THE NEW YORK TIMES NATIONAL
SATURDAY OCTOBER 17, 2009
C.I.A. Is Cagey About ’63 Files Tied to Oswald
By SCOTT SHANE
Probably not. But you would not know it from the C.I.A.’s
behavior.
For six years, the agency has fought in federal court to
keep secret hundreds of documents from 1963, when an anti-Castro Cuban group it
paid clashed publicly with the soon-to-be assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.
The C.I.A. says it is only protecting legitimate secrets.
But because of the agency’s history of stonewalling assassination inquiries,
even researchers with no use for conspiracy thinking question its stance.
The files in question, some released under direction of the
court and hundreds more that are still secret, involve the curious career of
George E. Joannides, the case officer who oversaw the dissident Cubans in 1963.
In 1978, the agency made Mr. Joannides the liaison to the House Select
Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) – but never told the committee of this
earlier role.
That concealment has fueled suspicion that Mr. Joannides’s
real assignment was to limit what the House committee could learn about C.I.A.
activities. The agency’s deception was first reported in 2001 by Jefferson
Morley, who has doggedly pursued the files ever since, represented by James H.
Lesar, a Washington lawyer specializing in Freedom of Information Act lawsuits.
“The C.I.A.’s conduct is maddening,” said Mr. Morley, 51, a
former Washington Post reporter and author of a 2008 biography of a former
C.I.A. station chief in Mexico .
After years of meticulous reporting on Mr. Joannides, who
died at age 68 in 1990, he is convinced that there is more to learn.
“I know there’s a story here,” Mr. Morley said. “The
confirmation is that the C.I.A. treats these documents as extremely sensitive.”
Mr. Morley’s quest has gained government supporters,
including John R. Tunheim, a federal judge in Minnesota
who served in 1994 and 1995 as chairman of the Assassination Records Review
Board (ARRB), created by Congress to unearth documents related to the case.
“I think we were probably misled by the agency,” Judge
Tunheun said, referring to the Joannides records. “This material should be
released.”
Gerald Posner, the author of an anti-conspiracy account of
the Kennedy assassination, “Case Closed” (Random House, 1993), said the
C.I.A.’s withholding such aged documents was “a perfect example of why nobody
trusts the agency.”
“It feeds the conspiracy theorists who say, ‘You’re hiding
something,’” Mr. Posner said.
After losing an appeals court decision in Mr. Morley’s
lawsuit, the CIA released material last year confirming Mr. Joannides’s deep
involvement with the anti-Castro Cubans who confronted Oswald. But the agency
is withholding 295 specific documents from the 1960s and 70s, while refusing to
confirm or deny the existence of many others, saying their release would cause
“extremely grave damage” to the national security.
“the methods of defeating or deterrining covert action in
the 1960s and 1970s can still be instructive to the United
States ’ current enemies,” a C.I.A. official
wrote in a court filing.
An agency spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, said the C.I.A. had opened
to Judge Tunheim’s board all files relevant to the assassination and denied
that it was trying to avoid embarrassment. “The record doesn’t support that,
any more than it supports conspiracy theories, offensive on their face, that
the C.I.A. had a hand in President Kennedy’s death,” Mr. Gimigliano said.
C.I.A. secrecy has been hotly debated this year, with agency
officials protesting the Obama administration’s decision to release legal
opinions describing brutal interrogation methods. The House speaker Nancy
Pelosi, came under attack from Republicans after she accused the C.I.A. of
misleading Congress about waterboarding, adding, “They mislead us all the
time.”
On the Kennedy assassination, the deceptions began in 1964
with the Warren Commission. The C.I.A. had its schemes to kill Fidel Castro and
its ties to the anti-Castro Directorio Revolutionario Estudantii, or Cuban
Student Directorate, which received $50,000 a month in C.I.A. support during
1963.
In August 1963 Oswald visited a New
Orleans shop owned by a directorate official, feigning
sympathy with the group’s goal of ousting Mr. Castro. A few days later,
directorate members found Oswald handing out pro-Castro pamphlets and got into
a brawl with him. Later that month, he debated the anti-Castro Cubans on a
local radio station.
In the years since Oswald was named as the assassin,
speculation about who might have been behind him has never ended, with various
theories focusing on Mr. Castro, te mob, rogue government agents or myriad
combinations of the above. Mr. Morley, one of many writers to become entranced
by the story, insists he has no theory and is seeking only the facts.
His lawsuit has uncovered the central role in overseeing
directorate activities of Mr. Joannides, the deputy director for psychological
warfare at the C.I.A.’s Miami
station, code-named JM/WAVE. He worked closely with directorate leaders,
documents show, corresponding with them under pseudonyms, paying their travel
expenses and achieving an “important degree of control” over the group, as a
July 1963 agency fitness report put it.
Fifteen years later, Mr. Joannides turned up again as the
agency’s representative to the House assassinations committee. Dan Hardway,
then a law student working for the committee, recalled Mr. Joannides as “a cold
fish,” who firmly limited access to documents. Once, Mr. Hardway remembered,
“he handed me a thin file and just stood there. I blew up, and said, ‘This is
all you’re going to get.’”
But neither Mr. Hardway nor the committee’s staff director
G. Robert Blakey, had any idea that Mr. Joannides had played a role in the very
anti-Castro activities from 1963 that the panel was scrutinizing.
When Mr. Morley first informed him about it a decade ago,
Mr. Blakey was flabbergasted. “If I’d known his role in 1963, I would have put
Joannides under oath – he would have been a witness, not a facilitator,” said
Mr. Blakey, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame. “How do we know
what he didn’t give us?”
After Oliver Stone’s 1981 film “J.F.K.” fed speculation
about the Kennedy assassination, Congress created the Assassinations Records
Review Board (ARRB) to release documents. But because the board, too, was not
told of Mr. Joannides 1963 work, it did not pursue the records, said Judge Tunheim,
the chairman. K
“If we’d known of his role in Miami
in 1963, we would have pressed for all his records,” Judge Tuheim said.
No matter what comes of Mr. Morley’s case in Federal
District Court in Washington ,
Mr. Tunheim said he might ask the current C.I.A. director, Leon E. Panetta, to
release the records, even if the names of people who are still alive must be
redacted for privacy.
What motive could C.I.A. officials have to bury the details
of Mr. Joannides’s work for so long? Did C.I.A. officers or their Cuban
contacts know more about Oswald than has been revealed? Or was the agency
simply embarrassed by brushes with the future assassin – like the Dallas F.B.I.
officials who, after the assassination, destroyed a handwritten note Oswald had
previously left for an F.B.I agent?
Or has Mr. Morley spent a decade on a wild goose chase?
Max Holland, who is writing a history of the Warren
Commission, said the agency might be trying to preserve the principle of
secrecy.
“If you start going through the files of every C.I.A.
officer who had anything to do with anything that touched the assassination,
that would have no end,” Mr. Holland said.
Mr. Posner, the anti-conspiracy author, said that if there
really were something explosive involving the C.I.A. and President Kennedy, it
would not be in the files – not even in the documents the C.I.A. has fought to
keep secret.
“Most conspiracy theorists don’t understand this,” Mr.
Posner said. “But if there really were a C.I.A. plot, no documents would
exist.”
‘
No comments:
Post a Comment