& 4. As far as source descriptions are concerned, we believe that it is important that the source description used by both your Bureau andthe -Aggnoy clearly state that the reliability of the sourcefhimselft (rather than Simply that of his’ information)} has not yet been estab- lished. For example; one of the following descriptions | might be appropriate: a | . a *€2. "A confidentia sinformant, contact with — 4° f whom ye Vegay neat sictent to establish his relia- has” fb. "A Soviedp source’ whose veliability not been established": os , Cc. (soviet official]? o is aware that his information is being passed to the U.S. Government Jk 8: RBecguse myc pOf the.positive intelligence infor- mation f£fOm[SHAMROCKfwhich we would propose to disseminate at this time" deals with United Nations atters, and much of it will inevitably raise questions from consumers, we believe that we will ultimately find it necessary to dis- cuss the existence and’: oz é no am) ‘ e with pamoassa— ‘While we do abérgpend (Secretary o 3 not seé any hecessity for this atthe - do wish to call your attegzion to the “dissemination o£ [SHaMROC ~nformation matters will very likely” require that present time, we - fact that extensive on [United Nati this be. done. a en agreement on the1ipoints raised have serious reservations about the dissemination of the: information contained in your memorandum. This report deals with a subject which owing to exceptional circumstances: makes objective evaluation. | of the information set forth’ extremely difficult. Essen- tially, the report contains ‘two basic elements: the , information aboutkKthe KGB S aBberess established to in- go> ¢ 6. Even subject. to ' ‘stntabove, however, we still vestigate the circumstancés. ofkPresident Kennedy's acath, BER and information on Lee Harvey" swald's relationship with - -the KGB. s far as we know, .theré has been no previous Poe ‘A 2. _— i £ this commissio -that - résident Kennedy was killed by wing’ monopolists--have long com- a conspiracy of right. y To cite prised the standard Soviet line on this subject. DoclId: 327172206 Page 3 HW 53944 reporting On the existence. £.sugp a-commission. It is important to note, howeve chatthe allegedf conclusions ia but two examples, KHRUSHCHEV. took this tack in an inter- a view he granted to columnist .Drew Pearson in early 1964u).
HW 53944 (see attached column from the. ‘Washington. Post of 26 June 1964); a complete © ‘statement’ Of the Soviet line on. Ken- nedy's death is to be found:in a book called "Where do the Tracks Lead?" - [Kuda ‘vyedut sledy] by A. IORYSH and B. SERGEYEV, which was. submitted for publication on 2 Sep- tember 1964. This book. spells out the theory of a right wing conspiracy in great detail. “it is interesting: in this connection that. ‘the ‘surname of one of. the two authors, SERGEYEV, is identical withthe alias used by SITNIKOV. in his contacts with both Pierre Salinger and Donald Brennan. In any event,” aside. from the existence of a KGB commission to consider the. problem, none of tbe find oa ings of the commissioniSsas. oported by [SHAMROCK], are either new or: significant, 7. feurther in ‘this. ‘vegard, “we note ‘that the iden- tification of SITNIKOV as” being chief of a sector, Infor-- mation Section, International Department, Central Committee of the CPSU is misleading in’ that, raccording to[SHAMROCKJ@. at the time that SITNIKOV. was. studying the assassination of President Kennedy he was’ “still Deputy Chief of the In- formation Service, First Chief Directorate, KGB. ,(See transcript of Meeting #17,. page 12, in which SHAMROCK ates SITNIKOV's transfer to.the cc in 1965, when SKRYABIN ‘retired and VIDYASOV became “chiefgof the Information Service.) Furthermore, (Fuwnocd fer ibed to KULEBYAKIN, who was then Chief of thé American Department of the FCD, the chief responsibility - for weighing the evidence that had been gathered by KGB sources on the President's death. (Seeftranscript of Meeting #4, page 18, RRWe sug- gest, therefote, that the report be made consistent by “either including KULEBYAKIN's name or deleting SITNIKOV's; or at least the SITNIKOV be “clearly identified as still Sy within the KGB at the time Cc “In connection with: ‘the Soviet assessment of president Kennedy rales page 2 of your memorandum, \ ‘we also note {that (SHAMROCK ntinued his discussion of this topic by providing the. current Soviet assessment of J a 20.) President Johnson. (See, transcript of Meeting #4, page While it is true that this assessment of President John- son was in answer +t direct question by one of the in- en terviewing ices lee that the sourcé's information on (3) this is not directly elevant: to the assassination of President Kennedy, we. nonetheless. believe that the juxta- ok position of SHAMROCK ! Ss remarks on ‘the two. Presidents AR) Ss} 2 t DoclId: 327172206 Page 4
significant and woult®ps forks ie to consumers in evaluating the report: bec use’ Of ‘the similarity of these By remarks to those made Spa Soviet officials around the world in pursuance’ ofwhdt appears to be a semi-offi- cial "line." (A good example of this is to be found in SITNIKOV's ‘meetings, with Pierre Salinger in Moscow in (of che spring of 1963-49) ae 9. Finally, it is the part of the report that deais with Lee Harvey Oswald'’s.relations with the KGB--or rather the lack of such: a. relationship--that raises seri- ous problems. As you. are. ‘aware, much the same story about _ Oswald, although: in consider cably greater detail and . allegedly based on first-hand. knowledge, has been related by NOSENKO. This Agency. firmly believes that NOSENKO did not in fact have first- hand : knowledge of the relations between the KGB and OSWALD, «and that NOSENKO's story on OSWALD is a KGBr-prepare “message. Similarly, this Agency , believes -that Simuenock ‘gl statements on OSWALD cannot auto- ; matically be a€cepted. as’ accurate or valid, and that the- ~ exact nature of the ‘KGB relationship with OSWALD has not Asgy ._ yet been established. . > Attachment As Stated . Above: ea ee F { | 4 4 HW 532744 DBocld:32172206 Page 5