Agency: HSCA
Originator: HSCA
From: CIA
Document date: 00/00/0000
Document type: REPORT

## Page 1

JFK Assassination System

Identification Form

Agency Information

Date:

2/16/201

AGENCY : HSCA

RECORD NUMBER :

180-10142-10135

RECORD SERIES : CIA SEGREGATED COLLECTION

AGENCY FILE NUMBER :

23-15-11

Document Information

ORIGINATOR: HSCA

FROM:

CIA

TO :

TITLE:

DATE:

PAGES:

SUBJECTS :

00/00/0000

5

Released under the John

43sassination Records

Collection Act of 1992

144 USC 2107 Notel.

Cased-Nu 53080 Date:

06-01-2017

CUBANA AIRLINES

CIA, METHODOLOGY

DOCUMENT TYPE :

REPORT

CLASSIFICATION: Unclassified

RESTRICTIONS :

1A; 1B

CURRENT STATUS : Redact

DATE OF LAST REVIEW :

08/07/1995

OPENING CRITERIA :

COMMENTS :

Box 12

v9.1

HH 53080

DocId: 32271439

Page 1

---

## Page 2

NOVEMBER 22, 1963 CUBANA FLIGHT

red better altation)

(Book V of the Senate Intelligence Committee

discusses

Report) sefers to a reported five-hour delay (6: 00PM

EST tO 11:00 PM EST) Of a Cubana flight from Mexico C/

to Havana the evening of President Kennedy's assas-

sination, November 22, 1963. 2(Senate Intelligence

Committee Report, April 23,1976, p.30) The most

Resent

more a fang ligh

story

delay see to await arrival at 10:30 PM EST of a pri-

Heareraft

vate twin engined aircrafts which deposited an uni-

dentified passenger who boarded the Cubana aircraft

without customs clearance and traveled to Havana

in the pilot's cabin. (ibid ps.

60-61) The Senate

stated

Intelligence Committee wrote that the Central In-

telligence Agency "had no information indicating

that a followup investigation was conducted to deter-

mine the identity of the passenger and had no fur-

ther information on the passenger, and no explan-

ation for why a followup investigation was not con-

ducted." (ibid p.61)

The Senate Intelligence Committee Report

raises four major Questions:

inform

a) Did the Central Intelligence Agency wind the

Senate Intelligence Committee that no investigation

the November 22, 1963 Cubana flight was conducted?

What

+

Wb?"

this

NW 53080 DooId: 32271439

Page 2

---

## Page 3

b) Did the Central Intelligence Agency further inves-

tigate the allegation?

Catter sscreport pull oratter

c) What were the results of the Central Intelligence

event to oleplace?)

Agency investigation?

d) Were the results of the Central Intelligence

Agency investigation forwarded to the Senate Intel-

ligence Committee?

doesn

sound

ery

Implessi

In an attempt to answer the questions raised

by the Senate Intelligence Committee Report, the

ütilered

House Select Committee on Assassinations has here

the following investigativeprocedures

a) Conducted.an extensive review of the Central Intel-

ligence Agency files that pertain to the November

22, 1963 Cubana flights:

analized

Insperto Generatingont

b) Reviewed rab B of the 1977 ciA Staff Report which

encerne

above cere

neluded a section on the November 22, 1963 Cubar

flights.

c) Reviewed the february 4, 1976 Central Intelligence

Agency letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

DID THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY WRITE THE

SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE THAT NO INVESTIGATION

OF THE NOVEMBER 22, 1963 CUBANA FLIGHT WAS CONDUCTED?

what

this

Lette

Identifyit

inamore

formaltaste,

After a careful review of the February

1, 1976 Central Entei digence agency letter to the

NW 53080 DooId: 32271439 Page 3

---

## Page 4

Senate Intelligence Committee , the House Select

Committee on Assassinations has determined that the

to dents

is misleading: The Central Intelligence Agency wrote

interthe senate Intelligence committee

that the Mexican

authorities were asked about the reported flight

delay, although there was no recorded response.

(CIA

letter to Senate Intelligence Committee, 2/4/76)

this

DID THE CENTRAL

INTELLIGENCE AGENCY FURTHER INVESTIGATE

THE ALLEGATION?

The Central Intelligence Agency conducted

regular surveillance of Cubana flights, filing cable

16

reports to Headquarters. (1977 CIA Staff Report, Tab B,

P. 11) There was one unilateral CIA surveillance team (LiF 6)

that observed arrivals and departures of Cubana

flights, reporting any unusual incidents and providing

1781

copies of flight manifests.

(ibia, p.11) The Mexican

government

authorities also had & surveillance team of Its own

at the airport which provided the cra with photonel

at porsons

Travelin

to Coobah

e telephone tap operation

(LIENVOY) against the Cuban Embassy provided trans-

betwee

Airlines.

cripts of conversations with

the Cubana office and

(cite)

5 tate in

NW 53080 DocId: 32271439

Page 4

---

## Page 5

WHAT WERE THE RESULTS

OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE

AGENCY INVESTIGATION?

what s

50 ke

about

ThiS

1ou need

arabsio

DIFFERENCE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND HOUSE

pertainin to

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS FINDINGS

The House Select Committee on Assassinations

findings differ from those of the Senate Intelligence

Committee in the following manner:

a) The Cubana flight was on the ground in Mexico

City for a total of four hours and about ten minutes.

It was not delayed five hours as reported in Book V.

NW 53080 DooId: 32271439 Page 5

---

## Page 6

b) The Cubana flight departed at 2035 hours

Mexico City time, 55 minutes ahead of the alleged

arrival at 2130 of a private flight with a secret

passenger..

cite

c) The 2035 departure also contrasts further with the

Senate Intelligence Committee Report that the Cubana

flight departed at 2200.

с,н

No record. of a November 22, 1963

one ball chatthis

aircraft carrying á lone passenger exists:

In addition,

no record exists of a passer ce travel to Hav namerpts and

in the pilot's cabin

In view of the surveillance

coverage of the cubana flight, it is doubtful that

the alleged activity involving the private twin-r

engined aircraft and passenger would have gone unno-

ticed or unreported had it occurred.

scond explair

cowth sistetak

WERE THE RESULTS OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE

AGENCY: FORWARDED TO THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE

COMMITTEE

The Central Intelligence Agency gave the

Senate Intelligence Committee only the informant

allegations. The Senate Intelligence Committee

did not review the LIFIRE Or LIENVOY records.

-Relying

solely on the informant's allegations, the Senate

Intelligence Committee could not have reported the

story any differently.

NW 53080 DooId: 32271439 Page 6

---