To euin Shea from l'arold V'erg Re prior FOIL appeals 1/14/79 New Orleans 100-166011 referrals; "pm/lowly processed"; infoements

There are vast gape in this supposed "Oswele file from the Ilew Orleans Field

Office. It is impossible to determine whether or not the missing records exist in

anyother file or have or have not been disclosed by any other meatus. I have enough

subject wetter knowledge to be unequivocal about the omissions. The prooessine was

areanged to be confusing enough to make any determination a total impoosiblity. This

mas not necessary. I therefore believe it was intended. Considering the enormous

possibilities for "embarrassment to the Bureau" there is pre-existing basis for

this belief.

Some of the workeht)ets are such poor pte,, supposedly of originals, that they

are again illegible.

There is no consistency in the references to "priously processed." Some say

this only, some refer to FBIleit, some to Dallaes sow to nothing. in files of the

enormity of these the citation is worse than meeninglees.

Moreover, there is no way* in which there can be good-faith compliance without

a comparison of these New L*rleans records with tee. allegedly processed. Without a

comparison all the processor appears to be saying is that there is a record reflectiug

the fact that the record was provided to FBIE earlier. Ile does not even state that

it was not then withheld. This denies me the right of appeal I have under the Act.

I suggest that it will be informative to you if you ask the FBI to do something

for you. 4f it refuses I will take the time.

There re a large proportion of these records that consists prof large compiled

reports, some of clew to 1,000 pages each. There is the mingle worksheet and the

sieele item and the single allegation of prior prooessing. Without a page-by-page

comparison there is no way in the world for anyone in Fake to know that aignifieant

information has been added, including by hand, as 14 not at all uncommon* 3o we are

telelns about many thousands of pages that nobody has even looked at, for all I can

know. I do believe this to be the case.

Now where some of teese are delicate matters for the FBI there is no reason to

believe that there was no aeeed comment. I'll give you some examples of this and

other consequences of the failure to provide either the records teemelves or a citation

to them (which still would not provide any withheld information but at least would

let the record concerned be consulted, even located).

There are repeated references to bitten questions submitted to the FBI by the

Warren Commission. in no case is the c;omelssion's communication provided, although

the records state they are attached. The FBI's responses are to numbers on the Com-

mission's comeunication, not to the substance of the questions. Because of the large

IVY,/ •- 11/ -I • 'hi 11114,--!

2

number of such inquiries I can conceive of no way of first knowing where in any file

to find any of them and then bow to identify this particular one with any certainty,

without a high degree of error and the potentially serious consequences, may I say

also for the Bureau at come future time from such misunderstandIngs that i believe

the Bureau is moil aware will be and will become inevitable.

While I cannot be certain that what follows caused a note to be made l believe

tthe possibility is at least reasoaahle and under ordinary aircumetences is certain.

e bi-lintel r143-st (I have seen no record of this added qualification) named el

Warren C. nem* was detail from N.O. to Hellas. OI have gone over the Dallas files

as provided to me.) Under date of 12/18/63 the NOW received a memo from Supervisor

Paul H. Alker relating to the SAC's phone conversation with dearueys, free Dallas.

Ae is the rent of thz, this ib captioned XXX "IS - R CUBL.° Item 4 reads,

"With reference to LAWRENCE FOX no investigation is being conduated slum there is

no indication OBWAID had any coutaet with him or the Cuban Revelutionalarl" t

Sk HUME:CS was telephonically advised of this on 12/17/63 and advised we knew no

reason to contact FOX."

Now mould you like to guess who covered the organisation in question in few Orleans`?

I have seen not a aingle FBI record that indicates it but it was deBrueys. So when

the office expert makes the request he is told "no reason" and in addition with a

case captimed "CUBA". While I recognize this will seem like an argument, I just can't

conceive of this being all there in or of their being no vote of any kind. For this

kind of contortion, *bather or not covering paper is required, there are too many

problems to have been ignored. (Volume 8, Serial 303.)

14Brueya did not forget the need. When he returned to N.O. he charged out a

large number of Cuban files, including this one. I have received no other retard,

including nothing he wrote or did after reviewing those Lban files. So there also

was no purpose in his extensive examination? 'dr all of it stayed in his head only?

This group wa:i known an the ICrente. The 44 knocked heads and Thread it to combine

with a more or less la 'or-oriented group of exiles, which led H. Howard Heat to quit

the hay of Pigs and subsequent projects in which he was in political charge. Oswald used

the return address of this group in New Orlosoo and the FBI got the proof and steade

lastly refused to let the Commission have it. In its extremity the Coemiseion turned

to the Secret aervioe and obtained a copy. Wu: of those) involve in both group3, the

Frente one the successor Luben Revolutionary Council is YWOOki Create Fena, my former friend and on a number of occasion host and chauffeur. Now nothing in this file reflects

it but there came F time when eena, who had been an FBI informer, whether or not

numbered, on Gaban natters, considered that this same 34 deBrueys had threatened him.

Pena's account te me is that he invited deRreeys into the alley and deBrueys left by

by the front door. This does not depend entirely on Oreste'e aaeount to me. But there

is NO record on it and nothing that aeyone oould eeceaniae ne relatine to it.

Other than subject experts, that is. -Perhaps no one in the FAI today.

There is an exquisite delicacy of cOveretheeposterior paper in this file. It

reflects that for not' apparent reason, none being provided, Pena insisted on having a

letter from the al netting time and date for an interview he wee ;o1d 1144 for the

Coumiasion and that be could have oouneelqt was at the field office. Az I reoall the

lawyer's name was MOM Tamberellap And the purpose was to make official complaint

against harassment. This IS in the Commissionl a teatiwony, if not in FBI records.

I find it impossible to believe that throne ramie in the glorious teaaition of

"no oebarraaameat to the Bureau' would run tee riee- of leaving no identifiable record,

no juntification, no commentary - not even on the unquestionably emotional makeup

of Pena, who I em satisfied is now an for several years has been paranoid.

It also happens that it is in eeaa'a HannunAr and Grill that a pereoe said to

have been Oswald ateeed afeupeeespectacular drunk in which be drew all kinds of

attention to hieeelf in a scene that no observer was likely to forget. No refeeence to

this, naturally, or to the efforts, if any, to identify the person with "Oswald." Now there is a report saying that one tarlos Briagotiereeigeetea

ommiemeereported seeing Oswald with a person in an eat*, rather an SAC oomeent, not

a report, and giving Bringuier as rene's eource. SAC Barry Maynor wan accurate in

pointing out that both are emotional mime not his word but true, what no record

provided reflects in that this hapoened twice and the second time eringuier also

gave the FBI the license number. (Teat z;ringuier 7111B an laforaer, a source if not numbered, also is not reflected bu I have this, from other files ana knew it before,)

end it appears to have been the same pereen who was along on the alleged ereek. Tip

whom there are other references to sightings.

If this entertains you that is roomy peones°. addreseine whether or not with eee

all thooe links to it, regaless of what Serial 303 sayer there bee to have been

so look at the Frente and successor and people in them in connection with Oswald. Roe

kBeeime me, extensively also to Yorrie.) The case is not captioned with the assassina-

tion. 4t is Internal Socurites Bessie and WM*

I note thatmy roquest was not for any information by file nueber tut for identi-

fied information. Ybile there may be more elsewhere in a large carton I cannot now

safely take apart, these first 26 Volumes having been flatwise on top of the others,

all that I refer to if of date prior to the end of Volume 23.

Speaking of informers, the name of one is removed. I happen to believe it is

one whose idea 'ty the ea disclose voluntarily to a friend of mine. If the FBI checksI think it will find the withheld name is Carlos eeiroga, who was in fact aelf.

.identified to others. seeee+

4

Speakergelof Secret Service, there are in these worksheets references to the withholdic of records that were referred to the Secret Service. Three months ago that is. The Secret Se rvice is one agency that has made no public claim to any backlog. t also is an agency to which I made an alleinelneive request in 1971. And by CO-

incidence it also happens to be the agency tp thigh at that time the ?,BI sent a vicious, base144;ecordeffrom Los les that had the Secret Service conspiring with

4 7kA F=51 me to - I'm sure you guessed eethee4o"eavistteieriereee. I t?onl- three morthe in adequate time for action on referrals. I. know that in the

past the FBI has had what ve• the appearance of reciprocal arrangements to stonewall referrile until the last moment, as the moment of court action, as eou may recall happened in the aniiiiiiitsse. Whore I believe scree referrals have no-t yet beer. acted upon.

As a eenerality what I here say about "previoaaly peocessed" also relates to that case. I do net collect scrap or second-hand records or paper. I seek information. Compilations of other records have an importance of their own, as is even recognized in copyright law relating: to authologiee. £ the Long tick4r reflects, for exaeple. So in this sense any withholding attributed to an alleged previous processing is an actual withholding of information.

In conaectien with Oswald and the Oswald investigation there is elliptical reference only to diueiplinayy action in which there is no name secrecy. !except in these records, which are void On that. j't ie immaterial to me where any information is filed or how arbitrarily numbered because, as I state above, my request is for information. This particular information has been the recent subject of house assassins committee testimony, including by the rile The few records in this file refer to publicatioa of tote names but do not include those clippings. Not in a s4nlle case.

There is incomplete and entirely inadequate reference to Oswald's arrest (with one Carlos Bringuier referred to above, who as I stated was also an na informer)- to Oswald's having asked to be interviewed $.1y an iBi ageutt some rather extraordirary FBI convolutions to have a eew Orloane emeloyee ordained as e hotary that very instant so that so dangerous a person as the clerk of federal court would not know of the execution of the affidavita that were to be entered into evidence and published and how at no little cost the crisis was resolved in time$ nick (copies if yeu'd like); and to a Lieutenaat eartello of the Nee Orleans police. But what published years ago and oil other details are entirely lacking, as are all copies of what Oswald had and

llo provided to the From the "Oswald" file? ("You don't have to wait for the last chapter. This included a slip of paper that would lead immediately to Aoecow, which you can understand every picketer carries in his pockets the same every r.d.oWtsrs who always ask to be interviewed by the al when they eepouaecauses the FBI doesn't.

In saying "].ead I mean almost by the nose. Otimald, a I disoovereli by a patient,

tedious check, eopied some entries out of his pocket addressbook, the same one the

FBI left soviet wee out of for the Warren Commission, the pages that happened to bold

Oswald's information about SA. Meaty, the destroyer of the note Oswald later wrote him.

ijoilaft the book hone on this expedition. He had instead these names and telephone

uumberSand other entries that without any exosption point to the 0361. Which is to

say the ,,ubject optioned in this file. uhose Aow °ries= reputetior is of

a duagium, saw the significano, which he could not, it appears, convey to the FBI.

Ahd neither in this record nor any other have I een t} Fills checking of that slip,

which hartelIo ford on it, as these records avoid saying, against tie notebook.

Ms,ybe it didn't do it but inolinee to believe it cam see and under9tmd what I

do, more easily after it is spelled out by dumdums, so there must be withheld records.

With so4many fewer records there are fewer unreasonable withholdings. Not that

a date was not withheld under (7)kc) claim early in tnis vile.