Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[104-10226-10117.pdf — page 14]
SECRETSENSITIVE-2-Subject: Apparent RIS Interest in Donald E. Thomas,Bell Laboratoriesphone call to Thomas was made on a pay phone. In fact, when the opera-tor cut in for overtime, Thomas called Pavlov back at the pay phone.Thomas mentioned that he possibly might have the phone number writtendown somewhere.4. Soon after the phone call from Pavlov, Thomas called John   McVicker of the State Department and inquired if any clearance of   Pavlov's proposed trip to his home in Madison would be necessary.   McVicker told Thomas that any such clearances were Pavlov's worry   and that he need not be concerned about. same.5. During his recent trip to the USSR, it would appear that   Thomas was exposed to two incidents which possibly could have been   of opposition fabrication. One involved an approach by a Soviet   interpreter by the name of FNU Petrov, who took Thomas aside and   asked him if he could do him a personal favor by getting him a sub-   scription to National Geographic Magazine for which he, Petrov, would   reimburse Thomas in rubles. Thomas politely refused.6. The other incident involved Thomas being photographed with   an attractive young female Interpreter, Ludmilla Oshkina. According   to Thomas, when one of the Soviets in their party vas about to take   a picture of him standing next to Ludmilla, another individual stand-   ing nearby vas pushed out of the way apparently so that he would not   be included in the photograph. In addition, Ludmilla attempted to   strike an affectionate pose with Thomas for the photograph by slipping   her arm through his. Thomas claims to have pushed her arm avay just   as the photo was being snapped.7. Assessment of Thomas: Subject strikes us as being extremely   naive and unrealistic. He appears to be more apprehensive about his   dealings with CIA than his dealings with Soviets. In fact, when Thomas   was asked if he would mind if a tape recorder were used for debriefing,   he became very nervous and expressed a fear that, if such a tape vere   made, perhaps the Soviets might gain access to it and use it against   him in some way at a future date.Thomas had an outline in his own handwriting of the sessions of thePopov Society Meeting. When we asked for a photostat of same, heagain expressed misgivings and indicated that he would prefer to havea typewritten copy prepared for us instead of a copy in his own hand-vriting because he was fearful that it might fall into Soviet hands.SECRETSENSITIVE
[104-10226-10117.pdf — page 15]
SECRETSENSITIVE-3-Subject: Apparent RIS Interest in Donald E. Thomas,Bell LaboratoriesWe inquired of Thomas why he had not mentioned Pavlov to us during our defensive briefing of him before his trip. He replied rather nebulously that it was his understanding that it was company policy that our oniy function in seeing him before his trip was to give him a defensive brief- ing, and that, since no debriefing was involved at the time, he felt no obligation to volunteer the information concerning Pavlov.It is our opinion that Thomas's obvious naivite, apparent lack of sophisti- cation, and extreme apprehension concerning dealings with our Agency would make him most unsuitable from the standpoint of operational utilization by the Bureau.8. We would strongly reccomend that all of the above be passed to the Bureau ASAP in order that that organization may effect contact with Thomas in time to provide him with proper guidance concerning any further approaches by Pavlov or other Sov legals in US.![signature of J.J. Comma and JAY B. L. REEVES]Eagle/mgSECRETSENSITIVE 10612
[104-10226-10117.pdf — page 16]
# SECRET1 May 1963SUBJECT: Coordination Outline - Donald E. Thomas, Bell LabsFROM: New York Field OfficeFollowing is coordination-outline for D. E. Thomas. Dr. W. O. Baker requested that Thomas be given defensive briefing by us before going behind Curtain. As you are already aware, Baker is Vice President at Bell Labs and member of President's Scientific Advisory Council and President's Intelligence Board.1. Name: Donald Edgar Thomas2. Date and Place of Birth: 18 May 1907, Hanover Township, Penna.3. Home and Address: 45 Fairview Avenue, Madison, New Jersey.4. Place of Employment and Position: Bell Labs, Murray Hill, New Jersey; Electronics Engineer.5. Itinerary: Subject departs 3 May for Moscow to attend Popov Society meeting, 5-14 May. Following Moscow meeting he will visit labs in Western Europe for approximately one week.6. Mission and reason for trip: Subject was invited to give paper at Popov meeting by USSR Academy of Sciences via I.E.E.E. (International Electronics and Electrical Engineers).7. Security Status: We hold favorable FAC completion on subject dated 23 Jun 59.8. Previous Intelligence Activities: Subject was contacted by OR/CI 1958-59 concerning info on Soviet work in his field which he acquired from contacts with Soviet scientific counterparts attending international meeting in US.9. Relatives or close friends in denied areas: None.10. Extent of previous trips to denied areas: None.11. Analysis of Subject's Competence: Pa. State College, B.S., E.E., 1929; Columbia University, M.A., 1932; US Army Signal Corps, 1940-44; WEAAY, 1944-46, on radio countermeasures, 1944-45; Retired Lt. Col. USAFR; Member (Civilian) panel on Electronic Countermeasures Field Board, Dept of Defense, 1948-53.12. Resume of personal assessment: During our limited relationship with subject, he has given every indication of being discreet, security conscious, cooperative, well motivated, mature. He is well regarded in his particular field of competence.13. Nature of substantive briefing proposed and requirements to be levied: Subject will not be briefed on operations of any kind. No photography or incriminating note taking will be requested of him.14. Defensive and realities briefings: Subject will receive routine defensive and Service realities briefing.15. Funding for trip: Subject's trip will be funded by his company.16. Briefing office and participants: Briefing will be conducted by NY/NJ New York Office personnel.17. Coordination Deadline: 2 May 1963.SECRET
[104-10226-10117.pdf — page 17]
# INFORMATION REPORTCENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCYThis material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title 18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-LCOUNTRY: USSRREPORT NO.: (XX-)SUBJECT: Alleged House Arrest of Soviet Scientist, L. ChistovichDATE DISTR.: July 1963NO. PAGES: 2DATE OF INFO.: July 63PLACE & DATE ACQ.: July 63REFERENCES:(C-XX-XXXXX)THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATIONSOURCE: US citizen, professor in a US university.He is an authority on acoustics.1. I attended the Third International Congress on Acoustics. 1-8 Sept 59, Stuttgart, West Germany.2. While at this Congress I met a Soviet female scientist, L. Chistovich, who is connected with the Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Leningrad. One day during the Congress I took a walk in the Black Forest with L. Chistovich and another Soviet scientist. After a short time, the other Soviet scientist excused himself saying that he had to rejoin his colleagues.3. In June 1963 Manfred Schroeder, an acoustician with Bell Telephone Laboratories, was in the USSR. On his return to the US he told me that he had heard while in the USSR that L. Chistovich, on her return from the 1959 Stuttgart Congress, had been placed under house arrest. He also said that he had seen L. Chistovich while he was in the USSR, and he had asked her whether it was true that she had been placed under house arrest on returning from the Stuttgart Congress. He said Chistovich's only reply was to blush.4. I suspect that the individual who reported L. Chistovich to the authorities was Yuriy Pavlovich Lysanov. He is connected with the Acoustics Institute in Moscow. He publishes very little and his conduct has seemed strange to me. He was in the United States in 1956-1957. I suspect that the fact that L. Chistovich took a walk with me alone may well have been the reason she was placed under house arrest.- end -C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-LGROUP 1 Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassificationNO DISSEM ABROADdissemination of document is limited to civilian employees and active duty military personnel within the intelligence components of the member agencies who must act upon the information. However, unless specifically stipulated by the originator, CID 1/9, it may be released to those components of the departments and agencies of the U.S. Government directly concerned. IT SHALL NOT BE DISSEMINATED TO CONTRACTORS, it shall not be disseminated to organizations of affiliated with the communist bloc or to communist front organizations unless such dissemination is authorized by the originating headquarters.
[104-10226-10117.pdf — page 18]
FBI report dated 22 Oct. 62 (Wash. D.C.)Memo for Secretary, re: 470 Special CommitteeFBI report dated 25 Oct. 62 (Wash. D.C.)Re: Exchange of Information RegardingSoviet Satellite DiplomatsFBI report dated 31 Oct. 62 (N.Y., N.Y.)FBI Memo dated 24 Jan. 63 (Wash. D.C.)Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 24 Feb 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 21 March 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 25 April 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 24 May 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 20 June 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 22 July 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 19 Aug 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Analysis dated 4 Sept 63 (Wash. D.C.)Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 4 Nov. 63 (Wash. D.C.)Re: Unknown Subjects (Two); Observed TakingPhotographs in Direction of U.S. NavalStation/Wash. D.C.FBI Report dated 25 Nov. 63 (Wash. D.C.) filed (E) 65-63478Re: Soviet-Bloc Intelligence Activities in U.S.FBI Report dated 27 Dec 63 (N.Y., N.Y.)TOP SECRET CROSS REFERENCE SHEET! (FBI Report 22 May 63)Re: Soviet Personnel Intelligence Activities
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 0]
# 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992MATERIAL REVIEWED AT CIA HEADQUARTERS BYHOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS STAFF MEMBERSFILE TITLE/NUMBER/VOLUME: TS Material from Deryabin SafeINCLUSIVE DATES:CUSTODIAL UNIT/LOCATION:ROOM:DELETIONS, IF ANY:| DATE RECEIVED | DATE RETURNED | REVIEWED BY (PRINT NAME) | SIGNATURE OF REVIEWING OFFICIAL || ------------- | ------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------- ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 ||               |               |                          |                                 |NO DOCUMENTS MAY BE COPIED OR REMOVED FROM THIS FILE
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 6]
DEFECTORS - NOSENKO| TAB | TITLE                                                                                                                                                 | DATE       || --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------- || 1   | Report on: Yurily Ivanovich Nosenko, Soviet                                                                                                           | 2 Apr 64   ||     | Attachments: 1. Memo for Record from David E. Murphy, Subject: Discussion with Deputy Attorney General on Nosenko Case                                | 2 Apr 64   ||     | 2. Memo for Director of Security from Lawrence R. Houston. Subject: Parole Status of Defectors                                                        | 3 Apr 64   ||     | 3. Memo, Subject: Yuriy Ivanovich NOSENKO                                                                                                             | Jan 75     ||     | Letter for Mr. Richard Helms from J. Walter Yeagley, Subject: Yuriy Ivanovich Nosenko                                                                 | 20 Oct 69  ||     | Letter for Mr. Raymond F. Farrell from Richard Helms, Subject: Yuriy Ivanovich NOSENKO (Forms I-125 and background data attached)                     | 9 Oct 69   ||     | Letter for Mr. Louis Wienckowski from Frank E.. Bartos, Subject: Yuriy Ivanovich Nossenko                                                             | 24 July 69 ||     | Letter for Mr. Raymond F. Farrell from Victor R.. White, Subject: Yuriy Ivanovich NOSSENKO                                                            | 18 Jul 69  ||     | Routing Sheet from Chief, SR Division to DD/OS                                                                                                        | 13 Feb 64  ||     | Memo for Mr. McGeorge Bundy from Thomas H. Karamessines, Subject: Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko                                                              | 11 Feb 64  ||     | Memo for US Intelligence Board Members from Marshall S. Carter, Subject: Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko                                                       | 12 Feb 64  ||     | Newspaper clipping: Nosenko's Account Disputes Charge by Soviet                                                                                       |            ||     | Newspaper clipping: U.S. Lets Swiss and Red Envoys talk to Defector                                                                                   | 15 Feb 64  || 4.  | Memo for Acting Chief. Support Branch from Jack M. Bauman                                                                                             | 12 May 64  || 5.  | Memo for Special Agent in Charge District Field Office from Victor R. White, Subject: LESNIK, George M. (Emergency Instructions Regarding Custody of) | 10 Jul 64  |
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 7]
TAB| TITLE | DATE || ----- | ---- |Memo for Headquarters from John D. Noble, Jr.,Subject: LESNIK, George M. (Emergency InstructionsRegarding Custody Of) with Attachment: EmergencyInstructions (2) | 1 Jul 646. Memo for the Record from John M. Maury.Subject: Briefing of Key Congressional Contactson the Yurly Ivanovich Nosenko Case w/att | 5 Aug 692 | Nosenko's Request for Political Asylum | 4 Feb 642 | Secrecy Agreements and Financial ArrangementsBetween the CIA and Yurily Ivanovich Nosenko | 21 Apr 69.3 | Memo for General Counsel from S. Breckinridge,Subject: Office of Security Reports on PARAGON,NOSENKO, AELADLE, CELOTEX I and II and MOCKINGBIRD | 31 Dec 74.4 | Memo for General Counsel from S. Breckinridge,Subject: Nosenko | 13 Jan 75✓ | Attachments:1. Memo for IG from C. W. Kane, Subject: Yurily   Ivanovich Nosenko; | 9 Jan 75   | 1A. Memo for USIB Members from M. Carter, 12 Feb 64,   Subject: Yurily Ivanovich Nosenko | 12 Feb 64   5 | Questions and Answers Concerning the Treatment of Soviet   Defector Nosenko | 67   5 | Memo for the IG, Subject: The Nosenko Case   Attachment:1. Summary of 1967 Document Which Outlines the   Nosenko Case |
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 8]
Yurily Ivanovich NOSENKOORIGINALIDENTIFICATION:NOSENKO, Yurily Ivanovich, a Soviet KGB officer who defected in 1964 and was subsequently involuntarily confined in the U.S. by the Agency for a period of approximately three years.BACKGROUND:NOSENKO first contacted Agency personnel in Switzerland in June 1962 and subsequently defected in January 1964. NOSENKO was brought to the IU.S. and after a period of relative freedom he was involuntarily confined in April 1964. From April 1964 to August 1965, he was confined at an Agency controlled site in Clinton, Maryland. From August 1965 to October 1967, NOSENKO was confined at Camp Peary, Virginia. In October 1967, he was returned to the Washington area, given increasing amounts of freedom until he was given total freedom in April 1969. NOSENKO became a U.S. citizen in April 1974. NOSENKO was employed by the Agency, as a consultant in March 1969 and continues under contract to date. His present salary is $23,500 per year.APPROVAL:(1) The legal basis to confine NOSENKO against his will was discussed by Mr. Richard Helms, DD/P, and others with the Deputy Attorney General on 2 April 1964 (Tab 1). On 3 April 1964, the Agency General Counsel, Mr. Lawrence Houston, advised the Director of Security by memorandum that such confinement was proper (Tab 2).(2) There are a series of letters from the DDCI, DCI and others to various agencies, including the Department of Justice and the White House, covering the period 1964 to 1969, evidencing awareness of these agencies of the NOSENKO affair (Tab 3).(3) The conditions of NOSENKO's confinement were established by the Office of Security (Tabs 4 & 5).
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 9]
# RESULTS:By memorandum dated 2 October 1968, the Director of Security forwarded two reports to the DDCI summarizing the results of the NOSENKO case to that date. The reports are voluminous. One was prepared by the Office of Security and the other by the FBI. Both reports conclude that NOSENKO was a bona fide defector. A draft memorandum attached to this file, dated 21 October 1968 and prepared by the CI Staff, raises question regarding NOSENKO's bona fides and challenges the above two reports.# TERMINATION:NOSENKO continues under contract to the Agency. He is brought to Washington periodically to consult on matters germane to his background and experience. Various reports are available in the files of the Office of Security which detail financial aspects of this case. No final accounting has been made since the project continues.# COMMENTS:(1) While the Office of Security files do document the rationale for the original confinement of NOSENKO, they do not document the rationale for his continued confinement over so long a period of time. A memorandum dated 5 August 1969 states that various congressional staff officers were briefed on NOSENKO and states that concern for his safety, as well as concern regarding his bona fides, prompted the prolonged confinement. (See Tab 6)(2) Office of Security files document a period in 1969 during which a mail cover was placed on NOSENKO.(3) During the above period, NOSENKO was allowed a pleasure trip to Florida. During this trip, Agency personnel, with apparent Headquarters approval, obtained the services of prostitutes. This apparently occurred on at least two occasions.
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 10]
FILES :Office of Security files on NOSENKO are maintained in the following locations:OS/SSD (Contact - Mr. Charles Phalen)OS/SAG (Contact - Mr. Bruce Solic)
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 11]
MEMORANDUN FOR RECORDSUBJECT: Discussion with Deputy Attorney General on Nosenko Case2 April 19641. Mr Helms, Mr. Houston and Mr. Murphy met with the Deputy Attorney General and members of his staff to discuss subject case. Present from Mr. Katzenbach's staff were Messrs. Foley, Yeagley and Reis.2. Mr. Helms explained the Nosenko case briefly and indicated that shortly we would be faced with what we at least considered to be two problems on which we would like the advice of the Department of Justice. First, we would seeon feel compelled to begin hostile interrogation of Nosenko in order to arrive at the truth with respect to his mission for the KGB and we wondered what the legal position would be in circumstances in which we detained Nosenko against his will for this purpose. Second, we would have to be ready after determining that we could obtain no additional information from Nosenko to deport him. We had thought of taking him to Germany and transferring him to Soviet custody in Borlin where this has been done a number of times in the past.3. There was some discussion of whether deportation to another country might be a consideration. Mr. Helms explained we would probably face publicity problems in deporting to a third country of the kind we would encounter if he were free in the U. S. Mr. Helms noted there were many itens of information which we and the FBI realize are of no significance because of the file holdings we have but which an unscrupulous newspaper man could use to create mischief. This aspect was then dropped and it was the consensus that Berlin was probably the best place.4. The question of the basis for detention was again raised and related by Mr. Foley to the conditions under which Nosenko is in this country. He is here as an "exclusion and parole case" which means he has not been admitted and has been paroled to the Agency which is responsible for him while ho is in this country. This
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 12]
SECRETEYES-2-parole can be interpreted to mean parole to a specific locale which would provide some justification for our detaining him for questioning. It was then pointed out, however, that if he said he wished to leave the country to return to the Soviet Union, technically we would not be able to detain his further. In this event, we would bo faced with the need to deport him quickly and quietly and for this purpose the immigration warrant of arrest and deportation was probably the best instrument.5. Mr. Katzenbach asked Mr. Foley to check into this and Mr. Foley will in turn contact Mr. Houston. Mr. Houston will in turn discuss the problem with CIA Office of Security officials to get the background of their liaison with the INS on these matters.6. Mr. Helms thanked Mr. Katzenbach for his assistance and we departed amid some jovial banter with respect to "The Spy Who Came in From the Cold" about what we expected to happen to him when he started to climb over that "wall" in Berlin.David E. MurphyChief, SR DivisionSECRETSGHLY
[104-10227-10000.pdf — page 13]
OGC 64-09033 April 1964MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of SecuritySUBJECT: Parole Status of Defectors1. On 2 April 1964 we had a discussion with the Department of Justice on the status of aliens whose inspection by I&NS is deferred upon arrival at our request and who are then paroled to this Agency. It was the position of the Department of Justice that we were responsible for taking any action necessary to carry out the terms of the parole.2. As you know, a basic parole agreement was executed by the Attorney General and the DCI on 10 February 1955. After setting up conditions for authorizing parole in any one case, the agreement states: "After parole of such aliens, the Central Intelligence Agency will assume responsibility for care, supervision and control of a kind and degree it believes consistent with the internal security needs of the United States during continuance of their parole status." This means that the responsible Agency officials must take the minimum action necessary to protect the internal security needs of the United States. The word "minimum" is not necessarily a limitation. It merely means that good judgment must be used as to what kind and degree of action is necessary.3. The agreement further provides that upon completion of the parolee's intelligence or operational purposes in the United States or if internal security reasons so require, the alien will be removed from this country through arrangements made by the Agency and, in such case, the Agency will inform the Service in advance of each proposed departure.![Lawrence R. Houston's signature]LAWRENCE R. HOUSTONGeneral Counselcc: DD/PC/SR