Foe FOIA Review on NOV 1976 REPRODUCTION PROGIBITED ( EX- /093.L Stion with the Agenc . OREN) REFE Ray” aks _ “Méhiorandum of Conversation, Dan ther/Les Midgley and the DCI, es Ss Dated 6 September 1975 io Be SPfMES 1. The referent memorandum contains two points which require comments. The first point concerns allegations that were made shortly after the assassination of President Kennedy and that ve crept up every so often since then. In one form or &x0: xr, the allegations are that Lee Harvey OSWALD had®i eH connected with the Agency. The allegations are totality. ‘wirfounded. 2. The facts re eauis 2 a. On 2 Sembee s 3 I was instructed by “ Mr. R.G. Rocce Qy ipmedi te superior at that time, to make a tho SG checks} thin the Agency at Headquarters to determin ee Harvey OSWALD had ever been used by the Agenc\or been connected with it in any conceivable way. e ordered me to make the checks - directly and personally to the degree possible and not to accept statements of intermediaries. He also ex- plained that he was following instructions from-Mr. R. Helms, who was then the DDP and served as one of the Agency's key contact officials with the Warren. Commission. on b. Although I had already checked the Main: Index of IP (then RID) on the night of the assassination, I rechecked the Main Index and found no record beyond that which I had already obtained.before (plus: those items which had been integrated izito. the- records system since the assassination). There was nothing in the DDO records which indicated any Agency connection with OSWALD. . e ‘ cai 7m (hep 7S 6002105 REPRODUCTION =u ‘PROLIBITED : HW 53320 Bocld:32339663 Page 4 61-28 J2S of 16
REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED fad Gorn Cc. The nex€: ‘component I checked was DCD. There was no -“esord in their Headquarters files. Arrangements; were thén made for me to check telephonieatly with -each DCD base in the US. The chiefs ofthe bas@s‘then serached their records , and spéke\with<their officers. I was then advised by yeh Co efs or their designees individ- Co e had been no contact with OSWALD. & en checked with’ Division D, SE Division, and LA Sf sion's Cuban Operations Group (COG) for any informal desk records. The results were like- wise negative. e. Through the egacast Research Section (GRS) of the Office of fae GuPity I had the security files checked. Therecwase o record of OSWALD. NAN os . RSS kee ond records on Americans, et, J jan, and Cuban holdings £. Although I checked their on the remote something on ey . files. ~y K&S g. In wy e the chief of the CI Staff's Administrative Office called the Office of Personnel and received the word that there was no record on an employee or an applicant for employment named Lee Harvey OSWALD. that ey may have recorded was no record in those ee N \O™. ~~ h. I also checked the Office of Medical . Services and found no record on OSWALD. i. The Covert Action Staff also foufd no record on him. . oe j.- Finally, I also checked the::records: of the CI Staff's Operational Approval Group: (CI/0A). with negative results. ind yt k. My checks were completed on. 4 December 1963 and I then sent a brief informal note to Mr. Rocca ra a 0602106 NEPRODUCTION eg 3 ae AE PAGE VY of Lan HW 53320 Docld: 32389863 Page 5
° REPRODUCTION PROMIRITED <. S specifying<alithe checks I had made and stating that the ‘rasa tsashowed that Lee Harvey OSWALD had eter had LOK onnection whatsoever with the Agen€y. > E y a statement to this effect wag Conmiuntcat to the Warren Commission. 2 SSv . s S&S > Simla = necks regarding use or employment~ oN . of os D dtaa\been requested by the foreign divisions +~ of their priate stations, I was told, and the | sO results we negative. 4. I recall very clearly that we were extremely concerned at the time that OSWALD, as an American: returning . from the USSR, might have been routinely debriefed by DCD, thus having established contact with the Agency. The same point has now, quite understandably, been made by the two CBS newsmen. Having some knowledge of this subject I have personally concluded that there is valid reason for DCD's lack of interest in OSWALD at that time. He would surely have been contacted and debriefed by DCD had he been to the USSR and returned to the US before 1957/1958. Travel to the Soviet Union by Westerners, particularly by Americans, before that time was quite uncommon and we were hungry for eyewitness information in those days. The thaw began in about 1956 and by the end of that Othe Sovte were so many persons travelling to and from the Sow? wetsonion that DCD was incapable of talk- ing to all of hem: Therefore, a program of selectivity and specific-taxyet pplicability was instituted. In light of th&aBove,s\: seems to me that OSWALD-- if he came to ee nm at all--would have easily been by-pass \bece simply did not possess the type of Sion : D was seeking at that time. DCD would sure lynave ak ts limited manpower on travellers who musk ge ater access in the USSR. Tr nn nn ee et i a se ee ee oer ree, ———— oi ee hould be added that my above-described search| in e Agency file holding produced no record or indication that any other US Government agency had -used him as a source or had considered him for recruitment. CORRDENTIAL PROHIBITED - HW 53320 Bocld:32339663 Page 6
° REPRODUCTION | | PROMBITED '6. The second point in the referent memorandum , concerns the paper No were available at Headquarters | on Oswald before e\day of the assassination. Spe ically, there N \five documents which had been s@ re to the Agency befSre, the assassination. Two of thea had been sent’te us: the FBI, two by the D ment_of State, andone byc<thewS Navy. <A 201 file had been: operied-on \QDecember 1960 on the receapt, oF the -fiyst of these five docyxé Lilk@ Contained. Qw records that had beg any Apéncy: component. The Mexico Cé&€ Ci of the moaitering of Oswald's activit#’s ix: co had not as yet beeh included in the 201 file. TH tinent cables from Mexico City were held at the Mexico b¥anch at Head~ quarters, while the data contained in them had been disseminated to the FBI upon receipt. The cables were incorporated into the file following the assassination - and were, of course, made available to all concerned, including the Warren Commission. pigin WO Y . ation eporting | 7. It should be noted that no particularly great urgency was attached to the handling of the records regarding Oswald hefore the assassination because Oswald's name had-no par NS ar meaning before that eee SIN \ . 8. The-fa regarding the records we ed: before theaas: Ss ination as well as the makQup ‘of .cur computer imed. ecards\system were explai ) Chi6S> Justice Warren «members : s Commission, an Y UE 4 | Commission's taf members when theys<@pacted Headgtarters ' i at? March. $464 for the expre ‘ok Viewing the in sdsat March: nefhoss and. catitrols we employed i actaritiessbur 201 file on Oswald ‘wa at the tige. From all I have heard regaiding this visit, the visitors were satisfied with our records system and the manner in which we kept our records. Peul iiartran . GU02108 “REPRODUCTION — oo PROMIBIMED Me geo WW 53320 Docld: 327389863 Page 7
. rer ROOUCTION a PRORIPITED Telephone Conversation between DCI and J. Edgar HOOVER 26 November 220 REPEC ’ PROBIBITED NEPRODUCTION POA ISITeED = HW 53320 Docld:32389863 Page