DRAFT STAFF STUDY.
Originator: CIA
From: S. D. BRECKINRIDGE
To: DICK RININGER, OGC
Document date: 02/05/1979
Document type: PAPER - TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

4-00000

104-10149-10002

2022 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF 1992

SEGRET

ASCA

OLG RECORD CONY

OLC 79-0113/9

5 February 1979

MEMORANDUM FOR:

FROM

SUBJECT

Dick Rininger, OGC

Bill Sturbitts, LA/DDO

Jack Sullivan, OS

Russ Holmes

:

S. D. Breckinridge

Principal Coordinator, HSCA

:: Draft Staff Study

1. Attached is a draft staff study on the question of mentioning

overseas Stations, with

the emphasis on Mexico.

2. It is requested that you get an official position on this with

the understanding that a final version, incorporating your comments,

will be distributed for coordination and final comment prior to

submission to the DDCI and DCI.

3. Your response by Wednesday afternoon would be appreciated.

1D. Buschn

S. D. Breckinridge

Attachment

UNCLASSIFIED WHEN SEPARATED

FROM ATTACHMENT

DO NOT REPRODUCE

RETURN TO CIA

21169

SECRET

CECLEane: Heard 1265

---

## Page 2

14-00000

SECRET

OLC 79-0113/8

5 February 1979

MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Intelligence

VIA

FROM

SUBJECT

: Legislative Counsel

: S. D. Breckinridge

Principal Coordinator, HSCA

: House Select Committee on Assassinations References

to Overseas CIA Stations

1.

Action Requested: That you approve one of the options

set forth in paragraph iT.

2. Background: CIA's participation in the investigation of

President Kennedy's assassination was limited by the pattern of Lee

Harvey Oswald's life. He served in the Marine Corps in Japan,

although he did not come to the attention of the CIA at that time.

He travelled to the Soviet Union in 1959, returning to the United

States in 1962. He did not come to CIA's attention until his

defection was reported by the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. He

travelled to Mexico City in late September 1963, returning to

the United States in early October after a five-day stay. CIA

detected his presence and reported it.

3. False allegations by a disaffected CIA employee claiming

CIA-Oswald ties in Japan consumed some of the Committee's time and

discussing it,

in Tokyo, We would endeavor to have the Committee sanitize and

downplay this section of its report simply because of the discrediting

of the witness' testimony, if thissunsuccessful, unclassified publication

may become an issue.

4. Oswald's entry to the Soviet Union, with a visa given by the

Soviet Consul in Helsinki, leads to HSCA discussion in its report of

existence of the CIA Station in Helsinki and the file held on the

14-1

CRIGNALCLCY 13110

EXT BYND G YOS SY

3/00

SECRET

---

## Page 3

14-00000

SEGRET

Consul, who was KGB. We believe this can be remedied by sanitization;

if not, it could become an issue if HSCA insists on publication.

5. Oswald's visit to Mexico City and other developments there

have produced detailed discussion of certain events in HSCA drafts.

One of those intended by the Committee for unclassified publication

has to do with a man who made allegations that Oswald received money

in the Cuban Consulate for the purpose of killing the President.

This considers the investigation of the allegation, with criticisms

It involves detailed reference to

the Station in Mexico. The other section intended for unclassified

publication has to do with a man who flew to Cuba from Mexico City

a few days after the assassination of President Kennedy.

Again, there

is extensive reference to the role of the Station. The Committee's

charter includes evaluation of the intelligence agencies, and it

would argue it must publish.

6. The present issue is whether there can be some euphemism

for describing CIA personnel in Mexico City for the investigation,

without specifying that they were assigned there on a permanent basis,

or whether we simply oppose any references.

The Committee can be

expected to contest our objections to any references to the Station

or CIA's presence there for the investigation because the story

cannot be told otherwise.

- hon, pot chore

To omit such references would mean

that these limited sections would probably have to be deleted,

or so emasculated as to be rendered sterile and incomprehensible.

7. The Warren Commission report has only limited references to

CIA, crediting it with reporting Oswald's visit to Mexico City prior

to the assassination, and obtaining by undisclosed means a photograph

of an unidentified man. Other information from CIA is not specified in

the report,

while the press has accurately described those matters,

the Agency has never officially confirmed it.

8. The Church Committee report, in Book V, makes 28 separate

caferences to the Mexico Station last Mexico City e ahis is notts

Chief, or its communications with Washington.

publication by CIA, it has the quality of official contirmation by

virtue of being contained in a Senate report. The Agency did not

contest this at the time.

Further

the Agency subsequently approved

references to the Mexico City Station and its Chief, in the book

published by David Phillips, possibly because already public in the

Senate report.

2

SECRET

---

## Page 4

14-00000

9. Staff Discussion: Since the Church Committee investigation

and the approval of the references in the Phillips book, there has been

an increase in the sensitivity of the Mexico City Station.

The Station

has been the subject of a running campaign in the local press.

Domestic

political controversy has focused attention on the Embassy and the

Station, with allegations of bribery and other misdeeds.

The interest

of the United States àn'-Mexico gas and petroleum has heightened

sensitivity concerning anything that may affect the political atmosphere.

President Carter will be visiting in Mexico soon.

The President himself

has instructed the Attorney General that there can be no references

to the Mexico City Station

an its prosecution of the lll matter.

While

the President can instructla member of the Executive Branch on this matter,

a formal position from him on this subject, directed to the Congress, does

not have the same weight.

10. The agreement between you and. Chairman Stokes provides that

when we receive an official notice of the intent to publish, you have

five days in which to respond to him if you object.

At present, we have

this information on an informal basis and the five-day period does not

apply. Therefore, this is posed to you in anticipation of a disagreement

if discussions do

not produce a way around the issue.

11. Our options are:

a. To seek some compromise by discussions;

b. Accept some euphemism that suggests the presence

in Mexico of CIA people in 1964 for purposes of the investigation

without specifying that they were assigned there permanently;

c. Catagorically oppose publication of these two sections.

to doing sortion eggested tons to sue tine dessar fior

shape how we proceed.

S. D. Breckinridge

3

SESRET

---