John Kowalski

One of the files released by Barbour includes a lead written by a man who lived in Ottawa and who said that Shaw lived at the Lord Elgin Hotel in Ottawa in 1952-1953. Has anyone ever done research on where Shaw was living during this time period?

Have had 2 hearings so far, the March one will be the third and hopefully the last one. Don't know what pro per right means. The term used for the hearings is "case management." Court officers recommended this to me as a way to expedite the process.

Maurice does deserve credit for the work he did. He took the archives to court twice and he forced them to open the files for public review. I spent a lot of time reviewing his court files and in them I found evidence that helped me win my case. My next court date is March 11. Will have a teleconference with a judge, archive lawyers and the Quebec Law Society. This conference should be the last one and in it we will discuss the closing of the case.

Yes there is a letter to Rosenbaum that is withheld but being withheld does not mean that there is something significant in that letter. If Bloomfield and Rosenbaum were involved in something that was either illegal or intelligence related, I do not believe that he would have put it in a letter and then donate that letter to the archives. I also want to mention that I have no suspicions about the withheld documents. The archives allege that they are all subject to solicitor-client privilege (SCP) but I doubt that they are. I have read and have copies of letters written by Bloomfield to some of the people on the list of withheld documents. In these letters he is not providing legal advice. There is one person on the list whose name is Mr. PJ de Dongo. He is Bloomfield's employee, who he sent to Rome to help him with his work he was doing on behalf of his CMC clients. As he was an employee and not a client, Bloomfield would not be providing him with legal advice therefore his letter to him should not be subject to SCP, but it is. What they probably did is choose some random letters and designated them as SCP. Why they held them back I don't know but speculate that they want to save face by saying that yes, some were subject to SCP rather than admit that they were wrong about all of them or admit that they had an ulterior motive for withholding them.

Yes there is a connection to Tibor Rosenbaum but the name of the bank is International Credit Bank. The English name on the letter below from Bloomfield to Rosenbaum is very similar to the French Banco Commerciale Internationale. I don't recall Metta entioning that bank or Rosenbaum, and I can't confirm this because the book has no index. There is probably a connection to the Mossad because Georges Mandel used to be connected to the Israeli Intelligence Service (ILS) which I assume had some connection to the Mossad. Mandel was separated from the ILS but given that he, Shaw and Nagy all have intelligence connections, Permindex and CMC were probably involved in intelligence work.

Hi Paul: Glad you liked my review. The archives didn't specifically hold back documents from 1963, they held back those documents they deemed to be subject to solicitor-client privilege. I think that the Mossad connection to CMC is weak. Metta's book mentions only one person who had been with them as been connected to CMC. This does not necessarily mean that there are no other connections between the Mossad and CMC, it it means that more research is required to see if there are other Mossad or Israeli connections to CMC. Have no idea who Bloomfield was representing. I spoke to Harry Bloomfield, who is Louis Bloomfield's nephew and who is mentioned in Bloomfield's letter to I.G. Alk in 1979 in exhibit 1 about this. He told me he does not know who he was representing. Bloomfield knew the Bronfmans but I do not know if he acted as their counsel.

Anthony: Thank you. Looking forward to comments or questions about my review.

I have written a book review about Metta's book about CMC. In the appendices there is a discussion about the three lawsuits brought against the archives to get Bloomfield's documents released and Bloomfield's true role in Permindex and CMC. https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/the-canadian-archives-michele-metta-and-the-latest-on-permindex

Not sure who he is but he must have some connection to the company he is discussing Permindex issues with him.

Could not find the book in this link but found another version online.

"L.M. Bloomfield, a lawyer of Montreal, Canada and a long time friend and confidant of J. Edgar Hoover, has been Hoover's contract supervisor of Division Five since his days in the OSS before World War II. Bloomfield held one-half of the shares of Permindex and was in total command of its operation in Europe and Africa as well as the North and South American continents. He was the co-ordinator of all activities responsible only to Hoover and Johnson in carrying out the plans for John Kennedy's assassination.34" The above quote from Torbitt's book is false. It states that he held one half of the shares of Permindex. Bloomfield's role with Permindex was to act as a representative of some of Permindex's shareholders. The letter below, which I found in the Bloomfield collection at Library and Archives Canada descries his role.Bloomfield.pdf. There is another document that can be found in the Library and Archives Canad Lawsuit thread. The document is from Michele Metta's CMC document collection. It is written in Italian and I translated both documents which state that Bloomfield holds shares as a proxy. A proxy is someone who acts on someone else's behalf. Metta's CMC document corroborates Bloomfield's letter that he is representing some shareholders and does not have an ownership interest in either Permindex or CMC.

Is there a list of speakers?

Found the one of you speaking on vimeo.

Are there any other videos from the March 2018 conference?

NATO's secret armies: operation Gladio and terrorism in Western Europe by Ganser, Daniele.

Do not ask the front desk at an archive ask an archivist. An archivist can tell you if the restriction was imposed by the donor. If the donor imposed it then there is probably very little that can be done about it. If it was not imposed by the donor then you may be able to do something about it. My fight with Library and Archives Canada was won because the archives had imposed a restriction that was not imposed by the donor.

Translated both documents and both use the word "proxy" in reference to Bloomfield. Proxy means acting for someone else. Bloomfield did not own any shares in either Permindex or CMC, he was acting on behalf of certain shareholders, whose names are unknown.

The archives have confirmed that they are going to update their access restrictions for the Bloomfield collection by January 11. At that time all researchers will be able to access all of the documents, except for the 92 that they are subject to privilege. Will visit the archives in January 2019 to review the Bloomfield collection to ensure they gave me all of the files. After that I will have one last teleconference where I will close the case.

Your welcome.

Yesterday I went to the archive's lawyers office to get copies of Bloomfield's documents. Received 2 CDs containing more than 2,000 documents that the archives previously refused to release to me. They only held back 92 documents because they are deemed to be protected by solicitor client privilege. The archives provided me with a document called a "privilege log", which is a list of names of people to whom letters are addressed to, none of the names on this list are important. Have also asked the archives to update their restrictions on access to the Bloomfield collection so other researchers will be able to access them. After this issue is settled, I will probably settle the case.

Who prepared the statement?

Will be looking forward to reading it, in the mean time there is Lisa's new book. Do you know if she interviewed him?

The interview was on ABC on The Alec Baldwin Show." The link is below, the RFK episode is not there but may appear soon. The interview covers 2 topics, his new book and his father's assassination. You will certainly like it. https://abc.go.com/shows/the-alec-baldwin-show/episode-guide

Robert F. Kennedy jr. was interviewed recently by Alec Baldwin. He asked Kennedy if he knew who killed his father, and he replied that he is pretty sure he knows who was responsible. He would not say who it was, and said that there should be another investigation and that Sirhan Sirhan should be paroled. Any comments about his knowing who was responsible? Does anyone believe that he could have been able to find out who the conspirators were? Mark Lane made a similar comment at the 2013 Pittsburgh JFK conference. He said that he knew who assassinated Kennedy but could not reveal it because of some legal issue.

Paz: What do you mean by respect? Do you believe that I am not being respectful to Michele after all of the work he has done?