Jump to content
The Education Forum

1973 DOD IG Report


Recommended Posts

Final Report of the ARRB, Chapter 6, Part 1 - The Quest....

I. .....

5. Army

The Review Board's two primary concerns with Army records were: first, to open the counterintelligence files located at the Investigative Records Repository (IRR) at Fort Meade; and second, to determine whether Army intelligence units had any regular responsibilities for protection of the President as part of their normal duties circa 1963.

a. U.S. Army's Investigative Records

Repository.

This facility at Fort Meade in Maryland, a part of the Army's Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), contains investigative files on individuals of counterintelligence interest to the Army. The HSCA studied 34 IRR "case files," and thus, the Army processed those records for inclusion in the JFK Collection. The Review Board requested three additional files and designated them assassination records. The three additional case files declared as assassination records by the Review Board pertain to Alfredo Mirabal Diaz, Jordan James Pfuntner, and Clemard Joseph Charles. The Review Board staff also designated one additional file consisting of an assortment of extracts from various Army Intelligence Regulations.

b. Army Security Agency records and files.

The Review Board did not locate any additional assassination records from the Army Security Agency's files. Review Board staff searched for information and records concerning ASA electronic surveillance from the 1960s, but was unsuccessful in its efforts to locate any such material. Army personnel provided to the Review Board staff a unit history which gave a generic description of ASA surveillance activities in Mexico City in 1963. The one paragraph that addressed this activity was short, not very detailed, and described the ASA surveillance effort of the Cuban and Soviet Embassies as largely unsuccessful, due to technical difficulties. This paragraph did not provide any raw intelligence or surveillance data.

c. Army Inspector General 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the U.S.

In 1997, the Review Board requested that the Army's Inspector General's Office locate and provide a copy of its own 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the United States, in the hope that this document might mention domestic surveillance activity in the early 1960s and provide leads to the Review Board. (The Church Committee cited this report in detail.) The Army IG office responded to the Review Board staff that it could not locate its own report.

(End FR ARRB)

If this report was published, as it should have been, and shared with whoever requested it, and the responsible oversight committee of the Senate and House, there should be dozens of copies around, but the DOD IG office can't even find the original? That doesn't make sense.

They're not saying they're not turning it over, that it was destroyed, or that it is classified for national security reasons, they're saying they can't find it.

That was 15 years ago. Is this report still missing?

Any info on this 1973 Army Inspector Generals Report would be greatly appreciated.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Final Report of the ARRB, Chapter 6, Part 1 - The Quest....

I. .....

5. Army

The Review Board's two primary concerns with Army records were: first, to open the counterintelligence files located at the Investigative Records Repository (IRR) at Fort Meade; and second, to determine whether Army intelligence units had any regular responsibilities for protection of the President as part of their normal duties circa 1963.

a. U.S. Army's Investigative Records

Repository.

This facility at Fort Meade in Maryland, a part of the Army's Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), contains investigative files on individuals of counterintelligence interest to the Army. The HSCA studied 34 IRR "case files," and thus, the Army processed those records for inclusion in the JFK Collection. The Review Board requested three additional files and designated them assassination records. The three additional case files declared as assassination records by the Review Board pertain to Alfredo Mirabal Diaz, Jordan James Pfuntner, and Clemard Joseph Charles. The Review Board staff also designated one additional file consisting of an assortment of extracts from various Army Intelligence Regulations.

b. Army Security Agency records and files.

The Review Board did not locate any additional assassination records from the Army Security Agency's files. Review Board staff searched for information and records concerning ASA electronic surveillance from the 1960s, but was unsuccessful in its efforts to locate any such material. Army personnel provided to the Review Board staff a unit history which gave a generic description of ASA surveillance activities in Mexico City in 1963. The one paragraph that addressed this activity was short, not very detailed, and described the ASA surveillance effort of the Cuban and Soviet Embassies as largely unsuccessful, due to technical difficulties. This paragraph did not provide any raw intelligence or surveillance data.

c. Army Inspector General 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the U.S.

In 1997, the Review Board requested that the Army's Inspector General's Office locate and provide a copy of its own 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the United States, in the hope that this document might mention domestic surveillance activity in the early 1960s and provide leads to the Review Board. (The Church Committee cited this report in detail.) The Army IG office responded to the Review Board staff that it could not locate its own report.

(End FR ARRB)

If this report was published, as it should have been, and shared with whoever requested it, and the responsible oversight committee of the Senate and House, there should be dozens of copies around, but the DOD IG office can't even find the original? That doesn't make sense.

They're not saying they're not turning it over, that it was destroyed, or that it is classified for national security reasons, they're saying they can't find it.

That was 15 years ago. Is this report still missing?

Any info on this 1973 Army Inspector Generals Report would be greatly appreciated.

BK

Bill, I can't address about the files you refer to, however, in response to FOIA requests I've been party to, I've gotten responses of:

- files not found, even though they were known to be, at one time.

- files destroyed [both 'routinely' destroyed, or in a 'fire'].

- these are the 'ultimate' 'fall-backs', way beyond 'denied' on the grounds of National Security.

I'm sure in a FEW instances they might be truthful, but I think in most they are just excuses....

Yes Peter, but if a report was published, they couldn't have rounded up and destoryed every one, and I know while they - meaning DOD DOA IG office don't really want to find it, somebody else has got to have it.

Peter Noyes (In Legacy of Doubt) accused the Camden, N.J. PD of being controlled by the mob because they wouldn't respond to his request for Jim Braden's 1948 arrest report. When my father, then a Lt. in CPD, gave me the report, he said it was in a dirty, dusty corner of the basement where the secretaries didn't want to go, so the secretaries ignored Noyes letters.

Somewhere, in some dark corner of some ex-Congressmen's secretaries file cabinets, theres a copy of the Army IG Report from 1973.

And you just know THEY do have a copy of it and their just sticking it to us, err the ARRB, and the review board didn't care enough.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Final Report of the ARRB, Chapter 6, Part 1 - The Quest....

I. .....

5. Army

The Review Board's two primary concerns with Army records were: first, to open the counterintelligence files located at the Investigative Records Repository (IRR) at Fort Meade; and second, to determine whether Army intelligence units had any regular responsibilities for protection of the President as part of their normal duties circa 1963.

a. U.S. Army's Investigative Records

Repository.

This facility at Fort Meade in Maryland, a part of the Army's Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), contains investigative files on individuals of counterintelligence interest to the Army. The HSCA studied 34 IRR "case files," and thus, the Army processed those records for inclusion in the JFK Collection. The Review Board requested three additional files and designated them assassination records. The three additional case files declared as assassination records by the Review Board pertain to Alfredo Mirabal Diaz, Jordan James Pfuntner, and Clemard Joseph Charles. The Review Board staff also designated one additional file consisting of an assortment of extracts from various Army Intelligence Regulations.

b. Army Security Agency records and files.

The Review Board did not locate any additional assassination records from the Army Security Agency's files. Review Board staff searched for information and records concerning ASA electronic surveillance from the 1960s, but was unsuccessful in its efforts to locate any such material. Army personnel provided to the Review Board staff a unit history which gave a generic description of ASA surveillance activities in Mexico City in 1963. The one paragraph that addressed this activity was short, not very detailed, and described the ASA surveillance effort of the Cuban and Soviet Embassies as largely unsuccessful, due to technical difficulties. This paragraph did not provide any raw intelligence or surveillance data.

c. Army Inspector General 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the U.S.

In 1997, the Review Board requested that the Army's Inspector General's Office locate and provide a copy of its own 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the United States, in the hope that this document might mention domestic surveillance activity in the early 1960s and provide leads to the Review Board. (The Church Committee cited this report in detail.) The Army IG office responded to the Review Board staff that it could not locate its own report.

(End FR ARRB)

If this report was published, as it should have been, and shared with whoever requested it, and the responsible oversight committee of the Senate and House, there should be dozens of copies around, but the DOD IG office can't even find the original? That doesn't make sense.

They're not saying they're not turning it over, that it was destroyed, or that it is classified for national security reasons, they're saying they can't find it.

That was 15 years ago. Is this report still missing?

Any info on this 1973 Army Inspector Generals Report would be greatly appreciated.

BK

Bill, I can't address about the files you refer to, however, in response to FOIA requests I've been party to, I've gotten responses of:

- files not found, even though they were known to be, at one time.

- files destroyed [both 'routinely' destroyed, or in a 'fire'].

- these are the 'ultimate' 'fall-backs', way beyond 'denied' on the grounds of National Security.

I'm sure in a FEW instances they might be truthful, but I think in most they are just excuses....

Yes Peter, but if a report was published, they couldn't have rounded up and destoryed every one, and I know while they - meaning DOD DOA IG office don't really want to find it, somebody else has got to have it.

Peter Noyes (In Legacy of Doubt) accused the Camden, N.J. PD of being controlled by the mob because they wouldn't respond to his request for Jim Braden's 1948 arrest report. When my father, then a Lt. in CPD, gave me the report, he said it was in a dirty, dusty corner of the basement where the secretaries didn't want to go, so the secretaries ignored Noyes letters.

Somewhere, in some dark corner of some ex-Congressmen's secretaries file cabinets, theres a copy of the Army IG Report from 1973.

And you just know THEY do have a copy of it and their just sticking it to us, err the ARRB, and the review board didn't care enough.

BK

Bill,

Do you think if we emailed or contacted the former sentators of the Church Commitee, or anyone that might have gotten a copy of this Army IG report from 1973 that we might be able to land our hands on a copy? My guess is, if it was distributed in Congress, or in Committee one might find it in a senator's library. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Final Report of the ARRB, Chapter 6, Part 1 - The Quest....

I. .....

5. Army

c. Army Inspector General 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the U.S.

In 1997, the Review Board requested that the Army's Inspector General's Office locate and provide a copy of its own 1973 report on domestic surveillance abuses in the United States, in the hope that this document might mention domestic surveillance activity in the early 1960s and provide leads to the Review Board. (The Church Committee cited this report in detail.) The Army IG office responded to the Review Board staff that it could not locate its own report.

(End FR ARRB)

If this report was published, as it should have been, and shared with whoever requested it, and the responsible oversight committee of the Senate and House, there should be dozens of copies around, but the DOD IG office can't even find the original? That doesn't make sense.

They're not saying they're not turning it over, that it was destroyed, or that it is classified for national security reasons, they're saying they can't find it.

That was 15 years ago. Is this report still missing?

Any info on this 1973 Army Inspector Generals Report would be greatly appreciated.

BK

Bill, I can't address about the files you refer to, however, in response to FOIA requests I've been party to, I've gotten responses of:

- files not found, even though they were known to be, at one time.

- files destroyed [both 'routinely' destroyed, or in a 'fire'].

- these are the 'ultimate' 'fall-backs', way beyond 'denied' on the grounds of National Security.

I'm sure in a FEW instances they might be truthful, but I think in most they are just excuses....

Yes Peter, but if a report was published, they couldn't have rounded up and destoryed every one, and I know while they - meaning DOD DOA IG office don't really want to find it, somebody else has got to have it.

Peter Noyes (In Legacy of Doubt) accused the Camden, N.J. PD of being controlled by the mob because they wouldn't respond to his request for Jim Braden's 1948 arrest report. When my father, then a Lt. in CPD, gave me the report, he said it was in a dirty, dusty corner of the basement where the secretaries didn't want to go, so the secretaries ignored Noyes letters.

Somewhere, in some dark corner of some ex-Congressmen's secretaries file cabinets, theres a copy of the Army IG Report from 1973.

And you just know THEY do have a copy of it and their just sticking it to us, err the ARRB, and the review board didn't care enough.

BK

Bill,

Do you think if we emailed or contacted the former sentators of the Church Commitee, or anyone that might have gotten a copy of this Army IG report from 1973 that we might be able to land our hands on a copy? My guess is, if it was distributed in Congress, or in Committee one might find it in a senator's library. What do you think?

Hi Greg,

Good idea, though I would think that, with good people on their staff like Doug Horne, responsible for military records, that the ARRB would have looked there, but maybe they didn't since they had a sunset provision that put them out of business at a certain time and the DOD knew that so they just waited them out and left it hanging.

The IG report should be among the official Church records if cited in their report.

These Army Inspecter General reports are really important, like the Army IG report on the Use of Human Subjects in Chemical Agent Research, which provided tons of detail and developed hundreds of news stories.

In the 15 years since the publication of the Final Report of the ARRB, maybe somebody else has already found it, unbeknown to us.

I posted it with the hope that someone has already or would make the effort to find this report, as it was important enough to be declared a JFK Assassinations Records by the ARRB (The Kefhaver Committee papers were not), and is still being with held for uncertain reasons.

The missing 1973 Army IG Report is also the kind of missing records that I am looking for as examples to present to the Waxman Oversight Committee, among outstanding questions that they could answer.

But hey, why wait for them if we can find a copy of the report ouselves?

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...