvin Kalb informs he was invited by *Harper's* magazine to participate in a panel discussion about you and the Hitchens articles. After seeing the piece he blatantly declined. Apologizes that you are going through this and informs he is "on your side

- all the way". [COPY FOLLOWS] TC

Peter Rodman sends copy of article re Hitchens piece, "One Man's War Criminal..."

02/05/01 by John O'Sullivan, *National Review*. [COPY FOLLOWS] TC

Timothy Sullivan, President, enjoyed have you and your family at William & Mary for
Charter Day Weekend. Sends copy of cartoon and articles re Hitchens demands for
an apology from Sullivan for calling him a liar from the *Richmond Times Dispatch*.

Also sends draft of letter to Dan Snyder (Redskins) persuading him to hold the

RAJ/

02/14/01 team's summer training on campus, for you to sign and send. CBN

Chancellor John Silber thanks you for your letter to President Fox. Sends
copy of his letter to the editor of *Harper's* magazine re Hitchens article.

02/16/01 [COPY FOLLOWS] TC

Conrad Black sends two articles re charges discussed in Hitchens article from *The*

02/27/01 *Guardian*. *Faxed to RH earlier*. TC

John Taylor sends copy of his "Letter to the Editor" in response to the Hitchens
article. Also handwrites that the Nixon Library is excited about the release of your

02/28/01 new book. [COPY FOLLOWS] TC

Bill Rogers e-mails copy of transcript, "Christopher Hitchens Discusses the New
Bush Administration and his recent article about Henry Kissinger in Harper's
magazine," from program "Hardball with Chris Matthews". *Will be in trip folder and*

03/01/01 *in Kent pouch* TC

Bill Rogers e-mails memo re Hitchens and the Chilean events. Also informs he met
with the new Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Lafer who is eager to meet with you.

RAJ

03/05/01 Rogers also informs the Cubans, including Castro, are eager for you to visit. /CBN

Jessee Incao

From: CHitch8003@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 10:27 PM
To: jessee.incao@kainy.org
Cc: ben@harpers.org; William_Rogers@aporter.com; eblue@ierinc.com
Subject: From Christopher Hitchens to Henry Kissinger

Dear Mr Kissinger,

I last wrote to you on 15 December 2000, inviting your response to a
series of questions I had prepared for my forthcoming book, which is to be
serialised in Harper's magazine.

I understand that you have many claims upon your time, but on 3 January I
received telephone messages from William Rogers of your staff and also from
Teresa in your New York office. Mr Rogers expressed a strong and indeed
specific interest in knowing what my questions might be.

Please do not think of me as immodest, but your letter of 5 November
last to the New York Times Book Review, in which you challenged my account of
the Nixon presidency as "tendentious", has emboldened me - together with the
responses cited above - to think that my efforts are not entirely beneath
your notice.

Yet - and here I approach a delicate area - you have still not
actually favored me with a reply of your own.

May I therefore be the one to break the ice? If this is a question of
money, I feel confident in saying that nothing pecuniary need come between
us, or impede our potential dialogue. I am not myself a wealthy man, and my
colleagues at Harper's have no Maecenas at their command, either. However, we
stand ready to consider any reasonable proposal for emolument from your side.

For what is vulgarly known as a "ballpark" fee, might I propose the
commensurate remuneration of an average ABC "Nightline" appearance? Mr Koppel
would not of course be the questioner, which would mean that we were
exploring "new ground", but you would not have to stay up to an unsocial hour
and we would of course meet your convenience as to place. If we ran over
time, that would naturally be taken into account on our side. (I could of
course wait for Mr Koppel to ask you these questions himself, but I fear that
time presses.)

Please be assured of our sincere intention to put these questions, and to
pay any price to have them answered.

yours,
Christopher Hitchens

March 9, 2000

Ithaca, NY
Stephanie Junger-Moat

On or about December 14th, 2000 while working at Kissinger Associates in New York I answered a call from a gentleman identifying himself as Christopher Hitchens. He indicted his desire to have Dr. Kissinger comment on an article he was currently working on and on a "tendentious" article Kissinger had written with Brent Scrowcroft in the New York Times Book review in November.

I had been instructed on the ways to handle different calls. When answering a call from a person with whom the office did not have regular direct contact and who requests a response from Dr. Kissinger, as was the case, my instructions were to direct the party to send their questions or requests in writing either by mail, fax or e-mail. I suggested to Mr. Hitchens that this be the best course of action and supplied him with the office e-mail.

Although I have handled numerous calls at KAI, I particularly remember Mr. Hitchens' call on that occasion. Whereas most people approach the office in a courteous and respectful fashion, during our brief exchange, I distinctly remember Mr. Hitchens' tone as pedantic and condescending. The request struck me as unusual; particularly because of the way Mr. Hitchens seemed to flaunt his obvious disdain for Dr. Kissinger. At one point, I felt that Mr. Hitchens' style was such that it was difficult to determine whether or not his request was serious.

When the conversation concluded I passed on the message to Jessee Incao. She informed me that he responded by e-mail on the following day.

Jessee Incao

From: CHitch8003@aol.com
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 2:30 PM
To: jessee.incao@kainy.org
Subject: Interview Request

Dear Ms Incao,

I have already left a verbal message with your colleague, Stephanie,
requesting the favor of a personal and on-the-record interview with Mr
Kissinger. As I stated to her, I am calling in reference to "matters arising"
from his letter to the New York Times Book Review of 5 November, in which he
refers to my criticism of the Nixon/Kissinger administrations as
"tendentious".

Harper's magazine proposes to serialise my book on this period, in which
I extend my criticism into the period of the Ford administration and
elaborate it from the discussion of Indochina to a wider consideration of
policy in Bangladesh, Chile, Cyprus and East Timor, as well as to the
individual case of Elias P. Demetracopoulos, whose name will be familiar to
your employer.

In order to avoid any suggestion of tendentiousness, I should naturally
wish to have Mr Kissinger's reaction to my questions in advance of
publication. I can either present myself in person at any time convenient, or
forward my questions by this electronic means, or conduct a telephone
interview if we can both agree on its being tape-recorded.

I may be contacted on this e-mail, or telephoned at any time on 202 387
4842, or sent a fax at 202 986 9702.

yours,
Christopher Hitchens

To: Dr. Kissinger
From: Jessee

December 20, 2000

## Interview/Media Requests

### Christopher Hitchens [Rec'd 12/20]

Christopher Hitchens would like to discuss the "matters arising from your letter to the *New York Times* Book Review of Nov. 5", in which you referred to his criticism of the Nixon/Kissinger administration as "tendentious".

Hitchens has been propositioned by *Harper's* magazine to serialize his book into the period of the Ford Administration and elaborate from the discussion of Indochina to a wider consideration of policy in Bangladesh, Chile, Cyprus and East Timor, and the case of Elias Demetracopoulos.

Would like "to avoid any suggestion of tendentiousness" by speaking to you telephone or in person.

Regret _______________

Put on phone list _______________

Agree in principle to meet _______________

### Manhattan Newspaper Group [Rec'd 12/20]

Request for a brief telephone conversation with you for the newspapers, *Our Town*, and *The West Side Spirit*. They are compiling an issue featuring predictions for 2001.

Would like to have 2-3 minutes to discuss your predictions about politics, especially the electoral college and what Senator-elect Hillary Rodham Clinton will achieve.

DEADLINE: Tomorrow 12PM

Not interested _______________

Prefer _______________

Jessee Incao

From: CHitch8003@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 10:57 PM
To: Kalyn_Bruin@aporter.com
Cc: William_Rogers@aporter.com; ben@harpers.org; EdwinBlue@aol.com; jessee.incao@kainy.org
Subject: Hitchens to Rogers

Dear Mr Rogers,

I must say I am impressed, if also a little concerned, by what I might
call your "tone". In your capacity as one of Mr Kissinger's underlings for
South America, as one of the beneficiaries of his consulting firm and as a
partner at Arnold and Porter, you might have been expected to develop a more
phlegmatic (or shall we say thick-skinned?) manner by now. It's especially
amusing that you should find any discussion of mere money to be "vulgar"

We were only doing our best to catch your attention and - do admit it -
we seem in that respect to have succeeded. Your proprietor trades in a "mix"
of cash and reputation and does quite well thereby. We were not, of course,
proposing to pay him in any way as a "source". Excuse us please, but we have
"sources" of our own, none of them recompensed I might add, and we have them
in plenty. We asked only for the chance to check our sources against your
often verbose but sometimes reticent boss, and we had noticed that money
often decided him as between the speech that is silver and the silence that
is golden. We gave you ample time before resorting to this second option. And
now - oh dear - we seem to have offended you.

I take it that you are the same William Rogers who appears as the silent
participant in the minutes of a meeting between Mr Kissinger and General
Pinochet, held in Santiago de Chile during the OAS summit gathering on 8 June
1976. This being the case, you have managed to contain yourself while
listening to praise for a discredited dictator, for the sanguinary coup by
which he broke his oath and brought himself to power, and to advice to this
same gentleman on how to resist questions from the United States Congress. At
that time, furthermore, with all the details of "Operation Condor" known to
you, and with menacing remarks made by Pinochet about a Chilean dissident
living in Washington DC - and later foully murdered - you continued to remain
in the room and to hold your tongue. I am most decidedly interested to
discover what it takes, at long last, to brush your nerve of outrage and
indignation. I also believe I can promise you an enlivening session with the
forthcoming issues of Harper's magazine. I shall arrange to have these
forwarded to you at my own expense, as an earnest of my continuing regard for
your delicacy in these matters. (If you choose, I will also pay to have a
qualified person visit your office or home and read them to you.)

On my side at least, this correspondence is not confidential and may be
inspected by any other party. May I have the same assurance from you? Before
you give it, I ought to say that my attention was drawn to an ill-written
item in the New York Post of Sunday 7 January, in which someone from your
office employed various irrelevant epithets about my Harper's essays but -
perhaps feeling rhetorically depleted - also described our findings as
"untrue". If this was seriously meant it was defamatory and I should very
much like to see your justification for the claim - or a disavowal of it -
before I take any further action.

yours

Christopher Hitchens

[y]

3/9/01

TO: Rebecca
Jessee

FROM: Theresa

RE: Andrew Hearn

Andrew Hearn, with whom HAK met this morning at Claridge's, called. He said he and HAK agreed to a follow-up meeting in May, either in NY or London. Nancy apparently would like to attend the second meeting as well. Hearn said he would be willing to do it in either place but, obviously, the legal fees would be cheaper if they were to do it in London. Hearn said he would be bringing a barrister along as well.

Hearn would like to have a number of possible options that would work, so that he can consult his diary and that of the barrister who will be accompanying him. I said that you would be getting back to him regarding dates.

FYI: Hearn also asked for a copy of all of the correspondence our office has had with Christopher Hitchens (which I am pulling together), as well as documentation of any telephone calls any of the staff had with him, specifically those taking place on or about December 20, 2000. Of course, I checked with HAK, who said it was okay to furnish Hearn with this information.

Hearn's contact information is as follows:

Mr. Andrew Hearn
Dechert
2 Serjeants Inn
London EC4Y 1LT
England

Office telephone (direct): 44-207/775-7466
Office fax: 44-207/353-3683
E-mail (least secure): Andrew.Hearn@DechertEU.com