DOCUMENT 027

NASSAU BEACH HOTEL
7/9 DECEMBER 1995

Interpretation....

There were many problems with transcribing these tapes, most involved the voice quality and the large number of translators debating the correct translation. Although Mirta Nunez translated for the Cubans, she also clarified the translations of the others as did Wayne Smith, and others. Mirta Nunez's voice was softer then both Escalante's and Rodriguez's, so her voice was sometimes drowned out when she was simultaneously translating.  In the simultaneous translations Mirta also left out much of what the speaker was saying. In order to get a full translation of what the Spanish speakers were saying, the tapes must be transcribed directly from the Spanish.

This is not always a word-for-word transcript. In many instances some dialogue was left out due to changing of tapes, poor speaker volume, too many people talking at once, or just plain mumbling on the part of both the speakers and translators. No dialogue was left out of this transcript intentionally! In spite of these adversities, the gist of the speaker was usually captured, if not necessarily the exact words.

Any item in [ ] is an inserted note and does not appear in the original video. Some items in [] are second last names, editor's notes, correction/clarification of statements, or Spanish which is different from the English translation, etc.

                              From Rio to Nassau:
                            A small look into Cuba's JFK records

Papers were given by Wayne Smith, Cyril Wecht, Gaeton Fonzi, Gordon Winslow, John Newman, James Lesar, Fabian Escalante Font, Arturo Rodriguez, William Turner and Eric Hamburg. All presentations were structured around the agenda set by Claudia Furiati. Some of the topics covered were, The Warren Commission evidence, the CIA, Mafia, and Cuban Exile theories, Oswald's intelligence ties, the Miami-New Orleans-Dallas Triangle, Mexico City, and the plan to implicate Cuba and the USSR in the assassination of JFK.

The three day seminar produced the prospects of all participants meeting again, informally face-to-face, to discuss at a later time, many of the issues in Nassau, Bahamas. Invitations were to be open to anyone willing to attend. And so the process of historical exchange was initiated as was the exchange on the Cuban Missile Crisis.

It was in Rio that a "one-on-one" meeting be held in Nassau with the Cubans.

Without billing, fancy brochures, press conferences, book marts, and the frills of the agenda, a group of highly motivated individuals gathered to put their collective minds toward trying to resolve some of the issues surrounding the JFK assassination at Nassau. Three Cubans attended the meeting to report on what they had found in regards to Cuban documentation on several issues. Carlos Lechuga, former Cuban diplomat, attended, as did two retired Cuban State Security officials, General Fabian Escalante Font and Arturo Rodriguez.

Wayne Smith from the Center for International Studies acted as moderator. Others in attendance were: Gaeton Fonzi, Jeremy Gunn (Council and Chief Investigator for the Assassination Review Board), John Judge, Andy Kolis, Peter Kornbluh* (National Security Archives), Mary and Ray LaFontaine*, Jim Lesar (AARC), John Newman, Alan Rogers, Dick Russell, Tony Summers, Russ Swickard, Peter Dale Scott, Ed Sherry, Noel Twyman and Gordon Winslow.
   *Attendance for one day only

AGENDA. The agenda was adhered to fairly well with many agenda questions fixed in advance. The sessions included the following topics, with about two hours set for each. Most exchanges ran over the time allotted. The topics were:

1. JACK RUBY.

2. CASTRO-KENNEDY CONTACTS IN 1963.

3. DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS AND OTHER CIA FIGURES.

4. EXILES. (Odio, gunrunning, other exiles, JM/WAVE)

5. OSWALD IN MEXICO CITY. (This included AM/LASH.)

CUBAN RECORDS. There were no records produced by the Cubans to verify anything presented. When pressed on the availability of records, General Escalante said that there is no procedure set up within the Cuban Government to declassify any record. He speculated as to how Claudia Furiati obtained Cuban documents for publication in her book, ZR. "She probably wrote to the Cuban Government", he said. He has been permitted to look at any record he seeks, but is not permitted to make photocopies

But in the Portuguese version of her book, ZR, there is an affidavit notorized by General Escalante Font that the State Security documents given to Mrs. Furiati are true and correct copies of the originals. [see her documents from  JFK MENU ]

All scheduled meetings were video taped.

Dec 7-8 consists of  7 tapes.

Not every tape contains two full hours.

One tape contains the "Slide" presentation of December 9.

                    Disclaimer (Anything in parenthesis are translator comments)

NASSAU TAPE 1

OPENING SESSION DEC 7, 1995

Smith: Colleagues and guests who have come, not a long way, but who have come from Cuba to be here this morning. Senior Escalante, Carlos Lechuga, Senior Rodriguez, Mirta Nunez, who is one of the best interpreters in the business. A lovely person in addition to that. We really appreciate your coming and sharing information with us. I think that I just violated the rule...that is please, as we are speaking, that this is being interpreted. Moreover, while Mirta is a professional, Adam and Daria are not and interpreting services and equipment and all are very expensive and frankly we simply don't have the money to get into that so we helped Adam and Daria spend a few days in Nassau in return for helping us with interpreting services. This is a very informal gathering. If there are any problems with words, terminology that we get stuck on, Adam, Daria, Mirta or some of us are not certain of, we can simply stop for clarification. One of the problems in Rio was the interpreting was lousy. They were in a booth in the back and there was no way to stop and ask what the devil they meant. On the agenda: I will have, unfortunately the only one I have, doesn't have the change on it. We begin this morning talking about Jack Ruby in Havana. The change is after the break. At 11:00 we will come to Kennedy/Castro contacts in 1963 rather than as now scheduled Oswald/Mexico. We will talk about that at the second session tomorrow. So "Contacts" is the second session this morning and then after a lunch break we will talk about David Atlee Phillips and other CIA figures and I will have copies. Most of you have copies with you. Let me say in the beginning that I see this as the first meeting of the first step. We only have two days; a limited amount of time to go over a large amount of material. Obviously we won't get to everything.

This is a passion with everyone in the room and lots and lots of questions and our Cuban colleagues have for us. So we can't expect to cover everything in two days. There is no reason we can't get together six months from now or a year from now. Moreover, let me say Fabian Escalante and Carlos where in the Cuban government (?) and Arturo now in an Institute and I used to be a member of the State Department. But I certainly could not go back to the US Government and get documents. I have no way to do that and General Escalante can't simply produce documents without a process that he would have to go through. So people can't expect the Cubans to simply hand over all the documents on a given issue. That would be expecting too much. It is all right to record. But if we get to a point where the speakers are uncomfortable with being recorded, say so, and we will stop the recording. The only other thing--dinner. I think you've all signed up for tonight at the Ocean View--7:00 pm. I had thought at first doing a dinner right here amongst ourselves, toast ourselves, the more I thought about it, the less attractive it seemed. (more dinner talk) You've seen the brochures of Gulf Stream Airways. Stop in because Gulf Stream is one of the funders of the conference. Tom Tuper flies frequent charters to Havana. (More sponsor info). We are flying by the seat of our pants and putting a lot of things on American Express Corporate Card. Okay, we are beginning this morning with Jack Ruby. Should I read the questions from the U.S. side?  What about Ruby's trips?

?____________: You were going to do the introductions.

Smith: Right. I'm Wayne Smith.

Issacson: I'm Adam Issacson and I work with Wayne.

Each person says their name: Escalante, Mirta Nunez, Carlos Lechuga, Arturo Rodriguez, John Newman, Alan Rogers, Gaeton Fonzi, Anthony Summers, Jim Lesar, Jeremy Gunn, Russell Swickard, Gordon Winslow, Dick Russell, Noel Twyman, Peter Scott, Andy Kolis, John Judge, Peter Kornbluh, Ed Sherry.

Smith: Essentially Jack Ruby's trip to Havana and so forth.

Escalante: On behalf of myself and my colleagues, I would like to express my pleasure in being here. I would like to state that we are here in an unofficial capacity. I hope with the experience and research that you have done that this will be a very productive meeting. We have participated in a panorama of US/Cuban relations from many different angles. Carlos Lechuga who is a politician and a diplomat, Ms. Nunez, who will be translating today has held has held many positions including the National Assembly. Arturo and myself [Escalante] have participated as State Security. Since 1978, I have been involved in research and investigations that have been done in Cuba. I have participated in research projects regarding to the CIA's role in Cuba. A very sensitive study from 1965-66 AM/Lash. (Nunez: He was responsible for it). Participated in other important investigations. Arturo and I have just finished a book about the Kennedy assassination. For this book we did interviews with 157 Cubans. In selecting that names of the people to interview, we had to rely on much of the research that you have done. I have to say with all honesty that the materials that you produced were most helpful. The principle objective is to demonstrate that the plot against Kennedy was also part of the plot against Cuba. This has been our principle objective of research. During the process of our research, we found many facts and data that where useful in the process of clarifying the Kennedy assassination. However, here today we are not going to be able to clarify exactly who was the assassin or that the (?) president of the United States. If the Kennedy assassination had really been investigated, it could have been solved right away at that time in Dallas. This did not happen. Also I'll clarify another point which seems important. The Cuban government had two different occasions to study the Kennedy assassination. In 1964 at the request of the Warren Commission and in 1978 at the request of the Select Committee. However, Cuba has never done an investigation. One of the problems was to obtain information. [Nunez: The only thing that we did was to give them the information that they requested. We didn't do research. We just gave them the answers to the questions.] It wasn't until 1992-1993 that Arturo and myself began to research the case that we will be talking about. [Nunez: Personal interest.] Unfortunately we don't bring final conclusions. The information that we will offer today we hope will serve to further the debate and form hypotheses, form questions which we can go to our archives and try to answer them. [Nunez: The things that we have there might be new hints that can be discovered by you in your own area or us in our area.] Like Wayne said, we are entering a new road or path together. This said, I would like to start with a very important witness--Jose Verdacia Verdacia (?). He was the captain of immigration in 1959. He was in charge of a camp for undocumented aliens. At this camp Mr. Santos Trafficante was interned with other United States citizens who were involved in the gambling industry.

I can't declassify necessarily but I am going to read some of the documents on Santos Trafficante. June 9, 1959...This document is (?__________ in answer to your letter. I communicate to you that in this  department exists North American citizen Santos Trafficante. He is interned here and I request that this be reported to the General of the Police. There is another document, same day. Here it says as follows: I send this document to the assistant to the Commadante General. This is a copy of an order of police wanting to search for Santos Trafficante, Jr. This information should be sent to every place and try to arrest him. This document was sent by the Minister of Government to the head of the police department. In relation to the arrest of the very well known criminal, North American Santos Trafficante. In accordance to is stated in Penal Code 64 (?) should be sent to the immigration camp to have him registered and detained in such a place until he is sent to the ship and back to the United States as an undesirable alien. Everything (?) we want to congratulate on (?) finally capturing him in search for this person who was accused by Narco-bureau in Washington and Interpol.

Santos Trafficante was arrested in Cuba for two reasons: first they were detaining all the main operators of the gambling casino and also at the request of the Bureau of Narcotics of the United States. He was detained there until August 18 [1959]. He left once because of the marriage of his daughter. But at this moment it is not confirmed that the Interior Minister was an agent of the CIA. AM/LASH was the Vice Minister of the Interior. Cubela was his name and that's why he was given permission to go to the wedding of his daughter. He was under arrest but he was permitted to go to the wedding of his daughter because AM/LASH was the Vice Minister of the Interior.

Rogers: Was a date given for the wedding?

Escalante: No. Probably in the month of July, 1959. Santos Trafficante's lawyer was a Cuban--Rafael Garcia Bango. He was very closely related to Rolando Cubela. He worked in Cuba until 1963. It is pretty much confirmed that he worked for the CIA in Spain in 1963-64. In 1964 he was involved in the Cubela and Artime plot against Fidel Castro. This is significant because in 1959 Garcia Bango worked to obtain Trafficante's brief exit from this camp--which was absolutely prohibited--with Cubela. This demonstrates Cubela's link to Organized Crime since 1959.

?____________: Can we have a spelling of his last name?

Nunez: Bango. B A N G O.

Escalante: There is another element to this lineage of Cubela, Trafficante and Bango. Since the middle of the 1950's there is another person of Italian origin. He was recruited by the CIA in 1959. He had a jewelry store.  He was called Carlos Tepedino. His code name was AM/WIN. He was a good friend of Cubela in 1956. At the same time he was good friends with Santos Trafficante. And after 1960, he played an important role in the recruitment of Cubela by the CIA. He met with Cubela in Italy in 1960, June or July, and in February of 1961 he participated in the recruitment of Cubela in 1961 in Mexico along with a CIA agent. This is a description of this CIA agent. Very interesting. In taking into consideration Cubela's description about the CIA official/agent who had met in Mexico. The Inspector General's report in 1967 and according to this report the fact that the official  had met with Cubela in Havana when he was assigned and a similar contact was planned that could never have taken place, it is probably the identity of this official could be David Phillips. The description of this character: he was a tall man, approximately 40 years old, thin, with a receding hairline, shadows under his eyes, good manners, well dressed, sociable, and speaks fluent Spanish. That's enough. We are not sure if it is Phillips but it is a very similar description.

Newman: As a point of order, we are talking about a meeting in Feb. of '61 in Mexico?

Escalante: Yes.

Scott: And who's description is this? Cubela's?

Nunez: Cubela.

Winslow: And what did you say about his eyes?

Discussion: We were unsure about the word.

Winslow: Were they deep sockets?

Discussion [Nunez]: Circles under his eyes. He looked tired. His eyes were baggy.

?____________: (?) Meetings in March. Who's describing? Cubela?

Issacson: Cubela.

Escalante: I would like to say a little bit more about this episode. That relates Mafia, Trafficante, CIA to the plot against Castro. According to the 1967 CIA Inspector General's report, the end of March 1961, there was a plan for ex-filtration from Cuba. This was planned by the CIA. Two Cubans, Rolando Cubela and Juan Orta. In this moment he was head of the office of Prime Minister (?). He is compelled to deliver some poison pills. This information surprises us because Cubela came back to Cuba from Mexico before departure. How was it then that they could have just taken him from Cuba that very same month? That they also wanted to take him out with Santos Trafficante at the same time? This looks like something that needs to be investigated. Back to Jack Ruby. In 1978 the Select Committee Investigators interviewed Cuban Verdacia. He was head of the immigration camp. He was interviewed by Richard Pryor, Edwin Lopez, Robert Blakey. They met with members of the Cuban Interior Ministry and Foreign Ministry. Blakey, he asked many questions. Reading it afterward, many details standout. There is a rumor (?) that some questions must have had to been asked. It is a wonder that they just weren't asked. They did not ask them. This Cuban guy was scared, terrified. The interviewers, including a woman, wanted to take a picture to prove the interview happened. He said no. This shows up in the records. He was asked, "what are you worried about?" He said I knew Santos Trafficante. He had many relations with him. He was capable of killing him. This is a very important element. In this interview he actually remembered Santos Trafficante. He remembered him because he was a very important person and he had a lot of visitors in the camp. This is something that he could not forget. He also remembered a British journalist that was interned at the camp at the same time as Santos Trafficante, Wilson Hodgeson. But in the interview he did remember having met or known Jack Ruby. (?) He said he did not really remember the people that visited Santos Trafficante in those days. After the interview however, he said he didn't want any declarations with the staff. He did remember a friend, Lewis McWillie, and he was the operator of the Trafficante casino. He was the person that went with Jack Ruby to visit Trafficante. There is no evidence of this. No material proof. The Cuban that ran the camp, he died. It is impossible to get affidavits from them.

Fonzi: I need to get a clarification here. From what I understand during the House Select Committee interview with Verdacia, he did not remember Ruby.

Escalante: No.

Fonzi: But after the staff left, Verdacia remembered?

[Discussions about Lewis McWillie and Ruby]

Escalante: No. He did remember after the Select Committee Commission let that McWillie was there several times to meet Trafficante with someone else that he couldn't he was Jack Ruby.

Fonzi(?)______________: He never remembered Ruby but he did remember McWillie.

Nunez: He said that he was coming with someone else and he assumed that they were together in all the
gambling business...

Summers: Just a finer detail. Is this posted to the memory of Verdacia something which was recorded by the Cuban authorities at the time and written down or is this a verbal memory of somebody that Verdacia spoke to afterwards?

Escalante: Verdacia told this to somebody else and they told this to us.

Summers: Thank you.

Winslow: I have a question sir. Where was the camp located?

Escalante: In a place that's near Havana called Casa Blanca where there was eight big barracks.

Winslow: What was the immigration officer's name?

Escalante: Jose Verdacia Verdacia.

Winslow: Was there a man there by the name of Verdeja?

Escalante: No.

Winslow: Then Verdacia and Verdeja couldn't have gotten mixed up as far as names concerned?

Escalante: Could be. There was a whole group of police there. It might have been somebody else.

Scott: There are a lot of questions. We just want to be sure.

Escalante: I want to comment (?)_____________ . Really we don't know more about this visit. We have the entry card of Jack Ruby in Cuban immigration. There they are [shows file]. That proves he entered. As many of you that investigate Jack Ruby know he was ties to the Mafia.

Winslow: What is the date?

Escalante: August...and one in September.

Winslow: What year? 1959?

Nunez: If you want a photocopy we can do this.

?_____________: We have these in the House Committee files.

Escalante: He was in Cuba. He left from New Orleans the first time and the second time from Miami. What he did in Cuba, we don't know. There are many hypotheses about what he did in Cuba. For instance, did you know he was tied to McWillie? McWillie was related to Trafficante. We suspect that he was there to extract gambling money to bring back to the United States. However, we can't say anything for certainty because we don't know. Trafficante was expelled from Cuba once and for all in January 1960. Apparently, Jack Ruby never came back to Cuba. That's the basic information that we have.

?_____________: Is that apparently....in quotes?

Discussion: [Note audible]

Smith: Apparently, they don't have any information that Ruby returned to Cuba after January.

Escalante: [Not interpreted]

Newman(?)______________: There are rumors that Trafficante returned to Cuba. That is why the question was asked.

Escalante: Trafficante was let out of camp in August of 1959.

Winslow: How did that process occur? How did he get out?

Escalnte: Let me explain. The Interior Ministry said that there did not exist any order for him to be arrested...from the government of the United States. He was free because the government of the United States said that there was no order for him to be arrested.

Smith: Although there had been an earlier...

Nunez: There had been an earlier...through the Interpol a call for him having been involved in narcotics.

Escalante: So they couldn't have detained illegally. Without that Interpol order he had to be freed.

Summers: Is this attitude of the U.S. reflected in documents, in other words, is there a record of the U.S. this guy let him go?

Escalante: We don't have any American documents but we have documents of our own that say so.

?____________: How about an Interpol document?

Escalante: Yes.

?____________: Who was the final person who made the decision...that signed the final order for Trafficante?

Escalante: The official of the Ministry of the Interior that was in charge of this case. Blanco is his last name. He was the one that signed the order to release Trafficante.

?____________: Is he the one to make the decision?

Nunez: He was at least the one to sign the document. It say Blanco. He is the head of public order in the Ministry of the Interior.

?____________: He had authority to do that? The ultimate authority? He didn't have to go any higher?

Escalante: No. That's what they do everywhere. If the embassy says you don't have to detain them you let them go. Trafficante was in Cuba until January 1960. This doesn't mean that he didn't leave Cuba sometime before.

Nunez: He may have gone out and back in during those days.

Escalante: He may not have left through official means through Immigration. If he had a yacht he may have just up and left. What is certain is that he left in 1960. Cuban authorities did create the expulsion of Santos Trafficante. At that time Santos Trafficante was staying in the Hotel Havana Riviera. Trafficante managed several casinos in Havana that had by that point been closed. He was tied to two Cubans who played a very important role in this--Senior Daniel Hernandez Ortega (?); he was a manager of Trafficante's in a gambling casino in Havana called Sans Souci. During 1960, Santos Trafficante also had a Cuban bodyguard. His name was Herminio Diaz Garcia. We will talk about later. ...Hernandez met and talked with Richard Cain in December of 1960 regarding a plot against the life of Fidel Castro.

Herminio Diaz is one of the people we feel was most definitely involved in the plot against Kennedy. Herminio Diaz died in Cuba in May 1966. He had a confrontation against Cuban forces when he tried to enter Havana illegally. But we are talking about other things now. Turning to Ruby, some information from the United States....(?) Cuba. That Ruby had a coffee business in Cuba in the 1950's. He also engaged in arms trafficking. He is very tied to former president of Cuba Carlos Prio. This is also a CIA agent, very well known, Frank Sturgis. There is a U.S. version of this story that says a Cuban gave a letter to Ruby asking him to sell weapons to Cubans in 1959. We know very little about this incident at this moment. However, we found an ex-officer of our Cuban army who knew of an attempt to sell jeeps on behalf of an American citizen whose name he cannot remember, more or less the same time Ruby was in Havana. That's all we know about this. We would like to know if you guys know anything about this.

Smith: Let's take that as a point of departure because they have sent out some questions, essentially what information... we do we have linking Ruby to Trafficante, Giancana, Roselli; do we have documents establishing such a link and what evidence we may have on this Ruby involvement to sell arms in which others have written about. Peter, why don't we go to you.

Scott: In 1977, I made a film about the Kennedy assassination with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation--CBC. We explored the jeep story, we had heard the same story. We interviewed people in Chicago who were involved in the import/export fields with Cuba . We obtained a partial corroboration with someone who said that yes he saw Ruby had been involved in such a deal. He said this on film but because it was not precise we did not use it. I would like to come back to the visit of the presence of Trafficante in this camp which the House Select Committee calls Trescornia...is that an accurate name?

Escalante: Yes.

Scott: Because McWillie was interviewed by the House Committee and confirmed that he had gone out and that maybe Ruby had come with him. But he said that when he went to the camp he saw many people: Jake Lansky, Dino Cellini...Dino Cellini is confirmed involved in the CIA/Mafia plots against Castro and the last person that he talked to...seeing, the primary person was somebody he called Guiseppe and later clarified as Guiseppe de Giorgio. Guiseppe de Giorgio was the major courier in the narco-traffic of the time, and possibly I would say more to you about this in private because it becomes very complicated, that de Giorgio had become involved in the planting of stolen securities. They stole securities from a Canadian bank and they had to be deposited in a Swiss bank. I suspect that Ruby knew about this particular group because a lawyer involved called Louis Knutner in Chicago who definitely could have known Ruby quite well. And so a question to you, have you ever looked at this Guiseppe de Giorgio recently who an alias (?) Conevese?

Escalante: There is no formal registry of information about this man. Apparently the registers were destroyed. These registers were apparently destroyed and I say apparently I want to explain why. About the registers. Not everybody that came in was registered by formal process. In 1961 just after the Bay of Pigs invasion, he was preparing himself for a very large war. At this time as we prepared for war the archives were moved around. They changed their location many times. They destroyed the archives that were non-essential. They saved the things that were most important in order to have them at hand rather than things that were not (?). These documents were kept in boxes and in the following years a lot of these boxes were not of interest or truly necessary were not taken out. Many are still hidden and unopened. Over time these documents have deteriorated, humidity, just plain time, they have broken down and made them unreadable. When we have the resources, which we don't have now unfortunately, we will go over this. Maybe then a few others will emerge but right now there is nothing that will happen. That's why I can't respond to your question.

Summers: To what extent what you've said this morning is reflected in documents or reports or research materials that we can have access to. I don't mean the Ruby immigration records that we have seen already. Is there any papers that we can study?

Escalante: The ones I have mentioned...

Summers: I'm sorry. What I mean is you have talked to us very interestingly for some time about the conversations...something that Verdacia Verdacia had said so and so and the information with the various names of the people that you have gathered together. Has this been set down on paper anywhere?

Escalante: They do exist but we do not have them available. Those are government documents. I have records but I cannot open the files.

Summers: SO they are still retained?

Escalante: Yes.

Nunez: I think that it is worth to say here that to help understand about documents and things like that we don't have a document release system. It doesn't exits in Cuba. Nobody has taken the position to declassify such and such a document. So it is very difficult to get some documents from the files of the government. It doesn't exist in the system.

Smith: Can I clarify something for all of us? Someone mentioned to me six or seven months ago, one of the American researchers, that documents would be coming available because they were released in Cuba five years, seven years ago, but I said at the time that I didn't think that was the case and you're confirming it that there is no system of declassification--certain documents in five years, certain documents in ten. There is no such system.

Summers: I have one more thing to say and then I'll keep quiet. I was interested very early in your address when I thought I understood you to say that you had provided information--that Cuba had provided information--not only to the House Assassination Committee but also to the Warren commission in 1964. I understood that also by something that was said casually to me yesterday. I know of no evidence in Warren Commission publications.

?____________: In the immigration. In the visa application.

Summers: Yes, except for the Ruby thing.

?____________: The Oswald visit to the embassy.

Summers: There was some paper work on that?

?____________: Yes. Visa application...

Escalante: There are various documents. Including documents that were published and given to the Warren Commission. They could do what they wanted to.

Nunez: We could give them to you if you need them.

Summers: I was told recently by a senior Commission lawyer only that during his work he had made a mission that is still secret, he said to...it's not clear where he went, but I understand from one of his colleagues that he may have gone to met a senior Cuban official during his work for the Warren Commission. Do you know of any such contact?

Escalante: No. The only contact we had with the Warren Commission was through the Swiss Embassy. Including a letter that came from the State Department thanking them [Cuba] for their cooperation and helping clarify the question of Ruby in Mexico.

Winslow: This declassification of documents...I have two things I want to ask you about. How did Claudia get those documents released for her book? And the second thing is, right after the three hour documentary that was in November of '94 a French newspaper reported a high Cuban official as saying that all the Kennedy materials are open and that anybody that wants to look at them can come and see them. Do you have any comments on that?

Escalante: Yes, I have a few. First thing, that high Cuban official that you are speaking of--you are speaking to him [Fidel Castro]. [Laughter] Any questions you have you should ask him. I know he spoke...it was Paris Match, the French magazine. I don't know what documents that he was referring to. Really, you will have to ask him. I don't know which documents the Cuban government declassified.

Winslow: I had somebody go to the Ministry of Interior, a Cuban national and they inquired about photocopying these things and they were told that there was a declassification process that they [the records] had to go through and it had not been started yet, it was not implemented and it would take two to five years to get it. Is this declassification process...I'm using that because you said...I think you said there was none, but, would this be taken care of under the Ministry of Interior?

Escalante: In the first place, I don't have as much information as you. I know that there was a will on the part of the Cuban government in this sense. But in the current circumstances it is not a real priority of the Cuban government. Right now the Cuban government is involved in the questions of its own survival. And such an issue as this would have to be presented before the National Assembly Conference. As far as I know, this certainly has not been presented. I don't even know if this process has begun or set in motion.

Gunn: When President Castro met with the HSCA on assassinations he generously agreed to give the HSCA any records that Cuba had related to the issues that they were concerned in and he made no limitations on the willingness to supply records. My question is: what would be the best way to continue or to renew that offer that he made in 1978?

Escalante: I unfortunately don't know how to do this. There might be complications. Fidel Castro talked to members of the Select Committee. The only thing we did was answer the questions that had been asked of Cuba. These documents were declassified and handed over. And as your (?)____________ indeed know I needed more than that at the time. I will clarify in a little while. I directed the Cuban part of this investigation. I am permitted to answer any questions and make the interviews go more smoothly. (?_____________ in 1992-1993....it was until 1992-1993 that we started a real investigation on our own. It was easy for me to do then. I had access to these documents [Nunez: Had] In addition to that I had information from your own research which allowed me to look in other directions from which the representatives from the Select Committee never mentioned. For instance, Fidel Castro no doubt was (?__________ remember Select Committee mentioned [mumbled]

?____________: Follow up to that As far as I understood the Cuban government did give to the HSCA what the HSCA asked for. The question would be in light of additional research both by people here and by people in Cuba. Is there a way that previous offer could be renewed and how would be the best way to go about that?

Escalante: As a result of this meeting that it one of the requests that we would like to make and I think it's possible. It's not my decision. I'm not going to commit myself on this. But based upon Fidel Castor's previous speaking on this and the responses in the past, it certainly is possible.

Summers: Senior Lechuga was not in the room when I asked my questions about possible high level contacts between the Warren Commission and the Cuban government during this investigation. Now that he is here I wonder if I could ask you sir as a senior diplomat at that time, were you aware of any mission by or human contact by a senior Warren Commission person with senior Cuban government.

Lechuga: No.

?____________: After President Kennedy's assassination wouldn't the Soviet government and Cuba be exchanging all their previous assassination information on Oswald?

Escalante: One moment. Yes. And information from the Soviet Security Service. From the '70's the era of the Select Committee...no no the Warren Commission 19060's in this they sent the file that had to do with Oswald. The information about what Oswald was doing while in the Soviet Union. I can read it to you when we get to that point. But I'm not going to talk about that now in order to stay with the theme of the current discussion.

Nunez: We will do that when we are all caught up.

Scott: You say that the person responsible for releasing Trafficante was Cesar Blanco?

Escalante: Yes.

Scott: Is this the same Cesar Blanco who is the Cesar Blanco who is from Teres (?)_____________ who immigrated to the States and became a leader in the counter-revolution there?

Escalante: No.

Scott: Is it Cesar Blanco Gutierrez?

Escalante: I tried to verify that but couldn't get it.

Scott: It would be very interesting. This man became [part] of the 30th of November Movement.

Escalante: Cesar Blanco did sign that order and the order did go...

Scott: I would like to pursue this matter.

Escalante: We'll try to do that.

Winslow: Fabian, I don't know if you overlooked it or not but the first part of my question before: how did Claudia get the documents if there is no process set up?

Escalante: We are talking about Jack Ruby?

Winslow: No, I'm talking about the documents that she published in her book that were Cuban documents.

Nunez: Because she had an authorization from the Cuban government.

Winslow: Oh. How do we get one of those? [Laughter]

Escalante/Nunez: She wrote a letter to Castro.

Winslow: Who? To Fidel?

Escalante: No to me. She didn't just talk to me she talked to different people.

Winslow: Yeah, I understand that but I'm wondering how did she get the authority? What department?  He doesn't know.

Escalante: She wrote a letter to the Cuban government.

Winslow: To the who?

Nunez: To the government.

Escalante: And they just authorized it.

Winslow: Ok... [Laughter]

Smith: I would imagine Claudia went first to the Cuban embassy in Brazil and talked with them and made an approach to the embassy in Brazil. Simple as that.

Nunez: I think she made several approaches.

?____________: Didn't I read somewhere that NSA has created some kind of bridge across to another information center in Cuba?

?____________: Yes, on the Bay of Pigs documents.

?____________: That's right. Just asking.

?____________: Can that channel be expanded? Can a similar channel be created?

Smith: Let's talk about that later on among ourselves. Look...

?____________: Wayne, can I just ask one...this seems like the most obvious question. If Mr. Escalante is probably still a friend of Castro, why doesn't he just ask Castro to release the documents? I mean we don't need all these committees to release this, Castro usually does what he likes.

Escalante: That's what we are trying to do. I would say something...you should remain near here (?). I will reiterate this idea. Cuban today, the Cuban government, this is just not a priority. However, documents are declassified. Telling about a specific event for instance the Cuban Missile Crisis. At the last meeting in Havana they discussed this Cuban Missile Crisis...They declassified a great volume of documents. Right now they are going through a similar process for the Bay of Pigs. From this we can perhaps move on to declassify documents regarding this. In respect, the Kennedy assassination should be the same thing. We are going to propose that this information be declassified.

Smith: Good. I suggest that it behooves us that we make an overture along those lines and perhaps the review board. Why don't we discuss that among ourselves and see how we should proceed. Peter Kornbluh was involved with the Missile Crisis conference process and he is with the Bay of Pigs process and the National Security Archives and thus and I don't see why we don't do the same thing. Why don't we have a crew go to them and ask. We'll have further discussions and try to provide them with information and ask for declassification of documents as we go along. The same way we did with the Missile Crisis process. So the ball is our court.  We've come to 11:15. We could go on talking about Ruby and issues that we've been discussing for the past hour or so but will you prefer. But I think we should take a very short break and then turn to "Contacts." We haven't exhausted the subject by any means. We'll have other opportunities. If someone has questions perhaps we can put them to our Cuban guests over coffee in the hallway. Why don't we take a very quick break and talk about the "Contacts".

END TAPE 1
***************************************

NASSAU TAPE # 2

December 7, 1995 (last of morning session)

Lechuga: In the first place, it was just a few months after the Cuban Missile Crisis. We knew about
the CIA efforts to knock off Castro and also military maneuvers going on--infiltration of
agents--sabotage... Requests to other countries that they unify with the United States in the blockade
of Cuba. It was a real surprise that in this atmosphere that they would be approaching us like this.
And I said the same to Attwood. Later, there was detente with the Soviet Union around the year 1963.
There was a partial trust-- the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, a direct hot line, credits for buying American
Wheat. There was an evident change in policy between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Kennedy gave a speech at the American University. This did not have the hard-line language of the
cold war, this speech. There was change. He was talking about the Soviet Union, not Cuba. Perhaps,
we thought, maybe this general detente with Russia, that he was trying to extend to Cuba as well.

Attwood told him (Lechuga) that in Attwood's conversation, a conversation Attwood had with
Kennedy, that he (Kennedy) would like to change policy toward China, but that was impossible. The
problem was public prestige just couldn't advance in that manner. The same case with Cuba. Kennedy
said to Attwood, "How do we change relations with Cuba?" in these conversations with Attwood.
These conversations happened in a very small circle. I don't even think Dean Rusk, Secretary of
State, knew about it. Stevenson, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations... Stevenson
authorized Attwood to speak with me. Averell Harriman also told him to proceed, and Galbraith also.
Robert Kennedy also called for a dialogue between us. I believe this was not initialed by Attwood or
somebody at his level, but was initiated much higher up--the initiative to begin this dialogue. I don't
think Stevenson would have given this authorization with an order from higher up. Stevenson says at
that time the CIA was in charge of the policy toward Cuba. I saw something in de-classified
documents. McGeorge Bundy was considering - promoting dialogue.

Newman: How did you find out that this was McGeorge Bundy? Was it from Stevenson?

Lechuga: Classified documents. Evidently this new policy that had been formulated before he spoke
with Attwood. Bundy's proposals according to these documents April 1963, he didn't with him until
Sept. It was probably planned that when the General Assembly opened its session, which happened
every September, that Attwood and the United States delegation would talk to him about normalizing
relations. The idea came from the United States, not with Cuba. In one of Attwood's books, "Kennedy
and Cuba", said that Castro was ready to normalize relations. Came out of...

Poss Twyman?: Just to clarify, Attwood was our Ambassador? He would...In addition, the initiative...

Several: Yes.

unknown: In addition, he would have the initiative...

Lechuga: So it was in these conditions that journalist Lisa Howard approached me and said somebody
from the United Nations would like to speak to me. And so she invited me to her house for cocktails.
And apparently Attwood would be leaving to go back to Washington on September 24th. I said, "sure,
I have no problem with that". In my book I said it was probably the initiative of Attwood's.

Nunez speaking for Lechuga: Lisa Howard told me that it was a private initiative.

Lechuga: Apparently he spoke with Stevenson and got his permission and after consultation with
Harriman...

Nunez: ...Harriman.

Abramson: Oh, okay.

Lechuga: The following day, Attwood went to Washington and spoke with Robert Kennedy. Robert
Kennedy also authorized this conversation... Attwood said, "it's time to break the ice between us".
Attwood said, begin a dialogue. There are no reservations about that. We should begin an agenda for
some sort of dialogue. The idea of having an agenda was Kennedy's.

Abramson: The president, not Bobby?

Lechuga: The president. To be presented by Attwood, not Kennedy. Attwood spoke about the current
political situation in the United States where it looked like Kennedy could win the next years'
elections. Civil rights were a big issue, still many criticized that they were not doing enough. They
didn't know who would be the nominee for the Republican Party, whether it was Goldwater or
Rockefeller. Possible Goldwater because Rockefeller had problems. It wasn't clear what Goldwater
would do to Cuba.

Nunez: It was known that Kennedy was an enemy--but it wasn't known if Goldwater would be against
Cuba.

Lechuga: Attwood said it was very, very important to keep these conversations secret because if the
Republicans found out it would be a huge scandal in congress. Following some of the conversations
--there were three or four -- Attwood met with McGeorge Bundy, the National Security Advisor. It
was decided that Gordon Chase would become the sort of a go-between for Bundy and Attwood
regarding this. To add to their surprise at these initiative of dialogue were going on, the funds, the
assets of the Cuban Mission of the United Nations were frozen. Well of course you can't really do this
because its the United Nations Mission not the United States. Protests came from the Secretary
General of the United Nations two or three days later. They unfroze the funds maybe four days.
Havana had to send cash up to the mission. They couldn't get money out of the bank. It seemed so
strange that in the midst of this going on that they would come forth with this dialogue. At this time a
French reporter, Jean Daniel, was in New York. A friend of Jean Daniel was...

Nunez: Jean Daniel was going to Cuba so Attwood thought it would be good to meet Bradley. Bradley
would make the introductions.

Smith: Bradley would meet with the President. Then Bradley...

Scott: I'm not quite clear. Who made, how did Attwood now of the Daniel contact? I thought you said
Attwood was a friend of Daniel.

Lechuga: He knew Daniel was at NY at that time and he was going to Cuba.

Smith: He asked them if Bradley would go see the President?

Lechuga: He (Daniel) spoke with Kennedy. He wanted to speak of Vietnam. Kennedy didn't want to
talk about Vietnam. He wanted to talk about Cuba and nothing else.

(A discussion in Spanish)

Abramson: Okay, let me catch them up.

Lechuga: When Kennedy was (with Daniel) there, he said it would be great if he (Daniel) could talk
about the Cuban Missile Crisis to Castro.

Nunez: If he was aware of how serious the crisis was for the world?

Lechuga: JFK didn't want to talk about anything besides Cuba. He (Daniel) went and spoke with
Castro and asked him--he respected Kennedy's [request]--"How do you feel about the Missile
Crisis?" during this conversation is when they heard on the radio that Kennedy was assassinated.
Fidel in talking at a 1992 conference, said that he had thought Daniel was serving as a messenger of
Kennedy. And he thought that Kennedy was capable and willing of changing his policies. He was
popular. He was in good position to make such a decision to change his policies.

Lechuga: Kennedy speaking through McGeorge Bundy said there should be an agenda for dialogue
with Cuba. Of course I sent all the information of these conversations with Attwood to Havana. In
Havana, the responses were delayed. According to Attwood's perception, the responses were very
slow. He wanted to accelerate the process somewhat. Havana was moving too slowly. And at this
moment, without his knowledge, Lisa Howard called Cuba and spoke with Commandante Vallejo, who
was the assistant to Fidel Castro. In order to try and accelerate the process. She had known him in
Cuba before. To try to take advantage of her friendship with him, in order to try to get a quicker
response from the Cubans. In November, Vallejo was contacted Lechuga and told me they are
working on the agenda. But the agenda never really arrived because they killed Kennedy. Attwood
said that JFK said through somebody, maybe McGeorge Bundy, that Kennedy had left a not for
himself on his desk that upon his return from Dallas to contact Attwood to find out how the Cuban
initiative was going.

Nunez: It was going to be a short trip to Dallas. He made a note on his desk to remind him that as
soon as he came back from Dallas he had to talk to Attwood to see how things were going with the
conversations.

Scott: Who is the source of this?

Nunez: Attwood. Because somebody told him, probably Bundy.

Lechuga: After JFK's death, Attwood spoke with Lyndon Johnson. Johnson had spoken at the UN, as
Kennedy had spoken.

Nunez: As he was president he want to speak at the General Assembly too. LBJ told Attwood that
he'd read Attwood's memo and was still uncertain about going ahead with the initiative. He would give
him an answer.

Lechuga: Attwood phoned and said, I've had no news from the president. Just trying to keep the
contact. Eventually Johnson did just break off the dialogue and well, you know the rest of the story.

Smith: Could I ask you to clarify a couple of points? In your book its clear that Attwood himself or
perhaps some other emissary would go to Cuba?

Lechuga: Yes, Attwood spoke to me and said he was fully disposed to go to Cuba. He had met Castro
in 1959 as a journalist and had interviewed him then and as a journalist was prepared to speak to him.
In 1959 it wasn't suspicious for him to go to Cuba because of being a private journalist. He thought it
wouldn't be suspicious now because he had already been to Cuba.

Smith: Attwood's idea was because he had interviewed Castro as a journalist. Carlos said well it
wouldn't be suspicious going to Cuba, but you are an ambassador now, not just a journalist. Attwood
was supposed to go.

Lechuga: Talked about going by private plane perhaps to Varadero. Robert Kennedy thought it better
if a Cuban came to the United States, to the United Nations. But this never resolved itself.

Smith: But in a sense, it's a substitute for that since Attwood sees he cannot get down there and he
learns that Jean Daniel whom he knows is going to go. Maybe Daniel is a substitute for Attwood.
Attwood didn't think he could go at that point. Not as a substitute, but here's a chance to have the
conversation.

Summers: Excuse me, Attwood told me that at the end of this process just before the President was
killed that the arrangement was indeed that once the President gave the go-ahead and briefed
Attwood that he would fly from Florida in private plane. And fly to Varadero. At that stage had
reached almost a firm arrangement to go.

Lechuga: Yes, but this was never really firmed up.

Smith: But the plan was there--Kennedy perhaps... Also, I had the impression that Daniel was asked
to say a little more than asking about the Cuban Missile Crisis. I thought that Daniel really raised the
possibility of dialogue. To get Castro's reaction.

Lechuga: Yes, that was what Daniel thought was the message.

Newman: I want to give some clarification. First of all, we're speaking of LBJ' s speech at the UN in
Sept? No, Nov. After the assassination. The line of communication. Did Attwood share this with you?

Lechuga: Which information?

Newman: That LBJ made this statement, "That he wasn't sure about whether he would go through."
Attwood discussed this with you?

Lechuga: Attwood told me this. No discussed, told me the information.

?____________: Attwood said to me--Bobby Kennedy was the original hardliner, but Castro was
offering an agreement that he would not try to subvert Latin America. In return we would lift the
economic blockade. Castro would give compensation for the companies that he had expropriated. In
return we would unblock the Cuban assets in America.

Lechuga: Not on these issues. That was never discussed.

Newman: It may have been their idea of an agenda, but it was never discussed.

Lechuga: It was never discussed. For instance, compensating for expropriated properties has always
been on the table. We've discussed it. Attwood told me about Bobby Kennedy was of course a
hardliner but he was also a realistic politician and that he knew that the moment was to have the
conversation, he would support it because he was a realist.

?____________: Senior Lechuga, you talked much about the [people?] surrounding the Kennedy
administration behind Attwood in their approach to you. Primarily, what I do not find in your book is
what the people behind you--specifically the first time Attwood approached you at Lisa Howard's. You
would of course had to have made a report. ...Got back to you and what did they say to you?

Lechuga: I transmitted it through normal channels. I was the ambassador to the Minister of Foreign
Relations, then the Prime Minister, to the President.

?: What was the response to that?

Lechuga: that they were discussing, considering the questions. Considering formulating agenda. Then
they killed Kennedy. During those two months of conversation, there was never any real response at
that point. They told me they were still working on the agenda. Before the assassination, not after.

Smith: The agenda for conversation?

?: One last piece. Those who authorized you to continue the conversation with Attwood, were they
cautious? Hopeful?

Escalante: All the communications were in Code Cables. The only thing you can say is very little.
Never had a conversation with a Cuban in Havana. We have change--have feelings the opinions of our
leaders in Cuba.

Lechuga: Those times in NY, he never came to Havana. The situation as it exists at that moment. The
policy against Cuba in Havana was take your time considering this. There were a lot of problems in
Cuba-- they did have to decide a little bit.

Escalante: We look at this in 1995. Maybe the situation in those days. I want to remind you that in
1963 two big attacks against us. It was not an attack by exile groups, it was a planned operation by a
special mission of the CIA. Cuban operatives were destroyed. Those days there was lots of
aggressive action, very strong. Also, May 1963 there were eleven bombings against Cuban industries,
oil industry. In the middle of this war, this was a big war. Can you imagine that a message of this type
could come out?

?: What was the date of the attack?

Escalante: (unclear)

Scott: This question is about the timing of the initiative vs the timing of the aggressive acts against
Cuba. In the light of what seemed to be opposing efforts, I ask a very precise question in the timing of
the...I would only talk about AM/Lash initiative that made the dialogue impossible. The CIA had not
spoken to AM/Lash since the middle of 1962. On Sept. 5, Lisa Howard says to Attwood that she
thinks its a good time to develop initiative for accommodations . Two days later the CIA makes
contact with [Rolando] Cubela [Secades]. In October, after the President had just spoken to Daniel,
Fitzgerald authorizes representation to AM/Lash, that is a personal representative of Robert
Kennedy. So my question is: on September 5 when Lisa Howard told Attwood that the Cubans were
ready, had she already spoken to you? Or did she...say to you I want to arrange the party?

Escalante: That was the 22nd of September.

Scott: The cocktail party was on the 23rd but she told Attwood as early as September five....that this
was what she wanted to do.

Lechuga: This conversation was [between] Lisa Howard and Attwood.

Scott: That is in his book.

Summers: If I may jump in here, its in his book, of course, I've talked to Attwood. Attwood's version
is the entire chain of events was started by Cubans. He was button-holed, contacted by Jaho? Who
was at the United Nations. Jaho suggested that the initiative came from the Cuban side. Jaho said
that Attwood should sit down--that Attwood should concoct a formula for talking to you [Lechuga].

Lechuga: No, the initiative was from the US. The first thing was the delegate Jaho had a word with
Attwood.

Summers: The ambassador -- he thought the Cubans were passing the word from Havana.

Smith: We began by saying that in talking to Attwood, he thought the Cubans were disposed. In the
same way that Attwood was a messenger.

Lechuga: No, No, No. The initiative was with the US. The ambassador could not be a messenger from
Cuba.

Newman: He probably so represented himself that, probably talking to Attwood. Attwood said the
Cubans were disposed and it might have been suggested that he had some observation.

Nunez (for Lechuga): That doesn't mean that wasn't a Cuban initiative. That's right. It might mean a
Jeho initiative.

Escalante: Interesting background. The conversation with...? Reading Russell's book I found the
name of a Cuban, Felipe Fidel Santiago.

Smith: Felipe Fidel Santiago

Escalante: It's tied to a colonel in military intelligence-Bishop, who worked for the CIA. So, I decided
to investigate. I found that Santiago was detained in Cuba in March 1964. Because he'd infiltrated,
tried to do some sabotage. I looked over the declaration of Santiago and I found some things that
were very interesting based on our conversation here. He says that in Dec. 62, he traveled to
Washington to talk with a lobbyist who was named Cleaver or something like that. I have the name of
the law firm he worked in. Santiago talked to this Cleaver person, who said, "I know that the US Govt
has a plan to dialogue with Cuba. And to resolve the problems with Cuba and the US. I know through
Henry Cabot Lodge." According to Cabot Lodge, Walt Rostow had said that to him. He told him that
some weeks earlier in October 62, he talked to a Cuban official in East Germany. This person was
named Comrade Blas Roca. This was really strange. Looking at the files it was clear Blas Roca says
he never had this interview.

Scott: Excuse me, he was not in Berlin? It was during the date of the Missile Crisis.

?: Is the date of this 62? September 62?

?: December 62.

Escalante: But the meeting was supposed to be in Oct 62. But, that couldn't be possible because the
Missile Crisis was gone. Who is this Cleaver? Cleaver was a member of the committee Americans for
Free Cuba. The president was Admiral Burke.

Newman: Admiral Burke.

Escalante: Ambassador William Powell was also a member and Clare Boothe Luce. As you'll
understand it, this information is very strange. It is very strange to think this conversation could have
taken place because this Santiago said this conversation had already started after the Crisis with all
the differences between Cuba and the US. We ask ourselves what 's the reason for this? Santiago
statements also make it clear. Santiago was very much surprised with that note. And to get back to
Miami and told Bishop about it and not only Bishop he told. And also said this to the
counter-revolutionary exiles. This was almost like a bomb in those meetings.

Scott: This is what you've found through Cuban sources, not the other...

Escalante: Yes, the Cuban sources. The only thing I found in Russell's book was the name and then
we researched on him.

Scott: May I make a comment? I believe the committee you're talking about, Citizens for a Free
Cuba was formed later, was in March or April. Although there was a big obviously in Washington
already. The first Bundy memo that talks of exploring accommodations is dated January 62. There's
one on April 21st but there's an earlier one.

Escalante: I'm not speaking about Bundy's action, I am speaking about the meeting held in
(?___________). I am speaking about the declarations of one person in two parts in 1962. When he
found out this what I have told you -- Contact that I have told. I didn't know of the committee was...
However, Santiago was the one who said this person, this Cleaver, was a member of this committee
that didn't have the least intention of solving the problem between Cuba and the US. That I'm thinking
this was an intentional measure in covert operation -- trying to find conflict among the Cuban exiles
and I think the events Kennedy started back before he was killed, way back. That's what I'd like to
express.

Scott: I think we can assume Rostow, (a hawk) would have been opposed to any such initiative. He
would not have supported it. So my question is to come back, there's so much we say. In April when
Lisa Howard raised this whole question for the first time...

?: not in April, McGeorge Bundy was in memo..

Scott: No, just April -- her show was aired on (NBC?)

?: She had talked to Castro. Her show aired in May 10th? April or May?

Scott: My question is, this was a time of great turbulence in the Soviet Union. Kostof was deposed
and Harriman made a trip to the Soviet Union. Harriman was involved with the September initiative.
My question is: did you have any knowledge of what Lisa Howard was doing in April at all?

Lechuga: Never, Harriman never mentioned this to me.

Smith: Before we do, let me just make certain. Santiago arrested in a sabotage raid in March 1964
and he is interrogated by Cuban security. That's when his name comes up. Looking at an interrogation
report of March 1964, and Filipe Fidel tells Cuban interrogators of a trip he made to Washington and
he talks to Cleaver in December 1962.

Escalante: Quote, "Henry Cabot Lodge told me in private conversation that he had heard Dr. Rostow
and some others were plotting a specific solution to the Cuban problem." One of the smallest advance
steps even by Rostow was an interview on October 25, 1962 with Blas Roca in East Germany. This
Cleaver used to work in the law firm Marshall-Dex.

?: That's the law firm of Gabrielle, Garcini, Coley.

Escalante: The committee American Citizens for Free Cuba headed by Burke. Members were Paul
Bethel, William Pawley, and a person named Marie with a Polish last name, I can't remember her last
name. Polish Summers?: Her name was Irish.

Smith: He is talking, this guy Cleaver. He knows this in 1964, the American Citizens for Free Cuba
committee may have been formed.

Summers: We don't get it in East Germany.

Smith: There isn't any. Cleaver is talking to Santiago, says that there is going to be this initiative and
how does he know because he has talked to Henry Cabot Lodge. Rostow has talked to Blas Roca in
East Germany in October. Which isn't true--there was no such conversation.

Fonzi: In the beginning, Lechuga says he was surprised at the initiative because of the raids and
continued attempts to assassinate Castro still going on. Was he aware of what was going on and did he
raise that with Attwood and if so what was the response?

Lechuga: Yes, I did talk to him. It was true. In spite of this, some efforts should be made to break the
ice.

Rogers: I've got some questions on the security of those meetings in this process. Initially Attwood
expressed concerns about the Republicans:

1. Did Attwood express concern about other domestic American groups? CIA, Cuban exiles, LBJ,
even in the administration, State Department?

Lechuga: No the only thing Stevenson told me was about the Republicans in Congress. The CIA was
running Cuban policy.

?: That's in Attwood's book.

Newman: Right, that would pertain then. From the Cuban side was there not any concern about the
security of such discussions as you say were surprising and not normal given the provocative actions
that were occurring?

Lechuga: at that point our worries were not keeping them secret because all our diplomatic
conversations were in secret.

Newman: But, these were not happening in secret. They were going over from

apartments in New York.

Lechuga: Only once did Attwood call and make...

Newman: What about the Lisa Howard call to the Cuban in Havana?

Summers: One phone call could do it.

Newman: The reason I'm asking the question is that in the new files that have been released, I can't
remember at this point if they are in JM/Wave or the CIA in Mexico -- there are definite reflections
in the exile community that in the fall of '63 there are definite reflections in the exile community that
this process is under way. They were very concerned--very negative comments. One final question I
wanted to ask, Obviously Cuba had very good contacts that this process was ongoing? I'll direct it to
Fabian Escalante. Did you get anything from your contacts, about a different track from the White
House is pursuing?

Escalante: Not that I know of. Not from my knowledge. In 1963 I was only 22 years old. Only a young
official. I did not have access.

Smith: To reformulate the question, you haven't seen anything in your files that indicate the exiles
organizations were aware of this?

Scott: Did you assume that--

Escalante: We are going to answer the other question. Following the Bay of Pigs developed a hostile
attitude in the exile community. They were convinced that Kennedy was responsible for the failure of
the Bay of Pigs and that he was even a communist. In the middle of 1963 they had infiltrated a special
group within the CIA. And one day an official of the CIA came to the safe house, a Cuban house.
Around that time Kennedy had made a public statement. Officials were bothered by this. It was said,
"the Cubans must eliminate the pinko in the White House." That's the type of info I have.

Russell?: Question for Lechuga. When the assassination of President Kennedy happened, when you
were in the midst of the negotiations, did you believe in any way that the assassination was linked to
the negotiations? And done to stop the negotiations?

Escalante: Not immediately. Maybe one month later.

Russell: So at first you just accepted the official version perhaps...

Escalante: Not the official version, but not link the counter revolutionary.

Russell: Was there something that changed your mind?

Escalante: We had some information.

Russell: Was there some discussion of this within the Cuban Govt at this time?

Escalante: We're brought it here one of Castro's speeches. On Nov. 24, 63 Castro after the
assassination visited as official statement of the Cuban Govt about the assassination. We have a copy
here if you want it.

Summers: A question on security of your conversation with Attwood and Lisa Howard. You said there
was one phone call between you and Attwood? The others were all in the flat? And the phone call was
between your apartment in New York and Attwood?

Lechuga: No, in the office.

Russell: Do you feel looking back that the office you used in the UN was

secure?

Lechuga: No.

Russell: How much substance of the discussion about the exchange would have been in a telephone
call?

Lechuga: That was just a lunch invitation. I'm calling to invite you to lunch.

Summers: When you had a in-the-flesh conversation where did they take place?

Lechuga: At Lisa Howard's house first, then in the delegate lounge at the UN.

Summers: No other ones? You think the actual human contacts were secure?

Lechuga: We weren't as worried because Attwood invited me. It was Attwood who should be
worried-concerned. We should have been concerned about security. We were just going to talk and
that was that.

Scott: In Attwood's book he says if the CIA might have you under personal surveillance. I wonder if
that came up? Did he say, "We have to be careful."

Lechuga: I knew the CIA was watching us as they did any other Cubans in the US. But I wasn't too
worried about it. We were not concerned, Attwood is the one who should be worried.

?: Chances that the CIA would have intercepted Lisa Howard to Lechuga?

Lechuga: Probably.

Newman: Perhaps there's another dimension. When he was at Lisa Howard's party, there were many
journalists and other people there. You mention in your book, were your talks with Attwood out in the
open? You went off to the side and talked quietly. Is this true?

Lechuga: At Lisa Howard's this is true. Yes, in the corner, apart. But I was invited to go. Maybe Lisa
Howard and Attwood knew who was there, but I didn't. I was just invited.

?: I ask further about he delegates lounge at the UN. Were you around other people there?

Lechuga: No, No, No. A lot of people there. Groups talking amongst each other.

Smith?: If I could add, even at these times the mere fact that a representative of the Cuban Embassy
was talking to an American was not all that incredible. As there is some business within the UN to
transact--talking about resolutions that are coming up and so forth.

Newman: Another question, indirect, but important concerns Cubela. Let me explain why. If there is
an ongoing dialog between the Cubans and Americans and the CIA is taking whatever activity to
circumvent or sabotage--there is an associated question of AM/Lash -- there is a channel going back
to the Cubans relative to his CIA connection. So the question is: Was there knowledge in Cuba about
the Cubela connection with the CIA at this time?

Escalante: No, not at this time. Not until the end of 1964 that they found out as to his connection to
the CIA.

Scott: Supplement to that, Pepanino, none of them were reporting back?

Escalante: Pepanino was a CIA agent--not ours.

Scott: Nobody is a double agent?

Escalante: No, no, no.

Smith: Too bad.

(All laugh)

Escalante? Maybe Lechuga: That's something that's an invention of Angleton, but nothing to so with
the truth. It's not true. Something has been forgotten in this going. That's going through all this
conversation. I'd like to bring it back. In September, let's put things in order. Cubela left Cuba at the
end of August, going to Brazil. Maybe today or tomorrow we can talk about that. On Sept. 8, there
was a reception at the embassy in Havana. Daniel Harker, an American journalist interviewed Fidel.
It was not a formal interview, just some questions as he arrived to the reception. He asked several
questions. One was related to the CIA attempts to assassinate him. Fidel said something such as,
"The American leaders should be careful. This is something the government could control." Or this
type of--somebody organized it to happen. Political assassination, this could become anything,
however Daniel Harker didn't say that in his report. Daniel Harker in his report suggested that Fidel
Castro was making a threat against Kennedy. And that is very interesting. That news was published in
New Orleans precisely during the days when all of us are trying to travel to Cuba. These acts can not
be isolated, in all this that started at the end of April 1963. In April 1963 the Cuban Revolutionary
Council, that was an organization that was CIA in the back of, accuses Kennedy of abandoning the
Cuban cause. President resigned in April 1963. Orlando Bosch prints a pamphlet that was called the
"Cuban Tragedy" that accused Kennedy of being a traitor to the Cuban cause. This was sent to the
White House in May. Immediately after , Oswald brought activism in New Orleans. Here Oswald's
history starts. And it's going to have it's high point when he is arrested by police in a public discussion
with some Cuban exiles. Afterwards this makes the discussion of Daniel Harker with Castro very
famous. Historic.

Cubela comes out to Brazil. Later the conversation was that this meeting in Paris as being held with
somebody who says he's with the Central (?) to plan Fidel Castro's assassination. Too many things
are happening--very strange and contradictory in a few months. It's a chronology of events that are
happening. I cannot be ?

Newman: May I add one piece of the in April and May. It's clear from the documents that we now
have in the US that the FBI falsely states that they have lost track of Oswald at this very time. In
other words, they are watching him up until this point then beginning in late April and continuing
through June, they claimed and they told the Warren Commission, that in that period they did not
know where he was or what he was doing. We know that this is not true.

Scott: If I could add--because I agree to the importance of this chronology. We are looking closely at
the Cuban side, we must remember there were dramatic developments with respect to JFK and the
Soviet Union. In particular, April 3 and April 11 there was an exchange of secret letters between
Khrushchev and Kennedy, to my knowledge we have still have not seen, but they were attacked as
early as July, 63 by "hawks" who said, apparently correctly, that they envisioned accommodations in
the area of Cuba. I should just say that they concerned Cuba. I cannot...

Escalante: On April 23, National Security Council discussed a proposal from Bundy. A different track
to make this conversation possible.

Smith?: The CIA was opposed and the Americans unlikely that knowledge would remain simply with
(?) It became knowledge at other levels. A very strong campaign against Cuba. By a group that was
under the care of JM/Wave station in Miami. ...Remember that name--Cuban exile group. (?) Orlando
Bosch--all terrorist groups --extreme groups. (?) organize 11 air raids against Cuba that they had
these and also one to sabotage this policy that was to begin by the government and also one to
sabotage ?

Scott: Will we have a chance--I would like to a long session, discussion, maybe not right now.

Scott: I want to report a rumor. Kennedy came under attack for being too much of a "dove" as we
say. Too willing to accommodate primarily to Khrushchev. There were two right-wing reporters called
Allen and Scott, not a relation of mine, that they got their sources from the military intelligence. They
ask a question whether in Averill Harriman was in Russia and Castro was also in Russia. Harriman
might have met Castro? Do you think that is ridiculous?

Escalante: Yes.

Summers: One short one and then a longer one. The short one: You have suggested, as far as I know
for the first time, a version of what Castro said to Daniel Harker. We know the version that Harker
published. I think I know that in discussion with the Assassinations Committee, Castro said he doesn't
remember talking to Harker. You now seem to have a Cuban version of what he actually said?

Escalante: I don't think Castro ever said that.

Scott: But did he talk to him at all?

Escalante: This was not an organized interview. It was not a long interview. Most probably when
asked if this journalist, he did not remember him. Thousands of journalist interview him in this short
approach.

Scott: What was Lechuga's source for his version of what Castro said.

Escalante: The interview he had with the House Select Committee. He explained it to the Committee.

Summers: I meant that to be short, but my second one is: There is quite a lot of work being done in
the last year or two that whatever the Kennedy administration was doing in conversations through
Attwood and Col. Lechuga, at the same time Robert Kennedy --and presumably the President
too--was personally behind a major effort that envisioned the overthrow of Castro in the fall of 1963.
Which would involve an internal coup with the death of Castro. After that, massive American backing
for which Kennedy's perceived as being [Cuban] democrats as opposed to being right-wing extremists.
I asked Dean Rusk about this, shortly before his death a year or so before. And he told me, yes he
learned about the plans for such a coup. They were indeed backed by JFK and understood by his
brother and were in charge of it. That he learned of this in 1964 during meetings of the National
Security Council. And what can one make of this? One is talking about not a double track, but a
double cross? If the Kennedy's were talking peace on the one hand and a full 1963 coup on the other?
He said, yes but they did this all the time. And he found that not surprising. He said the Kennedy's
work that way. And he said rather cynically, do governments everywhere. In your research in Cuba,
have Mr. Escalante and Lechuga gotten a similar picture of double-track, double-cross?

Escalante: Look, I'm going to answer very briefly. In 1963 McGeorge Bundy designed this new
approach towards Cuba. It involved a double track or multiple track. This appeared in documents in
the Church Committee. One of the tracks was to strengthen the blockade against Cuba, political
pressure, the isolation of Cuba from the continent and also from Western Europe. To destroy through
sabotage and external operations all the energy and industrial infrastructure in the country. In 1963
there were two major plans of sabotage proved against Cuba. Two paths, with one objective. To force
Cuba to sit down at the negotiating table, but under very disadvantaged circumstances. That's why we
never really heard what the possible American agenda would be. We never heard anything... That's
why the Cuban government took its time to deeply study the proposal put forth by Attwood.

Escalante: in the middle of the war that was being fought between the Kennedy government. What
could they possible been trying to do by trying to start a dialogue. So they took their time. Here's
what happened according to our judgement. The hawks never supported, they didn't understand this
strategy, didn't agree. Anything that didn't agree with a new invasion of Cuba, they didn't agree with.
We think the hawks felt themselves betrayed. According to our judgement there were two strategies
to be followed by the U.S.

1) from the administration

2) and one from the CIA, the Cuban exiles, and the mafia--and even they had their own independent
objectives. Around that on the part of this latter group, there developed this need to assassinate
Kennedy. It seemed to them that Kennedy was not in agreement to the new invasion. That's our
hypothesis.

?: If that's the hypothesis, then how do you explain that no serious attempt was made to invade after
the invasion?

Escalante: Are you sure about that. We'd like to talk about that after we finish with conversation.

Smith: I'd like to add when a new invasion attempt was? This new dialogue track--they did effectively
close that off with Kennedy out of the way. Also, there's ways to look at the multi track of the
Kennedy's. You don't have to see them as talking peace while getting the punch ready. They have
possibilities--attack outright or make peace. We're moving along these tracks to see which one would
come out.

Summers: Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. The information that's been coming out, new
scholarship that Robert Kennedy personally in those weeks heading up to November 22, in the weeks
leading up, was behind a detailed plan for the killing, overthrow of Castro, the killing of Raul, key
leaders of the revolution. To be followed by massive American support for take over in Cuba by the
so-called Cuban democrats. This was a real plan in the works. This is different from, maybe connected
with but very specific and different from conversation.

?: But also the part that you're leaving...

Summers: Are they aware of all of this specific theme for overthrow of the government of Cuba that
was to take place in late Nov.?

Escalante: yes, we do know of such a plan exists.

Scott: We should be clear. The plan...there is some disagreement here. The plan was not for an
invasion, but some, really, some kind of overthrow from within.

Summers: and followed by American support.

Scott: A pretext for recognizing this new government.

Escalante: I would add that there would be an invasion, a tiny invasion.

?: Can you tell us the basis or source for that?

Escalante: would you like to talk about the AM/Lash case now?

Smith: No, we're going to talk about that later.

Scott: The reaction to Kennedy's speech of November 18th? Some people talk of extending the
possibility of reapproachment(?) and some people see the same speech as a green light for the people
in Cuba to overthrow Castro.

Escalante: In the Orange Bowl? In Miami?

Winslow: No, no. The airport...November 18th.

Discussion: He wouldn't permit it...anymore Cubans...Is that the speech?

Scott: It's a speech that was made on November 18th and widely reported the next day but also on
different dates.

Escalante: Kennedy said there'd be no more Cubas in Latin America. He would not allow it. Who
could be worried about that speech? Us in Cuba or the people who were planning to liquidate Cuba? I
mean, a speech like that gives passive recognition. "We will allow Cuba, but not anymore Cubas."
Imagine how that was received by the people who were trying to overthrow the Cuban government. It
seemed JFK was backing down.

Smith: But it was interpreted, and I think it could be. This afternoon we are going to talk about David
Atlee Phillips and other CIA figures. If you have other questions on the initiative, there is no reason
we cannot continue then.

END TAPE 2
***************************************

NASSAU TAPE 3

?____________: ....this afternoon is DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS and other CIA figures. The questions
from U.S. side to our Cuban colleagues is, "Do they have any evidence to confirm that PHILLIPS
was, indeed, MAURICE BISHOP? Any information... anything linking PHILLIPS with the
assassination and what about information on DAVE MORALES and other figures... other CIA... and
information linking them to JOHNNY ROSELLI?"

And, I'm sure that we have... their questions to us, which we'll get to later, are essentially the same, so
what about the operations of the CIA in Mexico under David Atlee Phillips? And, do we have
information on the organization... the JM/WAVE station in Miami? How did this phase interact with
those involving ZR/RIFLE and Operation 40? And, I know that some of you do have information on
that, but, if we can turn first to the Cuban side and ask about their information on David Atlee Phillips
and various other CIA figures...

Escalante: ...contact with informants... contact with Phillips in '58 and '59... Salvat .... Lopez... Antonio
Veciana... Had contact with Phillips during that time.

?____________: What was the first name? Salvat?

Escalante: According to informant, this relationship was valid... Antonio Veciana gave him a
message... It's not known what the message was about...

Nunez: He told us he didn't know what the message was about.

?____________: He didn't remember the message?

Nunez: He didn't read it... He come to Veciana's office in Havana...

Escalante: As is known, David Phillips was in CIA operations in Cuba in '58, '59, and '60. We don't
know much of the relationship between Phillips and Antonio Veciana.

Nunez: We didn't know at that time.

Abramson: At that time.

Escalante: This relation.

Nunez: Conspiracy.

Abramson: Conspirator relationship.

Escalante: In this era there was an event of which we knew about later, but not at this time. In the late
1980's we came into contact with an informant who had known Phillips and who had contact with
Phillips in 58-59. This person told us about three Cubans who had had contact with Phillips at this time.
[Juan] Manuel Salvat, Isidro Borja and Antonio Veciana.

?____________: What was the first name again? Is this Salvat of DRE Salvat?

Escalante: Manuel Salvat, si, si! [yes, yes]

Escalante: This informant whose name I cannot provide to you only told us that there was this
relationship between these three Cubans and Phillips. According to this informant this relationship
was the following:

Nunez: No, he knew about this relationship such as he is going to tell.

Escalante: Veciana.... According to Antonio Veciana, Phillips gave him a message. It is not known
what the message was about.

Nunez: No, no, no... Oh, sorry. The message was given to this person, this informant, from Veciana...
from Phillips to Veciana, but he didn't know what the message was, at least he told us that he didn't
know what the message was.

?____________: Could we try that, I didn't understand.

Abramson: Ya, I didn't understand.

?____________: He didn't remember the message?

Nunez: He didn't read it, he was just the messenger.

Escalante: The informant was a messenger between Veciana...

?____________: From Phillips to Veciana?

Nunez: From Phillips to Veciana.

Escalante: The other two people, Borja and ... Salvat, used to come to Veciana's office in Havana
very often... frequently. Phillips had an office in Havana, a population office in Havana. That was el
Jumbo 106, Humbo street, a public office where you could just come and visit. The informant saw
Salvat and Isidro Borja in this public office. He knew who they were because they sort of _________
characters in something that happened in the soviet prime minister Nicoya? ____________. So he
showed him pictures of this incident that happened... He didn't recognize their faces, names, he
recognized their faces from the photograph, he didn't know who they were by name.

Nunez: They could have been known, but it's not only that he knew about the names but he also knew
that this person was the person of ?_______, he identified the person as ?_______________

Escalante: Phillips left Cuba in the middle or the end of 1960, we're not quite sure, but they came to
know that he was in Miami shortly after. And we came to know about his relationship with Radio...
Swan. He was managing a program in the information service of this radio station. Afterward, we
came to know about Phillips when he was in Mexico. The information we had of him in Mexico was
scant, it was pretty poor, we didn't know much about him. We knew he was there, we didn't know what
he was doing. After that we knew that he was in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic. Again we
didn't know what he was doing there. And the first information from agents we have about Phillips is
from the year 1966, seven. In London he conversed with one of our agents recruited by the CIA. His
name Nicolas Sirgado. S-I-R-G ... Sirgado.

?____________: He was a Cuban agent or CIA?

Nunez: He was a Cuban agent recruited by the CIA.

?____________: A Cuban agent recruited by the CIA.

Abramson: In London.

?____________: A double agent.

Nunez: A double agent, that's it.

Escalante: Our agents spoke with him in the King George hotel in London. From this point onward we
had periodic contact with him every few months until 1972. So you know, the CIA was trying to send
him in one direction, we were trying to send him in the other direction. What was the main reason,
fundamental reason, why we had this conversation with Phillips?

Nunez: The main reason we know that Phillips was having this conversation, and I will let you know
later on why we knew of this.

Escalante: He was mainly interested in Fidel, his trips. The structure of the Cuban government.
Information about the people that were around Fidel Castro. He was introduce himself with a sir
name, Harold Benson. However, he used to smoke a pipe that had an initial that could be an H or M.

?___________: M or H?

Escalante: Ah, an M and a B.

?____________: H and B.

Escalante: Or could be an H and a B, H and B, or M and B, could be either one. That is something our
agent informed us of. We did a spoken picture of this Harold Benson as we do always. But we didn't
know really know who he was. In 1972, this CIA official had an interview with our agent. Our agent at
that time had a different case official. But this man came as a.... as a leader, as a boss or something.
Had an interview with our agent. This interview was... took place in Mexico they were just having a
few drinks. In between, Kennedy [Kennedy's name] came into the conversation they were talking
about... into the conversation, not Kennedy came to, into... So when the subject comes up this
character explains to our agent that after Kennedy's death, he visited his grave and peed on it and
said he [JFK] was a communist and such and such. We still didn't know who Harold Benson was but
when Claudia Furiati did her research, among the people we interviewed was this agent. We showed
him a group of photographs. Plus we already knew about David Phillips. I'm speaking of 92 and 93.
And the photograph that we showed him was a photograph of David Phillips. And so he pointed out as
Harold Benson. This is all the information I can give you. There are some other informations.

?____________: Do you recall the other photographs you showed him at that time?

Escalante: I remember that it was Tracy Barnes. For example all the we took all the photographs that
were published in the Invisible Government. [...by] David Wise.

Escalante: He took the photographs from the book and put them to the side. We included Cuban
people that were there, but with photographs from those years. This is something you often do when
you are doing something like this. I think there were twelve photographs that were shown to them.

Winslow: Was one of them Paul Bethel, by any chance?

Escalante: No, no, no, Paul Bethel no...

Winslow: He didn't show him that.

Escalante: Tracy Barnes, Robert Hammery [were the only two I remember]. They were mainly in the
book -- Wise book.

I was telling you we have so much information. In 1979 Bercia told to one of our own informants in
Miami that he had been pushed by a select committee that he had given a fake name to the CIA
officer that was in charge of him. He had given the name of Maurice Bishop. But, truly the official that
had to deal with him was David Phillips.

A third information comes from Mr. Manuel Rodriguez. Manuel Rodriguez truly, we didn't know who
he was. We heard about Manuel Rodriguez when we started to do research on Oscar Berot on
account of what information was received from the __________ hotel. Oscar Berot is the second
surname of Manuel Rodriguez

and in our organization the index is always made by the first surname not by the second one. But when
we found out that Oscar Berot was Manuel Rodriguez, then we found another interesting information.
Manuel Rodriguez, Oscar Berot told one of our agents, first of all that he was in Dallas because he
was the officer 66 [Alpha-66] delegate in Dallas. And he was the delegate for office 66 in Dallas and if
anyone came to know that he and Bercian took part in the plot to kill Kennedy. They were going to be
killed. He was already living in Puerto Rico or a little after that he went to live in Puerto Rico. And
another information comes from a very close person of Bercian, I think... some of you have already
interviewed. This person told us that Phillips threatened Bercian in order for him to not reveal his true
identity. I'm not going to reveal his name, but I will only tell you that some of you have had interviews
with this person (don't talk about it) ?__________________ I cannot reveal this on account of an
ethics principle for the same cause, because some of you will not make such revelations.

These are the moments in which we have found in relation to Maurice Bishop and David Phillips of
course there was a very wide investigation made by ________________? where he also had had lots
of trucks and I think there's no doubt about both persons are the same. I'm going to tell you an
anecdote. This thing about using fake names is very complicated. The CIA in Havana has a book of
Cuban officials. And in that book I appear in two different books. I have my own name and I appear
with my fake name and I think that they already know that I am the same person, but when we
discovered that there were two different people. Those things happen.

About David Phillips, I can't add anything that you don't know. I think this is wide information about
him. And most of all his activities against Cuba and against the revolutionary movement of Latin
America with characters such as Howard Hunt. As you well know he was the head of the Watergate. I
think there is something that... that the only thing that is an official document from the CIA saying yes
both persons were the same. But I don't think there must be any doubt it's the same person. This is
what I can add to what you already know [in this case]. Excuse me, about David Morales. David
Morales, we knew him in 1960. He was another _________ from the United States Embassy in
Havana and he was linked to another official, an American official from the embassy Robert
VanHorn. He was a major in a conspiracy with Rolando Masferrer and a North American citizen
Geraldine Chapman. This was a plot to kill Fidel Castro to promote an armed uprising. This plot
started in 1959 and our agent, which is already dead was a man that had lived many years in New
Orleans and then lived in Miami in 1959, and he was named Luis Tacornal. And also there was
another agent that was his partner in New Orleans and had always things to do with the case, and he's
still alive in Cuba. He was an official of security whose name was Jose Veiga Pena

?____________: What was the first one?

Nunez: Luis Tacornal

?____________: Taconal?

Nunez: Tacornal, coronal.

?____________: and the other is Veiga Pena?

Nunez: Veiga Pena... Veiga, with an e, ei, Veiga.

Escalante: This plot really started in the United States.

and it started when Masferrer pointed out Luis Tacornal as his link with Cuba. In the meeting there
was a person that you know Eladio del Valle Gutierrez and our agent traveled once to Washington
with Eladio del Valle because Masferrer was not able to leave the Miami city [Masferrer was under
an INS order not to leave] and that he had a meeting with Colonel King to coordinate an invasion that
was getting ready to come to Cuba maybe from the Batistianos. By the end of 1959 Luis Tacornal is in
Havana with Jose Veiga and the contacts that are given to him by the embassy are Colonel VanHorn
and David Morales but mainly VanHorn

they only saw once Morales and they would go frequently to the embassy and have meetings with
VanHorn with Geraldine Chapman, she was a North American

?_____________: Is that Shamron?

Escalante: Chapman.

?____________: Chapman. It's nothing to do with Geraldine Shama/ Sharma, who was also...

Escalante: It could be the same. It could be the same, it could be the same, maybe it's a pronunciation
thing, I don't know. Sharma Chapman?

Abramson: Chapman, with CH or Sharma with SH?

Nunez: He thinks it is the same person, could be Sharma or Chapman.

?____________: There was a woman who wrote about her time in Cuba, spelled it Shamna.

Escalante: To my memory, it didn't have an L. She was arrested in Cuba in November 1960; she
should be the same.

The plot had as a main operative to kill Fidel Castro in Ramiro Valdez house at that time he was the
head of the security service. In February 1960 there was an official from the [CIA] headquarters
called Luis C. Herber to supervise the operation. Of course we made this operation fail. We have
penetration of all the organizations and in November all the people in the plot were arrested except
for the diplomatic, of course. And this was published in the Cuban press. They were on trial in it.
There is another moment when we knew about David Morales. In 1973 we arrested one of the CIA
agents that used to be a member of the Batista police he was recruited in 1958. He was called
Francisco Munoz Olivette and he told us about the official that was in charge but of course he had a
different name, a woman surname, Moralma. We didn't know who he was. However, he was sure that
it was someone who had worked in the embassy. So we showed him the photographs of the people
working in the embassy. I don't know if wine was there or not, in the photographs, but identified David
Morales as Moralma. He told us in those days, I mean, I mean Francisco Munoz Olivette, but in
several moments Morales or Moralma had told him about a plot against Fidel Castro's life that he
had headed in 1959. And that this plot was going on, to be carried out in the headquarters of the
military air force. We never knew who this person was. But after having so much information in our
hands we think that this could be Frank Sturgis because Frank Sturgis was in a plot with Fidel in the
Air Force with Jerry Hemming and with Pedro Luis Diaz Lanz and the last information on Morales.
We have it from Cubela. Cubela told us when he was arrested that he had interviews with at least
three CIA officials from Latin origin. In different moments we didn't know who they were but in 1978
in Havana there was a youth festival and there was an activity that had to do with an explanation to
the youth about the CIA activities against Cuba. Cubela agreed on going to this meeting to explain
which were his activities with the CIA in those days. It was published by the Grama magazine
newspaper several histories about CIA activities, one of them was this one about Francisco Munoz,
where David Morales photograph was shown.

Once, I remember I personally was talking to Cubela and Cubela told me that this was one of the
officials that spoke with me in Paris. Well, the conversation with Cubela was very... informal. I say
very informal because he was a person you couldn't do big things with; he said he had already been
sentenced. I asked him what had he told him. He said, No he was interested in knowing how could we
kill Fidel. But I... I thought he was a very vulgar man. So I told him I didn't want to talk with him or
that if he was to do it, it would have to take place in September of 1963. And this is what we know
about Morales.

?____________: Getting back to David Phillips. Veciana told me when I interviewed him in 1976
about, and I'll just read you the quote, of exactly what he said. It is about, ah, his cousin, who is Luis.

"Yes", it says, "I had a cousin, Guillermo Ruiz who worked with the Cuban intelligence service in
Mexico City after the assassination sometime early in 1964 Bishop said to me that I think by getting
my cousin a considerable amount of money would he say he talked to Oswald to make it appear
Oswald was working for Castro because of this I asked Bishop if it was true Oswald had been talking
to Castro agents. Bishop said it did not matter if it was true what was important was to get my cousin
to make that statement".

So my question is did you ever speak to, is this, do you know anything more about this? Did you ever
speak to Guillermo Ruiz about this?

Escalante: Yes, of course we have. We knew about this interview from this book about the
investigation of the select committee and we had an interview with Guillermo Ruiz in 1963, Guillermo
Ruiz. In August 1963, he was appointed to commercial (?) of the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.

?____________: In Mexico City?

Escalante: In Mexico City.

He told me that when he arrived in Mexico a group of Cubans were waiting for him at the airport to
welcome him, an act of repudiation, yes that's it. Guillermo Ruiz never worked for the Cuban
intelligence. He was not an official of Cuba. He was not really a cousin to Veciana. Veciana's cousin
was his wife. Guillermo Ruiz's wife. Guillermo Ruiz. So also is one of the persons who saw Oswald at
the embassy, he will explain that when he gets to Oswald.

?____________: Ruiz saw Oswald at the embassy?

Escalante: Yes. There is one moment when he gets there and then you see Eusebio Azcue having a
big discussion with Oswald in the last interview they have. He had an office on the top of the consulate
and when Guillermo is about to pass through Guillermo spoke better English than Azcue. Azcue
please explain to this gentleman that I cannot give him a visa to go to Cuba if he doesn't have a visa
from Moscow. So Guillermo looked at him and he is one of the persons that confirmed that he saw
Oswald in our Cuban consulate. This is what we know.

When we read this story told by Veciana, it looks very strange to us. We, in our book, have a chapter
it is dedicated to the press campaign that was started before and after the Kennedy assassination to
blame Cuba. However, there is a moment in December in 1963 after the Warren commission was
appointed and this company started to go lower, and lower still because they were just not
interviewed, I think. On the other hand, some other events which had happened in Cuba, didn't happen
to us it has always had very few meaning in 1964. Maurice Bishop gives this task to Veciana because
this was out of the context of the moment, (?) the most important moment. We have some other theory
about it. And we believe that the meeting Veciana speaks of in September of 1963 was for that was to
try to recruit Guillermo Ruiz.

?____________: He tried to recruit Ruiz?

Escalante: (?) the meeting between Oswald, Veciana and Phillips in 63, September 63, was really to
try to recruit Guillermo Ruiz

?____________: How so? I don't really understand.

Escalante: Let me explain. A few days before Kennedy's assassination, Guillermo Ruiz's wife walks
from her house to the Cuban embassy. She was about 200 feet in from the entrance of the embassy,
she looks at the..a big bunch of dollars on the sidewalk.

?____________: A big bunch of what?

Nunez: Dollars

?____________: Dollars?

Nunez: Dollars on the sidewalk.

Escalante: And a Mexican person. She recalls that it was a Mexican person from the accent and tells
her, lady this money is yours. She gets scared because there are the two people coming to approach
her, so she starts running for the embassy asking for help. When people from our embassy went to the
same place, no money nor the people were there anymore. Obviously, this is not something normal.
Imagine finding a big bunch of money in the middle of Mexico City. For us this had never had an
explanation and I think that the only explanation that we can give is a form to try to recruit her.

Lechuga: She was a cousin of Veciana.

Escalante: As you know, in front of our embassy there was a photographic post from the CIA. That
was handled by the Cuban CIA agent.

Lechuga: Hugo Cesar Rodriguez Gallegos

Escalante: Hugo Cesar Rodriguez Gallegos, a Cuban. I imagine, if she ever takes that money she was
going to have photographs taken of her grabbing the money. And that was a moment to compromise,
that it would be easy to talk to Guillermo Ruiz, show him the photos; if you don't collaborate these
photos will be published.

Smith: I don't understand how Phillips having Veciana in Dallas see him with Oswald has to do with
the recruitment effort against Ruiz

Escalante: I'm going to say once more. Veciana told to Fonzi and Russell, that in January of 1964 his
case officer, Maurice Bishop made a promise to recruit Guillermo Ruiz for him, to say that Oswald
was a Cuban agent. That was out of context, out of moment, because in January 1964 the campaign
against Cuba has lowered down, diminished. So we think that the true reason of the interview enter
Veciana, Oswald and Maurice Bishop in Dallas, in September 1963 could have been that, or probably
would have been that, and simply Veciana was given the information out of context, out of date to mix
up everybody and to give only part of the truth, not the whole truth, not the same that happened in
September, but in January 64. That is what we assumed even more logical that this (?) was in
September and there was a plot to try to include Guillermo Ruiz. He doesn't have any sense would
have wanted to put him in after murdering, but before...

Abramson: Would anyone like to...

Fonzi: I would like to... we have a slight disagreement on you know why... Why Phillips... General
Escalante believes deliberately had Veciana see him with Oswald and I still tend to believe, as a
result, the manner in which the information came up originally in the interview, that it was a mistake
on Phillips part. Now Phillips was not a man who did not make mistakes in his history. Joseph B.
Smith, of the CIA, who wrote the book told me, I think he told Tony Summers also that he recall
Phillips making two very bad mistakes in the course of his career one was in Havana when he was
caught in the house of prostitutes and called the American Embassy even though he was supposedly
not connected to the agency. And another story that Smith tells is that at one point Phillips was
supposed to have a meeting with a Russian in a restaurant and Phillips was asked to bring some
bonapita, and he did, and then on leaving he left his briefcase on a chair. So the point is that Phillips,
despite being a sophisticated spy, did make mistakes. The other factor I find difficult to find an
answer to involves the basis of Veciana's talking to me in the first place. I did not tell Veciana when I
first approached him that I was interested in the Kennedy assassination. At the time I was working for
Senator Schweiker who was on the Senate Intelligence Committee and my approach to all the Cubans
I interviewed at the time was that I was interested in the relationship between the CIA and
anti-Castro Cuban groups. And it was on that basis that Veciana began talking with me. When I had
originally gone to see Veciana and discovered Veciana, as a result of a suggestion by Paul Hoch out in
California, who had written an article for the Saturday Evening Post I think, suggesting that it may
have been Veciana who had visited (?)_____________. Hoch sent an advance copy, actually sent a
manuscript of the article, and I was unaware that it had been published in the Post already. So when I
was trying to work the interview around to the Kennedy assassination. Without being very blatant
about it, I asked Veciana whether Alpha 66 had branches in other cities and then whether or not they
happen to have one in Dallas and Veciana said... I said, then I asked him had he ever been to Dallas
at that house and Veciana said "yes, I have been there and now you are going to ask me whether I
saw Oswald there". And I said, "Why would I ask you that?" He said "because I just read it in the
Saturday Evening Post". I have it here in the bedroom. And he went to the bedroom and took it out.
So the subject of Oswald came up in that manner, not by any direct question, and so I have trouble
trying to figure out why Veciana would even bring up Oswald, why if he was involved in the
assassination, why he would even link himself to the Kennedy assassination with me at all even
though he told me everything about Bishop. He didn't have to tell me about the meeting with Oswald
at all.

Escalante: But let's take the facts. I said he was a hypocrite.

Let's go back to the facts. The CIA. We are not going to identify any names, thought that Guillermo
Ruiz was an official from the Cuban intelligence service. That is something that has been proved.
Guillermo Ruiz was in the city of Mexico from August 1963. His wife is Veciana's cousin. They both
are (?)______________. That is the second part.

The third part.. The information that Veciana gives you that he had had an interview with his case
official in September 1963 in Dallas and that he saw there a men that looked like Oswald, that he later
identified as Oswald. The fourth fact, is that Guillermo Ruiz's wife was a provocation to her, a few
days before Kennedy's assassination. The fifth point, Veciana tells that in January 1964 his case
official in Mexico makes him a proposition to try to recruit Guillermo Ruiz for him to confirm that
Oswald is a Cuban agent. These five facts obviously happened. All the information that we have
available, is that these five things happened. The only thing I give you is that the order in which this
timing in this facts, is not the one that Veciana says it was... No the way he said it was.

?____________: Possibly the way it was. I may be mistaken, because I haven't reviewed my notes on
this but my recollection is that Veciana told me, that Bishop shortly after the assassination made the
proposal to him to contact Ruiz. Later he said there was a CIA agent who came to him and asked him
to try and recruit Ruiz and Veciana said he made an attempt to reach Ruiz in Spain. Was he in Spain
at some point?

Escalante: Yes.

?____________: And they are two separate things?

Escalante: It was in 1967

?____________: I don't remember

Escalante: I have Guillermo Ruiz's statement.

?____________: Was that... when he was in Spain?

Nunez: Yes, in 1967.

?____________: In 67.

Escalante: And he made another proposition. He made a proposition to trade the hands of
______________ for the liberation of one person in prison. It's a different operation and there's one
sixth fact when I talk about five that David Phillips, when he heard of the operation against Cuba in
Mexico in 1962. There are a group of coincidences that make me think that the order of this facts, in
this case, they do make a different final result and has been changed.

?____________: I have to change the emphasis slightly and I do so despite my great respect for the
work done today _____, but what you just said is to me is the most important thing. That we know that
Phillips was in charge of operations against Cuba in Mexico City, in the period when so much
happened down there in respect to Oswald. There is the second thing we know about Phillips that is
even bigger, more obvious, and that is that Phillips had been in charge of this information about the
assassination since it happened and if there is a single key to this disinformation it is to blame the
assassination on Cuba. And it seems to me that we should talk primarily about this and only in this
context come back to the Veciana story. I would like to make two observations. One is that at the
time that the Maurice Bishop story began, Phillips had caught the public eye and therefore Phillips in
a sense had a reason to start creating disinformation about himself and his own role. Another point
which I think is relevant, is that at a certain point and I (?) to know better than me, is that Veciana
was shot through the head. It is important what year that was. It was in 1973. July 1973. I spoke to
him myself by telephone, not long after this. And he said to me, I know who you are. I would be... it
would be interesting to talk to you but consider this, I have just been shot through the head.

ALL: (laughter)

?____________: And there is a point there.

Escalante: That's a very strong point. Would you offer to be shot through the head? I would like to
talk about what you are speaking of.

?____________: Let me back up a bit. Did he ask me a question?

Nunez for Escalante: No, he would like to say something in response to what you just said. He does
not think, we cannot analyze the events isolated. I have just affirmed, and I took one side that Phillips
could have been in charge of the disinformation operation. And let us think from another angle the
events that are going to happen in Dallas in that days, September, October 1963. We are going to
relate what has happened. Now we know that Manuel Rodriguez Escarderos founded an organization
in Dallas in September in 1963. And we also know that Manuel Salvat was there in October 1963, in
Dallas [and] was involved in an arms program. And we also know that in September that was Silvia
Odio's incident and we all know that. According to Silvia one day two persons arrived to meet her, a
Cuban and a North American that presented himself, represented himself as Lee Oswald and two
persons that could have been Cubans or Mexicans, No? We have done some research about this. But
there is a character who calls our attention, which I mentioned this morning is Isodro Borja Simo.
Because Isodro Borja Simo was born in Mexico. He came in the early 50's to Cuba and he became an
engineer. And after the triumph of the revolution he was linked to Salvat's group.

?____________: DRE? DRE, Directorio.

Nunez: DRE, yes, directorate, he was looking for another name, but he can't remember now

?____________: Directorio Estudiante...

?____________: Another name?

Nunez: No, he was thinking of a name, the name of someone at the head of the DRE.

Escalante: The first head of the DRE.

?____________: Traviesa?

Escalante: Traviesa, no, no, one that came to Cuba, before Giron and was Veciana Majestradon,
guerillas. In a little while (?)___________ The point is that Isidro Borja joined this group and had to
get into an embassy a Latin American Embassy, with somebody really well-known and Ricardo
Morales Navarrete.

?____________: There's more?

Escalante: Oh no, there's more, "es muy interesante". He is a very interesting person, a lot of
people. If we look at exhibit one in Warren Commission where Oswald is seen, giving away
pamphlets. Behind Oswald, I think it was left corner, it looks like there is a man, very low, short.

?____________: Short?

?____________: Short.

Escalante: That looks like a Mexican person. And that could have been Isidro Borja, I don't know
whether he is alive.

?____________: Can we talk about the photo in New Orleans?

?____________: Yes.

Escalante: Exhibit one photo from the Warren Commission, the photo.

Escalante: Ya mataron a Viviela...

Lesar: Si, estalo de Viviela y seguro...

Escalante: And Carlos Bringuier, exhibit 1. I cannot say that it is the same person, because the
photograph is not very good. The photo we have from Isidro Borja is from the 50's, but no doubt that it
is a person, that looks like a Mexican, but used to speak like a Cuban. It is an interesting fact that we
should take into account.

?____________: Did he spend time in Mexico in the early, in 1962 or 63, or was he ever linked to
Alpha 66?

Escalante: Yes. Yes, he was in Mexico City in 62-63. Yes, con Alpha 66?

Escalante: That I don't know, if he was linked with Alpha 66. We knew he was linked with the DRE.

?: The DRE.

?: And he was in Mexico City in 62-63?

N: In 62-63.

Escalante: But we do not know if he had links in Alpha 66. The only thing that I want to point out is
that both incidents, that when told by Veciana the Odio incident and the DRE incident, in Dallas

E: Yo no lo veria de (?)

?: DRE

N: DRE incident in Dallas.

?: D-R-E.

N: D-R-E, yes

?: Oh, DRE, ok

Escalante: I did not see them isolated. In a disinformation operation you cannot see them separate.
For instance, I have thought a lot about why this visit to Silvia Odio, why Silvia Odio's father, Amador
Odio, he was imprisoned [in Cuba]. Amador Odio was one of the founders of the MRP. Manolo Ray
left Cuba at the end of the 60's. Manolo Ray was a social democrat and when he got to Miami, into
exile, he found a very strong opposition for the CIA for him to belong to the revolutionary Cuban
council. And after Giron he was put apart from this council. But moreover, the CIA made... some
contacts with their agency in Cuba in order to take him out, this representation in the outside.
Something that had really happened, Manolo Ray after the missile crisis, some contacts happened
between Ray and some of the Kennedy administration officials and Ray had already founded the
Revolutionary...

_________?: JURE, JURE

Nunez: JURE, that's it, JURE

_________?: Junta Revolucionaria

Nunez: Junta Revolucionaria, esta bien.

Escalante: And this group started the privileged, by the administration. I think, what I didn't know the
plans for this administration is that we should take into account what we spoke about this morning. In
the case of negotiation between the United States and Cuba. The United States would have to have
something of his hand to impose him to Cuba. They were going to demand that somebody would be a
part of that new government to be established in Cuba and who would be better than Manolo Ray,
who used to be a minister in that government. Manolo Ray, that was a person that didn't have good
relations with the CIA. He was a social democrat. And it turns out to be that Silvia Odio belongs to the
same group. So I could think that Oswald's presence, and Emilio Cordo (?)______________ might
have some link to some involvement of JURE? as Castro agents... who is a Castro agent that later
would kill Kennedy. So I think all these episodes have to be seen related one to another. For instance,
I think the same way you... some of you do that Oswald was taken to a trap from the very beginning.
But he was penetrating a Castro group that wanted to kill Kennedy. But I don't think that Veciana had
anything to do with it. I think that people that had to do with that, are people in the DRE, the DRE,
but here I am just... using some technical... because when you are going to carry out an operation as
complex as this one, you cannot put all your money in one single horse. You have to use different
ways in order not to have any mistakes. And obviously, the DRE was in the whole plot against Cuba.
Again, this was the organization that was ________

Fonzi: I would like to share two small pieces of information... ah, with the Cuban side. One is from the
new releases and that is the date that Phillips became in charge of anti-Cuban operations in Mexico
City. We now have the cable from headquarters to the station. He was there of course already. I'm
not entirely sure in what capacity, maybe counter intelligence, certainly the local leftist file that you
have commented... Sorry?

?____________: Cuban covert actions.

Fonzi: Covert actions?

?____________: Ya

Fonzi: And we know that he had the local leftist file from June Cobb... the June Cobb documents. But
we now know that it was in the days immediately following Oswald's departure October 1; it begins
October 1. No, he is a TDY, he doesn't get back till the 9th, the 7th, 8th, or the 9th. He is TDY the 7th
thru the 9th. Right, and he returns at that point as the chief of anti-Cuban operations...

Nunez: I can't translate this, because I couldn't understand it.

Fonzi: It's in the first week of October 1963. Yes. And the CIA cable is specific about this point.

?____________: This is interesting. But what is also interesting is that he comes... he comes to D.C.
to pick up a package. Right... under a code name. And that's, that's in connection with the TDY
business I think. Explain that, TDY is temporary... Temporary duty, TDY means temporary duty. He
went to Washington and then Miami and then came back and was chief of operations. In military
terms, it means that he was stationed at one place, and then up to 90 days he was sent to another
place. That's temporary duty, TDY. Anyway, I just bring this up because I think it's interesting. Is
germane to the comments General Escalante was making. One other small point.

?____________: Excuse me... I want to interject while you are talking about chronology, an
interesting point is when Howard Hunt sued A. J. Weberman they took a deposition from Phillips.
Phillips said mostly nothing in all the questioning. But what de did admit was that, he might have been
in Dallas, at least the Dallas airport, in early September, 1963.

Escalante: La primera mitad?

_________?: On September

Nunez: On September or in September?

_________?: September, early September.

Nunez: Ah, Septiembre.

?_________: The other point I wanted to share is not from a document, but from an interview.
Actually, it began with a mutual friend of many of us here, his name is Larry Haapanen. A good
researcher who is not written in the books, who had an occasion many years ago where James Hosty
visited his class. And they discussed the Silvia Odio incident. And at that time, Mr. Hosty, who as you
know was an FBI agent watching Oswald. At that time, Hosty told the class, that he thought the
visitors to Odio's house were agents of William Pawley. More recently, I had occasion to talk with
Mr. Hosty. At present he will not talk to any of us including me, but before I was very far into doing
research for my book he called me and did not know I was researching for a book. He was asking me
for some information. I took the opportunity to ask him some questions, including, this piece about the
Odio visit. And he reiterated again, that that was his feeling. I don't have any documents. But I find...

?____________: You took notes?

?____________: I took notes, and I find this an interesting observation by the same token, because it
would fit, would it not? If you had the right wing elements investigating the left wing elements, and as
you say, perhaps even with the view to do something more nasty than that

?____________: I'd like to touch on something that Peter brought up earlier because I've felt now for
several years that one of the ways, perhaps the only way, that you can get a handle on the Kennedy
assassination is to carefully analyze the disinformation aspect after the assassination, and see if that
gave you any clues as to who might be involved. And I think that we should maybe take a little time
here and go over some of those incidents and see whether or not they relate to Phillips. I think there
are some of them that are well known. I guess perhaps the most well-known is the one involving how
Hendrix, who, on the afternoon of the assassination leaves a message for Seth Kantor to call him. And
later Kantor learns that Hendrix was trying to give him information about Oswald's background. That
seems to be an obvious candidate for an attempt to plant information that would paint Oswald in a
way...favorable to those who would want to make him a patsy. And I believe that we know that
Hendrix had a relationship with David Phillips

I think probably Gavin or Tony can probably fill in more on that.

But I would like to hear a discussion on the specific incidents of disinformation after the assassination.
There's the Alvarado incident.

?____________: It's another..., on the Hendrix thing, we interviewed him a year or two ago in
connection with the Frontline Program.

Nunez: I'm sorry, I can't hear...

?____________: We interviewed him a couple of years ago in connection with a television program
called Frontline. And he now claims that he could not even remember the journalist that he told this
information to, let alone having talked about the information. Which is very implausible, because it
was his contribution on the afternoon of the assassination. I was involved in history, but I don't
remember how.

ALL: (laugh)

?____________: I was there. What also interests me about that is that of course the information about
Oswald's connections to the Assassination Cuban Committee, and so on, would have come up. What
seems to have been important was for them to get the information out very quickly, like within hours
after the assassination, and that is in itself (?)_____________

Winslow: I have a couple here on Monkey Morales. You've brought his name up, and then you just
left me hanging here.

Escalante: The only thing I said was he went into exile with somebody, in this history.

Winslow: OK, that's fine. What was... what were the dates of his work with the Cuban intelligence, and
what did he actually do?

Escalante: Ricardo Morales you mean?

Winslow: I'm talking about Morales Navarrete, Ricardo Morales Navarrete

Escalante: He never worked with our Cuban intelligence

He worked for the Cuban police. There is a difference.

Winslow: The civil police?

Escalante: The criminal police.

Winslow: The FBI? or the...

Escalante: The FBI, the criminal police. They are very distinct. Morales no... como Tony Cuesta
worked for the police or Virjilio Dias worked for the CIA police. In 1959 all these people were in the
police.

Winslow: He was there in '59 until when?

Escalante: Only until June of '59.

Winslow: And then he came to the United States?

Escalante: And then he came to the United States.

Winslow: Okay, and then he worked for what organization?

Escalante: He knows that he worked for the FBI.

Winslow: For the Central Intelligence Agency or the FBI?

Escalante: With the CIA.

Winslow: With the CIA. In '68 he was working for the FBI?

Escalante: It's possible, I do not know.

Winslow: I know that because he was an informant with a bug on him tape recording Orlando Bosch's
testimony which was repeated in a trial. Then he went... And then he went to Venezuela. And he wasn't
affiliated with Cuban intelligence in any manner?

Escalante: No, never.

Winslow: Do you believe that he supplied the explosive that blew up the Cubana airlines?

Escalante: He could have been.

Nunez: We know it was supplied, from which he took part

Escalante: But, we do not know which role each one played.

Winslow: He admitted that in a sworn deposition in Miami, a fourteen part, fourteen volume
deposition where he was... every bombing he ever did. But he says he worked for Cuban intelligence, DGI.

Escalante: Are you going to believe him?

Winslow: Well, the circumstances that indicate that he may have been telling the truth... Because he
also worked for the Mossad, the CIA, the FBI, and the Venezuelan secret police.

Escalante: First of all, you are preparing us with very high quality services, and remember, during
those early days we were just a bunch of young people that were no more than 25. But no, I can
assure you, he never worked for us. He never worked with Cuban intelligence office. At least to my
knowledge, at least to my knowledge.

Winslow: At least to his knowledge. O.K., now, does, did Cuban intelligence, or Cuba have anything to
do with the death of Roselli?

Escalante: Let me not say something terrible.

ALL: (laugh)

Winslow: I got, I'll show you later if you want to see it. I got a, I have a document that was just sent to
me by the Central Intelligence Agency, questions that were asked of them by homicide detectives in
Miami about the Roselli... And it is very interesting. I'll see you later on that.

Smith: I think that in our discussion this afternoon we should remember that tomorrow the
LaFontaines will be here, and they have special knowledge of what happened in Dallas. But, there are
some things that have come up here, and also this morning that pull everything together. What
concerns me is that sometimes we talk as if Borja and Morales, because they defected at the same
time are of the same politics?

?____________: I'd like to ask you a question. Is it not true that if you take the whole of the counter
revolutionary Cuban presence there is a right wing and a left wing? And you should place the DRE
over on the right wing and place Alpha, not only JURE, but also Alpha 66 over on the left wing?

Escalante: I wouldn't put Alpha 66 on the left. JURE yes, but Alpha no.

?____________: Well, there has been quite a lot of literature that has, for example, Rodriguez
Orcarberro has been called simultaneously Alpha 66 representative and also a DRE (?)
representative.

?____________: The second is false, I think.

?____________: And that, if we are trying to visualize what happened here that, as you said yourself,
these initiatives that the Kennedys were taking to create alliance with JURE were -- caused great
consternation in the right wing. And we will, at some point, be talking about John Martino. John
Martino, in December of '63, published an article and he said -- he talked about the well-known plot
between Khrushchev and Kennedy to install a left wing government in Cuba which he said would be
headed by Huber Matos and the Minutemen who were close to Martino. The Minutemen circulated a
document at the same time to the same effect and I think that what makes sense to me is that they,
either on their own or after instigation from the CIA, the right wing were saying if we don't, we not
only have to worry about Castro now, we have to worry about this new government that Kennedy is
planning to bring into Cuba

Escalante: About what you just said, I would like to read an article to you. An article that was
published in the United States and it's absolutely contradictory. But listening to you it begins to have
sense, some reason. This is an article that was published around September 28th. And it's called
("Los impulsionistas Anti-Castristas, construyen una fuerza area, mientras la CIA tiemble") "The
anti-Castro ______ are building an air force, which the CIA is shaking". This was published in the
Jackson Daily News, Jackson, Mississippi. It was signed by Robert Allen and Paul Scott. You know
the article?

?____________: No, but we know the authors. We have talked about this before.

Escalante: Here they say or they used to say That President Kennedy and his advisors on foreign
policy and very much compromised and several entries but, contradictory with anti-Castro in ....
cursionists?

Abramson: Cursionists? Cursionists, I guess. That sounds like that would be.

Escalante: It speaks about the organization of an air fleet to carry on excursions against Cuba,
actions against Cuba and that this Air Force is not officially under the United States control and that's
the way it says and that call my attention. He mentions a very interesting character, Alexander
Rorke, but at a certain moment, something that has no meaning is said...

Nunez: This very unusual consul.

Abramson: Sort of conjunction.

Nunez: No, no.

?____________: Disconcerting.

Nunez: Disconcerting events in the American policy.

Escalante: Comes in the moment when secret sources are sending around almost unbelievable news
of the next Cuban crisis. According to the news we cannot confirm the operation, control operation
should happen in Cuba in 1964 and secretly it's been organized by certain officials in Moscow, in
Havana, and Washington. The plan includes the use of Soviet troops in Cuba to control less as
possible the sparing of blood and uprising, forcing Kennedy to send troops to Cuba. To keep this
compromise, this promise of not allowing another Hungry in Cuba in front of the possibility for nuclear
war, by Cuba, the United Nations would be called for a cease fire so the United States and Russia
would agree and a correlation government would be started in Cuba including the communists, the
United States and Russia will use this new environment for some agreements including a nuclearized
zone in America. What do you think about that?

?____________: Who says it sounds like, sounds like an article that might be written by Mr. Remos
in the Diario de las Americas today.

Escalante: I recall your attention on one part. Who speaks about a concert is an agreement between
Washington and Havana and Moscow. They speak about the communist plot because with three, in a
group of three, when two are out, it's the third should be a (?). And this was published on September
28, 1963

?____________: After my book was published,

I received a phone call from someone that I came to consider... she sounded pretty reliable. And the
name that she mentioned to me as having been directly involved in the assassination was the CIA
agent, or officer, named Grayston Lynch. And I wondered if you ever had any information that might
have linked him to Phillips or any of the people.

?____________:(John): We got some information before the very first national conference of the
Coalition of Political Assassinations about a luncheon meeting between top former CIA officials which
are Richard Helms, William Colby Richard Helms, William Colby. I don't know if he is a high ranking,
or even former. But, Gus Russo was apparently there and he told some people that and they had a
concern about what was going to be presented in our conference and one of their main concerns, they
said, was with how we were going to deal with their friend David Atlee Phillips. Well it was, I think it
was Joe Goulden was also present at that meeting and he was exceptionally close to David Phillips.
And, in fact, is executor of David Phillips estate. And his history with Phillips goes way back, they are
both from Texas And I believe I saw some where in one of the releases made by the CIA a year or so
ago that Goulden grew up in the same town that David Phillips father was from I think it was
Marshall, Texas, or somewhere. Anyway, it was a long time relationship between Goulden and
Phillips. And Goulden has been extremely concerned about Phillips legacy

?____________: Goulden?

?____________: Goulden. It's spelled, G-O-U-L-D-E-N

?____________: Dave Goulden?

?____________: No, Joseph Goulden, Joseph...

?____________: Well, their strategy, as I understand it, as it was explained to me...

?____________: Goulden, if I could just add one other thing, Goulden is one of the two reporters, the
other being Lonnie Hudkins who broke the story that Oswald had an FBI informant number John,
were you going to say something? Ya, John.

?____________: If we are talking about disinformation and David Phillips in an attempt to pin the
blame on the assassination on Cuba I think it's time we discussed Silvia Duran's sex life for many
reasons the least of which is Mr. Lechuga sitting to my left here. And Anthony Summers, sitting over
there who on my behalf interviewed Silvia Duran just recently, but first of all let me say that, if it could
be shown that Silvia Duran...

END TAPE 3
***************************************
NASSAU Tape #4

This tape starts with a statement in progress..........

Q: That this story is largely if not completely false. The purpose of this story was to implicate Havana
in the assassination. I may retract one hypothesis I had which was that the story was invented entirely
after the publication of the Warren Commission. It appears now there are indicators that this story
may have, in fact, been put together earlier. As early as the days just following the assassination. I
don't think this changes the hypothesis, it only adds strength to it. It is clear to me that most of the
individuals from whom the pieces of information actually come, are mostly local leftists. We also know
that the person who handled the leftist files in Mexico City was, in fact, DAVID PHILLIPS. It is also
clear from reading the LOPEZ report, that when E. LOPEZ interviewed DAVID PHILLIPS, that
DAVID PHILLIPS lied about his knowledge about the so-called OSWALD-DURAN affair., in the
beginning feigning ignorance of all of the documents in possession of the Mexico City CIA station.
Only after E. LOPEZ showed him these documents one by one, did DAVID Phillips begin to
acknowledge knowledge of these documents. I have spoken this morning , as one or two of you have
here, with CARLOS LECHUGA about the story, which I published, of the allegations of a sexual
liaison between himself and Silvia DURAN. Which she, for the first time in an interview with Tony
Summers recently spoke on affirming that such an affair had taken place. What lead me to the story
was a documentary basis. In the first instance CIA documents, that they were related to FBI
documents from late 1962. I don't recall the date right now, but I am going to guess, November or
December 1962. It is very interesting to me that, if this is not true.... and CARLOS LECHUGA denies
this story. What we face here is either a person somewhere in intelligence, because the FBI
documents make reference to very sensitive channels. Some source in US intelligence as early as late
1962 putting false information into the intelligence channel or perhaps at a time after the
assassination fully false documents into the record. So I am very intrigued at this situation. So I don't
pretend to have the answers, but in light of what CARLOS LECHUGA said....the first words spoken
by Silvia DURAN to Summers in the interview when he brought up this subject now ring in my ears.
When Tony said, asked her about the alleged affair and mentioned that there were documents, her
first words were, and correct me if I am wrong, "Oh, that's top secret."

Summers: I would just like to say here. I gather that my colleague John Newman has mentioned it to
you, not in the conference. I would have hesitated to ask you about it in such a wide forum. If this is
your private life and something you don't want to discuss openly in this forum, please say so, because
it seems to me a private matter.

Lechuga: I have no objection about that.

Summers: Well then, fine.

Lechuga: He approached me.

Summers: Right.. Then the extraordinary thing to me then is that just last year in 1994 when I asked
her about this. And by this time I was, back up for a moment. I think I was the first journalist from
America or Europe to sit down for any great length with Silvia DURAN back in 1978. and came to
know her pretty well then and revisited her in 1993. And spent a lot of time with her again then. At
that time I asked her about the story cited by ELENA GARRO that Oswald had been at the twist
party held at DURAN'S house, and that she, DURAN, had slept with Oswald. And she just laughed a
lot and thought it very funny and said, "No of course. If you had seen him, you think I would sleep
with such a weedy little man, Oswald. Certainly not. And anyway I was married at the time." She
rejected the story completely. When, by 1993, I had now heard of the suggestion that she had had an
affair with you, sir, I put it to her on the phone and there was silence and she said, "Oh, that is
supposed to be top secret. But since it is now in the documents that have been released, I guess I can
refer to it. "And she said this was a very serious affair with you and that she had hoped that she would
be able to join you. And that if you were going to be permanently in New York, she would have gone to
New York and even married you. I mean, and as a Christmas present to you, I will send you a tape of
her interview. But this means nothing to you?

Lechuga: (Lots of laughter from ESCALANTE, NUNEZ and LECHUGA) You have the tape here?

Summers: No, not here. But I will send it to you for Christmas. (Lots of laughter again) But, you knew
her?

Lechuga: Of course, she worked in the consulate.

Smith: But not in the biblical sense.

Lechuga: She worked in the consulate of Cuba in Mexico. I seldom saw her because of two different
building.

Summers: Yes I know

Lechuga: In the garden of the embassy, the patio of the embassy.

Summers: Do you people have any reason to suppose that Silvia DURAN, looking back, that Silvia
DURAN may have been involved in any way with US intelligence?

Lechuga: No.

Summers: So it's a mystery.

Lechuga: Yes.

?____________: The impression that I got from the researchers was that they had strong suspicions
that DURAN was , in fact, involved with US intelligence. And I have here a little paragraph I would
like you to read while they were interviewing DAVID PHILLIPS. It's interesting in terms of his
non-responses about, how vague he gets. Mr. PHILLIPS says that he first heard the name of Silvia
DURAN about the time he arrived in Mexico, as soon as he started reading the telephone taps
transcripts. "Her name appeared time and time again." He added, "We had no interest in her. She
wasn't friendly with anyone." Mr. PHILLIPS had previously mentioned in his discussion of the Cuban
shop's interest in recruiting agents, the name of Ambassador Lechuga and their interest in pitching,
recruiting, enticing him. Mr. PHILLIPS was shown Slawson's memo concerning his trip to Mexico
where Scott told him that the CIA had a substantial prior interest in DURAN because of her affair
with Lechuga.

Lechuga: Who told that?

?____________: Win Scott. Station chief. That may be where it started. PHILLIPS seemed surprised
and said, "No one let me in on this operation." Mr. PHILLIPS said that "it is possible that the agency
pitched DURAN". This was the guy that was in charge. "At one time we pitched almost everyone at
the Cuban embassy. She must have been considered. Mr. PHILLIPS said that it was possible that she
was not pitched because the station could not identify any of her weaknesses. At this point Mr.
PHILLIPS was told about LITAMEL/Nine report on DURAN that said that all that would have been
done to recruit her was to get a blond haired blue eyed American in bed with the little ??????. Mr.
PHILLIPS admitted that it sounded like she had at least been targeted and that the station interest
was substantial and the weakness and means had been identified. He pointed out, however, that
targeting does not necessarily mean that she had been pitched, enticed. Even if she had been pitched,
that she had accepted. Mr. PHILLIPS stated that Miss DURAN'S 201 file should be very thick. He
stated that a thin 201 file prior to the assassination would be very surprising. And I think at that time,
her file, at least what the CIA turned over to the committee, had three documents in it. I thought that
would be interesting to hear.

?____________: That's the passage I was referring to just a minute ago. And if you go on reading, you
will see Mr. PHILLIPS gradually beginning to agree with EDDIE LOPEZ, piece by piece. And the
question in my mind is how DAVID PHILLIPS, if he in fact was head of Cuban operations in Mexico
City, would not have had access to this material. It makes no sense to me. So it looks to me like
PHILLIPS was playing along with Eddie Lopez. But let's be clear about one thing. This story was very
important. I am talking , not about the Lechuga piece, but about the OSWALD-DURAN piece.

?____________: Which is also corroborated by LI/Nine.

?____________: Right. For years after the assassination, this story grew and grew and grew. It
involved people, very interesting people, including a career foreign service officer. Mr. CHARLES
THOMAS, who became part of the story then in 1964 and 1965. Then again in 1969, writing directly
to the Secretary of State about it. Given the magnitude of the story and all the people involved in it,
and apparently it is false. The whole subject of Duran's extra-marital activities, I think deserves close
attention. And if there was no affair between Mr. Lechuga and DURAN, it gives us, for the first time,
a crucial distinction between , on the one hand, an affair or a piece of disinformation created after the
assassination, and on the other hand a piece of disinformation created before the assassination. To
wit, a document, an FBI document, a CIA document about this in 1962. Anyway, I think that I am
sufficiently interested now in this to say that this should be looked at more closely.

?____________: Is that the CHARLIE THOMAS who committed suicide?

?____________: Yes it is.

Summers: Before we leave this business of amour, I am really, I would not have discussed this
incident in this forum, but I was planning to ask you about it sir. I am so surprised that there's nothing
to it, because there was just a pause on the telephone with a man, me, who she had met over the years
and talked to over the years often. And she paused for one, two three, that long. And then she said,
"Oh, I thought that was still very secret, but since it's out....". She talked as if she loved you then and
she loves you now. I'm sorry.

Lechuga: I don't know why she told you that. It is a mystery. It has nothing to do with the whole
thing....the embassy in Mexico.

Summers: Except that it's not a true story.

?____________: It's clear that in the files, these documents, the FBI documents and the CIA
documents, were being looked at about the DURAN Lechuga affair, were being examined because of
the light they might shed on the DURAN Oswald affair. That in the minds of the investigators, this
was the relevance of these documents. That's why we have them today.

?____________: The only relevance could be that the story was that if OSWALD is send by the CIA
to meet with Silvia and DURAN at the Cuban embassy and there is this story about you and DURAN
at the same that you are starting this overture with the Kennedy administration. You can see how
people might want to mix these things up.

Escalante: In the first place, let me make clear that Mr. Lechuga in 1962 up to the days of the missile
crisis, at which point he was called by Premier Fidel Castro to be his representative at the United
Nations. So he was present and participated in the conversations that happened in Cuba during the
missile crisis. Then he went back to the United States and he stayed there until after the Kennedy
assassination. AS you heard this morning, his versions of those conversations. Really, this stuff about
Silvia Duran's relations really surprises us. It is outside the context of this meeting. As you said, the
telephone......

Lechuga: Really, this is all an invention. In this book it says that this story of Silvia DURAN is made
to separate me from my wife. I was with my wife in Mexico. This affair was for me to have a divorce
from my wife. She says she was expecting me to divorce. The truth was that I was with my wife in
Mexico. From Mexico, I went to New York with my wife. And it was two years in New York with my
wife. Later on I went to Havana when I was appointed to the President of the National Culture Council
and my wife went with me to Havana. I was divorced to my wife in 1967, five years after that story she
had done. And for personal reasons that have nothing to do with politics or nothing. I think it is
something she invented. Anyway, It is very surprising that Silvia DURAN, in 1978....

Summers: In 1993.

Lechuga: ....In 1993, could say that, Yes, she had an affair with me. It doesn't match.

Summers: And I think what should concern us all is the question that if Silvia DURAN is still, even
today, suddenly inventing this, what else has she invented down the years?

Lechuga: On the other hand, it is very queer, because I think Silvia DURAN was, had a good position
here. She was arrested by the police in Mexico. She was tortured. And she refused to link Oswald
with Cuba. So she had a good attitude.

Summers: She told me that she wasn't tortured at all. That the police just sort of shook her about.

?____________: She told you that when she was in Mexico.

Summers: She was in Mexico. But also in her manuscript about this.

?____________: My interest is how close DAVID PHILLIPS is to the pieces of this story.

Smith: Fabian is, I think, uncomfortable with this. I take it that John had spoken with Carlos before
the meeting and otherwise, we wouldn't have. But I very much appreciate his willingness to discuss
this. And it is, in fact, very important point to clear up. Not because of personal at all, no one cares
about that. But because of SILVIA Duran's role in all of this. And I would suggest that we all look
again at the question whether or not she does have some U.S. intelligence, or some other motive here,
but I apologize to Carlos, I really do, and I appreciate his willingness to discuss this and it was an
important point to clarify, and that Carlos was willing.

Scott: I would like to come back solidly on the theme of DAVID PHILLIPS and of course, one of his
specialties is false stories And we have trouble picking our way thru all these things. It is interesting
worth remember , it came up briefly, the story of Alvarado the Nicaraguan in Mexico because it told
us not only that it was another false story to link Oswald and Cuba together to the assassination. It
was a story that was vigorously promoted at the time by DAVID PHILLIPS. And what we learned
also was that DAVID PHILLIPS was not alone here. And what was surprising in the documents is the
extent to which he was encouraged, the Alvarado story was actively promoted by the chief of station
Win Scott, and the Ambassador Thomas MANN. And when you come to Thomas MANN, he was both
a career State Department official, but also he was someone quite close to Lyndon Johnson, who
promoted him right after. And in particular, Thomas MANN served as interpreter when Lyndon
Johnson would meet on his ranch with ORTAS who graduated from being head of Cuba Nation to
being the President of Mexico. So we shouldn't just think of PHILLIPS as an individual. He was part
of a faction that included more important people. Including, particularly Thomas MANN, who had
announced in 1963 that he would retire from the foreign service and who became the Assistant
Secretary for all of Latin America. At the time of the coup in Brazil and many thru 1964., the Brazilian
coup

Lechuga: He was an enemy of Cuba. He certainly was on the other hemisphere.

Smith: Well, he was, but on the other hand. I would fully agree. On the other hand. Thomas MANN
sent a memo before the Bay of Pigs saying it was illegal. It would be a violation of international law.
The memo did not get any support, so he dropped it and, in the final meeting, he voted for the Bay of
Pigs invasion also. He was very close to Lyndon Johnson. I wouldn't put Thomas MANN in the same
boat with DAVID PHILLIPS , but he was very conservative and certainly was no friend of Cuba. He
sent forward the memo not because he didn't want to do in the Cuban government, it was because he
felt this means was inappropriate.

Scott: It was Thomas MANN, in a cable, who told Washington that SILVIA DURAN should be
re-arrested in the light of the ALVARADO story and that she should be tortured and that they should
be told to break her. It is astonishing to me that this was in force.

?____________: We don't know to what extent MANN was being fed information by Scott.

Scott: But we do know that MANN signs the cable. In other words, It wasn't the CIA cable, it was an
Embassy cable.

?____________: My point is that he may have been manipulated by Scott in terms of believing that.

Scott: My point is that up to know, we have been talking about PHILLIPS as a sinister individual. And
we have to deal with a whole , right there in the Mexican Embassy, there was a very powerful,
manipulative... People who were trying to exploit the assassination in order to mount opposition to
Cuba. And it's really a question whether you, on your sides, have asked yourself about the role of Win
Scott and Thomas MANN and their connection to the Mexican government.

Lechuga: I don't have any information.

Summers: Coming back to disinformation, another thing that I think is new and definitely perhaps
interesting to those of you around the table who don't know and also our Cuban friends. One of the
stories told immediately after the assassination, was that OSWALD had met during his visit to
Mexico with the Cuban Ambassador. And that the Cuban Ambassador had dined with OSWALD,
taken him to a name restaurant. Like the ALVARADO story, this was designed to suggest that the
Cubans had been plotting something with OSWALD. The source, the main source of this story was a
character called SALVADOR DIAZ. And I think we know something about him. And this story was
repeated by a man who, is to this day, a prominent Cuban exile journalist writing, among other things,
for Excelsior, in Mexico City. His name is GUERRO.

Lechuga: (Acknowledges the name)

Summers: And I interviewed him in Mexico City two years ago to ask him about the origins of this
story and how he remembered it. And he is old now, but very fit, and he sat in his office surrounded by
his....It is one of those offices filled with plaques and pictures of himself with famous people, including
Nixon....And he told me his version of the story. And he said "Yes, the story was so and I believe it to
this day." And he says the story was told to him, and this is the sinister bit, about as early as
September, no October, early October.. The story about OSWALD meeting with the Cuban
Ambassador. In other words, this was not a post assassination story of opportunism, this was a story
told clearly for a purpose well, well before the assassination. And said he had named to me in turn the
sources that provided the story and I am afraid I cannot remember the name of these two other
sources. But one of them is the former Batista chief of police, who is now dead.

Lechuga: Orlando GUTIERREZ.

Summers: Cannot remember. I have it.....But this seems to me very significant because the story
about OSWALD was being told well before the assassination. And I believe the date could tell us that
the Assassinations Committee identified certainly, SALVADOR DIAZ as an agent of DAVID
PHILLIPS.

?____________: We found that many disinformation stories stemmed from Phillips' assets.

?____________: There were many stories coming out of Miami about Oswald and demonstrations and
pro-Cuban groups in Miami. They put OSWALD in Miami and a number of different places, all with
pro-Castro groups.

TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE: I had an awful time in this section with Arturo speaking so loud and Mirta
so softly. You will need to check it closely. sorry......

Rogers: I just wanted to speak now about the ?????. About a new conversation I had this morning
with John Newman. I was telling Newman that I was certain that all the information that was given up
in Mexico, in one way or another in implicating Cuba in the murder was disinformation. Some were
prepared before the murder and some after. The decision of the Warren Commission .........involved.
Some of the documents. According to my reading and different sources, my impression is that
disinformation was sent off by PHILLIPS at several directions. One was to discredit the witnesses. On
the other hand, blame Cuba for the assassination. The decision itself to arrest SILVIA DURAN, at
the following day after Kennedy's assassination allows that she was a crucial witness of OSWALD's
visit to the consulate. And Silvia's declaration of her police statements in Mexico were several times
modified. Several times. I think there are four or five different versions of her declarations. However,
we do not have any motive to doubt of Silvia's integrity. About things that have come on top of her,
that she was a Cuban agent, ex-agent, American agent. Logically, we can only say no - on the Cuban
side. To believe her, her own declarations could never be known before the parliamentary commission
in the United States. I think up to 1978, in which she was interviewed in Mexico, her declarations was
same as she gave to the Warren Commission. We also think that it was admitted by documents about
the declarations. It is an effort to try to discredit her. If she had an affair, but not with Oswald, but
Lechuga, etc. All of these persons who give this information were either CIA officials or CIA agents in
the CIA station in Mexico. The very same research in the US. The origin of this information about the
relations of SILVIA DURAN, I think was someone called JUNE COBB. But also, with this initial
......... Ambassador Thomas is unofficial second secretary at the embassy at November in the CIA and
so on. The person that is related to one disinformation....Why should we fall into a trap to pay
attention to this many disinformation? Is it to take us away from our main object ? Or take us away
from the truth, which is precisely what we are trying to get to. It is not true that OSWALD had plans
to kill Kennedy in the Cuban consulate. It is not true. Absolutely not true. Some of our officials have
been , I am sure........have been interviewed. Even Fidel Castro was questioned. Despite
disinformation we might have had, ...... That should tell you that the government itself if also ......There
are no records that .... Trying to discredit the witnesses at the Cuban consulate and blame our
country.

?____________: When you went thru the files of the Cuban State council, it wasn't clear to me
whether you were saying there was no reference to the SOLO people or if there was no reference to
the statement that SOLO was recorded to have made about OSWALD.

Rogers: I am not a

Escalante: No interview with any director of the Communist Party shows up.

?____________: If OSWALD didn't threaten to kill Kennedy , what was it that made Azcue so angry
to throw OSWALD out of the embassy and say that he was a detriment to the revolution?

Escalante: There is an important detail we haven't taken into account. In the inspector general's
report on the CIA in 1967 there was some very important information. It was explaining the
AMLASH operation, which was CUBELA, as we know. It says that CUBELA came back on the first
day of the assassination and this report says that two days after the assassination, the CIA officer in
Mexico City sent a cable to the headquarters in Langley. It says that CUBELA showed up on a list of
Soviet agents in Mexico City. This seemed very strange to him too.

Scott: I think that technically, ANGLETON, inside the CIA, drew attention to the fact that CUBELA
had been a contact of KOSTIKOV. KOSTIKOV was supposed to be the agent who , in theory, had
met with OSWALD on September 28. John Newman and I don't believe in the credibility of that story.
We have seen the cable on which ANGLETON based his claim. They had KOSTIKOV under
continuous surveillance since he came to Mexico years before. And in an extraordinarily long list of
people he had seen, there was one contact with CUBELA in, I believe, 1960. About three years before
the assassination. So from our point of view, it was ridiculous. But that was what ANGLETON used as
a pretext to take over the control of the investigation of the Kennedy assassination.

Scott: I wanted to make a more general point, but if you want to respond on the
CUBELA-KOSTIKOV point.....

Escalante: CUBELA worked in Mexico from January to the first few days of 1961. CUBELA never
came back to Mexico. In the second place, during the 1961 trip to Mexico, that's when he was
recruited by the CIA. Carlos already explained who he was. An American case officer, a physical
description. He already told you. This is the man who matched DAVID PHILLIPS description. I
doesn't know if CUBELA was in the Soviet Embassy in 1961. But if he was there, then it would have
had to have been social or diplomatic activity. I don't know how KOSTIKOV could have been tied to
CUBELA. In reality they probably hardly knew each other or probably never met. Whoever it was
that received OSWALD at the Soviet Embassy, it definitely wasn't KOSTIKOV. It was probably P.
YAKOV. This cable that was sent from Mexico to Langley, it didn't have anything to do with
ANGLETON. It tied to CUBELA to CIA. And this same CUBELA was recruited by the CIA two
years before. Since CUBELA was in Paris on the day of the assassination receiving weapons or arms,
it seems really strange to me. There are other things, other connections perhaps. They are just made
up, something that Angleton just made up. Maybe one of ANGLETON'S own obsessions. There could
be other alternatives. We've analyzed these events because we are talking about the scene in
Mexico. We are saying that PHILLIPS could have deceived with disinformation . In other words, this
cable that had to do with the Cubans, PHILLIPS had to know about. It is probably more likely that he
just made it up.

Smith: PHILLIPS, as I think we all know, had been in charge of disinformation in Guatemala. During
the invasion, he was the one responsible for spreading the stories of the advance of the victorious
liberating army when, in fact, there wasn't any advance at all. And who took over the operation of the
radio. So this was his specialty and we would have to assume, even if we didn't know, that in Mexico.

?____________: The question that puzzles me is that, if you assume, and I think there is a fairly good
amount of evidence that PHILLIPS was involved in the disinformation in the Kennedy assassination,
one - is there any innocent explanation for that apart from involvement in the Kennedy assassination.
And two - since PHILLIPS is a disinformation specialist, that doesn't get you to shooting the
president. Is there any link whether PHILLIPS connections with the Army or with Special Forces, or
someone that could have carried out an assassination?

?____________: I want to jump in on this one. We've been drawing some distinctions here a couple of
times. I think Tony Summers brought up something, he's gone now. A piece that was
pre-assassination piece. And I find that more interesting than things that are definitely post
assassination information. But while we were talking here today, something that came to mind was my
interview with June COBB. And she was discussing the twist party and this was the beginning of the
story of OSWALD's extra-marital affairs. June COBB stayed with ELENA GARRO in the days after
the assassination and talked to her at length about this supposed party. And what JUNE COBB said
was that the people who were invited were predominantly left wing, local left wing people. And
ELENA GARRO was out of sorts and disgusted in that way. But the impression that was generated
by these events, was that the Cuban community in Mexico City was being organized for the purpose
of effecting OSWALD's escape after the assassination. Therefore further implicating the Cubans in
the story. And this story comes to us from a CIA informant, JUNE COBB. What I find interesting
about this is the nexus of OSWALD and ELENA GARRO and local left wing Cubans in Mexico City
before the assassination. So it would be an example of a story put together prior to November 22,
which, if it had followed through would have been very bad for Cuba.

?____________: One possibility is that if the cable linking CUBELA to KOSTIKOV is false, and
PHILLIPS generates it perhaps. If you look ahead a few years later to the Johnny ROSELLI story
that teams of Cubans were turned around. In other words, Castro supposedly did it by turning around
assassination teams sent in against Castro. I'm tired too, but do you see my point? If CUBELA is
falsely linked to the Soviets and as a double agent for Castro, the false stories kind of continue
through CUBELA's ties to the plot. Does that make sense?

Winslow: We brought up DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS and Swan Island. Now is it possible that David
PHILLIPS knew MAS [CANOSA]?

Escalante: He did know MAS.

Winslow: He did?

?________: MAS worked directly for him.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
END OF DAY ONE
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Smith: The topic as we begin this morning is EXILES - a broad topic. And we will discuss Oswald in
Mexico in the second session this morning. We've already discussed this, but in a more specific point
this morning. For the afternoon we have scheduled a discussion of Cuban theories of Kennedy's
assassination. I will draw up a list of participants to distribute to all of you. Any questions or
comments on procedures? Let's begin.

Scott: For the record, I would like to go on past six.

Smith: At a given point, what we can do is state that the formal session is over, and anyone who wants
to stay can continue the conversations. This should be a very interesting discussion at this point. On
the exiles, on the agenda beginning from the US side. Do you know the real names of the two Cuban
exiles using the code names ANGEL and LEOPOLDO who visited SILVIA ODIO? From the Cuban
side: What information do US researchers have about the training camps near New Orleans? Some of
you have written about that. What about the New Orleans-Dallas-Miami gun running operation?
We've touched on that already. What connection does it have to the crime? Which figures in the
Florida exile community were most probably involved in the murder and why? And which exile
organizations seemed to operate independently from JM/WAVE? Let's go to the Cuban side first.

Escalante: For ANGEL and LEOPOLDO, we would like to develop some information according to our
judgment on Santiago, was running an operation of the CIA until 1962. He was informing the groups of
exiles in the United States about Kennedy administrations attempts to have dialog with Cuba. While
interrogating SANTIAGO in Cuba, we came up with some more interesting information. He was
arrested in 1964, March. A few months after the assassination. He explained that he had a
relationship with a CIA official, who was military intelligence - William BISHOP. He says that in
November of 1963, William BISHOP invited him to a meeting in Dallas. It was a meeting with a few
wealthy people in Dallas talking about financing an anti-Castro.

?____________: What was the date again?

Escalante: The first few days of November, 1963. He says that William Bishop picked him up in his
car in Miami and they drove to Dallas. They were there for about four days. This would had to have
happened the weekend before the assassination, according to what he says. They stayed in a second
class hotel. They stayed in a second class hotel. Bishop left several times to have interviews. But this
guy did not know who he was talking to. After approximately four days, they returned to Miami. After
the assassination, they were in Tallahassee, when he went to visit a new house for a new car. He
passed information ..

?____________: When did he say this?

Escalante: In March, 1964. When he was being interrogated.

?____________: Did he identify any of the wealthy people he met? Hunt?

Escalante: No. There is something else. I found his name in your book. That's where I went to look
him up. I didn't know who he was. He was arrested in March of 1964 when he tried to ram his boat in
Cuba with three others to perform acts of sabotage. There he had many conversations with us. He just
told us this of his own accord. We didn't ask questions. Our interest really were in the plan of
sabotage. Sabotage when and where. We wanted to know what was behind the sabotage and then he
started to talk about his subject. So then, that's why a decision was made to take down everything he
said. And that's why we have tapes. He talked about things not associated with the sabotage. There
were too many people, we didn't have the resources or tapes to take it. It was in his first declaration,
it was political information. He came to us for the first time to talk to us about September of 1962,
opening a communication with Cuba. And that was very important to tape all of his conversations
about Cuba.

?____________: But Felipe Vidal was not talking about dialog with Cuba. Quite the contrary.

Escalante: Oh no. He told us. As I read yesterday.

Scott: Two points. First, SANTIAGO was a major figure in Iran Contra.

Escalante: It is not the same person. He died in Cuba He was an official from the navy. In 1959, he
was in Cuba and Venezuela. In 1960, he went to Columbia, left Miami and he had a conversation with
???????????.

Scott: I don't want to be a bore, but I keep a file on Cuban exiles.

Escalante: Maybe it is the son. The same name.

Scott: Well I was actually told that the father was killed and that this was the son. In 1981, I had a
phone call from Gerry Patrick Hemming. I did not solicit the call. And he told me quite a lot about
your man, the one that was killed. What interests me is that he said that his group in 1964 was FLN,
which I assume was ___________________. And that when he was arrested in Cuba, my notes says
that Charles Astin was the lawyer and sought belligerent status for SANTIAGO. And the other thing
is that Hemming drew my attention to him and I don't know why.

Escalante: I have read somewhere, I am not sure who the writer is. That some American publication,
that HEMMING later said that he was invited by some to a meeting that was to take place in Dallas
in November 1963, but that he did not go. And I read somewhere, at least I am telling you the
declarations that that meeting took place. I didn't ask him about his. Nobody asked him. Our cameras
were not on. He gave us political information we did not ask him. But nobody asked him.

?____________: I did not put in my book what Colonel Bishop told me about SANTIAGO, but we did
talk about it a great deal and he knew him very well.

Lesar: I can talk about HEMMING, who showed up in my office a few years ago. He mentioned the
meeting in Dallas with members of the Petroleum Club and he said that he had been at that meeting.
And that the talk was about that the problem was not in Cuba, the problem was in Washington.

?____________: HEMMING told me he was NOT at the meeting. That he was invited to go. He said
that he warned SANTIAGO not to go.

Winslow: HEMMING named his son after SANTIAGO.

Smith: He did.

Escalante: Felipe.

Winslow: You know he was married to a Cuban woman before that was killed in prison in Cuba.

Escalante: HEMMING?

Winslow: Her name? I don't know. I don't recall the name. I think she was killed in '59, early on. She
was put into a prison or something. He didn't go in to it.

Escalante: No woman died in a Cuban prison.

Nunez: I can speak for the women's movement in Cuba too. No woman died in prison.

Escalante: Yesterday I talked about a person - SIMO (Cesar). Like I explained yesterday, this
person was born in Mexico. He had Mexican features, coarse. He became a Cuban citizen in the
1950's and he studied engineering. In 1959 or 60 he affiliated himself with a group called Salvat. AS I
said, he was one of the people who frequently visited PHILLIPS' office in Havana. He asked for
asylum in 1960. And in his house they found a large cache of arms and explosives. I am sure that is
the reason he asked for asylum in the first place. Interestingly, in the same embassy he asked for
asylum at the same time was Ricardo Morales. After he left Cuba, he went to Mexico and after that
to Miami.

?____________: Ricardo MORALES was in the same asylum and same time?

Escalante: Same date and same embassy.

?____________: Interesting

Escalante: See, when several people seek asylum in the same embassy at the same time, you sort of
assume they are in cahoots with each other.. We had information that in 1963 Eusebio VORJA was
working for David Phillips in Mexico. That's the only information we have on Eusebio. The description
of Eusebio VORJA is the same as that given by Silvia ODIO.

?____________: Spell his whole name

Escalante: In the Cuban registry, he shows up under two names - ISIDRO and EUSEBIO. S-I-M-O.

?____________: Is there anything linking him to other Cuban exiles - Eladio del Valle, Masferrer?

Escalante: Eladio del Valle. No. I told you what we know. Felipe did have relations, but not Eusebio.

?____________: This is a sensitive question. You don't have to answer. Is it possible to share how you
know that VORJA was working for PHILLIPS in 1960?

Escalante: Yes. Somebody saw him visit the office of PHILLIPS.

?____________: That's 1960. I am talking about 1963.

Escalante: So was I.

?____________: You began by saying that Eusebio looked like ANGEL.

Escalante: Yes. Resembles ANGEL. That is why I researched ANGEL. Dealt with arms traffic. There
is something very important there that I haven't gotten . In December, a communique taking notice
that there were three members of the DRE - CARLOS ROCHA, JULIO GARCIA. They had fought
in a battle in Escambray while there were troops. That was very strange because it didn't have any
meaning. Of course we checked - the date was the wrong date. But also, they were well known
because it was a family of three brothers. One was a counter revolutionary. Two was ????? And in the
same battle, two brothers died. In that battle, none of these two person names and they never were a
part of the record. And we did research on these two persons and we really were able to locate
CARLOS ROCHA. And the CARLOS ROCHA we found......... This is our first discovery . In Cuba in
1960, the very same date that the Bringuier brothers memorial, he had established was called CASA
ROCHA. Another detail we found for CARLOS ROCHA, was that Carlos stored things. Because he
tried to steal..... A DAVID FERRIE investigation of Jim Garrison said he was waiting for a Cuban
exile named CARLOS. So we cannot say that this is the same person, but there is a very interesting
relation. Because why Bringuier comes to store named CASA ROCHA. This was the first visit
OSWALD did, when he proposes his services to get involved in the anti-Castro movement. It turns
out to be that Carlos has an outstanding role in the OSWALD history. Bringuier had an association.
Carlos did not fight in Cuba, at least not in the battle he says. So we think perhaps he was trying to
find a way out, and through the disappearance of these three Cuban exiles. Maybe they were killed.
Maybe dangerous witnesses. Maybe part of a plot. There is another point to make. The role of DE
GOICOCHEO SANCHEZ. DRE representative in Dallas. He also ends up being tied to the story. We
found that both DE GOICOCHEO and SALVAT were involved in arms trafficking in Dallas for
Central America. That people in Central America were people of ???????????????? Looks to us like
this arm trafficking could have been for an invasion of Cuba. I think that this group of DRE was
manipulated by the separation , the assassination disinformation plan for Cuba. That's the real reason
for the presence of SALVAT and DE GOICOCHEO in Dallas. There wasn't arms trafficking, it was
??????? and could have been part of the plot to assassinate Kennedy. That is the information we have
on these subjects.

Now, ELADIO DEL VALLE. He worked for two police services - military intelligence and the
traditional police. He was in charge of narcotics. He was also a legislature in the government - a
representative. He was from a little town from the south of Havana. He was a captain in the merchant
marines. In 1958 he was doing business dealings with SANTOS TRAFFICANTE in a little coastal
town south of Havana. There he brought in contraband whose destination was SANTOS
TRAFFICANTE. When the revolution triumphed, he went to Miami., ELADIO DEL VALLE went to
Miami. He settled in Miami, we don't know the address and he allied himself with ROLANDO
MASFERRER and other Batista supporters and they formed an organization called the Anti
Communist Cuban Liberation Movement. From that moment on, ELADIO was involved in many
project against Cuba. But as I told you yesterday, we managed to penetrate this organization. And we
came to know of a lot of projects, efforts, for an invasion of Cuba in secret. In order to provide arms
to internal rebel groups, they needed DAVID FERRIE as the pilot on these flights. In 1962. ELADIO
DEL VALLE tried to infiltrate Cuba with a commando group of 22 men but their boat had an English
key - a little island. In the middle of 1962. Of course, we knew this. I tell you about this, because one
of our agents who was one of the people helping to bring this group to Cuba, was a man of very little
education. They talked English on many occasions on this little island with DEL VALLE.. DEL
VALLE told this person , on many occasions, that Kennedy must be killed to solve the Cuban
problem. After that we had another piece of information on ELADIO DEL VALLE. This was offered
to us be CUESTA. He told us that ELADIO DEL VALLE was one of the people involved in the
assassination plot against Kennedy. As you know, he was taken prisoner and he was very thankful to
be taken back - he was blind.

?____________: Are they written? Tony CUESTA said that DEL VALLE and who else?

?____________: Are the statements of CUESTA written or taped?

Escalante: Written by the interrogator.

?____________: The declarations that were made by CUESTA, when was that?

Escalante: Early 1978. In August he was set free. I have it written. I had several conversations with
him. Interviews to speak about different things. We didn't question him about this because we didn't
know about his involvement. We were just trying to question and this came out. Cuban exiles in
Miami, somebody was arrested in 1966 and he told us a little of this history. His plan, his projects.

?____________: 1978 - wouldn't that have been about the same time the congressional committee
went to Havana? If it was before, was this information given tot he committee?

Escalante: No. He asked that this information not be public. I am only saying it here, because he is
already dead. It is finished. We didn't have any other kind of information to give. There are some
things you must respect. He gave us this information and in 1978 we didn't know if it was true or not.
In 1978, we were not aware of the participation of ELADIO DEL VALLE. We didn't know who he
was. Remember that I explained to you yesterday that when the Select Committee when they came to
Havana - they didn't give us any specific information. They just came to question us. We didn't know
the relationships.

?____________: Can the written report now be supplied?

Escalante: I am sorry. I cannot do this. Because it is a Cuban document. I am just telling you what I
know. I speak of these things. I didn't have the authority to do that.

?____________: Could we begin a process? Tony CUESTA was released as part of a general .....
 

END TAPE 4
***************************************

NASSAU TAPE #5
Tape picks up in the middle of a sentence

**********************************************************************

Smith: .....did his release have anything to do with the assassination?

Scott: Is it true that Cuesta was captured first in 1966? Was there a second time?

Escalante: He was in prison the whole time.

Other: On the same raid with Diaz, right?

Escalante: Right.

Scott: He was in prison in 1978 and only gave the interview in `78?

Escalante: No. The file is this high. (holds hand up)

Scott: When is he start talking to you?

Escalante: He started talking from the very beginning. He talked about many things. About ...for
example we know that M________________ was behind the 66 operation. His mission was to infiltrate
himself. Organize, according to Cuesta. There were exile pl

Question: When I asked Antonio Veciana about Cuesta, he said he also had been acquainted with
Maurice Bishop. When I asked about Leopoldo and Angel, he suddenly changed the conversation and
asked if I knew what became of Cuesta. He said he was with se

Escalante: Some of the groups he worked with would explain all of the things he was involved with.
His relationships with others......some of the names I cannot recall. Afterwards he spoke about his
relationship with Veciana, all of this.

Question: But he didn't talk about this document? It comes later on.

Escalante: Yes.

Scott: I think this is very important. Sum up what you have just said in the various things that Cuesta
has told you.

Escalante: Early 1978, he speaks about this in 1978.

Scott: For 12 years he said nothing.

Escalante: We didn't ask him. He didn't speak about this. I can tell you this from my own experience
at being arrested in the Batista regime. People arrested might speak about something that is well
know by the person who is questioning him. But there are

y dangerous for my security. But I want to tell you this information. But he didn't want to go deeper
than he would tell. I cannot tell you information that I don't want to be questioned about.

Question: So he never said anything about Oswald?

Escalante: No.

Question: So why was he released?

Escalante: In 1978, a group of exiles from the leftist side, already negotiated the release of several
prisoners and he was one of them.

Question: So he only said that Eladio del Valle and Castillo were in involved in the assassination?

Escalante: Yes and he did not want to say any more.

Scott: Was anyone else picked up at the time?

Escalante: Of course. There were two others and they were part of a team and they were released.
They have declarations but none of them speak about this.

Question: Did you get the idea that Cuesta knew more than he said?

Escalante: Yes, we think he did.

Question: Garcia?

Escalante: He died. He was a member of a group. He was with _______ in the 50's. With Hernandez.
He killed the President of Costa Rica. He was arrested and exiled to Mexico. He killed several
people. A Cuban consulate in Mexico. Hernandez - he killed h

Winslow: Did you say Penio Fernandez?

Escalante: Fernando Ortega. Manager at Sans Souci in Havana. The biggest casino in Havana.

Winslow: Do you know anything about the death of del Valle.

Escalante: Only what was published.

Winslow: Did Cuban intelligence have anything to do with this killing?

Escalante: We really didn't know, at least I didn't. In those days, I had nothing to do with the head of
these services when Eladio del Valle was killed.

Winslow: How was Santiago Ray Perna fit in?

Escalante: That was the same group.

Winslow: ____________________________________

Escalante: No. Who is she? Speak about her?

Winslow: Irma Collazo and Theodoseo Bahadue.

Escalante: No.

Winslow: They were both indicted for the death of Del Valle. He was dropped from the case for lack
of evidence and she fled to the Dominican Republic via Chicago. And I just got this the other day,
dated 14th of November 1977 and it says that Perna w............................

Escalante: Where is this from?

Winslow: From Lt Charles Black, Supr of Criminal Intelligence, Dade County Police.

Question: Richard Nagell says than in Jan 1963 when he was in Miami, he checked out relationships
between Sergio Arcacha Smith and Eladio del Valle. Do you have any information?

Escalante: No we don't have any. The Prio government - he was consulate at one time.

Scott: I'd like to come back to President Kennedy.

Question: We'd like to finish this first. The consulate.

Escalante: He did the same in New Orleans later on for the Prio group. He was the President of the
Cuban Revolutionary Council there.

Scott: Yesterday you were talking about _______________________ For me this is very important.
You said it was responsible for sabotage in 1963. I interviewed ___________________ for many hours
and would like to exchange information on this.

The HSCA characterized _______________ as a Mafia organization. But this seemed unlikely to me.
Both of them , I seem to believe that Sierra's story that he thought he was working for Robert
Kennedy based on various documentation in Schlesinger's b

Assuming that Sierra was sincere to take all these people , a disposition plan. You had Alpha 66 which
had made many problems for Pres Kennedy in 1963 - specifically between the US and the Soviet
Union because they were attacking Soviet ships. And

Guiterrez, the number 2 man in the junta (Chicago/Miami junta).

Escalante: Guiterrez was the man of this organization but was not related to the terrorists. And that
Robert Kennedy was made to believe that they were involved. Overnight, with all these steps were
given on the plot to kill Kennedy in April and May 1963, the

Scott: I agree that these groups were financed by the junta were very suspicious groups. Americans
(Minutemen) were involved too? What were they doing together? He says he cannot remember this.
The important thing for me is that the purpose was to m

Escalante: What is the relationship? It is not clear.

Scott: Sierra claims that he thought he was working for the US government even though the person
did not identify it. Met with two people with Sierra and all felt it was official - William Browder office.
A year earlier, the first connection with the

Escalante: Can you show him a photograph of him?

Scott: No - I'm not like you , I don't have those resources. I interviewed in 1978 or 1979 and he was
about 78 then, so I doubt he is still alive.

Winslow: Cuesta died.

Escalante: We can send you a photo of him.

Scott: I have many pages of notes. As you may know, H. Johnson said that on the day of the
assassination, there was a phone call in which the words were said: "One of your boys did it." Others
here know the details better than myself. meaning one of _

Maybe later you can answer.

Escalante: I am interested in knowing research and the reasons why the important role played by the
Cuban exiles at this time.

M. LaFontaine: We are going to give to you, two chapters of our book that will help to explain some
of the documentation from the CIA, FBI and Dallas Police files. I think it will explain exactly who
those Cubans were and what they were doing in Dalla

Escalante: Does anyone else have any information about this?

Question I will be here for a few days after the conference to hear anything else.

M. LaFontaine: In a story for the Washington Post, we explain how we came to know about this arms
trafficking in Dallas. The genesis of this story is that LHO spoke about guns in an arrest that had
been made 5 days before the assassination. He identified

Question: Three Cubans and the cover story for their murder or their deaths, for intelligence work.
Other details, about the meeting at the Petroleum Club. The Warren Commission report said that
Forest Sorrels of the FBI changed the route of the motor

Escalante: (Shaking his head at this comment)

Question: For some Watergate interest in connection to exiles. I was given access to a new document
recently - don't think it has been public. It was sealed by the court. At the request of Bernard Barker
and Martinez. Their list of potential witnesses.... Artime, Prio, Ramon Gonzalez, Louis H. Vidana,
Jose Arriola, Pablo Gomez, Oscar Fernandez, Jamie Borela, Hiram Gonzalez.

Martinez and Barker requested that these names be sealed. That's all I know about this document.
Their own potential witnesses.

Winslow: Is this in the archives?

Judge: Yes but it is not public yet. It is part of the ongoing litigation between Liddy and John Dean.

B R E A K

Smith: You've read most of our theories, what about ZR Rifle?

Escalante: The first thing I would like to clear up is that it is theory. I don't even know the theory. It is
government theory. We are the ones who have investigated it. Our object has been to investigate the
Cubans being blamed for this. We did not have, I am not sure what the whole agenda was, or all of the
plots proposed to Cuba but I think one of the agenda was this stuff. Because at this time, Sept, Oct,
Nov, these are _____________. I will remind you that in these operations, there was the est

CIA organized groups of special missions that were commanded by Mombises, (Cuban independence
fighters in the war against Spain). They were a group of about 100 men that were under the direction
of military, director of the Air Force during that ti

Only in the month of May, these groups achieved 11 operations of bombing alone. So we can say that
there were two operations that were happening at the same time. There were various attempts on
Castro at the time. There were articles and an inter

Question Was this an informant or Louis?

Escalante: The informant, because Louis was dead. Another was organized at the baseball stadium in
Havana. This was the last day of the national games. Louis ordered these games so a plan was made
and then it was canceled. It was a big commando. Fortunate

The third project was Tony ________ group, but there was also someone you know Joachim
________________. To be carried on by Cubans Mario S_______________ to shoot Fidel on the 26th
July meeting of the revolutionary council. The guns came to the We

So, during the first semester of 1963, there were many plans to destroy, to make trouble in our
country. There was a big psychological campaign to turn people, in Cuba, Costa Rica and Santo
Domingo. We realized and came to know that there were a bu

LaFontaines: All of the reports say that Oswald visited him for the first time in August. What is your
source that he visited him in May?

Escalante: HSCA - they told us. It was in May. That Oswald offered his services. But I may be wrong
about the date. He tried then to organize the FPCC. In those days, no embassy. He wrote to the
president of FPCC asking for the organization of a delegati

Oswald started to be seen with other Cubans. In a Committee that never existed, he was the only
member. Don't know the reason to go to Mexico except to go to Cuba. We do believe that the person
at the embassy was LHO and we will talk about it this

In New Orleans, LHO's tracks to Mexico and also to Dallas with Maurice Bishop are the same as
others. The object was making him seem like a Castro agent. Especially trying to travel to Cuba.
Discussion with Oswald at the consulate was for this too

But we have an idea. Imagine that LHO, we have nothing written of what he spoke. Someone
destroyed that - that in any police organization would arrest this man and not interrogate him. Those
notes were destroyed on purpose. That is why we think,

We think that when the information filtered out, when the information about the administration was
about to negotiate with Cuba, when the administration took actions against these exile groups,
apparently out of CIA control, these people were the pe

There are many different translations but it is said that it was never asked for. The CIA sent him a
gun. Cubela had a meeting on October 29. What they spoke about there was as Cuba as a country and
a coup against Castro. Cubela wanted to come back..

The gun, the weapon had a __________...... So we must think that he was to be used in a public act, for
Cubela to be there at the official program. An official day in Cuba is December the 7th. And I
understand that these forces in Central America

Blame Cuba for the murder

Provoke campaigns against Cuba

Carry out a military force against Cuba

Participation of American forces against Cuba.

Smith: Ironic that this backfires so obviously against the plans of the conspirators because as we see
the statements of LHO as communist agent and possibly Cuba and Soviet Union connection, that
Lyndon Johnson becomes very concerned. He doesn't want WWI

__________?: You can't rule that out.

Smith: I know. I wouldn't put anything past LBJ. But it is one of the ironies.

_________? Also, it is the motive LBJ used to press Warren into service - the threat of WWIII.

Smith: It is also the motive of taking over from a very attractive president and the last thing he wants
is the country divided over the question of who killed the President. Particularly with the election
coming.

Scott: In my book, Deep politics, I tried to reconcile what you laid out and the point laid out by Wayne
Smith that LHO was a lone assassination. I would invite you to consider that within the plot you
described, there was a second a plot which envision

to happen.

_________?: Johnson, we need to keep in mind that a lot of the figures we talked about have strong
Texas connections. David Phillips from Texas. Johnson from Texas. If a plot was devised in Texas,
you need Texas connections. I just wanted to draw attention

Smith: The appointment of Warren was a masterstroke. And Dulles and Ford too.

_________: Those two viewpoints are not in contradiction. Johnson may have had some measure of
knowledge of what was going to happen but in the midst of the crisis he would have pressures to react
militarily against Cuba or USSR. These pressures would no

_________?: Seems to question that somebody has made up false stories which put Cuban
involvement. In your own assessment of these stories, at least the part hinting at blame of Cuba. Can
you distinguish between exile groups attempting to use the situation

Escalante: We have said here many things. There were too many subjective elements. Plots to Cuba
started at the same time that the plots to kill Kennedy started. When Oswald comes , there somebody
had thought to link him with the Cuban government. And that

_________?: Can you give some example of documents. The Solo document that LHO made threats
to kill JFK in the Mexican embassy. After the assassination. Then the Pedro Charles letters - before
the assassination mailed on November 14th.

Escalante: Somebody else wrote that letter.

_________: It is important to distinguish between actions before and after the event.

Escalante: Anyone that had an idea to cover actions, sabotage, including agents in a hostile territory.
You had to take some measures. Somebody had to watch. Watch to see what a person would do. Kill
Kennedy. There had to be somebody to communicate. There...

_________?: Do you think there is Texas oil money (H L Hunt) involvement?

Escalante: That's why I wanted information. I think it has a potential about it. The information through
the exiles says that wanted - after the missile crisis. Now we know that it existed, but it was there. So
somebody got the information so that somebody

END OF TAPE 5
***************************************

NASSAU TAPE # 6

?____________: And that is my question to you. Have you considered the possible involvement of
other forces besides American?

Escalante: I don't know. Obviously, apparently after any, the assassination, the plans change. I don't
know why, but that's what happened. I can't make political judgments. I don't know
whether.....something turned out bad. I always thought OSWALD was condemned to death after the
assassination.

?____________: After?

Escalante: Before and after.. (Some laughter) OSWALD was the king. And OSWALD was practically
king for about forty-eight hours. There is no other solution except to be killed by Jack Ruby. This
could not have been planned. The thought that someone could have contemplated Jack Ruby to come
and kill him... that's crazy. It was a very extreme act. Actually what I think is, the most probably thing,
is that OSWALD was supposed to die immediately after Kennedy's assassination. If this had
happened, what would have happened?

?____________: Cuba would have gotten blamed. I think the lone assassin idea was already planted
before OSWALD was dead.

Smith: The OSWALD thing would exclude that. If OSWALD was supposed to die immediately after
the assassination, they had to blame him, he's the assassin. And blame those in Cuba because of the
earlier...And maybe they wouldn't have, but that was the plan.

?____________: What do you think it would have mattered if the Cuban consulate had approved
Oswald's visa?

Escalante: He would have been a couple days, three days maybe, and then back to Mexico. The
circle....... This afternoon we are going to speak about that..

?____________: Let's try to close this off at 1:15, if that's okay with everyone.

Escalante: Before finishing today, I would like to say something. I have spoken very freely today. It
has been taped. I have told you all of these things have been discovered in a book which is to be
published. Keep all of this in mind when you handle this information. We explained things. We are
going to a meeting, not for books. We thought in a small circle like this, knowing most of you, we could
talk freely as we have done. I ask you beforehand to be very careful with the information I have given
you from our book.

?____________: When will your book be published?

Escalante: Early next year.

Smith: Let me simply repeat something I said as we began. And that is that, it is perfectly okay to
film, but he would like to view before you do anything with it publicly. Anything with the film, he would
like to see. And also, I think he would appreciate it if any of you that are taping, would send copies of
the tapes, That would be very useful to him and his memory in going ahead with the book. I think it
would be the gentlemanly thing to do. Is this correct?

Escalante: Yes.

Smith: So, you can either get the address and send direct. Or, if you wish, I can be the central point
and make sure they all get to him. However you want to do it, that's okay with me. So let's take a
couple more questions and then we'll break for lunch.

?____________: I'm confused about one thing. Mr. Escalante says no ____________? did go
through.... On November 27th, he went to Cuba from Mexico City. The strange thing is the
Assassinations Committee concluded that the flight didn't take place. For some reason they didn't
want to get into this point but they also said that the gentleman skipped customs.

Escalante: (Interpreter) Sorry, it's too fast. I need time...

?____________: That's okay. Well anyway.....You said that LOPEZ did go to Mexico on the 27th.

Escalante: Yes (nodding head up and down)

?____________: The funny thing is that the Assassinations Committee, they concluded that the flight,
this incident did not take place. For some reason they wanted to sweep it under the rug. But the
original report says this man, he didn't go through customs. And he was the only one on the Cubana
plane and he went straight to Cuba without going through customs. Is that true?

Escalante: It wasn't possible. Mexico was our only way out. The only port we could go out. The FBI
had taken so many measures, that it was absolutely impossible to go without going through customs or
the Mexican police.

????? He got to Mexico. And asked at the Cuban Embassy to travel to Cuba.. He was in a hotel in
Mexico. I don't remember the 27th. It was a regular Cubana flight ___________? He got on the
flight...... and got to Cuba. And the flight was very much delayed. And it was late on the 27th. Because
it got.... Anyone who has traveled to Cuba, know it is late. Our friends are always late.. It's the truth.
In those days we had British Air... We didn't have the money to buy the spare parts. Always late.
(Short exchange between Nunez and Escalante) Every time a Cuban would get to Mexico, they would
make you sit there and take a photograph of you.

Nunez: There was somebody there. To say, you're a Cuban, put her there. I went once with a
photographer. We were traveling together. She was this girl. She was so angry. She was very young.
Seventeen or eighteen. Her first trip. And we went into the airport and a man came up and said you're
Cuban and I am going to take your photo. And she said, I'm going to take one of you too. She was so
angry. So this was very different. So it is very difficult to go out, through, without customs.

Smith: Just to take thirty seconds. I was with the first group of American diplomats to return to Cuba
in 1977. April. And I was left behind with one other fellow. The group returned to the United States.
And we were going to go out and talk to some American prisoners. So we stayed behind and we flew
out through Mexico. Our charter plane left, so we flew out through Mexico. Of course, at that point,
the Mexican police were not at all nice to Americans, especially American officials, traveling from
Cuba. So as soon as we arrived in Mexico, we also faced the cameras until a protocol officer came
over and said, "that's not necessary." Of course, maybe the CIA was there with another camera.
(laughter)

?____________: I have always thought from my work and my analysis, that as pertinent as
discussions are of involvement of the anti-Castro exiles and /or even the CIA operatives, or the Texas
oil interests who may have put money forward...that all of this is still a discussion of the mechanical
level of the assassination. That level on which the assassination was authorized or planned - similarly
to the mafia. But this doesn't mean this is....But my analysis has always been that these were the
figures of the assassination. And I think this information being given to the anti-Castro community
about Kennedy's plans to normalize relations, may have been done very deliberately in order to
involve them, and others, for their own motives at this mechanical level. So that these various groups
could have time to take credit for the killing and later, if necessary, take individual blame. And I've
discussed a little bit privately with Fabian and the other Cubans, information I have collected over the
years. Mostly anecdotal, from people in the military. A little bit written in books, in public forums,
about what appears to be a plan in action on the day of November 22 an invasion of Cuba and
assassination of Fidel. Which I think indicates that this plan we are talking about is phase I, was
probably canceled or superseded by phase II. In other words, in my view, these would have been
posing elements. And I have other indications that the response capability of the government and the
whole military that day to any sort of military reaction against the Soviet Union was completely
disarmed at the highest level. No communication possible, no code books aboard the planes, the black
box outside presidential control, nuclear command. It was effectively a coup that disarmed the military
November 22. But things have always indicated to me that the hand moving was well beyond any
mafia, anti-Castro Cuban, CIA operative could have done. So I just add that.

LUNCH BREAK

Smith: (Talks about missing video equipment [slide projector] and suggests that people might be able
to secure one on the next day to view the slides.)

Scott: I have been talking to Wayne and some other people during the lunch hour. I have been so
excited by the success of these meetings that I hope that they will be resumed at some future point.
And I have made resolutions for this meeting to that effect which would say: Resolved

1) that this group reconvene in about six months or so and

2) that individuals be invited that could throw further
light on US policies and bureaucratic arrangements with
respects to Cuba in 1963.

Now that's the text of the resolution, but in clarification, of individuals who could throw further light,
we are thinking of people, who, by the way, have not been invited, such as Richard Goodwin or
?____________. That's the two points I have.

Smith: Since I've....In as far as the resolutions, we should go through parliamentary procedures here.
Does anyone object to the resolution?

D. Lyman Objects. (laughter)

Smith: Would it be, it's not anything we have to decide here, but would it be feasible to think about
doing it perhaps, the next one in Havana? That might give you some problems. It might be some of
our participants would not be able to, or choose not to, or both, participate in Havana. But it seems to
me it might be logical next step. Would this, I'm not asking you to reach a decision right now, but just
off the top of your head, or heads. Would this seem like an interesting idea?

Escalante: Okay.

Smith: Okay. Good. That's all we need. So we'll go ahead with the resolution and talk to COPA about
it and we'll be in touch with you and the other two officials. The possibility of Havana or not Havana,
or somewhere else. We could do it here again or somewhere else. (Some discussion of potential sites.)
 

Smith: Any other issues before we get started?

Rodriguez: Colleagues. I know it is not the most appropriate hour for this. We also have this problem,
as we mentioned, that we don't have this projector yet. It would be much easier to make our
explanation. All this information is in pictures and photographs. But I will try to do this as briefly as
possible and try to keep your interest. And try to interest you in spite of this inconvenience. As you
know, better than us, the date of Oswald's visit in Mexico City is full of unknown things. These
unknown things have been the result of because of a lot of acts of disinformation, efforts to hide or
manipulate the evidence and as a consequence of this, we can't quite say anything specific about what
happened. We don't intend to resolve this problem in this forum. We only aspire to clarify part of this
truth. This is in direct relation with the evidence that we are able to provide in relation of the visit of
OSWALD to the Cuban Consulate. The certainty this part of the truth will contribute in some measure
to draw conclusions that have something to do with the rest of the entire truth. In the second place, we
intend to explain the evidence that makes up our estimation that this trip was high, a culminating
phase, of the plan to invade Cuba, and link their country to the assassination. I would like to clarify
some missions that were in operation in Mexico in September of 1963. In September of 1963, the
Cuban Consulate had two General Consuls - Mr. E. AZCUE and Alfredo __________XXXX, both
Cuban citizens of course. AZCUE, at the moment, was turning over his credentials to MIRABAL. He
was assigned by ......AZCUE, afterwards returned to Cuba in Nov 18, 1963. The characteristics of the
building, the consulate. It had an upper floor in which was based personnel of the trade office of their
diplomatic representatives and the bottom floor , that's where the Cuban consul was.

?____________: I didn't understand. On the upper floor was a trade office?

Nunez: There were two buildings.

Rodriguez: It was a separate building. The entrance door to the Consul and the waiting room was
shared by.... The consulate and trade office shared the same entrance. As a result, all the people that
worked there had to pass the waiting room to go to the upper or lower floors. And the consulate....did
not have protected areas against listening devices. Neither had systems of surveillance. that would
have allowed them to see or film people who entered the offices for whatever reason. As you know,
there was a narrow entrance, strict surveillance that was maintained by the CIA station from an
observation point situated in the Francisco Market Street, 149-1, Colonial Con Deso, among others.
Con Deso neighborhood. Their work, Cuban citizens worked there. One passed themselves off
(possibly Columbia). And he called himself CESAR ALBERTO RODRIGUES GUERRO.

Where he worked, they recorded all the conversations that took place in the consulate and in other
places in the embassy. Telephone conversations as well as conversations that took place in the
hallways or offices. In addition they photographed everybody who came in there, including consulate
people and probably people who came to the trade office. In one of the slides we were going to show,
we had a photo of this CIA agent watching. We had a picture of the ALBERTO CESAR. Our
intelligence was able to identify him. We know that there were no less than three, and it seems we
identified one. The other two it was not possible to identify..

?____________: One you knew about at that time, but there were in fact three?

Rodriguez: We are aware there are three from the E. LOPEZ report, but we only identified one. In the
E. LOPEZ document, this part is sensitive. But we are still sure they did exist. The proof of the
existence of these others were handed by the Cuban government to the US House Committee. I would
like to make a comment. We don't know if ALBERTO CESAR is still alive. The last we heard of him
was from the end of the 1970's.

?____________: The committee told me that they had not talked to him, that he was in Spain.

Rodriguez: He directed one of the Berlitz Schools. A cover for the CIA. Since this person, if he does
still live. It would be great to talk to him about these photos and the recordings that haven't shown up.
That we don't know about. Taking together the declarations of the witnesses about Oswald's visit tot
he consulate, so that it is easier to understand and more accessible to understand. The Cuban also
mentioned another woman. A Mexican woman - Silvia DURAN. These people were the staff of the
Cuban consulate in Mexico. These three people, they agree and confirm that the first time that
OSWALD made his presence know, showed up at the Cuban consulate September 27, 1963 in the
morning. That's the first fact, the first time he showed up with AZCUE in the consulate. He couldn't be
categorical about this, but he doubted OSWALD (he) would have been there three times. He said that
it seemed to him, that the third visit took place on the 28th of September, a day that was Saturday. A
day that they wouldn't accept visitors. If they were there, they would be working on internal things. In
the case of MIRABAL, he acknowledges having seen the subject OSWALD on two different
occasions. He was there on 27th and in other of his declarations, he says on these two occasions in
which he see OSWALD, he (OSWALD) discusses things with AZCUE AZCUE says he thinks that
there were three visits. He's not sure. He believes the third one must have happened on Saturday the
28th. He acknowledges before the SELECT COMMITTEE having seen OSWALD on two occasions.
He also says that on the two times he saw him, both were on the 27th. But he also says that on both
times he saw him, he saw OSWALD discussing things with AZCUE. This is important to clarify
exactly how many times OSWALD presented himself to the Cuban consulate and in what dates it
happened. As you'll see real soon, AZCUE has contact with OSWALD because OSWALD is
interested in the 2nd and 3rd visit. As a result you can see that the witness at the second and third
visits because those are the only two occasions that OSWALD talked with AZCUE. The first visit was
only with Silvia DURAN.

Smith: According to AZCUE, there may have been two visits after Silvia DURAN visit.

Rodriguez: And to my opinion, both on the 27th. And the third witness, SILVIA DURAN, says they all
happened on the 27th of September. This is SILVIA DURAN'S testimony and she is the most
trustworthy after which she was interviewed by the Select Committee. SILVIA adds a few.... that the
other witnesses were not able to say. Perhaps they did not ask them with the same zeal to her. She
says that the three visits + 11:00 am, 1:00 pm and between 5:00 and 6:00pm.. We realize that he time
spaces here between the times given by her and the other it is possible to take in to consideration that
in the first visit, OSWALD came to ask for a visa, topic by topic. And Sen. DURAN demanded to see
photos, which is part of the process for the form for the visa. And he went out to get photos near the
consulate. There was a place, a business, where people would get Polaroids. This visit happened at
11:00 in the morning. His visit with DURAN had no reason to meet with AZCUE. He came back in the
afternoon, and that's enough time not only to get photos but also have some lunch. He came before
and then DURAN went over all the documents that she had him sign. But she explained to him that in
spite of filling out this form it was still necessary to have a Soviet visa because he was asking for a
transit visa. As a result he wanted to talk to AZCUE, someone who wasn't a secretary to make sure
this was really necessary to go thru this Soviet process to get this visa. As a result, based on this
situation, AZCUE looked at the documents and came over and said the same thing DURAN had told
him. According to both of them, she thinks that OSWALD left for the Soviet consulate to get a Soviet
visa. The third visit, SILVIA says between five and six in the afternoon, OSWALD comes back and
explains that he now has the Soviet visa but has no official document to prove he does have the Soviet
visa. SILVIA calls the Soviet Consulate. The consulate confirms that yes, OSWALD was there, and
the documents seemed real, but still the visa would take three or four months because they would
have to consult about this with Moscow. SILVIA repeats and explains to OSWALD that he cannot get
a Cuban visa at this time without having the Soviet visa and that the easiest way to do this is to take
into consideration that the membership card in the Communist Party of the US. (grease the wheels to
get the visa).

Scott: Did SILVIA say this to him at some other time or is this a summary of her House committee
testimony?

Rodriguez: This is select committee testimony. (He has a slide) OSWALD answered to SILVIA that
he did not have time to do this. She suggested to him that he change his route. He became more angry
and he insisted to her. When he got so angry, she put him to AZCUE again. This was also an angry
conversation. He was insistent, saying they were a bunch of bureaucrats instead of being
revolutionists, to make him abandon his trip to Cuba.

We have just finished the first topic. OSWALD was there on 3 occasions all on the 27th. It is probably
that it happened according to SILVIA DURAN. One call to the CIA to declassify....

END TAPE 6
***************************************

NASSAU JFK CONFERENCE--Tape #7

E1 = English speaking participant #1, etc.

H1 = Hispanic participant #1, etc.

UE = Unknown English speaking participant

UH = Unknown Hispanic participant

Rodriguez: ...North American embassy (unintelligible)...they don't give you a visa right away. The
documents were definitely were hardly real, etcetera. This record of this call, it seems that this is the
call that Silvia is talking about that she called when she called the Consulate. This refers, says Silvia
recalls 15 years later, (unintelligible) thought it was between 5 and 6 fifteen years later and according
to the CIA records between 4 and 5. (Unintelligible) Who knows whose mistake that this, this
discrepancy.

?____________: Good enough for government work.

(Unintelligible)

?____________: It would seem, I know most of you have been into this a lot more than I have, but it
would seem that Azcue's recollection that there may have been three, maybe the other one was on the
28th, see, because he only saw Oswald twice on the 27th so he really doesn't know when the 3rd, the
1st the 3rd, when the other (unintelligible) takes place.

Summers: For what it's worth--for what it's worth I have this point (unintelligible), because we could all
talk about his a long time. But I did talk to Azcue's widow a couple of years ago and she said that she
remembered him going to work on Saturday, which he often did to catch up with work that he couldn't
do (unintelligible). And that--I'm so sorry, I was talking (unintelligible)--this widow Azcue tells me a
year or two ago that Azcue used to go readily in on a Saturday morning to catch up with work that he
couldn't do in the regular weekday situation. And she remembers him coming home stamping and
angry about this young man who visited the Consulate. And she isn't sure, but she thinks that it was
that he was angry, maybe angry more than once and suggested it have been Saturday. Her memory's
not clear. On the other hand Duran says she never worked on Saturdays, as I recall.

Newman: The point is that this meeting with Azcue, when they had the argument is in the
afternoon-evening and therefore the CIA transcript confirms what Silvia Duran has told us. It cannot
happen 24 hours later. Furthermore, the Russians also confirm this call on Friday and discussed it
Friday evening. So, much like different isotopes measure geologic strata, we have 3 different angles,
all giving us the same conclusion--which is that the 3rd visit must have happened as Silvia says, on
Friday.

Rodriguez: (Unintelligible)...you remark that regarding this event, regarding the testimony of the
witnesses we should stick to their declarations. Anyone else was not present, they weren't there to
see these things happen. We have different (unintelligible) we have the truth, just go by what the
witnesses actually said. We knew that Oswald was there 3 times. And it's true the first time he didn't
enter. Maybe the secretary told him to, but he did not enter. But it's clear that in the 3rd visit until
they had that really argument-discussion between Azcue and Oswald. In this 3rd visit, Mirabal is the
witness to talk about it. Mirabal says it happened on the 27th. In addition, we're going to support with
the testimony of another witness. While they can' support that it was that date, but at the
moment...they see Oswald there. This person, nah, this person didn't work on Saturday either,
because they're from the upstairs (unintelligible) the Trade Office, Commercial Office. We're gonna
get to that. I don't know if there are any more questions? This refers to the phone calls between the
Cuban and Soviet Consulates. The 3 witnesses, they acknowledge having talked with the Soviet
Consulate about Oswald's visa application. Silvia, she already told us about this, these phone calls.
Azcue, Mirabal, they don't say exactly which dates these happened on. However Azcue admits that
maybe his phone call was requested that it happen by Silvia, Silvia requested that he make it and later
it was transferred up to him. Which according to our judgment is perfectly possible. However the CIA
records (unintelligible) at 4:26 in the afternoon (unintelligible) 4:25 (unintelligible) they show no
evidence it was transferred to Azcue. Another detail that he also talked with the Consulate according
to Silvia's own witness, testimony, that Mirabal also (unintelligible) since Azcue was handing over his
charge to Mirabal they were together a lot in the office, in Azcue's office. And if this call really was
transferred up to (unintelligible) it's possible that in addition to talking with (unintelligible) maybe
Mirabal intervened as well. This is just speculation. But according to--this is just some of our, a piece
of our judgment that should be taken into account.

Scott: Can I ask a question? I ask this question as a man who was for 6 months the Canadian Counsel
in Warsaw. If you're going--it seems to me--that, my question is to (unintelligible, the Ambassador?)
that if the call is addressed to a Counsel then the person who should speak to the Counsel is the
Counsel. Is it normal for a secretary to request and obtain a call from a Counsel?

Nunez: Yes, it's normal.

Lechuga: The secretary received the call, no?

Scott: No--the issue that we must settle here, because it's an important issue. Whether the Counsel's,
either or both, spoke seems to me an important one because it is at odds with the CIA transcript which
has no evidence of the Counsels. It only has Silvia, every word that Silvia spoke, including "thank you
very much" and hanging up. So, we want to look very closely at whether the Counsels spoke to the
Russian Counsel.

?____________: (not Rodriguez, speaking Spanish): I think it's probable. First of all, this is something
that they didn't (unintelligible) Soviet Counsel there might have been relations with the secretary of
the Counsel. It doesn't have to be necessarily among our relations, Counsel with Counsel, a secretary
could talk to the Counsel.

Scott: See one reason why Counsel Azcue and Counsel Mirabal might have thought in 1978 that they
had spoken to the Soviet Counsel is because they--the House Committee--had shown them a copy of
the actual visa application which has on it a declaration made by the Consulate, where it says "we
spoke to the Soviet Counsel." And this might have put in their head the idea they spoke. I only say
this because it is such an important point. And I would ask also if Azcue or Mirabal were ever asked
by the Cubans after this deposition or before or if they only (unintelligible).

UH _________________ (unintelligible)

Summers: Just a brief point there in terms of going back and talking about what people remember in
1978, which is better, but not much better, than in 1993. What did Silvia say on this particular point in
her statement to the cops, to the Mexican Police?

Scott: They were changed, you see.

Summers: Yes, but what--on this particular point, what did Silvia's original statement say in 1963. I
know there are differences, but on this matter. My question is since we're talking about this issue of
who spoke to who, it seems to me that the earliest statement or deposition that we have is the
statement--paper--that we have which supposedly reports what Silvia Duran told the Mexican
Security Police. What did she say on this point, I can't remember. Maybe if you don't know, perhaps
John or Peter know what was said on this point.

Newman: I would have to look at it--my sense is that she just told them that about call and I didn't see
any discussion of it in the uh (unintelligible) we didn't have, I don't think we had an English translation
we worked on, we just had the Spanish.

Scott: I have looked at this quite closely in this thing I've just given out and the problem is we have 4
versions of what--but it's extremely relevant here. As this is the point on which the statements change,
on this particular matter. And not only that, they change in Washington. A cable is sent...

Summers: This is really important I think.

Scott: But talk for a minute and I will be able to read you in a moment exactly what happened,
because it is interesting

_________________ (not Rodriguez, speaking Spanish): There are not four versions of Silvia--four
versions from the people who took declarations from Silvia.

Summers: Agreed

?_______________ (not Rodriguez, speaking Spanish): This is important to point this out, not that
Silvia said 4 different things, but the person said that Silvia said 4 different things, which is not the
same.

Summers: No, I did not mean that, I know what you're...

?____________: We're all in agreement on that.

Rodriguez: I would suggest (unintelligible) the first one officially taken (unintelligible) before the
Select Committee.

Summers: I would just say that I interviewed her myself that year and like an ordinary human being,
she was very rocky. She couldn't really remember terribly well, she remembered as best she could,
like any human would.

Lechuga: Time passes even for...

Summers: That's why I say even though the Mexicans or the CIA may have messed with her
statement, nevertheless what we have of what she first said in November of 1963 is interesting to
study, which is what (unintelligible).

?____________: I believe Peter has it, right now.

Scott: First of all, before I read what the DFS says she says, I'd like to point out that after she was
released she went to the Cuban Ambassador (unintelligible) and she made a statement to him. And he
sent both a cable and a statement to Havana. And I would appeal to those of you here from Havana to
make available to Jim Lesar and to the Review Board all of the records of what Silvia Duran said
back then to the Cuban officials.

?____________: He says that how can you know that report does exist and the cable does exist?

Scott: Because we have the--the CIA intercepted a telephone call from Ambassador Armas to
Dorticos, to the President (unintelligible) Presidente Dorticos. And in the telephone call, he talks of
the cable and report. I will refer you, and this is all on page 126 of the back part of the book that I
gave you. Let me read to you the cable which the CIA sent--no sorry, it was not a cable, it's a
memorandum of the interrogation that was given by the DFS to the CIA. The CIA thought it was so
important that somebody flew with it to Washington. That is what I call the second version. It's on
page 126 for those of you who have it. And in the Spanish memorandum it says, this is my translation,
"Oswald was told that the aid which she, Silvia, could give him was to advise him to go to the Russian
consulate. Now in the original (unintelligible) "she spoke to him, by telephone, to the person in charge
of that office and was informed (unintelligible) that the case would have to be referred to Moscow and
that there would be a 4 month delay." Now, the CIA in Washington, in Langley, translated the cable
into English and sent it to the FBI. And listen to the difference: "Oswald was told that the aid which
could be given to him was to advise him to go to the Russian Counsel. The Counsel then spoke by
telephone to the person in charge of that office and was informed that the case would have to be
referred to Moscow and there would be a 4 month delay." And I suggest that the reason, the only
reason I can think of that the CIA would alter the text and make it "the Counsel" instead of "she" is
because they already had the visa application, the Cuban internal document in which it was already
typed "nosotros" spoke to the Russian Counsel.

?____________: One of the problems is that those cables and code were destroyed years ago. Every
now and then at the Foreign Relations Minister, the cables are destroyed, all the code cables. Except
some that have a very high historical interest. Which is not this cable. (General laughter) At that
moment, we did not know who was Oswald, who was going to kill Kennedy, or anything.

Scott: Excuse me, the report and the cable were made after she was released from the DFS.

Summers: After the assassination.

Scott: After the assassination, yes. So you cannot tell me that this was devoid of historical...

Lechuga: No, I don' know, no, I thought it was before the assassination. After?

Scott: She had been arrested, she was detained, she was tortured, she was bruised all over by the
DFS. So she came out and went to the Ambassador. And we know this because the CIA intercepted
the phone call. Let me again, on page--am I boring you with this? I can give you the numbers, it's CIA,
Cuban Embassy conf--, page 124 in my book, Cuban Embassy Confidential Report #125.

?____________: Which note is it?

Scott: It's page 124 of my book and it's Confidential Report #125, the top of that page. Armas sent
this to Havana after he'd interviewed Duran on November 25. And then, there is the telephone
conversation of which I spoke, in which he talked about that report. And then she prepared a longer
statement for the Ambassador after the initial confidential report had been sent. Now, in the spirit of
what Summers said, I believe that these are the best available evidence that we have on an issue
where there is much conflicting testimony and in which a DFS statement signed and attested to as
being November 23 is the 4th version that was actually prepared in mid-May of 1964 and contains
many changes from the 2nd and 3rd versions of the (unintelligible).

___________ (not Rodriguez, speaking Spanish): We're going to try and check and find out whether
this information...

Scott: Give this to Mr. Lesar and Mr. Gunn.

Rodriguez: And then there are (unintelligible) questions to take into account (unintelligible) witnesses
agreed in their testimony with respect to the incident during the 3rd visit, the incident between Oswald
and Azcue. Oswald never returned to the Consulate, nor did he call. He never showed any more
interest in his application. Do you feel this is logical if you take into account the discussion between he
and Azcue. They practically threw him out of the Consulate. And that was known by the same US
investigations. In this case, the investigations were (unintelligible). Go to the fact that Oswald never
filled out a form in the Soviet Consulate, the necessary forms. He never came, never (unintelligible)
the Cuban Consulate. There, that was the (unintelligible) of his little request before the Cubans.
These circumstances allow us to doubt, to doubt the truthfulness of the CIA registry about the call
that's attributed from the Cuban Consulate on the 28th.

Summers: Excuse me, perhaps I misheard. Did you say that Oswald never filled out the forms.

Rodriguez: The Soviet forms. The Cubans yes, the Soviets no. This makes them doubt the veracity of
the CIA registry of calls because there was a call on the 28th (unintelligible). The documents
presented by Oswald to ask for his visa in the Cuban Consulate; all of the witnesses agree
(unintelligible) the same documents seem to have been (unintelligible) in the section of observations
on the form you know where you write "office use only", observations. There Silvia made sure to say
apparently by according to Mirabal's indications, every (unintelligible) Mirabal with his signature
confirmed the (unintelligible) of the documents. Among these documents, among these documents of
Oswald's, because of the (unintelligible) they have, Oswald showed either a card or some other
identification as being a member of the US Communist Party. Even Mirabal, when questioned by the
Select Committee about this little piece of (unintelligible) said that this credential or this card or
whatever it was, it seemed new, brand new. Three witnesses say that he identified himself as a
member of the Communist Party. That's clear (unintelligible)

Summers: Who are the three witnesses.

Rodriguez: Azcue, Mirabal, (unintelligible).

Summers: Duran says now that--well, a year ago that--she said "this is a mistake." That she's sure
that Oswald didn't have a card, whatever he may have said.

(much untranslated Spanish discussion)

Summers: She'd written me a year or so ago that this was wrong and was misunderstood...

Rodriguez: Previous testimony...

Summers: ...by those who'd questioned her in 1978.

Rodriguez: Anyway, there's still two other witnesses that say those are the documents he presented
(unintelligible) never retracted her testimony. It was another two people who testified that...

Summers: The other two witnesses, one is Mirabal. There other is--what does it say on the document
itself about that? It doesn't mention the communist party card on the document...

Scott: Do you want me to read what it says?

(much Spanish discussion)

Scott: Can I read the English translation (unintelligible)?

Rodriguez: It's here, we have it here.

Summers: Peter, have you got it already?

Scott: Yes, it's page 80. "The applicant states that he is a member of the American Communist Party
and Secretary in New Orleans of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. He displayed documents in proof
of his membership in the two afore mentioned organizations and a marriage certificate. That's what
she wrote up for Mirabal on the day.

Summers: I would have to take that, I just for what it's, for the record, she now denies only that
particular card.

Scott: Also, for the record, on page 124 of my book, I list where she herself appears to pull away from
what she originally said, because the first official report from the CIA of what the DFS heard from
her, the first version we have of what she told the DFS is a cable from the CIA Station in which it
says, what a minute now, this is one of the things that disappears (unintelligible) very important.
Originally she types in that he showed a card. Actually I believe in 1978 with the text of the House
Committee Report as published, you will not find a reference to a Communist Party card, it is missing.
But if you read the Lopez Report, summarizing what she said in that interview and citing the exact
same page, the exact same page, and this is a quote Oswald showed her "his American Communist
Party membership card."

Summers: I don't know why she's denied it now, but I would just throw in because--I'm sure Arturo
needs to push on--she told me in 1978 and then again 18 months ago. While insisting for reasons best
known to herself that Oswald did not have this Communist Party card, she said but he did have a
photograph of himself with a policeman on each arm, to show himself being arrested during his Fair
Play for Cuba activities in the United States. And yet, to all of our knowledge, I think, there is no such
photograph. Yet she's absolutely clear that there was such a picture and that he was--man on each
side.

Scott: (unintelligible) there's a photo of his arrest in November.

Summers: Oh yes. She says that Oswald at the Embassy wanted to prove what a good revolutionary
he was and he had his Fair Play for Cuba stuff and his card for the Fair Play for Cuba, and she now
says and said to me in 1978 no Communist Party card but a photograph of himself being escorted by
two policemen after he'd been arrested.

Scott: I'm sorry to talk so much, but I will make this my last (unintelligible). It's a Mexican joke.
Remember that Silvia lives in Mexico and was interviewed by the House Committee in Mexico. Now
this is the joke: There was a murder and the story went out that a rabbit had committed the murder.
And British Intelligence went in search of a rabbit and they came back in 10 minutes with a rabbit, but
he denied committing the murder. And the French Intelligence was given the same challenge. They
came back in 5 minutes and the rabbit said, "I committed the murder." And they also asked the DFS
to find the rabbit. And they came back in 2 minutes, with an elephant. And so they said, "no, not an
elephant, we want a rabbit." And the elephant said, "I'm a rabbit, I'm a rabbit, I'm a rabbit!"

(much laughter)

Rodriguez: Okay, a crucial aspect of these (unintelligible) is that regarding identification of the
subject who actually visited the Counsel. In this case, as is known, Mirabal and Silvia Duran agreed
categorically that the person identified there was Lee Harvey Oswald, he who has been accused of
killing JFK. Mirabal said that he observed him on two occasions at four meters distance (12 feet)
while Silvia was always with him during his 3 visits. In the case of Silvia, she identified Oswald on the
23rd of November after he was arrested--before--before she was arrested, sorry. She had said to her
husband...

(Female voice, can't tell if English or Spanish): (unintelligible)

Rodriguez: Of the 3 witnesses who were initially interrogated 15 years afterward, Azcue was the only
one who didn't possibly identify Oswald as he had identified the person who visited as the person who
was blamed for assassinating Kennedy. He said the impression that he had, him now being in Cuba, he
left for Cuba (unintelligible) he said, the images of that moment, the moment of when Oswald was
killed by Jack Ruby, images of that moment this affected this image (unintelligible) their judgment.

(untranslated Spanish discussion)

Rodriguez: Azcue identifies him (unintelligible) he says he's not the same person. And he says why?
We kept on doing the research, which we haven't finished it, about the different persons who could
have seen him during his visits to the Consulate. And up to this moment we have two other persons.
One (unintelligible) already talked to you about him and (unintelligible) that is Guillermo Ruiz Perez
and the other one is Mr. Antonio Garcia Lara. (unintelligible) Garcia Lara was a member of the Trade
Office. He came to this moment--the discussion that was between Oswald and Azcue. (unintelligible)
He didn't know whether it was (unintelligible) or not (unintelligible) something accidental being there.
He was coming down from the office and could see (unintelligible) closely when he was almost
finishing the discussion with (unintelligible) and leaving the Counsel. And so he could be quite certain
of how he (unintelligible) when Oswald's photograph was published in the press after the
assassination. He said that he didn't have any doubt that it was the same person that he had seen in
the Consulate. Somebody asked him why didn't you report this before? And he said that the Cuban
government had already delivered to the US government in 1964 all the evidence we had, the
evidence that was requested. Nobody asked him before. (unintelligible) worked not in the Consulate,
but in the Trade Office (unintelligible) the same person that was Oswald.

Summers: When did Lara, Garcia Lara say this?

Rodriguez: In 1993 (unintelligible)

Summers: Arturo (unintelligible) talked to him about this in 1993?

Rodriguez: Si, approximate.

Summers: And what about Luis Perez, when did he say this, the same time?

Rodriguez: No, no, no. It was before, I think it was before.

(untranslated Spanish discussion)

Rodriguez: We never did research in 1964. The only time we've done research was in 1994. This is
the result of that research.

Summers: Just for the record... but Silvia Duran when I talked to her and her husband, and in 1978
when she talked to the Committee [HSCA], I asked her if she was certain it was the real Oswald and
she said, and certainly what actually happened, her husband thinks what was in the paper... that after
the assassination, she remembers the name Oswald. And when she read the paper she assumed it was
the same person because he was named the same. I asked her, did anyone show her some
photographs or film after the assassination and she said "no, all I see was a picture -- mug shot in the
Excelsior newspaper". And I said, fine, you've never seen a film of this person because there's a film
of the real Oswald walking and talking from the summer in New Orleans. So I did send them to her, a
shot of him in front of the camera and she said when I sent it to her, she said, "oh, that was not the
same man I saw. The man I saw at the consulate was weak and feeble character and this man was
more of a powerful person". For what it's worth she also said she thought the physical description that
she saw which are not consistent with the real Oswald. Ask Peter [Scott] or John [Newman]... maybe
others are familiar with her statements to the DFS at various stages that Peter could tell us about,
refers to an Oswald with blue eyes and blonde hair. This is in November '63. That was with meetings
at various stages with the CIA, but also she describes herself. She could not say to me that he was so
and so height because she said that would be silly to say he was so and so height.

But she is a very little woman and she said to me he was the same height as her and she is a little
woman. Oswald was much taller, 5-10 or 5-11. I say this only because we cannot be quite so certain
that she remembers that the Oswald was definitely the real Oswald.

Rodriguez: I do not doubt that Silvia might have said that, but Silvia herself made a description of
Oswald on the application form and the height was different, which was a lot taller than her. It is very
difficult to think that a woman like her, that was very outgoing, that it has also been said that she liked
North American men. Because we all know that descriptions, as years go by, change do to human
reasons.

I suggest we end, then come to a compromise because we'll never get to the end.

Anyway, there are two things, his photograph and his signature. The signatures were authenticated as
well as the photographs. In our point of view, besides four witnesses recognized Oswald. These two
last ones I just mentioned, there are some logical reasons that allow us to doubt that a double was the
one that showed up at the Cuban consulate. Oswald was a well known person to the Soviet Secret
Services and the CIA knew about this...the KGB, Soviet Intelligence and counter intelligence. The
CIA knew that these agencies knew that these organizations had cooperation with the Cuban
Intelligence Services. We are of the opinion that if a double had existed and asked for a visa from the
Cuban and Soviet Union offices it would have been a risky situation. It would have meant additional
risks for him to be able to travel to Cuba, and furthermore, it would have shown evidence of a plot. It
would have been easy to prove, by Cuba and the USSR using photos, that he was a double. I doubt
that Cuba had the means in its consulate to identify the real Oswald, and also doubt that the Soviet
Embassy had the means to identify a double Oswald.

On the other hand, it was true that Oswald was creating his own pro-Castro legend. And those that
guided him did so under reasonable pretext for them. The element we have mentioned before to
investigate certain supposed plans of Cuban Intelligence and tied to it, an assignment in Cuba. It had
been done before in the USSR. Why then utilize a double? All the information we have read before the
trip to Mexico suggests the participation of a double. They are tied to actions that will later
incriminate him to the assassination or with the deliberate intention to implicate Cuba. There are more
operative reasons with all this here mentioned. We are convinced of the identity of the subject.
There's more evidence in what we talked about in regards to the signature and photograph. As it was
proved by the Warren Commission and the Senate, Cuban specialists have also determined that the
visa request was filled out by Oswald at the consulate. It was typed with the same typewriter as other
visas had been typed, the typewriter used by Silvia Duran. According to statements by witnesses, the
visa form was also signed at the consulate and it was never taken from there. It was witnessed by
three. These are the additional elements to the American investigation that reenforce our findings. If
we assume that the person was not the real Oswald that visited the Cuban consulate, then we should
ask, why does the local CIA station in Mexico City hide the fact which they should obviously have had
because of their technical capabilities of the unquestionable presence of Oswald at the Cuban
consulate.

Why did they hide or do away with the conversations made by Oswald and others accredited to
Oswald, and why didn't they furnish photos of him when he visited both consulates? We don't have an
explanation. We think there were different factors for this inexplicable conduct. First, something that
has already been mentioned, Oswald's detention and second, President Johnson's action to name a
presidential commission headed by Warren to conclude with a predetermined conclusion of a lone
assassin. Maybe we should take into consideration that the proof could have been destroyed because
it did not favor the evidence that had been fabricated, the evidence to involve Cuba. In our opinion,
taking these factors together, it was a decision to hide the evidence. We are under the impression it
could have been Phillips, the head of the Cuban case, that was working against Cuba in Mexico, and
he made the decision. It is clear because this indicated we had mentioned before, that that had
happened after the assassination and it is suggested to Veciana to try to get statements from Ruiz in
the sense that he would make him say Oswald was a Cuban intelligence agent. It shows clearly his
intentions to blame Cuba and that if he did that, why wouldn't he do that?

That is our opinion.

Smith: I'd like to suggest another question, a puzzlement, this is as we all agree that this is part of the
maneuver to blame Cuba. But the real reason is to get Oswald to Cuba where he would be for a few
days or a couple of weeks, he would have been described convincingly as a Cuban agent. But all you'd
have are picturers of Oswald, obviously taken by the CIA.

Kolis: Excuse me Wayne, but the hotel next door will lend us a slide projector for the slide show.

Smith: Not tonight. We're going to get one tomorrow.

Kolis: We could have it in a minute or two.

Smith: People are too tired.

Twyman: Do we have a room for tomorrow?

Smith: I talked to the hotel and suggested if we couldn't get a slide projector today most of us would
be here tomorrow and they said "sure".

[Note: The discussion for getting a slide projector continued. The problem was that the hotel could not
find a bulb for their projector. It took them three days. Finally they decided to borrow one from the
hotel next door.]

Smith: If you get him to Cuba this is convincing evidence. If all you have are pictures of Oswald going
to the Cuban embassy applying for a visa and he doesn't get it, it's not convincing evidence. It's not
convincing evidence he's a Cuban agent. Now of course you can always say he is consulting, he's just
not applying for a visa. You can always say these are pictures of Oswald going into the Cuban
embassy in Mexico and that in itself is proof.

Lesar: But you have a string of other things.

Smith: I know. You've got to get other stuff you just can't give up on this. It's not that they give up on
this. This evidence, pictures of Oswald going into the Cuban embassy is not as convincing, is not as
good evidence as they had hoped for. Perhaps what they really hoped for was to get him to Cuba. But
if that's the case, how do we.... the CIA as we all know makes mistakes and forgets things and leaves
their classified documents at snack bars. But they must have known he had to have a Soviet visa. He
had to ask for a transit visa. He had all sorts...

Lesar: First of all I don't think they ever had a plan to release photos of him entering the Cuban or
Soviet embassies. They wouldn't do that because that is "sources and methods". That would have
been planned.

Smith: Yeah. Okay John.

Newman: It's really easy to theorize in ten thousand directions but there are some real hard facts that
have emerged that bear directly on the questions raised by Arturo [Rodriguez]. What happened to the
evidence? We know they had to have evidence, photographic evidence. They had acoustic evidence.
Now we know... one of the things I was able to bring forth in the book were at least three documents.
When Winscott [phonetic], the head of counter intelligence and Dick Helms all saying they knew
this---he was in that consulate. What puts the lie to it is the CIA cover story that they did not know
Oswald was inside the Cuban consulate until after the assassination. Now with that cover story in
place, it's very desirable to get rid of the evidence because the evidence will undermine such a cover
story. Now with respect to photographs. I don't know why. We can theorize. Maybe somebody,
someone else was in that picture. Could be many reasons, but I think we are in the position today to
make a very good guess why the acoustic evidence had to be destroyed. Oswald's voice was not on
any of those tapes. Now when I wrote my book, I overlooked one key piece of evidence and I would
like to just point at one very quickly. I did mention the Hoover-Johnson transcript of 23 November of
which Hoover tells Johnson, "we have up here in the United States the tape and Oswald's voice was
not on it", but what I missed, and it was available at the time, is a lengthy addendum to a footnote to
the Eddie Lopez report, the HSCA Report written by Lopez. It's footnote 614. I have a copy. I will
give you this very briefly. There are two passages in this footnote that pertain to FBI agents familiar
with Oswald's voice, presumably, both from previous contacts in Dallas. But also from the
interrogation after the assassination. And it is clear from these FBI memorandum cited in here, that
not one, but two conversations with the alleged Oswald were listened to by the FBI after the
assassination, the one October transcript and the 28 September Saturday transcript from the Cuban
consulate to the Soviet consulate. In both instances the FBI agents were very clear. It was not
Oswald's voice. So now we have a large number of FBI people after the assassination listening to
tapes from Mexico and it's not Oswald.

In the last few months, the Review Board has declassified new documents, CIA documents. The
documents make it clear that all of the tapes in Mexico were destroyed. We were told by the CIA that
they destroyed all the tapes before the assassination. Now we have CIA documents which state the
tapes were reviewed after the assassination. Furthermore, the person who has a cover name of
Fineglass [phonetic], which we presume to be, I suppose, to be Tarasoff [phonetic] made a voice
comparison which only can be done from tape not transcripts. And finally, yet another CIA document.
It is presumably to have reason to compare tapes of Oswald's voice until after the assassination. The
document itself is 1964, but it is not clear.

The last document I want to make reference to is a CIA document which makes reference to the one
October intercept and the possible existence of another copy found after the assassination. These
documents are released to us by the Review Board only in the last two months. So the point is this,
the evidence is building, overwhelming evidence, that Oswald's voice was not in this acoustic
evidence; so a very good reason to destroy the acoustic evidence is because it proves that that wasn't
Oswald on those phone conversations.

Scott: On those two...

Newman: Yes, on those two. And furthermore 28 September and one October and that it wasn't Silvia
Duran. Now, I don't know where we go ultimately with this, but I think this takes us a lot further than
we have been so far in establishing cover stories, a large number of cover stories, "we didn't know he
was in the consulate", "we didn't destroy the tapes", "we didn't even have any idea Oswald was in
America since 1962", which they told their CIA station. A large number of these cover stories, all
relating to one subject, Oswald's Cuban activities, in particular, his presence in the Cuban consulate
and what happened there.

Rogers: Continue with films and tapes. I have frequent conversations with Eddie Lopez. The last
conversation just a week ago. He met him when he was in Washington. He was introduced to a man
called Escarlin, E-S-C-A-R-L-I-N. He was an attache at the Cuban Mission. Later when the HSCA
went down to Cuba, Escarlin was there. He pulled him to the side. He didn't say outright, but he
intimated, he suggested, to Ed Lopez that here was indeed photographic surveillance at the Cuban
embassy by the Cubans and that there is perhaps a record of the visitors on those days. I had heard
you specifically state that there was no photographic surveillance. How do you know that? What do
you base that on?

Smith: No, he didn't say that Alan. He said in the Cuban consulate they did not have a camera.

Rogers: That's what Eddy's talking about. In the Cuban consulate they had photographic of the
visitors.

Lechuga: I am speaking since 1962. I am positively sure we did not have that.

Rodriguez: But of all the persons we have talked to that worked in the consulate, none of them says
there was photographs or anything. The same way we have given everyone visa applications that went
there. We would have given the photographs.

Rogers: I'm not saying you are hiding anything. I just wondered what you based your statement on. It
could have been someone said they didn't have it and they may have had it. My suggestion is that to
identify this Escarlin and ask him. If he made such a statement.

Rodriguez: We know he was an official. We have talked to him because he was one of the persons
who was with the Commission in March '78. We have talked to him several times.

Rogers: But he said something to Ed Lopez. Ed Lopez mis-heard?

Summers: Excuse me, but I have a related, but different, question. When your people allowed me to
come to Havana in '77 or '78 and you supplied me with the pictures Arturo is describing of your people
taking pictures of Gallego taking pictures, I was also allowed to talk to your electronic man Silvio
Lombrada, I think, who talked to me about the evidence that that embassy was riddled with bugs. I'm
not talking about telephone taps. I'm talking about bugs under the table, bugs in ______? And Senor
Lombrada showed me the arm of the library chair which had a CIA bug. Here is my suggestion.
Lombrada did not have knowledge that the consulate was bugged. This is very relevant to what we
might have got out of the CIA, might get out of the CIA, and I noticed Arturo, early in your address
you said that the telephone taps, waiting room, hallways and so on... Do you have hard evidence that
the consulate was bugged?

Rodriguez: Yes, I was aware of the research Lombrada did in the embassy and the consulate. I don't
know why he told you only the embassy because it's the consulate and the embassy.

Summers: These bugs were found and located by your people?

Rodriguez: Yes.

Summers: When?

Rodriguez: 1964.

Gunn: I have two questions. You know about the unidentified man in the photo that the CIA identified
as Oswald after the assassination? I was told these were photographs of two different people, but that
one of these people, at least one of these people coming out of the Cuban embassy was in fact a
Cuban. I wonder if you have ever done any research into these photographs to try to determine who
these people might have been who were falsely identified as Oswald?

Rodriguez: Some efforts were made, but after we went through the different persons who worked
there... We showed that photograph... it could have been some friends. It could not be identified.
People say it was two different persons. It was just one photograph.

[At this point the interpreter could not translate what he was saying. Possibly something about
"angle" and "goodpaster"]

A person was added, a proback? photograph from another. That is the only photograph that I know.
But nobody... I could not find him.

Russell: One other one final brief question to verify if this is true or not. This is a letter from Nagel
written by Nagel in 1975 about this mystery man in the picture. He says, " I would guess he was
photographed..." This actually has to do with the Soviet embassy. "As he was exiting the main
entrance of the Soviet embassy compound, the surveillance camera was situated on the second floor
at a building located across the street".

Actually this is the Soviet embassy so I don't know if you know where that is.

Smith: It's almost 5:30. Let's begin to bring this to a close.

Scott: This is very short. In addition to the points raised by John Newman, in a very recent release,
we have a penciled note from someone in 1976 who recalls that the Mexican... then there is a deletion.
I assume these are the people manning the listening post on the Soviet embassy. That the caller that
called himself Oswald, this is referring to September 28 and October first calls, not the September
27th... that the caller that called himself Oswald had difficulty making himself understood both, as I
recall, in English and Russian, which suggests that the September 28/October first person may not
have been an anglophone? at all. I just wanted to add this to the list of points.

Lesar: Immediately after the assassination when the news had been disseminated that Oswald had
visited the Cuban consulate, I would assume there must have been a demand from Fidel Castro or
your Ministry for reports as to what happened and that Mirabal and Azcue must have submitted
reports. Do such reports exist and have you reviewed them?

Rodriguez: We already went through that and we have taken note and we don't know if they were
there.

Lesar: Sorry.

Newman: I just wanted, in closing, to summerize in the last two days relative to Oswald in Mexico
City, that we agree on the following points. Three visits Friday, right?

Rodriguez: Apparently.

Newman: The Solo story about Oswald threatening to kill Kennedy is false.

Rodriguez: Okay.

Newman: That much I would like to put on the table that both sides agree on.

Scott: I would like to record that I myself think the Solo story is false and probably had to do with
David Phillips. This is slightly different than I sent to the Cubans some months ago. In this document I
change my position.

Lesar: I want to pursue the Solo visit a little further.

Smith: Not much further.

All: Laughter

Smith: Just solve it. That's all.

Lesar: First, have you determined whether or not that Solo did visit Cuba at the time that the recently
released document says he visited Cuba, and if he did visit, did he speak to Castro?

Rodriguez: No.

Lesar: No, to both questions?

Rodriguez: No. No to both questions. He did not visit Cuba and he did not visit Fidel Castro. I went
through all the files in the consul's papers and there's no references. He claims it was in 1964, but in
that whole year no one had anything to do with Fidel Castro or from the Communist Party.

Lesar: No visit by anyone representing the U.S. Communist Party?

Rodriguez: Well, I cannot that. I can say this Solo person was not in the immigration files or in the
files for the consulate. So he was not there.

Summers: I know you are trying to end quickly, but this Mexican thing is so important to the story. I
was always up on what the CIA was possibly covering was not some dark involvement in the
assassination, but it's operations in general and to embarrass the Cubans, and to smear people
associated with the Cubans. In this case I'm thinking of the Fair Play For Cuba Committee. We know
that in the very month that Oswald went to Mexico, the CIA and FBI were working together to
penetrate and damage the Fair Play For Cuba Committee. I understand there was a quite strong Fair
Play For Cuba Committee group in Mexico. Do you people have any evidence that the CIA was at
that very time doing operations to damage the Cuban support that was in Mexico City?

Rodriguez: Yes of course.

Escalante: We cannot speak of those plans against Fidel Castro or operations, but you might look at
all the CIA stations in each country which Cuba had relations. We are not telling specific operations in
that direction. I think [unintelligible] in his book explains it very widely on this. In those days Mexico
was the only way out from Cuba.

Summers: But no special search in operations in September-October '63?

Rodriguez: We haven't done that.

Smith: What it comes down to is that they can't say because they haven't searched the files at the
time. You might bear that question in mind for a later time.

Let me then call this....

Newman: One last thing please for those that did not go to Rio de Janeiro. Arturo gave essentially the
same chronology in Rio that he did today without having read my book. [see Rodriguez's Rio
presentation at the beginning of this transcript] So those of you that weren't there, I just wanted to
point that out. I in my basement in Maryland and Arturo in Havana analyze the material the same
way.

Rodriguez: I agree on that.

Smith: Let me express an appreciation to our Cuban colleagues. They really came very well prepared
for this. I'm really impressed and rather touched in the response to some of the things we sent them.
They did file checks and so forth and they took this very seriously. It is much, much appreciated. And
appreciate your taking the time to come up to Nassau. And in closing again... I'd like to again, express
appreciation... I think I've forgot to mention, and I shouldn't. Some of you do know them, Lee Halpern
and Evie Rockefeller who did make some funds available for this. Again, Gulf Stream Airways and
________? Company, and some others who will be checking in. This is a good beginning. It's really
worthwhile to other meetings. Hopefully the Review Board can revive the contacts done by the Select
Committee.

Thanks to all of you for coming. I've said a number of times, its a more pleasant place to meet than
Dallas. We can say that.

Scott: We talked of perhaps seeing the slides tomorrow [Saturday] morning. I just want to get a time
to meet, nine or nine-thirty. If not, I would vote for nine.

Kolis: Okay, I set up... They said we could not use this room because it's being used. We can use a
little satellite room next to it. Starting at 9:00 am. I'll have the slide projector.

Smith: I'll tell you I'm not going to be here, so I'll leave that to you. Nine in the morning is rather an
uncivilized time as far as I am concerned.

Escalante: If one hour is enough, we can do it.

Summers: I have a word of thanks here. Certainly a word of thanks obviously to the interpreters, but I
could just say there is a lady in Dallas; she has worked on this for years now, called Mary Ferrell.
And Mary Ferrell is a woman of just great excellence. I know of hardly anyone who criticizes her, and
not only does Mirta look somewhat like Mary Ferrell, but she equaled Mary Ferrell in excellence.
Thank you.

[clapping]

[More discussion on the time of the slide show]

Lesar: One point. Tony has forgotten to thank the person who put this all together, Wayne Smith.

[clapping]

Smith: I really do appreciate Adam and Daria coming along helping with the logistics and interpreting.
They will both say they are not professional interpreters. Poor Mirta would have expired without
some help. Okay, we don't have a dinner tonight....so we will all be in touch.

[At this point everyone got up and either mingled or left the room. A number of private conversations
were caught on tape, but most were not intelligible.]

END OF FORMAL CONFERENCE

END OF TAPE 7
***************************************

NASSAU TAPE 8 ---------SATURDAY SLIDE PRESENTATION

DEC 9, 1995

[NOTE: The translation was so confusing that this transcript reflects the English translation directly
from the Spanish and are not the words of the translator in Nassau.]

Rodriguez: Not much time...maybe later.

First image [slide] control point of CIA across from the Cuban consulate in Mexico --- the window of
the building. This is the subject to which we offered yesterday that worked in that control point. Here
you see sticking a hand out to open the blinds to be able to photograph with _______________
counseled??? the people who entered or exited the Cuban consulate...I gave you the address
yesterday. This is one of the individuals that worked there...Cuban...that had a cultured
personality...you must be familiar with these photographs as we turned them over in 1978 to the
House of Representatives. I am sure Tony Summers will recall it...he is not here now. According to
Henry [Cabot] Lodge __________???, this is one of the locations to watch the Cuban consulate. We
knew about it.

Another image... An aspect of the __________dictamen? done about the espionage means that they
were installed in secret form of course in the locations of our embassy and consulate. Here it says
"telephone equipment". The bug installed in the telephone allowed conversations to be heard even
when the receiver was on the telephone...up to six meters of distance from where people were talking.
These bugs worked from the energy from the telephone lines itself and transmitted the signals clearly
of the conversations to a distance from 80 to 100 meters outside the locations [of the bugs] ...and... the
CIA control building was about 50 meters from the Cuban consulate and embassy. So, therefore, they
received an audible signal of the highest quality. Everything that was said from the Cuban consulate,
the commercial office and other locations in the Cuban embassy...I can't say which now. So the CIA
was able to penetrate with its technical means our installations. Since when? We do not know. These
equipment [the bugs] were discovered, disconnected in 1964. It is very possibly they heard
conversations of our ambassador about 1962. This listening system that was installed in the telephone
was combined with microphones that were inserted in the wood of the furniture, some window frames.
These as well as the bugs on the telephones transmitted the signals by radio to a distance of 80-100
meters. In this case these radio transmitters worked on battery energy, activated from the outside.
They could be turned on and off at will.

The technical means during this time were not only found at the consulate or our embassy, but were
also found in other diplomatic installations abroad of other countries. We had knowledge of these, the
components of which were U.S. making and were not normal commercial equipment. Similar
equipment is sold commercially according to our technician, these devices found in the Cuban
installations were specially made.

This is essential. By this means they could hear all conversations in all locations. No doubt the CIA
was able to hear Oswald's voice during his visit.

?____________: When you did discover these devices in '64, were they cancellate in the office where
Duran had worked in?

Rodriguez: Yes Duran and another one.

?____________: The equipment in the widow panes was also six meters?

Rodriguez: Yes, six meters.

?____________: Did you also find these devices in Duran's office in '64?

Rodriguez: Yes, yes. This was a common locale, in the telephones. I don't remember the month, but I
know it was in '64. With respect to Duran's office at least at the time they [the bugs] were discovered,
what happened in that room should have been covered by these bugs... perfectly. Oswald was not only
in Duran's office but also in Azcue's in a loud voice. Furthermore, they were installed in such a way
that they could hear the conversations from any angle originated...one bug compensated
another...conversations could not have been missed.

?____________: Were there more than one telephone at the consulate?

Rodriguez: Yes of course. I could not say how many. The secretary, Azcue...

?____________: Did you find a bug in every telephone, in all telephones?

Rodriguez: I'm not interested in the number 112845. Yes, yes, the phone used by Duran, Azcue, and
the other telephones. That is the number Duran gave to Oswald July 10. I would have to ask the
experts. He has the information about the phones but not the numbers...he is going to check...this is
mainly a technical report...what kind of equipment...conclusions...what possibilities there are to
intercept.

?____________: The issue...the CIA taped conversation within a consulate in which Silvia is asking
for the number of the consulate...this is September 27...day Oswald came in...and so she is told
number 112845...this is the number she gives him. Also the CIA bugged Silvia's phone and
transmitted this intercept...but they should have also intercepted at the Cuban end and they, CIA,
never gave this info to Washington.

Rodriguez: This shows that the CIA has withheld and or manipulated information. We talked about it
yesterday...I'd see no reason to go over it. I am going to check if there is information regarding this
particular phone number. I want to make sure they know. They must have heard any conversations in
the room.

?___________: Now I'm talking about a telephone conversation out of the Soviets... these are two
different points...

Rodriguez: Of course --- Of course.

Next slide!

This is a topic I was not able to cover yesterday, incriminating letters. These I was able to translate to
English and to abbreviate. This is a summary of what we concluded about this incident, gives a general
idea. Five letters sent. [Pedro Charles letters] Apparently four were sent through Havana mail, fifth
one from signature [postmark] does not seem to have been sent from Havana. In Cuba remains the
original. There are four return addresses, Jorge and Pedro Charles, Miguel Galvan Lopez and Mario
del Rosario Molina. Two of these letters had left Cuba one day after the murder [of JFK], 23
November 1963, signed by Pedro Charles and Molina. Two of the letters signed by Pedro Charles and
Jorge have dates before the assassination, tenth (10th) and fourteenth (14th) of November 1963. A
third one signed by Miguel Galvan Lopez has the date of November 27, 1963, two days after the
assassination. The other two have no information. These letters, done a few days before, touch on
topics that were known only after words by the investigators and were written before the
assassination. We will come back to this.

In all of the letter's text it involves Cuba to the assassination. It gives an image of a conspiracy
between Oswald and a Cuban official, and others are dedicated to denounce this relationship. Well,
this is the essence that I can give you in relation to these letters based on information we have been
able to access.

Next slide!

This is the letter that remained in our possession, signed by Jorge, addressed to Lee, Miami, Florida,
dated November 14. This is one of the letters done before the date and never left Cuba, postmarked
November 23. The text is of a conspiracy nature. Some of the topics that were known later. This letter
was the only original in our possession. We did an analysis of it, graphologically and equipment used
to write it to determine by which means it had been written. Furthermore, graphologically [hand
writing analysis] to determine the characteristics of the person who wrote it.

Question on the address... L.H. Oswald, Royalton Hotel, no street address. Remember that all of
these letters, two of them, were discarded by the FBI. The FBI sent a letter with a memorandum to
the Warren Commission down playing them because two of the letters were found to have been
written by the same person. It was concluded [by the FBI] that it had been the effort of isolated people
from inside Cuba trying to implicate the Cuban Government with the assassination. And this is the
conclusion we ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT with.

We are convinced that this was part of a plan...a plan to _____ involve our country...tying to the visit
of Oswald to Cuba. And this is one more fact.

Next slide!

This is the chart that allows us to determine with which typewriter it was done. It was a Remington
typewriter, Pica system, model 16, and these are the peculiarities of the typewriter used to write this
letter. You see how the "a" is worn out here? This individualizes the typewriter in our judgement.
What is the importance of all this? If we obtain documents elaborated in the CIA station in Mexico
City...original documents typewritten, we could determine if this typewriter was located there. For
example, any document of any suspect, Howard Hunt, a well known writer of police novels... _______
have personal letters, we can see and tell about the ______...and from a legal point this carries some
weight.

Well, we characterize the person by the way they write. Everything seems to point at, although we
cannot affirm it categorically, maybe. You can do it, the researchers present, because we have their
original in our possession, the letters that were sent to Robert Kennedy, that according to the FBI
records were two, and the FBI concluded were written by the same typewriter. Also they were written
with this type of machine. They [the FBI] do not offer any details. If we could get access to their
research, we could compare and formulate some conclusion. Furthermore, of the five letters, we only
have knowledge of the text to four. The four texts seem to come from the same machine, results from
the graphology (hand written analysis).

In our book, we are going to show the handwriting report for those who have an opportunity to search.

Next slide!

?_____________: Did the Cuban Government share this letter with the Warren Commission?

Rodriguez: This was published, but what happened was that this incident was disregarded in 1964. I
don't know if it was published in 1978. It was _________ . We had possession of the letter...that this
letter had been disregarded by the FBI. The problem was that this was something that had been
disregarded, had no value. In 1993 it came to our attention that the letters were disregarded and we
decided to re-look and analyze in detail all of these. And we realized it was an important issue in the
thesis of the intent to blame Cuba.

Next slide!

Here is a summary of the elements that support our idea...

WOMAN SPEAKING FAST IN ENGLISH..................

Questions about the sample original letter in the previous slide, it is to show the type of machine used,
the machine is in the U.S. We were first making an analysis as to the type of machine used to write
the letters. It was concluded to be a Remington typewriter, manufactured in the U.S., model #16, Pica
system. These are international codes so we showed a photo of a similar machine so you can see what
it looks like. It doesn't mean it is the same machine used to write the letters. This allows us to
compare the document in the possession of any suspect that might have participated in the conspiracy.
(Rodriguez turns here and explains to the translator what he means.)

Question: The letters of Pedro Charles were published by the commission. I imagine you have the
page number.

Rodriguez: I looked for it and did not find it. They are in the volume with no index. I found references
to it but not the page.

Q_____________________: There are new documents released since 1992 on the letter and how the
CIA used the mail inside Cuba.

Rodriguez: I think that is very important, but also, it is important to find out how the FBI concluded
and disregarded the evidence about the machine used to write the letters that reached the U.S. This
will allow us [to see], when compared to our study, the results [of the Cuban conclusion], to reach a
conclusion in part as to how many machines were used, and secondly, the results of the handwriting
analysis. If we could analyze the originals with the photocopies of the letters we do not have in our
possession, we could conclude how many people participated.

In summary, we have the impression that this incident was disregarded because it constituted proof
that there was a plan, and if there was a plan, there was a conspiracy. That is the summary. Any
questions?

Q_____________: When did the U.S. find out that the Cubans had the letter?

Rodriguez: As far as I know through the Warren Commission... through the FBI.

Q_____________: No, what I mean is when did the U.S. first know Cuba had possession of this letter?
 

Rodriguez: It was publicized in 1978... the thing was... At that time there was a lot of campaigning with
the issue of Cuba and accusations were increasing... in the days previous to the Commission, House of
Representatives Select, such as the 1977 CIA report... the Church Commission, all of these
"disinformation" campaigns...

Excuse me, but I have to leave, no.

Translator: There is a question, is it possible to meet again...I cannot give you an exact time. I am
going to see _______, then I have two meetings.... leave a message in room 316 or leave message
with Mirta... Mirta will let them know when he is back...

Audience: I don't know. I think the text [of the letter] is in volume 26, page 148.

Rodriguez: I don't think the letter appears, but I will check it.

Audience: Those other things are not published, but referenced by Lesar and the National Archives.

Rodriguez: Does he have them here?

Audience: No! It is unlikely... if not in the published... but somebody in the review board could get
them.

What we are talking here is an actual reproduction of the letters, as it appears as a facsimile... a high
quality reproduction. I'm sure he knows better than me if there is a facsimile or not on that page sand
if it doesn't exist there, then it seems to me that it is an assassination record. It should be in the
Warren Commission files in the Archives... the original should be. Gaeton and I could give to you the
Warren Commission document references. There are few facsimiles in those Commission
Documents... the original letters should be in the Warren Commission files...

[Transcriber's note: This last guy keeps talking on and on while the speaker is doing something else.
The interpreter is going on and the speaker's body language says "I want to get out of here and go on
a tour of Nassau!]

Audience: Shall I give you the citation? anybody have a piece of paper? The CIA had many
typewriters.

Rodriguez: Fine, but we have to start somewhere, maybe we hit the "bell" [jackpot].

Audience: The records I've been looking at are mostly CIA cables and reports. I know of typewriter
reports that we can use, but they probably are not from the same machine... there are some memos
written...

[At this point a crowd of people enters the room]
 
 

Rodriguez: It is one more possibility. Keep it in mind. A personal letter by Howard Hunt, for example,
done at home, or at a friend's house...
 
 

END TAPE 8 -- SLIDE PRESENTATION
 

END OF TRANSCRIPT *****