SUMMARY POINTS ON HSCA HEARINGS
Agency: CIA
Originator: CIA
Document date: 8/5/78
Document type: PAPER-TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

## Page 1

1104-10147-10141

5 August 1978

ASCA

(ECC 1 79.3838/3)

Summary Points on HSCA Hearings

::: in

I, The ESCA has scheduled hearings on the assassination

of President Kennedy for weekdays, 6 - 29 September.

Preliminary hearings on the assassination of Martin

Luther King are to be 14 - 18 August and November.

2. Areas of apparent emphasis appear to be CIA coverage

in Mexico City, and issues arising from the questions

of Nosenko's bona fides. On the Nosenko matter,

CIA's treatment of Nosenko is also under scrutiny.

3, The Mexico City story is essontially, in terms of

Agency coverage, one of sources-and-methods. Aspects

of the Nosenko story also involve sensitive matters.

4. Recent handling of restricted Agency material (press

release), without checking with the Agency, may

indicate lack of concern about sensitive matters.

5, HSCA has failed, despite repeated requests, to discuss

with the Agency how to handle sensitive matters in

public hearings.

6. Agency employees called to testify may be faced with

the dilemma. of violating their secrocy oath or risk-

ing a contempt citation.

7.

The matter tends, to become political

in addition to

whatever legal questions there are.

21570

APPROVED FOR RELEASE 1993

CIA HISTORICAL REVIEW PROCRAM

---

## Page 2

-i=.

HISCA Hearings

1.

The HSCA has scheduled public hearings for August,

September, and November.

•. The King hearings are 14-18 August, and 9,

10, 13-17, 20, 21, 22, 25-29 November. It

appears that CIA is unlikely to feature in

in these hearings, although this is only an

impression.

•. The Kennedy hearings arc to be on weck days,

6-29 September. ClA doubtless will share the

stage with the FBI.

II. We have requested the HSCA Staff for information on the

plans for the hearings, with special attention to the

security considerations, (orally on 29 June and 13 July,

and in writing from the DDCI on 26 July and 4 August).

To date what we know about plans was acquired from The

Congressional Monitor.

•. It has been the practice of the HSCA Staff to

avoid dialogues, the effect of which is to conceal

much of what they are doing or thinking. The

resulting frustrations of trying to cooperate with

the investigation are not important; inevitably we

---

## Page 3

are provided partial insights into areas

of interest, if not the details.

The

significance of the tactic, however, grows

as public hearings approach, involving as

they do subject matter that we view

as

having considerable sensitivity and importance

to CIA.

III. We obviousty

do not know all the lines of inquiry pursued

by HSCA investigators. They have undertaken to reconstruct

as much as possible about Oswald and the assassination of

President Kennedy.

They also are attempting to develop

an evaluation of the performance of the intelligence

agencies in the investigation. Two areas of special

interest have become evident, both of which involve

sensitive

operational considerations:

Mexico City

•. Mexico City is considered one of the most 'important

bases for Soviet clandestine operations against

the United States. As a result Soviet and Cuban

diplomatic installations have long been the subject

of CIA surveillance operations, conducted both

unilaterally by CIA as well as jointly with the

Mexican authorities.

•. Telephone and photographic coverage of the Soviet

installations is

carried on, as well as physical

4-00 a

2

---

## Page 4

surveillance. The Mexican authorities

share the telephone operations with us;

it is against Mexican law for them to be

engaged in this activity. They are

aware

of the fact of photographic surveillance.

•. Because of the telephonic coverage CIA was

able to provide the initial firm evidence

on*Oswald's contacts with Cuban and Soviet

officials, in his attempt to obtain visas

to Cuba and the USSR. CIA, limited in not

being able to conduct a traditional police-

type investigation, was able to suggest to

the Mexican authorities that they interview

at least one person known to have dealt with

Oswald during his visit. However, gaps remain

infwhat is known about his visit. This has

attracted HSCA attention..

$.

•. The reported questioning of some HSCA investigators

has on occasion appeared to be developing

a basis

for

criticizing CIA's performance in its part

of the investigation in Mexico City, under its

charter to evaluate

the performance of the

intelligence agencies. At one time, and possibly

still, they appeared to be attempting

to develop

a case to the effect that (1) there was photography,

3

SECRET

---

## Page 5

and (2) CIA must have suppressed it.

•. Practically all the above CIA reporting

on Mexico City involves classically sources.

and-methods material.

Nosenko

•. Yuri Nosenko was a KGB officer who defected

in early 1964. Among the items of information

that he asserted he brought with him was knowledge

about Lee Harvey Oswald, from his file in the

KGB .

•. The bona fides of Nosenko's defection was the

subject of doubts and he was subjected to

extensive interrogation. He was in the custody

of CIA for some five years, under laws concerning

such persons, some three years of which was in

solitary confinement under what the Rockefeller

Commission termed "extremely spartan living

conditions."

•. Eventually Nosenko was judged to be a bona fide

defector. He has proven to be the source of a

wide range of information on many hundreds of

KGB officers, and KGB operations abroad, as well

as about the KGB. Over the years histinformation

has been responsible for a number of successful

counterintelligence initiatives by either the

4

---

## Page 6

. . ::

U.s. or its allies.

•. The recent book about Oswald, Legend, by

Epstein, has dramatized Nosenko's defection,

repeating the early doubts about him and

leaving the strong implication that he is

still to be doubted. Recently the HSCA

investigators scem to have shifted the

emphasis of their inquiry from this issue

to how Nosenko was handled; this judgment

may be in error and the issue of his bona

fides may return during the hearings.

•. CIA did mistreat Nosenko. He was kept in

solitary confinement, he was given a

minimum diet, he was allowed few comforts,

and he was subjected to intensive interrogation

for extended periods of time. He believes

that he was subjected to drugs, but there is

no record that such was the case; those who

were involved say he was never subjected to

drugs,

although it was considered once and

rejected.

•. The question of the bona fides of Nosenko's

defection could involve matters that have

sensitive connotations; however, a decision

to emphasize only his mistreatment would be

-

only embarrassing to the Agency.

SCORE TO

---

## Page 7

:.:

1°

IV.

In the absence of agreement with the HSCA on how

sensitive matters are to be handled in its public

hearings, the Agency may face the dilemma of how to

protect intelligence sources and methods.

• Current employees could find themselves

faced with the dilemma of abiding by their

secrecy oath and requesting to be excused

from-testifying, but having to choose

between a contempt citation and violation.

of the secrecy oath.

• Against the possibility that HSCA does not

undertake to work with us on this problem,

we may have to give notice to the employees

of the problem. A draft letter has been

prepared (copy attached) for forwarding to

present

and current employees who have been

interviewed by the HSCA. Its limitations are

apparent, in that it serves primarily to .

apprise the employee of his or her dilemma.

• OGC will request further advice from the

Attorney General.

v.

Should the most

pessimistic development come to pass,

the situation will be more political than legal. The

fact is that time is of the essence, and any stretch-out

will reduce the time in which the Agency can react with

considered judgments, either in cooperating in the public

---

## Page 8

hearings or in opposing their conduct because

of absence of adequate means for protecting

sensitive subject matter.

---

## Page 9

MATT

Dear

The Agency's records indicate that you have been

contacted by representatives of the House Select Committee

on Assassinations (HSCA) in conjunction with the Committee's

investigation into the deaths of President John F. Kennedy

and the Rev. Martin Luther King. •

As part of the Agency's effort to be fully responsive

to the Committee's investigation, you were authorized to

disclose classified information to Committee representatives.

This was possible because of arrangements worked out between

the Agency and the Connittce whereby the Conmittee would

obtain this information in secure surroundings and

handle it

properly once it was acquired.

The Committee has indicated that it plans to hold public

hearings in conjunction with its investigation. Thesc hearings

are to commence this month and stretch over the next several

months.

The Agency, of course, has no way of knowing whether

you will be called to appear during these public hearings.

You are hereby advised that the Agency's agreement with

the Committee under which you have been authorized to disclose

classified information to Committee representatives does not

authorize public circumstances.

Consequently, you are not

to disclose classified information during any public

hearing in which you may be called to appear.

If you are called to appear in these hearings, and if you

are asked a question which would require that you

which voura

disclose

classified information, you are entitled to point out this fact

to the Committee and indicate that you are not authorized to

reveal classified information in public circumstances.

You

should also indicate to the Committee that you are quite

prepared to answer the question in an executive session, and

you may request that the Committee convene such

a session to

hear your response.

If the Committee were to insist upon your testimony at this

point, you are entitled to request that the Committee grant you

an opportunity to confer with the Director of Central Intelligence

before answering the question.

---

## Page 10

It is my opinion that the Committee would not continue

to insist in the face of these responses from you. However,

were it to do so, you must at this point use your own juagment

as to how to respond, since your continuing refusal to answer

could result in your

being found in contempt of Congress.

If you are notified that you are to appear before the

Committee in these public hearings, please notify the Agency

of this fact promptly. You may do so by making a collect

telephone call to the Agency's security duty officer, who

can be reached at (703) 351-6161 at any time, day or night.

If you have any questions concerning this letter, please

indicate that fact to the duty officer, who will

arrange for

an appropriate Agency offficer to return your call.

Yours truly,

•:.

---

## Page 11

14-00000

Distribution:

1

- Mr. Hitz/OLC

1

- Mr. Rininger/OGC

- SA/DDCI

- Mr. McMann/DD0

• Mr. Carpentier/oL

Mr.

Blake/ DDA

- Mr. Waller/IG

- SDB Chron

- RSG Chron

otri.

---