My new book, "Into the Nightmare"

[Joseph McBride]

Mr. McBride -

I spent a lot of time yesterday reading through the Amazon preview of your book, so clearly it's possible that my questions are answered by other sections of the book. But I do have a few questions (and/or observations you may want to respond to) -

1) you state very clearly as far as I can tell that you think Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent and had intelligence connections - and that the dictaphone tape, you indicate, is useless as evidence and the result of her "disinformation" efforts - was also wondering if you had read D.B. Thomas' work in this area?

2) you don't seem to be aware that Kennedy had an active representativeWilliam Atwood, I believe it wasin negotiations with representatives of Castro for some time before the assassination. You only mention Jean Daniel's late encounter with Castro in this regard ( and I did check in the index and did not see any entry for Atwood).

3) you also seem, and once again this is only by partial reading so I apologize if I'm incorrect, to be at least partly in the camp that theorizes that JFK was reckless in his supposedly hawkish stance and policies towards Cuba, and thus vulnerable. Now I know that Jim here has done a lot of work in this area, of course. but I was wondering if if you do subscribe to the "JFK as hawk" theories.

thanks

Allen,

Thanks much for your interest and for reading parts of the book. That "Look Inside" feature on Amazon is useful, though it gives you only
parts of what you might be looking for and not others. It's a long book, and I follow certain threads throughout, including my discussion of
Kennedy's policies and how these relate to the assassination. I go into some of those in considerable detail, including his Cuba policies,
though I try to keep the focus on the assassination, so I can't go into every area in the same detail as others. You'll find in reading the whole book
that I interweave analysis of his presidency and the growing threat to it that led to his assassination. Many mainstream
historians, as we know, make the mistake of assuming that the two had nothing to do with each other. But when you examine
his administration in the light of his death, many points become more clear, and I have tried to provide my own fresh analysis and
to learn from Peter Dale Scott and other historians who have not made the mistake of separating the death from the life.

I do go into Kennedy's efforts at rapprochement with Castro and his attempts to rein in the CIA and anti-Castro Cubans after the Missile Crisis. I worked for Kennedy as
a volunteer in his 1960 campaign and have always admired him overall, but I believe he and Robert Kennedy were
somewhat reckless on Cuba (e.g., the Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose) before the resulting Missile Crisis was resolved; that near-catastrophe had a sobering
effect on JFK and made him work even harder for peace. I was headed toward the Milwaukee airport to hear JFK talk on October 20, 1962, when he cancelled
because of what the French would call a "cold diplomatique" and flew from Chicago back to Washington; we didn't know the Missile Crisis was just heating up. He and Khrushchev deserve our thanks for our survival, and Khrushchev also lost his job as a result. Kennedy always had an anticolonialist side, that's true, and yet his Cold Warrior side and pressures from the military and the military-industrial-complex led him to get too involved in Vietnam before he began trying to extricate himself. These problems helped lead to his death, which is my focus, along with the Tippit murder. And, as we all know, Kennedy was a complex figure who learned on the job. I was too quick to dismiss the charges of "inexperience" against him in 1960, but I was only twelve/thirteen at the time.

Yes, Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent. I figured out quickly when I had my first dealings with her that
she was not to be trusted, and I investigated her and discovered many disturbing aspects to her work, which I discuss in eye-opening detail in INTO THE NIGHTMARE. I realize a lot
of researchers liked her and some still do revere her, but she put on a good act that misled people. I believe the dubious tape was intended to discredit
the HSCA investigation. I've read Thomas's book but offer my own research and analysis on the tape. I studied the HSCA investigation in
detail from 1978 onward. Many of its working papers have since become available. Other researchers helped me understand Mary Ferrell and her MO.

[Allen Lowe]

interesting - I didn't know her, but this is an area that will definitely cause disagreement.

As for the tape, given that the impulses as identified correspond to the exact points at which certain shots were fired (and Thomas quotes astronimical odds against the chances that, if they were not shots, they would correspond), this may also lead to some argument. And I don't really understand how Ferrell could fake something like this. Also, have any files emerged that indicate her intelligence connections?

and given your mention of Mr. Lifton, do you believe JFK's body was altered by surgery?

[Tracy Riddle]

In correspondence between Mary Ferrell and Harold Weisberg, she described herself as a fiscal conservative and social liberal. Weisberg considered her more right-wing than that, but had a good working relationship with her. I imagine she was a Goldwater supporter and probably blamed Castro for the JFK assassination. So I don't know if she was a disinformation agent so much as her ideological views just colored her thinking (every conspiracy must be a Communist one).

I've never been a fan of the Dictabelt "evidence." Never smelled right to me.

[Joseph McBride]

interesting - I didn't know her, but this is an area that will definitely cause disagreement.

As for the tape, given that the impulses as identified correspond to the exact points at which certain shots were fired (and Thomas quotes astronimical odds against the chances that, if they were not shots, they would correspond), this may also lead to some argument. And I don't really understand how Ferrell could fake something like this. Also, have any files emerged that indicate her intelligence connections?

and given your mention of Mr. Lifton, do you believe JFK's body was altered by surgery?

Allen,

Mary Ferrell was a member of the Association of Former Intelligence
Officers (AFIO), founded by David Atlee Phillips. Rather than
trying to summarize the detailed sections of the book on her, I'd refer you to it.

There is no doubt the body was altered. David Lifton and Douglas
Horne go into convincing
detail on this. I offer a hypothesis of how the body was
smuggled out of Parkland (an area that has been
unresolved). It would help explain the strange
confrontation at gunpoint over the coffin. Henry Wade in our interview
took responsibility for giving the illegal order to release the body. I also
offer some fresh commentary on a bullet removed from the body
without being placed into evidence. When I first came upon
this evidence in the 1980s, no one else had written about it, but Horne
touches on it. I provide further information from my research. It's a crucial
finding that (further) invalidates the fraudulent official autopsy.

[Tracy Riddle]

I didn't know Ferrell was a member of AFIO.

Joseph, you probably know that the two most divisive issues in the research community are a) Body Alteration and b) Zapruder film Alteration.
I personally try to stay away from both because all they do is create bad blood between people who otherwise agree on a lot of things.

[Joseph McBride]

I didn't know Ferrell was a member of AFIO.

Joseph, you probably know that the two most divisive issues in the research community are a) Body Alteration and b) Zapruder film Alteration.
I personally try to stay away from both because all they do is create bad blood between people who otherwise agree on a lot of things.

Yes, Tracy, I've read a lot of those disputes. Sometimes they are honest disputes, but sometimes
you get the impression feuds are driven by disinformation specialists. I think it's unfortunate when scholars in any field, no matter how
controversial the subject, become acrimonious toward
each other. i think we can respect each other and disagree while learning from those we may not entirely
agree with, or at least keep an open mind in doing so. And I find it tedious to read invective in forums, which
distracts from what should be our main task. So I try to stay out of academic disputes or other such disputes. To quote President Kennedy's inaugural address,
"Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us."

[Dawn Meredith]

Mr. McBride -

I spent a lot of time yesterday reading through the Amazon preview of your book, so clearly it's possible that my questions are answered by other sections of the book. But I do have a few questions (and/or observations you may want to respond to) -

1) you state very clearly as far as I can tell that you think Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent and had intelligence connections - and that the dictaphone tape, you indicate, is useless as evidence and the result of her "disinformation" efforts - was also wondering if you had read D.B. Thomas' work in this area?

2) you don't seem to be aware that Kennedy had an active representativeWilliam Atwood, I believe it wasin negotiations with representatives of Castro for some time before the assassination. You only mention Jean Daniel's late encounter with Castro in this regard ( and I did check in the index and did not see any entry for Atwood).

3) you also seem, and once again this is only by partial reading so I apologize if I'm incorrect, to be at least partly in the camp that theorizes that JFK was reckless in his supposedly hawkish stance and policies towards Cuba, and thus vulnerable. Now I know that Jim here has done a lot of work in this area, of course. but I was wondering if if you do subscribe to the "JFK as hawk" theories.

thanks

Allen,

Thanks much for your interest and for reading parts of the book. That "Look Inside" feature on Amazon is useful, though it gives you only
parts of what you might be looking for and not others. It's a long book, and I follow certain threads throughout, including my discussion of
Kennedy's policies and how these relate to the assassination. I go into some of those in considerable detail, including his Cuba policies,
though I try to keep the focus on the assassination, so I can't go into every area in the same detail as others. You'll find in reading the whole book
that I interweave analysis of his presidency and the growing threat to it that led to his assassination. Many mainstream
historians, as we know, make the mistake of assuming that the two had nothing to do with each other. But when you examine
his administration in the light of his death, many points become more clear, and I have tried to provide my own fresh analysis and
to learn from Peter Dale Scott and other historians who have not made the mistake of separating the death from the life.

I do go into Kennedy's efforts at rapprochement with Castro and his attempts to rein in the CIA and anti-Castro Cubans after the Missile Crisis. I worked for Kennedy as
a volunteer in his 1960 campaign and have always admired him overall, but I believe he and Robert Kennedy were
somewhat reckless on Cuba (e.g., the Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose) before the resulting Missile Crisis was resolved; that near-catastrophe had a sobering
effect on JFK and made him work even harder for peace. I was headed toward the Milwaukee airport to hear JFK talk on October 20, 1962, when he cancelled
because of what the French would call a "cold diplomatique" and flew from Chicago back to Washington; we didn't know the Missile Crisis was just heating up. He and Khrushchev deserve our thanks for our survival, and Khrushchev also lost his job as a result. Kennedy always had an anticolonialist side, that's true, and yet his Cold Warrior side and pressures from the military and the military-industrial-complex led him to get too involved in Vietnam before he began trying to extricate himself. These problems helped lead to his death, which is my focus, along with the Tippit murder. And, as we all know, Kennedy was a complex figure who learned on the job. I was too quick to dismiss the charges of "inexperience" against him in 1960, but I was only twelve/thirteen at the time.

Yes, Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent. I figured out quickly when I had my first dealings with her that
she was not to be trusted, and I investigated her and discovered many disturbing aspects to her work, which I discuss in eye-opening detail in INTO THE NIGHTMARE. I realize a lot
of researchers liked her and some still do revere her, but she put on a good act that misled people. I believe the dubious tape was intended to discredit
the HSCA investigation. I've read Thomas's book but offer my own research and analysis on the tape. I studied the HSCA investigation in
detail from 1978 onward. Many of its working papers have since become available. Other researchers helped me understand Mary Ferrell and her MO.

Now I cannot wait to get your book. I have know a lot about Mary for many many years. I have shared with a few trusted friends. However I have never seen anyone call her an out and out disinformation agent on a public forum before now. Good for you. It's late in the game but time for that charade to be revealed. She fooled so many. She could certainly lay on the charm.
More on this later.

Dawn

[Joseph McBride]

Mr. McBride -

I spent a lot of time yesterday reading through the Amazon preview of your book, so clearly it's possible that my questions are answered by other sections of the book. But I do have a few questions (and/or observations you may want to respond to) -

1) you state very clearly as far as I can tell that you think Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent and had intelligence connections - and that the dictaphone tape, you indicate, is useless as evidence and the result of her "disinformation" efforts - was also wondering if you had read D.B. Thomas' work in this area?

2) you don't seem to be aware that Kennedy had an active representativeWilliam Atwood, I believe it wasin negotiations with representatives of Castro for some time before the assassination. You only mention Jean Daniel's late encounter with Castro in this regard ( and I did check in the index and did not see any entry for Atwood).

3) you also seem, and once again this is only by partial reading so I apologize if I'm incorrect, to be at least partly in the camp that theorizes that JFK was reckless in his supposedly hawkish stance and policies towards Cuba, and thus vulnerable. Now I know that Jim here has done a lot of work in this area, of course. but I was wondering if if you do subscribe to the "JFK as hawk" theories.

thanks

Allen,

Thanks much for your interest and for reading parts of the book. That "Look Inside" feature on Amazon is useful, though it gives you only
parts of what you might be looking for and not others. It's a long book, and I follow certain threads throughout, including my discussion of
Kennedy's policies and how these relate to the assassination. I go into some of those in considerable detail, including his Cuba policies,
though I try to keep the focus on the assassination, so I can't go into every area in the same detail as others. You'll find in reading the whole book
that I interweave analysis of his presidency and the growing threat to it that led to his assassination. Many mainstream
historians, as we know, make the mistake of assuming that the two had nothing to do with each other. But when you examine
his administration in the light of his death, many points become more clear, and I have tried to provide my own fresh analysis and
to learn from Peter Dale Scott and other historians who have not made the mistake of separating the death from the life.

I do go into Kennedy's efforts at rapprochement with Castro and his attempts to rein in the CIA and anti-Castro Cubans after the Missile Crisis. I worked for Kennedy as
a volunteer in his 1960 campaign and have always admired him overall, but I believe he and Robert Kennedy were
somewhat reckless on Cuba (e.g., the Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose) before the resulting Missile Crisis was resolved; that near-catastrophe had a sobering
effect on JFK and made him work even harder for peace. I was headed toward the Milwaukee airport to hear JFK talk on October 20, 1962, when he cancelled
because of what the French would call a "cold diplomatique" and flew from Chicago back to Washington; we didn't know the Missile Crisis was just heating up. He and Khrushchev deserve our thanks for our survival, and Khrushchev also lost his job as a result. Kennedy always had an anticolonialist side, that's true, and yet his Cold Warrior side and pressures from the military and the military-industrial-complex led him to get too involved in Vietnam before he began trying to extricate himself. These problems helped lead to his death, which is my focus, along with the Tippit murder. And, as we all know, Kennedy was a complex figure who learned on the job. I was too quick to dismiss the charges of "inexperience" against him in 1960, but I was only twelve/thirteen at the time.

Yes, Mary Ferrell was a disinformation agent. I figured out quickly when I had my first dealings with her that
she was not to be trusted, and I investigated her and discovered many disturbing aspects to her work, which I discuss in eye-opening detail in INTO THE NIGHTMARE. I realize a lot
of researchers liked her and some still do revere her, but she put on a good act that misled people. I believe the dubious tape was intended to discredit
the HSCA investigation. I've read Thomas's book but offer my own research and analysis on the tape. I studied the HSCA investigation in
detail from 1978 onward. Many of its working papers have since become available. Other researchers helped me understand Mary Ferrell and her MO.

Now I cannot wait to get your book. I have know a lot about Mary for many many years. I have shared with a few trusted friends. However I have never seen anyone call her an out and out disinformation agent on a public forum before now. Good for you. It's late in the game but time for that charade to be revealed. She fooled so many. She could certainly lay on the charm.
More on this later.

Dawn

Thanks, Dawn. I am glad you also have delved into her activities. I studied the research community a lot. My sections on her are eye-opening.

[Allen Lowe]

I agree, that we can disagree and not be nasty about it. Absolutely. It's just that in trying to judge, some things give us a good idea of the perspective of the critic.

And I certainly would be bothered by the advocacy of body alteration, given that I think some very credible people have given pervasive evidence to the contrary. Same with the dictabelt.

but as the saying goes, we will agree to disagree. I can certainly live with that.

thanks for responding.

[Allen Lowe]

also, looking at the membership requirements in the AFIO:

"Associate Members - U.S. citizens in private, civil, academic or corporate pursuits, as well as, Americans currently in non-intelligence government employment (at any level) or other military service, may become Associate Members."


is there any documentation of her being asked how and why she joined? If she was involved in doing the kind of research that we know she did, it would not be a stretch to say that it was a reasonable thing for her to do. Does the AFIO offer its members certain resources? Introductions to particular people? Look, David Von Pein might join the Mary Ferrell Foundation to do research.

not every member of the CIA was involved in the assassination - and not every member of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers was involved, either, I would suggest.