[104-10217-10221.pdf — page 15]
# SECRET/KAPOK## OFLA 255535. S/1's family situation presents some cause for concern. As noted in the discussion on motivation, he has been receiving funds since January with only SKOPPRA to give as a source. His wife, who is a conscientious leftist, is presently suspicious of his activities, he says, largely because he received a phone call from PBSWING London in January. He explained it was a PBPRIDE journalist passing through who wished to talk with him, to which she was supposed to have retorted: "Why should someone from PBPRIDE be interested in you, and, moreover, why should you be interested in working for anything or anyone from PBPRIDE?" S/1 told RODIGAST that the backstopping effort initiated by LOND 8004 did not fully dispel her skepticism. S/1's reaction to the FLIFTER examination on the question of what his wife thinks" suggests that the matter is not laid to rest.36. S/1 seems to be most concerned that his wife not find out he is working for ODYOKE, let alone KUBARK, and we presume he has reason to feel she would probably say or do something, whether deliberate or not, that would compromise him in his present situation. We do not know the history of S/1's marriage, but we have received indications from him that lead us to believe he could not count on her discretion and loyalty in all circumstances. His relationship with his wife, therefore, must be watched with some care to insure that it does not comprise an undue hazard or that she does not become vulnerable in some way to forces inimical to his effectiveness in his work for KUBARK.37. Aside from speculation about possible repercussions in this area of their marital relationship, there remains the question of cover for some $3,100 passed S/1 by KUBARK in the past six months. His wife has been in the Journalism business long enough to know that virtually unemployed journalists are not usually given travel and salary advances merely for the asking, especially when their press credentials are largely notional or the nominal sponsor has yet to go into publication. Thus, we have reason to believe she has some rather nagging doubts as to the legitimacy of S/1's present cover job. This is implicit in Paragraph 5 of the attachment of OFLA 43,272.38. On 15 June S/1 told RODIGAST his wife told him on the phone that a letter to his from IDEN D warned him to be careful as things might be 'hot' for him in Algeria." IDEN D had apparently heard of S/1's forthcoming trip from contacts in New York and Paris, and S/1 surmises this means news of his summer's travels must be rather common knowledge by now.39. At TIFFANY's request S/1 let IDEN E know he was in Paris, and S/1 says that latter "came rushing around" to see his. S/1's report on this contact was passed to the Paris Station 17 June by LCPIPITH. In the report is S/1's assessment that IDEN E would probably be willing to talk to RODIGAST's "service." We shall discuss this case further with Paris Station, but in the meantime it should be noted for the record that as long as S/1 is said by many to be a KUBARK agent, it would not be unreasonable to assume that IDEN E might connect an approach by an ODYOKE representative with his recent conversations with S/1. Therefore, the possibility of a flop here should not be ignored.40. As far as S/1's contacts with KUBARK, he knows no one by true name and his case officer will continue to use an alias in all future contacts. At the same time, there is the ever-present danger that he may some day come to know RODIGAST's true name because of the number of acquaintances they have in common in Paris. It was largely for this reason that RODIGAST will avoid holding future operational meetings with S/1 in Paris. RODIGAST has already reportedthe rather unsettling experience of having S/1 tell him: "I think I've seen you someplace before." RODIGAST says this is quite possible. Were S/1 ever to stay in Paris for a considerable length of time the chances are not remote that RODIGAST's identity would be compromised to S/1.