Charles Drago

I hope that I'm not alone in my disappointment that neither Rex Bradford nor any other player at the Mary Ferrell Foundation has seen fit to address the issues raised within this thread. Perhaps multiple inquiries from members of this forum addressed to Mr. Bradford and containing requests for a full and verifiable accounting of the hidden history of the MFF and the current condition and whereabouts of Mary's physical archives might prove sufficiently stimulating. Charles

I wanted to revisit this topic, if only to move it to the top of the list with the hope of stimulating additional postings. Charles

In the late 90's, fully in command of my faculties, I co-sponsored with junk scientist Ken Rahn and the fools in the University of Rhode Island's Political Science Department (who allowed him to present propaganda as instruction in the methods and philosophy of science) a JFK research conference in Providence. Rahn began his presentation with the promise that it would, once and for all, demonstrate the viability of NAA in general and Guinn's process in particular, and thus demonstrate beyond refutation that LHO fired all the shots at the motorcade and acted alone. Seriously. When Rahn concluded, the first questioner to rise was Stewart Galanor, mathematician and author of "Cover-up." Stewart, in his typically understated and concise manner, eviscerated the just presented "science" to the degree that Rahn, shaken and pale, was forced to rise and say, "What I just shared is merely a work in progress." "'Work in progress,' Dr. Rahn?" Stewart responded. "But you began your presentation by telling us that it was 'definitive.' What happened?" (I'm paraphrasing from memory, but the session was recorded, so bring it on if you so desire) Stewart then demanded that Rahn produce his oft-referenced bench notes. "They're in my other brief case, at home" the junk scientist offered. Stewart than reminded one and all that once before, in the wake of a Rahn smoke-and-mirrors show, he had asked after the not-so-good doctor's notes, only to receive the same evasive reply. Through it all, the semi-comatose chair of the Poly Sci Department silently demonstrated the thousand-yard stare. Yes, it was all b.s. From Day One. Yet -- and here's the point of this stroll down Memory Lane -- it took the imprimatur of the ultimate false authority, the parent state (in this instance in the form of an FBI conclusion) to render acceptable that which had been scientifically demonstrated decades before (see, for instance, Evica's "No More Magic Bullet"). Is there not a lesson to be learned here? An aside: In a fascinating variation on the Helsinki Syndrome, Rahn's intellectual hostages -- his students -- were the first to defend his excreble performance, one of them going so far as to hold up a copy of the Warren Report and refer to it as "the Bible." This was the same young victim who wrote a paper for Rahn's class in the scientific method -- for which I believe he received an "A" -- in which he argued that the observations of Parkland physicians were of little value because, based upon analysis of emergency room docs across the nation, gunshot wounds were too often grossly misidentified in terms of entrance, exit, and other significant characteristics due to the physicians' unfamiliarity with that sort of trauma. "But aren't the on-duty Parkland doctors' skills and track records the only relevant data base in this case? Doctors with vast experience in gunshot wounds?" I asked. Silence. The case against LHO is non-existent. Charles Edited: Language. Antti Hynonen

Who wants to know?

I commend to your attention, "A Certain Arrogance: U.S. Intelligence's Manipulation of Religious Groups And Individuals in Two World Wars And the Cold War -and the Sacrificing of Lee Harvey Oswald," by George Michael Evica. And the "Sinister Forces" trilogy, by Peter Levenda. Two sides of the same coin. Charles

And while we're on the subject, let's indulge our church/state jones by looking at: Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J. Avery Cardinal Dulles, S.J., is currently the Laurence J. McGinley Professor of Religion and Society at Fordham University, a position he has held since 1988. An internationally known author and lecturer, he was born in Auburn, New York, on August 24, 1918, the son of John Foster Dulles and Janet Pomeroy Avery Dulles. He received his primary school education in New York City, and attended secondary schools in Switzerland and New England. After graduating from Harvard College in 1940, he spent a year and a half in Harvard Law School before serving in the United States Navy, emerging with the rank of lieutenant. Upon his discharge from the Navy in 1946, Avery Dulles entered the Jesuit Order, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1956. After a year in Germany, he studied at the Gregorian University in Rome, and was awarded the doctorate in Sacred Theology in 1960. He was created a Cardinal of the Catholic Church in Rome on February 21, 2001 by Pope John Paul II. Cardinal Dulles served on the faculty of Woodstock College from 1960 to 1974 and that of The Catholic University of America from 1974 to 1988. He has been a visiting professor at: The Gregorian University (Rome), Weston School of Theology, Union Theological Seminary (New York, N.Y.), Princeton Theological Seminary, Episcopal Seminary (Alexandria, Va.), Lutheran Theological Seminary (Gettysburg, Pa.), Boston College, Campion Hall (Oxford University), the University of Notre Dame, the Catholic University at Leuven, Yale University, and St. Joseph's Seminary, Dunwoodie. The author of over 700 articles on theological topics, Cardinal Dulles has published twenty-two books including Models of the Church (1974), Models of Revelation (1983), The Catholicity of the Church (1985), The Craft of Theology: From Symbol to System (1992), The Assurance of Things Hoped For: A Theology of Christian Faith (1994), The Splendor of Faith: The Theological Vision of Pope John Paul II (1999), The New World of Faith (2000), and his latest book, Newman (2002). The fiftieth anniversary edition of his book, A Testimonial to Grace, was republished in 1996 by the original publishers, Sheed and Ward, with an afterword containing his reflections on the past fifty years. Past President of both the Catholic Theological Society of America and the American Theological Society and Professor Emeritus at The Catholic University of America, Cardinal Dulles has served on the International Theological Commission and as a member of the United States Lutheran/Roman Catholic Coordinating Committee. He is presently an advisor to the Committee on Doctrine of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. He has an impressive collection of awards, including Phi Beta Kappa, the Croix de Guerre, the Cardinal Spellman Award for distinguished achievement in theology, the Boston College Presidential Bicentennial Award, the Christus Magister Medal from the University of Portland (Oregon), the Religious Education Forum Award from the National Catholic Educational Association, America Magazine's Campion Award, the F. Sadlier Dinger Award for contributions to the catechetical ministry of the Church, the Cardinal Gibbons Award from The Catholic University of America, the John Carroll Society Medal, Fordham's Founders Award, and twenty-eight honorary doctorates.

Secret Service complicity would have been -- I accept that it was in fact -- multi-tiered, with some agents aware only of a benign security stripping test and others -- very few -- knowledgeable of what really would go down. See Vince Palamara's "The Third Alternative" for the best data base. That title, by the way, was given to Vince by George Michael Evica in response to the former's presentation of the either/or position being articulated again on these cyber pages. Peter Dale Scott's multi-phase assassination theory supports this analysis. "If only I had seen it," Kellerman is reported to have said remorsefully to Mrs. Kennedy. "Seen" what? Material objects and events -- people, weapons, the first hits in the back seat -- in the Plaza? Or "seen" as in "realized" that the test of which he had been made aware was a set-up? By the way, I've written a letter to the editors of the Providence Journal in which I point out the M-1 error --among other, shall we say, problematic aspects of the news story. Charles

I tend to agree. So too Lansdale. My only reservation in terms of Morales arises from all we've been give to understand about his aggresiveness and psychopathology. Yet how much of that legend can we afford to accept? The definitive Morales biography has yet to be written. Don't spend a lot of time checking Amazon. Charles

Jack, At least three from this site. But back on point: I understand -- I hope -- the emotions that would drive some of the killers to want to witness their handiwork as it was ultimately crafted. Blood is blood, and we dare not discount the primitive elements and motivations in this story. But an Ed Lansdale, to the degree that I can figure him, would understand that it was not the recognition of the people on the scene that ultimately would threaten him and his masters, but rather the recognition of history. And so he would not be there that day. I believe -- as oppose to "know" and "can prove" -- that the prime movers of the murder signed their work, so to speak. I've written of this to Sterling Seagrave recently. For the same reasons I believe -- as above -- that a significant amount of smoking gun evidence (unretouched autopsy photos, unaltered original motion picture films, etc.) exists to this day. Hubris is hubris, after all. But I don't buy the Lansdale ID for a minute. Would that I am wrong. Charles

"In an interview, Roy Hargraves made the point that in certain operations, handlers would be present on the ground to show that it was a genuine op, to share risk and to be close by if it all went wrong." James, Hargraves might not have been prevaricating here. I would submit, however, that regardless of the latitude you allow to the term "handler," Lansdale would not be included. Conein? Sure, if he were hands-on with the planning of the ambush, the placement of the gunmen, etc. And were others sent to muddy the waters? Without question! But to this observer's mind, if we wish to find prime movers and their highest-level facilitators, we need to look to the east. And I don't mean the Dal-Tex Building. Charles

Jack, Thanks for the heads-up on the Richards post. I'll take the time to research his offerings and keep an open mind. But I'm still most interested in examining independent tests of the skills and claims of a Lois Gibson. As I may have queried on another thread: Has an expert in facial reconstruction from skeletal remains ever been given the skull of a known (although not to the reconstructionist) subject and come up with a face that can be compared to the "original"? As for Lansdale walking into a photo trap: Given the sheer number of photographers in the Plaza that day, it is simply counterintuitive to accept that an individual sufficiently wary of being identified would have traipsed into the middle of such a scene. "Counterintuitive" at least to me. Charles

It is all but unthinkable that a main facilitator of the murder of a president would allow him/herself to be within a thousand miles of the operation as it goes down. To argue that Edward Lansdale played such a role in the assassination yet would be in Dallas on November 22, 1963 is to ascribe to this consummate professional the weaknesses and errors in judgment common to the rankest of amateurs. As a writer of fiction I am quite capable of creating a Lansdale-esque character whose personal hubris and hatred for his target are sufficiently massive to outweigh professional and operational sensibilities and compel him to bear witness to his vile work. But viewing the hit from a so-called God spot is one thing, and going into the camera-infested weeds to take a hand-off from EHH is quite another matter. Has anyone evere examined the available archives with the intent of finding posterior views of Lansdale? Have measurements of the height of the figure in question been undertaken and compared to the suspect's vertical dimensions? As for Lois Gibson and all the other so-called experts in facial recognition and skull reconstructions are concerned: Where are the blind studies that substantiate their professional claims? If Lansdale and Hunt were in Dealey Plaza that day, it was for the purpose of patsying. And neither of the above qualifies as a patsy in this case. Charles

I was impressed with the use of the surname: spooks sufficiently well read to know Dumas. Of course we could take all of this too far by claiming that a reference to Three Musketeers addresses aspects of the Dealey Plaza mechanics ... Just foolin' around, My Lady. Charles

Myra, Does the name Oswald LeWinter ring a bell? I assure you, the authors of that dangle didn't just pull those names out of thin air. The trickster, it seems, has a sense of humor. All for one, one for all. Charles

I am convinced that all these photographs are of David Morales. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/CIAmorales.htm I'm not about to argue otherwise, but only note that the years can take their toll.

I'm led to believe that the widow Morales for a time lived rather comfortably in Boston. With apologies to John Armstrong: The two commonly available photos of the adult Morales appear to be of two different individuals. One, which I think originates from Cuban files, shows a heavyset man with square jaw and close-cropped hair. The other is of an older fellow, thin-faced, with wavy hair piled high on his head. It is the former who more closely resembles the figure identified as Morales in the schoolboy basketball team photo. Does the passage of time between adult views account for these differences? Or once again is there merde in the game?

Ah, Bud ... Let's address the pachyderm in our shared living room: Anyone who claims to know Mary Ferrell's most deeply held motivations and other secrets is a fool or worse. I've never encountered a mind as facile, broad, and deep as was Mary's. On more than once occasion I witnessed the most celebrated intellects of the research community sit in awe of her recall, her access, her experiences. Mary reveled in these times, holding court in her hotel suite during just about every JFK conference convened in her lifetime, surrounded by a small, hand-picked audience. I'll share some of my recollections of one of many such evenings -- and believe me, I missed the best ones, including those with Fensterwald in camera. The assembly on that night in question included Peter Dale Scott, David Mantik, Jerry Rose, George Michael and Alycia Evica, Robert Chapman (Mary's cherished caregiver for so many years), "Grassy" Noel Twyman, and myself. I had been volunteered to be bartender, so everyone was being extra nice to me. "David, I really enjoyed you this afternoon," Mary said to the good doctor, who earlier in the day had delivered a typically brilliant presentation to the Lancer group. I couldn't help myself. "Okay, Mantik," I asked, "when was the last time a woman said those words to you?" "It's been so long, it's not even in the memory banks," he confessed as everyone in the room -- including Professor Scott -- erupted into laughter. Mary remained poker-faced, masterfully conducting the proceedings. As the crowd settled down, Mary abruptly changed the tone as she launched into one of her most compelling stories, involving a personal, not altogether relaxing interlude with Mitch WerBel and other unsavory types who waylayed her on the eve of a Caribbean cruise out of Florida to discuss their plans to invade a sovereign state. Her audience was spellbound -- to say the least. Some, I seem to recall, even took notes. Palpable during the entire evening -- indeed, in all such gatherings to which I was honored to be invited -- was spectral presence of Mary's secret life, the parts of her stories that she chose not to tell. I cannot overstate her kindness to me or the affection and respect I'll always offer in return. I'll cherish and protect Mary's memory to the bitter end. I have no doubt that she was as powerfully connected to the secret world as anyone you might be able to mention. And I just know that she approves of this outing. Charles

Peter, Thanks for your thoughts on what we agree is an issue of immense significance -- to our work, and to history. For what it's worth, it did occur to me that any "anonymous benefactor" of the MFF -- especially one from the very middle of the mainstream, so to say -- by definition would have grave reservations about being identified with the lunatic fringe. But Oliver Curme came to the Lancer conference freely and openly, without benefit of CIA make-up and voice alteration devices. It didn't require a great deal of thought to conclude that Ollie's cover was self-blown. As for Rex Bradford: I share your high opinion of his work, and yes, he may be constrained from telling us more by confidentiality agreements. Here's hoping that this thread will sever such tethers. For me, the second most distressing element of this story is how the seizure of Mary's archives failed to set off alarm bells within a community of experts (self-styled and, in a few cases, genuine) in the ways of the secret world. Know that I take myself to task for waiting so long to voice my own major concerns. In terms of the physical Ferrell archives, I fear that we'll never be able to ascertain just how much damage, if any, has been done. It is my understanding that Mary kept more than a few documents and other materials very close to her vest; they do not appear, I'm led to believe, on any publicly available inventory of her holdings. But this may be nothing more than a twice-told tale. Finally, there's this: Prior to last year's Lancer conference, I suggested to George Michael Evica that we convene a panel to question, publicly and as part of the conference program, Bradford, Curme, and other principals of the MFF. We shared a sense of the need for and value of such a forum, and we agreed that our approach would be adversarial but collegial in all ways. No interest. At least not yet. Perhaps we can start one of those groundswells we hear so much about??? I eagerly await Rex Bradford's response. Charles

Testing. Is anyone else experiencing delays and non-postings?

I might add for the record that, in sharing what I know of what it's safe to characterize as the origins of the MFF, I am not violating any confidences whatsoever. During the referenced Lancer conference and for a period of months thereafter, I did keep my word to Mary by refraining from any mention of Curme, his offer, and her response. Only later, after the deal was done and the archives removed from the "temple" built by Buck Ferrell to house them, was I released from the pledge of confidentiality. It also should be noted that the final arrangement between Mary and Curme is not known to me; for all I'm able to gather, Curme may have bowed out. Though I have good reason to doubt it. I am aware of the earliest discussed terms, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that whatever deal ultimately was cut differs significantly therefrom. Finally, it is my fervant wish that Curme is on the level, the physical archives in their entirety are intact and guarded, and that Rex Bradford will impress upon his benefactor the very legitimate need for full disclosure. It all boils down to a matter of trust. At least it always did with Mary. CD

See below.

It is past time for the powers that be at the Mary Ferrell Foundation to step forward and present the true story of how and why that organization was created. And by whom. I am going to break my silence and tell what I know about the MFF in its nascent stages. My hope is that Rex Bradford will proffer the rest of the story, correct my memory if there is need, and convince the formerly anonymous benefactor to step forward and explain his motivations. I'll help with the latter task. It was at a JFK Lancer conference -- not her last -- that Mary Ferrell announced to George Michael Evica and me that she had been approached by, in her words, a "billionaire venture capitalist" with a stunning offer. He would purchase her entire JFK archive in return for a huge initial payment plus other "considerations" (I know the number and the rest of the story, but at this point such data is not relevant to our tale). His stated reason: He was helping to develop and bring to market revolutionary computer programs designed to store, organize, and provide access to data bases of the size and complexity of Mary's holdings. He also promised to create what we know today as the MFF. By the time the Lancer banquet was being served, Mary had informed others of her good fortune. She, George Michael, and I dined together that night with the benefactor. And so we met one Oliver Curme, a general partner of funds related to Battery Ventures, a venture capital firm located in Wellesley, Massachusetts. Curme earned a B.S. in Biochemistry from Brown University, and holds an M.B.A. from the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration. Among his business interests are IBEX Process Technology and OutlookSoft. I encourage you all to GOOGLE away. Over dinner, Call Me Ollie didn't try to hide the fact the he had little if any knowledge of or interest in the JFK assassination. At least that was his cover story. More than once, Mary dissolved into tears as she related how Ollie would take care of her, her family, and her materials. I won't characterize George Michael's reactions to the plan. I was simultaneously happy for Mary, who seemed so genuinely relieved to have been rescued -- my word -- by this good sir knight, and concerned that the alarm bells that should have been going off in response to what appeared to be a world-class dangle were being smothered by the sheer weight of Curme's cash. The deal was done. Mary's library was -- what shall I write ... transferred ... looted ... Curme kept his part of the bargain. Life went on ... longer for some of us than for others. After the passage of a few years, the Mary Ferrell Foundation emerged. And who can fault Rex Bradford, to my mind a world-class historian ("researcher" doesn't do him justice) for the manner in which he runs this world-class archive. Except ... Where are Mary's original holdings? Beyond the obvious informational value of this material, we must acknowledge that original and one-of-a-kind documents carry with them added significance. And in its totality, the Ferrell archive stood as a counter-National Archive (as do the collections of Harold Weisberg, for instance). Where are Mary's original holdings? I'll keep asking, and so should you. Are they intact? Have they been sanitized? What of the symbolic power of their sheer mass to inspire and energize us? Why the secrecy, Mr. Curme? Why so shy, Ollie? Have all of us learned nothing in our study of how intelligence operations are mounted? Am I alone in my suspicions of Curme's motives and masters? Why the secrecy, Rex? I last phoned Mary not long before she passed. From her hospital bed she spoke with the consummate eloquence and vaulting intelligence that all who knew her had come to expect. She was alternately curious about ongoing research projects, generous in her suggestions for avenues of investigation, and kind and loving in the extreme. Topics ranged from Delk Simpson to John Coltrane, from hospital food to family and friends. I miss Mary every day. Her furious, uncompromised search for the truth is Mary Ferrell's greatest legacy. I would submit to Rex Bradford that he, more than most, is expected to live up to such a standard. He can begin by writing and sharing the history of the Mary Ferrell Foundation as he knows it. Charles Drago

Was it the National Lampoon that published a drawing of Alfred E. Newman as Lt. Calley, with the caption, "What, My Lai?" Alas, today the subject might be Colin Powell (double relevance) or the squatter at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Does this make Miller the Man From DUNKEL? Sorry. Too easy. Yet somehow pointed, no?

If it is Lee Oswald's body, then they dressed him in Lovelady's red plaid shirt. Oswald's arrest photos show Lee wearing a brown grainy shirt. Groden's book "TKOAP" shows Lovelady wearing his red plaid shirt. The Hughes film shows it to be a read shirt. Altgens photo #6 shows the plaid design. Lovelady's head - Lovelady's clothes. Bill Miller A well read shirt, no doubt.