Jump to content


Spartacus

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield


  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#1 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 21 April 2006 - 05:35 PM

For instance, in Google, if you just type "Bloomfield archives" you won't find anything on the Canadian National Archives, except for my blog. But, if you type "National Archives Canada" you will eventually find their sites. There, at: http://www.collectio...2012302_f.html , you can type the name "Bloomfield". In the results, you will find the LM Bloomfield collection at: http://data4.collect...f.html&r=15&f=G

Following the links in this page you will find that a new access restriction was made in April 2005 (http://data2.collect...r000000675.pdf ) and you'll also find a fascinating description of the fonds at: http://data2.collect.../p000000813.pdf . (For one thing, you’ll have confirmation in this listing that Bloomfield had correspondence with George Bush Sr…, something that you won’t find on the web or in any JFK book. )

Now if you want confirmation that there is indeed a legal battle on this subject in Canada, you can eventually find the Canadian Federal Court website. There at: http://www.fct-cf.gc...p_queries_e.php , typing my name "Philipps" as a party, you'll find out that there is indeed a "MAURICE PHILIPPS c. BIBLIOTHECAIRE ET ARCHIVISTE DU CANADA" judicial review process filed there.

I'm in this case since 2 years now and its takes lot of energy. That's the main reason I didn't post regularly on my blog.

Now, I should add that I'm looking toward Bloomfield's papers in order to find out the historical truth about him. I'm quite critical on what was said about Bloomfield: the sources on him are dim and even the simplest facts about him have been distorted. To give you a basic example, it was said that Bloomfield was an American, but the bio from the National Archives will show you that he was a Canadian.

I think that researches on Louis Bloomfield should follow a factual trail starting with the fact that, as a lawyer, he was said to be a major stock holder of Permindex "FOR PARTIES UNKNOWN". Finding out who were those parties for whom attorney Bloomfield was acting is the first thing to find out, and I believe the Bloomfield archives can give you this information. In fact, I think that the Bloomfield archives description is pointing toward some new names in the case. Google a few of them, Namebase them, go to library and look for books about them and you may find something new pointing to the.. Corsican trail. Speaking of books, Googling and Namebasing, I’m surprised to see that nobody ever reported a Lansky-Bloomfield connection that is documented in a book that had nothing to do with the JFK assassination. Still, it is written in a book easily accessible on the internet. You can’t just find it on Google, but if you look in some other of the Google services, you will learn something new.

Since 2004, I have been seeking release of the Louis Mortimer Bloomfield archives collection, hold by Library and Archives Canada (LAC), the Canadian national archives. The collection was given to the Canadian government by L. M. Bloomfield in 1978-1980, on condition it was open to public 20 years after his death, which occurs in 1984. When I asked access to the open collection in summer 2004, LAC restricted access to the archives for at least 10 more years, as a direct result of my request. In April 2005, the day after Library and Archives released to me a few pages of administrative records on the Bloomfield archives, asked under a FOIA request, LAC extended to 25 years the new access restriction to the collection, again as a direct result of my request. In 2005, I open procedures with the Canadian Federal Court to obtain a judicial review of Library and Archives’ decision. After opposition by LAC to release documents in this case, the procedures were put back on a normal course in February 2006, and hearing in the case should be hold before fall 2006.

I intend to share with other researchers all information and relevant documents I will access. I value factual documented information and I’m critical of speculation, and there was a lot about Bloomfield! So, instead of trying to develop new theories, I will rather just share the new information I can find. I will mainly do so on my blog at: http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/ . You can contact me via this blog if you have specifics questions or if you want to support me in my fight to get the Bloomfield archives opened.


Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, the son of Harry Bloomfield, was born in Canada, about 1910. A Zionist, Bloomfield joined the British military and served in Palestine as an Intelligence Officer under General Charles Orde Wingate. Bloomfield was involved in training the Jewish army, Haganah (1936-1939).

President Franklin D. Roosevelt established the Office of Strategic Services in 1942. Bloomfield was recruited and given the rank of major. In 1947, the OSS evolved into the Central Intelligence Agency, and Bloomfield continued doing contract work for the new organization. He was a regular visitor to Israel and met the Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion on 4th May, 1949.

A successful lawyer he worked for years at the law firm of Phillips and Vineberg in Montreal. He was a major stockholder of Permindex, a corporation based in Switzerland. He was also the author on several books on on international law including The British Hondurus Guatemala Dispute (1953) and Egypt, Israel and the Gulf of Aqaba (1957).

In Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal William Torbitt claims that the assassination of John F. Kennedy was organized by Bloomfield and Permindex. Also involved included Defense Industrial Security Command, organized by J. Edgar Hoover and William Sullivan. Torbitt claims that Bloomfield was in control of the operation. DISC agents included Clay Shaw, Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Lee Harvey Oswald, and Jack Ruby.

According to the author Permindex was comprised of:

(1) Solidarists an Eastern European exile organization.

(2) American Council of Christian Churches led by Haroldson L. Hunt.

(3) Free Cuba Committee headed by Carlos Prio.

(4) The Syndicate headed by Clifford Jones, ex-lieutenant governor of Nevada. This group also included Bobby Baker, George Smathers, Roy Cohn, Fred Black and Lewis McWillie.

(5) Security Division of NASA headed by Wernher von Braun.

#2 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 08:19 AM

Namebase entry for Louis Mortimer Bloomfield

http://www.namebase....Bloomfield.html

DiEugenio,J. Destiny Betrayed. 1992 (211-4)
EIR. Dope, Inc. 1992 (342, 418-9, 436, 452-60, 475)
Executive Intelligence Review 1998-11-06 (64)
Executive Intelligence Review 1999-01-29 (24)
Garrison,J. On the Trail of the Assassins. 1988 (88-9)
Lobster Magazine (Britain) 1995-#30 (39)
Marrs,J. Crossfire. 1990 (499)
Morrow,R. First Hand Knowledge. 1992 (120, 126)
New Federalist 1994-05-02 (8)
Piper,M.C. Final Judgment. 1993 (84, 182-5, 259)
Russell,D. The Man Who Knew Too Much. 1992 (217)
Thomas,K. Popular Alienation: A Steamshovel Press Reader. 1995 (200)
Turner,W. Rearview Mirror. 2001 (179)


http://www.spartacus...Kbloomfield.htm

#3 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 22 April 2006 - 11:00 AM

The relevant section of William Torbitt's Nonmenclature of an Assassination Cabal (1970):

The killing of President Kennedy was planned and supervised by Division Five of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, a relatively small department within the FBI whose usual duties are espionage and counter-espionage activities.

Actually, Division Five acted dually with the Defense Intelligence Agency which was acting on behalf of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon. Directly under the two-pronged leadership of Division Five and the DIA was the Control Group, their highly secret policy agency - the Defense Industrial Security Command.

The Defense Industrial Security Command has always been kept secret because it acts, in addition to its two official control organizations, on behalf of NASA, the Atomic Energy Commission, the U.S. Information Agency, and the arms, equipment, ammunition, munitions and related miscellaneous supply manufacturing corporations contracting with NASA, the AEC, USIA, and the Pentagon. One can readily observe that DISC is not compatible with an open Democracy and the U.S. Constitution. Consequently, the top secret arms manufacturers' police agency has been kept from the knowledge of even most U.S. officials and Congressmen.

The Defense Industrial Security Command had its beginnings when J. Edgar Hoover in the early 1930's organized the police force of the fledgling Tennessee Valley Authority at the request of David Lillienthal. The police force covered the entire TVA from Knoxville, Tennessee through Huntsville and Florence, Alabama into Kentucky and back through the eastern portion of Tennessee into southern Kentucky. This was one of the first federal agencies with a separate police force. This force grew and Lillienthal took it forward to cover the Atomic Energy Commission, thus tying it into the Army Intelligence Service.

L.M. Bloomfield, a Montreal, CANADA lawyer bearing the reputation as a sex deviate, the direct supervisor of all contractual agents with J. Edgar Hoover's Division Five, was the top co-ordinator for the network planning the execution. A Swiss corporation, Permindex, was used to head five front organizations responsible for furnishing personnel and supervisors to carry out assigned duties...

The Defense Industrial Security Command is the police and espionage agency for the U.S. munitions makers. DISC was organized by J. Edgar Hoover; William Sullivan, his chief assistant, is in direct command. We shall later examine the involvement of a large number of the DISC agents including Clay Shaw, Guy Bannister, David Ferrie, Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby and others with Permindex's Louis Mortimer Bloomfield of Montreal, Canada in charge.

Attached Files



#4 Maurice Philipps

Maurice Philipps

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 03:27 AM

WHY THE BLOOMFIELD ARCHIVES SHOULD BE OPENED

In 1968, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, a Montreal prominent lawyer, was named as an associate of Clay Shaw, the New Orleans businessman indicted of conspiracy in the JFK assassination by District Attorney Jim Garrison. According to Italian newspapers articles, Bloomfield would have been the major shareholder of Permindex, a shadowy corporation to which Clay Shaw was related.

Since both Clay Shaw and Bloomfield were intelligence veterans of World War II, and since Permindex was suspected of funneling money for intelligence operations, including assassination attempts on General De Gaulle, Bloomfield eventually became the victim of his supposed association with Shaw, to the point where he was perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy.

First of all, it must be stressed that the allegations against Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, even his hypothetical relation with Clay Shaw, never were documented. The more explicit accusations against him (in Torbitt's Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal) was even coming from an unpublished manuscript written under pseudonym and giving for source two anonymous US federal agents. Most of the other speculations about Bloomfield took roots in this unsubstantiated and uncorroborated text, and never bring any solid evidence against Bloomfield.

Why was the rumor mill so hard with Bloomfield? Because, regardless of any JFK assassination connection, he was a character related to the world of espionage during World War II, and that, well after WWII, he still played some important historical part in international politics, that up to the 1980's. In many aspects, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield was comparable to William Stephenson, the man called Intrepid, except that his story was never made public.

Before its death, Bloomfield donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, nearly two years after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents, even after legal procedures were taken on this matter in Federal Court.

Even -and furthermore- if Bloomfield have nothing to do with the JFK assassination, it is more than time that his archives become opened to the public and that his true story finally been told.

There is one overwhelming argument in favor of this: that his personal archives been open to the public -twenty years after his death- was the clear expressed will of this eminent attorney. Whatever was Bloomfield intention in giving his archives and in asking that they become open to the public, he deserves this will to be respected, just as much as the public deserves to know the truth about him.

Will the content of his archives clear him of any connection with the JFK assassination? Or will this content show what really happened in Dallas? We don’t know but Louis Mortimer Bloomfield knew and asked for it to be revealed.

This two dimensions conviction is the reason I took action in court to get those papers released, and I convey everyone to support their opening.

#5 Ron Ecker

Ron Ecker

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 04:46 AM

Forgive me if this has been previously explained, but what reason are they giving for not opening the Bloomfield archive?

Also, was it Bloomfield's wish that the archive be opened 20 years after his death, or did he simply say it would be permissible to open them 20 years after? And why 20 years, instead of simply after his death? To give certain other people time to die too?

#6 Mark Stapleton

Mark Stapleton

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,913 posts

Posted 24 April 2006 - 05:32 PM

WHY THE BLOOMFIELD ARCHIVES SHOULD BE OPENED

In 1968, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, a Montreal prominent lawyer, was named as an associate of Clay Shaw, the New Orleans businessman indicted of conspiracy in the JFK assassination by District Attorney Jim Garrison. According to Italian newspapers articles, Bloomfield would have been the major shareholder of Permindex, a shadowy corporation to which Clay Shaw was related.

Since both Clay Shaw and Bloomfield were intelligence veterans of World War II, and since Permindex was suspected of funneling money for intelligence operations, including assassination attempts on General De Gaulle, Bloomfield eventually became the victim of his supposed association with Shaw, to the point where he was perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy.

First of all, it must be stressed that the allegations against Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, even his hypothetical relation with Clay Shaw, never were documented. The more explicit accusations against him (in Torbitt's Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal) was even coming from an unpublished manuscript written under pseudonym and giving for source two anonymous US federal agents. Most of the other speculations about Bloomfield took roots in this unsubstantiated and uncorroborated text, and never bring any solid evidence against Bloomfield.

Why was the rumor mill so hard with Bloomfield? Because, regardless of any JFK assassination connection, he was a character related to the world of espionage during World War II, and that, well after WWII, he still played some important historical part in international politics, that up to the 1980's. In many aspects, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield was comparable to William Stephenson, the man called Intrepid, except that his story was never made public.

Before its death, Bloomfield donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, nearly two years after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents, even after legal procedures were taken on this matter in Federal Court.

Even -and furthermore- if Bloomfield have nothing to do with the JFK assassination, it is more than time that his archives become opened to the public and that his true story finally been told.

There is one overwhelming argument in favor of this: that his personal archives been open to the public -twenty years after his death- was the clear expressed will of this eminent attorney. Whatever was Bloomfield intention in giving his archives and in asking that they become open to the public, he deserves this will to be respected, just as much as the public deserves to know the truth about him.

Will the content of his archives clear him of any connection with the JFK assassination? Or will this content show what really happened in Dallas? We don’t know but Louis Mortimer Bloomfield knew and asked for it to be revealed.

This two dimensions conviction is the reason I took action in court to get those papers released, and I convey everyone to support their opening.


Hi Maurice,

Congratulations on your ongoing efforts to get Bloomfield's papers released. The extended restrictions seem rather strange, as I don't see why his widow would object to his clearly expressed intentions. Perhaps another force is at work here. I'm especially interested in the correspondence between Mr. Bloomfield and George Bush Snr., which you alluded to in the "Israel, LBJ and the Assassination" thread.

#7 Maurice Philipps

Maurice Philipps

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted 25 April 2006 - 04:36 AM

In order for readers to understand the administrative background of the Louis Mortimer Bloomfield archives, held secret by Library and Archives Canada (LAC, the Canadian National Archives), here are copies of the documents pertaining to the management of this collection. I include a few basics comment on my attempt to access the archives.

First of all, readers should know that the Louis Mortimer Bloomfield collection was transferred to Public Archives Canada (PAC) in 1978-1979 by Bloomfield himself, under the Cultural Property Program. This program entitled him to special tax deductions if he irrevocably alienated his archives to a designed cultural institution. There was no specific contract between Bloomfield and PAC except letters exchanged between the parties and Bloomfield received two tax certificates. In one letter (that I will post later on this site), Bloomfield stated that there wasn't any other condition to the transfer except that the documents been opened to the public only 20 years after his death. Bloomfield died on July, 19, 1984.

Following his death and according to this condition, PAC thus determined that the restriction on Bloomfield's paper should be of 20 years starting on July, 19, 1984. This is the 1986 restriction form that PAC which was available in 1996 in the database of the Canadian National Archives.
Posted Image
According to this restriction the Bloomfield collection should have been opened in July 2004.

In 2002, National Archives of Canada (NAC), PAC's latest appellation, put a new version of this restriction form online on its website:
Posted Image
Even if the wording of this form didn't make reference to July, 19, 1984, still, just two years before 2004, the National Archives were confirming that the collection should be open in 2004. (Note: As I learned later, according to internal procedures, documents restricted until a specific year should have been opened on January 1st of that year.)

In August 2004, after the 20 years period stated in the first restriction file, I contacted Library and Archives Canada (LAC), successor to NAC, in order to access the Bloomfield collection. My request was put on hold for a month, and then on September 3, I received a short answer saying only that the collection was "still restricted". Since the wording of the last restriction form could mean that the National Archives may restrict the documents for the whole year 2004, I decided not to contest this answer and to wait a few more months until January 2005. At this moment, I contacted again LAC and asked access to the documents. The answer I received was astonishing: the collection was now restricted for ten more years. When did that restriction occured? On September 8, 2004, right after I asked access to the collection.

Here is the new access restriction form that was prepared at this date:
Posted Image
Note that in this form, the "Authority for restriction" is referring to a letter dated August 31, 2004, that is a correspondance that was received after my August request.
Naturally, I inquired about the reasons of this decision and asked the Librarian and Archivist of Canada to reverse it. In order to debate the matter, I eventually file a Freedom of Information request to obtain copy of the original agreement between Louis M. Bloomfield and the Public Archives. This request was handled by a section of LAC called Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP). On April 18, 2005, ATIP send me a few pages including copy of the letters from Bloomfield.

At first, I was quite please to see in those letters that Bloomfield asked that his archives been released 20 years after his death. On this ground, for a very short moment, I believed that I may convince LAC to respect Mr Bloomfield's will. But, I quickly lost this optimism. Doing a routinely check of the Bloomfield collection statute on LAC's website, I had the surprise to find that a new restriction form as just been released 2 days after ATIP answered me.

As you can see, the new form was describing an access restriction ending only 25 years after the death of Mrs. Justine Stern (Bloomfield) Cartier, Bloomfield's widow. That is a restriction 120% longer than the original one asked by the donator.
Posted Image
As I learned later, by obtaining, through FOI, 385 pages of documents pertaining to the treatment of my demand, this new 25 years restriction was a direct result of my first Freedom of Information request.

According to the archivists I did consult on the matter, such a behavior is highly irregular from any archives institution. But nevertheless, that is the course of actions Library and Archives Canada elected to take with regards to the Louis Mortimer Bloomfield archives.

#8 Maurice Philipps

Maurice Philipps

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 04:43 AM

Forgive me if this has been previously explained, but what reason are they giving for not opening the Bloomfield archive?

Also, was it Bloomfield's wish that the archive be opened 20 years after his death, or did he simply say it would be permissible to open them 20 years after? And why 20 years, instead of simply after his death? To give certain other people time to die too?


Hi, I'm reproducing here the last post I have just put online on my blog at: http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/. It will answer Ron's questions.

THE BLOOMFIELD ARCHIVES: IS LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES CANADA SINCERE?

It is hard to understand why Library and Archives Canada (LAC) is still refusing to open the Bloomfield archives two years after the end of the 20 years access restriction asked by its creator, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield. To justify a supplementary restriction imposed to this collection. LAC invokes its intention to respect the donator’s will. But this explanation doesn’t resist serious scrutiny, to the point where we may ask ourselves if we are just in presence of a case of poor management or if LAC is not maliciously hiding to the public archives that even its donator wanted to be released.

When an institution receives the private archives of a citizen, the first question this establishment has to resolve is to determine when those papers could be open to public.

In the event where the collection is given by its creator’s succession, the families that transmitted this collection usually have full responsibility and power to impose a timeline of its opening and, in some case, to review it.

But, naturally, when the private archives are given by its creator himself during his lifetime, the institution should respect the expressed will of the donator. We may even say that, in this situation, the institution first responsibility is to make absolutely sure that it will enforce the expressed will of the donator, even if, decades later, his succession disagrees with this original intention. In such a case, we might even consider the high probability that the donator foresaw his entourage's hesitation, and that he consciously transferred his papers to a neutral institution which he trusted to respect his will. That an establishment can fail to fulfill such will is then a grave betrayal of this donator.

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, while he was alive, did trust the Public Archives of Canada (PAC) and versed to it a collection of papers that the PAC qualified of great national value. At the time of this donation, Louis M. Bloomfield was a prominent lawyer and president of the International Law Association. At the time of this donation, PAC had for legal mission to collect documents of national importance and to guarantee their diffusion. It can’t be reasonably argued that this outstanding lawyer didn’t know what he was doing or the consequences of his donation to an institution that had for name PUBLIC Archives of Canada. The short letter that Bloomfield addressed to the archivist on Feb. 24, 1978, was quite clear and straightforward.

http://photos1.blogg...ld_19780224.gif

On the matter of restriction, its simply reads:

“The documents which you are taking from me to form a Bloomfield section of the archives are to be held for a period of twenty (20) years after my death before any of this material is made public.”

In the second paragraph, Bloomfield designated his wife as “literary exetrix” (sic) and allow her (and three others persons) to have access to his collection, without even suggesting that she may had any authority to restrict them for longer than 20 years.

If those instructions weren’t clear enough, a year and a half later, on July 30, 1979, Louis M. Bloomfield addressed another letter to the Public Archives in which he again stated the conditions of the documents transfer.

http://photos1.blogg...ield_gordon.jpg

Again, there is no interpretation to be done of Bloomfield’s will. He stated clearly:
“There will be no conditions attached to the deposit other than the original conditions that these documents be made available to the Public only twenty years after my death.”
In the following phrase he just repeated his authorization for his wife, and three named peoples, to access his collection, without any reference of entitling anybody to change the terms of his will after his death.

With his will clearly expressed in two different letters, Mr. Bloomfield was surely trusting the Public Archives to know how to act in the event of his decease.

Louis Mortimer Bloomfield death occurred on July 19, 1984. Following this event, the Public Archives first acted in full respect of this donator’s will. They contacted his widow, by letter dated November, 7. (Regardless of many request to receive copy of all papers pertaining to the Bloomfield-PAC agreement, LAC never produced this letter.) Eventually, Mrs Bloomfield answered this letter on November 19, 1984 and acknowledged her husband’ will.

http://photos1.blogg...eld19111984.jpg

That letter is merely an acknowledgment of the unique condition set earlier by Louis Bloomfield, that is a confirmation of the 20 years embargo on his papers. In that letter, there is no specific clause regarding prolongation of this 20 years restriction. The phrase "Of course we will review this matter at a future date" can even be seen as an opening to lower this restriction before its end. Citing this letter as reference, PAC prepared a Restricted Papers Form in which the restriction period was stated as being of 20 years starting on July 19, 1984.

http://photos1.blogg...nat_arc_lmb.jpg

The Restricted Papers Form didn’t say a word about any possible revision or prolongation of the restriction. Seeing that everything was taken care of as he specifically asked for, the spirit of Louis Bloomfield was ready to rest in peace, confident that his archives will be opened 20 years later in 2004.

Surely, Louis M. Bloomfield would be disappointed to see that, 22 years later, the Public Archives of Canada didn’t respected his expressed will.
Surely, Louis M. Bloomfield would be disappointed to learn that Library and Archives Canada (LAC), the federal body that replaced PAC, not only forgot but actively refused to make public his archives, to the point of resisting this opening in Federal Court ?
Surely, Louis M. Bloomfield, the prominent lawyer, would be disappointed to see that LAC archivists and lawyers based their refusal on the fact that they see in Mrs. Bloomfield’s letter an agreement to let her review the duration of the restriction AFTER its termination and AGAINST her husband’s will.
Surely, Louis M. Bloomfield would be disappointed to see that, instead of being opened 20 years after his death, his valuable archives will remain secret 25 years after her widows’ death. Since Mrs. Bloomfield is still alive in 2006, that means they will stay closed at least up to year 2031; that is at least 47 years after her husband’s decease.

At a first level, we can deduct morale from this story: If you are alive and have valuable archives, don’t trust Library and Archives Canada, because, like Louis M. Bloomfield, you’ll surely be disappointed.

On a second level we are justified to ask ourselves an imperative question: Is LAC just misguided in its appreciation of its donator’s intentions? Or is LAC guided by some covert intentions?

If Louis Bloomfield's intentions of having his collection opened to the public is not clear enough by now, in the next post, we will see a letter he sent to the Public Archives in which he stressed the great historical value of his papers. This will be a good reading both because it shows that Bloomfield wanted his archives to be shared, but also because he is giving us a few hints on their content.

#9 Mark Carter

Mark Carter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Interests: I am a writer who has just finished my first book about the Kennedy assassinations.

Posted 27 April 2006 - 07:42 AM

John great article but you tend to leave out the huge Jewish connection to this whole thing. Over 80% of the people mentioned in your article are Jewish. If you look at the current President George Bush during his first term he had an all Jewish Cabinet. Fleisher, Wolfowicz, Bremmer, Feith, Senor. HARDLY a right-winger!
The main enemy of Right-wingers here in the U.S. were Jews who created the Communist Party in America.
The first head of the Communist Party of the United States was a man by the name of Jay Lovestone back in the 1920s. He was also Jewish. One of the strangest aspects of this senario is that Allen Dulles who was the Head of the CIA when John Kennedy was President was secretly funneling taxpayer dollars to Jay Lovestone for decades. Why? The CIA is supposed to be a right-wing organization. My investigation into the CIA shows otherwise.
J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI who was in charge of putting hundreds of Communists in prison used to complain to the State Dept. That Allen Dulles was hiring a bunch of Bolshevicks over there at the CIA. So WHO really is this ultra secret organization called the CIA? If the CIA and the FBI were supposed to be fighting againt Communism during the Cold war then why were they bitter enemies? They should have gotten along great together.

#10 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 27 April 2006 - 09:06 AM

John great article but you tend to leave out the huge Jewish connection to this whole thing. Over 80% of the people mentioned in your article are Jewish.


For obvious reasons. I see no connection between Jews and the assassination of JFK. Some Jews might have been involved in the assassination and the cover-up, James Angleton for example, but it has nothing to do with their religious beliefs.

The main enemy of Right-wingers here in the U.S. were Jews who created the Communist Party in America.
The first head of the Communist Party of the United States was a man by the name of Jay Lovestone back in the 1920s. He was also Jewish.


It is true that a fairly high percentage of people in the American Communist Party were Jewish. This is true of the Communist Party in every country. There is a good reason for this: Anti-Semitism. Jews have always being persecuted and they were understandable attracted to a movement that claimed it was in favour of equality and against the persecution of racial minorities.

It is also true that a high percentage of white people involved in the civil rights movement in America in the 1950s and 1960s were Jewish. The same is true of the fight against apartheid in South Africa. Unlike some other persecuted people, the Jews have often taken the side of the underdog. It is something that I admire in the Jews. Don't you?

J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI who was in charge of putting hundreds of Communists in prison used to complain to the State Dept. That Allen Dulles was hiring a bunch of Bolshevicks over there at the CIA. So WHO really is this ultra secret organization called the CIA? If the CIA and the FBI were supposed to be fighting againt Communism during the Cold war then why were they bitter enemies? They should have gotten along great together.


I am afraid that you have been reading too much McCarthyite propaganda. It is true that McCarthy, using material provided by J. Edgar Hoover, accused some CIA officials of being sympathetic to communism. This resulted in Cord Meyer being suspended from duty. This was because Meyer’s wife had been a member of the American Labor Party in her youth. Other leading CIA officials had been Roosevelt New Dealers before the war. Of course McCarthy considered liberals to be the same as communists. McCarthy was being used by Hoover who feared that the CIA that had been established in 1947 had taken away some of his power. These claims were part of a power struggle. It was a fight that Hoover lost.

It is complete nonsense to portray the CIA as being sympathetic to communism. In fact they were all fanatically opposed to it. Most of them developed these opinions while serving in the OSS during the Second World War.

#11 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 28 January 2007 - 09:30 AM

http://www.canada.co...t...f0c&k=23786

Dispute over releasing archives keeps lid on potential link to JFK's death
Elizabeth Thompson, CanWest News Service
Published: Saturday, January 27, 2007


Does the key to former U.S. President John F. Kennedy's assassination lie buried in Canada's national archives?

Or is it another secret that has pitted Montreal researcher Maurice Philipps against Library and Archives Canada and the widow of a prominent former Montreal lawyer, the late Louis Mortimer Bloomfield.

One thing is certain: Whatever Bloomfield's widow is trying to keep under lock and key out of concern for "privacy and the reputation of Louis M. Bloomfield," it has left Canada's national archives wrestling with a dilemma that goes to the heart of the question of who controls access to private documents donated to the federal government.

A recent Federal Court ruling found the institution cannot arbitrarily extend the restriction on access to Bloomfield's papers well past the original deadline set by Bloomfield himself. Now, archive officials are struggling to decide when to lift the veil of secrecy on papers that have been judged of exceptional interest to Canada.

"We are in the process of reviewing the whole issue, and upon having completed that review we will make it known," Francois Gagnon, spokesman for Library and Archives Canada, said Friday.

Gagnon could not say how long that review is expected to take.

Bloomfield's nephew says he sees no reason to keep the papers shielded from public view. Montrealer Harry Bloomfield says the fight to keep his uncle's papers behind a veil of secrecy is likely fuelling conspiracy theories tying Bloomfield to JFK's assassination - theories that he says are completely unfounded.

At the centre of the controversy are 31 boxes of documents Bloomfield, a well-known lawyer who specialized in international law and was a pillar of a number of Montreal charities, donated to the archives a few years before his death in 1984.

In addition to correspondence with a number of prominent Canadian politicians and with George Bush Sr., the collection includes documents relating to a variety of charities in which Bloomfield was active, cases in which he was involved and papers related to some of his notable clients.

The one condition Bloomfield placed on the donation was that public access to the papers would be restricted for 20 years after his death. Members of the public who wanted to consult the Bloomfield Collection would have to obtain the permission of Bloomfield's widow, Justine Stern Bloomfield Cartier.

Philipps, author of the book De Dallas a Montreal (From Dallas to Montreal), which explores a possible Montreal connection to JFK's 1963 assassination in Dallas, stumbled on a reference to the Bloomfield connection in the mid-1990s and was intrigued - particularly given allegations advanced by some JFK conspiracy theorists that tied Bloomfield to the shooting, a shadowy international company called Permindex, the CIA and the agency that preceded it, the OSS.

While the conspiracy theory connection between Bloomfield and JFK's assassination is a complex one and has evolved over time, it appears to stem from the fact that he was named as a major shareholder in Permindex. There are allegations that Permindex was a front or shell company for the CIA and was used to funnel money for intelligence operations.

While Philipps does not believe the papers implicate Bloomfield in the shooting -- in fact, he thinks they may clear Bloomfield's name -- he says they might contain clues that could help shed light on JFK's assassination.

In 2004, however, just as the 20-year restriction was coming to an end and Philipps applied in writing for access to the collection, he was told the archives had extended the restriction on access at the request of Mrs. Bloomfield, who was still alive, until 25 years after her death.

When chief archivist Ian Wilson rejected his request to review the decision, Philipps took his case to court, saying the archives should respect Bloomfield's own wishes for a 20-year delay.

Lawyers for the archives argued the terms of Bloomfield's donation allowed his widow to extend the length of the restriction.

In his ruling, rendered in November and made public this month, Judge Simon Noel ruled that the donor's original wishes should be taken into account and the archives' view that Bloomfield's widow had a right to revise the terms of the restriction on his papers was an error in law. He ordered the archives to review the decision.


ethompson@thegazette.canwest.com

#12 Don Roberdeau

Don Roberdeau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 453 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States Navy
  • Interests:+++++

    T ogether
    E veryone
    A chieves
    M ore

    Donald Roberdeau is a Volunteer United States Navy veteran who has served and led worldwide for National and International Leadership for Our United States Navy, Department of Defense (DoD), Our Coalitions Allies, + Our many Friendly countries Defenses & Strengthening's, + Population's Defense, + Help after Catastrophe's & Disaster's Giving and Delivering Medical relief & Basic foods + Sustenance goods, + Nation's Liberation's with Leadership responsible for all assigned Veteran's Safety, Skills training, Establish Goals Successfully Accomplished @ coordinated levels for Our Team for the Individual Veteran, Work centers, Divisions, Departments, + Duty stations.

    Don is a 1st generation JFK assassination researcher, steadily researching and detailing evidence (and its massive amount of stark, transparent contradictions), contacting the Dealey Plaza witnesses (45 to date, including the 2 wounded, surviving victims), contacting scores of witnesses to assassination related events before, during + after 11-22-63, contributing new discoveries, + steadily developing detailed key considerations for 39+ years (after observing the Zapruder film during its 1975, first-ever, public showing in-motion on TV) providing public & private presentations, + contributing via the Internet, periodicals, newspapers, radio, others books, + TV.

Posted 28 January 2007 - 08:47 PM

Do Lawyer's Files Hide JFK Secrets?

Good Day John.... Found another, nearly similar article in CANADA‘s “Montreal Gazette” that has a bit more information towards the end of the article, plus, provides an additional Internet link.

http://www.canada.co...b3-1811ff2a9def

<QUOTE>

Do Lawyer's Files Hide JFK Secrets?

Bloomfield papers. Montreal lawyer's widow asks federal archives to seal husband's documents for at least 25 more years


ELIZABETH THOMPSON, The Gazette
Published: Saturday, January 27, 2007

Does the key to the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy lie buried in Canada's national archives?

Or is it another secret that has pitted Montreal researcher Maurice Philipps against Library and Archives Canada and the widow of a once prominent Montreal lawyer, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield?

One thing is certain. Whatever Bloomfield's widow is trying to keep under lock and key - out of concern for "privacy and the reputation of Louis M. Bloomfield" - it has left Canada's national archives wrestling with a dilemma that goes to the heart of the question of who controls access to private documents donated to the federal government.

A recent federal court ruling found the institution cannot arbitrarily extend the restriction on access to Bloomfield's papers well past the original deadline set by Bloomfield himself. Now, the archives is struggling to decide when to lift the veil of secrecy on papers that have been judged of exceptional interest to Canada.

"We are in the process of reviewing the whole issue and, upon having completed that review, we will make it known," Francois Gagnon, spokesperson for Library and Archives Canada, said yesterday.

Gagnon could not say how long that review is expected to take.

However, Bloomfield's nephew says he sees no reason to keep the papers shielded from public view. Montrealer Harry Bloomfield says the fight to keep his uncle's papers behind a veil of secrecy probably is fuelling conspiracy theories tying Bloomfield to JFK's assassination - theories he says are completely unfounded.

"There was this amazing world of conspiracy theories that somehow landed on my poor late uncle who was completely ... horrified that anyone would ever (suspect that), after an amazing, long, highly prestigious, highly proper, fine career as a lawyer in Canada and the world," said Bloomfield, one of only four people authorized under his uncle's instructions to view the restricted papers. "It is total, absolute nonsense. I don't think there is anything about his papers that will prove anything otherwise."

Bloomfield said his uncle had nothing to hide and his aunt, who asked that the papers be kept under lock and key, has been estranged from the Bloomfield family since his uncle's death.

"A natural reaction by Mrs. Cartier, who is an extremely private person, may have bolstered the idea that there is something to hide. If they must be shown, then let them be shown. I am sure he would have been delighted and proud of his career."

At the centre of the controversy are 31 boxes of documents that Bloomfield donated to the archives a few years before his death in 1984. A well-known lawyer who specialized in international law, Bloomfield was a pillar of several Montreal charities, including the Reddy Memorial Hospital and the Canadian Human Rights Foundation.

In addition to correspondence with many prominent Canadian politicians and with George Bush Sr., the collection includes documents relating to a variety of charities in which Bloomfield was active, cases in which he was involved, such as the attempt to bring Romanian King Carol to Canada as a refugee in the Second World War and papers related to some of his clients, such as letters of Lady Henrietta Davis and her husband, Sir Mortimer Davis.

The one condition Bloomfield placed on the donation was that public access to the papers would be restricted for 20 years after his death. Members of the public who wanted to consult the Bloomfield Collection would have to obtain the permission of Bloomfield's widow, Justine Stern Bloomfield Cartier.

Philipps, author of the book De Dallas a Montreal, which explores a possible Montreal connection to JFK's 1963 assassination in Dallas, stumbled on a reference to the Bloomfield connection in the mid-1990s and was intrigued - particularly given allegations advanced by some JFK conspiracy theorists that tied Bloomfield to the shooting, a company called Permindex, the CIA and the agency that preceded it, the Office of Strategic Services.

While the conspiracy theory connection between Bloomfield and JFK's assassination is a complex one and has evolved over time, it appears to stem from the fact he was named as a major shareholder in a shadowy international company called Permindex. Among the other people involved in Permindex was Clay Shaw, whom New Orleans district-attorney Jim Garrison suspected was part of a conspiracy to murder the president. There are also allegations Permindex was a front or shell company for the CIA and was used to funnel money for intelligence operations.

Some of the theories allege Bloomfield had been recruited into the OSS and that he had ties to intelligence circles - something Harry Bloomfield vehemently denies.

While Philipps does not believe the papers implicate Bloomfield in the shooting - in fact, he believes they may clear Bloomfield's name - he believes they could contain clues that could help shed light on JFK's assassination:

"I think we will find information on people other than him ... but I don't think that Mr. Bloomfield was directly linked to that in a criminal way."

In 2004, however, just as the 20-year restriction was coming to an end and Philipps applied in writing for access to the collection, he was told the archives had extended the restriction on access at the request of Mrs. Bloomfield, who was still alive, until 25 years after her death.

"I am concerned about certain privacy issues and the reputation of Louis M. Bloomfield," she wrote in a letter to the archives dated Aug. 31, 2004.

The letter does not say what in Bloomfield's papers might risk harming his reputation. When chief archivist Ian Wilson rejected his request to review the decision, Philipps took his case to court, saying the archives should respect Bloomfield's own wishes for a 20-year delay. Philipps pointed out part of the archives' mandate is making Canada's documentary heritage available to Canadians and that Bloomfield had got a tax deduction for his donation.

Philipps also argued Bloomfield must have wanted the papers to be available eventually to the public - pointing out if he didn't want them to be seen by Canadians, he could have easily left them to his family or to his law firm.

Lawyers for the archives argued the terms of Bloomfield's donation allowed his widow to extend the length of the restriction. While Bloomfield's conditions meant that the papers had to be restricted for 20 years, they argued the question of whether to grant access after that lay within the powers of the chief archivist, powers that the archivist needed in order to negotiate with private donors to obtain documents of interest to Canada's history.

In his ruling, rendered in November and made public this month, Judge Simon Noel ruled the donor's original wishes should be taken into account and the archives' view that Bloomfield's widow had a right to revise the terms of the restriction on his papers was an error in law.

While the archivist should have some power of discretion over whether archives documents should be available to the public, the decision to restrict the Bloomfield Collection until 25 years after his widow's death was an unreasonable one, Noel ruled. He ordered the archives to review the decision.

Reached in Cambodia, where he is travelling, Harry Bloomfield said he has no doubt his uncle's papers would be of interest to scholars.

"People lead interesting, fascinating, complicated lives. My uncle was delighted and honoured to leave his papers to the Canadian archives," he said.

For a detailed description of the Bloomfield collection, go to:

http://data2.collect.../p000000813.pdf

ethompson@thegazette.canwest.com

<END QUOTE>

Best Regards in Research,

Don


Don Roberdeau
U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," Plank Walker
Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly
ROSEMARY WILLIS 2nd Headsnap; Westward, Ultrafast, & Towards the "Grassy Knoll"
Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map Detailing Victims locations, Witnesses, Photographers, Suspected trajectories, Evidentiary artifacts, etc
BOND Photos Do Not Timestamp Gordon Arnold
4 Principles


T ogether
E veryone
A chieves
M ore

Posted Image
Posted Image

"A red-brown to black area of skin surrounds the wound, forming what is called an abrasion collar. It was caused by the bullet's scraping the margins of the skin on penetration and is characteristic of a gunshot wound of entrance. The abrasion collar is larger at the lower margin of the wound, evidence that the bullet's trajectory at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the body."

- 07HSCA175
describing President KENNEDY's, theorized, not-completely-probed, neck and back wound trajectory as being slightly upward anatomically

Edited by Don Roberdeau, 28 January 2007 - 08:54 PM.


#13 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,137 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 January 2007 - 11:47 PM

[quote name='Don Roberdeau' date='Jan 28 2007, 08:47 PM' post='91368']
Do Lawyer's Files Hide JFK Secrets?

Good Day John.... Found another, nearly similar article in CANADA's "Montreal Gazette" that has a bit more information towards the end of the article, plus, provides an additional Internet link.

http://www.canada.co...b3-1811ff2a9def

<QUOTE>

Do Lawyer's Files Hide JFK Secrets?

Bloomfield papers. Montreal lawyer's widow asks federal archives to seal husband's documents for at least 25 more years


ELIZABETH THOMPSON, The Gazette
Published: Saturday, January 27, 2007

Does the key to the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy lie buried in Canada's national archives?

For a detailed description of the Bloomfield collection, go to:

http://data2.collect.../p000000813.pdf



Thanks for that Don,

Note : 16 1 Bush, George (Sr.) Correspondence 1976-1984

Paul Louis Weiller - Cuba Correspondence

and

Mexican Light and Power - 1960-64 ?

BK

Edited by William Kelly, 28 January 2007 - 11:51 PM.


#14 John Simkin

John Simkin

    Super Member

  • admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 16,059 posts

Posted 31 January 2007 - 10:52 AM

WHY THE BLOOMFIELD ARCHIVES SHOULD BE OPENED

In 1968, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, a Montreal prominent lawyer, was named as an associate of Clay Shaw, the New Orleans businessman indicted of conspiracy in the JFK assassination by District Attorney Jim Garrison. According to Italian newspapers articles, Bloomfield would have been the major shareholder of Permindex, a shadowy corporation to which Clay Shaw was related.

Since both Clay Shaw and Bloomfield were intelligence veterans of World War II, and since Permindex was suspected of funneling money for intelligence operations, including assassination attempts on General De Gaulle, Bloomfield eventually became the victim of his supposed association with Shaw, to the point where he was perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy.

First of all, it must be stressed that the allegations against Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, even his hypothetical relation with Clay Shaw, never were documented. The more explicit accusations against him (in Torbitt's Nomenclature of an Assassination Cabal) was even coming from an unpublished manuscript written under pseudonym and giving for source two anonymous US federal agents. Most of the other speculations about Bloomfield took roots in this unsubstantiated and uncorroborated text, and never bring any solid evidence against Bloomfield.

Why was the rumor mill so hard with Bloomfield? Because, regardless of any JFK assassination connection, he was a character related to the world of espionage during World War II, and that, well after WWII, he still played some important historical part in international politics, that up to the 1980's. In many aspects, Louis Mortimer Bloomfield was comparable to William Stephenson, the man called Intrepid, except that his story was never made public.

Before its death, Bloomfield donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, nearly two years after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada (LAC) refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents, even after legal procedures were taken on this matter in Federal Court.

Even -and furthermore- if Bloomfield have nothing to do with the JFK assassination, it is more than time that his archives become opened to the public and that his true story finally been told.

There is one overwhelming argument in favor of this: that his personal archives been open to the public -twenty years after his death- was the clear expressed will of this eminent attorney. Whatever was Bloomfield intention in giving his archives and in asking that they become open to the public, he deserves this will to be respected, just as much as the public deserves to know the truth about him.

Will the content of his archives clear him of any connection with the JFK assassination? Or will this content show what really happened in Dallas? We don’t know but Louis Mortimer Bloomfield knew and asked for it to be revealed.

This two dimensions conviction is the reason I took action in court to get those papers released, and I convey everyone to support their opening.


Maurice, I hope you keep the forum informed about your struggle to get this material released.

#15 Mark Stapleton

Mark Stapleton

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,913 posts

Posted 31 January 2007 - 02:55 PM

Here here to that, John.

Your efforts in this regard are greatly appreciated, Maurice.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users