Ron Kessler Oswald Mexico City

8/13/2019 Ron Kessler Oswald Mexico City

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ron-kessler-oswald-mexico-city 1/25

AgencyName

AgencyNumber

DiskNo

ControlNo

Document id number

Recser ies

Agf i lenoJFK Box #Vol Fo lder

T i t l e

Ti re s tDocument DateWho fromFromres tWho to

Tores t

Numpg

Orig ina to r

DaterevClass i fy

Curs t a tDoc typeRC1RC2

RC3

RC4RC5

RC6RC7

CommentKe ywords

K l P K U U ~ t U Al Ht ~ A l i U N A L A K ~ n v c ~

0

00

NARA IDENTIFICATION AID

1993.08 . 12 . 14:55:45:840060JFK

80T01357A

JFK35

F1

PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF THE POST'S 26 NOV. ARTICLEON OSWALD. II

N

11/27/1976WALLER JOHN, CIA

N

H NKN

CIA08/12/93uRIF

PAPER0

0

0

00

0

0

PHILLIPS, DAVE

KESSLER ARTICLEOSWALD - MEXICO

2 91

10013 2091

t - J.



J · .

'.

~ P K U U ~ t U Al 1Ht ~ A i i U L

27 Nov

~ a n k :Attached is rough draf t of a · _· · ~ , . . c r t

preliminary analysis of the Post Is .,6 ~ ~ 1 . . ; \ t t ~26 November a r t i c l e on Oswald. NOTE or; --:-' ..,

tha t no record can be found tha t --p ?o t ·t · - p . t S ~Oswald discussed with the Soviet Union s ~deal in which he would provide them $ ~ ~ ~with in te l l igen_ e in exchange for a t r f - ~ ~ _

to the USSR as a l ~ e g e d in ' the Post . I twas t h i s spec i f ica l ly tha t the Postclaimed we withheld from the FBI andthe Warren Commission.

Of course, i t i s within the realmof poss ibi l i ty that the stenographer ,11 t rans la tor and Dave P.hi l ips rememberedsomEthing to th i s ef fec t , but i t wasnever committed t ~ r e c o r d ~ T h a t would. . - ~ . . _ : snot be" normal or l1kely as the at tachedpoints out . Dave Phil i'p.s told meyesterday that he had to ld the UPtha t he had hazy r e c o l ~ e c t i o n sconcerning some sor t of deal but

couldn' t t i e these recollec t ions toany spec i f ic report or document. Hehas probably also told Sprague's s ta f fr epresen ta t ive th i s yesterday eveningwhen an interview took nplace. Dave'scomment is ambiguous to say the l eas t ,but Sprague may take i t a t face valueor consider i t confirmation of the

Post Story as the UPI has done.

over·

I

I

\

. I

I



.

1

~ ~ P K U U Al 1Ht ~ A U ~ A L A K ~ n v c

.cl l' -

MLEA f:F Q. . ; ~ p L l The Off ice o f Secur i ty a t our T P A . ; A C t )

reques t i s ~ r y i n g to ge t a l i ne on the _...

s tenographer and t r ans l a to r whom =•Kess ler claimed he t a lked with in

Mexico. S i s a lso reviewing theAgee mater i a l s ince Kess ler i s known

to have t a lked with Agee before hewrote h i s a r t i c l e . .. t

Dave ~ i l i p s was duly informedby Lyle Mil ler as well as myself t ha tSprague w a ~ not yet c lea red to accept

=c l a s s i f i e d mate r ia l , thbs he , Dave,could aot be re l i eved of his secrecy

agreement . (Today s Post s t a t e st h a t Phi l ips w i l l appear before Sprague HJ

under oa th - - tha t he has al ready had

dnformal conversa t ions with Spragues t a f f e r s . ) .

f

·. .



...

?

• -. ,. · , .• •r J .',_ · · ..

JJR }

27 :lovCDbe r 1:76

• 4

~ E M O R A N D U M FOR THE RECORD

SUBJECT: Comments on Ronald KESSLER's Article CIA WithheldDetails of OSWALD Call which Appeared in theWashington Post ,of 26 November 1976

Comments are keyed to the article by number according to~ a r a g r a p h .

t . In late September, 1963 -- eight weeksbefore the assassination of President KennedyLee Harvey Oswald telephoned the Soviet embassy

in Mexico City and tried to make a deal.

COMMENT While CIA knew that a man identifying himself:s Lee OSWALD had been in touch with the Soviet embassy on 1Jctober 1963, this information had no particular significance~ n t i l 22 November 1963. At that time an intensive review by the~ e x i c o t j t y Sta t ;c ·of voice transcripts on the basis of the 1Octobe ·• hich had been reported to Headquarters andiissem ateu Lv c e interested members of the intelligence com--unity (as a former Marine, OSWALD was a Navy and FBI case, and;otentially of interest to the Department of,State). Ti t ~ n e dJP ~ . a t c h e s based upon content with materiali' n 27

=nd 28 September 1963. These matche$ were reported to eadquarters:n 23 November 1963. {MEXI 7023, 23 November 1963.}

Analysis baserpont. j)(except for what~ a u l d be recalled by th - and th1s was not an· insigni-ficant element because o the poor ~ u s s i a n spoken by OSWALD}

could not be made b e c ~ s e / t h f } in a ~ o r d a n c e with the nor- .a 1 practice, had bee.l .

There is no indication in the transcripts that Lee~ a r v e y OSWALD telephoned the Soviet embassy Mexico City and:ried to make a deal .

2o In exchange for unspecified information, hewanted a free trip to Russia.

COMMENT This statement is not substantiated by our:=n es.



. . ,...

K ~ P K ~ c U A1 l H ~ ~ l l U ~ L K Y C ~

f t i L ~ . . h S FN P

) . This conversatio/ )ry the C e n t r a ~ Intelligence Agency at dhe

~ t l m e . but i t was not then · turned over to theFBI, which has responsibility for investigatingpossible spies, and i t was not later turned overto the Warren Commission during i ts investigation

of the assassination.

C O ~ ~ E N T : The information regarding the l October 1963contact with the Soviet embassy -- received in Headquarters on9 October -- was disseminated on 10 October 1963 to the Departmentof State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department ofthe Navy, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. (SeeDIRECTOR 74673, 10 October 1963.) The information was passed tothe State, FBI, Navy, and I NS representatives in Mexico City.(See DIRECTOR 74830, 10 October 1 9 6 3 ~ A copy of the 10 October1963 dissemination was made available to the Warren Commission24 March 1964. (See Memorandum for J. Lee RANKIN, dated 24 March

1964, from Richard HELMS, Deputy Director for Plans; subject: CIADissemination of Information on Lee Harvey OSWALD, dated 10 October1963). (NB:· ·on 16 October 1963, our Chief of Station sent a memorandum to the American ambassador on the subject of Lee OSWALD scontact with the Soviet ·embassy. The original of this memorandumwas routed to the ambassador, the minister, the counselor for political affairs, the regional security officer. A copy was sent tothe legal attache, naval attache, and the I N S ~ )

In April 1964, Messrs. COLEMAN, SLAWSON and WILLENS,Staff representatives of the Warren Commission visited the U.S.Embassy in Mexico c1 v. Our station i n d i c a ~ d that the three menknew all about th ~ O S W A L D had. Accord

ing to the Memorandu for the ~ e c o r d of 11 April 1964, t h ~ threemen reviewed the t

0

r I

0 0

, • ior the·..days 27, 28 Septemoe:r anu 1 uc.luiJe:r 1 :1oJ when Lee OSWALt) contactedand visited the Cuban and Soviet embassies. They made a 'schedule'of OSWALD s activities as far as possible for these days from thissource. Note: They were given/ ·· ·See: -...

a. Memorandum for J. Lee RANKIN, dated 31January 1964, from Richard HELMS, Deputy Director forPlans; subject: Information Developed by CIA on theActivity of Lee Harvey OSWALD in Mexico City, 28

September - 3 October 1963.

b. Letter to Richard HELMS, Deputy Directorfor Plans, dated 10 February 1964, from J. LeeRANKIN, General Counsel.

l •

2

I f. .... _

- .... .. :c Cfi



, ;

?

N R -

c. Memorandum for J . Lee RANKIN, dated 19February 1964, from Richard HELNS, Deputy Director for Plans; subject: Information Developed byCIA on the Activity of Lee Harvey OSWALD in MexicoCity, September 28 to October 3. 1964.)

4. The unanswered question is why not?

The existence ofllswald s conversa,on 1n Mexico Cny ana t1lt::

~ o n t e n t s of the stil · t:ranscript have beenverified by The Wash gtun 1- Jst. The Post hasalso verified that the CIA failed to turn over thecomplete transcript to either the FBI or the WarrenCorrmission.

COMMENT: See comments in paragraph 3 above.

5. Instead, the CIA gave the FBI in October,1963, only a brief report saying Oswald had madecontact with the Russians.

C O t ~ M E N T : The Agency disseminated the information onOSWALD s contact with the Soviet embassy on 1 October to the De-partment of State, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the De-partment of the Navy, and the Immigration and NaturalizationService on 10 October 1963. (See DIRECTOR 74673, 10 October1963.) n ~ November 1963 the Agency disseminated to the FBI thetranscripts c · · , . ) made on 27. 28 September, 1October, an J u c t o ~ r 1 ~ o J \Nb The latter call, t was deter-mined. did not pertain to OSWALD.) (See CSCI-3/778,829 dated

26 November 1963.) On 23 November 1963, the Agency disseminatedto the FBI information relating to OSWALD s contacts with theCuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City. (See DIRECTOR 84915,23 November 1963.)

6.( It gave the Warren Co,ission a transcript,. · · · ut for unexplained

. c::cl l.ura::, , a ·· 1ed to 1nc 1ude n the transcriptOswald s offer of information and his suggestionthat the Russians would want to pay his way tothe Soviet Union.

alleged

·.

COMMENT : OSWALD s/offer of information and t=1that the Russians would want to pay his wa(_ to the Sovietnot appear in Agency copies of transcripts

suggestionUnion does

with the Cuban and Soviet embassies.

3

. . ,,

)



R c ~ K U U Al i r t ~ N A l U ~ A L A K ~ t l 1 \ ~ ~\ jFK ACT}

REL.f .i.l\u-- ·

N R

D A . i ~ - - - - -

7o The Post has also determined that the CIA,for unexplained reasons, told the Warren Com-mission that i t learned of most of Oswald'sactivities in Mexico City only after t h ~ assas- )sination. The fact is, however, that i f

. ~ . . J

~ e . 1 c o l.lty 111 Ltle tall of 19bJ, before Kennedy'sdeath.

C 0 ~ 1 M E N T : OSWALD was in no sense under investigation(before L November 1963) . None of the facts of his defectionand stay in the USSR and return to the United States, 1959 - 1962,were known to Mexico Station files before 10 October 1963, whenthe bare bones of his biography were forwarded by Headquarters inresponse to a station cabled report of 8 October 1963 which forwarded, on a routine basis, what appeared to be a contact by anAmerican for a visa ;o Cuba in transit to _the U S ~ R It should

be pointed OUt t t · .la not (andnormally is not) . ·) llle means of acquisi-

tion and the val •c: ot Ute 1ntormation precludes a ~ y t h i n g butthe spot reporting of i terns judgec/ ):> be of more

(than ordinary interest and, t h e r e ~ r e notea ln sunmary logs. )

une of the tnggers that normally operates 1:0 tocus and accelerate more speedy review and reporting of this kind of raw intelligence is the mention of a name. This was what occurred in thesecond of two conversations on l)October with the Soviet Embassy,during which( · · · e was Lee O S ~ J A L D . It was thisinformation reportea oy tne stat on to Headquarters in i ts firstindication on OSWALD on 8 October 196 3. (MEXI 6453 (IN 36017),9 October 1963 -- the station cabled the information on -8 October·;Headquarters received i t on 9 October 1963.)

Had, at any time, a person telephoned the Soviet Embassy,or any other communist bloc installation, with an offer of information and the suggestion that the Russians (or another communistcountry) might want to pay his (OSWALD's) way to the Soviet U n i o ~i t would have t r i g ~ r e d an immediate reaction( thestation-- First, t 1 • t?ond, to ryor t the in-formation to Head(jllbl ..o::r .., ' • v ~ i . t p u nd photo- 'graphic surveillance.

8 I t was the CIA's belief that the two embassies•

were heavily involved in the spy business and that,specifically, they were operational bases for intelligence activitie s direc ted at the United States.

4

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~



·,

0

\

N P

So. with ~ h {)

The CIA was especially interested in U.S.citizens who made contact with the embassies.

Thus, when Orlrald showed up in Mexico.City

( in. late ~ e t s c r i p t was made and c.rculated

1n 1 1 1 ~ dA offices in the American embassy inMexi co City.

The station chief at that time was the lateWinston M Scott, w h ~ P e r s o n a l l y rexiewed alltranscripts e m a n a t i n ~ n Sovietbloc installations.

The Oswald transcript, according to a CIAtranslator who worked with Scott, aroused a lotof interest.

COMMENT: No comment.

9. They usually pi eked up the transcripts the

)

next day, he said. This they wanted right away.

What that transcript contained is a matter of )some dispute, and the CIA says i t routinel( ·

/ · · f,-.,·r t l-r _,..,.; } u ,

ljleOJ)Ie wno saw tne transcnpc or neard thE(. .:jbe-fore the assassination recall that Oswald was trying ·.to make a deal .

_OMMENT:

JFull transcripts of calls made on 28 September 1963

and 1 October 1963 forwarded to H e a d ~ a r t e r s on 23 November ~(see MEXI 7025). According to cable )did transcripts. There is no mentio of om1ssions from thetranscript, or that OSWALD offered information .

10. One ·of them is David A. Phillips, a formerCIA officer, who now heads the Association ofRetired Intelligence Officers and is a leadingdefender of CIA activities. Phillips was stationed in Mexico City at the time.

C O r · U ~ E N T : No comment .

. . //_-

5

,- -

)



11. The transcript revealed, Phillips recalled,that'Oswald told the Soviet embassy: " haveinformation you wou)d be interested in, and Iknow you can pay mj y way to Russi a.

COMMENT File does not support this statement.

The stenographer who typed up the transcriptand the translator who prepared i t had similarrecollections.

He said he had some information to tellthem, the typist said in an interview in Mexico.His main concern was getting to one of the two

countries (Russia or Cuba) and he wanted them topay for it._ He said he had to meet them.

COMMENT Files do not support this statement.

13. . The Warren Commission later concluded theRussians and Cubans were not much impressed byOswald. This view is supported by Sylvia Duran,a Mexican citizen who worked in the Cuban embassyat the time of Oswald's visit. She talked toOswald on Sept. 27, 1963, and recalls the meetingin some detail.

In a joint interview in Mexico City with thisreporter and Post special correspondent MarliseSimons, Duran said Oswald told her that he wanted

to travel to Cuba and Russia and displayed documents to show he was a "friend" of the Cuban re-volution. Among other things, he claimed to .be amember of the American Communist Party.

Duran said she informed Oswald that in orderto travel to Russia he would have to obtain permission from the Soviets. Oswald went off and re-turned later in the day to inform Duran that hehad obtained the necessary permission. Duran saidshe called the Soviet embassy and was told Oswald'sapplication for a visa would take three to four

months to process. Informed of this, Duran saidOswald "got really angry and red. He was gesticu-lating." Duran said she had to call for help fromthe Cuban consul who got into a shouting match withOswald and told him to get out. u r ~ n said shenever saw him again.

6

· · ~

' -, ._

v - -



?

I A

N R. J J K ACT)

D TE

C 0 ~ 1 ~ 1 E N T : The information given by DURAN is sup-ported by her interrogations by ~ 1 e x c i a n authorities.

14o However, Duran's story covered only thefirst day of Oswald's five-day stay in Mexico

City. Oswa.ld later referred in a letter tomeetings he had in the Soviet Embassy.

COMMENT: OSWALD later referred in a letter to 'meetings he had in the Soviet Embassy. Although KESSLER choosesnot to give aetails, this statement is in reference to a letterOSWALD wrote on 9 November 1963 to the Consular Division of theSoviet Embassy in Washington. (Commission Exhibit No. 15, vol.XVI of the Hearings · before the President s Commission on the As-sassination of President Kennedy.}

i5. How interested the CIA was in Oswald's deal

ings with the two embassies is uncertain .

The translator and typist who handled thetranscript of the intercepted conversation re

c ~ l l e d that the level of interest was high .But the CIA's own actions lead to a differentconclusion.

The agency waited until Oct. 10, 1963, tonotify the FBI of Oswald's activities. Andits teletyped report made no mention of Oswald'soffer of information in exchange for a free trip

to Russia or of his attempts to travel to Cubaand Russia. On October 1, 1963, the teletypemessage said, a reliable and sensitive sourcein Mexico reported that an American male, whoidentified himself as Lee Oswald, contacted theSoviet Embassy in Mexico City inquiring whetnerthe embassy had received any news concerning atelegram which had been sent to Washil)gton .

That was strictly a routine handling of thematter, and similar to the standard reports madeto the FBI at that time on other contacts withthe communists by American citizens in Mexico.

COf1MENT: No additional comment.

16. Even after Kennedy's assassination, the CIAfailed to turn over to the rren C01r.mi s s ion thefull transcript of the telephone intercept t

had made in Mexico City. Oswald's offer of information to the Russians in exchange for pass age

7

. ~



?

j

t i R

was omitted from the transcript, and the CIAclaimed i t did not know of most of Oswald sactivities in Mexico City until after theassass ina ti on.

DA r

cm1MENT: CIA claimed i t did not know of most ofOSWALD s activities in Mexico City until after the assassination ...This is true; however, i t should be pointed out that after thedissemination on 10 October of the 1 October 1963 contact no requests were received from the recipients of the report for furtherinformation or follow-up investigation. Under the DelimitationsAgreement, OSWALD as a former Marine, was a Navy and FBI caseand potentially of interest to the Department of State .

17. The significance of the CIA actions isdifficult to assess. The FBI in the fall of1963 was already showing intermittent interest

in Oswald and might or might not have intensified that interest i i t had been told ofOswald s conversations.

Whether the new information would haveaffected the Warren Commission s deliberations is also an open question. The commis-sion investigated the possibility of a foreignconspiracy and concluded there was no evidencet show Oswald acted on behalf of a foreignpower.

Nevertheless, there is yet no explanationfor the CIA s handling of Oswald s conversations.The CIA today refuses to comment saying i t wouldnot be appropriate in the 1 ght of an impending ·.

investigation by the House Select Committee onAssassinations.

When asked i they could explain the agency sactions, some CIA officers stationed at the timein Mexico City said the CIA may have had a relationship with Oswald that i t sought to conceal.The CIA has denied this.

David W. Belin, who was an assistant coun selto the Warren Commission and later executivedirector of the Rockefeller commission s probeof the CIA said that i the Warren Commissionhad known of Oswald s conversations and other

8

d·/ :r l

---------------------------------



•·

?

. 'l< ·

K l P K U U ~ l U Al l H ~ A L ~ n l ~ L

ltAaA ~a JFK ACT

DATE-----new infonnation, i t would have .been less surethat the assassination was not part of a foreignconspiracy.

Sen. RichardS. Schweiker (R-Pa.), who led

the Senate intelligence committee's probe of theassassination, said that investigation would havetaken on an entirely different directi on and perspective i f the _committee had been aware ofOswald's conversations.

co:a ENT: fui.s discussion res t s on a.ssUlllptions aDd

: . : . l ~ e 5 a : i o r . s aeve Loped e r l i e r in the ur t iv]e follo-..:ed by

co;T---:ents b r : e s s c r ~ Bel in ~ l d 3c "r.-r e fu r a:J:.:·crrently c::.sed i.""l

~ ~ n on ir..fom3. tion :n-ovided tl:e:n by the r e n o r t e r s ~ ::o

:. ' .. rt::er c::n.1ent seems relevant , beyoni those con. 1cnts x s d ~e a r 1 ; e ~

18·· In interviews with The Post, Belin , who docu-mented the CIA plots against Castro in his capacityas executive director of the Rockefeller commission,revealed the CIA also did not tell the Warren Commission of a report from an alleged witness to a

meeting in Mexico City between Oswald and Cuban in telligence agents.

COMMENT: Is BELIN referring to Gilberta ALVARADO

Urgate? If so, information regarding OSWALD provided by ALVARADO

was passed to the Warren Commission as attachments to a memorandumfor J. Lee RANKIN dated 1 June 1964, from Richard HELMS DeputyDirector for Plans.

(See also Memorandum for J. Lee RANKIN , dated 4 June1964, from Richard HELMS; subject: lnfonnation Developed on theActivity of Lee Harvey OSWALD in Mexico City. This memorandum

became Commission Exhibit No . 3152 contained in Volume XXVI ofWarren Commission report.}

19. Belin called on the CIA to make full disclosureof i ts knowledge of Oswald and his contacts with theCubans and Russians.

c m ~ ~ r r : :Je :::o ~ o t ~ ~ " : 0 ~ H?l::Lt R ~ l i n ~ c t u . : : U . : . . y said to t:.c~ o : = - - i : , . n ~ n or i:1 . : - ~ : ; p o n s e ~ - i l : : : . t U . ' 1 J a : = - : . ; ~ E . . . . ' 1 c i i . . ' 1 ;s c o n v ~ ; r e a to hi: l

ie C n l i c v ~ ~ ~ t i t i l l disc os 1Jre us b :·en B:ld JrO;>er i o r i t i e s



.

t

j....

I

1

I

III

I

II

. .. ..

,

..

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Col11llents on Ronald KESSLER's Article: CIAWithheld Details of OSWALD Call which Appearedin the Washington Post of 26 November 1976

The following comments are keyed to the attached WashingtonPost article i .e. the paragraph numbers below correspond to theparagraphs as numbered in the margin of the xerox of the article:

. ,

. ..

.. . ..

. : ( 1



. .

..

I .

f

I

J

i

· ... .

2

. ,

.-.

•.

•



..-.; ' . ·

·-·

'•

I E ~ t O R A N D W I FOR:

APPROVED OR REI f ASf 1993

CIA HISTORICAL REVIEW PROGRAM

)Deputy Chief, CI/OPS Group

14 oECU7B

SliD.TECT: Responees to Ques t ions Raised by Richard SPRAGUE

durin g llis ~ t e e t i n g \'lith Representatives of OLC.

Of the eleven questions raised by Richard SPRAGUE

af te r reauing through the memorandum and supporting documents

regarding the KESSLER ar t ic le of 26 November 1976, draf t

repl ies have been prepared on eight questions. The remaining

three questions are s t i l l under research.

The responses to the eight questions (see attachment)

are in draft form. Continuing research lnay turn up additional

deta i l s without, hoNever, altering the substance of these

responses. iI

OLC has not called me; hoNever, I'm told they Nill be

seeing SPRAGUE th is afternoon and ,.,.ill l lant ,.,.hatever may be

ready, even in draf t to shm. r to SPRAGUE. I shall suggest

to OLC that these papers not be l e f t with him but brought

hack to Headquarters . When our research has been completed

we can pass a clean copy, perhaps, . .i th supporting documents,

proviuing, of course, SPRAGUE and company have the i r securi ty

clearances. As far as I known, only SPARGUE has a clearance

which the Office of Securi ty issued.

t• l f U ,.,

l o , •••• . I

.• •lf. 'J, . ·l 't · · :\

t I • • t I

.. .lr:;·: ,J, ,;, 14 • ) (

• • I o

t . · : · ·

. .. . ~ . . . . ......... •

I '

. .. . . ·. · ..



/

.1. QU ESTI ON: Docs th e mat er ia l whi ch \ve made available to

Richard PSRAGUE include a l l the t ranscr ipts? \'/ere there any

.copies in Russian?

. ·· .

AN SWER:

Transcripts were made available for the followingI-- -·,

which r e la te to OSWALD ' s request for a t rans i t visa II

• • t

to Cuba:

'• .... -

- - II

Ia. 27 September 1963, 1605 hours - from Si lvia DUR .Ai l in

the Cuban Consulate to u n i d e n t i ~ i e d person in the SovietI

• · j

Embnssy. Language : Spanis h ,.,ri th a c c o m p a n y i ~ g t r n s i a t i ~ n i-.- - - - __

I

b . 27 September 1963, 16 26 hours - from unident i f ied per - .:I

son in the Soviet Embassy to Si lvia DURAN in ' the Cuabn Con- i

sula te . Language : Spanish Hi th accompanying 't rans l a t =I

I tc. 28 September 1963, ]...6-2-b hours - from Si lv ia DURAN in - i

the Cuban Consulate to an unid ent i f ied person in the Soviet , .

Emb as sy. Language: Spanish with accompanying ..tran s la t ion;·- j

English; t ranslat ion into Eg gl i sh from Russian (which notI

incluued in t r ans cr ip t ) .

d. 1 October 1 963, 10 31 hours - from unkno\m male to uni-

dent i f ied person in Sovi e t Emba ss y. Language: En g l i sh

W . c . ~ . l .(NB: U n k n o H n ~ p e a k s in broken Ru s sian; however, only t rans- ·

~ 1 - t ~ h ' ~ ' - \ c:4 r , ..,x-- v.u.\..c.. c.. ' ? ' - ~ ~ ' c . r - . . , . . ~ ~ . . , . . · • -

l a t ion included . I t would appear that rather than recording

the conver s ation in the language used , i . e . , Russian, the

conversation Has t rans la ted immediately into En gl i sh and

then transcribed.) , "

e . 1 Octob er 1963' , .10 45 ho ur s -· ~ j ~ unknoHn male to

.. - __..

OBYEDKOV a Soviet Emba s sy guard. Language: English . . ~ ~ w ~• • • , • , , . •1 • • :.o: • d ~ ~ ~ I I J ' " l ~ < , ~ ~

(NB: I t is not c lear from the t r anscript , but OSWALD - .~ . . . ·. 1•· · . 0 • .. r t I PJ . ' ~

th is i s the f i r s t time he i dent i f ies himself . - may have . . : ··: . ..

spoken in broken Rus s ia n . I f he did' I

_ ; .....

•

. . ..• 0 • •.... . . · ..



'..

• •

2 -

the conversation Nas t ran s la ted immediately into English

, . ,ithout f i r s t recording tho conversation in i t s or iginal

language.)

In answer to the second part of th is question - none of

the t ranscr ip ts held in _the OSWALD f i l e is in Russian.

O ~ I ~ I E N T The Warren Commission group tha t vis i ted the

~ t e x i c o Stat ion eaxmined not only five but

one other for the 27th of September and one for the 3rd of

October tha t seemed to have relevance. These appear, upon

review, to be excludable from the OSWALD matter on logical

or substant ive grounds, or both, bearing in mind that the

Soviet Embassy received many calls pe r ta ining to visa matters.

On 27 September at 1037 hours, the Soviet Embassy received

a ca l l from an unknown individual speaking Spanish who said he

·Nanted v is as to go to Odessa. He Nas to ld the Consul was not

in and to ca l l back at 1130. OSWALD is knO\ ill to have arr ived

at the Flecha Roja bus terminal on bus no. 516 at ahout 1000

hours on 2 7 Septernbe r . I t ' as, there fore, possible for him

to have made this cal l . But granting th i s , it i s unreasonable

to bel ie ve the calls were OSWALD s for the following reasons:

a. The cal le r Nanted visas , and spec i f i ca l ly for Odessa.- -OSWALD Has seeking a v s ~ and never in any context did he

specify the Black Sea port of Odessa as a dest inat ion ..

b. The cal l was d irec ted to the correct Soviet consular

iI '

II

IIlIi

I

IiI

I

number: 15-60-55 . On 1 October, QSWALD f i r s t ca l l e d the

wrong number, 15 - 69-87 (the mil i t ary at tache 's number),

and had to redi rect his ca.l l to ' t h e c o r r ~ c ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ ·.• ' l ~ ; . r · : ' l · :....- l •l i J . - ~ · . , . ~ ~ : - · · ... ,\ 'J'1 ,0...2l . ·: .. · .... , .... : ·

15-60-55. t seems unlik e ly he Hould have made what ,.,ould

have been an in i t i a l cal l , on Friday the Z7th, to the' 1 • ' 1 ' • > : > ~ ; ~ I • - • ~ . . . · 1 · ~ _ • ' It,,_; . . : q . ' o , ~ . • . , (it:.·'» ~ fi 6 .,. . i )•r•\•c o r ~ e c t numbe'r , a ~ d ~ a l i ~ u the n c o r ; e ~ t n u ~ b e r on . .. . . .

.. ··• ... .. , . ~ • .,...;... u v . . . , . . . , - . . ~ t r • •J

1 October.0 t • .. .lo* . • • •

. I

. ·:· ·: • • •• • , • ••• '

. . . . . ·:. . .. . · · .

• · t • • • . ; • ;. ' . • •

..... : . · ... · ·:: .

. . :, ' ·( .,. . I • • • • I ·.

.• .



• •/

2. QUESTION: lii1ere are tilC origin<t ls of the t r ansc r i p t s?

[CO'Ic ENT: The o m m i t t e ~ has contac ted the persons ~ h o

a l leged ly t r ans la ted and typed tl1e t r ansc r i p t s . Both of

them sa id tl1at in h i s conversa t ions 1vith the fore ign embassies

Lee Harvey OSW LD ditl t a lk of a deal ' to go to Russia . Fur-

thermore, both of these ind iv iduals sa id t ha t OSW LD spoke in

Englisl1 not Russian. From t h e i r in te rv iews of these i nd i v i -

dua l s the Committee fee ls they have obta ined more in format ion '

tha11 was involved in the OSW LD conversa t ions than i s included

in the t r a ns c r ip t s lvhich we made avai lab le to Hr. SPRAGUE.]

Avai lab le informat ion regard ing OSWALD's contacts JVith the

Cuban and Sovie t Embassies does not support the above comment;

research cont inues .

I I : . . · ·. : .;.

. · ·



• o,

:

...

l o •

· 4. QUESTION: What arranr ements could be made for the people

· Nhom the Committee has intervieh•e d to revie\v the · t ranscripts

. which He made· available to Hr. SPRAGUE for the purposes of

clarifying gaps discrpancies or inconsistencies in the i r

: statements and inferences to be drawn from the t ranscripts

. we made available?

· [COt·lf\IENT.: I I t a p p e ~ r s in revieHing the various l e t t e r s a f f i -

-davi ts e t c . that there was a del ibera te attempt on the

• I0 A g e n ~ y s part to avoid any references to information concern1ng ·

. OSWALD s in teres t in t ravel l ing to Cuba and Russia. For

. example the cablegram from a s ta t ion in l e x i c a related only

I

· to the telegram and made no mention on OSWALD s part to go to;

:Russia.]

:see draf t reply at tached to QUESTION No. 13.

T

I .I ,

, . :

o , t •• • •

0 :

II

. I

j .

I

I

.

0

J U l i i M I \ ~ · ~ ~ ~ ~ :.•. I .

• : '

·- I : I . o,-:. , • \ - .

.a - ' n _ : ~ ' •. - ~ ; . , - \ l ' ~ ~ - 1 ~ ...... ~ · ~ ~ .. .f r ~ o ~ M M ~ ~ I h i -::;

. ·'··.·0.- ,, " ... . . . - . ·. .: . _ :

0 • • ; .•• . ; . 0. • . . : . 0 : • • • • • . · ".. . . ·.. : : · . ::::· ;· _ : . . ·· . 0 • • : • . 0 . .

-....· . · ; :: ·.. . ..

. ·.·· . . .

.. ..0 • •

. .·



•/

· .

7. QUESTION: \ las there any provision for holdinp, the tapes of

· any conversations in the event any in te res t was shown in them?

I

This par t icular ly pert inent in view · of a cable to headquarters

when five days l a te r OSWALD was ident i f ied as the individual in -

volved. ·

Tapes were apparently held for t1 o weeks and then erased. As a

resul t the tap es on 27 and 28 September

had been erased sothat

the voice could not becompared d

ththe voice in the 1 October intercept . The Stat ion was told not

- i

to erase tapes made between 22 November and

1963, date of cable .

II

present (13 D e c e m ~ ~--- ·- .. - .I

I

Iee draf t reply at tached to QUESTION No . 13... _ __ . I

Research continues .

,.

I

·-·-·--' .

• •• • II

.I

·•'

t , · * " .- .·. : .

. .. ~ ~ < . " - ' ~ ; i . i ~ . < . • ·. ?. ,,,il,,. .• -..t-< 1 •

I

I II .- ·' ..

.. .. .,._ • •• o

'

.. · ...

0 4 1 I • • ' • ~ t \ : • r,llo Jt.f ' . ~ - · f ... L \

' · • o o • :

t:.\, : ' ' • • , • ,

. ..·.

I " •. •...



•

12 ho matle the marg inal notes on the t r ansc r ip t s? I t

appears t ha t most o f t:10 nota t ions Here made by the Sall e

person an<l IVith tl1c same type of Hritin_g ins t rument

r · larginal comments in the hanrhvri t ing of Winston SCOTT,

C:1iaf of Hexico City Sta t ion

i

iI

. .;; '' r ,

:.·i

·.. ' ~ 1 1 \ { ~ ~ ~ ~ t r r ' . ~ i o O . o i : ~ . ~ ~ l o ; ~ ; i • . . · _ . , - ; • · · ~ · ~ ~



•

13. QUESTION: With resp e c t to the I IEUIS ' Let t e r , \'thy d i d n t

HELll.lS say ar.ythinr. abo11t the visa reques t to Russia , i n s t ead

of deal in g only 1dth the teler,ram'?

{Comment: I (SPIU\GUE) have a fee l ing t ha t t he re was an e f fo r t

not to c.lisclos e the v i sa aspects of t h i s case . ]

See at tached dra f t rep ly .

..·

.... .. -. - .. :·

;

....... • ·' ,· : . { : ••• • . .c

. • ' · .... -t' ' '/ 1. .:-k .. f

'«J • I

. .. o t o: o C . ... .. . ·: - - ; j : t i J ~ . ~ , ; i i ~ ~ ; , • _ . ; o t : ; . i ~ i t ~ I. , - . . .

........· ;..,.,. , ..,. : : . . i. , . ... , .

' I

. • . , •. t:-• c .>U t . •

•• ·•: •. ' .: •: ' •l·• • • • ; •:. : , •' • · t •• •• ,• • • c: . • .,, • ••' . '•... ·•••• •.·-_·:·, '.·' ·;1:.;,_, • ~ f t t .;:.. i :._,·.··-..:..A., • :. l. :. ; :_ . . _. .- > -,:...-·.·:.. ; .·..,-J ···.': ... -. . · . · ~ : . ...- · , :.. . .. ••• •. ; • .- ;

0

' : : : . . ' : ; ,•• :\\ : -,-,: : • .r . . •; b •, •0

. . , • , - r "" ... _ r -

..



•

; ·

15. QCESTION: With r e s p ~ t to the 25 November 1963 llEDIS

l e t t e r 1·egard in g the t runs c r i p t s of tlte th ree phone ca l l s ,

hoH can you make voice comparisons \vhcn the t apes have been

ernsetl?

[Col ll:tent: He o ~ s not agree with the chronology o f the

photographs . fie a lso inquired 1v:10 vrote the chronology . ]

The HELHS l e t t e r r e f e r r ed to above \vas typed on 25 November

1963 and was disseminated to the FBI on 26 November 1963.

See page 2 .o f dra f t reply at tached to QUESTION No. 13.

· :.

• <, . .. •

:·· " \ j:. . • •• . : . ) ' . ' · > . . :

. .

•

'.

.: ·.. }. ;

. ... -,,.. ·

.. _ . i ·: . # > • •• t

. . .. , . •

. .. ·· ·· .·• ~ - : i - . : . • · . .• ~ : . H - ' ?'\. ;,,d i : . ' f

I

Ron Kessler Oswald Mexico City

Documents

Transcript of Ron Kessler Oswald Mexico City