Did Clay Shaw commit perjury when he said he'd never worked for the CIA?

[Tom Graves]

David Reitzes posted the following at the Alt.Conspiracy.JFK Google group in 1999.

Did Clay Shaw perjure himself when he said he never worked for the CIA?

No; the claim that Shaw perjured himself is based on the ill-informed belief
that anyone who performs a service for the CIA is an agent or employee. Shaw
served as a contact for the Domestic Contact Services division of the CIA
between 1948 and 1956; there is no evidence that he was ever employed by the
CIA as a contract agent or in any other capacity. Just as FBI Paid Criminal
Informant Jack Ruby can in no manner be designated an agent or employee of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, CIA domestic contacts -- paid or unpaid -- are
not agents or employees of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Hundreds if not thousands of businessmen who travel and trade abroad serve as
domestic contacts for the CIA, providing a legitimate source of intelligence.
"Contact" status in no way relates to the notorious exploits of the CIA's
Covert Action arm, and cannot be reasonably related to the Kennedy
assassination in any manner.

Many Garrison boosters don't even realize that Shaw was not charged with
perjury regarding the CIA; Shaw was charged with perjury for denying
associations with Lee Harvey Oswald and David William Ferrie. Garrison had no
evidence whatsoever that Shaw worked for the CIA (or was even a contract agent
-- many Garrison fans don't even understand the difference) and his followers
would likewise come up empty-handed when trying to substantiate the claim.

Meanwhile, documents released in the mid-'90s under the JFK Records Act have
fueled speculation that Shaw was indeed a contract agent. But what do these
documents actually say?

In Fair Play, Martin Shackelford writes, "The CIA paid for one of Shaw's trips
in 1955, and the following year he actively solicited information for them.
Although a CIA internal report described him as a valuable informant, his
formal connection with the Agency suddenly ended in 1956. His CIA activities,
though, continued. The House Select Committee on Assassinations learned, but
didn't report, that Shaw was heavily involved in anti-Castro activities; he
allowed one group rent-free space in his International Trade Mart. He had a
working relationship with former FBI agent Guy Banister, many of whose former
employees now confirm that Banister employed Oswald in the summer of 1963."

As Shackelford omits source citations in his article, the basis of the
allegation that the CIA paid for a trip in 1955 is unknown, although this
writer does not contest the fact. CIA contacts are often reimbursed for
services performed. Shackelford likewise omits any citation or description of
the manner in which Shaw "actively solicited information" for the CIA, or a
description of the type of information he allegedly sought. There is nothing to
indicate that Shaw was acting as anything more than the informant the CIA long
ago revealed him to have been.

The statement about Shaw's so-called "CIA activities" continuing after 1956 is
misleading. For one thing, Shaw had never been involved in any "CIA activities"
in an operational sense. There also is no firm evidence that Shaw's agency ties
extended past 1956, as will be examined shortly.

Shackelford refers to a relationship between Shaw and William George Gaudet,
something worthy of investigation. Gaudet published the Latin American
Newsletter out of the rent-free office at the Trade Mart. Gaudet himself had
been a CIA domestic contact until 1961, and told journalist Anthony Summers in
1978 that the Newsletter was a CIA front operation. This is not a charge that
can be dismissed outright: Although the Newsletter's official sponsor was
Standard Fruit, a company which did a tremendous amount of business in Latin
America, a great deal of its funding came from New Orleans doctor Alton
Ochsner, founder of the Ochsner Clinic, who had a long-standing relationship
with the CIA that has not been adequately explained with regard to his
anti-Communist activities in New Orleans over the years.

Gaudet himself plays a murky role in the story of Oswald's 1963 summer in New
Orleans. He happened to be next in line to Oswald when Oswald applied for his
Mexican tourist visa. Though the registry list was published by the Warren
Commission, Gaudet's name was withheld from the public until it accidentally
leaked out in 1975. Gaudet insisted he did not see Oswald that day and called
the event a coincidence. He did say, however, that he'd seen Oswald around the
Trade Mart and, most interestingly, he said he had witnessed Oswald conversing
at length with New Orleans ultra right-wing extremist Guy Banister on several
occasions.

Gaudet, who is now deceased, remains something of a mystery, though his
relationship to the International Trade Mart may not prove especially
noteworthy, since -- according to Garrison advocate Jim DiEugenio's *Destiny
Betrayed* -- it was ITM employee Ted Brent, not Clay Shaw, who allowed Gaudet
the use of ITM office space. As an institution prominently involved in
facilitating trade with Latin America, the ITM could have had legitimate
reasons for providing an office for the Latin American Newsletter. And if the
Newsletter was indeed a front for a CIA operation, as Gaudet has stated, there
are any number of explanations that don't require implicating anyone in high
crimes or assassinations.

It is now theorized that Shaw may well have had a working relationship with
rabid anti-Communist, ex-FBI Bureau Chief Guy Banister; many New Orleans civic
leaders did. However, even for those who theorize that Lee Harvey Oswald was
somehow involved in Banister's operation, this hardly implies a link between
Shaw and Oswald. In short, Shackelford generates a lot of smoke with no
evidence of fire.

Shackelford continues, "As late as 1967, Shaw had a 'covert security'
classification for a top secret program called QK/ENCHANT. The program remains
so highly classified that we are still unable to learn anything about its
nature, but Shaw's classification was approved by the CIA's then covert
operations chief, Richard Helms, and we know that clearances were being granted
in December 1962.

"Former CIA official Victor Marchetti said that QK/ENCHANT was most likely run
out of the Domestic Operations Division of the Clandestine Services, run by
Tracy Barnes. Support for this comes from recently released documents
identifying Barnes' then-deputy, E. Howard Hunt, as another individual involved
with QK/ENCHANT. We also know that a pilot was considered for clearance for the
program. One of the few others known to have been cleared for QK/ENCHANT was
Monroe Sullivan, director of the San Francisco Trade Mart, and Shaw's alibi
witness for November 22, 1963. At the time of the House Select Committee
investigation in 1976, inquiries to the CIA about Clay Shaw were coordinated by
J. Walton Moore, the former Dallas CIA contact for Oswald's friend George De
Mohrenschildt."

Webmaster John McAdams notes that a document from the HSCA, CIA Segregated
Collection, puts a different light on this. . . . a series of handwritten
notes, presumably by an HSCA staffer," dated June 28, 1978 and regarding a
"possible CIA connection" to "Clay Shaw." Referring to a CIA memo of September
18, 1968, it notes that Shaw was "granted covert security approval for use
under Project [REDACTED] on an unwitting basis 10 Dec. 62" (NARA
180-10143-10220, Agency File Number 29-04-01). McAdams also cites a CIA
memorandum dated 26 April 1967, which reports that "J. Monroe Sullivan,
#280207, was granted a covert security approval on 10 December 1962 so that he
could be used in Project [REDACTED]. SHAW has #402897-A."

These are the documents that the Assassination Records Review Board has now
confirmed are in reference to QK/ENCHANT. McAdams notes that Shaw's "approval,"
not "clearance," was for use on an UNWITTING basis.

Shackelford's conclusions would seem to be unfounded. The Agency was either
using Shaw as an unsuspecting source of intelligence of an unknown nature or
they were actually spying on HIM for some reason.

Victor Marchetti is quoted frequently by conspiracy theorists despite the
questionable nature of his information. It should be kept in mind that
Marchetti incorrectly informed researcher A. J. Weberman in the '70s that the
existence of a CIA 201 file in Oswald's name was proof that Oswald had been a
CIA contract agent. 201 files actually have nothing to do with contract
employment or operational use of a subject.

The references to Tracy Barnes, Howard Hunt, and George De Mohrenschildt are
window dressing: Shaw himself had no idea that any CIA operation was going on
around him, and there is no reason to believe he ever had any relationship with
Howard Hunt or any of the other figures named.

We also know that J. Monroe Sullivan, onetime director of the San Francisco
World Trade Center had been granted a "covert security approval" for
QK/ENCHANT. Sullivan told Patricia Lambert in 1997 that he'd never heard of any
such thing and that he'd never worked for the CIA. That's a reasonable enough
claim: Like Shaw, Sullivan was approved for unwitting use.

Now, you ask, what exactly was QK/ENCHANT? We don't know; the CIA isn't
talking. If two men involved in international trade were unwittingly involved,
one might guess that QK/ENCHANT had something to do with business-related
intelligence. Why don't we ask the authority on Shaw's purported CIA
connections, Mr. Bill Davy. From "Through the Looking Glass," p. 54 fn. 16:


(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CIA Information and Privacy coordinator, John Wright, has written to the author
that information on QK/ENCHANT is still classified. Yet, an admitted ex-CIA
employee has broadcast on a popular computer Bulletin Board System, that
QK/ENCHANT involved routine debriefing of people in the trade industry. Either
this person has violated his/her secrecy agreement by revealing classified
information or is deliberately spreading false information. Time will tell.

(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Shackelford continues, "Another recently released document connects Shaw to the
top secret project ZR/CLIFF, which was run out of William Harvey's super-secret
Staff D along with the ZR/RIFLE assassination program."

This writer has not seen the document in question, so a definitive conclusion
cannot be drawn. The CIA's Staff D was a division generally involved with
cryptography, although the existence of ZR/RIFLE, the CIA's top-secret
assassinations training operation was confirmed by the Church Committee in
1975. Shackelford notes that ZR/RIFLE, though operated out of Staff D, was kept
separate from the crypto operations, and suggests that the same may be true of
ZR/CLIFF. He explains, "The top-secret CIA division Staff D was used to conceal
the highly-sensitive ZR/RIFLE assassination program. ZR/CLIFF may well have
been handled in the same fashion, as it was also run out of Staff D. What we
don't know is why it would be that highly sensitive" (E-mail to this author,
December 3, 1998).

In five months, Shackelford has not been able to come up with a citation for
his claim. The closest I can find is a Bill Davy allegation from *Through the
Looking Glass* claiming to link Shaw to a pilot who was allegedly considered
but refused for the ZR/CLIFF project:

Leslie Norman Bradley (described as a "soldier- of-fortune and freelance
pilot") was alleged by Klansman/Minuteman Jules Ricco Kimble to have known Clay
Shaw, and that NORMAN "was once considered for employment as a pilot in Project
ZR/CLIFF, but for unknown reasons the offer of employment was withdrawn" (Davy,
9).

It would appear the entire "ZR/CLIFF" accusation is another false lead. I do
yet again invite Mr. Shackelford to produce that citation, however.

The latest allegation regarding Shaw, the CIA, and assassination plots involves
Freeport Sulphur, which, according to researcher Lisa Pease, is "a company that
connects the CIA, the Rockefellers, Clay Shaw and [CIA officer] David Phillips.
The company had serious clashes with Castro over an expensive project, and with
the Kennedy administration over matters of great monetary significance to
Freeport. Allegations of a Canadian connection with New Orleans, and Cuban
nickel mining and processing operations fit neatly into Shaw's reported
activities. And this is a company which had at least one director reportedly
talking about killing Castro." Pease's case can be examined at:

http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/hidden/board.htm


*What about this Centro Mondiale Commerciale?*


Clay Shaw sat on the board of directors of Centro Mondiale Commerciale, an
alleged CIA front, and its subsidiary, Permindex, which has been linked by some
to assassination plots directed against foreign leaders. These allegations were
the subject of a 1967 article in an Italian newspaper, Paese Sera. CMC had been
ejected from both Italy and Switzerland and relocated to Johannesburg, South
Africa, due to perceived subversive activities, including alleged assassination
plots against Charles de Gaulle and others. The Italian authorities accused CMC
of money laundering and of being a CIA front company, and its officers' refusal
to divulge information about the source of some of its funds contributed
towards its hasty ejection from the country.

A State Department memo released by the Assassination Records Review Board
confirms the long-alleged identities of Shaw's fellow board members, an
astonishing bunch consisting largely of former officials of Nazi Germany and
Fascist Italy.

Shaw told *Penthouse* magazine, "Back in 1959 or 1960, a young Italian came to
see me in New Orleans and told me about a world trade center that was being
planned in Rome. The idea was to have one place where buyers coming into the
Common Market area would find all the Common Market countries represented in
one center. He wanted my advice and asked me to serve on the board of
directors. I had no objection if it was a legitimate project. I investigated it
and found that the head of it was a man named Imre Nagy, who had been the last
non-Communist premier of Hungary. Some of the other people involved were
Italian senators, journalists, lawyers, and other responsible people. It was
agreed that we would have an exhibit at their center, and they would have one
at the mart here in New Orleans, and we would exchange information and so on. I
didn't mind being on their board, although there was no money involved, but I
would have to go to Rome annually to the board meetings and my way would be
paid, so why not? Then they ran into difficulties, but they finally got the
center opened. It turned out to be either badly planned or badly organized and
it closed very shortly, and that was the last I ever heard of it. I never heard
that it was a CIA operation and I don't know that it was. I'll say this -- it
was a highly unsuccessful operation which is not customary with the CIA. Other
than what I've told you, I know nothing more about the Centro Mondiale
Commerciale. I have never had any connection with the CIA."

The *Paese Sera* charges were never especially well documented. Inevitably,
what little we know about CMC/Permindex comes from sources of questionable
reliability.

Alleged former CIA agent Robert Morrow describes flying to Greece with David
Ferrie to transport a cache of arms from a Permindex warehouse to Houma,
Louisiana. This is implied to be the cache later acquired in Houma by a
CIA-backed group of anti-Castro plotters including Ferrie, Gordon Novel, and
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- some of the same cast of characters that Morrow and
others have fingered in the assassination, and whom Jim Garrison himself had
been investigating. Morrow's source regarding the shipment's destination is CIA
officer Tracy Barnes, who, of course, is not alive to substantiate the author's
story.

Ulric Shannon researched Morrow's claims for a review of Morrow's *First Hand
Knowledge.* Shannon's article demonstrates that Morrow's story lacks even a
semblance of credibility:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/morrow.htm

The pseudonymous "William Torbitt," believed to be Texas attorney David
Copeland, in a 1970 manuscript entitled *Nomenclature of an Assassination
Cabal,* and published recently as *Nazis, NASA & JFK,* accused Permindex of
complicity in the JFK assassination. "Torbitt's" sole cited source is the
*Paese Sera* article.


*Didn't the CIA try to destroy Garrison's investigation?*


Former CIA agent-turned-author Victor Marchetti testified to the HSCA that he
heard Richard Helms and various CIA officers discuss the Shaw trial on numerous
occasions, and quotes Helms as asking of one agent, "Are we doing everything we
can [for Shaw]?"

While Marchetti's credibility remains questionable, Robert Tanenbaum, onetime
Deputy Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, stated in an
interview with Jim DiEugenio that he'd seen documents proving the CIA
interfered with the Garrison investigation, and both he and HSCA investigator
Gaeton Fonzi have alleged that the DA's office was infiltrated and disrupted by
CIA agents. Such allegations remain unsubstantiated.

When researcher Vince Salandria worked with Garrison, they and other members of
Garrison's team believed that the CIA was actively plotting against them.
Salandria admits now that a lot of this was simple paranoia: "I would see
anybody trying to destroy Garrison as a CIA agent" (JFK: The Book of the Film,
195).


*Wasn't there a massive government conspiracy against Jim Garrison?*


That's what Garrison said. But is there any truth to that assertion?

If there was a government conspiracy against Jim Garrison's office . . .

1. Why did the Supreme Court (under Earl Warren) refuse to intervene and
dismiss the Shaw case when they had the chance? (New York Times, December 20,
1968)

2. Why did Ohio Governor James Rhodes agree to extradite Garrison witness
Gordon Novel? ("Novel Will Be Returned -- Ohio," New Orleans Time-Picayune, May
10, 1967; cited in Epstein, *Counterplot*)

3. Why did Judge William T. Gillie dismiss the extradition case against
Gordon Novel only after REPEATEDLY asking Garrison's office to complete the
necessary paperwork within the required sixty-day period? ("Ohio Frees
'Witness' Sought by Garrison," New York Times, July 4, 1967; cited in Epstein)

4. Why did California Governor Ronald Reagan refuse to extradite Garrison
suspect Edgar Eugene Bradley only after Garrison's office refused to present
even the slightest evidence of Bradley's complicity in the assassination? (New
York Times, November 9, 1968; cited in Epstein)

5. Why did Nebraska and then Iowa authorities refuse to extradite witness
Sandra Moffett, when the Shaw trial transcript proves it was the defense -- not
the prosecution -- that wanted Moffett's testimony? (Shaw trial transcript,
opening day arguments)

6. Why did Texas authorities agree to allow Garrison's office to depose
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- an offer that Garrison turned down? (cf. Paris
Flammonde, *The Kennedy Conspiracy,* 117-21)

7. Why was Judge Charles W. Halleck, Jr., about to hear Harold Weisberg
and Bud Fensterwald's arguments for releasing the JFK autopsy materials to the
New Orleans DA when Charles Ward at Garrison's office phoned Weisberg and
Fensterwald AT THE COURTHOUSE and ordered them to drop the entire suit?
(Weisberg, *Post Mortem,* 135-6; Livingstone, *Killing the Truth,* 376).

8. Why did the courts enforce Garrison's subpoena to LIFE magazine for the
Zapruder film?

9. Why did Judge Herbert J. Christenberry dismiss Garrison's perjury
charges against Clay Shaw only after a lengthy 1971 hearing in which, among
other curious incidents, Garrison refused to state how many witnesses he had
against Clay Shaw at the time of Shaw's arrest, refused to answer questions
about the veracity of witness Vernon Bundy's testimony, refused to elaborate on
his claim that more had come out of his investigation than merely the Shaw
prosecution, and -- perhaps most curious of all -- Garrison's star witness,
Perry Raymond Russo, pleaded the Fifth Amendment when he was called to testify
on Garrison's behalf? (Christenberry transcript; Patricia Lambert, *False
Witness,* 165-79)

10. Why -- in thirty years -- has not a shred of evidence emerged
indicating that elements of the US government obstructed Jim Garrison's case or
interfered with his investigation?


As Jim Garrison himself pointed out in his often quoted *Playboy* interview, "The
very repetition of a charge lends it a certain credibility, since people have a
tendency to believe that where there's smoke, there's fire . . ."

One thing is certain: If there exists even a single shred of evidence
implicating Clay L. Shaw in a conspiracy to assassinate President John F.
Kennedy, Jim Garrison failed to unearth it for Shaw's 1969 trial, and his
advocates have failed to turn it up in the three decades since.