27,498 research outputs found
2026 Calendar: Mark Brizzypix Coleman Drone images
No full textA calendar selection of drone images taken by Mark Brizzypix Coleman of various landscapes, buildings and bridges in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Coleman Collection; no.02110
No full textSepia postcard of two views showing the living quarters on the property of the "New Mexico Cottage Sanatorium, Silver City, New Mexico." Bottom view; three unidentified men are pictured, two are sitting at the cottage, one man walks. Verso: Stamped in red ink, "Post Card." Upper right edge of the postcard is a faint postage mark from Silver City and the remnants of a US postage stamp. Message written in pencil.This postcard is one of 44 that was given to Gussie Coleman from Mr. and Mrs. Dan McFadin of Leaky, Texas. Mr. and Mrs. Mc Fadin lived and ranched in both Playas and the Gila- Cliff valley.Master file: image/tiff; 92,495 KB; Computer Hardware: Intel Pentium (R) 4 3.20 GHz/ 1.99 GB RAM manufactured by Dell; Operating system: Windows XP 2002; Creation software: Adobe Photoshop CS2 version 9.0.2; Scanner: flatbed reflective scanner Microtek 1000XL; Scanner software: Microtek SilverFast Ai 6.4.2r2b; Scanned by Jason Dunlap on 2009-07-11
The sense of a beginning : Bakhtinian dialogic criticism on 'the gospel' in Mark.
No full textContemporary literary approaches have caused paradigm shifts in Biblical Studies in the last two decades as it appears in a great deal of Markan studies using narrative, reader-response, deconstructive, feminist, and new historicist approaches. However, literary studies on the Gospel of Mark have not taken into account theoretical questions underlying those approaches. As a result biblical critics are driven by new trends without ever having a chance to examine the critical baggage of the approaches. Consequently, there is a gap of communication between the old and the new one. Therefore this thesis is an attempt to meet the need of enhancing the quality of critical endeavour in biblical studies. In the light of most recent competing critical theories of literature, the first contribution of this thesis is the methodological finding that Bakhtinian dialogic criticism contains the most profound philosophical and practical foundations for solving some crucial theoretical problems in contemporary literary theories. It is a critique to a Saussurian linguistic system of language which becomes the very foundation of modern and postmodern literary criticism. Bakhtinian literary theory shifts the foundation of literary criticism on linguistic signs into the creative activity of the socio-cultural production of human communication. The shift into socio-cultural reality of language communication makes the notion of 'genre' very important to unlock the problem of text and context in literary studies. Since the Gospel of Mark has fascinated most literary critics in Biblical Studies, the problem of 'genre' of this gospel is chosen as the focus of this study. Secondly, as no agreement is reached as to what 'genre' the Gospel of Mark belongs, this thesis makes its contribution to the discussion by locating the problem of 'genre' of Mark in the context of genre theories and argues that the Bakhtinian suggestion to find genre in the socio-cultural sphere by analysing artistic intercourse between narrative agents in Mark has freed the competing analysis from the unresolved problem between the kerygmatic (content oriented) approach and the analogical (form oriented) approach. To achieve finding 'genre' in the socio-cultural sphere, this thesis focuses on Bakhtinian analysis of the process of artistic intercourse between narrative agents. The narrative communicative interrelationships between narrative agents is constructed in this thesis as a 'stereophonic' Bakhtinian model of dialogic communication. This model is an original contribution of this thesis for revising the traditional two dimensional model of narrative communication. Based on this dialogical model of communication, a special role is given to the Bakhtinian 'author-creator' in the realization process of genre through the interaction of polyphonic voices. Through the interaction of voices of the author-artist and the hero we are led to discover a relatively stable type of portraying and controlling reality in Mark, known as the genre of Roman 'satire'. The closest literary affinity is Satyrica by Petronius. This narrative strategy of 'satire' in Mark has its root in the prophetic discourse of the Old Testament which is saturating the speech of the narrator, John the Immerser, the centurion, the people, and even Jesus. Finally, the whole search for Markan 'genre' culminates in the analysis of the realization of genre through the analysis of Bakhtinian chronotope. The reality of the genre of Mark is its social reality that is in its role as dpxrj/ 'beginning'. As the Gospel of Mark proclaims itself as 'a beginning', it defines its claim of socio-cultural 'authority' in early Christianity. It is this 'sense of beginning' which enables the narrating and the narrated world of Mark to interact dialogically
Reed Coleman
No full textReed Coleman oral history interview as conducted by Mark Madison and Steve Laubach.
Reed Coleman talks about how the Leopold Memorial Reserve got started and who helped to start it. He also talks about the basic concept, objectives, threats and changes of the Reserve through the years. And he mentions the differences between the Leopold Memorial Reserve and the Leopold Foundation.
Name: Reed Coleman
Keywords: History, Biography, Preservation (specimens), Landscape conservation, Hunting, Education1
Oral History Cover Sheet
Name: Reed Coleman
Date of Interview: October 28, 2009
Location of Interview: Wisconsin
Interviewer: Mark Madison & Steve Laubach
Most Important Projects: The Leopold Memorial Reserve
Colleagues: Howard Mead, Frank Terboilcox and various neighbors
Brief Summary of Interview: Reed starts out with a little bit of background on the type of person he is. He talks about how the Leopold Memorial Reserve got started and who helped to start it. He also talks about the basic concept, objectives, threats and changes of the Reserve through the years. And he mentions the differences between the Leopold Memorial Reserve and the Leopold Foundation.
2
Mark: (laughing) with what you just said.
Reed: Oh you want (unclear).
Mark: Yea I thought that was a good introduction.
Reed: If you think that’s important to the process.
Mark: I think it gives some insight into your character and that’s important.
Reed: Um well I’ll just go through it again I …
Mark: Sure.
Reed: …indicating that my three favorite uh forays into history are uh an understanding of Will and Aerial Durant’s lessons of history so that I’m not likely to make mistakes based on what has gone before, uh I enjoy The Prince because it tells me um…what I ought to know about what people might be trying to do to me and then I uh look at the decline and fall of the Roman empire by given as somewhat of an indication of what might be happening, happening in today’s society. My entire life, the interests that I’ve had either to start something, that needs to be done and to help build it to the point where it’s pretty much routine, then I get out or to fix something that’s broken and once fixed and back on track and operating normally, get out. Uh and one of the things that I really love about Sand County Foundation is that its almost always broken, it can never be really fixed and uh everyday there’s something new to start. So that just gives you a little background on the kind of person that you’re going to be expecting to tell you the details of the history of Leopold Memorial Reserve.
Mark: Okay. Well let’s start at the beginning. Um who were some of the folks, the earliest folks that worked with you to start up the Reserve? 3
Reed: Uh Howard Mead and Frank Terbilcox.
Mark: Okay. And how did you guys first come together and brainstorm this idea?
Reed: Um Howard and I were drinking martini’s and cooking duck, it’s true, (Mark laughing) (unclear) and lamenting the fact that, that we like to go up to uh our cabin and that there was nobody there paying any attention to the Leopold shack, the family was pretty much all out of, out of the city or out of touch or otherwise occupied and they were selling 33 foot lots along the riverfront uh right up next to the Leopold property. And we really did talk about what we could do and how we could do something to keep that from damaging the Leopold property and uh ruled out the DNR, ruled out the state and literally at that point sort of came up and said “Well, why don’t we get a bunch of people to agree to not develop it, put some restrictions on it.” And uh Frank was tired of getting up at midnight to go and turn on the broiler in his Ross Floral Company so as we moved down the line we talked to him and he said “Yeah, I like to get involved” and then of course eventually became the manager.
Mark: Okay. Were there other models that you guys…
Reed: No.
Mark: …emulated? So you just came up with this all on your own?
Reed: Seemed like a good idea.
Mark: Okay. Who were the first land owners that were invited to participate?
Reed: Uh, inviting would be an unusual phrase uh but we made a map to look at who they were: it included Collins and Leopold’s and Terbilcox’s, which of course was a major section of what we’re trying to do. And then the Turners’ the Van Heusens were 4
the two key elements that we needed to have included and of course those were the ones that was most fun trying to convince them that we weren’t a hunting club from Chicago or the Wisconsin DNR. And I think those were the ones that we really attained uh permission from at the offset.
Mark: Did anybody refuse to join?
Reed: Uh no.
Mark: No.
Reed: But it was a long, hard sell.
Mark: How long did it take to sell?
Reed: I don’t remember. (Mark laughing) But there was a lot of evening in farm kitchens at the Turners’ and the Van Heusens and uh the Leopold’s is interesting, I’m not, you know that’s a whole just line through is whole history. Uh I really don’t remember much about their participation other than that they were willing to do it. Uh the basic concept, which was one of the questions that you asked, uh…if we could get a number of landowners to agree to not do certain things, and that was really to change the agricultural patterns and to change the structural patterns and if we could then get them to permit the entire area to be studied as a unit instead of each on their own individual basis for both research and education. And if we could then obtain, which was really the only legal thing we every got, which was (coughed) excuse me, which was uh the first right of refusal recorded and the consideration for that was to pay their property taxes, very simple.
Mark: Was the agreement signed by everybody then or was it…
Reed: Yea. 5
Mark: …but it wasn’t, the only legal part was the first write up?
Reed: What, well there was the agreement and then there was the first right of refusal, which was recorded.
Mark: Okay.
Reed: But the agreement was never recorded.
Steve: And research and education was part of the division from the start, you’re saying it wasn’t simply to protect the land that uh.
Reed: Well that depends on whether you’re talking about the martini party or once we got going on things here.
Steve: Right.
Reed: And got Frank involved and his becoming management. I don’t know what those timelines are (unclear).
Steve: Yea I’m not gonna.
Reed: …make any difference.
Mark: But what was the primary mission, if you had to say what the mission was at the inception? We can talk about how it changed, but at the inception if you would say you know was it research, was it preservation, was it…
6
Reed: It was whatever of those things we could convince two completely (unclear) farmers with something they would be willing to put up with. And that’ll sort of come into play when we get to what ought to happen on the LMR (unclear).
Mark: (laughing) Okay we won’t jump ahead then.
Reed: But uh I think the thought that was any grand scheme when we started to do this would be unheard. Uh I drafted the, I drafted the agreement; I just sat down with a dictating machine and drafted it, I don’t think it got changed much from what I drafted. I haven’t looked at it for a long time.
Mark: Okay. And when you first did the agreement, you mentioned the martini party and so on but what was the biggest threat to this landscape? Was it being developed or was it just uh…
Reed: Well we were, I think the trigger, if you want to look at that, was the combination of the absence of any of the Leopold’s in the area and uh the fact that they had sold all these lots on property that was adjacent. And you have to remember I’d spent most of my high school and uh some grade school weekends up there, as a kid so that place was very special to me. You know, you know it just happened.
Mark: What was it like going to the shack as a kid? I know I’ve deviated from the inception part.
Reed: The shack as a kid.
Mark: Yea, yea.
Reed: The Leopold kids picked on me, basically. And I was the guy who got to pump the water and carry the buckets through the trees.
Mark: That’s a lot of buckets. 7
Reed: Steve’s heard the story (unclear) swinging the birches.
Steve: No, haven’t heard that one.
Reed: You know how to swing a birch?
Steve: (unclear)
Reed: Jeepers (unsure of spelling)
(Laughing)
Mark: Maybe we need to…
Reed: What a lost youth you had. Uh you pick a birch of a certain size and theoretically uh (unclear). And you shimmy up it to where you think you are at the right place, then you grab it with both hands and you swing out. If you’ve made a good decision then it’ll gently drop you down on to the ground and then you can let go and it’ll go back up. So they use to encourage me to swing off too early so that I would end up on, about that far off the ground. (Mark and Steve laughing) Anyway, that’s a digression.
Mark: (laughing) but a good one.
Steve: Um.
Mark: Go ahead.
Steve: There’s the Coleman cabin on the property, now is that a later, is that something that you went to growing up as well.
8
Reed: Oh yea.
Steve: Okay.
Reed: Well the land we would go to, mostly we would to go Leopold’s. Now we had this vacant across Chapman Lake from the Leopold property. And I think it was ’45 or ’46 when uh our family bought the horse barn down the road from, from the Leopold’s down the river, which had been the cabin, the story and a half cabin for Mrs., you probably know better than I, the old lady who…can’t remember her name, but she had been born there and I remember going to talk to her and she would be able to tell you about Indians going by on the River Road in front of her cabin. Bought the cabin for a hundred dollars, disassembled it, uh it had been a horse farm so the lower maybe three courses of logs were rotten, but the logs were all numbered and I used to work at the camp; went up on weekends, moved it over and reassembled it on our property. Then we were able to begin to use that as well as the shack, the shack property we would just go up for a day and back the same day.
Steve: Okay.
Reed: Nobody wanted to sleep on those beds.
Mark: Did, in the early years you mentioned um going to farmers houses over kitchen tables and talking, were there organizational meetings, I mean did you have meetings where you actually took minutes and had to prescribe…
Reed: (speaking at same time as Mark) I saw the question.
Mark: Yeah.
Reed: And I think we tried to have a meeting once a year with the people who were on the reserve just to sort of bring them up to date. But uh, you know, people died, moved 9
uh it wasn’t necessary and the people who were actively involved were Leopold, Terbilcox and Collins, and Collins pretty much knew what was going on anyway so. But there was no, there was no structure.
Mark: You didn’t have a formal (unclear). [laughing] Cuz that’s what they’re getting at is that they’re trying to find out if there was…
Reed: Yea we probably did have something but it was probably ignored.
Mark: Well that’s one of the issues that came up the, they um, it seems like they’ve got good records for the Reserve from like 1975 onward. Did you guys keep detailed records before ’75.
Reed: No, not that I know of.
Mark: So, so they don’t exist. [Laughing]
Reed: I suppose there could be some correspondence buried in what we call the black hole out here but nobody wants to go up there and starting looking for it. But I don’t think um, I think it would have been…gee I just don’t know, I mean I don’t, there was no, now when did Charlie Bradley show up?
Steve: ’75
Reed: Yea.
Steve: ‘76
Mark: Yea ’75.
Reed: And that’s a basic, this thing was all pretty much (unclear) and, you know, once we got it together and once we accomplished and Frank did the management and I don’t 10
remember when Frank actually left Ross permanently uh or when he became a full-time. But uh then when Charlie came then we really began to have what I think we had all sort of thought could happen on a fifteen hundred acre piece of land that was individually owned but could be used uh in common for research and education. We had, you know, we had tours, Frank conducted tours, Charlie did his research I mean at that point it took a life uh of it’s own and onto itself.
Mark: Were you, were the organizers and you influence by the land ethic at all and if you were, was it (unclear) or did you talk about it?
Reed: No. (Unclear) we never sat down and said…
Steve: Be philosophical.
Reed: …this is all about the land ethic. I think if you spent the time I spent with the Leopold’s as a kid and in the late ‘60’s I had already spent four years in environmental science in college and in ecological so I probably had a pretty good idea of what it was without going to the Sand County Almanac and saying “Oh” or the essay and saying “Oh, there it is.”
Mark: Was it in the back of your minds that’s what you were doing though when…
Reed: I thought it was just the right thing to do and pretty much I think the land ethic is a description of what the right thing to do should be if you owned land.
Mark: Okay, good.
Reed: But, you know, I…these questions sort of describe a context that may not be fully justified.
11
Mark: Well, I was at some of the meetings and they’re fishing because, they’re fishing for information cuz we don’t know. [Laughing] You know the answer to many of these questions may well be “No” (unclear, laughing).
Reed: That’s why this is going to be short.
[Sounds like everyone laughing]
Mark: Did you guys…and we’re not trying to jump ahead to where you are now, but did you have a vision about what the place might look like, you know, five years into it when you first began? Did you, how did you envision it?
Reed: We pretty, pretty well made it up as we went along and Frank came on board and uh how could we teach what Leopold thought the kids and school kids and so forth and so and so we made trails. And, you know, that was as visionary as buying a mower on a tractor and Frank loved to mow trails and so we (unclear). And uh poison ivy control was a big deal, if you want to know one of the most evasive species um…yea I (unclear) developed, it happened, worked it’s way up to something and then Charlie came and it became much more serious.
Mark: Yea. Did the neighbors who weren’t directly involved in the Reserve know what you guys were doing? Were they generally supportive?
Reed: Um huh, and they liked it, they like it yea.
Mark: I could imagine they would be.
Reed: They thought it was great.
Steve: You mentioned though that was a hard sell to the Turner’s and the Van-Heusens, what made that a hard, what were some of their objections? 12
Reed: “Well who the hell are these guys coming into my, writing me a letter saying we like to meet with you” and we were either a gun club from Chicago (unclear) from Chicago and…they didn’t believe that anybody was really going to do this, I mean they couldn’t understand why these two people or three people (unclear) uh but it was mostly Frank and Reed. But “why are you doing this”, you know, “what’s in it for you” or “who are you fronting for” or “what are we going to find out that’s bad after we agree to do this.” It’s just, you know, hey here’s who we are, here’s what we want to do, believe us.
Mark: To overcome the skepticism . Now we’re moving into the questions about how the reserve’s changed over time and uh the first question we had there was, have you’ve seen land management or land use change in that area since 1965, (unclear).
Reed: Uh…sure, part of it was on purpose and part of it was controlled burns, the great expert trying to make an oak opening, uh was turned into a raspberry patch instead. Uh and the whole deer quality, hunting ecology for deer, the management hunt on a reserve, uh Frank uh doing some things on his own, which probably didn’t fit the original model but which were fine. I mean if you’re going to have private landowners then you have to say “You know it’s your land, you can do what you want to do.”
Mark: Right.
Reed: And uh when we start talking about the future and how do we do what’s next, uh if you want to get a group of land owners together to do something that’s good for the land, then you really have to go to each one and say “What is, what is the most restriction that you’re willing to except? And what is the most participation that you’re willing to do in order to make this work?” And once you have that then you say “Okay, well that isn’t enough to make a concept work, that isn’t enough to make it a real collaboration.” So their in (unclear), if they do join and you do have, with that reasonable level of private enterprise/private property restrictions, times change, people die, sons and daughters may 13
not wish to so the same thing so it has to continue to be something that the private landowner wants to do and I think maybe that’s part of the answer to your question.
Mark: Yea.
Reed: It came to the point where the Turners and the Van-Heusens, who were really the out layers in this whole thing, decided that this was something that they really wanted to and they did, they came to enjoy it.
Mark: Great. You mentioned a couple of changes that occurred; let me ask you one by one…
Reed: Sure.
Mark: …when some of these occurred. When did the public visits start on the reserve? Was it with the school children?
Reed: That was fairly early, I think, cuz that was mostly Frank Terbolicox. Uh and we didn’t call it public, we had to be very careful not to and uh we had some wonderful, I have signs still that have the uh “Danger” um “No Trespassing” or I can’t remember exactly what it says but it warns you not to enter this property because there’s an extensive poison ivy infestation. Uh I also saw a sign on a western fence this morning on the internet somebody sent me said um “Prayer is the best way to go to heaven, Trespassing is Quicker.” Um and it was uh…can’t remember now which of the Bradley’s, Luna I think, he and I were talking about something and we were talking about trespassing and so forth or maybe Star Trek, I can’t remember which one it was. And he said “Well why don’t you have a radiation sign made, with a symbol and all and then list the (unclear) underneath it” so we did; uh “Warning Radiation” whatever abeyant sunlight (unclear) is, was what we put underneath it and it worked for awhile, not really for very long but we had a good time doing it.
14
Mark: [Laughing] The first night they noticed it didn’t glow, they became suspicious.
Reed: The DNR didn’t show up and say “What are you doing?”
Mark: What about the ecological restoration? You alluded to that earlier, bringing back the oaks and so when did that start?
Reed: Well some of that, I mean, the experiment with the oak opening about five years old. Uh but uh controlled burns goes back a long way uh Charlie’s research goes back to when he really started and uh when the study center was built. Um and then as Frank, Charlie went away and as Frank got older then so those things tended to fall away and then Leopold’s research and interest has uh created that aspect to the quote, unquote “Reserve,” which was probably not a part of the original intention so I’d say that’s probably where the major shift has occurred. And I think that’s one of the reasons why LMR 21st Century is an important part of what we need to do, The Sand County Foundation point of view.
Mark: Yea, very good.
Reed: We don’t like buildings at all uh to be honest with you. Uh we think they focus things on inanimate objects and do not, from The Sand County’s point of view, represent what the Reserve’s, the outdoors, land owning is all about but you know ends with the money. Those with the gold, make the rules so we have the study center up there.
Mark: How has the Reserve, over the years cuz once again we’re looking at changes, affected the surrounding land owners that aren’t part of it, has it given them a better quality of life or you know led to occasional (unclear)?
Reed: Probably as, well if you look at the expansion out into the farm land to the west uh I think the awareness of the Reserve and what it’s doing is appreciated and maybe it gives some people some ideas. Uh I wouldn’t be able to document it. 15
Mark: Sure.
Reed: Any of that, other than the fellow who crops are fields uh had done some things that would be attractive and appealing and thinks he might want to be a member of the Reserve.
Mark: That’s great.
Reed: So who knows, would be the first pig farmer.
[Mark laughing]
Mark: What about deer management? There’s a bunch of questions that suggest, occasionally, deer management has been a point of contention with neighbors.
Reed: Uh.
Mark: I don’t know…
Reed: Deer management, well it was obvious that something had to happen in terms of deer hunting.
Mark: Right.
Reed: And that all sort of came to a head with uh quality hunting/ecology was the term used uh which still goes on. Uh and that’s to try and knock down the doe population, knock down the deer population to uh per square mile to per acre tolerance. Uh and so it was used, the Reserve was used, people wanted to (unclear) to agree to abide by those standards and a lot of people like to hunt there. Uh fifteen hundred acres probably not a large enough unit to do a really, fully capable scientific study but the (unclear) who are 16
quality deer uh activity in Pennsylvania is and so I think it was something that was; Sand County we always looked to see “Have we really done something here that affected policy” and although they say they invited it, the DNR did do essentially the (unclear), uh hunting (unclear). And you know we have a close enough interchange with the DNR so
Tennis players Mark Stevens (left) and Coleman Clark, 1938
No full textPlaying table tennis are, from left, Mark Stevens and Coleman Clark, 1938https://mavmatrix.uta.edu/specialcollections_startelegram1930s/1944/thumbnail.jp
Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny: How to be a liberal with Ian Dunt
No full textOn this Democracy Sausage Extra, Ian Dunt - host of the Oh God, What Now? podcast and author of How to be a liberal - joins Mark Kenny to discuss the history of liberal thought, how it has shaped present day politics, and the origins of the ‘culture wars’. Have the culture wars emerged out of the failures of liberalism? Why haven’t contemporary political actors done more to protect people from prejudice and the tyranny of the majority? And is liberalism a natural corollary to democracy? On this Democracy Sausage Extra, author, political journalist and broadcaster Ian Dunt joins Professor Mark Kenny to discuss the history of political thought, present day politics, and liberalism’s trajectory
[Interview with Mark Lane in Playboy Magazine #3]
No full textPoor quality photocopies of a magazine article which appeared in Playboy Magazine. The article features an extensive interview with Mark Lane, an attorney and author, who is critical of the Warren Commission's assessment of the assassination of President Kennedy
Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny: Full circle with Scott Ludlam
No full textOn this episode of Democracy Sausage, Scott Ludlam, former Greens Deputy Leader and author of the new book Full Circle: A search for the world that comes next, joins Mark Kenny to discuss what he learnt from his time in politics and Australian climate policy. What role do corporate and private interests play in shaping Australian policy-making? Will the country make changes to political donation rules to make the system more transparent? And how can Australia make meaningful progress on climate policy? On this episode of Democracy Sausage, Professor Mark Kenny speaks with former Greens Senator Scott Ludlam about Australian politics, his new book, and Section 44 of the Constitution
Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny: Truth is trouble with Malcolm Knox
No full textOn this Democracy Sausage Extra, award-winning journalist and author Malcolm Knox joins Mark Kenny to discuss the saga of Israel Folau - former star rugby union player sacked for sharing anti-LGBTQ views on social media - and how free speech got so complicated. The sacking of former star player Israel Folau by Rugby Australia for his comments on social media once again revealed faultlines which had recently been laid bare during Australia’s marriage equality plebiscite. So what did the saga reveal about freedom of expression in Australia? What is the significance of groups like the Australian Christian Lobby in Australia’s public discourse? And, with ‘free speech’ very much a political battleground, what might the future hold? On this Democracy Sausage Extra, Professor Mark Kenny speaks with Australian journalist and author Malcolm Knox about the Israel Folau issue, Australia’s evangelical movement, and the ‘culture wars’. This episode was recorded live as part of the ANU/Canberra Times ‘Meet the Author’ series
[Interview with Mark Lane in Playboy Magazine #2]
No full textPoor quality photocopies of a magazine article which appeared in Playboy Magazine. The article features an extensive interview with Mark Lane, an attorney and author, who is critical of the Warren Commission's assessment of the assassination of President Kennedy
- …
