Important message for Michael Collins Piper
Dreitzes
I will be posting a review of *Final Judgment* very soon. Before I do that,
though, I suggest strongly that you provide me with reliable primary source
citations for each claim in the following statements:
". . . French intelligence (the SDECE) charged that Permindex laundered money
into the OAS coffers to finance the attempt on DeGaulle's [sic] life. . . .
(Piper, *Final Judgment,* 199). According to a report later issued by
DeGaulle's secret service, the SDECE, Israel's Bank Hapoalim supplied funds to
the OAS through the office of former FBI agent and CIA contract operative Guy
Banister in New Orleans. Banister's agent, Maurice Brooks Gatlin, in turn,
carried the money to the OAS in Paris" (Piper, 201).
You see, when you admitted in a newsgroup post of May 8, 1999, that "Clay Shaw
is innocent," you eliminated one of only two people in your book who could link
Lee Harvey Oswald to your Mossad-Permindex theory. I commend you for
acknowledging the fatal weaknesses in the case against Shaw, even as an
unwitting accessory. But without Shaw, it would seem that your one and only
suspect for a link between Permindex and Oswald is Guy Banister, and his one
and only suspected link to Permindex occurs in the statement made above. Though
I notice that you don't explicitly link Permindex to Banister in that passage,
you do write, "The aforementioned Bank Hapoalim was the bank established by
Israel's labor bund, the Histradut, for which Permindex chairman Louis
Bloomfield served as chief fundraiser in Canada" (p. 201). You have no source
cited for this claim.
You do, as already cited, state, "According to a report later issued by
DeGaulle's secret service, the SDECE, Israel's Bank Hapoalim supplied funds to
the OAS through the office of former FBI agent and CIA contract operative Guy
Banister in New Orleans." Your source is cited as "Executive Intelligence
Review, *Dope, Inc.,* p. 442-443." I don't have *Dope, Inc.,* but Linda Minor
has posted that *Dope, Inc.'s* cited source for the claim is the famous Torbitt
document. That raises a problem, because the Torbitt document does not mention
Bank Hapoalim a single time. Torbitt *does* say that Permindex directly
provided these same funds ($100,000, according to Torbitt) to the OAS through
Banister and Gatlin, but that conflicts with your published account.
You also fail to link Permindex to the OAS but for your statement that ". . .
French intelligence (the SDECE) charged that Permindex laundered money into the
OAS coffers to finance the attempt on DeGaulle's [sic] life." Your source for
this is given as "Executive Intelligence Review, *Dope, Inc.,* p. 434." Now,
again, I don't have *Dope, Inc.* Would their source for this claim *also* be
the Torbitt document? You yourself say in your book that you consider the
Torbitt document an unreliable source that you refuse to cite. In fact, you
refer to the work as "good old-fashioned disinformation" (576-7). Torbitt,
however, links Gatlin and Banister to Permindex, something your book fails to
do.
So, as I see it, the only way to make your theory even tenable -- not proven or
even likely, but merely tenable -- is to either suggest another candidate for a
direct link between Permindex and Lee Harvey Oswald besides Clay Shaw or Guy
Banister, or cite reliable primary sources demonstrating that:
1. Bank Hapoalim (or, as Torbitt states, Permindex) transmitted funds to
the office of Guy Banister;
2. Guy Banister's office transmitted funds to the OAS; (your cited source
for this information, Dick Russell, *The Man Who Knew Too Much,* p. 396, itself
cites a William Turner *Ramparts* article as its source: "William W. Turner,
'The Garrison Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy,' *Ramparts*
(January 1968). Jerry M. Brooks, a former Minuteman who worked for Banister on
"anti-Communist" research in 1961-62, made the allegations about Gatlin."
William Turner cites the same "allegations," (that word should be a warning
sign to you, Michael . . .), oddly enough, as the Torbitt document, namely this
statement allegedly given by one Jerry Milton Brooks to the Orleans Parish DA's
office. I need you to cite that statement, Michael, preferably in its entirety,
and also cite the sources you've used to confirm the accuracy of this
statement, which your own avowed source, Dick Russell, admits contains only
"allegations." Also, please cite primary sources that demonstrate that:
3. Guy Banister's office was acting as a conduit for Bank Hapoalim (or
Permindex) when these funds were transmitted to the OAS though Maurice Gatlin;
in other words, that it was not simply a coincidence that Banister's office
made a onetime donation (of $100,000?) to the OAS and received funds on at
least one occasion from Bank Hapoalim (or Permindex);
4. Guy Banister had a professional relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald in
November 1963.
If you cannot support these four assertions with reliable primary sources, I'm
afraid that even if every single *other* statement in your book is correct,
your Mossad-Permindex thesis of the JFK assassination is demolished.
Please respond immediately, as I would like to post my review of *Final
Judgment* tonight or tomorrow if possible.
Regards,
Dave Reitzes
McSpooky00
Dreitzes wrote:
> Michael,
>
> I will be posting a review of *Final Judgment* very soon. Before I do that,
> though, I suggest strongly that you provide me with reliable primary source
> citations for each claim in the following statements:
>
> ". . . French intelligence (the SDECE) charged that Permindex laundered money
> into the OAS coffers to finance the attempt on DeGaulle's [sic] life. . . .
> (Piper, *Final Judgment,* 199). According to a report later issued by
> DeGaulle's secret service, the SDECE, Israel's Bank Hapoalim supplied funds
to
> the OAS through the office of former FBI agent and CIA contract operative Guy
> Banister in New Orleans. Banister's agent, Maurice Brooks Gatlin, in turn,
> carried the money to the OAS in Paris" (Piper, 201).
All of the items referenced here, according to the footnotes in my book,
are (at the very least) second hand sources. I have no "primary" sources.
>
>
> You see, when you admitted in a newsgroup post of May 8, 1999, that "Clay
Shaw
> is innocent," you eliminated one of only two people in your book who could
link
> Lee Harvey Oswald to your Mossad-Permindex theory.
The "admission" that "Clay Shaw is innocent" was totally sarcastic as I
would hope you would know, Dave, inasmuch as the next line suggested that
"Jim Garrison was an evil Mossad operative trying to ruin a good loyal
American."
I have never said (seriously) that I believed that Clay Shaw was innocent,
but I have said all along (and say very frankly and directly in the pages
of my book) that it is quite possible that Shaw -- however he was linked
to the intrigue surrounding Oswald in New Orleans (directly or indirectly)
-- did not know that the assassination of JFK was in the works.
> I commend you for
> acknowledging the fatal weaknesses in the case against Shaw, even as an
> unwitting accessory.
Thanks for the commendation, but don't get too comfortable, Dave. Many of
the "fatal weaknesses" that I have often seen cited are matters of
interpretation and opinion. And, frankly, Dave, I'm surprised that you
cite Miss Lambert so fervently. Actually, Dave, you are a far better
advocate for Garrison than she is. You tend to deal in basic facts
(however interpreted) whereas she gets into a lot of psychobabble
(analyzing Dean Andrews' dream-state, Jim Garrison's family history
problems and reputed sexual shenanigans).
> But without Shaw, it would seem that your one and only
> suspect for a link between Permindex and Oswald is Guy Banister
But then, again, as far as my thesis relating to a possible Mossad role in
the JFK assassination, Permindex is only a part.
However, I believe Clark Wilkins has posted some very good material up
here about Paul Raigorodsky and the Dallas Russians and the Permindex
linkage. As I have said, my book itself is probably deficient in not
getting into the Raigorodsky and De Menil connections to Permindex and
then to Dallas and Oswald.
************************************************************
DR responds:
Strike three, Michael. Oswald didn't go anywhere near De Menil or
Raigorodsky in the fall of 1963; he hated their guts and they hated his.
If you can't link Oswald to your Permindex nonsense, your theory is
crushed like a grape, Mike. It's just that simple.
**************************************************************
But to repeat: even if --somehow -- both Clay Shaw and Permindex were
cleared -- absolutely, entirely, forever and ever -- of any involvement in
the JFK assassination, that does not -- repeat DOES NOT -- rule out
involvement by the Mossad. The Mossad had the motive and the means (and
certainly the opportunity). James J. Angleton, the Mossad sympathizer (and
much more) at Langley, was the key player in the JFK affair and in the
cover-up. That spells (should I say "smells") Mossad.
So, Dave, no matter how far you succeed in discrediting Garrison and
clearing Clay Shaw (and even Permindex), you can't get away from the fact
that Israel had the motive and the means and that the key CIA player in
the assassination and cover-up was the Mossad's man at the CIA. (But, of
course, there's much more.)
******************************************************************
DR responds:
Read my lips, Mike. IF YOU CAN'T LINK OSWALD TO YOUR PERMINDEX BULLSHIT,
YOU'VE GOT NO THEORY.
*******************************************************************
Ironically, of course, there are even a lot of Garrisonites who want to
shut me up. Even though they fervently want to believe that Clay's
Connection (i.e. Permindex) is relevant and evidence of his "intelligence"
connections, they don't want to admit that it points toward the Mossad.
They prefer the much more comfortable and politically correct allegation
that permindex was some sort of Nazi front! (Love it.)
*******************************************************************
DR responds:
But you can't cite a primary source -- reliable or otherwise -- to link
Permindex to any of the people you need to link them to. You just assume
that all the crappy books you've read are accurate. Bad move, Mike;
they're not. Not even close.
******************************************************************** >
> and his one
> and only suspected link to Permindex occurs in the statement made above.
Actually, that's not strictly true (but I get your basic drift.)
In fact, Banister has several "connections" to Permindex (which was
backing the OAS), including E. Howard Hunt, who was reportedly a CIA
liaison with the Permindex-funded OAS and, at the same time, working with
Banister in New Orleans.
********************************************************************
DR responds:
Never happened, Mike. There's not a single shred of evidence that Banister
worked with Hunt. You need to read more reliable sources, Mike. If you
did, then you wouldn't be saying this nonsense. At least, I'd hope not.
I'm not even going to get into Hunt and the OAS; you can't even link
Permindex to the OAS!
*********************************************************************
(No, I don't have any "primary" documents proving this. No, I don't have
any sworn statements by Hunt or by Banister).
> Though
> I notice that you don't explicitly link Permindex to Banister in that
passage,
> you do write, "The aforementioned Bank Hapoalim was the bank established by
> Israel's labor bund, the Histradut, for which Permindex chairman Louis
> Bloomfield served as chief fundraiser in Canada" (p. 201). You have no source
> cited for this claim.
detracked That was almost certainly DOPE, Inc. and you are right, I did
not cite that. However, you note below the source. I should mention also
that somebody (perhaps Dave Sharp) posted some news accounts up here (from
"mainstream" newspapers) that hail Bloomfield's role with Histadrut. And
Bank Hapoalim's connection with Histadrut is well-known, at least to those
who have any knowledge of Israel and its antics.
****************************************************************
DR responds:
"Well known" doesn't cut it, Mike. And if Dave Sharp posted it, you're
definitely in trouble.
****************************************************************
Let's not get sidetracked here in minute details.
****************************************************************
DR responds:
That's your only hope, Mike, because none of your details holds up, not
even regarding the major theses of your book.
*****************************************************************
>
>
> You do, as already cited, state, "According to a report later issued by
> DeGaulle's secret service, the SDECE, Israel's Bank Hapoalim supplied funds
to
> the OAS through the office of former FBI agent and CIA contract operative Guy
> Banister in New Orleans." Your source is cited as "Executive Intelligence
> Review, *Dope, Inc.,* p. 442-443." I don't have *Dope, Inc.,* but Linda Minor
> has posted that *Dope, Inc.'s* cited source for the claim is the famous
Torbitt
> document. That raises a problem, because the Torbitt document does not
mention
> Bank Hapoalim a single time.
You are right about this. Torbitt does not mention Bank Hapoalim.
DOPE, INC. does cite the Torbitt Document as a source for certain
material, but as you note correctly, Torbitt does not mention the Bank
Hapoalim. Either you were mistaken in interpreting Linda's post to say
that DOPE, INC. was the source for the specific reference to Bank Hapoalim
or Linda was mistaken in reading DOPE, Inc. to say that Torbitt referred
to Bank Hapoalim. that doesn't matter either way, since the ONLY source I
know of to say that Bank Hapoalim was the sourceof the funds in question
is DOPE, INC.
********************************************************************
DR responds:
And you take umbrage when a certain periodical nails you for relying on
worthless secondary sources!
********************************************************************
But PLEASE NOTE: the book DOPE, Inc. does not rely exclusively on
Torbitt. Not at all.
Yes, I know that DOPE, INC. is a LaRouche publication. Don't bother
wasting our time with that one. LaRouche's people are excellent
fact-finders but I don't always necessarily agree with their CONCLUSIONS.
I saw someone up here proclaiming LaRouche to be "racist" (not true) and
"anti-Semitic" (not true--in fact, most of his top and top-notch people
are Jewish). Those "racist" and "anti-Semitic" allegations are designed
to distract from the facts that LaRouche's people present.
*******************************************************************
DR responds:
Michael, I don't give a damn whether your sources are anti-Semitic or not;
I'll let Bob Harris worry about that. My problem is that your sources are
garbage. You know what that makes your book, Mike? Three guesses.
*******************************************************************
> Torbitt *does* say that Permindex directly
> provided these same funds ($100,000, according to Torbitt) to the OAS through
> Banister and Gatlin, but that conflicts with your published account.
That's because Torbitt leaves out Bank Hapoalim or ANY Israeli connection.
(I suspect that was probably the reason why Torbitt was concocted to begin
with). To DISTRACT attention from the Israeli connection. The Torbitt
Document even claims that Tibor Rosenbaum's Banque De Credit
Internationale was the same as Credit Suisse (which, of course, it wasn.t.
Anyway, Since I wasn't there to help in the transfer of funds, I obviously
can't tell you what happened. But my basic understanding is that Israeli
funds were laundered through Permindex (probably through a Permindex
account in Mossad operative Tibor Rosenbaum's Banque De Credit
Internationale in Geneva) back through to Banister and Gatlin.
>
>
> You also fail to link Permindex to the OAS but for your statement that ". . .
> French intelligence (the SDECE) charged that Permindex laundered money into
the
> OAS coffers to finance the attempt on DeGaulle's [sic] life." Your source for
> this is given as "Executive Intelligence Review, *Dope, Inc.,* p. 434."
Nope, permindex board member Ferenc Nagy, for one, was a "munificent
contributor" to the OAS and its top political man, Jacques Soustelle.
Soustelle had help from the israelis when he was on the run from DeGaulle
and he was a major player in Israel's nuclear bomb program (via his
connections in France as head of French atomic energy. That's all in my
book for those who are interested in all of the details.
> Now,
> again, I don't have *Dope, Inc.* Would their source for this claim *also* be
> the Torbitt document?
I honestly can't say. I will get in touch with the LaRouche people soon
and see what they have in their (volumnious files--probably as big as
yours, Dave) collection.
> You yourself say in your book that you consider the
> Torbitt document an unreliable source that you refuse to cite. In fact, you
> refer to the work as "good old-fashioned disinformation" (576-7).
Yes, I've addressed that above. I think the Torbitt Document was put out
for the specific purpose of distracting attention from the Israelis.
Torbitt claims that "the Nazis" and their allies in U.S. intelligence and
the Mafia were behind the JFK assassination. Now that is a crock, although
I know a lot of our "liberal" researchers believe that. DiEugenio, for
example.
> Torbitt,
> however, links Gatlin and Banister to Permindex, something your book fails to
> do.
I thought that's what my book did. That is: link Gatlin and Banister to
Permindex.
****************************************************************
DR responds:
I just showed you precisely where you tried and failed, Mike. Are you
paying attention at all?
***************************************************************
>
>
> So, as I see it, the only way to make your theory even tenable -- not proven
or
> even likely, but merely tenable -- is to either suggest another candidate for
a
> direct link between Permindex and Lee Harvey Oswald besides Clay Shaw or Guy
> Banister, or cite reliable primary sources demonstrating that:
>
> 1. Bank Hapoalim (or, as Torbitt states, Permindex) transmitted funds to
> the office of Guy Banister;
I have no PRIMARY source. Reliability is in the eye of the beholder. Some
people say I am unreliable because I work for LIBERTY LOBBY!
***************************************************************
DR responds:
You're better off with those folks than with me, Mike. I just think your
idea of scholarship is laughable.
I'm going to quit wasting my time -- and yours, no doubt -- and just
finish up my review.
Later,
DR
Dreitzes
>
>In article <3738F032...@mailcity.com>,
>Michael Collins Piper <pip...@mailcity.com> wrote:
>>
> [...]
>>
>> Actually, let's not get into it here, but while you might be able to
>"clear"
>> Permindex by demolishing those "four assertions" (although I don't think
>you can)
>> you cannot -- repeat CANNOT -- get away from Guy Banister's palsy-walsy
>> relationship with Bee Botnick of the New Orleans Anti-Defamation League
>(funded by
>> CLay Shaw's gal pal, Edith Stern) and with Kent and Phoebe Courtney (widely
>> perceived to be ADL assets in the 'right wing'). ADL means MOSSAD.
>>
> According to Jack Nelson's Terror in the Night, Botnick became
> regional director of the ADL in New Orleans in 1964. If correct,
> and given that the assassination occurred on 11/22/63 and that
> Banister died on 6/6/64, isn't that a bit late for Botnick to
> be a player in the "framing" of LHO.
Details, details . . .
DR
jpsh...@my-dejanews.com
> the ADL a long time prior to that, but he didn't become REGIONAL director (that is, big
> shot for the whole southern region) until 1964.
>
How about this:
-
"After becoming known for his activism in the civil rights
movement, he [Botnick] was recruited by the Anti-Defamation
League and took a position in its Atlanta office in 1961. He
returned to New Orleans in 1964 to become the organization's
regional director." - New Orleans Times-Picayune; Oct 6, 1995;
Sec B, P1; "Activist Adolph 'B' Botnick Dies at 71"
>
>
> That's kind of like LBJ was "in the White House" (as vice president) from 1961 onward,
> but didn't get moved upstairs until November 22, 1963.
>
> Ya know what I mean?
>
> But that would be a good point if it were a valid one.
> > >
> > > Cordially,
> > >
> > > MCP
> > >
> > Jerry Shinley
>
Jerry Shinley
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Michael Collins Piper
in the next edition of my book I am going to note this accordingly.
However, this does not contradict the fact that Botnick was close to Guy
Banister either prior to the time he went to Atlanta or from the time he
returned in 1964. And even if Botnick were not "on the ground" in New
Orleans that doesn't mean that Banister himself was not maintaining a
"professional relationship" with the ADL office in New Orleans during that
period.
Anyway, I make it very clear in my book that I was simply speculating
about the possibility of Banister's "fact finding" operations being tied
in to the ADL.
But, as I said, you have come up with a good solid fact. Much appreciated.
--MCP
But it doesn't shoot my basic theory to shreds or even dent it.
Michael Collins Piper
rights movement is a lot of horseshit from the Times-Picayne, relying, I'm
sure, on an ADL press release. As Jack Nelson documents in his book,
Botnick was trying to undermine the civil rights movement by linking it to
communism, etc. But as I noted in my previous response, I appreciate the
chronological fact you presented. --MCP
Dreitzes
>rights movement is a lot of horseshit from the Times-Picayne, relying, I'm
>sure, on an ADL press release. As Jack Nelson documents in his book,
>Botnick was trying to undermine the civil rights movement by linking it to
>communism, etc.
You mean as Jim Garrison did when he participated in the SCEF raid, using a
statute against "subversives" to harass civil rights workers, invade their
homes and office, seize their property and arrest them under false pretenses,
as recorded in the US Supreme Court case, Dombrowski v. Pfister, in which the
Court ruled in favor of the victimized SCEF?
http://www.artmeg.com/casecites/dombrowski.htm
Thanks to Jerry Shinley for bringing this to our attention.
Dave Reitzes
P.S. Michael, Mr. Liberty Lobby, do you *really* want to open a discussion on
civil rights?