Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 40]
(3) The date of each dissemination.(4) The use which was in fact made of the ... information by the recipient.c. What evaluations were made of the original grounds for the surveillance as it progressed?d. What were the results of the evaluations?e. Who made them?f. What are the reasons for use of electronic surveillance without judicial warrant to investigate "leaks" of classified information to the press?g. How does each of the above instances relate to these reasons?h. To what extent would requirement of a warrant interfere with the ability to detect such leaks?Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderMark Gitenstein
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 41]
# Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther KingThis investigation examines the authorization for, conduct and termination of, and deliberations regarding the surveillance of Dr. King. This case may involve specific allegations of abuses and other controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.## QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:a. Through what procedures and by whom were wiretaps and electronic bugs of Dr. King initiated, approved, continued, and terminated?b. What were the locations, extent, and duration of the electonic surveillances of Dr. King?c. What were the grounds of national security, if any, for the introduction of the electronic surveillances of Dr. King?d. What was the relationship between the information collected and each of the purposes of the surveillance?e. What evaluations were made of the original grounds for the surveillance as it progressed?f. What were the results of those evaluations?g. Who made them?h. What periodic evaluations were made of the relationship between the information being collected and the original objectives of the surveillance?i. What were the results of the evaluations?j. Who made them?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 42]
k. To whom were any results of the surveillance disseminated?1. As to each person to whom information was disseminated, please state*   (1) The nature of the information.*   (2) The basis for the dissemination.*   (3) The date of each dissemination.*   (4) The use which was in fact made of the information.Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force LeaderMike Epstein
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 43]
# Surveillance at the Democratic National Convention, Atlantic City, 1964The Committee is examining the use of surveillance and other intelligence operations in Atlantic City, New Jersey, on or about the time of the Democratic National Convention in 1964. This case may involve specific allegations of abuses and other controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.## QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:a. Did the FBI conduct electronic surveillance and other intelligence operations at this time and place?b. Who were the targets?c. Through what procedures and by whom were the decisions made to engage in electronic surveillance and intelligence operations at this time and place?d. What were the nature, extent, and duration of the electronic surveillance and other intelligence operations at this time and place?e. What was the relationship between each target selected and the purpose of the surveillance?f. Was the FBI requested to conduct such surveillance by any person or organization outside the FBI?g. If so, by whom, when, and for what stated reason?h. To whom were the results of the surveillance disseminated?i. As to each person whom information was disseminated, please state
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 44]
(1) The nature of the information.(2) The basis for the dissemination.(3) The date of each dissemination.(4) The use which was in fact made of the information.Responsible staff: Senior StaffTask Force LeaderMike Epstein
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 45]
## B. Surreptitious EntryThe purpose of this inquiry is to determine the extent to which the FBI has used surreptitious entry as an intelligence technique, either through its own operations or through operations by other agencies and individuals. This case may involve allegations of abuse and controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.### QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. What are the scope and basis of the claim of Executive authority to conduct warrantless surreptitious entry`as asserted by the Department of Justice in *United States v. Ehrlichman*?2. What surreptitious entries have been carried out by the FBI or by another government agency with the knowledge of the FBI from January 1, 1960, to the present? Please list by date, place, and target.3. As to any instance in which the FBI has refused to comply with another agency's request for surreptitious entry, what was   a. The basis for the refusal?   b. The reason given for the request?4. What procedures were employed to authorize any surreptitious entry identified under 2, and who authorized each such entry?5. To the extent applicable by their terms, each of the above questions and the General Questions will be explored specifically with reference to any entry or proposed entry at an embassy in May 1972.Responsible Staff: Senior StaffTask Force LeaderMike EpsteinPaul Wallach
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 46]
## C. Mail Covers and Mail OpeningsThe Committee is examining the conduct of mail covers and mail openings by or on behalf of the FBI and any instances of mail openings or intercepts which may have been conducted by or on behalf of the FBI. This inquiry may involve allegations of abuse or other controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. The specific purposes of all mail covers conducted in connection with FBI intelligence and counter-intelligence activities. This includes all documents pertaining to FBI decisions to request Postal Service mail covers and lists of all subjects upon whom mail covers have been placed as a result of FBI requests since January 1, 1960.2. The procedures and practices for the dissemination of information from mail covers requested by the FBI. This includes a list of all entities to whom mail cover information has been disseminated since January 1, 1960.3. Whether or not FBI personnel may have conducted mail covers in violation of existing Postal Service regulations. For any mail covers which may have been conducted by FBI personnel or for the FBI by -persons other than Postal Service employees, from January 1, 1960, to the present: identify the physical location where the mail cover was conducted, the names of all persons who participated in and authorized the mail cover, and a brief explanation of the purpose of the mail cover and why it was initiated.4. Whether or not the FBI has opened mail or caused mail to be opened, either with or without the permission of the Postal Service. For all incidents of mail opening which may have been conducted by FBI employees or by other persons in cooperation with the FBI, from January 1, 1960, until the present: identify the physical location where the mail was opened or intercepted, the names of the individuals who participated in the opening or intercept, and the purpose of the opening or intercept.
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 47]
## DocumentsThe Committee requests the following additional documents bearing on the questions stated above:1.  All documents which discuss, refer to, or relate to the origins, authorizations, conduct, and termination of and procedures for the mail covers, intercepts, and openings identified in 3 and 4 above.Responsible Staff: Senior StaffTask Force LeaderPaul Wallach
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 48]
## D. Other Specific TechniquesAs to the following techniques, the Committee's inquiry will initially be confined to the General Questions. As the inquiry proceeds, areas of potential abuse and thus of specific inquiry beyond the General Questions may develop:1. Incommunicado detention and interrogation.2. Photographic and television surveillance.3. Polygraphs.4. The obtaining of bank, credit, school, and other personal records and information, including the obtaining of information under false pretext.
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 49]
# E. COINTELPRO and Disruptive ActivitiesThe Committee is investigating the circumstances surrounding the origins of, authorization for, and implementation of the FBI program known as COINTEL-PRO and any similar programs. This inquiry may involve allegations of abuse and controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred. The scope of this investigation covers:1. COINTELPRO -- Communist Party USA;2. COINTELPRO -- Socialist Workers Party;3. COINTELPRO -- White Hate Groups;4. COINTELPRO -- Black Extremists;5. COINTELPRO -- New Left;6. COINTELPRO -- Special Operations (except as targeted against hostile foreign intelligence services);7. COINTELPRO -- Puerto Rican Independence Groups;8. COINTELPRO -- Operation Hoodwink9. Any other activities of the FBI which have or have had the purpose and effect of disrupting domestic groups or discrediting U.S. citizens, whether or not carried out under a COINTELPRO program.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. Under what circumstances, through what procedures, and by whom were these programs initiated, authorized, and terminated?2. Under what circumstances and through what procedures did the FBI discover and report to the Attorney General the existence of items 7 and 8 identified above and similar disruptive activities not included in the original review of COINTELRO activities conducted by the Department of Justice in 1974?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 50]
3. What were the purposes of each program?4. In each case, by what means was it intended the purpose would be accomplished?5. What internal FBI procedures were adopted for the consideration and approval of specific disruptive activities and for determining the results of such activities?6. As to each operation listed above, and any others of a fundamentally similar kind, identify by type the sources of the information used against individuals and groups for disruptive purposes.7. As to each instance in which such information was obtained through electronic surveillance(a) What or who was the target of the surveillance?(b) Was the surveillance legal?(c) Was the surveillance conducted pursuant to warrant?(d) What were the dates of the surveillance?(e) What were the precise means of surveillance?(f) Who authorized the surveillance (both within and without the FBI)?(g) What was the purpose of the surveillance?8. As to each case listed above and all fundamentally similar cases, what was the legality and propriety of the distruptive activities? Should any of the activities referred to in the above sentence be forbidden by statute, considered for future use, or otherwise subject to statutory or administrative regulation?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 51]
9. In what activities has the FBI engaged since April 28, 1971, the purpose or effect of which has been to disrupt domestic groups or discredit U.S. citizens or which bear any other similarity to the purposes or effects of COINTELPRO activities?10. What restrictions, directives, or other measures have been adopted by the FBI and the Justice Department to limit or regulate the use of such disruptive techniques?The Committee will investigate all COINTELPRO and disruptive activities identified above. On the basis of a review of the summaries of COINTELPRO cases prepared for the so-called Petersen Committee, as well as other sources of information, the Committee will develop further requests for information and documents.Responsible Staff: Senior StaffTask Force LeaderLes SeidelMike EpsteinWalter Ricks
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 52]
# Clandestine Informant ActivitiesThe Committee is examining all aspects of the FBI's use of informants, sources, and undercover personnel and the techniques employed by such persons. Although informants are the single most productive source of intelligence information, the difficulties of controlling their activities may increase the possibility of improper conduct. The use of informants to infiltrate organizations also may pose dangers to the right of associational privacy. Consequently, proposals have been made for the imposition of a judicial warrant requirement or other safeguards for the use of informants. The Committee seeks to evaluate such proposals as well as the contributions of informants to the accomplishment of legitimate objectives.In addition, the Committee is examining informant activities with respect to several particular situations and cases. This investigation may involve specific allegations of abuse or controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred. The Committee's inquiry covers the general circumstances surrounding the following incidents or cases:a. Wounded Knee;b. Kent State;c. New York v. Stroble (Attica);d. United States v. Buckalew (Gainesville);e. United States v. Briggs (Camden);f. New York v. Dillon (Hobart College);g. United States v. Marshall (Seattle).Additional cases may also be examined.In addition to the above cases, the Committee is examining the role of FBI informants in providing information to the FBI concerning members of the following organizations:
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 53]
a. Ku Klux Klan;b. Students for a Democratic Society;c. Weathermen;d. Black Panther Party;e. Communist. Party USA;f. W.E.B. DuBois Clubs.Additional studies of informant activities with respect to members of other organizations may be formulated.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. With respect to both categories of cases listed above, what allegations, whether unfounded or not, of improper, illegal, unethical, or provocative conduct by FBI informants have been made in connection with these situations or groups?2. What measures has the FBI taken to investigate such allegations of misconduct and to prevent such alleged misconduct from taking place in the future?3. What instructions has the FBI given to its informants with respect to possible improper, illegal, unethical, or provocative conduct?4. What has been the largest number of informants, sources, and undercover personnel in use at any one time during each year from 1960 until the present in connection with security, intelligence, and counterintelligence matters, cases, and programs?5. What has been the annual total amount of funds (including reimbursement for expenses) paid to informants and sources for each year from 1960 until the present?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 54]
6. What limits, if any, have been placed on the type of information which informants have been intrusted to report back to the FBI?7. What have been the annual percentage of potential informants who became paid informants in connection with security, intelligence, and counterintelligence matters, cases, and programs from 1960 until the present?DocumentsPlease provide a summary of ten cases (for each of the following categories) where the FBI's use of informants, sources, or undercover personnel resulted in:1. the conviction of an espionage agent of a foreign government.2. the prevention of the theft of national security information.3. the prevention of sabotage.4. the prevention of an act of violence.5. the prevention of the carrying out of a conspiracy to overthrow the government.6. any other successful preventive actions in furtherance of the FBI's national security responsibilities.Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderMike EpsteinJack SmithWalter RicksPat Shea
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 55]
G. "Notional" OrganizationsThe Committee is examining the FBI's alleged creation of the support for "notional" organizations for intelligence or counterintelligence purposes. Although it may rely upon informants and other clandestine operatives, this alleged practice is sufficiently novel to require separate attention.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. What groups, organizations, movements, or other associations has the FBI caused directly or indirectly to be formed or created for intelligence or counterintelligence purposes? Please provide a complete list from January 1, 1960, to the present.2. What groups, organizations, movements, or other associations has the FBI supported financially or materially? Please provide a complete list from January 1, 1960, to the present.3. In which cases has the FBI supported or created such organizations in coordination or cooperation with other agencies?4. How have the presence of such "notional" organizations affected the public's perception of the movements of which they form a part?5. How have any FBI programs for the creation and support of such groups been coordinated with any similar programs undertaken by the CIA or other U.S. intelligence agencies?Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderMike Epstein
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 56]
# Joint FBI-Police OperationsThe purpose of this inquiry is to examine certain allegations that joint FBI-police operations resulted in misconduct or abuse. These cases are complex and involve a variety of techniques. Nevertheless, they may indicate some of the most serious problems which may arise in attempting to deal with potentially violent situations.1. The White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, MississippiThe Committee is inquiring into the relationships between the FBI and other law enforcement agencies and private organizations in Mississippi in connection with the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. The purpose of the inquiry is to determine what effect, if any, FBI activities had on the actions of other law enforcement agencies and private individuals with respect to the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in Mississippi. This investigation may involve allegations of abuses or other controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:a. Was this organization a target of FBI COINTELPRO operations?b. If so, how and by whom was it selected as a target?c. What were the purposes of any disruptive operations directed at it?d. To what extent were the purposes achieved?e. What disruptive techniques, if any, were employed?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 57]
f. Over what period of time did the disruptive activities occur?g. What evaluations were made of their effects?h. By whom were they made?i. What were the results of the evaluations?j. Were FBI informants used to infiltrate the organization?k. If so, what kinds of information did the informants gather?l. What activities did the informants engage in other than information gathering?m. Identify by date and names the persons involved in all contacts the FBI had with other law enforcement agencies and private groups and individuals with respect to alleged Klan bombings of Jewish synagogues and the homes of Jewish leaders in Meridian, Mississippi, during May - August 1968.Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderJack SmithLes Seidel
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 58]
## 2. The Black Panther Party, ChicagoThe Committee is inquiring into the relation- ships between the FBI and other law enforce- ment agencies in the Chicago area in connec- tion with the Chicago chapter of the Black Panther Party. The purpose of the inquiry is to determine what effect, if any, FBI activities had on the actions of other law enforcement and intelligence agencies with respect to the Black Panther Party in the Chicago area. This inves- tigation may involve allegations of abuses or other controversial matters where there is rea- son to believe improprieties may have occurred.### QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:a. Was the Chicago chapter of the Black Panther Party a target of FBI COINTELPRO operations?b. If so, how and by whom was it selected as a target?c. What were the purposes of any disruptive operations directed at it?d. To what extent were the purposes achieved?e. What disruptive techniques, if any, were employed?f. Over what period of time did the disruptive activities occur?.g. What evaluations were made of their effects?h. By whom were they made?i. If FBI informants were used to infiltrate the organization, what kinds of information did the informants gather?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 59]
j. What techniques did the informants employ to gather the information?k. Were the techniques used by the informants all approved and monitored by the FBI? If not, which were not so approved?l. What activities did the informants engage in other than information gathering?m. What other methods and sources did the FBI use to gather intelligence on the organization?n. If electronic surveillance was used, how did the use of such surveillance relate to each of the general questions?o. To what extent was information on persons and groups not members of or affiliated with the Black Panther Party gathered, stored, or disseminated by the FBI as a result of its investigations of the organization?Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderWalter RicksChris Pyle
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 60]
# The "Huston Plan"The Committee is examining the FBI's role in the disposition of the report of the Interagency Committee on Intelligence (Ad Hoc) in 1970. This report as submitted to the President included certain options which were specifically identified as "illegal". It purported to represent the joint recommendations of all members of the U. S. intelligence community, but FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover disagreed in a series of footnotes. The serious consideration given to such allegedly illegal proposals gives this case the utmost significance for the Committee's understanding of the risks of uncontrolled intelligence activity. This case may involve specific allegations of abuse and controversial matters where there is reason to believe improprieties may have occurred.QuestionsThe Committee requests that the FBI and the Justice Department address the following specific questions:1. What contacts occurred between Tom Charles Huston and personnel of the FBI and the Department of Justice during 1969 and 1970? Identify by date and names of persons involved.2. What was the purpose of each such contact?3. With respect to any assistance provided to the Interdepartmental Committee on Intelligence (Ad Hoc) by personnel of the FBI:   a. Who were the FBI participants?   b. What kind of assistance was provided?   c. What was the role of the FBI in preparing the various drafts of the special report of the Committee?
[124-10271-10033_multirif_redacted.pdf — page 61]
4. What were the specific arguments, advanced for the inclusion of the allegedly illegal options in the special report submitted for the President's consideration? Were other allegedly illegal options considered and rejected?5. Were any measures taken by the FBI to implement specific elements of the Huston Plan? This includes both the allegedly "illegal" aspects and other provisions such as the expanded recruitment of 18-21 year old informants.6. What are the present views of the FBI and the Department of Justice as to the legality and propriety of the various options included in the special report?Responsible staff: Senior staffTask Force leaderBarbara BanoffLoch JohnsonNW 88326 Docld:32989611 Page 62