CIA blocked FBI contact with Oswald in weeks leading up to assassination.

[Craig Carvalho]

You are spot on Steve. I suppose we simply have to follow that 105 designation and see where and to whom those files would go to in other agencies. I am just starting my day now, (3 a.m.), but will have more time later today to do more searching. Thanks.

[Steve Thomas]

10 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Please humor my current interest in James McCord Jr. when I note that, on October 16, 1963, it was deemed necessary to swear this CIA officer to secrecy; noting that during his previous 14 months with A "Q" clearance from the Atomic Energy Commission it was not deemed necessary.

"In 1961, and under James McCord's direction, a counter-intelligence program was launched against the Fair Play for Cuba Committee." Wikipedia 

 

 

Michael,

 

The answer to your question here might lie in item# 2 on McCord's "Q" clearance file.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10124-10007.pdf

It's not that it wasn't deemed necessary, rather it was so important that it wasn't to be reduced to writing.

I read up on the Department of Energy's Q clearance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_clearance

 

What in the world was this guy doing breaking into the Watergate?

 

Steve Thomas

[Jim Hargrove]

12 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

I just used the insert URL tool, edited-in, above. Did that work?

here are links, in case that did not work.

 

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10123-10377.pdf

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10124-10007.pdf

 

Michael,

Those links work fine.  Considering all those long-hidden connections from Dallas to Watergate, McCord's involvement with anti-FPCC activities as well as his being subjected to additional secrecy requirements so close to the assassination is fascinating.  It doesn't prove anything, of course, but it is interesting.

[Craig Carvalho]

22 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Craig,

 

I am just going on a hunch, but I think Hosty is referring to case files that start out with 105-

For example: 

FBI Oswald Headquarters File (105-82555)

FBI Oswald Mexico City File (105-3702)

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/JFK_Documents_-_FBI.html

The main FBI Assassination file is a 62 case number FBI JFK Assassination File (62-109060)

The anti-Castro case numbers had a 109 case file number FBI Anti-Castro and Cuba-related files in 109 series

 

I don't know enough to know what other 105 cases were out there.

 

Steve Thomas

 

 

A check of the National Archives website gives a list of all classes of FBI case files closed prior to 1985. The classification "105" references "Foreign Counterintelligence". The classification "109" references "Foreign Political Matters". Classification 62 (HQ): Miscellaneous Subversive.

[Steve Thomas]

2 hours ago, Craig Carvalho said:

A check of the National Archives website gives a list of all classes of FBI case files closed prior to 1985. The classification "105" references "Foreign Counterintelligence". The classification "109" references "Foreign Political Matters". Classification 62 (HQ): Miscellaneous Subversive.

Craig,

 

Thank you. Now what Hosty said, " I could have told them I was forbidden to interview Oswald because he was a contact case."  makes more sense.

 

One of the most informative things I've read in a while is CD 852

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11249

DOD Bartimo Letter of 24 Apr 1964 with Attachments

Starting on about the third page or so of this document is a copy of Army Regulation 195-10 which spells out how the Army was supposed to liaison with other agencies. It talks about the Army, Navy, Air Force and FBI, but interestingly enough, leaves out the Secret Service.

Basically Army Regulation 195-10 is a How to Manual for conducting investigations of armed forces personnel: Who's got responsibility, who's got control, how the information flows, etc.

 

Look at Paragraph (9)(c)(1)(a) on the bottom of Page 5 of this CD. It says how Army Commanders are supposed to establish policies to establish "effective liaison" with other agencies and specifically mentions the ATTU.

 

The idea was not to step on each other's toes, and establish contact with an individual that some other agency was working, e.g. informants. I think in CIA jargon, it was called the “third party” rule.

 

As I sit here, I don't know if the FBI or the ATTU has such a Regulation they were supposed to be operating under.

 

Steve Thomas

 

 

[Craig Carvalho]

22 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Craig,

 

Thank you. Now what Hosty said, " I could have told them I was forbidden to interview Oswald because he was a contact case."  makes more sense.

 

One of the most informative things I've read in a while is CD 852

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11249

DOD Bartimo Letter of 24 Apr 1964 with Attachments

Starting on about the third page or so of this document is a copy of Army Regulation 195-10 which spells out how the Army was supposed to liaison with other agencies. It talks about the Army, Navy, Air Force and FBI, but interestingly enough, leaves out the Secret Service.

Basically Army Regulation 195-10 is a How to Manual for conducting investigations of armed forces personnel: Who's got responsibility, who's got control, how the information flows, etc.

 

Look at Paragraph (9)(c)(1)(a) on the bottom of Page 5 of this CD. It says how Army Commanders are supposed to establish policies to establish "effective liaison" with other agencies and specifically mentions the ATTU.

 

The idea was not to step on each other's toes, and establish contact with an individual that some other agency was working, e.g. informants. I think in CIA jargon, it was called the “third party” rule.

 

As I sit here, I don't know if the FBI or the ATTU has such a Regulation they were supposed to be operating under.

 

Steve Thomas

 

 

 

Yes they were Steve. The third party/agency rule did, and still does exist within the FBI as well as the CIA.

Earlier today I made a list of questions that I had in mind regarding the FBI's 105 contact files.

1.) Were the FBI 105 contact files on Oswald comprised solely of internal reports generated by SA's in outlying field offices?

Answer: Yes. 

2.) Were there internal restrictions on access to these files within the FBI? (beyond proper security clearance)

Answer: No

3.) Were these files ever shared with other government agencies?

Answer: Yes.

Here is where it gets interesting.

From John Newman's Oswald and the CIA, Chapter Nineteen, The Smoking File, section entitled, The Hidden Compartments in Oswald's CIA Files:

"Prior to Oswald's trip to Mexico City, information on his activities reached the CIA via FBI, State, and Navy reports. Again, the "routing and record" sheets attached to these reports tell us who read them and when they read them. They show how the collision between Oswald's 201 and his FPCC story altered the destination of incoming FBI reports to a new file with the number 100-300-11."

"What did this new number signify? On August 24, 1978, the CIA responded to an HSCA inquiry about Oswald's various CIA file numbers. That response contained this paragraph:

"The file 100-300-011 is entitled "Fair Play for Cuba Committee." It consists of 987 documents dated from 1958 through 1973. All but approximately 20 are third agency (FBI, State, etc.) documents." 

"(Note: FPCC portion of the above quote classified until 1995)"

"CIA documents lists show that Hosty's September 10, 1963 report--the first piece of paper associating Oswald with the FPCC-- was the catalyst for the diversion of the FBI files data stream into 100-300-11."

"One of the two documents lists contains an interesting note in the "Formerly Filed" column for the September 10 Hosty report. It states, "Copy CI/SIG [351 164] 100-300-11." The other documents list has a column with the heading "Location of Original," that has this entry: "CI/SI File 100-300-11." CI/SI was short for CI/SIG, and it appears that the mole- hunting unit was again connected with a key change in Oswald's CIA file designation. Moreover, the association of Oswald's security number (351-164) with the 100-300-11 file denotes a security office tie-in. They had been tracking Oswald all along and now had access to this file too. Thus it appears that it was Angleton's CI/SIG which, in conjunction with the Security Office, had all the pieces of the Oswald puzzle."  

Only after JFK's assassination were these FBI files rerouted to Oswald's CIA 201 file.

 

     

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Craig Carvalho
Edit to add final line in post.