John Kowalski Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 In an earlier post, I mentioned that I have brought a lawsuit against Library and Archives Canada because they denied access to me to certain files in the Louis M. Bloomfield collection. I'm not the first person to do so, Maurice Phillips sued them in 2006 and again in 2008. At the end of the 2008 case, the court ruled that the archives could impose a restriction on some files in the collection, and what they did was to impose a 50 year restriction on those files that they believed to be subject to solicitor-client privilege. When I began my research of the Bloomfield collection years ago, I would check an online document on the archives website that would indicate which files were now 50 years old. I would then order those files and review them. In 2018 the archives informed me that those files that had the 50 year restriction i.e. those files that they deemed to be subject to solicitor-client privilege could no longer be viewed by the public. Because of this action by the archives, I brought a lawsuit against them in the Federal Court of Canada. Since bringing my court action, a new problem has arose. La Barreau du Quebec aka The Law Society of Quebec, which is one of the of the largest law societies in Canada, has intervened in my case at the request of the archives. They are intervening in my case because they want to defend solicitor-client privilege, which protects communications between a lawyer and his client from being divulged. I have informed them that the files Bloomfield donated to the archives are not protected by solicitor-client privilege because the files he donated are not related to his legal work with clients, but they still have not withdrawn their intervention. A local media outlet has written a story about my lawsuit. The story also has a comment from Harry Bloomfield, who is Louis M. Bloomfield’s nephew. Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Lawyers In JFK Archive Case One of Canada’s largest law societies is intervening in a court case over archival records linked by conspiracy theorists to the 1963 Kennedy assassination. The Québec bar association said the challenge raises important questions affecting all solicitors and clients. “We are intervening on the principle of solicitor-client confidentiality,” said Jean-Francois Del Torchio, director of communications for the Barreau du Québec. “That confidentiality doesn’t belong to the lawyer; it always belongs to the client. We have the mandate from our board of directors to protect solicitor-client confidentiality.” Library & Archives Canada in 1979 accepted a donation of 31 boxes of personal records from Louis Bloomfield, a Montréal attorney. Bloomfield from 1967 was named in unsubstantiated press reports as an agent for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency with knowledge of the JFK assassination. Bloomfield had asked that his records be released 20 years after his death; he died in 1984. However, archivists last February 21 told researchers the files would remain sealed forever since they contained confidential information. “On the advice of Department of Justice lawyers, Library & Archives Canada has closed in perpetuity records subject to client-solicitor privilege,” said the agency. John Kowalski, an Ottawa researcher, is suing for release of the Bloomfield papers in Federal Court. In an interview, Kowalski disputed claims the papers must be kept confidential in perpetuity. “To be protected by privilege, you have to be giving legal advice to a client,” said Kowalski. “The lawyer must be acting in their capacity as a lawyer. I’ve examined so many of these letters, and none of them involve legal advice – not one iota. These are general letters to many different people about business matters.” Researchers in 2006 won a Federal Court ruling Philipps v. Librarian & Archivist of Canada that there was no justification to withhold the files. Justice Simon Noël noted Bloomfield received tax credits for his donation under the Cultural Property Export And Import Act. “Once the term of 20 years is complete, the power of controlling access ends,” wrote the Court. Harry Bloomfield of Montréal, nephew of the archives donor, said in an interview his family remains baffled by claims their uncle had any connection to the CIA or Kennedy shooting. “He tried to fathom why this was happening,” said Bloomfield. “I see no reason why his files shouldn’t be completely open,” said Bloomfield. “I would like to get this whole conspiracy business cleared up, from the point of view of my late uncle. To say he would be involved in something like the Kennedy assassination is just grotesque, and if he were alive today I’m sure he would sue for defamation.” Bloomfield described his uncle as an esteemed lawyer and WWII veteran who left his papers with the national archives because “he thought his career might be interesting” for researchers. By Jason Unrau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 (edited) God John, If i hear that phrase conspiracy theorist one more time I think I will puke. This is not about a conspiracy theory, its about the free flow of information. The guy has been dead for over thirty years. If he donated his papers and said they would be open in 2004, what is the legal problem? Why does a third party have to intervene on such a nebulous tenet? Really, its just nutty. Edited July 18, 2018 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted July 18, 2018 Author Share Posted July 18, 2018 40 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: God John, If i hear that phrase conspiracy theorist one more time I think I will puke. This is not about a conspiracy theory, its about the free flow of information. They guy has been dead for over thirty years. If he donated his paper and said they would be open in 2004, what is the legal problem? Why does a third party have to intervene on such a nebulous tenet? Really, its just nutty. I do not like conspiracy theorist either. The connotations of those words do not do justice to those people who have dedicated so much time and effort to unraveling the truth about the Kennedy assassination. I prefer the word historical researchers because that is what we are doing, conducting historical research. The legal problem does not exist; their stated reason for closing the files, which is solicitor-client privilege, is not real, and I have the proof. I believe that the archives closed certain files in the Bloomfield fond because Bloomfield's widow, or if she is no longer alive, someone else, asked for it to be closed. The reason for the closure may have been a reaction to the October 2017 file release which focused the public's attention on the Kennedy assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Harper Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 2 hours ago, John Kowalski said: I prefer the word historical researchers because that is what we are doing, conducting historical research. Your efforts and contributions, in Canada, has been noted and applauded by those seeking the truth around the world. Continued good wishes for recovery of what was intended to be seen by others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted July 18, 2018 Author Share Posted July 18, 2018 Thank you Robert, and I will keep everyone posted on the progress of my case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 A lurker wanted me to forward this to John: One of the PDF files he shows under the Bloomfield thread is a letter Richard Coit (likely Cote) in C/O: Sir William Stepheson, the British SOE at address 608 Fifth Avenue 20, NY. That address was the Goelet Building and it was adjacent to Rockefeller Center, which according housed the David Sarnoff RCA - NSA appartatus which included Stephenson and Walter Sheridan. Pages 418---pages 487-491 in Dope Inc. Dope Inc PDF file can be accessed and downloaded on line. Interesting history of the building maybe John would like to review. http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/lpc/lp/1810.pdf Bloomfield really was a player it seems. He really moved in the upper circles of the power elite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted July 20, 2018 Author Share Posted July 20, 2018 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: A lurker wanted me to forward this to John: One of the PDF files he shows under the Bloomfield thread is a letter Richard Coit (likely Cote) in C/O: Sir William Stepheson, the British SOE at address 608 Fifth Avenue 20, NY. That address was the Goelet Building and it was adjacent to Rockefeller Center, which according housed the David Sarnoff RCA - NSA appartatus which included Stephenson and Walter Sheridan. Pages 418---pages 487-491 in Dope Inc. Dope Inc PDF file can be accessed and downloaded on line. Interesting history of the building maybe John would like to review. http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/lpc/lp/1810.pdf Bloomfield really was a player it seems. He really moved in the upper circles of the power elite. Jim: I will have a look at it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted July 22, 2018 Author Share Posted July 22, 2018 On 7/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, John Kowalski said: Jim: I will have a look at it. John I could not find the references to pages 418 and 487-491 in Dope Inc., because the copy I downloaded from internet archive only has 406 pages. It is true, Bloomfield is connected to many in power elite, he had contact with the Rothschilds, Stephenson, and other notable people. But this contact with them does not prove he was participant in the Kennedy assassination, or other deep political events. Dope inc. is written by Lyndon Larouche's North American Labour Party, and anything written by them is not supported by facts. He wrote about Permindex in Executive Intelligence Review, and it it he claimed that Bloomfield was working with Albert Osborne in the operation of a group of assassins. I never found any connection between Osborne and Bloomfield when I was researching my story about Osborne. Larouche also claims that Canada is run by the English monarchy. It is not, Canada is a democracy and the queen has no power, she is only a figurehead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 John: We are not talking about the JFK case. At least not me. The reason that info interested me was because of the possible associations between Stephenson, the Rockefellers and Sarnoffs and Bloomfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted July 23, 2018 Author Share Posted July 23, 2018 2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: John: We are not talking about the JFK case. At least not me. The reason that info interested me was because of the possible associations between Stephenson, the Rockefellers and Sarnoffs and Bloomfield. Bloomfield knew Stephenson and the Rockefeller. They are mentioned in his letters. He moved with the upper echelons of society in Canada, US and Europe. He was a very-well connected man. The link below is a letter written by Bloomfield in which he mentions Dulles. https://archive.org/details/Dulles_201807 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted November 30, 2018 Author Share Posted November 30, 2018 Have an update on the court case. Had another tele-conference with the court regarding Bloomfield's files. They are going to review all letters they have deemed to be subject to solicitor-client privilege (SCP). If they find a letter that they believe should not be subject to SCP, it will copied and put on a disc that will be given to me. The work will be done by mid-December. If I am not satisfied with the letters that are not released, I still have the option of arguing my case in front of a judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 Thanks for the update, and look forward to anything interesting. Have you been able to get Mr. Metta to show his info on CMC to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kowalski Posted November 30, 2018 Author Share Posted November 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said: Thanks for the update, and look forward to anything interesting. Have you been able to get Mr. Metta to show his info on CMC to you? Have not asked him for this info. Has anyone else asked for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 1 hour ago, John Kowalski said: Have not asked him for this info. Has anyone else asked for it? Not directly. But I know you at least posted your desire to see it, and I’d like to also. There seems to be disagreement on Bloomfield ‘s exact position in the company - attorney or founder if I recall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paz Marverde Posted November 30, 2018 Share Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) Mr. Metta is showing his info to anyone in the world, since he published a whole book on CMC, he translated it into English, and created an Appendix at the end of his book showing the documents; documents that he even posted on Flickr as well. Thank you Edited December 1, 2018 by Paz Marverde Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now