This article appeared in the Washington Monthly on March 1976: On the second page, Bethell writes about the Garrison investigation: "I was in charge of Garrison's "Archives" throughout this investigation -- his research man, so to speak -- and so I was well placed to observe the course of his investigation. As is by now perhaps well known, Garrison did nothing to disturb the Warren Commission's central findings. Garrison did allege that Lee Harvey Oswald had entered into a conspiracy with two men, David Ferrie and Clay Shaw, and after Ferrie and Oswald were both dead Shaw was charged with conspiracy to assassinate the President; he was acquitted two years later, and all serious, or even half-way serious students of the case agree that Shaw was, in fact, innocent. No credible evidence ever existed that any two of Garrison's three alleged conspirators even knew one another. I think it can honestly be said that Garrison did not turn up one scrap of information relevant to the assassination not already known to the FBI or Warren Commission. A personal recollection may perhaps be illuminating here. Garrison would make public statements saying what a "fraud" the Warren Commission had been, but this is not what those of us actually engaged in the investigation thought. I can well remember discussions with Louis Ivon, Garrison's chief investigator, and James Alcock, his chief trial assistant. What astounded (and appalled) us was that we were unable to find one person in New Orleans who had known Oswald and who had not been interviewed by the FBI, and interviewed within about a week of the assassination. The trouble was that Garrison and others (myself included) had come to the conclusion that the Warren Report was a pushover as result of reading Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment and Harold Weisberg's Whitewash series, and other similar books. In these books there was no hint that the Commission's work had been so extensive. The revelation, when it came, as it slowly but surely did, was privately demoralizing to Garrison's staff. But not, I think, to Garrison himself, who lived in a world of his own and was blithely unaware of any such concern by his aides. I'll never forget one day Garrison had gone on television and said that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent. This did nothing to help our case against Clay Shaw, which was based on a conspiracy with Oswald. Jim Alcock, who had to try the case, was so worried by this that he mentioned it to Garrison. "Oh, you can argue it differently in court," Garrison said magnanimously, with a wave of a hand. It was the Big Picture he was after." Tom Bethell also said this in his diary. Here is his entry from August 30, 1967: "Critics of the Warren Report are nearly always not aware of the extensiveness of the FBI's investigation. I was in the position till I went to Dallas, and more especially the National Archives and read through their voluminous reports. Sciambra has reported the same experience as a result of his trips to Louisiana towns, and certainly Garrison must be in the same position. E.g., early in the investigation he wrote a notation on a memo to get copies of the hotel register where Oswald stayed in Mexico City, and also Dallas YMCA records. Both were published in the 26 volumes." Here is his entry from March 15, 1968: "Also, Alcock, Ivon and Sciambra have all attested at different times to the efficiency of the FBI's investigation. It is hard to think of anyone of any relevance who was not interviewed by them within a week or two of the assassination. (In fact, most were interviewed within a few days.) This has been, I am sure, a source of great disappointment to the DA's office, although Garrison himself has never admitted as much. When all the books and articles came out criticizing the Commission, I think many people in the office thought they were exploring virgin territory when they looked into Oswald's background, because these books had tended to over-emphasize the short-comings of the FBI. They gave no indication of how extensive their investigation had been. Far from finding virgin territory, they found that the FBI had been there ahead of them every time -- three years ahead of them. I don't think anyone was expecting this. I know I wasn't; it was clear that many of the people working on the investigation, such as Louis Ivon, acquired a certain sneaking respect for the FBI, as I did too."

Here is a letter that Carlos Quiroga wrote to Clay Shaw: Here is the letter Quiroga wrote to the press. I don't know if his program ever came off. When Mr. Quiroga was talking about Garrison's accusations against anti-Castro Cubans, this is what he meant: And this: Nashville Tennessean, June 22, 1967 And this:

Richard Popkin, the author of The Second Oswald, took a keen interest in the Garrison investigation. He wrote a long article on Garrison for the September 14, 1967 issue of the New York Review of Books. David Levine was a terrific caricaturist for the New York Review of Books. There was a paragraph in the article about journalist James Phelan; (page 23) James Phelan responded with a letter: You can read the Sciambra memorandum here. As an added bonus, here is Sylvia Meagher's response to Richard Popkin's article: An edited version of Meagher's letter appeared in the December 7, 1967, issue of the New York Review of Books. Popkin replied: "Mrs. Meagher finds Russo’s story “inherently bereft of credibility." Those who heard it examined in court and before the Grand Jury obviously did not find it so. That the conspirators discussed their plans in Russo’s presence—the point that bothers Mrs. Meagher—is I think possible. In Russo’s account in court, he stated that Oswald objected to Russo’s presence, and was reassured by Ferrie, who vouched for Russo. Some of Russo’s other accounts claim that Ferrie, in the summer of 1963, was openly discussing assassination plans with Russo. Their friendship was presumably such that Ferrie felt he could confide in Russo without fear of betrayal (and Russo told the authorities about Ferrie’s interest in assassinating Kennedy only after Ferrie was dead.) Some have suggested that Russo might himself have been involved, but this he strongly denies. I find it conceivable that once Ferrie vouched for him, the others present would have gone on with their planning, especially if they knew that Ferrie was talking about the matter with others, and if they trusted Ferrie. Since I wrote my article, I have been able to read the Sciambra memorandum purporting to give an account of the first interview with Russo by Garrison’s office on Feb. 25, 1967. (Mr. James Phelan sent me a copy of the document.) This, as Phelan has said, raises serious questions, since no mention appears of the famous conspiratorial meeting. Russo told me he definitely discussed the meeting when he talked to Sciambra. If so, I think some more complete explanation is required to reconcile Sciambra’s report with Russo’s testimony. It is to be hoped that this will be clarified when Russo testifies at the trial (now postponed at the defense’s request until February 1968), so that we will be in a better position to judge the credibility of Russo’s story. It seems to me that Russo, at the time of the Sciambra memo (if it accurately reports their conversation), was almost exclusively concerned with Ferrie, who had just died, and was only anxious to describe Ferrie’s views, his plans to kill Kennedy, etc. Russo may have been so overwhelmed by Ferrie, that at first he could only recall the events of the summer of 1963 according to what Ferrie was saying and doing. This memo may be of significance in assessing Ferrie’s activities at the time. The code matter bothers me in several ways. It seemed extremely suggestive that the same number, 19106, appeared on the “o” page of Oswald’s address book, and in Shaw’s address book as the P. O. Box of a Lee Odom of Dallas, Texas. The fact that there was no P. O. 19106 in Dallas in November 1963 obviously made Garrison suspicious, as probably did the entry above it in Oswald’s book, which looks like “18206.” So he worked out his code, which he has claimed fits other entries as well. As far as I can see, since Mr. Odom exists, and only rented the P. O. Box long after Oswald’s death, there can’t be any connection between the two numbers, and it must be accounted just an amazing coincidence. If Garrison has found a code that interprets various entries in Oswald’s book in a meaningful pattern, this may be important. But, at the moment, like Mrs. Meagher, I’m unconvinced by this item. Clues that look very important, and then peter out, occur in most investigations, and there are no doubt many in Garrison’s effort. The code theory is not central to his case as it has been presented so far. What will be important is whether the final showing of evidence does or does not make a convincing legal case and a satisfactory explanation of the events that culminated in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. As for Andrews: in going over the evidence, I am forced to conclude that Andrews’s original story was true: that Oswald was his client, that Oswald was involved with homosexuals and Latins, that Oswald had a powerful patron, Clay Bertrand, who wanted to help him after the assassination, and that Andrews knows something about who the mysterious Bertrand is. This, in addition to items mentioned in the new book, Plot or Politics by Rosemary James and Jack Wardlaw, seems to indicate that Oswald’s New Orleans period was much different from the Warren Commission’s version, and that this alone should lead to a new public investigation. If Oswald was linked to Ferrie and to Bertrand, up to the time of Oswald’s death, then Oswald was certainly not the Warren Commission’s loner, and was involved with at least one person who was conspiring and plotting to kill the President—Ferrie. I, for one, am waiting anxiously for the public presentation of Garrison’s case. From what I have heard, he seems to have gotten much further than the Warren Commission in unraveling the events that led to Kennedy’s assassination. Whether he has a convincing case that Mr. Shaw was actually involved, we will have to wait and see. Only then will we know if Mrs. Meagher’s fears are confirmed, or whether Garrison has found important and reliable new data. Finally, Mr. Phelan has asked me to say that he has not refused to repeat his allegations before the New Orleans Grand Jury. He states he has not received any official invitation, and hence has not refused. He was in New Orleans after his article appeared, and he says he notified two of Garrison’s close friends that he was there. He talked to Russo then, who he says told him that he had informed Garrison’s office of his presence and his whereabouts. Phelan also tells me that later on he saw Garrison in Monticello, New York, and talked to him for two hours, and nothing about his testifying before the grand jury was mentioned. So, according to Mr. Phelan, he has not been avoiding appearing before the grand jury. I apologize if I gave such an impression. He was challenged by Mr. Sciambra to appear, but according to Mr. Phelan’s letter he has never officially been asked by the grand jury to appear." Popkin was proved wrong about Perry Russo's credibility. When Russo initially talked to Andrew Sciambra in Baton Rouge, he said nothing about a gathering at which the assassination was discussed. Here are some links that pertain to Russo's early statements: Perry Russo Talks - in Baton Rouge, Part One After David Ferrie died, Perry Russo went to the press in Baton Rouge with his story. He did not mention a meeting at which the assassination was discussed. Perry Russo Talks - in Baton Rouge, Part Two Matt Herron was present when Phelan asked Russo if it was true that he said nothing about a meeting until he came to New Orleans. He confirmed that Russo admitted he had not. Perry Russo Talks - in Baton Rouge, Part Three Russo talked to Clay Shaw's attorneys in 1971. He admits that the memory about the meeting was planted in New Orleans. I'm glad that Popkin was bothered about Jim Garrison's ability to decipher codes. Here is more about Jim Garrison, the Cryptologist. Of course, Sylvia Meagher was proved right about Jim Garrison. He had nothing. Previous Posts about Sylvia Meagher and Jim Garrison M. S. Arnoni and Sylvia Meagher Take On Jim Garrison... Sylvia Meagher Congratulates Clay Shaw On His Acquittal Sylvia Meagher and Jim Garrison, Part One Sylvia Meagher writes Clay Shaw and he replies. Sylvia Meagher and Jim Garrison, Part Two An unpublished Sylvia Meagher memo on the Clay Shaw trial. Sylvia Meagher and Jim Garrison, Part Three - a never before published article by Meagher A Sylvia Meagher memo from 1967 on Garrison and Warren Report critics. Sylvia Meagher's Reaction to the Verdict in the Shaw Trial Sylvia Meagher writes Harold Weisberg about the Shaw trial, and she reviews Paris Flammonde's book on Garrison. Was Jim Garrison Napoleon or Rasputin? Sylvia Meagher writes Kerry Thornley. Previous Posts about Richard Popkin Richard Popkin Writes Garrison About Richard Case Nagell Popkins writes Garrison and gets an interesting reply from Tom Bethell. Richard Popkin Melds the Second Oswald Theory with the Richard Case Nagell Story Popkin tries to meld his Second Oswald theory with the story of Richard Case Nagell. Who was Leon Oswald? Jim Garrison Discusses the Two Oswalds

When Delphine Roberts (secretary to Guy Banister) was interviewed by the HSCA, she told them several things she clearly made up. Here is the report in full: Some comments: Roberts said she met both Lee Harvey Oswald and his wife Marina in Banister's office. Lee Harvey Oswald was interviewed for an investigator position for Guy Banister. She believed that both David Ferrie and Guy Banister were murdered, and she kept quiet because she was scared. In the pistol-whipping episode between Jack Martin and Guy Banister, Martin threw the first punch. Ferrie showed Banister pictures of Clay Shaw in drag and Banister kept the photos. I don't believe any of this. The allegation regarding Shaw sounds like something a homophobe would make up: yes, Shaw was a homosexual and so he must have dressed in drag. There is no evidence that Shaw ever dressed in drag, not even on Mardi Gras. I also asked Don Carpenter, author of Man of a Million Fragments, who is undoubtedly the expert on Clay Shaw and he saw no evidence that Shaw dressed in drag. Here is link to Delphine Roberts' statement to Jim Garrison. Have a look at what Mary Brengel had to say. The pistol-whipping episode was probably over long-distance phone calls.

In February 1978, Jim Garrison called into Ted Gandolfo's radio show with some startling information. Here are some of the highlights: Here is an audio tape of the conversation: Of course, when the HSCA released their final report and accompanying volumes of evidence, there was no confession tape. In September 1986, Gandolfo talked to Robert Blakey and accused him of a coverup. Here is Gandolfo's newsletter from December 1986: What's interesting is that there indeed was a confession tape. And the person who confessed was Thomas Beckham. You can listen to his interview on the document page. Here is a transcript of his HSCA interview. Here is part of the interview - at least his confession: How could the HSCA investigators not laugh when they heard this? And there is a lot more - just read the transcript for yourself. Of course, Beckham was an incredible fabulist. He had a long history of faking degrees and of telling all sorts of stories. In short, he was a con man. Please read the transcript of his interview with HSCA investigators. It's sheer lunacy. I don't understand why they didn't pack up and leave. Instead, they recommended that Beckham be fully deposed by the HSCA. And when Beckham was deposed, the HSCA realized that he was a total fraud. Here are some previous blog posts on Thomas Beckham: Did Thomas Beckham know Lee Harvey Oswald? Why did Jim Garrison Want to Speak to Thomas Beckham? Thomas Beckham's Book, Remnants of Truth, Part One Jim Garrison's Memo to the HSCA regarding Fred Crisman and Thomas Beckham, part one... Jim Garrison's Exhibits to his HSCA Memo on Fred Crisman and Thomas Beckham Jim Garrison Identifies the "Cut-Out" of a "Professional, Highly Organized, Clandestine Operation." Who Exactly was the Man with a Scar? Did David Ferrie Have a Map of Dealey Plaza in his Desk Drawer? I will soon be posting Thomas Beckham's complete deposition to the HSCA. But wait, there's more! James DiEugenio, in his book Destiny Betrayed, alludes to this episode but shies away from actually naming Beckham: (page 342) "When Delsa, Buras, and Blackmer found a New Orleans witness who said knew something abut a New Orleans based conspiracy along the lines outlined by the DA, they decided to polygraph him using their own money. When the session was over, the technician said he had passed the test. When word of this got back to Washington, Blakey, Billings, and Deputy Counsel Gary Cornwell decided the New Orleans team was going to be put out to pasture." Blakey was upset that an unauthorized polygraph test was administered. I don't know if Beckham passed, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. He was such a pathological liar, that I doubt he understood the concept of truth. It's interesting that DiEugenio won't say this was Beckham, and that is because he knows that Beckham had no credibility.

In a recent review of Operation Dragon, a book written by former CIA Director James Woolsey and the late Ion Mihai Pacepa, James DiEugenio included several paragraphs about Permindex/CMC and Clay Shaw. Unfortunately, he gets it all wrong on Permindex/CMC. Here is an analysis of what he wrote: "Another piece of confection from Mitrokhin, much appreciated by the CIA, dealt with Clay Shaw and the mysterious business entity, Permindex-CMC. Shaw was arrested by New Orleans DA Jim Garrison on March 1, 1967. Three days later, the Italian leftist newspaper Paese Sera began publishing a six part series on the activities of Permindex-CMC in Italy. In an article published in the Daily Beast by Max Holland, the Mitrokhin notes say that the USSR started this disinformation program in Paese Sera that was later picked up in New York. (Daily Beast, April 28, 2017)" You can read all about Permindex/CMC and Paese Sera here. Don't miss Max Holland's important essay: "How the KGB Duped Oliver Stone." Front page of Paese Sera, March 5, 1967 Quotes from DiEugenio's review are indented: "Since Shaw’s arrest preceded the publishing of the articles, it is unlikely they had any impact on Garrison’s indictment of Shaw. The late Bill Turner told me that in going over the Italian articles, he told the DA that, since the reportage concentrated on the entity’s business activities in Rome, it would have little relevance to his case against Shaw in the USA. And, in fact, at Shaw’s trial, they were not brought up." The Paese Sera articles were not brought up at the trial of Clay Shaw. But that is because there was no hard information in the articles about Clay Shaw, just a bunch of rumors about his supposed involvement in Permindex/CMC. "But the real point of the original series is not indicated by Holland or Daily Beast. I have read the articles in English translation. It was a lengthy six-part series which explored the business activities of the CMC in Italy. An investigative series like this would take a team of reporters weeks to research and then days to write and prepare for printing. But what makes the Mitrokhin story even more strained is this: there was every reason for the newspapers in Italy—and it was not just Paese Sera that printed stories—to be suspicious of Permindex. This business enterprise had previously been kicked out of Switzerland, due to there being a long, drawn out controversy over its sources of funding. In particular, one of the banks was rumored to be involved was Henry Schroder’s, which had been directly associated with CIA Director Allen Dulles. (William Davy, Let Justice be Done, pp. 96–97) Therefore, the Italian newspapers were wholly justified in investigating Permindex-CMC as a suspicious business entity when it moved to Rome and announced its real estate plans. In fact, with the Swiss example behind it, it would have been irresponsible not to." Here is a link to an English translation of the articles -- right from the papers of Jim Garrison. DiEugenio says that it "would take a team of reporters weeks to research and then days to write and prepare for printing." Not when you can just take material from your archives, and then make stuff up. Here is one page from the Paese Sera series: The third paragraph is on Louis Bloomfield, and Paese Sera got all the facts wrong. Bloomfield was not a "former American major," he was a major in the Canadian military during World War II. He was not "presently a banker in Montreal," he was a lawyer in Montreal. And he was not a shareholder in CMC - he represented some of the shareholders. And there is absolutely no evidence that "Bloomfield . . . had participated in the espionage activities of the OSS (now the CIA) during the war." You can see a reference above to George Mantello - the founder of Permindex - saying that "Mantello's person is surrounded with clouds." Indeed, there were many negative newspaper articles about Mantello in the Swiss press in the late 1950s – almost all from one socialist newspaper - and this was largely due to antisemitism and his history in saving Jews during WWII. You can read more about George Mantello here. He gave out about 15,000 El Salvadorean citizenship papers to Jews and saved thousands of lives. His partner at the consulate, Salvadoran consul Colonel José Arturo Castellanos, was recognized with the title of "Righteous Among the Nations" by Yad Vashem in 2010. DiEugenio says that there was "every reason for the newspapers in Italy ... to be suspicious of Permindex. This business enterprise had previously been kicked out of Switzerland, due to their being a long, drawn out controversy over its sources of funding." This is not true. Permindex was not kicked out of Switzerland. They left because they could not find enough capital to build their world trade center in Basel. The local authorities also required them to build a 200-room hotel. Here is an excerpt from a State Department Despatch of May 28, 1958. DiEugenio then goes on to claim that "one of the banks was rumored to be involved was Henry Schroder's, which had been directly associated with CIA Director Allen Dulles." Permindex did approach Schoeder, but they did not invest. Here is an excerpt from a State Department Despatch of February 1, 1957: And an excerpt from a State Department Despatch of October 8, 1957: And we know from the Louis Bloomfield archive in Ottawa, Canada that Schoeder never invested in Permindex. There are several hundred letters from Bloomfield to George Mantello in Italy amongst his papers. Many of them discuss financing as Permindex/CMC was always short of funds. There is not one mention of Schroder’s Bank in any letter. But even if had Schoeder invested in Permindex, so what? "But as it turns out, there was nothing for the KGB to create and hand off in the first place, which is what gives the lie to Mitrokhin and shows what a hack Max Holland was and is. Clay Shaw was on the board of Permindex as it moved to Italy in late 1958. He himself noted this in his Who’s Who in the Southwest entry and it was also announced by Permindex and relayed to Washington in a State Department cable. (Ibid, Davy p. 98)" A gratuitous insult of Max Holland. Very typical of James DiEugenio. You can read more about his insults of Paul Hoch and myself here. Clay Shaw was on the board of Permindex, but he never attended a Board meeting in Italy, and he knew very little of its operations. You can see Clay Shaw's Permindex file here. "Years later, looking through the papers of Montreal lawyer Louis Bloomfield, researcher Maurice Phillips discovered that the attorney was an important figure in the Permindex scheme. Bloomfield coordinated meetings and elicited investments in the enterprise for the titular leader of the organization, Ferenc Nagy. These contributions were requested from some of the wealthiest men in the world at the time, such as Edmund de Rothschild and David Rockefeller. (Letter from Bloomfield to Dr. E. W. imfeld, 2/10/60) There can be no doubt of a CIA angle to the operation due to Shaw’s presence; plus Phillips discovered Nagy was a CIA asset who offered the Agency the use of Permindex in any capacity. (CIA memo of March 24, 1967)" There is nothing nefarious about Louis Bloomfield trying to raise capital for Permindex. They were always short of funds, and since he represented several major shareholders, he did his utmost to help Permindex and its World Trade Center. Here is the letter from Bloomfield to Dr. Imfeld: Yes, Bloomfield thought it might be wise for Permindex/CMC to cooperate with the Port Authority of New York. As you can see from this letter, Bloomfield had to spend a large amount of time dealing with internal problems of Permindex. When they decided to move from Basel to Rome, they had to incorporate locally, and thus the establishment of Centro Mondiale Commerciale (CMC), Here is an earlier letter from Bloomfield about the proposed collaboration with Rockefeller: Unfortunately, no deal was ever consummated between Permindex and the Port Authority. DiEugenio makes much of Ferenc Nagy's offer to allow the CIA to put one of its people in Permindex. Here is an excerpt of a memo about this offer: Given the state of the Cold War in the late 1950s, it is not surprising that the CIA might have been interested in using an international trading organization as non-official cover for an officer or agent. The memo describing Nagy’s suggestion goes on to note that “the advantages which in Nagy’s judgment PERMINDEX offers to CIA include the opportunity to develop information on and contacts in many developing countries of Asia and Africa; cover; and the possibility of influencing the economies of these countries to some extent.” There was a very important caveat, however. Before proceeding the CIA needed “information on the financial condition of PERMINDEX, its business potential, and further comments on the backgrounds of its management.” On 25 February 1960, an internal memo reported that “we regret to say that up to date information obtained via Agency channels does not provide us with sufficient data to form an opinion” about whether to proceed. Subsequently, a memo dated 24 March 1960 noted “we were hopeful that more valuable information could be obtained through another source. This has now been received and while it is not complete it does furnish considerably more information than heretofore obtained.” Unfortunately for Nagy's offer, the CIA was not overly impressed with PERMINDEX/CMC. Few American tourists were likely to be interested in the exhibition since “over-the-counter” orders for merchandise were not going to be permitted. The CIA also noted that “at this stage, the venture seems highly speculative from an investor’s point of view.” Unless exhibitors were found soon to occupy all the empty space in the exhibition buildings, the CIA observed, the first year’s exhibit will be unsuccessful with the consequent result that continuation will not be possible on a profitable basis.” Charles White, on the commercial staff of the CIA, concluded his memo by stating that “it will be noted that no contracts are claimed with any of the Soviet Bloc countries, which may be a consideration in your decision whether to inject anyone into the organization’s staff as suggested by the ex-prime minister.” And they were right. The CMC had trouble finding tenants and had to close in 1962. "The worst suspicions about Permindex-CMC were pretty much certified in Michele Metta’s book, CMC: the Italian Undercover CIA and Mossad Station. The brother of Shimon Peres, one Gershon Peres, was on the board of Permindex from 1967. (Metta, p. 114) But further, Permindex shared the same office space with Propaganda Due. (ibid, p. 120) P2 was one of the very worst and deadliest secret societies to exist—not just in Italy—but in all of Europe. When it was led by the infamous Licio Gelli, it was implicated in numerous crimes and murders (e.g. the death of banker Roberto Calvi). With all of this evidence in the record today, we can see the Mitrokhin scheme as being nothing but a made to order distraction. Permindex was for real, and it was what Garrison suspected it was." James DiEugenio Uses a Crackpot Book to Buttress many of his Permindex/CMC Claims. Metta's book is poorly translated from Italian, and it is very hard to read. I challenge anybody to buy the book and see if you can finish it ... let alone understand it. Most of the book is just “six degrees of separation” – linkages without meaning and context. There is no hard information in the book on Permindex/CMC, and what it does have is inaccurate. Here are some examples: 1. “Bloomfield had tremendous power inside CMC, because he was the majority shareholder of this company. In other words, he had the power to do things that even all the other shareholders combined couldn’t, especially the authority of replacing corporation officers or board of directors.” (page 154) This is completely untrue. Bloomfield was a corporate lawyer who represented some of the shareholders. As you go through his archives, it is clear that Permindex/CMC was run by George Mantello and his son Enrico. Almost 100% of Bloomfield’s letters to Permindex/CMC are to the Mantellos, and, in many of them, Bloomfield is requesting additional information on the operations of the company. 2. ‘In fact, if we dig deep enough about the Carcano, the rifle that Oswald allegedly used, we come once again across elements that are fully in turn with a conspiracy involving the CMC.” (page 68) Metta tries to tie the Carcano rifle to Clay Shaw. Here’s how he does it: The Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was part of surplus army stock from WWII. Adam Consolidated Industries bid on a stock of rifles in 1960. Adam used another company, Crescent Firearms, to sell the Carcanos. The “factotum” of Crescent was Joseph Saik, an anti-Communist who had worked with General Eisenhower in Europe. And one of Eisenhower’s “collaborators” was General Charles Thrasher, whose aide-de-camp was Clay Shaw. Got it? 3. “The point is that there are many undeniable clues showing H.L. Hunt’s involvement right in the middle of the international plot which led to the death of the 35th President of the USA.” (page 105) Once again, this is convoluted. Paolo Marella met with H.L. Hunt in 1966. Marella was a relative of Giuseppe Azzaretto, who was a member of the CMC [I am not sure what he means by a member] and thus the linkage. 4. “Finally, there existed a dense and long correspondence between Bloomfield, founder of Permindex-CMC, and George H. Bush. This correspondence is kept in the previous mentioned documents submitted by Bloomfield himself, as explicitly expressed in his will, to the Library and Archives Canada. However, they are still inaccessible…” The correspondence between Bloomfield and Bush is completely open to any researcher. And guess what – the letters are completely mundane. Here is a link to the complete collection of Bloomfield-Bush correspondence. 5. “This too cryptic conduct gave reason to the assassination scholars Sprague and Cutler to make an analysis and reach the conclusion that the umbrella was used to fire a dart with a paralyzing agent at JFK to restrain his muscles and make him an immobile target far easier to kill. An explanation fully endorsed by Fletcher Prouty, one of the most relevant Dallas ambush whistleblowers.” (page 159) The connection of the umbrella man to Clay Shaw requires some incredible gymnastics. This blog post examines all the documents from this utterly ridiculous section. 6. “Gershon Peres was on the Board of Permindex from 1967-1970. Peres was the brother of Shimon Peres.” I don’t know if this is true – but if it is, so what? Is this nefarious? Well, clearly to Michele Metta it is. After all, the subtitle of his book is The Italian Undercover CIA and Mossad Station and the Assassination of JFK. Metta tries hard to link Israel into the assassination. The only thing he lacks is evidence. DiEugenio strains the limits of credibility when he writes that "Permindex shared the same office space with Propaganda Due. (ibid, p. 120) P2 was one of the very worst and deadliest secret societies to exist—not just in Italy—but in all of Europe.” DiEugenio has the wrong page number. You can find this so-called claim on page 39, or page 126, of Metta's book. Here is what he writes: "That explained, let's go now to what Paese Sera ignored because of the aforesaid unavailability of the whole amount of CMC papers: meetings of the IAHC Board of Directors in a very central place in Rome; that is, Piazza de Spagna (Spanish Square -- near the Spanish Steps) at 72/A; or, as the report itself shows, "in the office of the lawyer Roberto Ascarelli." Here’s how this one works. The Italo-American Hotel Corporation (IAHC) was supposedly a subsidiary of Permindex – and its Board meetings were held in “the office of the lawyer Roberto Ascarelli.” Ascarelli was instrumental in the rise of Licio Gelli, the leader of Propaganda Due (P2) lodge. Therefore, Permindex is linked to P2. That's it. Extraordinary claims require ... well, at least some evidence. In this case, we just have extremely tenuous links. I should add that I have seen no references to IAHC in the Bloomfield files, or any references to Ascarelli or Gelli. The linkage of IAHC to Permindex is questionable - even the Paese Sera articles say that Mantello was just a director. And even if they had a meeting in Ascarelli's office, so what? This is all six degrees of separation. This might be enough for DiEugenio, but not for any rational thinking person. I do agree with DiEugenio on one thing. Operation Dragon is a pretty bad book. Click here for a more substantive review of the book. Relevant Links Please read the chapter from my book On The Trail of Delusion - Jim Garrison: The Great Accuser on Louis Bloomfield. The Lie That Linked CIA to the Kennedy Assassination by Max Holland. The Demon in Jim Garrison by Max Holland Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Permindex/CMC Clay Shaw's Permindex File The Founder of Permindex, George Mantello, Saved Thousands of Jews during the Holocaust... Was Permindex Running an Assassination Bureau? Exposed! Louis Bloomfield's Letters to Baron Edmund de Rothschild... Why Didn't Jim Garrison Go to Montreal? Did The Umbrella Man Have Links to Clay Shaw? Was Louis Bloomfield a Member of the OSS? Exposed! Bloomfield's Letters about David Rockefeller! Exclusive - Louis Bloomfield's Secret Correspondence with George H. W. Bush... Conspiracy Nonsense Snared a Canadian Did the FBI's Regis Kennedy Know that Clay Shaw worked for the CIA?

Here is a letter from Edward Wegmann to Irvin Dymond with a to-do list. They had a huge task list -- in addition to checking out a variety of New Orleans witnesses, they were also forced to investigate leads related to the Warren Report and the JFK assassination that really had nothing to do with Clay Shaw. There was no discovery in the Louisiana courts, and so Shaw's attorneys had to investigate any possible lead discovered through their sources and through the newspapers. Irvin Dymond told James Kirkwood that "our time was consumed, primarily, with running down and investigating leads which were based upon information that we had received about the DAs office having interviewed certain people. We had to track that down, find out what they had told the DAs office, we had to do what we could to neutralize whatever false statements had been made, and that became a horribly expensive process. We had investigators working day and night on this case." Wegmann and Dymond reduced their legal fees, but the detectives had to be paid in hard earned dollars: Kirkwood: Then all the investigatory work Clay had to pay for, naturally, didn't he? Dymond: Oh sure. That's were all his money went. Kirkwood: That's brutally expensive, isn't it? Dymond: Brutally. The whereabouts of Jack Ruby had to be determined because of Clyde Johnson, an insane man who ran a fraudulent campaign for the Governor of Louisiana, and told Garrison that Shaw had given money to Ruby in Baton Rouge in September of 1963. Click here for more information on Clyde Johnson. The Shaw defense team eventually made it to Des Moines to take the testimony of Sandra Moffett McMaines. The Shaw defense team spent more than $50,000 on investigators (Carpenter, Man of a Million Fragments, page 326), which is just over $400,000 in 2021 dollars. Previous Related Blog Post Clay Shaw's Lawyers Faced an Unfair Fight!

Paris Flammonde was the author of the Kennedy Conspiracy: An Uncommissioned Report on the Jim Garrison Investigation. I have previously posted Sylvia Meagher's review of his book. Here is a lead that Paris Flammonde sent to Bernard Fensterwald and Richard Sprague. I found this in the Sprague files at Georgetown University. Sounds like a good lead, no?

On March 9th, 1967 the press started reporting that a Dallas taxicab driver, Raymond Cummings, claimed to have driven Lee Harvey Oswald and David Ferrie to Jack Ruby's nightclub. William Gurvich interviewed Cummings in Dallas. Here is his report. Raymond Cummings then flew to New Orleans to meet with Garrison and his staff. Cummings was then given a lie detector test. For whatever it's worth, the lie detector test showed Cummings was not telling the truth. In the meantime, Shaw's defense team had to look into Cummings. Here is their internal report. One would hope that Garrison's investigators would have dug up the same information. The Dallas police were also looking into Cummings. Now, the whole story gets interesting. Ten years after the whole incident, Jim Garrison must have been reviewing his files (perhaps for his upcoming book) and marked up the Gurvich memo on Cummings. Here are two of his notations: Here is what Garrison wrote: 9/9/77 Caveat: I have no way to evaluate the veracity of Raymond Cummings’ statement. It may be quite true – or it may be false. We internally were surprised by his apparent truthfulness in the telling the story, as I recall, and by some of his details. However, when he came to New Orleans – as he had volunteered – and took the lie detector test, the investigative service which provided the test reported to our office that he had “shown deception” with regard to substantive details of his story. This caused us to put this report on the back shelf. (Subsequently,) however, we learned that this “[investigative service] which was “helping” the office – had produced lie detector reports for 'deception’ whenever we sent anyone to them – particularly if the subject had any probative information for the JFK case. Consequently, this report should be regard as unconfirmed and requiring further inquiry - but until such further inquiry or possible collateral corroboration, should not be totally dismissed out of hand." He also added a notation to the file folder: The lie detector test had been organized by William Gurvich's firm - Gurvich ultimately defected from Garrison's staff in June 1967. Now Garrison thinks that Cummings is a "possibly good lead," but that it was "torpedoed" by the lie detector test. This would all be comical if it were not repeated in Joan Mellen's book, A Farewell to Justice (page 112). Garrison did not use Cummings in his book On The Trail of the Assassins, but Joan Mellen had no problem with rehabilitating the lead - even claiming that Garrison "regretted" his head not used Cummings as a witness. In any investigation with a ton of publicity, a lot of people will come forward. In this case, Raymond Cummings had a story that was very appealing to Garrison. With little investigation, Shaw's defense team knew there was nothing to this story - and yet it's still in one of the major books on the case.

In November 1967, Garrison sent Stephen Jaffe, a part-time investigator from Los Angeles, on a mission to Dallas. Here is the letter that Jaffe sent to Garrison - all 16 pages of it. This letter convinced Garrison that JFK was shot from a sewer on Elm Street. On page 2, Jaffe writes that "I now believe, without reservation, that it was possible for the storm sewer to have been used in the murder of President Kennedy. I also believe that there is a strong possibility that the fatal shot was fired from this position." He noted that "a car passing in front of the opening of this drain, at approximately 11 m.p.h. is seen for approximately two seconds. Time enough to aim carefully and fire with a rifle or other type of short-range weapon." Garrison then issued a press release. Here is a UPI report (unfortunately I don't have his actual press release). Here is the headline from the LA Free Press: And, here is the headline from the New York Times: Here are the three photographs that Garrison released to the press: Original caption: New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison has released this first of three photos to support this theory that a shot was fired from a storm sewer during the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Here, an investigator steps into one of the entrances into a sewer complex under Dealey Plaza. Original caption: New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison released these two of three pictures to support his theory that a shot was fired from a sewer during the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The top picture is a sewer opening on the north side of Elm Street, which can reached from tunnels under Dealey Plaza. The bottom photo was taken from the sewer as a convertible passed by. Does any of this make any sense? George Lardner of the Washington Post talked to Josiah Thompson on January 2, 1968 and asked him. Here is his reply from Lardner's notes: Garrison's theory could never hold much water. "Most of the sewers beneath Dealey Plaza are only 15 inches in diameter, leading to a search for what reporters have called "the mini-midget." Jerry Dealey is an expert on the TSBD and Dealey Plaza. His Great Granduncle was George Bannerman Dealey, the founder of The Dallas Morning News, and for whom Dealey Plaza was named. He has published a very good article on the TSBD and the sewer system. Here are three pages from his paper. Here is his complete paper. Oh, and if you are in Dallas, Jerry gives the best tours of Dealey Plaza. Update A letter from Tom Bethell to Sylvia Meagher about the possible motivation of Stephen Jaffe:

The October 1967 issue of Playboy Magazine contained the longest interview in their history - 20,000 words from Jim Garrison. About 5 million copies were printed and Playboy organized a press tour for Garrison. You can read the whole interview here. Here is Playboy's press release for their interview: Warren Commission critic Sylvia Meagher did not much like the Garrison interview and she wrote Playboy a 3-page letter. For the first time ever, here is her letter: As you can see above, Meagher wrote that "without intending levity on matters as grave as these, I have to admit that Garrison's theory of men on the grassy knoll whose sole function was to catch the cartridges as they were ejected from the assassins' rifles' strikes me as comical." Garrison had more information to tell Playboy, but he didn't want it in print. And so he confided in Eric Norden, the Playboy interviewer, and he wrote several memos to the editors of Playboy. Edward Jay Epstein has written about these memos, but they are not available anywhere. I found them in the Papers of Elmer Gertz, the lawyer for Gordon Novel, who sued Garrison for libel because of the Playboy interviews. Here is the first memo of secret information: This is one insane memo. None of this stuff panned out - it's no wonder that Garrison didn't disclose this publicly. For instance, the Reverend Clyde Johnson {it wasn't Alvin} was a complete fraud (I have the full story on him in my book); the Shaw-Ruby connection was never mentioned in court; Raymond Cummings never had any credibility and Garrison quickly forgot about him; the "New York accountant of good reputation" turned out to be a total crank, etc. You can see that the Clinton story still wasn't fleshed out, and that Garrison knew about the Permindex/CMC story (more about this to come). Tomorrow, another secret Playboy memo. Stay tuned. Update Here is an excerpt from a letter that Sylvia Meagher wrote to Tom Bethell in which she mentions the Playboy interview:

Clearly, my title explains the truth about Jim Garrison - that he was chasing a delusion. A mythical belief in a JFK conspiracy....and since he could never actually find it, he had to make one up. And, in the process, he ruined lives. The subtitle, The Great Accuser, comes from Harry Connick, Garrison's successor as District Attorney of New Orleans. He came up with it - here's an article from the Times-Picayune. And, where did Harry Connick get it from. Well from the New Testament. From 1 Peter 5:8 Curb every passion, and be on the alert. Your great accuser, the Devil, is going about like a roaring lion to see whom he can devour.