Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 22]
Mr. Chairman, I am here today at your request to provide my views on Senate Joint Resolution 282, "The Assassination Materials Disclosure Act of 1992," and to describe the nature of documents held by the CIA that relate to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak on this important matter.Let me begin by stating that I am in complete agreement with the purpose underlying the joint resolution--that efforts should be made to declassify and make available to the public as quickly as possible government documents relating to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. We hope that opening up and giving journalists, historians and, most importantly, the public access to governmental files will help to resolve questions that still linger even 28 years after the assassination. Further, I believe that maximum disclosure will discredit the theory that the CIA participated in the murder of John F. Kennedy.Even before introduction of this joint resolution, I recognized the need for greater public access to CIA documents of historical importance. Two months ago, I announced the establishment of a new unit within CIA that will be responsible for declassifying as many historical documents as possible consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 23]
methods. This new unit, the Historical Review Group, in theAgency's Center for the Study of Intelligence, will review fordeclassification documents 30 years old or older, and nationalintelligence estimates on the former Soviet Union that are10 years old or older. In addition to the systematic review of 30-year- old documents, I have directed the History Staff in theCenter for the Study of Intelligence to assemble CIA recordsfocusing on particular events of historical importance, includingthe assassination of President Kennedy. The Historical ReviewGroup will then examine the documents for the purpose ofdeclassifying the records. As we speak this Group has alreadybegun its review of the documents related to the assassination ofPresident Kennedy, and I am glad to report that the first group ofthese records, which includes all CIA documents on Lee HarveyOswald prior to the assassination, has been declassified andtransferred to the National Archives for release to the public.As we carry out our program to declassify Kennedyassassination documents, we will use a presumption in favor ofreleasing as many documents as possible. In fact, I recentlyapproved new CIA declassification guidelines for our HistoricalReview Program which have a presumption in favor ofdeclassification. I believe we can be very forward leaning inmaking these documents available to the public, and I haveinstructed the Historical Review Group to do so.be2
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 24]
To understand the magnitude of the effort involved in reviewing these documents for declassification, it is important to place them in some context. The CIA's collection of documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy consist of approximately 250,000-300,000 pages of material. This includes 64 boxes of information provided to the House Select Committee on Assassination between 1977 and 1979, and over 17 boxes of material on Lee Harvey Oswald, (accumulated) after President Kennedy's assassination.At first blush, you might think that this is an enormous amount of material for the CIA to have on the assassination. It is important to recognize, however, that virtually all of these are essentially "secondary" documents collected after the assassination as a result of specific inquiries received from the Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations. There were some documents that did exist before the assassination, but they were only brought together in response to investigations of the event. I have prepared a chart that illustrates this very point.As you can see, prior to President Kennedy's assassination the CIA held only a small file on Lee Harvey Oswald that consisted of approximately 33 documents (less than 150 pages), of which 28 documents consisted of material originated by the State Department, the Navy, the FBI, and newspaper clippings. I have brought along a copy of Oswald's file as it existed before the assassination so that you can see first hand how slender it was at the time. As I have
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 25]
What's that mean? Sounds like a dodge.Already noted, we have declassified the CIA documents in this file and provided them to the National Archives. The records in this file dealt with Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union in 1959 and his activities in the U.S. after his return in 1961. By contrast, it was only after the assassination that CIA collected all the rest of the material on Oswald--some 33,000 pages in total.I should emphasize that much of the material held by CIA originated from other agencies or departments. For example, in the 17 boxes of Oswald records, approximately 40% percent of the documents originated with the FBI, and about 20% originated from the State Department or elsewhere. Staff is still going through the material compiled at the request of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which includes 63 boxes of paper records and one box that contains 72 reels of microfilm.However, we estimate that within the 63 boxes of paper records, approximately 10% originated from the FBI, and a smaller number of records, less than 1%, originated from the State Department or elsewhere, and 24% originated from a variety of other government agencies, and private organizations, and foreign and American press. Although our holdings do include many documents from other agencies, we nonetheless have a substantial collection of CIA documents that will require a considerable effort to review.A preliminary review of these files has provided us some indications of what they contain. Although the records cover a wide variety of topics, they principally focus on CIA activities concerning Cuba and Castro, Oswald's defection to the Soviet
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 26]
Union, and Oswald's subsequent activities in Mexico City andNew Orleans. They also include a large number of name traces.requested by the staff of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, as well asmaterial relating to the Garrison investigation, Cuban exileactivities (copies of FBI reports about Oswald, and eveninformation about Watergate.The CIA cannot simply act to declassify or release a number of documents unilaterally because of the limits in the Privacy Act(which protects the names of American citizens againstunauthorized disclosure), the sequestration of many documents bythe House Select Committee on Assassinations, and the fact thatmany of the documents belong to agencies other than the CIA.However, we have already taken the necessary steps to lift thesequestration, coordinate with other agencies and begin theprocess of declassification. If necessary, I will askthe House for a resolution permitting CIA toproceed to review for declassification these documents.While I expect a large amount of material can be declassified under our program, there still will be information thatcannot be released to the public for a variety of reasons, includingprivacy concerns or the exposure of intelligence sources andmethods. Let me take a moment to give examples of this type ofmaterial. During the investigation by the House SelectCommittee on Assassinations, I understand that security andpersonnel files were requested on Agency employees. These filescontain fitness reports (performance evaluations), medicalevaluations and credit checks on individual CIA officers.5
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 27]
Although (largely) irrelevant to the question of who killed President Kennedy, these and other personal documents ultimately ended up in the sequestered collection of documents. I do not believe that the benefit to the public of disclosure of this information outweighs the clear privacy interest of the individuals in keeping this information confidential. Similar privacy concerns exist with documents containing derogatory information on particular individuals where the information is based on gossip or rumor. Our files also contain names of living individuals who provided us intelligence information on a promise of confidentiality. We would not disclose this information in breach of such a promise. Where we cannot disclose such information to the public, the Agency will be willing to make redactions, substitute generic information or summarize the information in order to ensure that the maximum amount of information is released while still protecting the identity of an agent or the privacy of an individual.The effort required to declassify the documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy will be daunting. However, it is an important program, and I am personally committed to making it work. Even in this time of diminishing resources within the Intelligence Community, I have directed the allocation of 15 full-time positions to expand the History Staff, and to form the Historical Review Group that will undertake the review of the JFK documents and other documents of historical interest.
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 28]
intent to get there papus declassified and released, and to what remains classified to outside, non-Governmental review.While we are in complete agreement on the need to declassify documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy, I do have certain technical reservations about the mechanism established by the joint resolution to achieve this result. I intend to address only Intelligence Community concerns; I will defer to the Department of Justice on any additional problems posed by the joint resolution.My primary concern with the joint resolution, as currently drafted, is that it directs the Executive Director of the Assassination Materials Review Board to make the initial determination as to whether materials related to the assassination held by all Executive Branch agencies, including CIA, can be released to the public. Vesting this review authority in an outside body is inconsistent with my statutory responsibility to protect intelligence sources and methods. In addition, I am concerned that placing responsibility for classification determinations in a Review Board that has no particular expertise in intelligence classification determinations and is unfamiliar with the assassination material is bound to result in delays in releasing the material. It will also result in a duplication of effort since originating agencies will have to review the decision of the Executive Director to release particular documents.I share your belief that the review of documents be done in an expeditious and efficient manner. To that end, I propose that the initial review of assassination materials be made by the7
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 29]
originating agencies and completed within a reasonable period of time. As I have indicated, the CIA has already begun this process. Documents that an agency determines cannot be released to the public would then be reviewed by members of the Review Board, who could operate with a lean staff. Any dispute between an agency and the Review Board over the release of a document could then be resolved by the President or his designee. This arrangement would ensure that the initial review of documents is accomplished quickly by individuals who are in place and have the necessary substantive experience to declassify documents while at the same time providing an independent review of all decisions made to withhold information. It presumably would expedite the process because the amount of material still classified, wanted to be reviewed, would be only a fraction of the whole. Second, I am concerned that the joint resolution contains no provision requiring security clearances or secure document handling by the Assassination Materials Review Board or its staff. As Director of Central Intelligence, I have an obligation to protect intelligence sources and methods, and to uphold that obligation I could not make classified information available to the Board until it took the necessary steps to safeguard that information.Third, I am concerned that the joint resolution does not provide the Agency with the opportunity to object to the release of CIA information contained in documents originated by Congress or the Warren Commission. Under the joint resolution, documents originated by these entities can be released directly by the Executive Director of the Assassination Materials Review8
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 30]
Board without any review by the President or other Executive Branch agencies. Once again, this provision conflicts with my statutory responsibility to protect sources and methods; that duty should not be delegated to an outside body. I believe that the joint resolution should provide that an agency that originated information found in another's document should have the opportunity to review the information and raise necessary objections prior to its release to the public. An interagency working group should be established to coordinate the review and release of this "third agency" information in a timely fashion.Fourth, the joint resolution defines "assassination material" broadly to include any records that relate "in any manner or degree to the assassination." I believe we have already identified these documents as a result of previous inquiries from investigative bodies, such as the Warren Commission and House Select Committee on Assassinations. These investigations were thorough, and any additional requests for information should bear some reasonable relationship to the JFK assassination. Perhaps a panel of distinguished historians could be formed to provide advice to the Review Board as to what, if any, additional material should be reviewed.Fifth, the joint resolution provides provision for only a 30-day period for agencies or departments to appeal decisions by the Executive Director to release information. This may not provide sufficient time for meaningful review of what could prove to be large9
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 31]
volumes of material at one time. If the initial review of documents is done by the Executive Director, the joint resolution should be amended to provide that an agency may request a reasonable extension of time to determine whether documents may be released. Finally, section 6 of the joint resolution, which outlines the grounds for postponement of public release of a document, may not be adequate to protect Agency interests in certain respects. For example, there is no provision for postponing release of documents that may contain Executive privilege or deliberative process, attorney-client, or attorney work-product information. While such privileges could be waived in the public interest and are not likely to arise with respect to factual information directly related to the JFK assassination, they would be unavailable under the joint resolution in the rare case that they might be needed. I also believe that "intelligence agent" under section 6 of the joint resolution should be defined to include covert employees of an intelligence agency, or former employees who retired undercover from an intelligence agency.While I believe that the joint resolution can be improved, I want you to know, Mr. Chairman, that the CIA will cooperate with whatever reasonable mechanism is established to declassify the assassination material. As Director of Central Intelligence and as Robert Gates, private citizen, I am committed to making this process work. It is my hope that the declassification of this legislation, CIA is proceeding to review documents under its control. We will cooperate with any mechanism established by the Congress and the
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 32]
NOTE FOR: DCIFROM: Neal Wolin, SA/DCIRe: JFK Testimony6 May 1992Attached is the draft JFK testimony, as prepared by OCA. The draft has been coordinated with OGC, the Center for the Study of Intelligence (both Dave Gries and Ken McDonald), and the DO. The handwritten edits are mine and Dave Gries'. A briefing book with Q's and A's will be ready by COB Friday. As Stan's cover note suggests, the testimony must be coordinated with others in the Executive; OCA's preference is to send it out tomorrow.Dave and I agree that the section of the draft testimony commenting on the proposed legislation (pp. 7 et seq.) is too long and runs the risk of overwhelming the positive message you relay in the first part of the statement. It seems to me that while you should lay down your objections to the legislation's scheme clearly (and even forcefully), you should do so in language that will leave the impression (which is consistent with the reality) that (1) you are in agreement with their basic objectives relating to the material in question and (2) that you are doing, and will continue to do, all that you can to accommodate the release of material consistent with your statutory obligations.In particular I think it unnecessary to reiterate your "statutory responsibility to protect sources and methods" more than a couple of times. Moreover, I think the paragraph on the definition of "assassination material" (middle of p.9) unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. One of the impetuses for the JFK resolution, after all, is the notion (crazy or not) that previous inquiries were insufficient in scope; this paragraph feeds right into that criticism. Some of the other "technical" criticisms (i.e., paragraphs on pp. 9-10) seem important to make (especially if the basic model of the legislation is adopted) but might be better included in a post-hearing letter to the committee or something. Again, otherwise I fear you run the risk of leaving the perception of trying to nitpick the concept of JFK material declassification to death.![signature of Neal Wolin]Neal
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 33]
13-00000OCA 2149-9219 May 1992MEMORANDUM FOR:Director, Center for the Study ofIntelligenceChief, Administrative Law Division, OGCFROM:David M. PearlineDeputy Director for Legislation, OCASUBJECT:Follow-up to DCI's 15 May JFK Testimony1.  We have reviewed a transcript of the Director's 15 May testimony on the JFK Assassination Materials Resolution to identify those questions with respect to which CIA committed to provide answers for the record. A copy of the transcript with relevant portions marked is attached.2.  The following specific questions require follow-up action:a. How much material has been destroyed by CIA that we may never know about? (p. 5)b. Why was the Oswald file opened at the CIA 14 months after his defection? (p. 5)c. Was Oswald in fact a Soviet spy? (p. 5)d. Was that picture in his (Oswald's) file that was thought to be him, was that an error? Or was there something involved in that you can shed some light on? (p. 5)e. [W]hat consisted of new information [in the Oswald file] that the public had not already had in its published files somewhere? (p. 14)f. [W]ould the establishment of such a panel of outside experts [by DCI, to review redactions in the absence of legislation] . . .violate the Privacy Act? (p. 16)3.  I assume CSI, in coordination with appropriate components, will take the lead on all questions except for the last. I understand OGC will take the lead on the Privacy Act question. (Note: OGC advises that the issue of why Oswald's file was not opened for 14 months after his defection is addressed in the Findings and Recommendations volume of the HSCA Report at pp. 200-202.) I appreciate your assistance in preparing proposed responses for the record.AttachmentDavid M. Pearline
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 34]
Draft: 14 May 1992CIA SPECIAL COLLECTIONSRELEASE IN FULL2000STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. GATESDIRECTOR OF CENTRAL INTELLIGENCEBEFORE THESUBCOMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION ANDNATIONAL SECURITYCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONSUNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES15 MAY 1992
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 35]
# CIA SPECIAL COLLECTIONSRELEASE IN FULL2000Mr. Chairman, I am here today at your request to provide my views on House Joint Resolution 454, "The Assassination Materials Disclosure Act of 1992," and to describe the nature of documents held by the CIA that relate to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak on this important matter, just as I did before your Senate counterparts last Tuesday.Let me begin by stating that I am in complete agreement with the purpose underlying the joint resolution--that efforts should be made to declassify and make available to the public as quickly as possible government documents relating to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. We hope that opening up and giving journalists, historians and, most importantly, the public access to governmental files will help to resolve questions that still linger over 28 years after the assassination. Further, I believe that maximum disclosure will discredit the theory that CIA had anything to do with the murder of President Kennedy.Even before introduction of this joint resolution, I recognized the need for greater public access to CIA documents of historical importance. Two months ago, I announced the establishment of a new unit within CIA that will be responsible for declassifying as many historical documents as possible
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 36]
consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods. This new unit, the Historical Review Group, in the Agency's Center for the Study of Intelligence, will review for declassification documents 30 years old or older, and national intelligence estimates on the former Soviet Union that are 10 years old or older. In addition to the systematic review of 30-year-old documents, I have directed the History Staff in the Center for the Study of Intelligence to assemble CIA records focusing on particular events of historical importance, including the assassination of President Kennedy. The Historical Review Group will then examine the documents for the purpose of declassifying the records.Because of high interest in the JFK papers, I am not waiting for legislation or other agencies to start declassifying documents belonging to CIA. The Historical Review Group, at my direction, already has begun its review of the documents related to the assassination of President Kennedy, and I am happy to report that the first group of these records, including all CIA documents on Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassination, has been declassified with quite minimal deletions and transferred to the National Archives for release to the public. This is, I acknowledge, a small fraction of what we have, but it is an earnest of my commitment immediately to begin review for declassification of this material. And, indeed, as I speak, the reviewers are going through a substantial number of documents, and I anticipate that many of these will be released shortly.
[104-10337-10001.pdf — page 37]
As we carry out our program to declassify Kennedyassassination documents, our goal will be to release as many aspossible. In fact, I recently approved new CIA declassificationguidelines for our Historical Review Program which specificallydirect a presumption in favor of declassification. I believe we canbe very forward leaning in making these documents available tothe public, and I have instructed the Historical Review Group totake this attitude to heart. In this spirit, the Agency is makingpublicly available these new guidelines for historical reviewand declassification.In connection with these historical review guidelines, Ihave recently commissioned a task force to review Agencyprocedures under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Ιhave instructed this task force to ensure that our internalFOIA procedures are consistent with the approach that I havedescribed for historical declassification. Although the taskforce will have to explore the difference between currentdocuments that often are requested under FOIA and 30-year-old documents that are placed into the historical reviewprogram, my intention is to bring to the FOIA process a muchmore positive attitude toward declassification and release ofAgency records.To understand the magnitude of the effort involved inreviewing the JFK papers for declassification, it is important to