Francesco/who-killed-jfk huggingface dataset:
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 19]
of activity, would be the SC Division. On this I think theCI staff could be considered as speaking for the Directorate.Mr. Goldsmith. Is the Domestic Contact Division part ofthe CI Staff?Mr. Tovar. No, part of the Directorate of Operations.Mr. Goldsmith. The response of the Agency dated April20, 1978, which appears in CIA Number 1818, indicates thatcontact seems to be based on opportunity and circumstance.Then it goes on to say only ten of the 117 persons have hadany contact with CIA. Would it be possible for you to go intomore dtail on what is meant by opportunity and circumstance?Mr. Tovar. In the asecne of a policy, of a guideline, aprocedure, internal instruction which says you will debriefAmericans who return from having resided in the USSR, in theabsence of that, this thing is left to chance obviously. Icannot explain to you how the names of these 11 passed the deskof whoever was in charge at the time, but assuming they did,my guess, and it is really only a guess, would be that theperson who read that, whatever document it was, would say,"Hmmph! He looks like he might be interesting", and perhapswould then get in contact with CCD and suggest if they get incontact with a person, let us say he is known to be living inNew York, suggest that they might want to seek out his locationand if possible interview him.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 20]
19I think it would be a matter of chance in the sense that the analyst or whoever it was who reviewed that document, might react, and yet he or she might not, too, depending on how they woke up that morning. Its sheer whimsy.Mr. Goldsmith. Let me explain to you why the question whether or not it was standard operating procedure to debrief returning defectors is important to the Committee. Since the assassination of the President, there has arisen a group of researchers who have reviewed the Warren Commission Report and have reviewed releases made under the Freedom of Information Act by the CIA and the FBI.Having reviewed these materials the argument has been made that Oswald received unusual treatment at the hands of the CIA. One example of this unusual treatment is that there is no record of Oswald having been debriefed by the CIA upon his return. For that reason, we are focusing on this issue. Is there any way you can give us guidance on how to respond to that question?Mr. Tovar. I can't becuase I am sphculating every step along the way. I would hesitate to say more than Oswald simply didn't connect with whoever happened to be looking -- let us assume his name appeared. Was his namde in the list?Mr. Goldsmith. No. That is the list of people who were debriefed.Mr. Tovar. One hundred seventeen?
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 21]
Mr. Goldsmith. I haven't seen the list of 117 people.Mr. Tovar. What is this?Mr. Goldsmith. That is a list of 350 odd people I was going to ask you about. However, since you don't have knowledge of the 117, I am not going to ask -ou about them.Mr. Tovar. If Oswald's name was on the list, I can't explain why he might not have been contacted. Maybe he didn't appear attractive or interesting enough. I don't know what information might have been given with these names on the list, such as a memo from the FBI or State Department, whoever had originated it, what they said that would have titilated the analyst who might have seen it that would have elicited a response on the part of the analyst who would say "Ah, let us look into this further."Mr. Goldsmith. In particular, a lot of focus has been given to Mr. Robert Edward Webster, who appears in CIA Number 1820 who defected approximately the same time that Oswald did and returned at approximately the same time that Oswald did and who was debried by the CIA for two weeks in Virginia.Mr. Tovar. I didn't know that he was. It doesn't say so here.Mr. Goldsmith. That does not indicate the extend of the debriefing. That information was obtained independently by this Committee.Mr. Tovar. The name means nothing to me so I can't
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 22]
TOP SECRET211. enlighten you on it.2 Mr. Goldsmith. Does the CIA have any affiliation with3 organizations in the United States who might be responsible for4 debriefing someone?5 Mr. Tovar. Not that I am aware of.6 Mr. Goldsmith. In other words, if anyone is going to be7 debriefed it would be by the Domestic Contact Division?8 Mr. Tovar. In the intelligence sense. In the sense of9 elucidation of intelligence, DCD would do it. A different type10 of inquiry, personal investigation, the Office of Security, or11 whoever it works through, would be the one.12 The one we are talking about, DCD is the only organization13 I know of. I can visualize a circumstance under which operating14 components might seek out an individual or might have in times15 past but I can't think of a case in point in my own recollec-16 tion. I would say, given the strictures on our operating in17 the United States, we would rely upon DCD to do it if they had18 any positive intelligence connotation. If it were of an19 operational nature today, the Foreign Resources Division might20 pursue it.21 Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.22 Mr. Tovar. It is the division level of the Directorate.23 It is the division which seeks in the United States to develop24 potential intelligence assets for abroad. I think I had25 better defer to the other people on that. That is roughly where
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 23]
22it stands. They certainly would not have interest in debriefing defectors that I am aware of.Mr. Goldsmith. In any event, for the purposes of summary, there is today no standard operating procedure of interviewing returning defectors?Mr. Tovar. Right, insofar as I am aware, there is none.Mr. Goldsmith. There is no standard operating procedure between the Bureau and the CIA which would coordinate any effort to contact returning defectors and share information?Mr. Tovar. None that I am aware of.Mr. Goldsmith. Turning to another area which I would like to get into briefly, would you define what a 201 file is?Mr. Tovar. A 201 file is a file or files -- it could be several volumes to it -- which relates to an individual. It might pose a dicotomy, a 201 file and project file. A project file might deal with an activity, say collection operations in Timbucktu, a broad scale o activity involving several numbers of people, there might be several 201 files, A, B, C, who were associates in that project. The 201 file would be on the individual himself.Mr. Goldsmith. Ti would contain primarily biographic information?Mr. Tovar. No. It would contain a much vaster -- some of them might contain one sheet of paper with name, rank and date of birth. But if the association with him developed and
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 24]
23became more extensive, it night contain a considerable amountof information. If he became involved with this ope-ation itmight include operational material, intelligence operationsas well, all part of the 2)1 complex.The point I am making is that it is an individual fileas opposed to an activity file.Mr. Goldsmith. If you wanted to learn about the operationsthat an individual was involved in, would you go to his 201file or to his operations file?Mr. Tovar. I would go to the 201 file first. There mightnot be an operations file. In fact, in the vast majority ofthe 201 cases there are no operational files because there isno hard and fast rule on when you open a 201 file or who opensa 201 file.If I, for example, am overseas and I become interested ina person who looks to me to have considerable promise from theoperational standpoint, sa a local foreign type, I might givemy own local checks, I might examine my own files to see if Iknow anything about him. 'Then I say to headquarters "here isJoe Doe. He is interesting to me for these reasons. Will youplease check against headquarters records and other agenciesand let me know if you have anything of interest on him."I might not ask for a 201 file. Headquarters might then,because they thought he was interesting, open a 201 file.Conversely, I might likewise say this looks terribly interest-
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 25]
24ing Please open a 201 file and give me all of the informationyou can collect on him."Mr. Goldsmith. I understand that the fact that someonehas a 201 file does not mean at all that the individual wasinvolved in any operations of the Agency. If you wanted togetinformation of an operational nature, would you go both to the201 file and operations file?Mr. Tovar. Assuming there was information of an opera-tional nsture?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.Mr. Tovar. Yes, indeed we would.Mr. Goldsmith. If someone is an agent of the CIA -- Iam not referring now to case officers or staff agents -- some-one is a field agent for the Agency, would that fact be indi-cated in the 201 file?Mr. Tovar. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. In the Directorate of Operations someonemight open up a 201 file on an individual if the person wasof a potential positive intelligence significance?Mr. Tovar. Or counter intelligence, either one.Mr. Goldsmith. That was going to be my question. TheCI Staff in particular, when would you have occasion to open a201 file?Mr. Tovar. CI staff would not necessarily be the only oneto open a 201 file. In the case of a person of CI interest,
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 26]
a field station might have a counter-person I described earlierand become interested in him because he did have some CIattraction or interest. The station itself or the division wouldopen the 201 file. It would not be us. The CI Staff as a ruleis not involved in that type of thing.At this stage of the game since we are not operating andwe are not out soliciting new contacts, we are not working inthat sense of the term, we don't to my knowledge originate 201files.Mr. Goldsmith. The C: Staff does not open up 201 files?Mr. Tovar. There is no reason that we couldn't.Mr. Goldsmith. As a pratical matter?Mr. Tovar. As practical matter it does not work that way.Our research is primarily focused upon established cases, casesthat may even be dead, terminated, or dormant, or even currentin certain cases, but as a rule not very many. 201 file isopened by someone else. We may examine those files and reviewthem. We do review other activities. But the 201 file wouldbe in existence. They would not be created by ourselves.In former days when C: Staff files were segregated fromtherest of the Directorate it might have been different. Idon't know.Mr. Goldsmith. When was that?Mr. Tovar. Say prior to 1974, 1957. Today our foles areintegrated in the files of the Directorate or it is in the
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 27]
TOP SECRET26process of being integrated. We have been working on this. This is one of our major final exercises in the past two or three years to make sure, when you go to the central files and research a name, if there as something in the CI Staff repository that will turn up when you are making a check of the index.Mr. Goldsmith. Will most 201 files be open as a result of information coming into headquarters from the field, one of the field stations?Mr. Tovar. Yes, the vast majority. In years before when they has such programs as MH Chaos, I assumed they opened 201 files of their own.Mr. Goldsmith. What is that?.Mr. Tovar. MH Chaos program?Mr. Goldsmith. For the record, will you indicate what that program is?Mr. Tovar. I frankly would rather not because I don't know the precise definition of the program. It was a program which has been described in the press as domestic surveillance. Whether that is the correct proper designation, I don't know. Our CI Staff does not normally open a 201 file. We don't have occasion to.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know what the term CI/SIG stands for?Mr. Tovar. Counter Intelligence/Special Investigative
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 28]
27Group, I think it is. Investigative or investigations, I don't know which.Mr. Goldsmith. Is that group still in existence today?Mr. Tovar. No.Mr. Goldsmith. When did it go out of existence?Mr. Tovar. I don't know exactly. Before my time. I think it ended in '73, '74, '75. I am not sure.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know what the function of that group was?Mr. Tovar. Only in a very vague sort of way. I have heard about it, it was the investigative group in the CI Staff that investigated whatever the CI Staff did in those days. I can't speak to that with any first hand knowledge. I know some things they did but I would be hesitant to make a general definition of their function.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether the function of that group was to investigate Agency employees who were suspected of having been penetrated?Mr. Tovar. I think, because I have seen nothing in writing on the subject, but I have been given to understand that was one of their functions in the context of their responsibilities that was included. But I am no authority on the subject.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know whether CI/SIG would have occasion to open a 201 file?Mr. Tovar. I don't know. I can speculate. I don't know.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 29]
## TOP SECRETMr. Goldsmith. What would your speculation be?Mr. Tovar. I would speculate in the days when they were functioning they probably did. You have a very unauthoritative witness on that subject.Mr. Goldsmith. What is the relationship if any between the Office of Security and the CI Staff?Mr. Tovar. We have basically different functions. The Office of Security is under the Directorate of Administration and is responsible for the personnel and physical security of the entire division. It focuses on personnel security and physical security.The CI staff as I described it, is an element of DDO concerned with research and analysis and operation and coordination. The relation between us and the Office of Security is simply that between us and another fraternal element of the Agency which has responsibility which sometimes comes close together.Mr. Goldsmith. Does the Office of Security maintain files which contain information of a derogatory nature on individuals, not necessarily limited to Agency employees?Mr. Tovar. To my knowledge they don't. My assumption is ii I have never seen what is in their files -- my assumption is that they have files only on Agency personnel. I cannot visualize circumstances under which they would maintain information on people who are not in the Agency or who had not been
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 30]
# TOP SECRETappplicates for employment and then left.Mr. Goldsmith. Is the Office of Security interested in maintaining information so that if in the future an individual was being considered for employment in some capacity with the Agency the Secuirty Office would have that information on him?Mr. Tovar. I cannot visualize that heppening today.Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to ask you to read CIA 0786, which is a document that this Committee obtained from the Office of Security files on Lee Harvey Oswald.Mr. Tovar. That sort of suggests they maintained such information then. I still cannot visualize there doing it today.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you think the function of the Office of Security may be different today from what it was in 1959 with regard to maintaining such files?Mr. Tovar. The functon, I would use the term function, I would say the policy of the Office as far as the way the office operates today. I don't know what they do intrinsically.I cannot visualize their maintaining that kind of current records today. Maybe this is historic, it was in the files since 1969. With the injunction against destroying files, the files remained.If it was John Q. Doe appearing today in a similar context I would not visualize the Office of Security maintaining this
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 31]
# TOP SECRET301 kind of document.2 Mr. Goldsmith. To whom would this document go today?3 Mr. Tovar. You mean from the State Department?4 Mr. Goldsmith. Yes, a State Department document. Which5 is indicating that an American citizen is giving information,6 intelligence information to a foreign country, to whom in the7 CIA would that document go?8 Mr. Tovar. I am not sure it would come to the CIA at all9 because the CIA does not have responsibility for that type ofperson. I think it would go to the FBI.11 Mr. Goldsmith. Even though the individual is overseas?12 Mr. Tovar. Yes. He is an American. Again, this is13 speculation. I don't know what moves the person who releases14 cables to the Moscow Embassy today. He might decide or some-15 body here in State Security might decide that CIA should seethis. In that event, it probably would go to the Office of17 Security as a matter of information..18 Mr. Goldsmith. Would information contained in this type19 of telegram normally lead to the opening of a 201 file?20 Mr. Tovar. I would think not.21 Mr. Goldsmith. Why not?22 Mr. Tovar. There is nothing that suggests here this23 is going to be of continuing interest to the CIA. This is24 1959. Let us say in 1962 the man came back and another message25 came over and it indicated that he was available for discussion
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 32]
TOP SECRET31or was of interest and so on and maybe there are reasons for debriefing, I can visualize a 201 being opened if the matter were of apparent continuing interest. I can see no reason why a 201 would be opened in this case.Mr. Goldsmith. What if this telegram was followed by aable indicating that the individual had decided to defect?Mr. Tovar. What do you mean? He is applying for Soviet citizenship, so he is defecting here?Mr. Goldsmith. You are correct. I withdraw the question.Mr. Tovar. I think basically my point is that it is a fact that a 201 need not be opened up on this type -- this is a casual piece of information. If one could eliminate the name Lee Harvey Oswald, which raises flags, it is John Doe and there is nothing in this -- someone might say what an SOB this is but there is nothing to indicate anything but an unfortunate incidental event, I would say today, "why bother."We have enought to do without opening 201 files on people of that nature." The encyclopedic approach is not one that we try to apply.Bear in mind, I am doing a lot of speculating here. I perhaps shouldn't.Mr. Goldsmith. You really aren't aware of what the procedure would be in 1959 for dealing with a telegram like this?Mr. Tovar. No. I would still say today I would not expectNW 48331 DocId: 32277210 Page 33TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 33]
# TOP SECRET32that kind of document to be retained in Agency files anywhere.You know, inter-departmental correspondence is firing paper in all directions all the time on an informational basis. That does not mean it is retained.Mr. Goldsmith. With regard to this document, after 1959 your testimony is moreorless speculation but you are saying that today you don't think that this type of document would be retained and have any specmal significance?Mr. Tovar. I don't think so. I am scratching my head trying to visualize circumstances under which it could be retained. There is nothing of interest to the Agency. There is nothing of immediate counterintelligence interest. I don't know who would retain it o:: why.Mr. Goldsmith. For the purpose of clarification, if the CI asked that of the CIA, by that I mean the counterintelligence aspect of the CIA concerned primarily with a foreign counter- intelligence threat, in otehr words, foreign nationals, foreign citizens?Mr. Tovar. You are asking is it?Mr. Goldsmith. Yes.Mr. Tovar. Primarily yes, but not solely. We are concerned with Americans o: counterintelligence interest. If an overseas station is informed by somebody that an American is contacting the Soviets and is apparently engaged in what looks like espionage, we would become interested. That isNW 48331 DocId:32277210 Page 34# TOP SECRET
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 34]
TOP SECRET33espionage I am talking abou:.Mr. Goldsmith. I understand.Mr. Tovar. You realise of course with the sensitivity of Americans investigations of Americans we have to be an we are extremely careful in making the determination as to when a person is of counterintelligence interest. We have very strict rules and regulations on the consideration of investigations, considerations retaining information, the rights of a person. The criteria are very stringent. Theyare under esecutive order and Attorney General guidelines. We don't approach this casually at all. It is proscribed activity.Mr. Goldsmith. Both as to Americans?Mr. Tovar.. Primarily Americans. The Attorney General is not concerned essentially with non-US persons. Our focus of sensitivity is on US persons who are US citizens or residents, aliens or US entities, organizations, which are primarily American in composition.Mr. Goldsmith. Again, would you focus outside the-borders of the United States?Mr. Tovar. Yes. Ins: de US is FBI.Mr. Goldsmith. Before when you made reference to a station overseas, you became aware of an American who might be involved in espionage for another country, you were referring to an American who was living abroad, is that correct?Mr. Tovar. Yes, or traveling abroad.
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 35]
34Mr. Goldsmith. I would like to show you CIA Number 788 which is the field personality file request form that was used to open Oswald's 201 file. In the middle of the page there is a box which states the term 'Other identification". If someone wrote the number or letter "AG" down, what does that stand for?Mr. Tovar. I have no idea. What are they referring to here? I cannot think of anything.Mr. Goldsmith. The form also indicates that Oswald's file was restricted. Do you know of any reason why Oswald's file would have been restricted?Mr. Tovar. Where is that?Mr. Goldsmith. Here.Mr. Tovar. No, I don't know. I don't know what criteria they would have used at that time or even today for that matter, to open a restricted file. Bear in mind, there is a lot of latitude given to the individual who opened these things. He could be a very junior analyst who for reasons of his own decided he would do it this way. Supervision would not neces- sarily get down there very closely behind him.Mr. Goldsmith. Do you know what the inter-agency source register is?Mr. Tovar. Yes.Mr. Goldsmith. What is that?Mr. Tovar. As I understand it, it is a register maintained in which other agencies of the government register their
[180-10131-10325.pdf — page 36]
35interest in a person. Let us take, for example, you are workingfor the Army Intelligence and you are in Germany and you becomeinterdsted in Mr. Smith. Let us say you check Mr. Smith withthe CIA and with the other agencies and in so doing you wishto have him recorded under the ISR, Inter Agency SourceRegistry, the entry of his name in the ISR will normally flagprior interest on the part of somebody in the government, inthis case you are in the Army.I don't know what this symbol is but they put two asteriskswhich indicates to anybody else who checks that name later theUS Army has a prior interest in that person.Mr. Goldsmith. What kind of interest would that be?Mr. Tovar. Intelligence interest to me, potentialintelligence interest. Again, the ISR may have ramificationsthat I am not aware of. In my experience the ISR has been theplace we go to check, say, a new or potentially new source tosee if there is ny other previously established governmentinterest in the person which means keep your hands off. Themilitary rely upon this very heavily because we coordinate theirclandestine intelligence operations.Mr. Goldsmith. Would an ISR index be checked prior toopening up a 201 file as a matter of routine?Mr. Tovar. It has been so many years since I have donethis. The way we have become mechanized today I would assumethat a normal file check through the central files of the