Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[104-10162-10121.pdf — page 0]
# 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992SECRETREQUEST FOR APPROVAL OR INVESTIGATIVE ACTIONTO: CI/Operational Approval and Support DivisionSecurity Support Division/Office of SecuritySUBJECT:Santiago ALVAFEZ FernandesCRYPTONYM, PSEUDONYM, AKA OR ALIASESDATE: 30 Jan 61FROM: Margaret MossWE/427:2 Qtis E8564PROJECT: JWAEZCI/OR FILE NO.RI 201 FILE NO. 291413SO FILE NO.TYPE ACTION REQUESTEDPROVISIONAL OPERATIONAL APPROVALOPERATIONAL APPROVALPROVISIONAL COVERT SECURITY APPROVALCOVERT SECURITY APPROVALCOVERT SECURITY APPROVAL FOR LIAISON WITH U.S. OFFICIALSPROVISIONAL PROPRIETARY APPROVALPROPRIETARY APPROFALCOVERT NAME CHECKSPECIAL INQUIRY (50 field investigation)SPECIFIC AREA OF USE: CubaFULL DETAILS OF USE: PM TraineesINVESTIGATIVE COVERIS OR WILL SUBJECT BE AWARE OF U.S. GOVERNMENT INTEREST IN HIM? YES NOIS OR WILL SUBJECT BE AWARE OF CIA INTEREST IN HIM? YES NOINDICATE SPECIAL LIMITATIONS OR COVERAGE DESIRED IN THE SECURITY OFFICE INVESTIGATIONNoneIF NO INVESTIGATION OUTSIDE CIA. EXPLAIN FULLYPPO AND GREEN LIST STATUSPPO 1. OR EQUIVALENT. IN (2) COPIES: ATTACHED PPO 11. WILL BE FORWARDEDPPO 11. OR EQUIVALENT, IN (1) COPY ATTACHED GREEN LIST ATTACHED: 3108574FIELD TRACESNO RECORD NO INFORMATION OF VALUEDEROGATORY INFORMATION ATTACHED, WITH EVALUATION NOT INITIATED (Explanation)WILL BE FORWARDEDRI TRACES (Derogatory Information and Evaluation Attached)NO RECORD RECORD NON-DEROGATORY DEROGATORYDIVISION TRACES (Derogatory Information and Evaluation Attached)NO RECORD RECORD NON-DEROGATORY DEROGATORYSIGNATURE OF CASE OFFICER EXTENSION SIGNATURE OF BRANCH CHIEFfor Joseph Piccolo 8564 for Jacob D. EsterlineSECRET211-291417RETURN TO CIABackground Use OnlyDo Not Reproduce
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 0]
14-00000104-10162-10241 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992> [Figure: A scanned document with heavy crease marks and some stains, containing a photograph on top. The document mentions the name "Ivan Gavrilovich ALFERYEV" and an ID number.]PhotographsIvan Gavrilovich ALFERYEV (201-0330701)
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 1]
# DISPATCHCLASSIFICATIONSECRETRXBATTO: Chief, Soviet Bloc DivisionINFO: Chief, Western Hemisphere DivisionFROM: Chief of Station, Buenos AiresSUBJECT: RYBAT/REDTOP/DIOGENESIS/AFROOR - Surveillance ReportsACTION REQUIRED REFERENCES:Reference: HABA-20512, dated 25 April 19691.  Reference dispatch described our efforts against AEBOOR and stated that the next phase would consist of a 24 hour a day surveillance of Subject for a period of about two weeks. The coverage was initiated at 0600 hours on 19 May, and terminated at 1515 hours on 26 May, the day of AEBOOR's departure for home leave.2.  The overall results of the surveillance effort were interesting, and provided us with a great deal of basic data which should prove valuable in futuro AEBOOR operational planning. Although the period covered must be viewed as somewhat atypical since it covered a time of preparation for homo leave, the basic pattern could not have varied greatly from the norm. There was definite evasive action designed to shake surveillance taken by AEBOOR on several occasions; there were repeat visits to several establishments which could easily serve as lottor drops or con- tact points; and there was an interesting contact on 21 May (reported in BUENOS AIRES 3009) with an individual we failed to identify positively.3.  Although the above makes it appear that we are approaching -the-AXBOOR peration strictly from the CI/CE angle, this is not the case. We are attempting to gather adequate information to give us a clear insight into AEBOOR's activities in order to holp us attempt to introduce an access agent into this operation, or to expand direct development of Subject by Station officers.4.  Forwarded under separate cover for Headquarters study are copies of the surveillance roports along with a copy of the AFLANYARD transoript for 21 May.Attachment:U/B/C as StatedDistribution:3 - C/BHD, w/attach u/s/o2- C/WILD, W/o attachPaul W. LEVERONEHABA-20007SECRETRYBAT16 June-1.000201-236701L
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 2]
# DISPATCH## Chief of Station, Buenos AiresChief, SB via Chief, hli DivisionREDTOP/AEXICK/AEBOOROperational Possibilitios against ABBOORReference: IICSW 7666, 11 February 19691. With the departure of AEBOOR and his wife on home leave, wo would like to offer a fow comments about him for possiblu future action by the Station when he returns. The impetus for these thoughts was a recent examination of the files of H'l those Soviets on the priority target Adst to determine if, perhaps, one of thom offers more of a potential for intonsive development than another. The purpose of this review was not to discard the agreed-upon targo list, since this list is the rationale behind the entire concept of selective targetting; but rather, to attempt a narrowing of the Station's focus on the one particular Soviet who appears to be the best selection for operational devolopment among the priority group. We have looked at such factors as susceptibilities (known or potontial), contacts, accessibility, etc. and, for reasons discussed below, fool that AEBOOR may be the best selection for a dotermined Station offort aimed at his eventual recruitment. Thus, the Station's focus on the other priority Soviets would continue at its prosent lovel but at the same time, AliBOOR would be placed "under the microscopo" as the object of a more intonsive Station offort aimed as gaining multiple accoss to him.2. With the imminent departure of BIBANDIT/12 from Buenos Airoo and the resulting elimination of our one good contact with ABVULTURD, the choice of ANBOOR became casior to make. His saloccion, however, was based on several considerations which, from our vantage point, soon to offer the best potential for Station action when he returns to the country.a. Acceasibility: AEBOOR is one of the very few Soviets with whom direct Statfor contact has been made. The social ovening spone with him and his wife in January showed excellunt preniso because it appeared that foundations for rapport and Jurther contact had been laid. We note, however, that thero has been no moncion further moetings since the initial one, four end one-half months ago. Due to the olapsed time, wo assume that Subiect and his wife are not planning to rociprocato the Invitations on ve other hand, enough time will have pass since the initial contact for the Station to take the initiativoCS COPYSB/X/W!!SB/MCSB/CI/OC/WII/4/ARIDANABXFIDISPATCH SYMBOL AND MUMBIQJHADW11473CLASSIFICATIONOFFICEOFFICE SYMBOLDATEAC/3B/X/WISB/CT/OC/WII/4/AOFFICE SYMBOLC/W/4DAIL10 JUN 1960RELEASINGGIPIK'S WARRE
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 4]
CONTINUATION OFDISPATCH DISPATCH SYMBOL AND NUMBER# SECRET IIABW 11473d. AVDEPTH: The ability to monitor AEBOOR through this technical operation was a key factor in deciding to bring him under closer focus. it should be able to provide the necessary depth to any human assessment of the target and it gives us the singular opportunity to "observe" AEBOOR when he is relaxed at home and not exhibiting the official mannerisms and personality which he must display in public and around his other Soviet colleagues. If we are able to expand the burgeoning Staffer contact with Subject as well as place access agents in touch with him, then his reactions to these contacts can be monitored and our moves against him tailored accordingly.3. As part of the total effort to build up a large amount of information on the selected target, we are including as an attachment, a copy of the new Personality Characteristic Questionnaire (PCQ) with instructions for its use. lly employing it in conjunction with your direct assessment of ALBOOR, we should be able to slowly build up onough information on him so that the indirect psychological assessment techniquécan also be applied. The PCQ is a now form and less time-consuming than others but we believe it should be an integral part of the entire assessment process focused on a target Soviet and that it can bo an invaluable aid in attempting to evaluate the varied impressions of the target which have been obtained from multiple access to him. An initial review of the PCQ may give the impression that many of the questions are irrelevant and have no bearing on the determination of a persons susceptibility to manipulation. The questionnaire should not be perused piecemeal, however, but taken in its entirety since each portion will be interpreted and weighted by the indirect psychological cal assessment techniques until a very complete impression of the total personality emerges. We encourage the Station to wailise the PCQ and when sufficiently complete, forward it to Headquarters for evaluation.4. Once again, we wish to emphasize that lleadquarters is in a position to offer guidance and support to your efforts, but the direction of the case rests with the Station. The case officer involved is in the best spot to fudge the progress of the case and make decisions accordingly. For this reason, we encourage a continuous end candid dialogue, concerning the various aspects of your operations against the selected Soviet targets in order to insure professional development of each case. If our choice of ABBOOR is ag variance with your on-the-spot assessment of the priority Soviets, thon we would appreciate your appraisal of him as well as any suggestions about a more logical candidate for closer focus.AttachmentsAs stated H/WDistributioni3-COS![signature]Philip D. HIPERMAN
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 5]
CABLE SECRETARIAT DISSEMINATIONPERSON/UNIT NOTIFIEDSS-FIED MESSAGETOTAL COPIES 26UTING AND/OR INITIALS SEEN BY**SECRET**GROUP I6(When Filed in)7REPRODUCTION OF THIS COPY PROHIBITED8ADVANCE COPYISSUEDBLOTTEDINDEX: YES NO10BY:AT:CLASSIFY TO FILE NO.DISSEM BY DKPPERM-REF TO FILE NO.BRANCHDESTROY SIG.ACTION SR8RID COPYINFO:FILE, VR, RlAN. WHB, a.alops. slice F2187SECRET 272000Z MAY 69 CITE BUENOS AIRES/3032 MAY 69 IN 67772DIRECTORREDTOP BIOGENESIS1.  BIOGENESIS TRAVEL CONTROLS REPORT 26 MAY DEPARTURE FOR USSR OF IVAN CAVRILOVICH ALFERYEV (201-236701) AND WIFE ROSA VIA AEROLINEAS ARGENTINAS 140 TO ROME. LYUDMILA IVANOVNA MAKAROCHKINA, WIFF OF 201-802696, ALSO LEFT SANE FLIGHT.2.  PER BILOCULAR ALFERYEVS WILL TRAVEL ROME TO MOSCOW BY TRAIN. BIBAFFLE AND OTHER SOURCES INDICATE WILL RETURN BUENOS AIRES AFTER HOME LEAVE.3.  HAVE NO INFO ON MAKAROCHKINA'S ONWARD TRAVEL FROM ROME NOR ON HER HUSBAND'S PLANS TO JOIN HER. DO NOT KNOW WHETHER DEPARTURE PCS OR HOME LEAVE.4.  FILE 201-236701 AND 201-802696.SECRET![signature and markings]8201-802696![stamp with date and office name]SECRET![signature and markings]201-23670127 May 69
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 6]
# PATRICIA GRAHAM:DGNIT: WH/4/ART: 1926DATE: 27 MAY 1969ABLE SECRETARIAT DISSEMINATION15. PORFILE. VA. RIAN, SB 8, EVEL, C/K20SECRET 20 17 20 Z MAY 69 CITE DIRECTOR 06410BUENOS AIRES INFO PARISREDCOAT BIOGENESISREF: BUENOS AIRES 3009 (IN 65500)1. NO TRACKS.2. FILE: 201-236701END OF MESSAGEWH Comment: Requested traces Phillipe De Sezo, French citizen, who is visiting Argentina and is in contact with Ivan Gavrilovich ALFERYEV, known KGB.AC/WH/4/AEUR/FWILLIAM V. BROE/C/WHDCS COPY201-23670128 May 69C/WH/4
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 7]
# SECRETSECRET 231720Z MAY 69 CITE BUENOS AIRES 3009DIRECTOR INFO PARIS23 MAY 69 IN 65500RYBAT REDTOP BIOGENESIS1.  REQUEST TRACES INCLUDING LIAISON FRENCH CITIZEN PHILLIPE    DE SEZE, DPOB 22 SEPTEMBER 1920, BORDEAUS, PASSPORT 155114. DIRECTOR    OF EXPORTACION FRANCAIS VISITING ARGENTINA.2.  BIBAFFLE TEAM SURVEIL.LING IVAN GAVRILOVICH ALFERYEV,    SECOND SECRETARY AND KNOWN KGB, DURING WEEK PRIOR ALFERYEV    HONE LEAVE DEPARTURE. ON 21 MAY SPENT SEVERAL HOURS WITH    LIMPING MAN WHO OBVIOUSLY NOT ARGENTINE. TWO MET IN EMBASSY,    HAD COFFEE IN LOCAL CAFE, VISITED ALFERYEV APARTMENT THEN    RETURNED EMBASSY. CHECK OF HOTEL IN WHICH APPEARED MOST    LIKELY VISITOR STAYING REVEALED DE SEZE ONLY GUEST WITH LIMP.    HAS STAYED HOTEL VARIOUS TIMES INCLUDING PERIOD 3 TO 18 MAY.    CURRENT CHECK IN DATE WAS 21 MAY.3.  NO STATION TRACES.4.  INDEX DE SEZE. FILE: 201-836701.SECRETSECRET
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 8]
Source: BUENOS AIRESHABA-20528Reel No.: 5Side(s): 1Readability: Very poorDate(s) of Intercept: 16/17 April 69Rec'd at Prod. Unit: 16 May 69Processing Completed: 3 June 69Transcriber/Checker: N.V.M.Translator/Editor: L.T.Typist: L.T.Interesting Tape -deteriorating (apparently) relationship between A' & wife. Vasilyev again mediator.BILL BThirdKmky- Plls. file AE7002SECRET
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 9]
BUENOS AIRES - Reel 5A. Ivan (ALFERYEV)B. Rosa (ALFERYEV)C. Anatoliy Ilich (VASILYEV)((Readability is very poor. Music is playing very loudly.))A., B., and C. continue their conversation. ((Reel 4))They talk about clothing and dinner jackets. C. says he does not own a dinner jacket, and adds, "But according to regulations, I...By official government regulations, a counselor is provided/allowed ((to have a dinner jacket)). I'll tell you, there are some people who think I don't know this. They keep quiet about it... but I'm embarrassed to say..." B. comments, "You should have one made, and that's all." C. says that when he needed a dinner jacket, he talked to the Ambassador about it. He adda, "Concerning the dinner jacket, he ((the Ambassador)) said, 'Drive over; you have... well, get it from ALFERYEV. That's an Ambassador!' ((Short portion unreadable.))B. remarks, "Anatoliy Ilich, he ((probably the Ambassador)) is a strange man."They continue talking about dinner jackets. A. says that some diplomats at other embassies also do not have dinner jackets. He says to C., "Why don't you ask the French Ambassador if he has a tail coat..." 0. comments, "What a comparison!" A. continues, "By the way, they rent ((tail coats))... Ask the French counsel if he owns a dinner jacket..." C. states, "And you go ahead and ask how much they pay an ambassador -- $500, $1.000.I know they get (20) ((a high salary))." ((Portion unreadable; all talk at once.)) A. says, "He doesn't have one; they rent ((evening clothes.))" C. disagrees, "No, Ivan; you're wrong. That doesn't bother me." A. says, "I realise that." C. explains, "This is a matter of representation ((diplomacy)). If a man has such a difficult, such a difficult... but I know that (XG)." ((Portion unreadable; all talk simultaneously.))A. insists, "Everybody rents ((evening clothes)); everybody rents." C. exclaims, "But I'm supposed to have it ((a dinner jacket)) according to the regulations. It's written, it's written. Why should I rent it. If you wish, I'll let you read it ((the regulation)).'
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 10]
A. and C. try to convince each other on the pro and con of rentinga dinner jacket.C. expresses his indignation about the situation and tellsof his conversation with the Ambassador about a dinner jacket whenthey were due to attend a function: "I told him... if I find adinner jacket... So, you will go ((alone)). You have one. Buthe asked me, 'But why don't you have one?' I said, 'Yuriy Ivanovich,you yourself know why I don't have one.' He shut up..." Later,B. agrees, "You should have your own ((dinner jacket)).C. continues to be resentful, and says, "But the man ((unclear who,possibly the Ambassador)) is jealous, so that, I don't know...that some sort of (?crooked - krivoy?) counselor will have adinner jacket. I... ((B. laughs)) I spit on you..." ((probablyreferring to a supposed critic)). C. adds that he frequently saysthat "if a dinner jacket is required, I will not go."The three have a drink. ((short pause)) They discussmusic, and talk about an orchestra which they heard on TV. Theycomment on tickets which they have received for various concerts.((Readability is very poor: the TV covers their conversation.))They talk about theatrical artists, the Bolshoi Theatre, and anorchestra. Mention is made of DURMAYEVSKIY, the composer, andvarious records. ((Loud music covers their conversation.))They talk about OYSTRAKH and OSTROPOVICH. B. flirts a bit withA. and C. All laugh frequently.Farther, B. changes the subject and speaks irritably abouther work. She asks A., "Was my work at the Embassy normal, was itnormal?" A. states, "It was normal." B. retorts, "Oh... it wasnormal. Yes, ((sarcastically)) it was normal. I did not (so)normally when I was sitting in (Pavlovich's?) ((not otherwiseidentified)) office. (20). And I'll tell anyone you please thatit ((the work)) was not normal." A.'s brief comment is unprintable.B. insists angrily, "I'll say it myself. And I won't ask (to).I know whom to tell. I'll definitely say it." A. calls her"a fool!" B. rebukes him, "The word 'fool' is always at the tipof your tongue; 'fool,' 'fool.' All evening, all evening."A. states, "That's the first time I said it." B. rants, "So, you saidit for the first time! Really? You only said it once?"
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 11]
C. attempts to sooth B., "Well, Ivan didn't want to say anything bad. I'm sure of that... It isn't that... It concerns some sort of... ((All talk at once -- unreadable)) A. states, "This is none of your business (4G) and I'm not planning to." B. shouts, "Right, so don't put/seat me where you shouldn't -- in the bathroom!" ((figuratively speaking)). C. interrupts, "Rosa, Rosochka, what are you saying!" B. yells, "Well..." C. continues, "Well, Rosa... Rous, sometimen..." B. retorts sarcastically, "It's none of my business -- that's the main thing!" C. says, "Ivan is sometime incorrect/unjust in his attitude toward you ((plural)) but you ((the informal "ty")) understand how difficult it becomes for married (3G) ((possibly moaning "officials")), Roza. Rozochka, you shouldn't... you should work some more/longer..." A. repeats to B., "It's none of your business." C. adds, "You shouldn't be that way... Later everything will be better." A. remarks, "She's not satisfied..." C. continues, "Because we/you have to maneuvre somehow. Even if we were wrong, even if we were 100% wrong, you still have to wait. For you to see that we are wrong (1-20). Why is he wrong? Perhaps we are wrong, but there was some sort of precondition/reason for it. It's impossible for us to be wrong. According to his/our character, persuasion, (16)... desire... Do you understand what happens, Rozoohka?" A. states, "Do you understand, when they announce ((unknown what)) to them, they have not deserved that. It's always that way... In order to cast asperions on someone, it is absolutely necessary (2-30)..." B. protests, "((Even)) if (fan accusation?) is unjust? All right ((But if)) something is well done... ((express)) some gratitude, if you please..." C. comments, "Rozochka, don't you see, then the whole thing is that we then (10)." B. retorts, "At least he could have said that they were (?accusing?) me unjustly. At least he could have said..." C. says, "Roza! But here (20), do you understand, (XG) no such attention is given. For him here, you understand, (10). He is not alone here. A number of people are there, this one and that one ((colloquial: the fifth and the tenth))... And then perhaps someone... Especially a wife. That becomes most sensitive/painful. She is sort of the most sincere/frank person. But I wouldn't do it that way. There you are. And she will be correct. However, she did not see the one and the other person
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 12]
4. ((the fifth and the tenth person))... and immediately did not (2C)...It's good at times. My Lord, Galka does that. At times I feel hurt ((but)) I won't say (2G). I won't begin saying it. Sometimes I feel so hurt that (XG)." B. tells C., "Anatoliy Ilich, when everything will be clean, when everything will be put in order, then I/you/we can talk about gratitude. But now?... There's chaos all around! And you talk about gratitude... ((She sounds incensed))Everywhere there is (1G)." C. tries to convince her, "Roza! You shouldn't talk now. Do you understand? It has to be done gradually. After all, there is some sort of restraint/forbearance; there's a line... you have to (10). Roza! How much more/longer will we (10). er all, we haven't been together merely for one day. Take Ivan. (50) there are a minimum of 6 to 7 of us men in the Bureau. What I'm saying is that we must respect each other. We think, we discuss. We might make mistakes in something. But, nevertheless, 7 of us men won't be too mistaken as would be someone at (30). And then, a woman will sometimes not see/understand, Rozochka. (XO). Rosa, you shouldn't insult/hurt us that much. We have nerves and they (XG)." A.'s comment is unreadable.B. tells her husband, "Sit, sit, all right!" C. continues trying to convince B. that she shouldn't insult her husband.A bit further, B. tells C. irritably, "He piles everything on me. You're blaming me, right?" C. continues telling B. to treat her husband better, and says, "I love my Galka very much, and I see that Ivan loves ((you)). I am firmly convinced of that."B. laughs sarcastically. O. adds, "(XG) that means to indulge ((your husband)). Rosa, how can you do that?" C. continues, "what do you want to do -- do you want to see/think of your husband as a scoundrel?" B. replies, "(26) in ((his)) attitude toward his wife." O. adds, "Or that I should be a scoundrel? I won't be one. If Galka would throw me out, I wouldn't become a scoundrel any way. I spit on that. No matter what anybody says about me, I won't become a scoundrel any way. And I won't be led by the nose by any Nina MEDVEDEVA." ((Apparently, C. believes that MEDVEDEVA bosses her husband.))B. remarks, "I'm talking about (This attitude?) toward his wife." O. states, "And I'm saying that they are scoundrels."B. continues, "... personal attitude..."
[104-10162-10241.pdf — page 13]
C. states decisively, "They ((the MEDVEDEVS)) are scoundrels... Ivan, you shouldn't receive ((or, have anything to do with)) them. On the contrary, you should stay further away from them someplace, as far away as possible." C. continues lecturing B. about changing her attitude toward her husband.Further, C. tells B. about an incident which occurred where the MEDVEDEVs were involved, saying that the MEDVEDEVs had been given ingredients to make meat pastries (piroshki), and that they had not made the meat pastries but had said that the ingredients had spoiled. He asks B., "How could those people do that? What happened to the ingredients? Roza! You have to Answer! Please answer!" B. asks, "I should answer?! Let them answer!" C. says, "Aha... But they don't want to ((answer))." B. asks, "Why should I answer?" C. insists, "Go ahead... answer! What happened to them. How did they..." B. says, "I defend them!" C. continues, "What happened to the ingredients? Please answer. They... someone else, if you please... Why? Did they take them ((drive them)) someplace? They volunteered to make them. What happened ((to the ingredients)). How did they spoil? When did they spoil? What spoiled? And where did they drive to? Answer that question. And (?automatically?) they twisted everything around. Do you know what I'm leading up to? And what happened later?" A.'s comment is unreadable. B. states categorically, "Ivan will twist anything around..." C.'s comment unreadable. B. reports, "... he'll twist anything..." C. asks, "And then what about (10)?" A. says, "This is the very best example..." B. asks, "What did you say...?!" A. says something unreadable. B. asks, "Why do you ascribe things to me that I did not say? By the way, your manner has long since been noticed... has long since been noticed..." C. tries to interrupt her, but she continues, "... you can blame a person for something he did not say, and you will keep on insisting that he said that you (30) me." A.'s remark is unreadable. B. says, "... a good relationship. He ((MEDVEDEV)) has a very fine relationship/attitude toward his wife." Farther, C. asks, "What kind of relationship is that? If I did such a thing, Galka would give me such a lecture... if I permitted such a thing, did such a thing, she would not live with me. She would never permit me to do such a thing -- never would she look ((at me)) if I