Reagan denies giving C.I.A. licence to kill

Press, 7 October 1988, Page 6

Reagan denies giving C.I.A. licence to kill

NZPA-Reuter Washington President Reagan has denied a report which said he had authorised anti-terrorism efforts that gave the Central Intelligence Agency “licence to kill,” but the newspaper that published the report said it was standing by its story. Mr Reagan reminded reporters that he forbade assassinations by American agents back in 1981, and said that order still stood.

The “Washington Post” yesterday said Mr Reagan signed secret orders in 1984 and 1985 authorising aggressive covert activi-

ties against terrorists and stating that any actions taken would be deemed lawful if done in “good faith”. Unidentified sources quoted in the story said the language provoked disputes within the Government because it was widely considered “a licence to kill” that circumvented Mr Reagan’s ban on direct or indirect involvement in assassinations by United States intelligence agents. When asked about the report at a picture-taking session on Wednesday afternoon, Mr Reagan said:

“I saw that and I was quite upset about it ... No, back in 1981 I issued a directive that the United States would not permit assassinating anyone in any of the things that we were doing and that continues to this day.” A spokesman for Benjamin Bradlee, executive editor of the “Washington Post” said: “We stand by the story and we have no further comment.” A White House spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, had earlier heaped scorn on the “Post” report, calling it an “extraordinary cheap shot”. “This is an old story

being rehashed again, interestingly timed, and has no foundation,” Mr Fitzwater told reporters. He said reporter Bob Woodward, who coauthored the “Washington Post” report, had disclosed the secret antiterrorism order at issue in a 1987 book on the C.I.A. called “Veil” and had written that it was not intended to ' authorise assassinations. Mr Fitzwater said, “I think this (report) is an extraordinary cheap shot. It impugns the President in a way that the author himself has denied in previously written stories.”