My new book, "Into the Nightmare"

[Joseph McBride]

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.

Allen,

Yes, I appreciate your disagreeing in a constructive way. I like constructive arguments.

As with intelligence operatives in general, official documentation that they are members is usually
not forthcoming. That's why they are clandestine. Mary Ferrell claimed she joined AFIO to get
their newsletters and go to events and so forth. Her activities in the assassination coverup and in keeping
tabs on researchers and her rightwing political beliefs show her true colors.
I detail those sides of her. She doled out documents and other information
(and disinformation) to make herself seem a genuine researcher, while
in fact she was, as Greg Lowrey called her, "The Gatekeeper." Penn Jones
advised me, "Stay away from her." She was quite different in reality from what some of her admirers think she was.

[Tracy Riddle]

I still remain in awe of her type-written/hand-written chronologies, which are scanned on the website. This is not the work of someone just pretending to be a researcher.

[URL="http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/docset/getList.do?docSetId=1111"]http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/docset/getList.do?docSetId=1111


[/URL]

[Charles Drago]

Due to temporary circumstances beyond my control, there likely will be lengthy delays between the time I submit a post to DPF and the time that it is made available to the public.

Two of my posts, made today before noon, U.S. Eastern Time, appeared here just minutes ago -- nearly 11 hours after I sent them off. They are posts 29 and 30, found on page 3 of this thread.

Thanks for your attention.

[Phil Dragoo]

Joseph

Into the Nightmare is rising on the wishlist.

Mary Ferrell as playing a double game--joining the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, acting as The Gatekeeper;

more anecdotes accrue. Your analysis will be very helpful.

As for controversy, past the major step, that of certainty of conspiracy rather than theory, the first is Zapruder, the second alteration.

I don't see the turn, the stop, can't understand Hill's superhuman leap and the front seat agents' too-fast head turns, et cetera;

hence, the Horne scenario, two events at NPIC with Brugioni and McMahon, Zavada to the contrary notwithstanding, approximately pages 1100-1300 of Inside the ARRB Volume IV.

Alteration apparent in a six centimeter gash where the entry wound was inviolate in the two centimeter incision.

Groden cites eighty-one who saw the two-to-three-inch occipitoparietal avulsive wound, yet that perfect back of head photo profered.

Your work on Tippit is very useful. How Oswald fired automatic cartridges from a revolver with a defective firing pin he never received is a mystery.

As are the government's witnesses led like so many sheep versus say a Domingo Benevidez and Warren Reynolds and Aquila Clemmons dissuaded from the truth by gunfire either to the head of one's brother, one's own head, or merely threatened.

The reasoning has always been circular: Oswald shot Tippit and shot at Walker therefore shot Kennedy--when none of the three premises is true.

Taking them on and dispatching them is a great service.

[Joseph McBride]

Joseph

Into the Nightmare is rising on the wishlist.

Mary Ferrell as playing a double game--joining the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, acting as The Gatekeeper;

more anecdotes accrue. Your analysis will be very helpful.

As for controversy, past the major step, that of certainty of conspiracy rather than theory, the first is Zapruder, the second alteration.

I don't see the turn, the stop, can't understand Hill's superhuman leap and the front seat agents' too-fast head turns, et cetera;

hence, the Horne scenario, two events at NPIC with Brugioni and McMahon, Zavada to the contrary notwithstanding, approximately pages 1100-1300 of Inside the ARRB Volume IV.

Alteration apparent in a six centimeter gash where the entry wound was inviolate in the two centimeter incision.

Groden cites eighty-one who saw the two-to-three-inch occipitoparietal avulsive wound, yet that perfect back of head photo profered.

Your work on Tippit is very useful. How Oswald fired automatic cartridges from a revolver with a defective firing pin he never received is a mystery.

As are the government's witnesses led like so many sheep versus say a Domingo Benevidez and Warren Reynolds and Aquila Clemmons dissuaded from the truth by gunfire either to the head of one's brother, one's own head, or merely threatened.

The reasoning has always been circular: Oswald shot Tippit and shot at Walker therefore shot Kennedy--when none of the three premises is true.

Taking them on and dispatching them is a great service.

Thanks very much, Phil. You bring up a lot of the key topics.

I appreciate the questions raised already and am glad people are getting the book to read
it in its entirety, which no doubt will prompt additional good questions and comments. There's
so much to discuss in this case, and the Tippit murder has been largely neglected, which makes
it all the more important to study and debate.

[Allen Lowe]

I am a bit bothered by the assumption that Ferrell was simply a disinformation agent; starting with the fact that we have no actual proof of this, we have the additional likelihood that she joined AFIO for info purposes, just as, as I mentioned, Von Pein might easily sign up for the Ferrell site just because it has so much research. Rumor and theory are starting to appear as fact. But we need better evidence; Penn Jones was an early and courageous journalist, but spent a fair amount of time on tangents which had their own problems.

As for the dictabelt - the House Committee was about to close its investigation and declare NO SHOT from the knoll; that tape was the prime thing that forced them to reassess and declare, for the historical record, multiple shooters. And anyone who has read Thomas' analysis knows it is a serious piece of evidence. But if it had not appeared - well, then, the conspiracy side would have a lot less public support, both immediately and historically. This theory is like the Zapruder faking theory - if they are going to do it why do it part way and still leave it as evidence that supports conspiracy? I know there are possible answers to this, but none really make sense to me.

[Dawn Meredith]

I am a bit bothered by the assumption that Ferrell was simply a disinformation agent; starting with the fact that we have no actual proof of this, we have the additional likelihood that she joined AFIO for info purposes, just as, as I mentioned, Von Pein might easily sign up for the Ferrell site just because it has so much research. Rumor and theory are starting to appear as fact. But we need better evidence; Penn Jones was an early and courageous journalist, but spent a fair amount of time on tangents which had their own problems.

As for the dictabelt - the House Committee was about to close its investigation and declare NO SHOT from the knoll; that tape was the prime thing that forced them to reassess and declare, for the historical record, multiple shooters. And anyone who has read Thomas' analysis knows it is a serious piece of evidence. But if it had not appeared - well, then, the conspiracy side would have a lot less public support, both immediately and historically. This theory is like the Zapruder faking theory - if they are going to do it why do it part way and still leave it as evidence that supports conspiracy? I know there are possible answers to this, but none really make sense to me.

Allen:
Before you go shooting the messinger wait til you hear more evidence. I have some of my own but have to leave early for court this morning.
Mary was NOT who she pretended to be. Period.
I will just add one bit here. Her son Jimmy told me in 97 when I met him, and many times after that, that as a teen his mother sent him
to New Orleans to "volunteer" for Jim Garrison. But not to help him. To copy files, spy on him, and anything else he could do to sabotage Garrison's effort, for Mary. This from her own son.
More later.
Dawn

[Jim Hackett II]

Ms. Ferrell out.
Nuff Said

[Charles Drago]

Ms. Ferrell out.
Nuff Said

Not so fast.

Full disclosure: Mary was my friend.

Or was she?

I've always harbored uncertainties regarding the motives of this preternaturally intelligent and sophisticated woman. And I can assure one and all that, like an iceberg, most of who and what she was remains unobserved beneath the surface of dark, still, deep waters.

But was Mary's mission -- and yes, she was on a mission -- to sink the Titanic? Or the Bismarck?

[Magda Hassan]

But was Mary's mission -- and yes, she was on a mission -- to sink the Titanic? Or the Bismarck?

Maybe the answer is "Yes".