A WORD ABOUT THE BLOOMFIELD ARCHIVES
First of all, one word to explain my lack of follow up on this topic.
In the last weeks, I had a few professional and personal family matters that needed (and still need) a lot of my time. Even if I had opened a series of posts on the subject of Oswald’s presence in Montreal, I had to put it aside for those personal matters.
But mainly, the principal reason why I didn’t have spare time for those posts was that I also had to give priority to another demanding timely task. This other subject wasn’t a personal thing, and, in fact is something that would be of interest to anybody following this blog : writing and filing court papers relating to the opening of Louis Mortimer Bloomfield’s documents at Library and Archives Canada.
I did write a little about this topic on one of my first posts named “Things to come in this Blog”. At the time, I wrote this text:
“Louis Mortimer Bloomfield
ARE CANADA NATIONAL ARCHIVES HIDING THE KEY OF THE JFK MYSTERY?
OSS veteran, Louis-Mortimer Bloomfield is perceived by some as the architect of the assassination plot against President John F. Kennedy. Before its death, this Montreal lawyer donated his personal papers to Canada National Archives, under condition that they are made public twenty years after his death. However, more than one year after the end of this delay, Library and Archives Canada refuses to make available the Bloomfield documents. Will a legal battle carry out revelation of new information on the JFK assassination?”
Recently, members of the Education Forum http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6556&st=60 have reacted to this article, the firsts with genuine interest and one with unfounded negativism. I have tried to register and answer on this forum, but somehow my registration validation didn’t clear yet. So, knowing that some members will eventually read the present blog, I’m posting here my answer to the last post I have read on this topic. As soon as my registration clear, I will post this text on the forum. If in the meantime, members of the forum want to cut and paste this text in the Education Forum, they are welcome to do so. The best place to put it would be in reply to post #74.
Hi Lee Forman,
Congratulation for your research on the Canadian National Archives. In reaction to Len Colby’s negative post I was about to reply to him, but I’m glad that you were able to show Len that my information on the Bloomfield archives are somehow founded in fact and reality.
I should admit that I resented a little that Len called me a "semi-literate anonymous blogger". Even more since my name is quite easy to find on my blog and that any "semi-literate" reader should be able to deduct it. Here, understand that I don’t want to be insulting to Len, but I can’t resist to be a little sarcastic, Really, when I see somebody reading a blog where the author’s name is quite evident, concluding that this author is an anonymous blogger –really I wonder how this kind of highly deductive mind can solve the JFK assassination mystery…
Anyway, I'm not in this to engage in personal conflict, but I'm willing to give information for those who really want to do serious research.
Even if Google is a fantastic tool to do research, one has to use his brain when he wants to find something new, and, please, Len and everyone else, don’t say it doesn’t exist because you don’t find it on a simple search in Google.
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.collectionscanada.ca/archivianet/02012302_f.html , you can type the name "Bloomfield". In the results, you will find the LM Bloomfield collection.
Following the links in this page you will find that a new access restriction was made in April 2005 (http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/pdf/pdf001/r000000675.pdf ) and you'll also find a fascinating description of the fonds at: http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/pdf/pdf001/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.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_queries_e.php , yyping 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.
Now, if Len wants to apologize for calling me a "semi-literate anonymous blogger", I will gladly pardon him. Except for being French speaking and for having a less than perfect English, I don't think I deserve this kind of name calling and I hope that this forum is not a place for that.
Thanks for everyone that have linked my blog to this Education Forum, if I had more time I would participate in it and answer a couple of questions. (Incidently, the source for the Mertz-Mondolini connection is in Jean-Pierre Charbonneau "La filière canadienne", page 295 of the French 1975 first edition, both Mertz and Mondolini were implicated in the Bousquet affair.)
If anyone wants to know more or support me in the Bloomfield archives legal battle, please get in touch with me through my blog at: http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/ . As soon as there is relevant development, I will post them in that blog.
Now, on the subject of Oswald in Montreal, I would like to share some comments on the Tremblay sighting and on the FBI report about it. But that will have to wait tomorrow or later, if time doesn’t permit. For today, I’m leaving you with the transcript of the most relevant passages of the FBI reports that I have reproduced earlier.
“Aurelien Chasse, Senior Customs Representative, United States Treasury Department, Montreal, Canada, advised the United States Secret Service, Washington, D. C, that several persons had contacted his office and stated that LEE OSWALD had been seen distributing pamphlets entitled “Fair Play for Cuba,” on St. Jacques and McGill Streets in Montreal during the summer of 1963. In this letter, a copy of which was furnished to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by the Secret Service on December 11, 1963, Mr. Chasse also advised that Jean Paul Tremblay, Investigator, Customs and Excise, Montreal said on November 27, 1963, that he, Tremblay, had received one of the above—mentioned pamphlets from a man St. Jacques Street in Montreal. He said he believed this incident occurred in August, 1963, and he, Tremblay, is positive this individual was LEE OSWALD. According to Mr. Chasse, Tremblay said OSWALD at the time was accompanied by a short, homely, heavy woman who took unusually long steps when walking and by two men about the same age and weight as OWALD. Mr. Tremblay described one of the men as a little taller than OSWALD with a freckled face. He said he believed he could identify the three persons who accompanied OSWALD and the reason he paid special attention to these persons at the time was that he Tremblay was working on cases involving Cuba at that time.”
“Tremblay, on contact by the above agency, said on the date he had been given the pamphlet by the person he positively identifies as OSWALD, he also saw approximately six other people handing out leaflets. He said he is uncertain about the dates the incident took place butt believe it occurred in August, 1963, Photographs of persons participating in the Quebec—Washington-Guantanamo Walk for Peace in Montreal on June 7 and 8, 1963, were shown to Mr. Tremblay and he positively identified two of them as having been engaged in the distribution of leaflets on the day in question. One of the persons he positively identified was the woman referred to by Chasse in his letter to the Secret Service. The other person identified by Tremblay was believed by the agency making the above inquiry to be a Mr. Fred Moore of San Antonio, Texas. Mr. Tremblay could not identify any of the other people in the photographs as having been present on the date in question nor could he point out the person who gave him the leaflet and whom he believes to be OSWALD.”
“All additional efforts by the above agency to locate anyone who could state that LEE HARVEY OSWALD had been in Montreal in the Summer of 1963 were negative. The agency pointed out that while Mr. Tremblay believes the incident took place in August, 1963, it would appear on the basis of his identification of the photographs that the event more probably took place in June, 1963.”