All of the U.S. government’s files on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy are supposed to be released by October 26. But one batch of the CIA records on suspected assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, has gone missing.
The records were part of a 7-volume file on Oswald, held by the agency’s Office of Security (OS), which is responsible for protecting CIA property and vetting agency personnel. Declassified CIA records show that volume 5 of the file records existed in 1978. The contents of the missing file are not known.
The disappearance of the records, discovered by JFK researcher Malcolm Blunt, is significant because the Office of Security was the first component of the CIA to open a file on Oswald, an ex-Marine who defected to the Soviet Union in October 1959.
The disappearing Oswald file is the latest in a series of remarkable revelations found in long-secret JFK assassination files made public for the first time by the National Archives in July.
–As the time of JFK’s assassination in Dallas in November 1963, the mayor of the city, Earle Cabell, was a CIA asset. His brother Charles Cabell was a high-ranking CIA official until 1962. (WhoWhatWhy)
–The intensive interrogation of KGB officer Yuri Nosenko in 1965 failed to confirm that he was a false defector, or that his information about Oswald was false, as alleged by top CIA officials. (Washington Post)
–Some CIA officials came to doubt the Warren Commission’s finding that JFK was killed by Oswald in the mid-1970s (Politico).
Given the recent revelations, the disappearance of part of Oswald’s first CIA file has to be regarded as suspicious.
The opening of Oswald’s Office of Security file in December 1959 was an unusual deviation from standard CIA procedures, as I show in my forthcoming book on CIA spymaster James Angleton,
Standard CIA procedure, as prescribed in agency directives, required that,CIA personnel would immediately open a personality file (also called a 201 file) on a military defector like Oswald.
Yet the CIA’s 201 file on Oswald was not opened until a year later, in December 1960. During that year, the OS file was controlled by Betty Egerter, an aide to Angleton.
When JFK investigators asked Angleton and retired CIA director Richard Helms about the 12 month delay in opening of Oswald’s 201 file, neither man could explain it.
Testifying under oath to the HSCA in October 1978, Angleton pleaded ignorance.
“I don’t know the circumstances,” he said, which was almost certainly not true. Angleton did know the circumstances of Oswald’s defection because it was reported in the Washington Post and his aide Jane Roman wrote several memos about it.
“I don’t know why it would take that long,” Angleton said.
“I can’t imagine why it would have taken an entire year,” Helms sputtered when testifying to the HSCA in September 1978. “I am amazed. . . I can’t explain that.”
These professions of ignorance about the most important counterintelligence case in the history of the CIA are unconvincing.
In an email, Blunt, a retired British mental health professional who is not a typical conspiracy theorist, calls the disappearance of the records “obfuscation for a reason.”
“It had to be done because of an interest — undisclosed and unknown — in Mr. Oswald’s records.”
By law, the missing volume of the OS file, if it exists, has to be made public by October 26, the day all of the government’s Kennedy assassination files are supposed to be made public.
But does it exist?
The CIA’s story–that Volume 5–never existed, is dubious.
The OS volume is known to have existed in the 1970s because declassified records, found by Blunt, show that CIA officials and an HSCA Investigator, Betsy Wolf, had access to it.
Blunt asks the right question, which only the CIA can answer.
“Sometime between the HSCA closure in 1979 and the late surfacing of those files in 1997, one volume, Vol. 5 disappeared. This beggars the question; for what possible reason? The intact files were previously given to both the SSCIA [Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Activities] and the HSCA, so why did the CIA “not find them” until a direct, specific request from the ARRB in 1997? And then, why turn them over minus volume 5?”
Source: Analysis and Opinion from Assassination Archives and Research Center (AARC)
7 thoughts on “Missing from the new JFK files: a batch of CIA records on Lee Harvey Oswald”
More missing Oswald files? This doesn’t suprise me one bit. No wonder over 60% still believe in a conspiracy; When files go missing and agencies go into full-scale cover-up this usually means there hiding something sinister.
Im still wondering if anyone ever found a copy of Oswald’s military personality file that was supposedly routinely destroyed in 1973 and withheld completely from the warren commission?
Pingback: August 2017 News Reports - Eagle View DC
Pingback: Truth Redacted: The Farce of the JFK Document Dump – FunK MainStream Media News | Alternative Liberty News Sources
“All of the U.S. government’s files on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy are supposed to be released by October 26.”
Jim DiEugenio, his webmaster Al Rossi, Bill Kelly and yours truly have been working on a project to make all the released PDF files, current and future, more useful.
Every word (those which can be recognized, since as you know there are many pages that cannot be read by a human, much less a computer) has been extracted by OCR software. The 3,794 documents are at the disposal of their rightful owners, The People, here:
We are also looking to prepare transcripts from the Nosenko tapes, but first they must be processed in order to eliminate a pervasive background hum.
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/Low-Frequency-Hum.png (See pink horizontal lines)
If anybody out there can provide sound processing skills (how about the guy who did the AF-1 tapes?) their help is most welcome (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Pingback: James Angleton, the ignorant puppet master? – The JFK Network
Jeff, is there any information available from the SSCIA, or the HSCA, regarding information contained in the CIA LHO file (vol.5), that can be gleaned from those two committee reports?
Very little. Betsy Wolf of the HSCA is known to have reviewed the material but her notes say very little about the content. I’m looking for her now.