In other words, the seven of them were living in the same area in the city of Philadelphia at this period 1962-63. Most important of all, most of the time when I would interview these individuals themselves, a good many of them would invoke the FBI, as a matter of trying to counter me or trying to intimidate me.

Mr. EILBERG. How do you mean invoke?

Mr. ALLEN. When I would ask some questions about their background, they would say, "Look, if you keep this up I am going to report you to the FBI," or "I have sources in the FBI. I am going to report you," to me. I ignored it, discounted it, but I am just saying this was a consistent pattern.

Now this individual, when his extradition was requested, the Philadelphia Daily News of June 20, 1962, that year said as follows:

We are sure Russia will not get very far in its attempt to extradite [the Philadelphia resident] and try him as a “war criminal." He is right in calling this move Red propaganda. Why not extradite instead Khrushchev on charges of mass murder.

I say this because this was the tenor of the times, this is the flavor of the atmosphere at that time, this is part of the historical process which are not easy, they are subtle and complex, which I was talking about at the outset of my remarks.

Then the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin the same date described him as follows:

He is a man who keeps up on the activities of other Lithuanians in this city and the United States.

On the basis of that I went and interviewed this individual and he, too, made dispositions that were similar to the ones that I just indicated in my previous remarks.

I might add parentheticallly that the Philadelphia Daily News, to show you the changes of times from the cold war-McCarthy period, its reporter Frank Dougherty and the work that the Philadelphia Daily News, original creative journalism, is doing in this area is absolutely first-rate. So that I do not in any way impugn the Philadelphia Daily News. I am just using it as a historical

source.

Mr. EILBERG. Let me say I know Frank Dougherty and I have read most of what he has written for the Daily News, and I can only say I agree with you.

Mr. ALLEN. Yes; he is a top reporter.

Now I would like to go to No. 5. This deals again with an accused Nazi war criminal, in this case accused of participation in upwards of-the decimation of upwards of estimated 60,000 people, mostly Jews, specifically charged with 12,000 that he directed, 12,000 murders.

Now I have with me—and he is also the subject of proceedings by a Government agency at the present time. The San Diego Evening Tribune and newsman Bob Dorn

Mr. EILBERG. Can I interrupt here?

Ms. Holtzman pointed out her concern and our concern of agency involvement, governmental agencies.

Mr. ALLEN. Yes; this is third agency. I am not going into the details of the case as such.

Mr. EILBERG. Very well.

Mr. ALLEN. I have copies of three pieces of correspondence dated in chronological order as follows: April 11, 1975, May 5, 1975, July 20, 1976, from the CIA, addressed to this individual. Would you care that I read these letters? They have been published. It is a matter

Mr. EILBERG. We would like to look at them privately if we may. Mr. ALLEN. Pardon.

Mr. EILBERG. We would like to look at them privately if we may. Mr. ALLEN. Let me just summarize then what is in this correspondence.

Mr. EILBERG. All right.

Mr. ALLEN. This is obviously and patently and inarguably an attempt by the CIA to intervene on behalf of this accused Nazi war criminal. It is on the record.

On case No. 6, an Estonian, accused Estonian Nazi war criminal, who also, as I described to you, invoked the powers of the FBI against me. But I raised his name in my own listings because of these allegations, my arbitrary frame of reference is from documents to assertions by the accused Nazi war criminal, himself or herself.

The fascinating aspect of this case deals with a case which has already been tried in court, which I would like to summarize if I may, because it is related, in that the accused individual, I have the documents, is also related with another individual also from Estonia who is the subject of this trial. If I may summarize it, I would like to because it brings out third agency involvement.

Mr. EILBERG. Very well.

Mr. ALLEN. And I am quoting here from the book, "The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence," published in 1974, and the part that was not excised, a part that was not excised.

Mr. EILBERG. Is this classified, Mr. Allen, to your knowledge, the material that you are about to read; Is this classified information? Mr. ALLEN. No. It was published by Alfred Knopf in 1974, so I assume it is not classified.

Mr. EILBERG. All right.

Mr. ALLEN. "CIA has also been quite active," and incidentally, this is instructive because-in the sense that all of this is instructive but this is instructive of how this process works because, as I said, the two individuals I have proven and their relationships with third agencies have been demonstrated by me.

The CIA has also been quite active among Eastern emigres in the United States. In November 1964, [name], an Estonian refugee living in Canada sued for slander another Estonian resident in Maryland—he was the American national commander of the Legion of Estonian Liberation-was alleged to have denounced the other individual as an agent of the KGB. The individual's defense in court, in other words, the subject of the suit for slander, was based not on specifics of the case but on an affidavit submitted by the then CIA Deputy Director

Do you want his name—

Richard Helms, stating that he was a CIA agent and had spoken out against the plaintiff among other Estonian-Americans under direct agency orders.

Now I am going to pause there because this is very important. The previous case in which the three CIA letters, which have been published in the San Diego Evening Tribune, the body of them, so

this is not classified either or, if it is, it is no longer classified as far as the American public is concerned.

The principal role of this previous individual in his own words in the San Diego Evening Tribune's special and copyrighted series of articles by Bob Dorn, excellent series, was to, "provide misinformation among Latvian emigres living in the United States, Western Europe, and elsewhere." So that this reference in the Marchetti and Marks book is instructive on this point, namely, he was under direct orders to speak out against this other individual accused of being a KGB agent among Estonian-Americans.

Furthermore, during the course of the trial Helms of the CIA submitted two more affidavits ordering [name] not to testify in court in order to protect the integrity of the agency's foreign intelligence sources. The Federal judge ruled against the plaintiff, upholding this contention. The ruling is as follows:

It is reasonable that emigre groups from behind the Iron Curtain would be a valuable source of information as to what goes on in their homeland. The court concludes therefore that activities by the CIA to protect its foreign intelligence sources located within the United States are within the powers granted by the Congress to CIA.

That is the ruling of Judge Thompson. Incidentally, that ruling has never been challenged. Thus any foreign intelligence sourcewhich, as far as I am concerned, is legerdemain for invoking national security in the name of anything, and we are as Americans, particularly since the McCarthy period, fully conversant, fully knowledgeable, fully expert in such patent rot, is eligible for CIA investigation, harassment, or whatever. That eligibility extends as a result of this ruling to the privilege of being investigated, suborned, harassed, or whatever else that covert operators might wish to do, including citizens of the United States, including citizens of the United States such as myself, whose family came over here in 1644, to avoid that kind of patent subversion of the civil liberties and the civil rights of the American people.

The next case I am just going to refer to briefly because it involved a faculty member of one of our prestigious universities, Yale University.

As you know, I have written on this subject matter at great length and have been quoted extensively throughout the press. This case involved Yale University. I can tell you that I have also written other articles which have not suffered any libelous complaints. As a matter of fact, I would love to have such a libel case because I would get it into court, in which accused Nazi war criminals and collaborators have found their way into our prestigious institutions of education and learning.

In this case, Yale University, the facts of which are quite public, the one aspect of third agency relationships indicated that in the period 1949, 1950, 1951, this individual was an interpreter and debriefing analyst for the Debriefing Reception Centers of the CIA in West Germany. That material has been published. It has been accepted, there has been no denial of it. As a matter of fact the individual, in trying to defend himself before the faculty committee of inquiry at Yale University, let this slip out. And I have a copy of that university transcript.

Now, No. 9 involves a very involved case. If I may, I would like to refer to a series of nine articles that have been published in the Newhouse chain of newspapers, most specifically its paper The Newark Star Ledger in New Jersey and its top investigative reporter, Herb Jaffe-in my view one of the finest pieces of investigation done by any American journalist in the United States on this issue. The data which I have extrapolated from these series indicate third agency involvement to quite an alarming degree, starting in the midfifties. I will not go into the details but I will simply summarize which agencies are involved and you are welcome to my extrapolations, although again they are copyrighted and I have already given my admonition about that.

The National Security Agency, the FBI, and the CIA, the relationships are quite clear to me, of a paramilitary nature. Let me tell you why it is quite clear.

When you look at the accusations against some of these individuals such as is the case involved in this individual case, for such is the point involved in this individual case; one asks what possible talents or what possible experience in the so-called question of being an expert on the Soviet Union could come into play here? He is charged with doing many things, and among them are terror operations, roundups, interrogations, brutalities, ultimately murder.

What possible use could the United States have for such activities? What possible use could they be in carrying out government in our country? The possible use is clear. It could be used for paramilitary purposes.

And I point out to you the Phoenix operation during the Vietnam war. There is no doubt in my mind between the period 1950-54 through the sixties such utilization did indeed take place. And this particular individual case which we now have on the record in what I think is the largest read newspaper chain in the United States, if I am not mistaken, is there for anybody to study very carefully, simply extrapolate and the resulting conclusion that any logical inference can bring to bear is that it is for paramiltary experience and paramilitary purposes.

Mr. EILBERG. Mr. Allen, when you were interviewed by the GAO, did you give all this information to them?

Mr. ALLEN. Yes; I did.

Mr. EILBERG. Does their report reflect any information you gave them?

Mr. ALLEN. Yes; it does; some of it does not.

I might add this about the GAO report, that I think statistically, as far as I am concerned personally, the report was of value because it has provided me many new leads and many new insights. But qualitatively, as already indicated by the questions of the subcommittee, it leaves a lot to be desired and I am not going to comment qualitatively on the report itself.

I just want to note, however, that I thought the two individuals concerned with the report, namely John Tipton and Joe Mladonick impressed me as honest people, decent people, trying to do a job but under terrible constraints. I think it is another reason why I emphasize the real historical role that you and your subcommittee, your colleagues and your staff are playing on this issue because the

ultimate power, perhaps to ultimately define this question, really resides with you.

I would just like to make that comment.

Mr. EILBERG. Ms. Holtzman.

Ms. HOLTZMAN. Just to clarify the witness's testimony, did you say there was evidence that the Federal Government used case No. 9 in terror operations? I am just trying to understand you.

Mr. ALLEN. No; I said in asking myself the questions, why would this individual serve for a period of 6 months in Fort Meade, Md., of what possible use, which the documents show was a military operation, would he have for such operations? The only conclusion would be the one that I drew, namely, paramilitary, counterinsurgency. And I think I am quite justified in making such inferences. Now I would like to call your attention-is that responsive, Ms. Holtzman-to what I consider the most important of all the individual cases.

Mr. EILBERG. Which number are you on now?

Mr. ALLEN. This is No. 10. Again, my discomfiture at such processes, but most respectfully uttered.

This deals with I think the most important of all the cases. This individual occupied perhaps the highest post in the U.S. Government, with the one exception perhaps, of any accused Nazi war criminal or collaborator.

The area in which he worked as an employee and naturalized citizen and employee, I assume I can mention that area in the agency.

Mr. EILBERG. I didn't hear that statement.

Mr. ALLEN. I assume I can specify the two agencies he worked with, the U.S. Air Force and the National Aeronautical and Space Administration. He was one of their highest officials and he was accused of complicity in experiments conducted on individuals at the Dachau Concentration Camp, 1942.

This individual, on the record, New York Times, Washington Post, I am talking about, 1973, denied any knowledge during his period as a high ranking Luftwaffe official and scientist, so-called scientist, in the Nazi German period, denied even knowledge of those experiments.

He, as a matter of fact, appeared as this subcommittee well knows, on the June 5, 1974 lists of the Immigration and Naturalization Service which released 37 names at that time. He disappeared within 24 to 48 hours because of intervention by high congressional figures. That really whets my appetite when high officials in the Government say no, I want to find out what the answer is.

I subsequently did my own research in the Columbia University International Law Library and in consultation with a former prosecuting attorney for the United States at Nuremburg and in consultation with the Director of that Law Library, an acknowledged expert in this area, and in consultation with the Director of the National Archives of the United States-in terms of gathering the evidence and the data, assessing it and then going ahead and writing a fair commentary on the data.

I found out that he did, in fact, know completely about these experiments. That the Nazi SS, who were carrying out these ex