Jim Lesar Note:
There
are two Oglesby (now DiBacco) lawsuits, the first, Civil Action No. 87-Bill,
There are two Oglesby (now DiBacco) lawsuits, the first, Civil Action No.
87-3349, was for recrods on Gen. Gehlen, the Gehlen Org, and post-World War II
Nazi orgs such as Werewolves, Die Bruederschaft, Odessa, Die Spinne, Operation
Sunrise and records on Fort Hunt meetings in 1946. This case was recently
remanded by the D.C. Circuit to consider a group of about 2600 pages that the
Army and NARA forked over as a result of the appeal. On remand, there are
two different matters being litigated: (1) a battle over roughly $600,000
in attorney fees, about $100,000 or so the Govt. has now conceded, and a battle
over battle over whether additional materials have to be disclosed as a
consequence of issues raised regarding the remand of the 2600 pages.
The
second Oglesby case, Civil Action No. 02-0603, is still in District
Court. This suit is for records on Oglesby himself. The FBI has
been forced to do three re-processings, going from a few hundred pages, to
4,000 some pages, to 6,000 some pages to 23,000 pages. We're now headed
in to a battle for a fourth re-proccesing and hopefully some more records.
A
number of requests are ready for court action, among them for records on Eddie
Lopez, Prof. Blakey, the July 20 plot, the Cuban 109-files, the still
withheld JFK Act records, the Nov. 22,1963 cable from Sforza to Phillips, a
request by David Talbot for passport, visa records on Harvey and Wyatt, and a
couple of more. Not going to get any of them filed by Sunshine week, but
hope to get a couple filed within the next month.
3349,
was for records on Gen. Gehlen, the Gehlen Org, and post-World War II Nazi orgs
such as Werewolves, Die Bruederschaft, Odessa, Die Spinne, Operation Sunrise
and records on Fort Hunt meetings in 1946. This case was recently
remanded by the D.C. Circuit to consider a group of about 2600 pages that the
Army and NARA forked over as a result of the appeal. On remand, there are
two different matters being litigated: (1) a battle over roughly $600,000
in attorney fees, about $100,000 or so the Govt. has now conceded, and a battle
over battle over whether additional materials have to be disclosed as a
consequence of issues raised regarding the remand of the 2600 pages
The
second Oglesby case, Civil Action No. 02-0603, is still in District
Court. This suit is for records on Oglesby himself. The FBI has been
forced to do three re-processings, going from a few hundred pages, to 4,000
some pages, to 6,000 some pages to 23,000 pages. We're now headed in to a
battle for a fourth re-proccesing and hopefully some more records.
A
number of requests are ready for court action, among them for records on Eddie
Lopez, Prof. Blakey, the July 20 plot, the Cuban 109-files, the still
withheld JFK Act records, the Nov. 22,1963 cable from Sforza to Phillips, a
request by David Talbot for passport, visa records on Harvey and Wyatt, and a
couple of more. Not going to get any of them filed by Sunshine week, but
hope to get a couple filed within the next month.
OFF-GROUP
In response to today’s post, containing
Bill’s ten questions:
At the time, I did not think my quick
response to Bill last week (below) was Group-worthy.
Perhaps some of it is – in particular the
last section, emphasized below.
Surely someone else can do a better job
than I of appropriately constraining and refining expectations about the 2017
release.
On Thursday, Bill wrote to the Group
(perhaps tongue-in-cheek, in response to my perhaps tongue-in-cheek post about
Scalia and the Habsburg-influenced Order of St. Hubertus):
“They are withholding records concerning
the Exalted Ruler of the Fort Worth Elks who invited JFK to visit his lodge
when he was in town, so come Oct 2017 they are the first docs I'm going after -
to see why the security of the nation rests on them.”
I looked into this; the Byrne papers are
an “undeeded collection closed at the request of donor.” (Search
for “Elks” AND “Worth.”)
The on-line RIF for 176-10030-10032, an
oral history interview of Byrne, says “Closed until donor finishes his writing
project on JFK.”
This piece in the Archives magazine might
have been his “writing project”:
[SHARE AT WILL]
Bill:
“Some of the withheld records, such as the
Collins Radio documents are labeled “NBR” – Not Believed Relevant, yet they
most certainly are as Collins Radio made the Air Force One radios and operated
the relay station that broadcast the signals.”
Those items caught my eye too:
104-10107-10191 21
pp.
104-10291-10005 2 pp.
104-10291-10006 143 pp.
Those are among the 24 NARA hits on
“COLLINS RADIO” and the only ones which are listed as POSTPONED IN FULL.
The comments on the first of these include
“THERE ARE 4 DOCUMENTS; THEY WERE
DECLARED "NBR" BY THE ARRB, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARRB MEMO DATED 8
OCTOBER 1997.”
As you know, I am generally inclined to
accept an ARRB determination that specific documents are really not relevant.
Especially since other Collins Radio
documents were not called NBR.
But I don’t always accept NBR.
See my Group email of 9 Feb 16
(Subject: RE: List of withheld JFK assassination documents), where (on the
basis of an open copy) I said that “the characterization of the withheld copy
as NBR (Not Believed Relevant) is IMHO incorrect.”
The subject was a public meeting of the
Fensterwald CTIA which the CIA wanted a report on.
In any case, I would want to see the
referenced ARRB memo before reaching any conclusion that these specific items
should not have been called NBR.
And if that memo is not readily available,
I would look at the 21 available Collins Radio items for clues.
“If you want to get some deep background
on a particular record that’s listed you can go to the NARA or MaryFerrell.org
data base and type in the first two groups of the RIF number and it will lead
you to other documents in that field, sometimes even the exact document that’s
listed as being withheld has already been released and is available on line.”
Also, what has worked for me is search for
unusual keywords from the title/subject/comment fields of the RIF for the
withheld item.
Documents related to the Warren Commission
interest me more than most.
The list includes Slawson’s name four
times:
179-40003-10057 (41 pp.,
undated early draft of the Coleman-Slawson Report)
179-40003-10221 (69 pp.,
08/06/1964, Possible Foreign Conspiracy)
179-40004-10333 (58 pp.,
08/11/1964, Chapter VI)
179-40005-10317 (1
p., 04/06/64, REPLY TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS IN MEMO OF MARCH 12)
Based on my experience with documents on
this “fully withheld” list, I would not be at all surprised if other copies of
some of these documents were released years ago. I have seen various
drafts, some of which were released in part so long ago that I do not expect
they have RIFs.
Obviously it makes no sense for WR chapter
drafts or the Coleman-Slawson to be withheld in full. Perhaps there are
bits which are properly redacted, but no more than that.
It is possible that the first or fourth of
those include references to listening to a tape in Mexico, which is still a
puzzle. If I was not convinced that Coleman never met Castro, that would
be something that might me in the withheld documents.
In my Group e-mail of 4 Feb 16, I provided
the contents of 179-40004-10447 (one page, 04/17/1964, Willens to Rankin):a
“I got a call today from Mitchell
Rogovin of IRS. The Service is about to initiate a fraud investigation
into the tax affairs of Joe Tonahill.... Mr. Rogovin wanted to know if we
had any recommendations concerning this investigation.”
I would not call the withholding (until
2017) of this document unjustifiable.
It is “assassination related” only in a
very broad sense.
Is not the answer to your issue #7 (“How
come the ONI Defector and ONI Director Files are not listed among the still
withheld records when they are still being withheld?”) given by #9 – they are
not in the collection?
To put it another way, do you know of item
in the collection which are withheld but not listed?
There are various issues here which are
getting squished together, I think.
One of your commenters wrote “One could
also contend that if as the Government still claims - the death of JFK was all
the work of one deranged, dirty little communist, now long dead - why has there
been a need to withold any records at all?”
That is not a logically persuasive
argument.
I would like to see you and others deal
with that argument directly sooner rather than later.
For example, the withholdability of the
cooperation with the CIA by the Mexican government (President Lopez Mateos in
particular) can be debated, but whether LHO was a LN or not is not relevant to
that discussion.
[QUOTE OFF]
Yes, the tape is withheld (or at least
listed as withheld)
But an 18-page transcript is available,
along with related documents.
What could be sensitive? I predict
that nothing is really withholdable, but one document has SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO
ALLEGATION OF FEMALE COURIER DELIVERING MONEY TO OSWALD.
Perhaps with a comment about what we have
learned about listed documents where copies are not withheld or where NBR seems
correct.
Correct link to McIlvain
Paul notes there are other documents on McIlvain that have been
released that I haven't added yet.
To my article on Restoring Oliver Stone's Mercedes and the Elephant
in the Archives
Bill –
“Of the first three documents among the
list of those JFK Assassination records still withheld is: 178-10004-10394...”
“Here are some tributes to him from the
Hollywood Reporter, LA Times and UM, that may give some insight into what he
could of known and said during his interview with the Rockefeller Commission
concerning the assassination of President Kennedy that is so sensitive that it
must still be kept secret from the public.”
An associated transcript and two other
documents are already available.
Hit 1 of 2 [on ILVAIN]
AGENCY : ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10002-10085
RECORDS SERIES : BELIN-GRAY-GREENE FILES
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : B-G-G (IV-Z) INTERVIEW WITH JUDD MCILVAIN
ORIGINATOR :
ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION
FROM : BELIN, DAVID
TO : THE FILE
TITLE : INTERVIEW WITH MR. JUDD MCILVAIN
DATE : 00/00/1975
PAGES : 18
DOCUMENT TYPE : TRANSCRIPT
SUBJECTS
: CIA; OSWALD, LEE, TRIP TO MEXICO; CONSPIRACY THEORIES, CIA; BELIN, DAVID; MC
ILVAIN, JUDD
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 01/30/1997
COMMENTS : Unmarked but may contain classified information.
Hit 2 of 2
AGENCY
: ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10004-10394
RECORDS SERIES : ASSASSINATION FILE
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : A-III (C) INTERVIEW TAPES
ORIGINATOR : ROCK
FROM : [No From]
TO : [No To]
TITLE : MC ILVAIN TAPE (DUPLICATE)
DATE :
00/00/1975
PAGES
: 5
DOCUMENT TYPE : SOUND RECORDING
SUBJECTS
: MC ILVAIN
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 08/13/1993
COMMENTS : No transcript found. Subjects unknown. Date unknown.
Three additional open documents have the
name only as “MCILVAIN.”
157-10011-10073 (the 18 page item again)
AGENCY : HPSCI
RECORD NUMBER : 135-10001-10037
ORIGINATOR : ROCK
FROM : BELIN, DAVID W.
TO : MCILVAIN, JUDD
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 05/30/1975
PAGES : 1
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION OF FEMALE COURIER DELIVERING MONEY TO OSWALD
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 05/17/1994
AGENCY : ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10002-10001
RECORDS SERIES : BELIN-GRAY-GREENE
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : II-C, CHRON FILES, MAY 1975
ORIGINATOR :
ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION
FROM : BELIN, DAVID W.
TO : MCILVAIN, JUDD
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 05/30/1975
PAGES : 1
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: CONSPIRACY THEORIES, CIA INVOLVEMENT; OSWALD, LEE, POST-RUSSIAN PERIOD,
TRAVEL, TRIP TO MEXICO
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 06/23/1993
Bill –
Thanks for posting this clarification:
Bill Kelly
February 19, 2016 at 6:47 pm
There are other Mcilvain docs that are
open and it appears the transcript of this is available -,which appears to be
the case with many of these records. I am preparing a preliminary analysis of
the entire list of withheld records and the issues it presents that I will be
posting soon.
Also note that I posted that at
JFKCountercoup2 – my backup blog where I post important information that I
generally refer to in articles I post at my primary blog – JFKCountercoup –
Also note that John Barron – who
wrote the book on the KGB and popularized the term “disinformation” came out of
the same journalism school – and he may have gotten mixed up with Mockingbird
or was one of David Phillips assets.
More to come on this
BK
[QUOTE OFF]
I included the full text above because
others might have not seen it.
It has not shown up in the Comments RSS
feed – I think that happens from time to time.
I found it just now, as I was preparing to
submit my own comment:
[QUOTE ON:]
Selected details on “open in full”
McIlvain documents from the NARA database
178-10002-10085 (157-10011-10073): Belin to
File, interview transcript (18 pp.), “Comments: Unmarked but may contain
classified information.”
135-10001-10037 (178-10002-10001): Belin
to McIlvain (1 p., 5/30/75), “Subjects: Response to allegation of female
courier delivering money to Oswald
(Record numbers in parentheses seem to
refer to duplicate copies.)
This comment by Bill Simpich on JFKfacts is worth
sharing.
Look for your favorite document – do a RIF
search with only the first eight numbers – and you’ll find the docs closely
related to your favorite document. Fascinating.
I’d like to see the audiotapes with Boris
and Anna Tarasoff, the ones in Mexico City who transcribed the tapes of
Oswald/the Oswald character during late Sept 1963. (see page 57)
The most intriguing of the interviews is
180-10147-10337, entitled “Tarasoff” and McWillie and Oswald.
Why is McWillie being discussed with
Oswald? McWillie was a mobster who was a close friend of Jack Ruby in Dallas,
not Oswald according to the records.
Why is “Tarasoff” in quotation marks? Why
would either of the Tarasoffs – Russiann translators who did not live in Dallas
– know anything about McWillie?
Anna also worked in CI, which makes the
whole question even stranger.
Another important document on the same
page is 157-10002-10028,
“Rapproachement with Cuba – Testimony of
William Atwood”, given to the Church Committee by Kennedy’s aide who reached
out to the Cubans in 1963.
There’s so many good docs I’ll stop there
– it’s really worth your time to study the neighboring documents.
[QUOTE OFF]
The specific document referred to might
turn out not be as interesting as the title in the RIF("TARASOFF" AND
MCWILLIE AND OSWALD) indicates.
The item comprises three tapes:
COMMENTS: Tape 1: 32 mins;
tape 2: 29 mins.; tape 3: 27 mins.
Lewis McWillie and Marina Oswald testified
in the public HSCA hearings.
The would also have been interviewed
privately.
Using a single RIF for three separate HSCA
interviews would have been an error.
And if that happened, this item should
never have been postponed in full (as the RIF indicates it was).
Over 200 other RIFs in the same “record
series” (“AUDIOCASSETTES AND OTHER SOUND RECORDINGS COLLECTED BY THE JFK...”
[ellipsis in original]) can be seen in this 1994 finding aid:
An article by Bryan Bender (formerly
of the Boston Globe, always worth reading):
“The government gave a first-ever peek to
what's still out there Thursday, as the National Archives released a list of
the 3,063 documents that have been "fully withheld" since JFK's
murder in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.”
Do we have a primary source for the “fully
withheld” characterization?
I suspect that copies of some of these
documents have been released, with redactions.
That is potentially useful information
when the redacted version tells us something about the nature and significance
(or insignificance) of the withheld information.
I don’t have time to look further over the
next few days.
But for the benefit of those who will dig
into this list, please include identifying information (such as the record
number from the first column) in all references to specific documents of
interest.
Bender referred to one document
which I thought I could find, if a version had been released:
“There are a series of communications from
the longest-serving and highly secretive FBI director, including one titled
"Reaction of Soviet and Communist Party officials to JFK
assassination" that he sent to President Lyndon B. Johnson's chief of
staff, Marvin Watson, a week after the assassination;”
This is 178-10003-10131, Hoover to Marvin
Watson, 7 pp.
The date is given as 12/01/1963 but the
correct date is 12/10/1966.
This seven-page document (in Doug Horne’s
book) appears to be the FBI file copy of the document in question:
There are no redactions.
This Branigan-to-Sullivan memo explains
why this document was created for the White House:
I noticed that the list includes several
documents to or from Warren Commission people.
This interests me because I was under the
impression that we have been told that no WC records are withheld in
full. My memory is of course unreliable.
There are a few hits on “Willens”
including 179-40004-10447.
(Because of imperfect OCR, you have to
search for 40004-10447, not the full number. It is on p. 44 of the
164-page pdf.)
It is described as one page,
04/17/1964, Willens to Rankin, unclassified.
Willens has removed his archive fromhttp://howardwillens.com/archives/ in
anticipation of the documents being available on the National Archives
site. As far as I know, they are not online yet.
From a copy I saved:
“I got a call today from Mitchell Rogovin
of IRS. The Service is about to initiate a fraud investigation into the
tax affairs of Joe Tonahill.... Mr. Rogovin wanted to know if we had any
recommendations concerning this investigation.”
(In this case, I don’t think one can infer
that the document was ever cleared for release. All we know is that
Willens put it online for a while.)
I would not call the withholding (until
2017) of this document unjustifiable.
It is “assassination related” only in a
very broad sense.
From my Group e-mail of 29 Jul 15,
Subject: Consequences of the definitions of "assassination
related" records:
We know that much of the withheld material
in the Archives collection is there because of the ARRB’s broad definition of
“assassination related,” but many people do not know that and think there is a
smoking gun....
Basically, “we” got the ARRB to accept a
very broad definition, which led to the release of tons of fascinating
documents....
Are there any withheld documents in the
Archives collection which the ARRB did not review?... [Maybe]
Would the ARRB have gone along with
the withholding of material that was “assassination related” in the narrow
sense?...
We can predict what will happen in October
2017:
Some people who have already found
evidence of a conspiracy (no matter how implausible) in the old documents will
find support in the new documents and/or in the continued withholding.
Some of those who have said there is no
proof of a conspiracy will claim that the absence of a new smoking gun confirms
their position.
The quality of the general debate will not
go up.
[QUOTE OFF]
I can't tell you how often I have come across a document whose
title or date + title shouted "blockbuster" only for it to turn out
to be nothing.
William Attwood's testimony (not Atwood) has been released and I
cited it in The Road to Dallas. This is Church Committee testimony.
Among other things, when he was in Cuba as a journalist in 1959, he was at at a
party with CIA men who assured him the contract on Castro was already
out. I knew him very well and you could believe anything he said.
David K
|
|
|
The document Bill referred to (157-10002-10028) is not the
Attwood testimony,...
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
Does anyone on here recommend a must-have list of a half a dozen or
so docs listed in there that are worth POLITICO trying to FOIA? If I am
surmising correctly many of the docs have been declassified ahead of the 2017
release mandated.
Bryan
Here is another withheld document that
might already be available.
The new PDF includes (on p. 98)
104-10211-10075 and 104-10211-10076, each a one-page document dated 10/30/63
from Chief of Station, Mexico City to Chief, Special Affairs Staff.
The titles are respectively DISPATCH:
ILLEGIBLE and DISPATCH: WITHHELD.
A search of the NARA database for that
date plus [SAS OR SPECIAL] gives (among only five hits) those two documents,
plus one which is OPEN IN FULL, 104-10098-10191.
That one-page document has
TITLE : OPERATIONAL DISPATCH
SUBJECTS : OPERATIONAL
CLASSIFICATION : SECRET
Here it is:
It is a very poor copy; I can’t read it
myself. Maybe someone with younger eyes or better software can transcribe
it.
Of course, there might have been
two different dispatches from Win Scott to SAS on that date.
Here are one or two additional pairs of
withheld/open copies:
1977 memo about CD 729A:
Withheld:
179-10002-10165, 179-30002-10036 and
179-30002-10061
Open in full:
179-30002-10027
State (Mexico to DC) 23 Nov 63 (may be different
documents):
Withheld:
179-40005-10385
Open in full:
119-10006-10027
Details below.
Previous instances (from my emails of 6
Feb 16):
Mexico CIA dispatch, 30 Oct 63
Withheld:
104-10211-10075 and 104-10211-10076
Memo about Attwood’s testimony:
Withheld:
157-10002-10028
Open in full:
157-10005-10106
As I said, this sort of inconsistency is
no surprise.
It seems worthwhile to get the open copies
just to see what sort of information was (half the time) deemed withholdable.
Details:
1977 memo about CD 729A:
This item in the caught my eye because it
refers to a CD.
CD 729 is about the report that Oswald had
distributed FPCC pamphlets in Montreal.
It consists of a two-page FBI memo and
nine photos.
The memo was released years ago with
substantial redaction:
This later releases has no redactions:
Why is there a secrecy issue here?
Blame Canada.
Perhaps US cooperation with Canadian
agencies was seen as sensitive.
Cooperation with Mexican agencies was
orders of magnitude more sensitive, and probably accounts for some of the most
interesting currently withheld records.
Assertions that they should still be
withheld would not necessarily be frivolous. Some people in Mexico might
regard fifty-year-old relationships with the CIA as near-treasonous rather than
cooperative.
The document in question apparently
predates the release of CD 729.
From the NARA database (with uninteresting
lines omitted):
AGENCY : NARA
RECORD NUMBER : 179-10002-10165
RECORDS SERIES : WC DOCUMENT REVIEWED BY
FBI FOR HSCA
FROM : KELLEY, CLARENCE
TO : JOHNSON, MARION [NARA archivist]
TITLE : REVIEW OF WARREN COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729A ...
DATE : 02/14/1977
PAGES : 2
SUBJECTS : COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729; COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729A
CLASSIFICATION : CONFIDENTIAL
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
On 9 Mar 77, Rep. Stokes asked AG Griffin
Bell for many records, including this document specifically:
Apparently it did not get to the HSCA as a
result of the February 1977 review.
The RIFs for 179-30002-10061 and
179-30002-10025 connect this document to a Weisberg FOIA and an appeal by John
Woods, generating paper later in 1977.
State (Mexico to DC) 23 Nov 63:
These may well be different documents,
since there was surely much traffic on that date (and the RIFs give different
classification levels).
But the word “condolences” appears in
both, and each is one page.
Both Jeff and Bill have written about a
visit by the Mexican President which was expected to be a condolence call but
which revealed that the Mexicans had found an Oswald conversation in their copy
of the LIENVOY coverage.
This cable (or these cables) to State may
well relate to that visit:
RECORD NUMBER : 179-40005-10385
RECORDS SERIES : DO PERSONALITY FILE ON
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248
ORIGINATOR : DOS
FROM : AMEMBASSY MEXICO
TO : SECSTATE
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 11/23/1963
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: ASSASSINATION, KENNEDY, JOHN, CONDOLENCES IN MEXICO CITY
CLASSIFICATION : SECRET
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 00/00/0000
COMMENTS : BOX 2, FOLDER 4; TWO COPIES; ATTACHED TO CIA ROUTING SLIP THAT IS
OPEN; BOX DOS3
AGENCY : DOS
RECORD NUMBER : 119-10006-10027
RECORDS SERIES : CENTRAL FOREIGN POLICY
FILES
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : POL 15-1 US/KENNEDY
ORIGINATOR : DOS
FROM : MEXICO
TO : STATE
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 11/23/1963
DOCUMENT TYPE : CABLE
SUBJECTS : ASSASINATION, JOHN KENNEDY, CONDOLENCES
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/26/1993
COMMENTS : Msg. No.: 1181. Copy attached.
I ran into this kind of thing--multiple copies with oir without
redactions--many times researching American Tragedy. Often it all depends on
who had what for breakfast, it seems.
Here one more document which is both
withheld and open: the CIA’s coverage of the 1973 CIA conference
The characterization of the withheld copy
as NBR (Not Believed Relevant) is IMHO incorrect.
When the documents are released, we will
find out if NBR has been systematically overused.
I am not looking for withheld/open pairs.
This title caught my eye as I scanned
JFK-List-of-Denied-Docs-redacted.pdf.
From the NARA database (selected lines
only):
RECORD NUMBER : 104-10433-10165
ORIGINATOR : CIA
FROM : [No From]
TO : DIRECTOR
TITLE : MF: CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT
ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
DATE : 12/11/1973
PAGES : 28
SUBJECTS : COVERAGE; NBR
RESTRICTIONS : 1B
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 12/18/1998
COMMENTS : JFK-RH19 : F09 : 1998.12.18.09:46:55:936128 : NOT BELIEVED RELEVANT
(NBR)
A search for “CONFERENCE OF THE
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE” turned up the second copy:
RECORD NUMBER : 104-10433-10149
FROM : ANGLETON, JAMES FOR THE DD/P
TO : DIRECTOR, FBI
TITLE : WEISBERG FOIA REQUEST:MEMO:CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
DATE : 12/11/1973
PAGES : 37
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 12/18/1998
COMMENTS : JFK-RH19 : F10 : 1998.12.18.09:08:44:076120 : TWO COPIES OF MEMO,
ONE WITH ATTACHMENTS. ONE COPY IS PREVIOUSLY SANITIZED.
It is followed by a 7-page report on the
conference. The author is not named.
The handouts are on relPageId 12 through
30.
The style is notably informal in spots.
For example, “Mr. Hanson has become the counsel for Sirhan Sirhan. He studied
to become an engineer and then shifted to law. (To judge from the number of
cases which he says he has lost, he should have remained an engineer instead of
becoming an attorney.)”
I consider the NBR characterization the
most interesting aspect of this document at this time, but of course one can
also wonder about the propriety of the CIA’s coverage of this public event.
A search for “Robert Hanson” pointed to
the back story.
The CTIA had sent a newsletter mentioning
the conference to FBI SA Gemberling in Dallas:
The press release and program reached the
CIA, perhaps also sent by the CTIA:
(Group members Tink and Peter
were listed as speakers.)
According to the previous page (Rocca to
Angleton, 21 Nov 73) [QUOTE ON:]
“The Legal Counsel was looking for someone
to attend this and he inquired about the possibility of sending [Art] Dooley to
cover it. Apparently he thought Dooley was on contract with us or something.
I discouraged him from that notion, and he is attempting to get someone
else to cover it. I have put through a telephone call on this matter with
a small brief to Brannigan. This is a very interesting maneuver.
FENSTERWALD I learned is not only McCORD’s lawyer, but also [Andrew] ST.
GEORGE's.”
Here one more document which is both
withheld and open: the CIA’s coverage of the 1973 CTIA conference.
To the group:
Re: the CIA’s partial reporting of the Committee to Investigate
Assassinations (CTIA's) first national Assassination Conference, November 23,
1973:
Paul was I think quite right to suggest that “one can also wonder about the
propriety of the CIA’s coverage of this public event.” I believe one can also
explain it.
Jim Angleton (C/CI) and Jim Hunt (C/CI/OPS) had been
interested in Fensterwald and the CTIA since its formation in 1969,
See
124-10369-10049
ADMIN FOLDER-H9: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, LEE HARVEY OSWALD
VOLUME XXI
CIA LHM of 14 Jan 1969 to FBI Dir (Attn Papich) from James Angleton
(signed in fact by James Hunt)
The decision to attend and report on the CTIA Conference came after
a recommendation from
C/CI/OPS (Jim Hunt) and DC/CI/OPS (Ray Rocca).
See
104-10425-10074
Letter of 21 Nov 1973 to C/CI/OPS (Jim) from DC/CI/OPS (Rock) re
finding someone to report on CTIA conference.
The CIA partial report itself can be seen at
104-10433-10149
WEISBERG FOIA REQUEST:MEMO:CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO
INVESTIGATE ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
For some reason the report omits only one speaker from the first
morning: Bill Turner, perhaps, as a former FBI agent, the most respectably
qualified speaker.
Recently I wrote that the Helms perjured himself before the Warren
Commission, and CIA officers have been lying since, in order to protect the CIA’ s
“LCIMPROVE operation in October [1963] involving “Lee Oswald” (or “Lee Henry
Oswald”), which unquestionably was of very great relevance” to the JFK
assassination.
See
WHY CIA’S RICHARD HELMS LIED ABOUT OSWALD: PART 3,” WhoWhatWhy,
12/28/15.
LCIMPROVE is defined in two separate CIA documents as
"Counter-espionage involving Soviet intelligence services worldwide."
[In other words, an LCIMPROVE operation was a CI/OPS operation]
See Bill Simpich at
I take the on-going interest of the CI/OPS staff in the CTIA as
still further evidence that the CIA’s interest in the assassination had to do
with suppressing the relevance to the JFK assassination of their LCIMPROVE
operation in October 1963, involving “Lee Henry Oswald.”
The FBI did know, before the assassination, that Oswald had
contacted Kostikov.
ADMIN FOLDER-Q10: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, OSWALD FILE XEROX
Page 62
Kaack Report 10/31/63
The following information was furnished to the
Bureau by Legat, Mexico City, with the instructions that it
be classified secret and not be further disseminated:
CIA, Mexico City, advised Legat, Mexico,
on October 18, 1963, that LEE OSWALD contacted a Vice
Counsel [sic] VALERIY VLADMIRIVICH KOSTIKOV at the Soviet Embassy
on September 28, 1963, inquiring for a response from Wash-
ington, D.C. to an unknown request made by him. OSWALD
was again in contact with the Soviet Embassy, Mexico City, on
October 1, 1963.
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=117797&relPageId=62
Jerry Shinley
adding text to get past filter
Jerry has discovered an extremely interesting file here, and I am
trying to figure out exactly what it was. (I see it had gone to the HSCA
but I'm not sure what FBI office was in charge of it.) Among other
things, it appears (see p. 54) that the Washington Field Office had an ongoing
investigation of Oswald going on, which is news to me. I'm also intrigued
that while Oswald said he had left Reilly Coffee in July, Ms. Bertucci, I
believe, interviewed some time later, thought he was still there.
Jerry, have you figured out exactly what it is?
What is so intriguing about this post is that we don't know if this
post refers to Oswald's alleged visit to the Soviet consulate on the AM of Saturday,
Sept 28 (which I believe happened)...
or to the alleged Duran & Oswald phone call to the Soviet consulate
on the PM ofSaturday, Sept 28 (which I believe was an impersonation)...
Among other reasons, there is no record of who supposedly received
the alleged Duran & Oswald call!
This reminds me of one of the most fascinating finds by John Newman
of all time: the fact that an FBI agent, CB Peck, was investigating
the Mexico City trip a couple of weeks before the assassination. Has anything
additional come of that? And might it connect to this?
I think it refers to the later phone call, asking about his
visa.
Bill, could you please link the entire 11/4/63 document whose
picture is on that page? Thanks.
Meanwhile, I am quickly looking at the Kostikov mystery.
(Please keep in mind that I'm in the midst of a very complex book about
something completely different--baseball--and am not holding myself to the
highest research standards in these emails.) The first mention I can find
is in one of the October 2 conversations--the second one, in which
the caller identified himself as Lee Oswald. But it's the Soviet, in that
conversation, who asks the caller if he saw Kostikov, and the caller only says
that the man he saw was "dark." I can't find anything else
until much later, in the November letter to the Soviet Embassy in Washington
Oswald wrote, but that referred to "Comrade Kostin" And that's
too late to be the source of the cable.
As you were. . .
I just looked at Jerry's cable again. The significance is far
greater than he thought. The cable seems to be referring to the September
28 call supposedly from Duran and Oswald to Kostikov at the Soviet
Embassy, since it gives that date. But I can't see Kostikov identified as
the caller in the transcript, and Nechiporenko's book seems to indicate that he
was busy drafting a cable. Kostikov is identified in the
transcript of the obviously authentic September 27 call between him
and Duran, in which they agree they Oswald is nothing but trouble (in effect)
and that they can't give him what he wants. That call did prove Oswald
had talked to Kostikov--once you had identified "the American" as
Oswald.
What this means is that Jerry has discovered documentary proof, 52
years later, that the CIA knew before the assassination that Oswald had been in
the Cuban consulate, which they always officially denied.
More broadly, the file Jerry found--and I hope he or some one else
can shed more light on exactly what it is--seems to confirm something I have
thought for a long time. FBI HQ ran the bureau but was careful to insulate its
thoughts and plans from the field. We have never had access to what the
key people at HQ were thinking about Oswald--we don't even know who they
were. But it definitely seems from this file as if they were paying close
attention.
Here's the 11/4/63 Peck report - my article has a list of all of
Peck's reports.
I don't think the FBI memo should be read to indicate a phone call
between
Oswald and Kostikov on Sept. 28.
Kostikov, Yatskov, and Nechiporenko all say in
Nechiporenko's book that Oswald visited them on the morning of
Sept.
28 - none of them, nor any other Soviet, says that he called that
afternoon.
David is right in saying that no Soviet is identified in the
transcript as
taking the call from Duran and Oswald the afternoon of Sept 28.
I think
that either the voices were faked or (like Peter Dale Scott) the
call never
happened at all.
Next year, with a little luck, we may find out the identities of
the transcribers who listened to those phone calls. With a little more
luck, maybe one or more of them is still alive.
This kind of evidence is precisely why these documents have been
kept away from the public for more than fifty years. It's the equivalent
of destruction of evidence to hold it back until key witnesses die.
It's why even informants identities' should not be protected in a case like
this. The balance of fairness should tip towards justice, not privacy.
Back in the late 1970s when I asked Marion Johnson why the HSCA and
all Congressional records were sealed for 50 years - and exempted from the FOIA
- he said because that's the estimated amount of time those mentioned in the
records would be dead.
To make the point - Judd McIlvain - mentioned in the third document
on the list died a few months ago.
Bill Kelly
Sent from my iPhone
Correct link to McIlvain
Paul notes there are other documents on McIlvain that have been
released that I haven't added yet.
FYI, as a first crack here is what I have requested under FOIA from
the newly released NARA list of “denied docs.”
Department of State:
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10000
Telegram 1111 from “State” to “Moscow,” record series “261.1122
Oswald, Robert L,” dated 11/01/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10001
Telegram 1310 from “Moscow” to Sec. State,” record series
“261.1122, dated 11/02/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY FOR
SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,”
created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40007-10079
Document from “AMEMBASSY” to “Department of State,” record series
“Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,” dated 11/29/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
Department of Justice:
NARA Record Number 179-20001-10321
Document from “Kennedy, Regis,” to “SAC, New Orleans,” record
series “Classified Subject File129-11, Enclosures, Serial #71, created 5/18/67
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY [OF
STATE] FOR SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey
Oswald,” created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
CIA:
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA:
NARA Record Number 180-10110-10016
Document from “Phillips, David Atlee,” record series “Security
Classified Testimony,” file number 014726, dated 4/25/78
Originator House Select Committee on Assassinations
NARA Record Number 157-10002-10029
“Interview with Richard Bissell” by Church Committee, record series “Interview
summary,” sated 9/06/75
Originator: SSCIA
Bryan –
Thanks for filing and sharing these FOIA
requests.
I wonder if the recipients will
initially deny them, or look for available copies.
I have found two open-in-full copies.
Also, I found related documents which give
us some idea of what two of the withheld documents are about.
Requested: 179-10002-10000
A NARA search for 1111 with date=11/01/59
turned up four possible copies which are open:
119-10021-10205,
119-10021-10243, 119-10021-10263, 119-10021-10312
I think this unredacted document is
telegram 1111:
Requested: 179-10002-10001
“1302” and “11/02/59” gives three open
copies:
119-10021-10204,
119-10021-10244, 119-10021-10262
Requested: 179-20001-10321
This six-page document has SUBJECTS:
LACOUR, LOUIS; GARRISON, JAMES
A second withheld copy (179-20002-10281)
gives a better idea of the contents:
SUBJECTS: KENNEDY, REGIS, APPEARANCE BEFORE
ORLEANS PARISH GJ; GARRISON, JAMES
COMMENTS: ATTACHED TO DIRECTOR
TO AG 5/19/67; BOX 57
One copy of the document referred to in
that comment is also withheld:
RECORD NUMBER: 179-20002-10284
SUBJECTS: REGIS KENNEDY 5/18/67 RE KENNEDY'S APPEARANCE BEFORE LA GJ
But this copy is open:
124-10045-10130
Here is the grand jury testimony:
Requested: 179-40006-10052
RECORDS SERIES: DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE
HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248
FROM: HOOVER, J. EDGAR
TO: DIRECTOR, CIA
DATE: 12/06/1963
SUBJECTS: TRANSMITTAL OF DOCUMENTS
CURRENT STATUS: POSTPONED IN FULL
COMMENTS: BOX 2, FOLDER 4; ATTACHED TO REPORT FROM SEATTLE OF 11/26/63; BOX F11
Related and open:
RECORD NUMBER: 104-10422-10185
FROM: FBI: SEATTLE, WASH.
TITLE: REPORT: REACTION TO PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S DEATH BY VARIOUS SUBVERSIVE
GROUPS IN THE SEATTLE AREA
DATE: 11/26/1963
PAGES: 10
SUBJECTS: FPCC; NELSON, BURT GA
Paul
FYI, as a first crack here is what I have requested under FOIA from
the newly released NARA list of “denied docs.”
Department of State:
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10000
Telegram 1111 from “State” to “Moscow,” record series “261.1122
Oswald, Robert L,” dated 11/01/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10001
Telegram 1310 from “Moscow” to Sec. State,” record series
“261.1122, dated 11/02/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY FOR
SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,”
created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40007-10079
Document from “AMEMBASSY” to “Department of State,” record series
“Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,” dated 11/29/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
Department of Justice:
NARA Record Number 179-20001-10321
Document from “Kennedy, Regis,” to “SAC, New Orleans,” record
series “Classified Subject File129-11, Enclosures, Serial #71, created 5/18/67
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY [OF
STATE] FOR SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey
Oswald,” created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
CIA:
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA:
NARA Record Number 180-10110-10016
Document from “Phillips, David Atlee,” record series “Security
Classified Testimony,” file number 014726, dated 4/25/78
Originator House Select Committee on Assassinations
NARA Record Number 157-10002-10029
“Interview with Richard Bissell” by Church Committee, record series “Interview
summary,” sated 9/06/75
Originator: SSCIA
Bryan Bender
Defense Editor/National Security Correspondent
POLITICO
Correct link to McIlvain
...
David Philip's 4/25/78 testimony is already available:
Thanks all. Weird -and frustrating that somebody this stuff is
available but is deemed withheld. Is it possible what has been released is only
partial?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is it possible what has been released is only
partial?
|
|
Is it possible the Federal Government is not a well-oiled machine,
and one agency refuses to release something that another agency has already
released?
Is it possible that the Federal Government can’t actually keep up
with what it has or hasn’t been released?
Is it possible bureaucrats are often confused and clueless?
.John
Subject: Re: Bryan Bender's FOIA request
The answer to the above is "yes," but the list is not
necessarily all-encompassing. Jim
Dear Bryan et al,
Regarding the two
documents listed under NARA, I am quite certain I read Phllips's HSCA testimony
and Bissell's SSCIA testimony. (It's not clear whether you are looking for
something slightly different from the testimony.) Phillips's testimony
was fascinating because while he denied that he was Maurice Bishop, he
confirmed an astonishing amount of Veciana's story--almost as if he were
teasing the committee. Bissell gave the most arrogant testoimony I have
ever seen before a Congressional committee. I am pretty certain the
Phillips testimony was at history-matters.com and the Bissell testimony was
among the Church Committee testimony at NARA. However,. your citations
suggest you may be looking for supplementary materials.
Bissell's testimony was on the discs released by JFK Lancer many
years ago. I read it in 2005.
I don't recall Bissell being particularly arrogant, but rather
simply explaining how the CIA participated in carrying out things that were
official US policy. I guess things hit people different ways. I do recall that
on the Church Committee there was some tension between those who wanted to
blame the Kennedy brothers and those who wanted to blame Dulles, Bissell,
Cabell, etc.
Don
Bryan Bender
Defense Editor/National Security Correspondent
POLITICO
What the government is still hiding about the JFK assassination
The National Archives, for the first time ever, released a list of
documents related to the assassination that are still shielded from public
view.
02/04/16 08:07 PM EST
Updated 02/04/16 08:14 PM EST
More than five decades after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, thousands of government files detailing the activities and testimony
of shadowy spies, long-deceased witnesses and others with possible knowledge of
the events remain shielded from public view.
The government gave a first-ever peek at what's still out there
Thursday, as the National Archives released a list of the 3,063 documents that
have been "fully withheld" since JFK's murder in Dallas on Nov. 22,
1963.
The documents listed — released in response to a Freedom of
Information Act request from POLITICO, other news organizations and researchers
— were collected by the Assassination Records Review Board, an independent
panel created by the 1992 JFK Records Act.
That same act requires that all the documents on the list be
released by October 2017 unless the next president decides to keep them
classified.
Based on what has been revealed previously, many of the files are
expected to have no direct bearing on Kennedy's death in Dealey Plaza but could
reveal intelligence operations involving Cuba, secret relationships between
U.S. spy agencies and unsavory characters during the height of the Cold War, as
well as other secrets the U.S. government might have resisted disclosing
publicly as part of a full and open investigation at the time.
Cold War scholars have long suspected that many of the
still-withheld files will not necessarily shed new light on whether Oswald
acted alone. They could, however, help explain why some top officials at the time
might have sought to prevent a thorough investigation, out of concern it would
require airing the dirty laundry of covert activities.
Yet asked whether there might be any significant revelations about
Kennedy's unsolved murder, Martha Murphy, head of the Archives' Special Access
Branch, told POLITICO last year, “I’ll be honest. I am hesitant to say you’re
not going to find out anything about the assassination.”
The Archives says that "certain information has been
removed" from the list, including titles and other identifying
information, to protect national security, personal privacy and tax
information.
Here is a snapshot of what is still being hidden from the public
about key figures, probes and other events that the Archives has deemed
relevant to the JFK investigation.
Lee Harvey Oswald
Secret CIA "personality" studies of the reported lone
assassin fingered by the Warren Commission produced immediately after the
assassination have yet to be released, along with a telegram about him from the
U.S. Embassy in Mexico City to the State Department a week after the
assassination. Oswald, a former Marine who had temporarily defected to the
Soviet Union in 1959, is suspected of having visited Mexico City in the weeks
before the assassination, reportedly to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba.
There also are hundreds of other pages of undated CIA files that
contain classified information on Oswald, including a handwritten note from
Yuri Nosenko, a KGB officer who defected from the Soviet Union and also is the
subject of numerous other secret transcripts and tapes contained in the
withheld records, as well as another document on Oswald's "contacts with
Cuban and Soviet embassies." The trove also includes a pair of 1959
telegrams — one from the State Department to Moscow and the other from Moscow
to Secretary of State Christian Herter — regarding Oswald's brother Robert.
J. Edgar Hoover
There are a series of communications from the longest-serving and
highly secretive FBI director, including one titled "Reaction of Soviet
and Communist Party officials to JFK assassination" that he sent to
President Lyndon B. Johnson's chief of staff, Marvin Watson, a week after the
assassination; another a few weeks later to the deputy secretary of state for
security relating to Oswald; and a series of 1964 memos sent to J. Lee Rankin,
the general counsel of the Warren Commission, about Jack Ruby, the Dallas night
club owner with mafia ties who killed Oswald two days after the assassination
in the basement of the Dallas police station, preventing a trial.
Jacqueline Kennedy
At least five communications are contained in the files from the
former first lady to President Lyndon B. Johnson in the days immediately
following the assassination.
James Jesus Angleton
Still classified is the top-secret testimony from the chief of the
CIA's counterintelligence branch from 1954 to 1975 before the so-called Church
Committee, convened by the U.S. Senate in 1975 to investigate abuses by the spy
agency. It was the Church Committee that revealed for the first time that the
CIA had hired figures in organized crime with deep ties to Havana to help
overthrow the communist government of Fidel Castro, including through
assassination attempts.
Frank Sturgis
Also contained in the remaining JFK files is the former military
officer and undercover operative's 1975 testimony before the Church Committee.
Sturgis was also one of the five Watergate burglars whose break-in at the
Democratic Party headquarters in 1972 led to the resignation of President
Richard Nixon.
David Atlee Phillips
The trove includes the secret testimony before the House Select
Committee on Assassinations in 1978 from the longtime CIA officer who was
involved in covert U.S. plans to assassinate Castro and also was a person of
interest in the JFK case for scholars and researchers.
Regis Kennedy
Kennedy (no relation to the president) is among several witnesses
connected to the events in Dallas in 1963 who died before they could be fully
questioned. Kennedy reportedly suffered a heart attack the day before he was
scheduled to testify before a grand jury on confiscated home movies of the
assassination. The unreleased files contain an untitled communication from
Justice Department files from Regis Kennedy to the special agent in charge of
the FBI's New Orleans field office on May 18, 1967.
Protected sources
Several unidentified CIA documents, according to the newly released
inventory of withheld JFK records, have been kept from the public to protect an
intelligence source that is still living.
Illegible material
Sure to fuel conspiracy theories, a sizable portion of CIA
documents related to the JFK case is deemed “illegible.” The documents include
one from the general counsel of the Warren Commission to the CIA's Richard
Helms. Helms, who later became director, managed the agency's cooperation with
the independent panel that was set up by President Johnson and concluded that
Oswald was the lone assassin.
Another set of documents the agency shared with the Warren
Commission deemed unreadable: several communications from the agency's station
in Mexico City before and after the assassination, including a cable to
"Director Info Havana" on Nov. 11, 1959.
Also deemed unreadable is a secret communication from the CIA to
the Office of Naval Intelligence before the assassination — in October 1963 —
about Oswald.
Not believed relevant
Some of the withheld documents were designated in the 1990s by the
Assassination Records Review Board as "not believed relevant" to the
assassination but are nevertheless of keen historical interest. They include
the CIA "operational" files of E. Howard Hunt, another of the
Watergate burglars and a career spy. Also withheld is a CIA file on Jack
Wasserman, a lawyer for New Orleans mafia boss Carlos Marcello and a longtime
suspect in the assassination who was also involved in CIA plots to overthrow
Castro in Cuba.
this; the Byrne papers are
an “undeeded collection closed at the request of donor.” (Search
for “Elks” AND “Worth.”)
The on-line RIF for 176-10030-10032, an
oral history interview of Byrne, says “Closed until donor finishes his writing
project on JFK.”
This piece in the Archives magazine might
have been his “writing project”:
Subject: Collins Radio documents, NBR, WC documents
[SHARE AT WILL]
Bill:
“Some of the withheld records, such as the
Collins Radio documents are labeled “NBR” – Not Believed Relevant, yet they
most certainly are as Collins Radio made the Air Force One radios and operated
the relay station that broadcast the signals.”
Those items caught my eye too:
104-10107-10191 21
pp.
104-10291-10005 2 pp.
104-10291-10006 143 pp.
Those are among the 24 NARA hits on
“COLLINS RADIO” and the only ones which are listed as POSTPONED IN FULL.
The comments on the first of these include
“THERE ARE 4 DOCUMENTS; THEY WERE
DECLARED "NBR" BY THE ARRB, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARRB MEMO DATED 8
OCTOBER 1997.”
As you know, I am generally inclined to
accept an ARRB determination that specific documents are really not relevant.
Especially since other Collins Radio
documents were not called NBR.
But I don’t always accept NBR.
See my Group email of 9 Feb 16
(Subject: RE: List of withheld JFK assassination documents), where (on the
basis of an open copy) I said that “the characterization of the withheld copy
as NBR (Not Believed Relevant) is IMHO incorrect.”
The subject was a public meeting of the
Fensterwald CTIA which the CIA wanted a report on.
In any case, I would want to see the
referenced ARRB memo before reaching any conclusion that these specific items
should not have been called NBR.
And if that memo is not readily available,
I would look at the 21 available Collins Radio items for clues.
“If you want to get some deep background
on a particular record that’s listed you can go to the NARA or MaryFerrell.org
data base and type in the first two groups of the RIF number and it will lead
you to other documents in that field, sometimes even the exact document that’s
listed as being withheld has already been released and is available on line.”
Also, what has worked for me is search for
unusual keywords from the title/subject/comment fields of the RIF for the
withheld item.
Documents related to the Warren Commission
interest me more than most.
The list includes Slawson’s name four
times:
179-40003-10057 (41 pp.,
undated early draft of the Coleman-Slawson Report)
179-40003-10221 (69 pp.,
08/06/1964, Possible Foreign Conspiracy)
179-40004-10333 (58 pp.,
08/11/1964, Chapter VI)
179-40005-10317 (1
p., 04/06/64, REPLY TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS IN MEMO OF MARCH 12)
Based on my experience with documents on
this “fully withheld” list, I would not be at all surprised if other copies of
some of these documents were released years ago. I have seen various
drafts, some of which were released in part so long ago that I do not expect
they have RIFs.
Obviously it makes no sense for WR chapter
drafts or the Coleman-Slawson to be withheld in full. Perhaps there are
bits which are properly redacted, but no more than that.
It is possible that the first or fourth of
those include references to listening to a tape in Mexico, which is still a
puzzle. If I was not convinced that Coleman never met Castro, that would
be something that might me in the withheld documents.
In my Group e-mail of 4 Feb 16, I provided
the contents of 179-40004-10447 (one page, 04/17/1964, Willens to Rankin):a
“I got a call today from Mitchell
Rogovin of IRS. The Service is about to initiate a fraud investigation
into the tax affairs of Joe Tonahill.... Mr. Rogovin wanted to know if we
had any recommendations concerning this investigation.”
I would not call the withholding (until
2017) of this document unjustifiable.
It is “assassination related” only in a
very broad sense.
Is not the answer to your issue #7 (“How
come the ONI Defector and ONI Director Files are not listed among the still
withheld records when they are still being withheld?”) given by #9 – they are
not in the collection?
To put it another way, do you know of item
in the collection which are withheld but not listed?
There are various issues here which are
getting squished together, I think.
One of your commenters wrote “One could
also contend that if as the Government still claims - the death of JFK was all
the work of one deranged, dirty little communist, now long dead - why has there
been a need to withold any records at all?”
That is not a logically persuasive
argument.
I would like to see you and others deal
with that argument directly sooner rather than later.
For example, the withholdability of the
cooperation with the CIA by the Mexican government (President Lopez Mateos in
particular) can be debated, but whether LHO was a LN or not is not relevant to
that discussion.
[QUOTE OFF]
Yes, the tape is withheld (or at least
listed as withheld)
But an 18-page transcript is available,
along with related documents.
What could be sensitive? I predict
that nothing is really withholdable, but one document has SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO
ALLEGATION OF FEMALE COURIER DELIVERING MONEY TO OSWALD.
This information should be posted (under
someone else’s name – and don’t use this part of my email, which I unedited).
Perhaps with a comment about what we have
learned about listed documents where copies are not withheld or where NBR seems
correct.
Paul notes there are other documents on McIlvain that have been
released that I haven't added yet.
To my article on Restoring Oliver Stone's Mercedes and the Elephant
in the Archives
Bill –
“Of the first three documents among the
list of those JFK Assassination records still withheld is: 178-10004-10394...”
“Here are some tributes to him from the
Hollywood Reporter, LA Times and UM, that may give some insight into what he
could of known and said during his interview with the Rockefeller Commission
concerning the assassination of President Kennedy that is so sensitive that it
must still be kept secret from the public.”
An associated transcript and two other
documents are already available
Hit 1 of 2 [on ILVAIN]
AGENCY : ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10002-10085
RECORDS SERIES : BELIN-GRAY-GREENE FILES
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : B-G-G (IV-Z) INTERVIEW WITH JUDD MCILVAIN
ORIGINATOR :
ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION
FROM : BELIN, DAVID
TO : THE FILE
TITLE : INTERVIEW WITH MR. JUDD MCILVAIN
DATE : 00/00/1975
PAGES : 18
DOCUMENT TYPE : TRANSCRIPT
SUBJECTS
: CIA; OSWALD, LEE, TRIP TO MEXICO; CONSPIRACY THEORIES, CIA; BELIN, DAVID; MC
ILVAIN, JUDD
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 01/30/1997
COMMENTS : Unmarked but may contain classified information.
Hit 2 of 2
AGENCY
: ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10004-10394
RECORDS SERIES : ASSASSINATION FILE
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : A-III (C) INTERVIEW TAPES
ORIGINATOR : ROCK
FROM : [No From]
TO : [No To]
TITLE : MC ILVAIN TAPE (DUPLICATE)
DATE :
00/00/1975
PAGES
: 5
DOCUMENT TYPE : SOUND RECORDING
SUBJECTS
: MC ILVAIN
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 08/13/1993
COMMENTS : No transcript found. Subjects unknown. Date unknown.
Three additional open documents have the
name only as “MCILVAIN.”
157-10011-10073 (the 18 page item again)
AGENCY : HPSCI
RECORD NUMBER : 135-10001-10037
ORIGINATOR : ROCK
FROM : BELIN, DAVID W.
TO : MCILVAIN, JUDD
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 05/30/1975
PAGES : 1
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: RESPONSE TO ALLEGATION OF FEMALE COURIER DELIVERING MONEY TO OSWALD
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 05/17/1994
AGENCY : ROCKCOM
RECORD NUMBER : 178-10002-10001
RECORDS SERIES : BELIN-GRAY-GREENE
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : II-C, CHRON FILES, MAY 1975
ORIGINATOR :
ROCKEFELLER COMMISSION
FROM : BELIN, DAVID W.
TO : MCILVAIN, JUDD
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 05/30/1975
PAGES : 1
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: CONSPIRACY THEORIES, CIA INVOLVEMENT; OSWALD, LEE, POST-RUSSIAN PERIOD,
TRAVEL, TRIP TO MEXICO
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 06/23/1993
Bill –
Thanks for posting this clarification:
Bill Kelly
February 19, 2016 at 6:47 pm
There are other Mcilvain docs that are
open and it appears the transcript of this is available -,which appears to be
the case with many of these records. I am preparing a preliminary analysis of
the entire list of withheld records and the issues it presents that I will be
posting soon.
Also note that I posted that at
JFKCountercoup2 – my backup blog where I post important information that I
generally refer to in articles I post at my primary blog – JFKCountercoup –
Also note that John Barron – who
wrote the book on the KGB and popularized the term “disinformation” came out of
the same journalism school – and he may have gotten mixed up with Mockingbird
or was one of David Phillips assets.
More to come on this
BK
[QUOTE OFF]
I included the full text above because
others might have not seen it.
It has not shown up in the Comments RSS
feed – I think that happens from time to time.
I found it just now, as I was preparing to
submit my own comment:
[QUOTE ON:]
Selected details on “open in full”
McIlvain documents from the NARA database
178-10002-10085 (157-10011-10073): Belin to
File, interview transcript (18 pp.), “Comments: Unmarked but may contain
classified information.”
135-10001-10037 (178-10002-10001): Belin
to McIlvain (1 p., 5/30/75), “Subjects: Response to allegation of female
courier delivering money to Oswald
(Record numbers in parentheses seem to
refer to duplicate copies.)
[QUOTE OFF]
This comment by Bill Simpich on JFKfacts is worth
sharing.
[QUOTE ON:]
Look for your favorite document – do a RIF
search with only the first eight numbers – and you’ll find the docs closely
related to your favorite document. Fascinating.
I’d like to see the audiotapes with Boris
and Anna Tarasoff, the ones in Mexico City who transcribed the tapes of
Oswald/the Oswald character during late Sept 1963. (see page 57)
The most intriguing of the interviews is
180-10147-10337, entitled “Tarasoff” and McWillie and Oswald.
Why is McWillie being discussed with
Oswald? McWillie was a mobster who was a close friend of Jack Ruby in Dallas,
not Oswald according to the records.
Why is “Tarasoff” in quotation marks? Why
would either of the Tarasoffs – Russiann translators who did not live in Dallas
– know anything about McWillie?
Anna also worked in CI, which makes the
whole question even stranger.
Another important document on the same
page is 157-10002-10028,
“Rapproachement with Cuba – Testimony of
William Atwood”, given to the Church Committee by Kennedy’s aide who reached
out to the Cubans in 1963.
There’s so many good docs I’ll stop there
– it’s really worth your time to study the neighboring documents.
[QUOTE OFF]
The specific document referred to might
turn out not be as interesting as the title in the RIF("TARASOFF" AND
MCWILLIE AND OSWALD) indicates.
The item comprises three tapes:
COMMENTS: Tape 1: 32 mins;
tape 2: 29 mins.; tape 3: 27 mins.
Lewis McWillie and Marina Oswald testified
in the public HSCA hearings.
The would also have been interviewed
privately.
Using a single RIF for three separate HSCA
interviews would have been an error.
And if that happened, this item should
never have been postponed in full (as the RIF indicates it was).
Over 200 other RIFs in the same “record
series” (“AUDIOCASSETTES AND OTHER SOUND RECORDINGS COLLECTED BY THE JFK...”
[ellipsis in original]) can be seen in this 1994 finding aid:
An article by Bryan Bender (formerly
of the Boston Globe, always worth reading):
“The government gave a first-ever peek to
what's still out there Thursday, as the National Archives released a list of
the 3,063 documents that have been "fully withheld" since JFK's
murder in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.”
Do we have a primary source for the “fully
withheld” characterization?
I suspect that copies of some of these
documents have been released, with redactions.
That is potentially useful information
when the redacted version tells us something about the nature and significance
(or insignificance) of the withheld information.
I don’t have time to look further over the
next few days.
But for the benefit of those who will dig
into this list, please include identifying information (such as the record
number from the first column) in all references to specific documents of
interest.
Bender referred to one document
which I thought I could find, if a version had been released:
“There are a series of communications from
the longest-serving and highly secretive FBI director, including one titled
"Reaction of Soviet and Communist Party officials to JFK
assassination" that he sent to President Lyndon B. Johnson's chief of
staff, Marvin Watson, a week after the assassination;”
This is 178-10003-10131, Hoover to Marvin
Watson, 7 pp.
The date is given as 12/01/1963 but the
correct date is 12/10/1966.
This seven-page document (in Doug Horne’s
book) appears to be the FBI file copy of the document in question:
There are no redactions.
This Branigan-to-Sullivan memo explains
why this document was created for the White House:
I noticed that the list includes several
documents to or from Warren Commission people.
This interests me because I was under the
impression that we have been told that no WC records are withheld in
full. My memory is of course unreliable.
There are a few hits on “Willens”
including 179-40004-10447.
(Because of imperfect OCR, you have to
search for 40004-10447, not the full number. It is on p. 44 of the
164-page pdf.)
It is described as one page,
04/17/1964, Willens to Rankin, unclassified.
Willens has removed his archive fromhttp://howardwillens.com/archives/ in
anticipation of the documents being available on the National Archives
site. As far as I know, they are not online yet.
From a copy I saved:
“I got a call today from Mitchell Rogovin
of IRS. The Service is about to initiate a fraud investigation into the
tax affairs of Joe Tonahill.... Mr. Rogovin wanted to know if we had any
recommendations concerning this investigation.”
(In this case, I don’t think one can infer
that the document was ever cleared for release. All we know is that
Willens put it online for a while.)
I would not call the withholding (until
2017) of this document unjustifiable.
It is “assassination related” only in a
very broad sense.
From my Group e-mail of 29 Jul 15,
Subject: Consequences of the definitions of "assassination
related" records:
We know that much of the withheld material
in the Archives collection is there because of the ARRB’s broad definition of
“assassination related,” but many people do not know that and think there is a
smoking gun....
Basically, “we” got the ARRB to accept a
very broad definition, which led to the release of tons of fascinating
documents....
Are there any withheld documents in the
Archives collection which the ARRB did not review?... [Maybe]
Would the ARRB have gone along with
the withholding of material that was “assassination related” in the narrow
sense?...
We can predict what will happen in October
2017:
Some people who have already found
evidence of a conspiracy (no matter how implausible) in the old documents will
find support in the new documents and/or in the continued withholding.
Some of those who have said there is no
proof of a conspiracy will claim that the absence of a new smoking gun confirms
their position.
The quality of the general debate will not
go up.
[QUOTE OFF]
Stu
I can't tell you how often I have come across a document whose
title or date + title shouted "blockbuster" only for it to turn out
to be nothing.
William Attwood's testimony (not Atwood) has been released and I
cited it in The Road to Dallas. This is Church Committee testimony.
Among other things, when he was in Cuba as a journalist in 1959, he was at at a
party with CIA men who assured him the contract on Castro was already
out. I knew him very well and you could believe anything he said.
David K
|
|
The document Bill referred to (157-10002-10028) is not the
Attwood testimony,...
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
Does anyone on here recommend a must-have list of a half a dozen or
so docs listed in there that are worth POLITICO trying to FOIA? If I am
surmising correctly many of the docs have been declassified ahead of the 2017
release mandated.
Bryan
Here is another withheld document that
might already be available.
The new PDF includes (on p. 98)
104-10211-10075 and 104-10211-10076, each a one-page document dated 10/30/63
from Chief of Station, Mexico City to Chief, Special Affairs Staff.
The titles are respectively DISPATCH:
ILLEGIBLE and DISPATCH: WITHHELD.
A search of the NARA database for that
date plus [SAS OR SPECIAL] gives (among only five hits) those two documents,
plus one which is OPEN IN FULL, 104-10098-10191.
That one-page document has
TITLE : OPERATIONAL DISPATCH
SUBJECTS : OPERATIONAL
CLASSIFICATION : SECRET
Here it is:
It is a very poor copy; I can’t read it
myself. Maybe someone with younger eyes or better software can transcribe
it.
Of course, there might have been
two different dispatches from Win Scott to SAS on that date.
I am adding Bryan Bender to the
cc list for this thread. (I bcc’d him on two earlier messages.
Since he responded to one of them, I assume he does not object.)
1977 memo about CD 729A: Here are one or two additional pairs of
withheld/open copies:
Withheld:
179-10002-10165, 179-30002-10036 and
179-30002-10061
Open in full:
179-30002-10027
State (Mexico to DC) 23 Nov 63 (may be different
documents):
Withheld:
179-40005-10385
Open in full:
119-10006-10027
Details below.
Previous instances (from my emails of 6
Feb 16):
Mexico CIA dispatch, 30 Oct 63
Withheld:
104-10211-10075 and 104-10211-10076
Memo about Attwood’s testimony:
Withheld:
157-10002-10028
Open in full:
157-10005-10106
As I said, this sort of inconsistency is
no surprise.
It seems worthwhile to get the open copies
just to see what sort of information was (half the time) deemed withholdable.
Details:
1977 memo about CD 729A:
This item in the caught my eye because it
refers to a CD.
CD 729 is about the report that Oswald had
distributed FPCC pamphlets in Montreal.
It consists of a two-page FBI memo and
nine photos.
The memo was released years ago with
substantial redaction:
This later releases has no redactions:
Why is there a secrecy issue here?
Blame Canada.
Perhaps US cooperation with Canadian
agencies was seen as sensitive.
Cooperation with Mexican agencies was
orders of magnitude more sensitive, and probably accounts for some of the most
interesting currently withheld records.
Assertions that they should still be
withheld would not necessarily be frivolous. Some people in Mexico might
regard fifty-year-old relationships with the CIA as near-treasonous rather than
cooperative.
The document in question apparently
predates the release of CD 729.
From the NARA database (with uninteresting
lines omitted):
AGENCY : NARA
RECORD NUMBER : 179-10002-10165
RECORDS SERIES : WC DOCUMENT REVIEWED BY
FBI FOR HSCA
FROM : KELLEY, CLARENCE
TO : JOHNSON, MARION [NARA archivist]
TITLE : REVIEW OF WARREN COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729A ...
DATE : 02/14/1977
PAGES : 2
SUBJECTS : COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729; COMMISSION DOCUMENT 729A
CLASSIFICATION : CONFIDENTIAL
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
On 9 Mar 77, Rep. Stokes asked AG Griffin
Bell for many records, including this document specifically:
Apparently it did not get to the HSCA as a
result of the February 1977 review.
The RIFs for 179-30002-10061 and
179-30002-10025 connect this document to a Weisberg FOIA and an appeal by John
Woods, generating paper later in 1977.
State (Mexico to DC) 23 Nov 63:
These may well be different documents,
since there was surely much traffic on that date (and the RIFs give different
classification levels).
But the word “condolences” appears in
both, and each is one page.
Both Jeff and Bill have written about a
visit by the Mexican President which was expected to be a condolence call but
which revealed that the Mexicans had found an Oswald conversation in their copy
of the LIENVOY coverage.
This cable (or these cables) to State may
well relate to that visit:
RECORD NUMBER : 179-40005-10385
RECORDS SERIES : DO PERSONALITY FILE ON
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248
ORIGINATOR : DOS
FROM : AMEMBASSY MEXICO
TO : SECSTATE
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 11/23/1963
DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL
DOCUMENT
SUBJECTS
: ASSASSINATION, KENNEDY, JOHN, CONDOLENCES IN MEXICO CITY
CLASSIFICATION : SECRET
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 00/00/0000
COMMENTS : BOX 2, FOLDER 4; TWO COPIES; ATTACHED TO CIA ROUTING SLIP THAT IS
OPEN; BOX DOS3
AGENCY : DOS
RECORD NUMBER : 119-10006-10027
RECORDS SERIES : CENTRAL FOREIGN POLICY
FILES
AGENCY FILE NUMBER : POL 15-1 US/KENNEDY
ORIGINATOR : DOS
FROM : MEXICO
TO : STATE
TITLE : [No Title]
DATE : 11/23/1963
DOCUMENT TYPE : CABLE
SUBJECTS : ASSASINATION, JOHN KENNEDY, CONDOLENCES
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/26/1993
COMMENTS : Msg. No.: 1181. Copy attached.
I ran into this kind of thing--multiple copies with oir without
redactions--many times researching American Tragedy. Often it all depends on
who had what for breakfast, it seems.
Here one more document which is both
withheld and open: the CIA’s coverage of the 1973 CIA conference.
The characterization of the withheld copy
as NBR (Not Believed Relevant) is IMHO incorrect.
When the documents are released, we will
find out if NBR has been systematically overused.
I am not looking for withheld/open pairs.
This title caught my eye as I scanned
JFK-List-of-Denied-Docs-redacted.pdf.
From the NARA database (selected lines
only):
RECORD NUMBER : 104-10433-10165
ORIGINATOR : CIA
FROM : [No From]
TO : DIRECTOR
TITLE : MF: CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT
ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
DATE : 12/11/1973
PAGES : 28
SUBJECTS : COVERAGE; NBR
RESTRICTIONS : 1B
CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 12/18/1998
COMMENTS : JFK-RH19 : F09 : 1998.12.18.09:46:55:936128 : NOT BELIEVED RELEVANT
(NBR)
A search for “CONFERENCE OF THE
COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE” turned up the second copy:
RECORD NUMBER : 104-10433-10149
FROM : ANGLETON, JAMES FOR THE DD/P
TO : DIRECTOR, FBI
TITLE : WEISBERG FOIA REQUEST:MEMO:CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
DATE : 12/11/1973
PAGES : 37
CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED
RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL
CURRENT STATUS : OPEN
DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 12/18/1998
COMMENTS : JFK-RH19 : F10 : 1998.12.18.09:08:44:076120 : TWO COPIES OF MEMO,
ONE WITH ATTACHMENTS. ONE COPY IS PREVIOUSLY SANITIZED.
It is followed by a 7-page report on the
conference. The author is not named.
The handouts are on relPageId 12 through
30.
The style is notably informal in spots.
For example, “Mr. Hanson has become the counsel for Sirhan Sirhan. He studied
to become an engineer and then shifted to law. (To judge from the number of
cases which he says he has lost, he should have remained an engineer instead of
becoming an attorney.)”
I consider the NBR characterization the
most interesting aspect of this document at this time, but of course one can
also wonder about the propriety of the CIA’s coverage of this public event.
A search for “Robert Hanson” pointed to
the back story.
The CTIA had sent a newsletter mentioning
the conference to FBI SA Gemberling in Dallas:
The press release and program reached the
CIA, perhaps also sent by the CTIA:
(Group members Tink and Peter
were listed as speakers.)
According to the previous page (Rocca to
Angleton, 21 Nov 73) [QUOTE ON:]
“The Legal Counsel was looking for someone
to attend this and he inquired about the possibility of sending [Art] Dooley to
cover it. Apparently he thought Dooley was on contract with us or something.
I discouraged him from that notion, and he is attempting to get someone
else to cover it. I have put through a telephone call on this matter with
a small brief to Brannigan. This is a very interesting maneuver.
FENSTERWALD I learned is not only McCORD’s lawyer, but also [Andrew] ST.
GEORGE's.”
{Typo in the first sentence
corrected: CTIA not CIA]
Here one more document which is both
withheld and open: the CIA’s coverage of the 1973 CTIA conference.
To the group:
Re: the CIA’s partial reporting of the Committee to Investigate
Assassinations (CTIA's) first national Assassination Conference, November 23,
1973:
Paul was I think quite right to suggest that “one can also wonder about the
propriety of the CIA’s coverage of this public event.” I believe one can also
explain it.
Jim Angleton (C/CI) and Jim Hunt (C/CI/OPS) had been
interested in Fensterwald and the CTIA since its formation in 1969,
See
124-10369-10049
ADMIN FOLDER-H9: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, LEE HARVEY OSWALD
VOLUME XXI
CIA LHM of 14 Jan 1969 to FBI Dir (Attn Papich) from James Angleton
(signed in fact by James Hunt)
The decision to attend and report on the CTIA Conference came after
a recommendation from
C/CI/OPS (Jim Hunt) and DC/CI/OPS (Ray Rocca).
See
104-10425-10074
Letter of 21 Nov 1973 to C/CI/OPS (Jim) from DC/CI/OPS (Rock) re
finding someone to report on CTIA conference.
The CIA partial report itself can be seen at
104-10433-10149
WEISBERG FOIA REQUEST:MEMO:CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE TO
INVESTIGATE ASSASSINATIONS, REPORT ON PROCEEDINGS 23 NOVEMBER 1973
For some reason the report omits only one speaker from the first
morning: Bill Turner, perhaps, as a former FBI agent, the most respectably
qualified speaker.
Recently I wrote that the Helms perjured himself before the Warren
Commission, and CIA officers have been lying since, in order to protect the CIA’ s
“LCIMPROVE operation in October [1963] involving “Lee Oswald” (or “Lee Henry
Oswald”), which unquestionably was of very great relevance” to the JFK
assassination.
See
WHY CIA’S RICHARD HELMS LIED ABOUT OSWALD: PART 3,” WhoWhatWhy,
12/28/15.
LCIMPROVE is defined in two separate CIA documents as
"Counter-espionage involving Soviet intelligence services worldwide."
[In other words, an LCIMPROVE operation was a CI/OPS operation]
See Bill Simpich at
I take the on-going interest of the CI/OPS staff in the CTIA as
still further evidence that the CIA’s interest in the assassination had to do
with suppressing the relevance to the JFK assassination of their LCIMPROVE
operation in October 1963, involving “Lee Henry Oswald.”
Peter Dale Scott
The FBI did know, before the assassination, that Oswald had
contacted Kostikov.
ADMIN FOLDER-Q10: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, OSWALD FILE XEROX
Page 62
Kaack Report 10/31/63
The following information was furnished to the
Bureau by Legat, Mexico City, with the instructions that it
be classified secret and not be further disseminated:
CIA, Mexico City, advised Legat, Mexico,
on October 18, 1963, that LEE OSWALD contacted a Vice
Counsel [sic] VALERIY VLADMIRIVICH KOSTIKOV at the Soviet Embassy
on September 28, 1963, inquiring for a response from Wash-
ington, D.C. to an unknown request made by him. OSWALD
was again in contact with the Soviet Embassy, Mexico City, on
October 1, 1963.
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=117797&relPageId=62
Jerry Shinley
adding text to get past filter
Jerry has discovered an extremely interesting file here, and I am
trying to figure out exactly what it was. (I see it had gone to the HSCA
but I'm not sure what FBI office was in charge of it.) Among other
things, it appears (see p. 54) that the Washington Field Office had an ongoing
investigation of Oswald going on, which is news to me. I'm also intrigued
that while Oswald said he had left Reilly Coffee in July, Ms. Bertucci, I
believe, interviewed some time later, thought he was still there.
Jerry, have you figured out exactly what it is?
or to the alleged Duran & Oswald phone call to the Soviet consulate
on the PM of Saturday, Sept 28 (which I believe was an impersonation)...What is so intriguing about this post is that we don't know if this
post refers to Oswald's alleged visit to the Soviet consulate on the AM of Saturday,
Sept 28 (which I believe happened)...Among other reasons, there is no record of who supposedly received
the alleged Duran & Oswald call!
This reminds me of one of the most fascinating finds by John Newman
of all time: the fact that an FBI agent, CB Peck, was investigating
the Mexico City trip a couple of weeks before the assassination. Has anything
additional come of that? And might it connect to this?
I think it refers to the later phone call, asking about his
visa.
Bill, could you please link the entire 11/4/63 document whose
picture is on that page? Thanks.
Meanwhile, I am quickly looking at the Kostikov mystery.
(Please keep in mind that I'm in the midst of a very complex book about
something completely different--baseball--and am not holding myself to the
highest research standards in these emails.) The first mention I can find
is in one of the October 2 conversations--the second one, in which
the caller identified himself as Lee Oswald. But it's the Soviet, in that
conversation, who asks the caller if he saw Kostikov, and the caller only says
that the man he saw was "dark." I can't find anything else
until much later, in the November letter to the Soviet Embassy in Washington
Oswald wrote, but that referred to "Comrade Kostin" And that's
too late to be the source of the cable
I just looked at Jerry's cable again. The significance is far
greater than he thought. The cable seems to be referring to the September
28 call supposedly from Duran and Oswald to Kostikov at the Soviet
Embassy, since it gives that date. But I can't see Kostikov identified as
the caller in the transcript, and Nechiporenko's book seems to indicate that he
was busy drafting a cable. Kostikov is identified in the
transcript of the obviously authentic September 27 call between him
and Duran, in which they agree they Oswald is nothing but trouble (in effect)
and that they can't give him what he wants. That call did prove Oswald
had talked to Kostikov--once you had identified "the American" as
Oswald.
What this means is that Jerry has discovered documentary proof, 52
years later, that the CIA knew before the assassination that Oswald had been in
the Cuban consulate, which they always officially denied.
More broadly, the file Jerry found--and I hope he or some one else
can shed more light on exactly what it is--seems to confirm something I have
thought for a long time. FBI HQ ran the bureau but was careful to insulate its
thoughts and plans from the field. We have never had access to what the
key people at HQ were thinking about Oswald--we don't even know who they
were. But it definitely seems from this file as if they were paying close
attention.
Here's the 11/4/63 Peck report - my article has a list of all of
Peck's reports.
I don't think the FBI memo should be read to indicate a phone call
between
Oswald and Kostikov on Sept. 28.
Kostikov, Yatskov, and Nechiporenko all say in Nechiporenko's book that Oswald visited them on the morning of
Sept.28 - none of them, nor any other Soviet, says that he called that
afternoon.
David is right in saying that no Soviet is identified in the
transcript as taking the call from Duran and Oswald the afternoon of Sept 28.
I think that either the voices were faked or (like Peter Dale Scott) the
call never happened at all.
Next year, with a little luck, we may find out the identities of
the transcribers who listened to those phone calls. With a little more
luck, maybe one or more of them is still alive.
This kind of evidence is precisely why these documents have been
kept away from the public for more than fifty years. It's the equivalent
of destruction of evidence to hold it back until key witnesses die.
It's why even informants identities' should not be protected in a case like
this. The balance of fairness should tip towards justice, not privacy.
Back in the late 1970s when I asked Marion Johnson why the HSCA and
all Congressional records were sealed for 50 years - and exempted from the FOIA
- he said because that's the estimated amount of time those mentioned in the
records would be dead.
To make the point - Judd McIlvain - mentioned in the third document
on the list died a few months ago.
Correct link to McIlvain
Paul notes there are other documents on McIlvain that have been
released that I haven't added yet.
To my article on Restoring Oliver Stone's Mercedes and the Elephant
in the Archives
FYI, as a first crack here is what I have requested under FOIA from
the newly released NARA list of “denied docs.”
Department of State:
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10000
Telegram 1111 from “State” to “Moscow,” record series “261.1122
Oswald, Robert L,” dated 11/01/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10001
Telegram 1310 from “Moscow” to Sec. State,” record series
“261.1122, dated 11/02/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY FOR
SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,”
created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40007-10079
Document from “AMEMBASSY” to “Department of State,” record series
“Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,” dated 11/29/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
Department of Justice:
NARA Record Number 179-20001-10321
Document from “Kennedy, Regis,” to “SAC, New Orleans,” record
series “Classified Subject File129-11, Enclosures, Serial #71, created 5/18/67
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY [OF
STATE] FOR SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey
Oswald,” created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
CIA:
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA:
NARA Record Number 180-10110-10016
Document from “Phillips, David Atlee,” record series “Security
Classified Testimony,” file number 014726, dated 4/25/78
Originator House Select Committee on Assassinations
NARA Record Number 157-10002-10029
“Interview with Richard Bissell” by Church Committee, record series “Interview
summary,” sated 9/06/75
Originator: SSCIA
Bryan –
Thanks for filing and sharing these FOIA
requests.
I wonder if the recipients will
initially deny them, or look for available copies.
I have found two open-in-full copies.
Also, I found related documents which give
us some idea of what two of the withheld documents are about.
Requested: 179-10002-10000
A NARA search for 1111 with date=11/01/59
turned up four possible copies which are open:
119-10021-10205,
119-10021-10243, 119-10021-10263, 119-10021-10312
I think this unredacted document is
telegram 1111:
Requested: 179-10002-10001
“1302” and “11/02/59” gives three open
copies:
119-10021-10204,
119-10021-10244, 119-10021-10262
Requested: 179-20001-10321
This six-page document has SUBJECTS:
LACOUR, LOUIS; GARRISON, JAMES
A second withheld copy (179-20002-10281)
gives a better idea of the contents:
SUBJECTS: KENNEDY, REGIS, APPEARANCE BEFORE
ORLEANS PARISH GJ; GARRISON, JAMES
COMMENTS: ATTACHED TO DIRECTOR
TO AG 5/19/67; BOX 57
One copy of the document referred to in
that comment is also withheld:
RECORD NUMBER: 179-20002-10284
SUBJECTS: REGIS KENNEDY 5/18/67 RE KENNEDY'S APPEARANCE BEFORE LA GJ
But this copy is open:
124-10045-10130
Here is the grand jury testimony:
Requested: 179-40006-10052
RECORDS SERIES: DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE
HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-28924
FROM: HOOVER, J. EDGAR
TO: DIRECTOR, CIA
DATE: 12/06/1963
SUBJECTS: TRANSMITTAL OF DOCUMENTS
CURRENT STATUS: POSTPONED IN FULL
COMMENTS: BOX 2, FOLDER 4; ATTACHED TO REPORT FROM SEATTLE OF 11/26/63; BOX F11
Related and open:
RECORD NUMBER: 104-10422-10185
FROM: FBI: SEATTLE, WASH.
TITLE: REPORT: REACTION TO PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S DEATH BY VARIOUS SUBVERSIVE
GROUPS IN THE SEATTLE AREA
DATE: 11/26/1963
PAGES: 10
SUBJECTS: FPCC; NELSON, BURT GA
Paul
FYI, as a first crack here is what I have requested under FOIA from
the newly released NARA list of “denied docs.”
Department of State:
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10000
Telegram 1111 from “State” to “Moscow,” record series “261.1122
Oswald, Robert L,” dated 11/01/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-10002-10001
Telegram 1310 from “Moscow” to Sec. State,” record series
“261.1122, dated 11/02/59
Originator: Department of State
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY FOR
SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,”
created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40007-10079
Document from “AMEMBASSY” to “Department of State,” record series
“Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey Oswald,” dated 11/29/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
Department of Justice:
NARA Record Number 179-20001-10321
Document from “Kennedy, Regis,” to “SAC, New Orleans,” record
series “Classified Subject File129-11, Enclosures, Serial #71, created 5/18/67
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40001-10352
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “DEP ASSIST SECRETARY [OF
STATE] FOR SECURITY,” record series “Lot 85D275: Records relating to Lee Harvey
Oswald,” created 12/20/63
Originator: FBI
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
CIA:
NARA Record Number 179-40006-10052
Document from “Hoover, J. Edgar” to “Director, CIA,” record series
“DO PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” dated 12/06/63
Originator: FBI
NARA record Number 179-40006-10141
Document from “AMEBASSY MEXICO CITY” to SECSTATE, record series “DO
PERSONALITY FILE ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD, FILE 201-289248,” 11/22/63
Originator: Department of State
NARA:
NARA Record Number 180-10110-10016
Document from “Phillips, David Atlee,” record series “Security
Classified Testimony,” file number 014726, dated 4/25/78
Originator House Select Committee on Assassinations
NARA Record Number 157-10002-10029
“Interview with Richard Bissell” by Church Committee, record series “Interview
summary,” sated 9/06/75
Originator: SSCIA
Bryan Bender
Defense Editor/National Security Correspondent
POLITICO
David Philip's 4/25/78 testimony is already available:
Thanks all. Weird -and frustrating that somebody this stuff is
available but is deemed withheld. Is it possible what has been released is only
partial?
| Is it possible what has been released is only
partial? |
Is it possible the Federal Government is not a well-oiled machine,
and one agency refuses to release something that another agency has already
released?
Is it possible that the Federal Government can’t actually keep up
with what it has or hasn’t been released?
Is it possible bureaucrats are often confused and clueless?
John
Subject: Re: Bryan Bender's FOIA reques
The answer to the above is "yes," but the list is not
necessarily all-encompassing. Jim
Dear Bryan et al,
Regarding the two
documents listed under NARA, I am quite certain I read Phllips's HSCA testimony
and Bissell's SSCIA testimony. (It's not clear whether you are looking for
something slightly different from the testimony.) Phillips's testimony
was fascinating because while he denied that he was Maurice Bishop, he
confirmed an astonishing amount of Veciana's story--almost as if he were
teasing the committee. Bissell gave the most arrogant testoimony I have
ever seen before a Congressional committee. I am pretty certain the
Phillips testimony was at history-matters.com and the Bissell testimony was
among the Church Committee testimony at NARA. However,. your citations
suggest you may be looking for supplementary materials.
Bissell's testimony was on the discs released by JFK Lancer many
years ago. I read it in 2005.
I don't recall Bissell being particularly arrogant, but rather
simply explaining how the CIA participated in carrying out things that were
official US policy. I guess things hit people different ways. I do recall that
on the Church Committee there was some tension between those who wanted to
blame the Kennedy brothers and those who wanted to blame Dulles, Bissell,
Cabell, etc.
Don
Bryan Bender
Defense Editor/National Security Correspondent
POLITICO
What the government is still hiding about the JFK assassination
The National Archives, for the first time ever, released a list of
documents related to the assassination that are still shielded from public
view.
More than five decades after the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, thousands of government files detailing the activities and testimony
of shadowy spies, long-deceased witnesses and others with possible knowledge of
the events remain shielded from public view.
The government gave a first-ever peek at what's still out there
Thursday, as the National Archives released a list of the 3,063 documents that
have been "fully withheld" since JFK's murder in Dallas on Nov. 22,
1963.
The documents listed — released in response to a Freedom of
Information Act request from POLITICO, other news organizations and researchers
— were collected by the Assassination Records Review Board, an independent
panel created by the 1992 JFK Records Act.
That same act requires that all the documents on the list be
released by October 2017 unless the next president decides to keep them
classified.
Based on what has been revealed previously, many of the files are
expected to have no direct bearing on Kennedy's death in Dealey Plaza but could
reveal intelligence operations involving Cuba, secret relationships between
U.S. spy agencies and unsavory characters during the height of the Cold War, as
well as other secrets the U.S. government might have resisted disclosing
publicly as part of a full and open investigation at the time.
Cold War scholars have long suspected that many of the
still-withheld files will not necessarily shed new light on whether Oswald
acted alone. They could, however, help explain why some top officials at the time
might have sought to prevent a thorough investigation, out of concern it would
require airing the dirty laundry of covert activities.
Yet asked whether there might be any significant revelations about
Kennedy's unsolved murder, Martha Murphy, head of the Archives' Special Access
Branch, told POLITICO last year, “I’ll be honest. I am hesitant to say you’re
not going to find out anything about the assassination.”
The Archives says that "certain information has been
removed" from the list, including titles and other identifying
information, to protect national security, personal privacy and tax
information.
Here is a snapshot of what is still being hidden from the public
about key figures, probes and other events that the Archives has deemed
relevant to the JFK investigation.
Lee Harvey Oswald
Secret CIA "personality" studies of the reported lone
assassin fingered by the Warren Commission produced immediately after the
assassination have yet to be released, along with a telegram about him from the
U.S. Embassy in Mexico City to the State Department a week after the
assassination. Oswald, a former Marine who had temporarily defected to the
Soviet Union in 1959, is suspected of having visited Mexico City in the weeks
before the assassination, reportedly to obtain a visa to travel to Cuba.
There also are hundreds of other pages of undated CIA files that
contain classified information on Oswald, including a handwritten note from
Yuri Nosenko, a KGB officer who defected from the Soviet Union and also is the
subject of numerous other secret transcripts and tapes contained in the
withheld records, as well as another document on Oswald's "contacts with
Cuban and Soviet embassies." The trove also includes a pair of 1959
telegrams — one from the State Department to Moscow and the other from Moscow
to Secretary of State Christian Herter — regarding Oswald's brother Robert.
J. Edgar Hoover
There are a series of communications from the longest-serving and
highly secretive FBI director, including one titled "Reaction of Soviet
and Communist Party officials to JFK assassination" that he sent to
President Lyndon B. Johnson's chief of staff, Marvin Watson, a week after the
assassination; another a few weeks later to the deputy secretary of state for
security relating to Oswald; and a series of 1964 memos sent to J. Lee Rankin,
the general counsel of the Warren Commission, about Jack Ruby, the Dallas night
club owner with mafia ties who killed Oswald two days after the assassination
in the basement of the Dallas police station, preventing a trial.
Jacqueline Kennedy
At least five communications are contained in the files from the
former first lady to President Lyndon B. Johnson in the days immediately
following the assassination.
James Jesus Angleton
Still classified is the top-secret testimony from the chief of the
CIA's counterintelligence branch from 1954 to 1975 before the so-called Church
Committee, convened by the U.S. Senate in 1975 to investigate abuses by the spy
agency. It was the Church Committee that revealed for the first time that the
CIA had hired figures in organized crime with deep ties to Havana to help
overthrow the communist government of Fidel Castro, including through
assassination attempts.
Frank Sturgis
Also contained in the remaining JFK files is the former military
officer and undercover operative's 1975 testimony before the Church Committee.
Sturgis was also one of the five Watergate burglars whose break-in at the
Democratic Party headquarters in 1972 led to the resignation of President
Richard Nixon.
David Atlee Phillips
The trove includes the secret testimony before the House Select
Committee on Assassinations in 1978 from the longtime CIA officer who was
involved in covert U.S. plans to assassinate Castro and also was a person of
interest in the JFK case for scholars and researchers.
Regis Kennedy
Kennedy (no relation to the president) is among several witnesses
connected to the events in Dallas in 1963 who died before they could be fully
questioned. Kennedy reportedly suffered a heart attack the day before he was
scheduled to testify before a grand jury on confiscated home movies of the
assassination. The unreleased files contain an untitled communication from
Justice Department files from Regis Kennedy to the special agent in charge of
the FBI's New Orleans field office on May 18, 1967.
Protected sources
Several unidentified CIA documents, according to the newly released
inventory of withheld JFK records, have been kept from the public to protect an
intelligence source that is still living.
Illegible material
Sure to fuel conspiracy theories, a sizable portion of CIA
documents related to the JFK case is deemed “illegible.” The documents include
one from the general counsel of the Warren Commission to the CIA's Richard
Helms. Helms, who later became director, managed the agency's cooperation with
the independent panel that was set up by President Johnson and concluded that
Oswald was the lone assassin.
Another set of documents the agency shared with the Warren
Commission deemed unreadable: several communications from the agency's station
in Mexico City before and after the assassination, including a cable to
"Director Info Havana" on Nov. 11, 1959.
Also deemed unreadable is a secret communication from the CIA to
the Office of Naval Intelligence before the assassination — in October 1963 —
about Oswald.
Not believed relevant
Some of the withheld documents were designated in the 1990s by the
Assassination Records Review Board as "not believed relevant" to the
assassination but are nevertheless of keen historical interest. They include
the CIA "operational" files of E. Howard Hunt, another of the
Watergate burglars and a career spy. Also withheld is a CIA file on Jack
Wasserman, a lawyer for New Orleans mafia boss Carlos Marcello and a longtime
suspect in the assassination who was also involved in CIA plots to overthrow
Castro in Cuba.
