Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 75]
15**SECRET** 73I truthfully don't know whether any of these people ever went to jaul or not.Q. Other than identifying operations by militant anti-Castro groups, what other intelligence gathering did the AMOTS engage in?A. Well, of course, there was a counterintelligence -- I wouldn't call it a project but a counterintelligence interest at that time because we knew that they were infiltrating agents.Q. Cubans were?A. The Cuban Government. They couldn't do it very well on the airlift because, as I said before, the aged, infirm, and young, but they did infiltrate them by small boat. And I don't -- well, we had knowledge that this was on and we did try to identify those people whom we thought would be suspect.Q. Was that done in cooperation with the Bureau?A. With the Bureau, yes.Q. Because of their manpower limitations you folks were in a better position to do it?A. Yes, and language-wise, too. That is always a big factor.Q. And this was conducted through the AMOTS?A. Yes.Q. How substantial was the counterintelligence operation in the community?
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 76]
16                                                                                                         74**SECRET**would call a great number of suspect infiltrees, but they lid come up with a few promising ones and ones it turned over to the Bureau, of course, we have no idea what the hell ever happens to it because, you know, you just -- unless you personally know the guy in the Bureau that is handling the case, you might as well forget it. You have got too many other things to do.Q. What other positive intelligence gathering activities were they engaging in?A. Well, as I told you, one part of them were engaged in electronic intercept.Q. Where was that done?A. Down in Florda, down in Homestead.Q. This is Southeast of Homestead?A. Yes..Q. What ere they intercepting?A. Well, originally they were set up to assist with the commo. for the infiltration.As we phased down the maritime activities, they were made available to intercept Cuban Communications. NSA tasks them with the frequencies they wanted covered and the Cuban Communications nets they wanted covered, such as the border guards. Another important one was the sugar network. We had the border guards, sugar, transportation, maritime. I think there was an interior network they covered too. But all electronic intercept coverage
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 77]
17# SECRET75Now, since they belong to us we could levy ceratin requirements on them if we wanted to, which we did very infrequentlybecause the common interests, -- we have a common interest inwhat *NSA* has an interest in and unless there were one particularoperation going that they wanted to cover exactly what the Cubanswere doing, then we would task our people with that.For instance, we knew a Cuban vessel was taking arms intoAfrica and our operators saw the thing leave llavana and thenthere was absolute silence. So nobody knew where the thing was.But we knew arms were being loaded and we finally located theboat in an African port, I mean the *intercept operators did, wha*it came back on the air. And this is the type of thing. Asa matter of fact, they were unloading arms in Algiers. And 200Cuban troops.MR. MANFREDI: Off the record.(Off the record discussion)MR. MANFREDI: Let's go back on the record.BY MR. MANFREDI:Q. Were the *communications they were intercepting*exclusively foreign *communications*?A. Exclusively foreign *communications*.Q. Were they *intercepting any communications*, one terminusof which was the United States?A. No.
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 78]
SECRET                                                                                 76A. Right.Q. On the Island?A. Right.Q. Or between the Island and other locations?A. Yes.Q. But not between the Island and the United States?A. No. Let's go off the record on that.(Off the record discussion)BY MR. MANFREDI:Q. To your knowledge were the AMOTS engaging in the intercept of any communications, either that facility or elsewhere, in the Miami area or in the southern part of the country?A. No.Q. Of other communications?A. No.Q. Is that their only intercept facility?A. (Nods affirmative)Q. Do you know of your own personal knowledge -- strike that. Do you have any knowledge of any wiretaps, surveillances, breakins or activities of that type other than what we have discussed --A. No sir.-- that were conducted by the AMOTS?A. No sir. I want to go off the record a minute.(Off the record discussion)
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 79]
SECRET                                                                                                   77BY MR. MANFREDI:Q. I understand that a study of the history of the AMOTS has been prepared by one of your members.A. That is right.Q. What is his name?A. I think it is Joaquin -- I can't remember the last name. The poor guy is dead now anyway. Well, I will just have to get that for you.Q. What is the title of the study?A. The title of the study -- it is part of the historicai series of the Miami Station and I think it is just entitled "The AMOT Organization."Q. What is the historical series of the Miami Station?A. It was done when Paul Hennesse was down there. What we try to do as we go along, from year to year, is set aside what is considered to be some of the more siginificant things the station might do or that might occur in the station personne wise, this type of thing, and then these things are written.Q. I see.A. At intervening periods of time.Q. When was this particular report prepared, the AMOTS?A. I think it was prelared in 1967 or '68.Q. It is a fairly lengthy document, isn't it?A. Yes.
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 80]
SECRETactivities of the Alors?78A. It starts back in 1959 when we first started using this gent..Q. First started using what?A. First started using, I forget what his name was.Q. I see. Is it a chronological study of their activities?A. Yes.Q. And you have a copy of that in your custody?A. Yes.Q. I would like to see that document. And we will try and obtain it through Hank Knoche's office.A. Okay.Q. Excuse me just for a minute.(Off the record discussion)MR. MANFREDI: On the record.BY MR. MANFREDI: I wonder if you would -- let me ask you this. There have been some allegations in the press that prominent newsmen in the Miami area have in the past been agents of the CIA.Mr. Olsen just came into the office and I asked him to join us because some of your involvement in Cuban activities in the Agency in the Miami area touch peripherally on some of the things had has been charged with investigating, so I am going to turn
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 81]
SECRETMR. OLSEN: Thank you, George.BY MR. OLSEN:Q Can you begin, since I have not been in on the beginning of the interview here, can you start off, Mr. Sturbitts, by giving me about a one or two minute resume of what your contacts were with the Cuban elements in Florida and elsewhere withing this country on behalf of the Agencv?A. Well, I was a member of the Special Activities Staff which was in effect the Cuban task force at Headquarters and the Miami Station functioned under the Special Activities Staff in a variety of intelligence collection and operations.Q Who was the head of the Special Activities Staff?A. Desmond Fitzgerald.Q And who was his immediate superior?A. Dick Bissell. Excuse me. No. At that time it was Dick Helms. He was the DEP.Q Deputy Director for Plans?A Deptuty Director for Plans.Ω What period of time are we talking about now?A. We are talking in the period of 1963 to 1965.MR. MANFREDI: Off the record.(Off the record discussion)BY MR. OLSEN:Ω So you were not involved in this Special Activities
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 82]
SECRETΩ. Or the period leading up to the Bay of Pigs?A. No.Ω. And you were not involved in this program at all during the same time that E. Howard Hunt was involved in it?A. No.Ω. Do you know what the position was Mr. Hunt occupied in connection with the Cuban operations of the Agency during the period of 1959 to '61?A. To my recollection, Howard Hunt was on the Covert Action Staff dealing in propaganda.Ω. Was this propaganda directed to the Cuban people in this country?A. No. Cuban people abroad.Ω. And what was his connection with the planning for the Bay of Pigs?A. I would have to review the record to really answer that. I don't know.Ω. Didn't he spend an awful lot of time in the Miami area?A. He commuted quite a bit.Ω. Between Washington and --A. Washington and Miami.Ω. -- and Miami. During the period of 1960 and early '61?
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 83]
SECRET                                                                   81published materials that he was the person who was in charge oforganizing a political unit among Cubans in this country whichwould constitute the Cuban government in exile. Do you recallwhere that was?A. That could be quite true.Q. Have you reviewed, Mr. Sturhitts, the Agency's entirefiles relating in any way to the Cuban operations and particu-larly with reference to whether they reflect any contactsbetween the Agency and Frank Sturgis?A. Yes.Q. Or Frank Fiorini?A. There is no relationship.Q. Is it your testimony that the records and files ofthe Agency reveal no official or unofficial contact of anynature with Frank Sturgis?A. To my knowledge that is true.Q. I take it from that that you are emphatic in yourtestimony that he was never an employee of the Agency?A. Extremely emphatic.Q And you are also equally emphatic to the effect thathe was never a contract agent of the Agency?A. Exactly.Q. Do you know whether he ever served in the capacityof being an informer or informant to the Agency?
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 84]
SECRETQ. You mean a source of --A. Source of information of another agent. Another agency agent.Q. Do the files of the Agency reflect any matter?A. To my knowledge I don't recall anything like that but it is entirely possible that that could have happened without being a matter of record.Q. Do the-files of the Agency reveal any instance whatever in which Frank Sturgis was ever asked to undertake any kind of an operation or activity on behalf of the Agency?A. To my knowledge, nothing.Q. Do the files of the Agency reveal any evidence whatever that Frank Sturgis was ever paid anything directly or indirectly by the Agency?A. To my knowledge, no.Q. Now, when you say "to my knowledge, no", in answer to some of these questions, do I understand that to mean that you are giving us the full benefit of your knowledge on the basis of a full review of the Agency's records and files?A. On Frank Sturgis, yes.Q. Okay. During the period of time that you were with the Special Activities Group from 1963 to '66, first of all, can you tell us when that began in 1963?A. When the Special Activities Group--
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 85]
## SECRET1 Group began?2 A. It began -- well, it began around June of '63.3 Q. Now, with particular reference to the last half of 1963, including whatever period in June '63 may not have been involved, were there a great many Cubans in the southern United States who were active in revolutionary fronts that were being sponsored by the Agency?8 A. Wellm you mean Agency sponsored fronts?9 Q. Yes.10 A. The Agency subsidized these fronts in an effort to have unity rather than these split factions, split anti-Castro factions. Obviously the leaders of the fronts knew that the CIA was subsidizing. Supposedly the people that joined these fronts did not know they were being subsidized by the Agency or the U.S. Government.16 Q But when you say "supposedly," does the fact appear to be otherwise?18 A. WEll, based on my experience with the Cubans and this type of thing, and their penchant to talk, I would think that it wouldn't take long for knowledge of any subsidy to surface itself.21 Q. Was it your opinion and impression at that time, Mr. Sturbitts, that a great many Cubans considered themselves to be involved in the CIA organizations?
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 86]
# SECRETΩ. And again with particular reference to the Miami area?A. Yes.Ω. Was there also Cuban activity of this sort elsewhere in the United States? I am asking now particularly with reference to New Orleans.A. There was some Cuban presence in New Orleans. I am really not familiar with what happened in New Orleans that was sort of a sideshow to Miami.Ω But the same is -- it is possible that some of the same Cuban organizations which were being sponsored or funded by the Agency also had activities or operations in New Orleans?A. I don't know if I can answer that, whether they had the same functions. I know that some funding arrangement for subsidizing the organizations in Miami was carried out through New Orleans.Ω Well, can you be more specific about what you mean by that?A. Well, in other words, to fund these organizations we were subsidizing there had to be some ostensible source of income for them to continue what they were doing. A great number -- well, not a great number, but a number of select people were -- well, they were selected and then they were talked to, to pose as trustees, if you would, or directors or some of these organizations in order
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 87]
SECRETto get the funding through to the organizations.These people were normally prominent people and --Q. And did they get funded by the Agency, then, through the mdeium of prominent and well-to-do people?A. These well-to-do people ostensibly would call a friend of theirs that had been made trustee of another type of activity and say, you know, we are trying to assist these Cubans in this type of thing. Could your organization give us any money, and the guy on the other end would say, sure, we can probably lend you $25,000 or something like that, or donate $25,000. This is the way the funding went into the fronts.Q. And was some of that funding arranged through people in New Orleans?A. I would think so. I believe so.Q. Were any of the people in New Orleans through whom that funding operation was effected people who turned out to be involved in the investigations conducted by Jim Garrison?A. Not to my knowledge.Q. How about David Ferrie? Was he ever connected with the Agency in any manner at all in providing funds or assistance to Cubans or Cuban groups?A. I couldn't say. I am just not familiar with -- we had a great many people that did this.Q. How about Clay Shaw? Was Clay Shaw ever used as a
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 88]
SECRETA. This I do not know either.Q. Pardon?A. This I don't know.BY MR. MANFREDI:Q Where would that information be available?A. Well, we have a guy that used to work with me who was down in New Orleans at that time. He would probably know.Q. Is he in the building?A. Yes.Q What is his name?A. Bill Kent.Q. Bill Kent?A. Yes.BY MR. OLSEN:Q. Who is Bill Kent with now? Which department?A He is still with the DDO.BY MR. MANFREDI:Q Western Hemisphere Division?A. No. He is on one of the staffs. He is on the -- I think Career Management Group Staff.Q. Is he officed near you?A. No. He is down in the basement.BY MR. OLSEN:Q. Do the Agency files reveal who the intermediaries were
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 89]
## SECRETA. Oh, yes.Ω. -- to the Cuban movements?A. Yes.Ω. Do you know whenter -- do you know the identity of any of them in New Orleans?A. No. No. Totally unfamiliar with anything that took place in New Orleans.Ω I take-it that Frank Sturgis was never an intermediary for providing funds to the Cuban fronts?A. The files that I have don't reflect it.Ω. I think we covered this already just a few minutes ago but let me make sure that we have got it on the record.I understood you to say that it was your impression in 1963 that large numbers of Cuban exiles, Cuban people in the southern United States, talked about and believed that they were involved in the CIA sponsored activities. Is that true?A. That is right.Ω Was it also your understanding and your impression that there was a good deal of talk among this Cuban element in the southern United States about plans or prospects for the assassination of Fidel Castro?A. I would say no. I don't think there was -- you have got to remember that these people were embittered. They lost their homeland, their possessions, they lost everything and the
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 90]
SECRET                                                                                                 88Q. That is Fiedl Castro?A. That is right, and they would probably verbally do anything they could to get rid of him.Q. Was there a lot of talk about killing Castro among these Cubans?A. I would say among the Cuban exiles there probably was a lot of talk about that.Q. Did you participate yourself in the overhearing of such conversations?A. No.Q. Was this a matter of something that was reported to you?A. Well, it was -- I really don't remember what the source of it was but I know in my discussions with people at the Station and from my visits down there and that type of thing that this subject always came up. What were they going to do with Fidel? How are they going to get rid of him and this type of thing. I don't mean the Agency people. This is what the Cuban exile community was discussing.Q. Yes. Do you know what Howard Hunt was doing for the Agency in 1963?A. Well, it seems to me he was here at Headquarters in '63 and I think he was assigned to the European Division of the DDP.Q. This is your best recollection --SECRET
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 91]
SECRET                                                                                                                              891 A. Yes.2 Q -- at the moment. Is it possible that he was withDomestic Operations Division in the field of *proprietaries*4 engaged --5 A. I guess you are right, yes. I believe he was there.6 Q Did you personally know Howard Hunt?7 A. No.8 Q. Never met him?9 A. I met him. That is all. I can't say I know him.10 Q You would not have known anything about his where-abouts on any particular day, then. Is that true?12 A. Can we go off the record?13 (Off the record discussion.)14 THE WITNESS: Let's go back on the record.15 BY MR. OLSEN:16 Q I would like to have it on the record.17 A. Do you have a particular day?18 Q No. I am just asking you if your acquaintance withHunt was such that you would have known of his whereabouts on20 any particular day.21 A. No.22 Q Was it very infrequently that you ever saw him?23 A. Oh, I would see him in the halls, this type of thing,but -- bump into him perhaps downtown on the street.25 Q But you would have no occasion for knowing from one
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 92]
## SECRET1 day to the next where he was?2 A. No.3 Q. Have you ever conducted any kind of inquiry on behalf4 of the Agency as to where he was on November 22, 1963?5 A. Yes.6 Q. And when did you conduct, that inquiry?7 A. I have done it twice that I recall and the most recent8 one was I guess -- I am just trying to think. Well, it wasn't9 too long ago because we did have an inquiry and we obtained the10 time and the attendance records from the Office of Finance which11 showed that Howard Hunt was on sick leave on that day.12 Q. Was this just fairly recently?13 A. Yes.14 Q. I understood from what files I have seen, Mr.15 Sturbitts, that the only records that were available from the16 Office of Finance showed that he had had nine hours of sick leave17 during the two-week pay period ending the 23rd of November but18 that the records were not available as to how much sick leave19 or annual leave had been taken on any particular day.20 A Well --21 0. Am I mistaken?22 A As I recall, he was in a duty status one day and a23 sick leave status the next day and back to duty the next day.24 I would have to check that with my Budget and Fiscal Officer.25 He is the chap that got that for me..
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 93]
# SECRETPhone (Area 202) 544-6000Q Can you check that for us?A. Sure.Q. And give us the results of that?A. Yes.Q. Because this is much more detailed information than I have been previouly aware is available in the files of the Agency.A. All right. I will do that.BY MR. MANFREDI:Q Do you want to make a note of that?A. Let me have a piece of paper.Q. You might also want Mr. Sturbitts' phone number which is 351-5106.THE WITNESS: That was 22 November, right?BY MR. MANFREDI:Q That is the day.A. 1963.Q In response to whose inquiry was that investigation made?A. I don't know. I would have to look that up, too. I don't recall exactly who asked for it. I don't know whether I will just have to check that. I don't know who it was.Q And the date? Do you have any idea when you made the inquiry?A. No. But Ican find out from the B and F guy, hopefully!
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 94]
## SECRETQ. You said there was a previous inquiry?A. Yes. The previous inquiry came from Archie Roosevelt who is now retired and was at that particular time the Chief of European Division.Q. When was that inquiry received?A. That was about a year ago, I guess.BY MR. OLSEN:Q. About the first time these photographs began to be circulated?A. Yes.Q. About the bums in Dallas?A. Yes, and actually I think this -- Archie's inquiry came from some magazine or newspaper man in Europe. Archie was Chief of Station, London, for a long time and he apparently made a lot of acquaintances over there among the media.Q. This is something you are relating to Der Sterm Magazine?A. That is right.Q. And did I understand you to say that in checking with the Office of Finance that it was positively ascertained that Hunt was on sick leave on November 22nd?A. Well, I will have to check that. That is the way I understood it but I did get this through our Budget people who have the contact with the Office of Finance.Q. And that he was on annual leave the day before?
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 95]
# SECRET931 A. No. He was on a duty status the day before, on sick2 leave, and then on duty status the following day.3 BY MR. MANFREDI:4 Q. Was there any effort to determine what Mr. Hunt's5 previous pattern with respect to sick days had been?6 A. (Nods in negative)7 BY MR. OLSEN:8 Q. November 22, 1963, was a Friday. When you say that9 records reveal that he was on a duty status the next day --10 A. It was a Friday. Then I was mistaken.11 Q. Does that mean he was on duty the following Monday12 or on the next day, Saturday?13 A. No. On the following Monday. I didn't realize the14 22nd was a Friday.15 Q Will you check that thing for us and give us a brief16 memo together with whatever supporting -- copies of supportingdocuments you can find?17 A. Okay.18 Q As promptly as possible on this question.19 I think that covers the subject matter.20 MR. MANFREDI: I can give you another moment if you want.21 Can you think of anything else?22 MR. OLSEN: I think that is all.23 MR. MANFREDI: Okay. Off the record.24 (Off the record discussion)25
[157-10011-10083.pdf — page 96]
SECRET                                                                                              94BY MR. MANFREDI:Q. I am sorry for the interruption but over the long haul I think probably I saved you some time.We are talking about newspaper editors when we were interrupted -- or when I invited the interruption. I guess I ought to be fair.Is it not a fact that the Agency had some relationship with some prominent newspaper officials in the Miami area?A. Yes.Q. And what was the nature of that relationship?A. Traditionally the Chief of Station maintained the relationship with officials of the Miami Herald particularly the Latin American editor, as well as relationships with staff members of it. I think it is the Miami News and stringers for the other newspapers and periodicals stationed in Miami.Q. What was the purpose of those relationships?A. I really couldn't say what the prupose of the relationship was. I mean, the same reason that we establish a relationship with the press in this town. There were certain things that might come to the attention of the press involving true names and incidents that we felt should perhaps not be surfaced at any particular time.Q. Do you have any knowledge of use of the press in Miami for propaganda purposes?A. No. No.