[104-10218-10013.pdf — page 18]
well-built with little evidence of fat. He always wore a vest. He spoke fluentSpanish and could have been of Polish or Russian family background. HARBINalways drank tea, never coffee. He appeared affluent with a professorial airabout him.Following an initial mecting, ITHIN alleges that he am HARDE periodically in New York City. ITKIN alleges that he passed to HARBIN copiesof the correspondence developed by his law firm, Delson, Levin and Gordon,dealing with Indonesia, Burma, and India, ITKIN left that law firm in mid-1957,presumably thereby losing total access. Among the materials ITKIN claims hepassed to HARBIN before he left the Delson, Levin and Gordon firm was informa-tion he picked up from a friend who worked at the United Nations for theGovernment of El Salvador. This friend was Luis E. GUTIERREZ (see biographicsketch, Attachment A). ITKIN claims that he became very friendly withGUTIERREZ, who was studying either at New York University or Columbiawhere he prepared a master's thesis on El Salvador's economic position.HARBIN, he says, was interested in the topic and ITKIN alleges he furnishedHARBIN notes of GUTIERREZ' monograph.Sometime presumably after mid-year 1957, HARBIN asked ITKIN if heknew anybody else who could do (intelligence) work, ITKIN recalled GUTIERREZ,who meanwhile had moved to the position as Consul General of El Salvador inNew Orleans, Louisiana. HARBIN--ITKIN says--accepted the suggestion andITKIN provided an introduction for HARBIN by letter, which he sent to GUTIERREZin New Orleans, ITKIN asserts that HARBIN--according to his own statement--went to New Orleans and made the "new contact". ITKIN claims he last sawHARBIN in 1960.3. A comparison between the key points of ITKIN's account as summarized   in the immediately preceding paragraph with the data set out in Attachment A and   E will show immediate contradictions that tend to destroy any credibility in   ITKIN's account, particularly with respect to his relationship to GUTIERREZ.   We also point out, solely for your information, that we have found no confirma-   tion in our records of any relationship between this Organization and ITKIN during   the period 1954-1960, No traces have been found in our records or anywhere in   government thus far of a Philip HARBIN, and there is explicit denial that there was   any meeting in Philadelphia in 1954 between ITKIN and the high officials he   nominates. Finally, there is no substantiation in our files of any of the intelli-   gence product which ITKIN allegedly passed to HARBIN. This case, however, is   of such a nature that we must strive, if possible, to have GUTIERREZ' own   statement for the record.4. We leave to the Station determination of the best manner to approach   GUTIERREZ. It is our preference that a Station officer, under suitable cover,   perform the interview, but it may well be that a consular or embassy officer   might be the best person to do the job. We repeat that we are concerned in this   matter solely with the verification or denial of ITKIN's statements, specifically   the allegation that he introduced HARBIN to GUTIERREZ in New Orleans and   that as a consequence GUTIERREZ would be in a position to identify and describe   HARBIN in a way that would permit us to locate him if he exists. The request   for GUTIERREZ' assistance in this matter is in no way predicated upon hostility   towards ITKIN nor is there any predisposition against his claims if indeed   evidence is found to back them up. If GUTIERREZ indicates that he is willing to   provide whatever information he can, you can assure him that his information is   solely for U.S. Government use and will not be made public by us at any time   without his expressed consent. Also, it is clear that we are prepared to accept   his decision to give no assistance in the matter.