[Mark Ulrik]

Larry Hancock Wrote:The Larry in question would be me, Larry Hancock. Actually in the book I add a bit of additional detail of the CBS investigation, led by Daniel Schorr, of the Minsk story. In his final report on the lead Schorr stated that the CIA had confirmed the asset - but that it an ex-Navy individual in a city other than Minsk. As might be expected they offered no proof and Schorr's informant - vetted as a former CIA employee - had been adamant from the beginning that the paperwork said Minsk and ex-Marine. One piece of CIA internal paperwork about Schorr's inquiry that later surfaced says it all though - it was a directive that measures had to be taken to "ensure Mr. Schorr does not learn anything that might cast the slightest doubt on the above account (ex-Navy, not Minsk) before he produces his program.

It's too bad Schorr never saw that particular piece of correspondence...

Hi Larry,

Thank you for taking the time to comment. I haven't read your book, unfortunately, but since you don't seem to object to the thread title or the wording of the opening post, I'll take the opportunity to direct my response to you. I occasionally find Ben's "liar, liar" rhetoric too tiresome.

Ben quotes from a 10/11/78 letter from Robert Blakey (HSCA) to Scott Breckinridge (CIA) requesting access to a certain contact report (and the "volume of materials" where it was supposedly filed).

[10/11/78 letter from G. R. Blakey to S. D. Breckinridge]
http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docI...elPageId=3

Ben claims no response has ever been located (implying that the CIA was too afraid to answer). I have good news for him: The CIA did reply! There is both a confirmation of receipt and a follow-up letter, and (thanks to the MFF website) they're not even difficult to locate:

[10/12/78 letter from S. D. Breckinridge to G. R. Blakey]
https://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?doc...elPageId=2

Scott Breckinridge Wrote:As soon as we have collected these materials you will be advised. As stated to you we are searching for not only a report of an interview of a former Marine who defected from the U.S.S.R. to the U.S. in 1962, but also a record I recall of a former Navy man who redefected from the U.S.S.R. to the U.S. in the same year. The latter may be the person remembered by your source; his files have already been reviewed by members of your staff.

[10/26/78 letter from S. D. Breckinridge to G. R. Blakey]
https://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?doc...elPageId=2

Scott Breckinridge Wrote:We made available for review by a HSCA staff member the volume of materials referred to in your letter. There is no contact report. Your representative has confirmed this.

Breckinridge forwarded the request to USSR Division where a HSCA staff member a few days later reviewed the requested files. More details can be found in a memo authored by senior analyst Paul Fahey (CIA):

[10/17/78 memo by P. P. Fahey re: HSCA Request]
http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docI...elPageId=2

Paul Fahey Wrote:1. On 12 October 1978 Scott Breckenridge, Principal Coordinator for the House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), Office of Legislative Counsel, forwarded a request from the HSCA (see attached). HSCA, while investigating the circumstances surrounding the death of President John Kennedy, had been informed that a CIA contact report (presumably an OOB report from Domestic Contacts Division) concerning the Minsk radio plant had been received and filed in the Minsk Radio Plant folder by CIA's Industrial Registry Branch (sic) which in 1962 was a component of the Office of Central Reference. The source of the 1962 report was believed to be a former US Marine who had defected to the USSR, and then returned to the United States in 1962. HSCA therefore wished to see the report mentioned by the informant and the dossier on the Minsk Radio Plant.

2. In July 1975, USSR Division had handled a similar request, in response to a query from Chief, Domestic Contacts Division (see Veronica Mariani's Memorandum for the Record dated 9 July 1975). At that time, the request was generated by an interview by Daniel Schorr with a former CIA employee who recalled seeing a DCD report on the radio plant in Minsk from a US re-defector who was a former Marine (apparently Lee Harvey Oswald). For this request, USSR Division searched the plant folders for the three radio plants in Minsk, as well as Intellofax (for DCD reports). There were no hits.

3. In 1975, Schorr--at the conclusion of his interview with the former CIA employee--reported that then CIA Director Colby had denied any record of a contact with Lee Harvey Oswald but that the Agency had reported that it had debriefed a re-defector in 1962 who was an ex-Navy man who had worked in a Soviet plant in another city. In October 1978, Mr. Brekenridge informed Chief, USSR Division, OCR, that the ex-Navy man was Robert E. Webster and that he had worked in Leningrad.

4. For the October 1978 HSCA request the following was done:

• --the files of the three radio plants in Minsk were searched again for OO reports from a US re-defector; no hits.
  
  --the Minsk Town Folder was searched for a similar document; no hits.
  
  --the biographic files were searched for information on Robert E. Webster; there was one hit (in the Consolidated File under R. E. VEBSTR)--an FBIS article (from the USSR Daily Report of 26 May 1960, pages BB 29-31) on a speech by Webster, then a USSR citizen working in the Leningrad Polymerization Institute.
  
  --the folder on the Leningrad Scientific Research Institute of Polymerization of Plastics was searched for an OO report from a US re-defector; there was one hit: OO-B 3,232,798, 14 August 1962.
  
  --on 16 October 1978, Mr. Gary Cornwell of the HSCA staff visited USSR Division and reviewed the files on the three radio plants, the Minsk Town Folder, the FBIS article on Webster and OO-B 3,232,798. After an hour's review of file material, Mr. Cornwell left. His only comment was that he really couldn't be sure what was the correct story, whether the HSCA informant did or did not confuse the Webster case with the other defector case.
  

The above mentioned memo about the handling of the previous request can be found here:

[7/9/75 memo by V. B. Mariani re: Search for DCD Document]
http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docI...elPageId=2

Veronica Mariani Wrote:1. On 1 July 1975, the Central Reference Service (CRS) was contacted by the Chief, Domestic Contacts Division (DCD), and asked to use its facilities to search for a DCD document mentioned in the CBS evening news broadcast of 30 June 1975 (see attached transcript).

2. The USSR Division, CRS, conducted searches of the two files that might lead to the recovery of a document such as that mentioned in the CBS broadcast. The first search was of an installation file of three USSR radio plants in Minsk. No documents or document references pertinent to the subject were found.

3. The second search was of the Intellofax document retrieval system. The search was for DCD documents produced during 1961 and 1962 and coded for the geographic area Minsk. The search turned up 15 document references. All these documents were reviewed on aperture cards. None of the documents were pertinent to the subject mentioned on the CBS news broadcast.

I'm not sure how the 1975 (Schorr) request could have been handled much differently. Should the CIA have opened their files to the CBS?

Lastly, the subject of the "directive" you refer to isn't Schorr.

[9/6/75 memo by W. E. Colby of 9/3 conversation with Dan Rather and Les Midgley]
http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docI...elPageId=2

William Colby Wrote:With respect to Oswald's one appearance in our records, I explained that CIA might well have shied off from any interview with him if there was an indication of prior FBI interest. As for the military, I said the Interagency Sourve Register did not indicate Mr. Oswald was a clandestine source and that DCS Joint Debriefing Program with the military services from 1953 on would probably have indicated any military debriefing for intelligence purposes, but none appear in our files, so I believed none had been conducted.

We parted with my assurance that anything else that arose which would cast doubt on my statements would be brought to Mr. Rather's attention. The two gentlemen expressed appreciation for our discussion.

COMMENT: From their attitude, I believe there is a good chance that the program will indicate that there is no CIA connection with Oswald beyond that noted above. This could make a contribution to knocking down the paranoic belief to the contrary. We must, however, insure that Mr. rather does [not] learn anything which would cause the slightest doubt on the above account before he produces the programs in November.

How about this, relatively benign, interpretation: Should it turn out that he (unintentionally) had given CBS less than accurate information, it would be less embarrassing if they learned it from him directly.

You and Ben are obviously entitled to suspect that the CIA was withholding information about the contact report, but keep in mind that suspicion is not evidence.