Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 6]
8. We have seen DDP monthly operational reports which contain information on the allocation/distribution of operational funds. Are there other DDP records which would reflect how certain projects utilized their funding? How are these records organized? How should a search query be framed?9. Various open sources have linked the CIA to various journalists and publishing companies during the 1960's. How should a query be framed to search for connections between the Agency and journalists or publishing companies?10. Did the Agency have any relationship, projects, or contacts with publishing houses during the time of the assassination and in the aftermath of the Warren Commission? How would a search be formulated to determine whether or not the Agency had a relationship with any of the same publishing houses that were also publishing books about the assassination?11. How would a query be framed to search for files on any office or person dealing with organized crime and Cuba? How should a request be formulated to institute a reasonable search on this topic?12. Is there a comprehensive record or list detailing the identities of individuals on the Interagency Source Register? How are these records organized? How can a search query be framed to ascertain whether or not a particular individual appears in the Register.13. How could a search query be framed to ascertain whether or not a particular individual was given access to classified information by DCD (then OO)? What kind of files are assembled in the process of clearing non-Agency contacts/sources for access to classified information?14. ARRB's Request for Additional Information and Record No. CIA-13, dated November 1, 1996, contained the following questions:A. What forms of backchannel communications were there between the Mexico City Station (including the COS), JMWAVE, or Headquarters during 1963? By "backchannel" we mean, *inter alia*, any administrative, senior staff, or restricted access communications, or any written or electronic communications other than regular cables or dispatches (of the type included in the JFK Collection).B. Were there, in fact, any backchannel communications between the Mexico City Station (including the COS), JMWAVE, or Headquarters during the time periods 27 Sept - 16 Oct 1963 and 22 Nov - 30 Nov 1963?
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 7]
C. To the extent that there were any backchannel communications for the time periods 27 Sept - 16 Oct 1963 and 22 Nov - 30 Nov 1963 (other than those currently contained in the JFK Collection), please make such records available for review.Why has it been so difficult to answer these questions?15. ARRB's Request for Additional Information and Record No. CIA-14, dated December 23, 1996, documented our request for the annual or biannual Station reports for Mexico City Station for 1963 and 1964. Why has it been so difficult to provide these reports?16. The attached Agency document released in 1996 contains the paragraph:11. A memorandum marked only for file, 16 March 1967, signed M.D. Stevens, says that J. Monroe SULLIVAN, #280207, was granted a covert security approval on 10 December 1962 so that he could be used in Project QKENCHANT. (Clay) Shaw has # 402897-A.What do these numbers mean? What does the "A" at the ends of Shaw's number signify? Do the files identified by these numbers still exist? Why was Sullivan granted a covert security approval?17. During the period 1959-1963, what was the purpose or goal of QKENCHANT?18. Under what circumstances were non-agency employees given covert security clearances for the QKENCHANT project?19. Did Clay Shaw receive a covert security approval for the QKENCHANT project? Why was one needed? Did Clay Shaw receive covert security clearances for any project other than QKENCHANT20. What did Clay Shaw do within the QKENCHANT project?21. Do records exist to account for the disposition of all files on Clay Shaw?22. Did Howard Hunt have any involvement with the QKENCHANT project prior to 1964?23. Did J. Monroe Sullivan have any involvement with the QKENCHANT project prior to 1964?
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 8]
SECRETSECRET24. The DO telephone directories list an Operational Services/Defector Staff beginning in October 1959? What was the Defector Staff? Did it have an operational component?25. In the period 1959-1964, were DO officers, selected to serve overseas under State Department cover, legally considered to be "members of the Foreign Service, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate?"SECRETSECRET
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 9]
a relatively clean, easy-to-read specimen of what we already have.Note: only redaction is QK (what CIA calls a Digraph) from QKBLWCHANG on page 4 here paragraph 11:Enclosure 21 I've included a poor copy of page 4 that contains the QK!!CIA HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAMRelease As Sanitized1996SUBJECT: Clay L. SHAW (201-813493).1. Subject was born on 17 March 1913 in New Orleans, Louisiana.2. Standard background information on Subject (parents, marital status, records of education and employment, etc.) is lacking because SHAW was a contact of the Domestic Contact Service.3. Traces on Subject have been run in RID/Main Index, the index of the Office of Security and the Central Cover Staff. The first showed only a 1951 FBI interview with SHAW about a former employee of the New Orleans International Trade Mart. The second showed that 00/Contacts Division had requested a name trace about 1949 and that the check of FBI records then conducted was negative. Central Cover Staff had no record.4. Some of the 00-B reports based on SHAW's reporting are on hand. They are the following. (It is noted that the source description identifies the 'source by job title.)a. 00-B 47958, 26 March 1952, concerns a letter written to the public relations director of the International Trade Mart by one Dr. Jutta SCHALLER, a trade consultant to the Bonn Government. The letter is a follow-up of discussions held in New Orleans during December 1951. The letter said that Soviet production and export trade were being advertised andDocument Number 1430-492-Yfor FOIA Review on DEC 1977
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 10]
MAR 31 '97 12:07PM P.9RELEASED. PER P.L. 102-526 (JFK ACT)NARA DATE 2/14/97promoted by West German money. The publication *Wer Liefert Was?*, published in Leipzig, is now also being published in Hamburg, at a price much lower than competitive volumes.b. 00-B-9381, 27 December 1948. Information acquired 18 December 1948. SHAW (identified by job title) has agreed to lease to the CBR government 1,000 feet of space for a display of merchandise in New Orleans. The lease is for one year, starting 1 April 1949.c. 00-B-4933-49, 14 June 1949, information data late April and early May 1949. Results of a trip SHAW made in March through May 1949 in West Indies, Central America, and Northern South America.d. 00-B-4934-49, 14 June 1949, same general subject and background as above.e. 00-B-4935-49, 14 June 1949, as above.f. 00-B-35477, 29 June 1951. Results of a SHAW trip in 1951 in Central and South America and the Caribbean area.5. On 9 May 1961 General C. P. Cabell, then DDCI, addressed the Foreign Policy Association of New Orleans. It is believed that he was introduced by Clay SHAW.6. On 3 March 1967 the *Washington Star* reported that Garrison had arrested SHAW and had made public charges that SHAW, FERRIE, OSWALD, and others had plotted the assassination in the apartment of FERRIE at 3300 Louisiana Parkway, New Orleans. SHAW has said that he never saw OSWALD. He denies having used the name Clay BERTRAND. Jack S. MARTIN said that FERRIE had mentioned2
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 11]
# SHAW to him. J. Monroe SULLIVAN, executive director of the San Francisco World Trade Center, told the Associated Press that SHAW was in San Francisco and touring the Canter with him on the day of the assassination. SHAW, now retired, was formerly the managing director of the International Trade Mart in New Orleans. He is 54 years old. Ramsey Clark, U.S. Attorney General, said that the FBI had investigated SHAW late in 1963. "On the evidence that the FBI has, there was no connection found" with the assassination.## 7. Memorandum No. 84-67, 3 March 1967, from Chief, New Orleans Office, to Director, Domestic Contact Service, re SHAW.### a.The first contact of the New Orleans office of the DCS with Clay SHAW occurred in December 1948. A nama check request was returned "no info" on 23 March 1949. SHAW was contacted by Mr. Kunter Leake of the New Orleans office saven times in 1949, twice in 1950, five times in 1951, nine times in 1952, once in 1953, twice in 1954, twice in 1955, and twice in 1956. SHAW is the source of eight 00-B reports submitted by the New Orleans office. At one tima ho had the "Y" number 145.1. The last contact took place on 25 May 1956. On 23 January 1967 Jack S. MARTIN phoned the New Orleans office, said that he was working on an important undercover deal for. Garrison and Detective Louis IVON, and was calling at IVON's request. He was culling to ask the head of the CIA office to telephone IVON on his unlisted number. No such call was made. The writer, Lloyd A. Ray, asks that the General Counsel be informed and that he provide advice.## 8. Undated and unsigned memorandum (probably produced by CI/R & A). The following additional information was provided by the New Orleans office of DCS.
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 12]
Since 25 May 1956 Mr. [Hushambedkar]had seen SHAW casually, by chance, in various downtown New Orleans restaurants, and greetings were exchanged. The last such casual encounter was just before SHAW's retirement in 1965.9. On 7 March 1967 *Pravda* published an article called "Clay Shaw of the CIA" datelined Rome, 6 March 1967, written by V. YERMOLKOV. The article charged that CIA made use of the services of Clay SHAW for CIA's own interests in Italy. The *Pravda* piece notes that the DA in New Orleans is accusing SHAW of participation in the assassination conspiracy. It says SHAW spent "some years" in Rome as a World Trade Center leader. It claims that the Center was a cover for financing anti-Communist activity. CIA gave directives to SHAW. The World Trade Center was a branch of "Parmidess" (sic), "which the newspapers in Switzerland openly accused of 'criminal operations'...." (Concern. It appears that all of the *Pravda* charges are untrue, except that there was a CIA-SHAW relationship. So far as is known, SHAW was never asked to use his relationship with the World Trade Center for clandestine purposes and, in fact, he has not been in Italy.)10. Memorandum from [illegible/CIA] 8 March 1967 Subject: Italian Affairs of the Clay Shaw Affair; The Courier della Sera of 5. March 1967 has an article about SHAW, the assassination, and, the, World Trade Center: Contains no relevant information..11. A memorandum marked only for file, 16 March 1967, signed Stevens, says, that J. Monroe SULLIVAN, #280207, was granted a covert security approval on 10 December, 1962 so that he could be used in Project ONECHANT. SHAW has 0402097-1.12. Memorandum from [illegible/CIA] 24 March 1967, Subject: "Trace Results on Persons Connected with Centro Mondiale Commercinio" (World Trade Center), filed folder, Clay SHAW - working papers.
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 13]
MAR 31.97. 12:09PM:HELAABED, FER P.L. 102-886 (JFK ACT)HARA SKDATA 214197P.12Same page,better copy.QK redacted.Since 25 May 1956 Mr. Hunter Leake had seen SHAW casually, by chance, in various downtown New Orleans restaurants, and greetings were exchanged. The last such casual encounter was just before SKAW's retirement in 1965.9. On 7 March 1967 Pravda published an article called "Clay Shaw of the CIA" datelined Rome, 6 March 1967, written by V. YERMAKOV. The article charged that CIA made use of the services of Clay SHAW for CIA's own interests in Italy. The Pravda piece notes that the DA in New Orleans is accusing SHAW of participation in the assassination conspiracy. It says SHAW spent "some years" in Roma as a World Trade Canter leader. It claims that the Center was a cover for financing anti-Communist activity. CIA gave directives to SHAW. The World Trade Canter was a branch of "Permidax" (sic), "which the newspapers in Switzerland openly accused of 'criminal operations'...." (Comments It appears that all of the Pravda charges ara untrue, except that there was a CIA-SHAW relationship. So far as is known, SHAW was naver asked to use his relation-ship with the World Trade Center for clandestine puрposez and, in fact, he has not been in Italy.)10. Memorandum from C/EUR/I to C/CI/R & A, 8 March 1967 subjects. Italian Aspects of the Clay Shaw Affair. The Corriere della Sera of 5 March 1967 has an article about SHAW, the assassination, and the World Trade Center. Contains no relevant information.11. A memorandum marked only for file, 16 March 1967, signod M.D. Stevens, days that J. Monroe SULLIVAN, 1280207, was granted. a covert security approval.on 10 December 1962 so that he could be used in Project (JENCHANT. SHAW has 1402897-1.12. Memorandum from C/EUR/I to C/CI/R & A, 24 March 1,967,. Subjects "Trace Results on Persons Conneated with Centro Mondiale Commerciala (World Trade Center), filed CI/R& A folder, Clay SHAW - working papers.![signature]
[104-10330-10081.pdf — page 14]
HLRABBU IER P.L. 102-526 (JFK ACT) DATA 2/14/97a. The 5 March 1967 issue of Il Messaggero links SHAW with the World Trade Center. Others linked to the center were traced, with results reported in this memorandum. No relationship to the Garrison investigation appears here. A report on "Parmidex", a Swiss corporation with principal offices in Rome, is also in the file because the World Trade Center and Permidex are associated. Again, there is no information here which relates significantly to the case Garrison is trying to build in New Orleans.13. The Washington Post, Outlook, 2 April 1967, "Seeking Truth in New Orleans in the Middle of the Night", George Lardner, Jr.a. Garrison's men drove RUSSO to SHAW's French Quarter home. RUSSO posed as a Mutual of Omaha salesman. He knocked at door; SHAW answered. RUSSO said that he was Clem BERTRAND.b. SHAW is a 54-year old bachelor and socialite who pioneered the 33-story International Trade Mart in New Orleans. He was subpoenaed by Garrison's office on 1 March 1967. According to his friends, his questioners did not advise him of his rights. They told him they had evidence of a meeting with FERRIE and OSWALD. There was a fuss and SHAW was arrested and booked on conspiracy to murder JFK. That night Garrison's man raided SHAW's apartment and confiscated whips, chains, a black net cap, a cape and hood. RUSSO told reporters that he did not know Clay SHAW, but he identified the man arrested by Garrison as Clem BERTRAND.
[104-10330-10083.pdf — page 0]
# 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992SECRETCentral Intelligence Agency![Seal of the Central Intelligence Agency]Washington. D. C. 2050515 April 1997P.2/14MEMORANDUM FOR: David G. MarwellExecutive DirectorAssassination Records Review BoardSUBJECT: CIA Employees(We request that this memorandum be returned to CIA once the Review Board has completed its deliberations on the issues discussed below.)1. (U) Issue. The purpose of this memo is to relate CIA's concerns to the Review Board regarding the release of the true names of CIA employees that appear in the JFK Collection and to present a proposal on how this problem might be addressed.## I. Factual Background2. (U) To date, approximately 600 true names of CIA employees have been identified in the JFK Collection. Some of these employees are important to the JFK story, and CIA will continue to work with the Review Board to release as many of these names as possible. Many names, however, appear only a few times in the entire JFK Collection and appear to add nothing to the historical record.3. (U) Under guidelines adopted by the Review Board on or about 20 March 1996, any names of CIA employees are presumptively released unless CIA provides specific evidence to the Review Board that harm to the national security or to the employee would likely result from such release. Since these guidelines were adopted, it has become increasingly clear that the number of names at issue, and, in most cases, their tenuous connection to the JFK story, make this approach unworkable with regard to both CIA's obligation toCL BY: 2224130CL REASON: 1.5 (c)DECL ON: X1DRV FROM: HUM 4-82SECRET
[104-10330-10083.pdf — page 1]
# 13-00000APR 15 '97 04:55PM USGOVERNMENTSECRETP.3/14Subject: CIA Employeesprotect national security information and the Review Board's duty to inform the public about the JFK assassination in a timely and accurate fashion. The task of locating and informing hundreds of former employees scattered all over the country and the world has been a formidable one. Some employees have contacted us to report their concerns about a "suspicious" letter purporting to be from CIA which they had received. It would not be surprising, therefore, if many former employees ignored the letter for similar reasons, even though they might have legitimate needs to protect their identities.4. (U) Contacting every named employee and collecting information on each of them to present to the Review Board will clearly take more time and effort than any of us had anticipated. This will have obvious ramifications for how and when the Review Board releases information to the public. More importantly, the decision to publicly acknowledge employees who may have been living for over 30 years under cover is a critical one that should be made not by default, but rather by careful planning and consideration.5. (U) Relevant to this discussion is the fact that the Review Board and CIA have recently agreed upon a policy for releasing true names of sources of intelligence information. It was agreed at that time that there would be a presumption of protecting source names; but in cases where a source was particularly important to the JFK story and there was no overriding national security interest, the name would be released. Although the CIA recognizes that there are some sensitivities involved with sources that do not apply to covert employees, there are also many legal and operational similarities, which are described herein, that justify similar treatment by the Review Board. As is further detailed in Section IV, CIA, therefore, proposes that the Review Board adopt a general policy of protecting employee names that appear in the Collection, with exceptions for those individuals whom the Board believes are important to the JFK story.## II. Legal Considerations6. (U) As both covert CIA employees and clandestine reporting assets are types of "human sources" of intelligence, many of the same laws apply. Although Section 11(a) of the JFK Act provides that, when the Act requires release of information, it takes precedence over all other laws that would otherwise prohibit release, there are strong governmental national security interests in protecting the true names of CIA employees. CIA believes that it is2SECRET
[104-10330-10083.pdf — page 2]
# SECRETSubject: CIA Employeesimportant for the Review Board to reconsider the laws which protect classified information, because they clearly reflect a larger US Government policy to protect covert CIA employees from disclosure.7. (U) By Executive order and statute, the President and Congress have made the Director of Central Intelligence responsible for protecting sources of intelligence. In his Directive of 22 January 1946 that established the Central Intelligence Group, President Truman made the DCI responsible for protecting sources. With the establishment of CIA, Congress also gave the DCT this responsibility. The National Security Act of 1947, Section 103(d)(3), codified at 50 USC §403(3)(c) (5), requires the DCI to protect intelligence sources from unauthorized disclosure. In addition, §403(3)(d) (2) requires the DCI to ensure that risks to the United States and those involved in the collection of intelligence through human sources are minimized.8. (U) Protecting the identity of individuals working for CIA, not only covertly but overtly as well, has been of particular concern to US lawmakers since the establishment of the Agency. For example, with Section 6 of the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, 50 USC §403g, Congress specifically exempted the CIA from the provisions of any law requiring the publication or disclosure of the organization, functions, names, titles, salaries, or numbers of personnel employed by the Agency.9. (U) In 1980, Congress passed the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) which sets out pretrial, trial, and appellate procedures for criminal cases involving or potentially involving classified information. Working with the Department of Justice and the courts, CIA has successfully protected the names of CIA employees from public release even in criminal trials where there are heightened (i.e., constitutional) considerations favoring disclosure to the defendant of all government information relevant to the defense. CIPA allows for in camera ex parte hearings in which the judge can rule on questions of admissibility and relevancy of classified information, including the identity of CIA employees who may have information pertaining to the defense, before it is introduced either to the defendant, defense counsel, or in open court. In some cases involving CIA, the judge has ordered that CIA information be turned over to the defense, but only in some unclassified form such as in a summary. In other cases, judges have reviewed the classified information and ruled that the harm to national security outweighs the
[104-10330-10083.pdf — page 3]
# SECRETSubject: CIA Employeesdefendant's legal rights to the information. In still other,cases, the defense was never notified that CIA even hadinformation bearing on the case, as the judge ruled that themere fact that CIA possessed this information was classifiedand outweighed any rights the defendant had. Moreover,under CIPA, the Attorney General has the authority to drop aprosecution in those cases where the risk to nationalsecurity is too great.10. (U) In 1982, Congress again acted to protect CIA    employees by passing the Intelligence Identities Protection    Act of 1982, 50 USC §421 that criminalizes the revelation of    a covert employee or the identity of a source. This act    subjects anyone who reveals information that identifies a    "covert agent" to prosecution and provides up to 10 years in    prison and $50,000 in fines as punishment. This act    specifically defines a "covert agent" as including "an    officer or employee of an intelligence agency...."11. (U) Most recently, President Clinton signed    Executive Order 12958 on classified national security    information that became effective in October 1995. Although    it requires generally that agencies make greater    declassification efforts than under the prior executive    order, Executive Order 12958 affords human sources of    intelligence information, which would include employees,    extra protection from the declassification provisions.    Under E.O. 12958, information that is over 25 years old and    having historical value must be declassified within five    years. However, information revealing the identity of a    human source may continue to be protected.12. (U) The above federal laws show a long-standing    practice by the US Government to protect CIA employees from    disclosure to the public. In carrying out its statutory    obligations, the Review Board should give serious weight to    this policy and afford the protection of CIA employees a    high priority.## III. Operational Considerations13. (U) For current CIA employees whose names may    appear in the JFK Collection, the operational considerations    for protecting their identity are similar to those for    sources. Many of these employees have worked "under cover"    for CIA. Cover is used to disassociate entire installations    and offices from open linkage to intelligence activities, to    enable intelligence personnel to enter and work effectively    in foreign countries, to shield Agency employees and    authorized clandestine activities from attention by hostile    elements and from media exposure, to facilitate access to