104-10065-10026 a wee nee ie a aetae me aban ABODE $0 crank Ad Oe enasin aL feEOt Above Bafainine aaWinainnn 4 iehasawars nee anianbeit inte htbletnony.umeeacetes yude wow beslewe Cfo rey a) ea | rey amen] [oie # 78 30s 6/7! 15 September 1978 MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT : Meeting between DDCI and Chairman Stokes, HSCA 1. The DDCI, with Mr. Hitz and the undersigned, met with Chairman Stokes yesterday afternoon at the Cannon Building. Mr. Blakey was with Mr. Stokes. 2. The discussion covered the five points in the letter of 11 September from Mr. Stokes as follows: . ‘a. The question of the "mug book" has been resolved. . b. We believed that the "missing memorandum" _ had, in fact, been reviewed on five separate occasions in two different files. The problem was that it did not bear a number, although in a series of sequentially numbered debriefing memoranda of AMMUG. However, the time of the memo was such that it had to fall between others in that sequence, and was on the subject (Oswald) in which they were interested. The HSCA investigator had been told of this. Mr. Stokes asked that we simply write a letter explaing this, and stating our opinion that this was the case. c. The Security files of the employee, which they wished to review were described by the DDCI | . ‘as containing information of a personal nature about the employee. Mr. Blakey or Mr. Cornwell could review it. This was accepted. d. After emphasizing the sensitivity. of the Mexico City history, the irrelevance of\ 22 jyears to the inquiry, and the nature of the Agéncy's status there, the DDCI stated that Mr. Blakey and Mr. Cornwell could review it in unsanitized form. That was accepted. e.2.impoer cu ay 4222.28.) rarer! ‘ | $7/7
14-00000 a Lod ol a4 oy e. It was noted that the 201 file of the person in question (Proenza) had been reviewed for the period from January 1963 through May 1964. The DDCI emphasized the sensitivity of the operation, especially in the light of certain current develop- ments. We stated that the file had been reviewed by two named officers for the period requested, and that they reported that it contained no reference to assassination plotting or the subject of the investigation. The DDCI stated that if the Chairman insisted we could bring the file for him to review personally.. Mr. Blakey then stated that there was an allegation that Proenza had been recalled to Cuba as part of a Cuban inquiry into knowledge within the Cuban government about Oswald and the assassination, in addition to which there is a tele- phone transcript in which Proenza seems to have indicated that she had advance knowledge of the assassination. (We had assumed that the HSCA interest in Proenza was based on the coincidence in time of her being recalled to Cuba, but were not previously aware of either of the two allega- tions Blakey revealed). On the basis of this show- ing of relevancy the DDCI agreed for Mr. Blakey to review the file of the special operation for the period requested. Mr. Blakey stated that he could read Spanish sufficiently well to handle it personally. 3. j$%&It is noted that Mr. Blakey stated that the . Mexico City story is to be told in the public hearings without any reference to CIA, or its presence in Mexico. 4. Mr. Blakey also stated that no testimony will be sought from the DCI until December. —=~O) Qu gt S.D. Breckinridge Distribution: Orig - OLC/Subject 1 - OLC/Chrono 1 - Mr. Shepanek (PCS/LOC) 1 - Mr. Sturbitts (LA Division) oe 1 - DDO 1. - DDA 1 - Mr. Rininger (0GC) aoe at manned