Representative BOGGS. May I ask a question there?
Would you have any notion as to why names of defectors were not
provided to you prior to November 22?
Mr. ROWLEY. Yes; under the broad picture, Mr. Congressman, there was
no indication that they had made any threat toward the President
or members of his family. Whenever there was a threat made, we were
furnished promptly by the different agencies the information on the
individual's name. And this was done in voluminous reports by the FBI,
and the other agencies. When they got any information, they would
notify the local office, notify their liaison, who notified us by
telephone, and confirmed by memorandum. The same obtained with respect
to the CIA.
Representative BOGGS. This fellow was interviewed by the FBI several
times--he was interviewed in New Orleans when he allegedly had his
Fair Play Committee. If my memory serves me correctly, Mrs. Paine was
interviewed about him shortly before the visit of the President, after
he had gone to work at the Texas School Book Depository. I agree that
there had been no indication of a threat on the President's life. But,
obviously he was a person in the FBI files who was under some degree of
surveillance. It would seem to me strange that the FBI did not transmit
this information to the Secret Service.
Mr. ROWLEY. The FBI, Mr. Congressman, are concerned with internal
security. And I think their approach was internal security as it
related to this individual, whether or not he was a potential recruit
for espionage, intelligence, or something like that.
Their concern was talking to him in this vein, in the course of which
there was no indication that he bore any malice toward anyone, and
particularly to the President of the United States. If someone said
that Henry Smith didn't like the President, and we got his file, we
would get to the point where you have 3 million names in the file. How
effective are you going to be then?
Representative BOGGS. Well, that is right.
Mr. ROWLEY. And then you get in the area of civil rights and all, if
you start going into individuals----
Representative BOGGS. And if I remember correctly, there has never
been--we have had no testimony from anyone that Oswald ever threatened
the President of the United States. Is that correct?
Mr. RANKIN. That is correct.
Representative BOGGS. That was the only question I had.
Mr. DULLES. Along that line, I just raise the question as to whether
maybe too much emphasis is not put on the threat angle, because a
clever fellow, if he is going to assassinate the President, the last
thing he is going to do is go around and talk about it and threaten it.
Mr. ROWLEY. That is right. Well, this has been so with loners, too.
As you say, you read the assassinations. Some of them just kept to
themselves, and traveled, and the next thing you know they confronted
their victim. Sometimes they were successful, other times they were not.
Mr. DULLES. I recognize the difficulty of working out adequate
criteria. But I just think you ought to do some more seeking, and there
is more work to be done on that.
Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir.
Senator COOPER. May I ask this question: It hasn't been clear to me.
Is it correct that now a defector does come within the scope of your
Service?
Mr. ROWLEY. Yes, sir; we are furnished the names of defectors by the
FBI. And they investigate these people. And then in their report, if it
shows that the individual has emotional instability or propensity for
violence, we pick it up from there. But all the reports on the known
defectors in this country are submitted to us, and then we evaluate
from the case history of the report whether or not he would be a risk
for us subject to investigation.
Senator COOPER. I understood that was the procedure before. But my
question is now, is the defector per se classed as one of those against
whom you would take protective measures?