Blazer said:
Matthew,
I'm not Jim, but since I had the last post on the subject, I feel obligated to post a response.
You seem to be getting all tangled up in your own statements. I have no idea who Paul Dean is or what he has to do with anything. As far as Bob Corbin goes, Neither I or anyone I have quoted has ever tied MOEL into Bob's statement or the FBI investigation he mentions.. That all came from Gollum via an unknown source. (Until today) I have no idea what Corbin "Meant" and I have not tried to read anything into his statement that is not there. If you have any documentation that you consider proof of any of your claims, scan it and post it, but you saying it does not prove anything.
Blazer
Hey Blazer,
If you are going to bring my name into this, you might want to research the things I have said a little more closely.
While Matthew has been the source of SOME of my information, the greatest bulk of it has come from months of emailing, phone calling, and letter writing. I have contacted the SEC (L.A. Office), U of A Roger's School of Law Library, Redlands University, Mrs. Jane Dana (Professor Stephen Dana's Widow), Cal State University at Los Angeles, Jim Hatt, Azmula, One of Mitchell's Investors (who doesn't want to be named), and several others who want their privacy respected.
I will say one thing about the information that Matthew has provided me. Much of it has been in document form, that backs up what he has told me. I would post what I have, but promised not to post on public forum. The greatest part of what he states about the whole MOEL situation is beyond reproach (IMO). The place where he and I differ, is about the FBI's involvement in the SEC Investigation of MOEL in 1964. I believe what Corbin states about the FBI having the stone maps at the US Attorney's Office in Phoenix, as another source (official records of the MOEL Investigation) states that the FBI did indeed have the stones looked over by someone at ASU (date inconclusive), when they found out about the tests that Stephen Dana did in 1961 for Mitchell, they interviewed him and accepted a signed affidavit stating his conclusions. Still waiting on hard copies of the files to verify what was emailed to me about it. I am also waiting on Jane Dana to finish going through her late husband's papers to find exactly what made him come to the conclusion that the Stone Maps were at least 100 years old (in the early 1960s). So see, you are quite wrong about where I got the FBI's involvement with the Stone Maps (Matthew doesn't believe they did). Maybe when you have done as much research as I and some others have on the Stone Maps, you may be able to speak with some authority. Don't sit there and try to say that I got everything I know about the stone maps from Matthew, it just shows that you haven't actually read what I have stated, and if you approached some of the people who have actually done a lot of the footwork on this, you might have many of the copies of the releases and forms that we have (someone may have shared).
On a lighter note,
Blazer, I can answer a few of the questions you asked:
1. The Story and photos in the Life Magazine article (1964) and Mitchell’s own book (1965) contradict all of the above and show that he had more than a historic curiosity in the stones. Other than a few small pieces of tape over certain areas, the photos in these publications indicate that no “doctoring” of the stones have taken place to the exposed parts since these pictures were taken.
A: Yes, Mitchell truly thought the stones to be treasure maps, but by 1970, when he donated them, he had possessed them for about nine years, and couldn't solve the puzzle. If he thought they were THAT valuable, do you REALLY think he would have donated them as part of TAX BREAK DEAL? Of course not! If Clarence O. Mitchell thought that there was any way he could solve them, he would have kept them until he died as did both Travis and Robert Tumlinson.
2. You asked about the AM&M having copies of the stone maps made.
A: One of my sources gave me the name of the Special Effects Company in Arizona that made the copies in the mid 1980s for the museum. I spoke to the former owner (no longer in business), and found that this company made approximately five copies of the stone maps (other than the set for the museum). They then sold the molds to an artist in Laguna Beach, California (I live in Laguna Niguel, about 5 minutes away). This man made about 22 sets of full size plaster casts before the molds broke. He continued to make half size copies for many years, but no longer.
As for your questions about those marks Mitchell made on the stones, about Bob Corbin being part of any drama, I have no idea. Matthew and I disagree on the FBI's involvement with the MOEL Investigation.
Blazer,
I have an idea who you may be (probably wrong though), but if you REALLY know what goes on at the original LDM Website (not Peter's New One), you would know that there is so much behind the scenes drama in Apache Junction, The Young and the Restless staff is jealous! Most everybody has something bad to say about everybody else. Most everybody has an agenda. I stay out of all that, and talk to everybody. I also take most things that everybody says with a grain of salt, but when they include documentary evidence to back it up, I tend to give their statements more weight!
Best,
Mike
