the GARY MACK dilemna

[David Josephs]

I find the below a bit naive... his livelihood is his vested interest in his "public" position.

An IBM spokesman/representative is not going to ackowledge evidence of thier involvement in the Holocaust by helping the Nazis find, and inventory the Jews of Europe.... regardless of the evidence... And Condi Rice is not going to tell us they were expecting airplanes to hit buildings....

His posting on these forums can be seen as presenting the views of the Museum, just like when I say somehting in public about the Lottery I work for... the assumption is it represents the position of the company and not my personal beliefs.... the fact that he allows some of the more sanitary exchanges to be posted (and I am no expert on ALL his posted comversations... anything contrversial in there?), shows he's not "scared", just careful.

Gary's been ever so helpful of late to whoever asks. I've seen a lot of "Gary Mack Emailed and said" on a few forums of late.

Yeah, what would we do without him?

Maybe one of these days he'll strap on a pair and start posting for himself.

It will never happen, he is to scared

Gary also writes me from time to time and we have some very intersting email exchanges, some of which he agrees to let me post and share....

Most recently though, not so much, as our discussion has turned to why the Museum does not give equal (or any for that matter) time to any of the competing THEORIES that have as much if not more reliable evidence than the Governmental investigative THEORIES that are put forth so effectively by the museum.

without getting into the details, as he requested our recent exchange not be posted,I was going to send this reply but felt it more valuable to post.... I hope you agree...

and therein lies the problem facing the real citizens of the US... the continuing attitudes of people such as yourself, who actually have the opportunity to change history to reflect reality as opposed to the fantasy fostered upon us all these years. When you finally realize that what you are defending is the unsupportable (at least with verifiable evidence) OPINION of the most powerful and corrupt people the US has known... you could also realize that YOUR voice could carry significant weight in setting the record a bit more straight.

I realize you enjoy your position, salary, authority and influence and are most likely not empowered to make the waves necessary to bring light to the truth. Claiming there is no “evidence” in the face of it may be the company line or you just refusing to see. Not a single piece of your rebuttal to me refutes the conclusion that “we can’t place Oswald with a rifle in that window”...

Or Wade’s knowing he was FBI, or the Exec session where they simply cannot figure out how JFK is hit in the throat from the back...

or the fact that the 2 shots heard almost of top of each other by people in all areas of the Plaza makes it impossible for even that Rifle to have been the lone culprit... let alone Oswald

it’s as if none of this exists for you or the Museum

or if it does, you conveniently forget that the evidence FOR the conspiracy is presented BY the very investigation/commissions/panels you defend.....

It’s as if you’ve completely dismissed the US Standard Operating Policy of maintaining civil unrest to justify the attacks on civil liberties and the growth of the military/governmental machine...

As if the weight of evidence brought forth by experts and researchers without your agenda, without your fears or without “their” control, is simply something you can dismiss with a wave and an email.

Weitzman wrote what he wrote, Baker wrote what he did, and at least 60 people heard and/or saw evidence of shots from OTHER than the 6th floor...

But as Douglass, Salandria and others have brought to light... the why and what for, and what happened next of the assassination points to the real situation that most of the people on this planet understand as being the real history of the event. and when the final documents see the light of day, and we can conclude they are indeed real and not created to maintain the charade... the Lone Nut, "Oswald did it alone crowd" can finally just go away to their place in history along side those who believe the earth was flat and the universe revolved around us.....

sadly, those who subscribe to the “universe (as we define it) revolves around us” belief are all too real and all too well entrenched so as anyone pushing too hard in it’s face... simply gets eliminated.

Gary,

thanks for all you do help with and support... the 6th Floor Museum should, in my opinion, be the one place that offers its visitors all the relevant theories in the same light.... the “government endorsed one” given the poor evidence that supports it should not be offered to the exclusion of all others.

But then again, does the Museum of Natural History also present the notion that the Universe and World were created in 6 days about 6000 years ago along side their dinosaur bones exhibit? One has substantial evidence backing it while the other requires FAITH.

The time has come for the FAITH in Oswald, the lone killer, to be put aside... and let the FACTS speak for themselves

[Guest Robert Morrow]

The role of the Sixth Floor Museum is to cover up for the murderers of John Kennedy. It is not to present the truth or anything close to the truth. I have the lowest respect for the management over there. The Sixth Floor Museum is a farce - filled with many lies and inaccuracie - as it recycles the lies of LBJ, CIA, FBI and the Warren Commission (Allen Dulles Commission).

I do think it is important for folks to take the tour of the Sickth Floor Museum. Because it helps you understand the enemy. You get to see the 1950's Soviet style lies and propaganda in action as it stubbornly pushes the discredited lone nutter theory. Also, remember that the Dallas police have told Robert Groden that Gary Mack and the Sickth Floor museum management are the ones who are trying to harass American hero Robert Groden off the Grassy Knoll. Robert Groden just won his 81st court case against the city of Dallas.

There is a tiny section devoted to "conspiracies" at the Sixth Floor Museum. It mentions the Russians and the Fidel Castro Cubans as two of the first laughable theories. Then it mentions "investigative agencies" as a possible source of the murder of JFK - it can barely write the words CIA - as if the CIA were some sort of "investigative agency."

Another possible theory that it includes is SPACE ALIENS as being responsible for the JFK assassination!! That is a pretty pathetic attempt to discredit the ugly reality of the Coup d'Etat, aka the JFK assassination. Actually, now that I think about it, space aliens are more likely to have killed JFK than a lone nut LHO who was in turn killed by a lone nut Jack Ruby.

If you want to know what I think - just read below and send me an email to Morrow321@aol.com and I will send you my updated "LBJ and CIA killed JFK" file

Robert Morrow

There are a lot of good web links and other info in this file. I would SKIM it first and see what catches your eye. Also, if you have any questions or comments, feel free to call me at 512-306-1510. Lyndon Johnson made a dirty deal with CIA Republicans to murder John Kennedy in the 1963 Coup dEtat. (People like Clint Murchison Sr., H.L. Hunt, Nelson Rockefeller, David Rockefeller, top Nelson Rockefeller aide Henry Kissinger, George Herbert Walker Bush and Gen. Edward Lansdale all are excellent candidates for elite sponsorship.) Lyndon Johnson and Allen Dulles may very well have been co-CEOs of the JFK assassination; with the CIA in charge of the killing of JFK, and Lyndon Johnson and (his close friend and neighbor of 19 years in Washington, DC) FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in charge of the cover up.

Clint Murchison, Sr more so than even H.L. Hunt was a key player in the JFK assassination because of his close ties to the inner core of US intelligence (Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller), close ties to Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI, bankers Rockefellers; Murchison was even friends with key Kennedy-hater mafia godfather Carlos Marcellos of New Orleans. Not only that, Murchison, Sr. was a patient and partner of Dr. Alton Oschner, the former president of the American Cancer Society and who ran covert cancer research for the CIA. Oschner, likewise was a Kennedy-hater. John Simkin: One of Ochsner's friends described him as being like a fundamentalist preacher in the sense that the fight against communism was the only subject that he would talk about, or even allow you to talk about, in his presence.

The Warren Commission should have really been called the Allen Dulles Commission because he controlled it and made it the farce that it was. Dulles was probably an elite sponsor (i.e. murderer), as well as certainly Lyndon Johnson. The 3 hardcore cover up artists on the Warren Commission were the 3 Council on Foreign Relations members: Allen Dulles (president CFR 1946-50), John J. McCloy (then chairman of the CFR 1953-1970) and Gerald Ford (CFR member, later president). John J. McCloy was a Rockefeller man, former head of Chase Manhattan bank, and very deep US intelligence since the OSS days. John J. McCloys nickname was Chairman of the American Establishment, and he mixed at the highest levels of business, intelligence and he was close to the Kennedy-hating Texas business elite. Cover up artist Gerald Ford was secretly reporting to Hoover and the FBI what the Warren Commission was doing. In 1970, Newsweek called Gerald Ford the CIAs man in Congress. The CFR especially 40 years ago, was heavily Rockefeller influenced and it top players were deep CIA.

The CIA has been called the military wing of the CFR; and actually that is not too far from the truth. The CFR was in its heyday from 1950-1990.

Here is an absolutely spectacular article why the National Security State murdered John Kennedy: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig10/marshall10.1.html John Kennedy was despised by and did not control his CIA nor his Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Lyndon Johnsons reasons to murder were out of his desperation and fear of what would become of him after his imminent expulsion from the 1964 Democratic ticket and his fears of going to jail over the exploding Bobby Baker scandal. LIFE magazine, being fed extremely damaging info by Robert Kennedy, was set to run an expose on Lyndon Johnson that would blow him out of the water once and for all (Dec. 6th issue, but due to be printed and mailed on 11/29/63). Bobby Baker was the protégé of a wildly corrupt LBJ in the Senate; Lyndon Johnson was like both a dad and a big brother to Bobby Baker (who named two of his children after LBJ: Lynda and Lyndon). Both Lyndon Johnson and Bobby Baker were receiving tremendous amounts of under-the-table money while Johnson was running the Senate. The Kennedys and LIFE Magazine were literally days away from politically executing Lyndon Johnson with the rope of the unraveling Bobby Baker scandal. After vaporizing the despised Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy was going to replace LBJ most likely with Terry Sanford of North Carolina or possibly his good friend George Smathers of Florida as VP on the 1964 Democratic ticket.

The Kennedys and Lyndon Johnson were having a sub rosa fight: Jack and Robert Kennedy brought knives to the battle and Lyndon Johnson brought guns and it was settled on 11/22/63 at 12:30 PM in Dallas.

Lately, I have been studying the role of McGeorge Bundy, the National Security Advisor for JFK and Henry Cabot Lodge, JFKs insubordinate ambassador to Vietnam who Kennedy was planning to fire on Monday, 11/25/63. It is probable that both McGeorge Bundy and Henry Cabot Lodge were involved some way with the JFK assassination. McGeorge Bundy, astonishingly, was already drafting sharp escalations to JFKs Vietnam policy NSAM 273 (which JFK would not have approved) on 11/21/63, the night before the 1963 Coup dEtat! Bundy later ran the Ford Foundation from 1966-1979.

JFKs Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, who ran the Rockefeller Foundation from 1952-1961, and was also a hawk on Vietnam, is another one who merits close scrutiny in the Coup of 1963. Kennedy had appointed Rusk because it was unlikely that the Senate would confirm JFKs first choice J. William Fulbright, who later became a prominent opponent of the Vietnam War. After the 1963 Coup dEtat, Rusk lasted through all the blood and guts of Vietnam and all the way through Jan., 1969, as Johnsons Secretary of State. Walt Rostow (CFR), another Vietnam hawk, replaced McGeorge Bundy (CFR) as National Security Advisor in 1966. The CFR, not John Kennedy, lusted for the Vietnam War.

The midlevel murderers (field operations) of JFK would include CIA guys like James Angleton, Richard Helms, E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, David Morales, William King Harvey and David Atlee Phillips. Deputy Harry Weatherford is a good candidate to have been on the Records Building as a sniper. Influential mobster Johnny Roselli was especially close friends with the CIAs William King Harvey, a rabid Kennedy hater. The most likely mafia godfathers involved would be Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante, particularly in the Jack Ruby murder of Oswald and perhaps in the JFK Assassination as well and other murders in the post assassination cover up.

My current thinking on US intelligence agent Lee Harvey Oswald is that he was indeed involved in the JFK assassination, but he was a patsy who shot NO ONE that day, neither John Kennedy nor Officer J.D. Tippit. Both murders were complete frame jobs. Oswald was a fake defector to Russia and his behavior in New Orleans 1963 was all about Oswalds sheep dipping as he passed out pro-Castro flyers and pretended to be a pro-Castro Marxist. Meanwhile Oswald was working in concert in New Orleans with folks like David Ferrie and Guy Bannister whose politics were the equivalent of a 1960s Strom Thurmond or Jesse Helms. Oswalds fake public persona as a pro-Casto Marxist meant that he was an ideal pick as a patsy and his likely knowledge of and/or participation in the JFK Assassination meant that he had to be murdered quickly. The folks who killed Oswald wanted a dead Red not a talking head. The JFK assassination was a deception provocation intended to facilitate a US military invasion of Cuba. It was that bad and ugly. A US invasion of Cuba might have provoked a broader war with Russia and from the point of view of some like Air Force General Curtis LeMay that was fine because, astoundingly, he wanted to wage and win a nuclear WWIII. Curtis LeMay hated Kennedy so much that a child could have recruited him into a plot to kill Kennedy. LeMay told Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis that he was an appeaser equivalent to Neville Chamberlain for not bombing Cuba.

That was the pool of sharks John Kennedy was swimming in: a psychopathic serial killer Vice-President Lyndon Johnson who was literally murdering a string of people down in Texas and who was waging a sub rosa war with the Kennedys, an out-of-control CIA hell bent on a coup; an FBI director Hoover who detested JFK and who was close friends with LBJ, and a JCS military brass who wanted to invade Cuba, wage the war in Vietnam, and Curtis Lemay who, according to Robert McNamara, wanted to wage full scale nuclear war with Russia, giving them the Sunday punch while the USA still had first strike capability. Add to that the white hot mafia hatred that Robert Kennedy was engendering with his prosecutions. This same mafia had been working hand in glove with their friends the CIA to take out Castro in Cuba. Think of these enemies as fasces: a bundle of wooden sticks with an axe blade emerging from the center, which is an image that traditionally symbolizes summary power and jurisdiction, and/or strength through unity.

The elite domestic murderers of JFK did it for many reasons, both personal and ideological. At the core it was Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, and the shadow government of Texas oil barons and the Rockefellers. It was not either/or the Western Cowboys or the Eastern Yankees who murdered John Kennedy: it was the elites of both.

I am always will to learn and I am always willing to change my mind. Two excellent books to read on the JFK assassination are 1) LBJ: Mastermind of JFKs Assassination (2010) by Phillip Nelson http://www.lbj-themastermind.com/ and 2) JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why it Matters (2008) by James Douglass. Review: http://www.ctka.net/2008/jfk_unspeakable.html

Without a doubt, top honors for being biggest source for disinformation on the Coup of 1963 has been the NY Times whose reporting on the JFK assassination has been the equivalent of 1950s Soviet style propaganda, i.e. completely fraudulent and parroting the 1960s fantastic whoppers of LBJ, FBI, CIA and the Warren Commission. CBS News, ABC News, the Washington Post and the former LIFE magazine and CIA assets in other major media have been equally bad. LIFE Magazine actually bought the rights to the Zapruder film early on and never showed it once to the American people in video form., which would have revealed the incriminating back and to the left head snap of John Kennedy, all but proving a kill shot from the Grassy Knoll (grassy knoll shooting area being an extremely close 33 yards away from JFK). Finally, when American hero Robert Groden showed the Zapruder film on Geraldo on ABC in 1975, millions of Americans knew without a doubt what a sham the Warren Commission was.

A special word about the Council on Relations role in the 1963 Coup dEtat and cover up: no other organization has been more responsible for the murder and cover up of John Kennedy than the CFR. Elite CFR members such as Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush were probably sponsors of the JFK assassination. Certainly leadership CFR members such as Allen Dulles, John J. McCloy, and Gerald Ford played the most critical roles in the Warren Commission farce. Add in cover up roles played by Henry Kissinger (CFR), McGeorge Bundy (CFR), Nicholas Katzenbach (CFR), Jack Valenti (CFR), Bill Moyers (CFR), James Reston NY Times (CFR), Anthony Lewis NY Times (CFR), Kenneth Gilmore Readers Digest (CFR), Stephen Rosenfeld Washington Post (CFR), Bobbie Ray Inman (CFR), … the list is almost endless. Note two things: 1) they are the key establishment players of BOTH major political parties spanning decades 2) their power and influence is directly proportional to the fantastic whoppers they tell about in the 1963 Coup dEtat. For the older CFR members it is a case of PARTICIPATION and COVER UP in the JFK assassination. For the younger ones such as George Will (CFR), Charles Krauthammer (CFR), David Gergen (CFR), John Segenthaler (CFR), Michael Beschloss (CFR) it is a case of WILLFUL IGNORANCE as they still push the Big Lie. Note: Chris Matthews of Hardball, another willfully ignorant man, is close friends with Richard Haass, current president of CFR. I have never seen political guru Michael Barone, and Bilderberger attendee, say anything credible on the JFK assassination.

Question: do we really expect the CFR to admit that some of its elite members slaughtered John Kennedy and many more played integral roles in the cover up? No, but it is important to highlight that the Council on Foreign Relations has stunk up the place with tremendous amounts of radioactive horse manure relating to the 1963 Coup dEtat.

The Discovery Channel has put out some incredibly bogus, poorly done disinfo presentations such as Inside the Target Car. Any MSM site that features Vincent Bugliosi, Gerald Posner, Gus Russo, or Dale Meyers prominently and positively is giving you counterfeit money. If you google JFK assassination the first 2 links that come up are lone nutter controlled disinfo sites: 1) Wikipedia 2) John McAdams site. John McAdams is a very low regarded man who basically controls JFK related content on Wikipedia as well as his own site. Both Wikipedia and the NY Times are both tremendously dishonest sources for information relating to the 1963 Coup dEtat. Finally, another major source of disinformation on the Coup of 1963 is the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, which blithely recycles the shredded vapors of the Warren Commission, as if it had an ounce of truth in it. Gary Mack, the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum, simply does not have credibility on the JFK assassination.

The best discussion boards on the internet for good info are 1) Education Forum 2) Deep Politics Forum 3) JFKmurdersolved.com and 4) Mary Ferrell Foundation www.maryferrell.org 5) JFK Lancer. On Facebook, the premier spot is JFK-The Grassy Knoll Witnesses (run by Rusty Yardum) http://www.facebook.com/pages/JFK-The-Grassy-Knoll-Witnesses/115305938487641 . Black Op radios web site www.blackopradio.com (Len Osanic) is an excellent place to listen to high quality interviews with folks such as JFK expert Jim DiEugenio. Deep Politics Quarterly (Walt Brown) http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/ and www.ctka.net (Jim DiEugenio) are 2 other quality spots on the internet.

As for videos, I highly recommend going to You Tube and watching the extremely important The Men Who Killed Kennedy - (episodes 7, 8, 9). Much of these episodes focus on the role of Lyndon Johnson in the 1963 Coup dEtat and they were BANNED from the History Channel because they were so accurate. Jack Valenti (CFR) organized a suppression campaign on the videos along with Lady Bird Johnson, Warren Commission con man Gerald Ford (CFR), Jimmy Carter (CFR) and Bill Moyers (CFR). Also, watch Jesse Venturas 2010 Conspiracy Theory show on the JFK assassination (on You Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHUKPXR5TbQ ). In addition, I recommend JFK the movie by Oliver Stone, directors cut. Oliver Stone, despite immense criticism in the MSM by CIA assets, pretty much nailed the JFK assassination. It was a full blown Coup dEtat by Lyndon Johnson, the CIA and key elements of the U.S. military.

Robert Morrow Austin, TX 512-306-1510

Edited December 17, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[Dean Hagerman]

I find the below a bit naive... his livelihood is his vested interest in his "public" position.

An IBM spokesman/representative is not going to ackowledge evidence of thier involvement in the Holocaust by helping the Nazis find, and inventory the Jews of Europe.... regardless of the evidence... And Condi Rice is not going to tell us they were expecting airplanes to hit buildings....

His posting on these forums can be seen as presenting the views of the Museum, just like when I say somehting in public about the Lottery I work for... the assumption is it represents the position of the company and not my personal beliefs.... the fact that he allows some of the more sanitary exchanges to be posted (and I am no expert on ALL his posted comversations... anything contrversial in there?), shows he's not "scared", just careful.

Gary's been ever so helpful of late to whoever asks. I've seen a lot of "Gary Mack Emailed and said" on a few forums of late.

Yeah, what would we do without him?

Maybe one of these days he'll strap on a pair and start posting for himself.

It will never happen, he is to scared

Gary also writes me from time to time and we have some very intersting email exchanges, some of which he agrees to let me post and share....

Most recently though, not so much, as our discussion has turned to why the Museum does not give equal (or any for that matter) time to any of the competing THEORIES that have as much if not more reliable evidence than the Governmental investigative THEORIES that are put forth so effectively by the museum.

without getting into the details, as he requested our recent exchange not be posted,I was going to send this reply but felt it more valuable to post.... I hope you agree...

and therein lies the problem facing the real citizens of the US... the continuing attitudes of people such as yourself, who actually have the opportunity to change history to reflect reality as opposed to the fantasy fostered upon us all these years. When you finally realize that what you are defending is the unsupportable (at least with verifiable evidence) OPINION of the most powerful and corrupt people the US has known... you could also realize that YOUR voice could carry significant weight in setting the record a bit more straight.

I realize you enjoy your position, salary, authority and influence and are most likely not empowered to make the waves necessary to bring light to the truth. Claiming there is no “evidence” in the face of it may be the company line or you just refusing to see. Not a single piece of your rebuttal to me refutes the conclusion that “we can’t place Oswald with a rifle in that window”...

Or Wade’s knowing he was FBI, or the Exec session where they simply cannot figure out how JFK is hit in the throat from the back...

or the fact that the 2 shots heard almost of top of each other by people in all areas of the Plaza makes it impossible for even that Rifle to have been the lone culprit... let alone Oswald

it’s as if none of this exists for you or the Museum

or if it does, you conveniently forget that the evidence FOR the conspiracy is presented BY the very investigation/commissions/panels you defend.....

It’s as if you’ve completely dismissed the US Standard Operating Policy of maintaining civil unrest to justify the attacks on civil liberties and the growth of the military/governmental machine...

As if the weight of evidence brought forth by experts and researchers without your agenda, without your fears or without “their” control, is simply something you can dismiss with a wave and an email.

Weitzman wrote what he wrote, Baker wrote what he did, and at least 60 people heard and/or saw evidence of shots from OTHER than the 6th floor...

But as Douglass, Salandria and others have brought to light... the why and what for, and what happened next of the assassination points to the real situation that most of the people on this planet understand as being the real history of the event. and when the final documents see the light of day, and we can conclude they are indeed real and not created to maintain the charade... the Lone Nut, "Oswald did it alone crowd" can finally just go away to their place in history along side those who believe the earth was flat and the universe revolved around us.....

sadly, those who subscribe to the “universe (as we define it) revolves around us” belief are all too real and all too well entrenched so as anyone pushing too hard in it’s face... simply gets eliminated.

Gary,

thanks for all you do help with and support... the 6th Floor Museum should, in my opinion, be the one place that offers its visitors all the relevant theories in the same light.... the “government endorsed one” given the poor evidence that supports it should not be offered to the exclusion of all others.

But then again, does the Museum of Natural History also present the notion that the Universe and World were created in 6 days about 6000 years ago along side their dinosaur bones exhibit? One has substantial evidence backing it while the other requires FAITH.

The time has come for the FAITH in Oswald, the lone killer, to be put aside... and let the FACTS speak for themselves

You have no clue David

Gary Mack is scared because he talks trash to me in PMs but would never post the same trash he talks to me on the forum

He told me in a PM that "I know nothing about the assassination" and that I was "Stupid to believe in Jack White and any alteration theory"

So yes he is SCARED to post that on the forum, yet he can post that all day long to me in PMs

Now does it look "naive" to you David?

You could have just asked me first why I would say that instead of sticking your foot in your mouth by making a thread about it when im sure you could have guessed that Gary and I had some sort of history

Great job David!

[Guest Robert Morrow]

It really does seem silly for someone to be a MEMBER of a JFK assassination forum and do NO POSTING. Especially if you are the curator of a museum that supposedly has information and plenty of disinformation about the JFK assassination.

The whole point of joining a disussion board is to discuss. Anybody on the internet can read this stuff or be lurkers.

So I do think it is funny that Gary Mack joins a discussion board then does no posting of any type (except for perhaps many years ago). I really don't think Gary Mack has any credibility when it comes to the JFK assassination.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

It really does seem silly for someone to be a MEMBER of a JFK assassination forum and do NO POSTING.

[/Quote]

Here we go again. This topic has been hacked to death ad nauseam, and it is tiresome to see NEW MEMBERS rehashing stuff that the forum has discussed and is already tired of.

Gary Mack is a longtime JFK researcher who has a great deal of knowledge to impart to researchers on this case. As many members here can attest, Gary is extremely GENEROUS in sharing his knowledge with fellow researchers, and I know I speak for many when i express my thanks to him. I can guarantee that, when Gary retires, the next curator will be a pale shadow by comparison.

I say this even though Gary & I are on opposite poles on this case (I predict that some day Gary will see reason). Gary thinks Lee Oswald was guilty, while I have no doubt that Lee Oswald was completely innocent.

I really don't think Gary Mack has any credibility when it comes to the JFK assassination.

Mr. Morrow: You may be right on some of your assertions, but you are a novice in this case and should be more respectful of your elders, among whom is Gary Mack.

Gary mack is PERFECTLY CORRECT in accusing the DPD of complicity in the murder of Lee Oswald, and his comments are worthy of every researchers attention.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-did-jack-ruby-enter-basement.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-did-jack-ruby-enter-basement.html

[Bill Miller]

My two cents:

I think that all too often that we seemingly allow our anger and bias towards the assassination stem out in areas where it doesn't really belong. When I first started talking with Gary Mack after many years of going on my own when it came to absorbing JFK assassination evidence, I felt much the same way some of you do. However, once I had gone to the Museum and learned more about its function and Gary's role there ... I began to feel like a selfish individual who had been standing too close too the mirror which had been preventing me from seeing the bigger picture. There are some hard facts that I at one time, as well as others are doing presently, have been overlooking.

To start with, my understanding of the purpose of the Museum there in the Plaza is to stand as a 'historical museum' which deals with the assassination of President Kennedy. Gary Mack doesn't own the 6th Floor Museum, but is merely employed by the Museum as the curator. The definition of a curator is this ... "the custodian of a collection (as a museum or library)". The key word to remember is "historical". I think we all to often forget that Gary is also a researcher of the assassination in his own right. The man has an opportunity there to see first hand a wealth of data and materials collected on the assassination of President Kennedy. Who among us wouldn't want to trade places with Mack ... I know that I damn sure would!

Now what about the next term that comes to mind known as 'a conflict of interest'? A conflict of interest is said to occur when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other. Gary Mack has an obligation to his employer to separate his personal beliefs on what may have happened in Dealey Plaza from what history has recorded concerning what happened there to President Kennedy on 11/22/63. For instance we know that Gary supports he and Jack's work on the Badge Man, but none of us can certainly expect him to be allowed to go promote his views on that matter while representing the Museum which sole function is to inform the public of the history of JFK's murder. I cannot help but feel that if hard verifiable evidence was to be presented tomorrow that would change or add to the 'historical record', then the Museum would welcome it. It's up to us to change history, not Gary Mack ... at least not while on the job as the Museum's Curator.

I could probably go on for hours about why Gary Mack cannot involve himself at this time in doing more than what he does to satisfy the conspiracy aspect of JFK's murder and there will always be some individuals who seem to live for blaming and criticizing others because its easier than them taking on a more demanding leading role in the bringing about change in the history of the assassination of our 35th President of the United States, but that blame should fall on us - not Gary Mack. I can only imagine what it must be like to be in Gary's position ... I can only guess how hard it must be at times to try and remain neutral and stay focused on his responsibilities as a Curator of such a large collection of records. Who knows but what maybe one day Gary will retire from the Museum and then sit down and write out his own feelings and beliefs as to what happened on Elm Street so many years ago, but as my Father used to tell me ... "There is a time and a place for everything". For now I am just happy that he'll answer our questions pertaining to data sources, allow us to make appointments to come and see requested materials when available, and to maintain a level of impartiality to all interested parties when it comes to the history of President Kennedy's murder whether a person believes Oswald acted alone or believes that there was a conspiracy that resulted in JFK's death.

Bill Miller

Edited December 19, 2010 by Bill Miller

[Guest Robert Morrow]

It really does seem silly for someone to be a MEMBER of a JFK assassination forum and do NO POSTING.

[/Quote]

Here we go again. This topic has been hacked to death ad nauseam, and it is tiresome to see NEW MEMBERS rehashing stuff that the forum has discussed and is already tired of.

Gary Mack is a longtime JFK researcher who has a great deal of knowledge to impart to researchers on this case. As many members here can attest, Gary is extremely GENEROUS in sharing his knowledge with fellow researchers, and I know I speak for many when i express my thanks to him. I can guarantee that, when Gary retires, the next curator will be a pale shadow by comparison.

I say this even though Gary & I are on opposite poles on this case (I predict that some day Gary will see reason). Gary thinks Lee Oswald was guilty, while I have no doubt that Lee Oswald was completely innocent.

I really don't think Gary Mack has any credibility when it comes to the JFK assassination.

Mr. Morrow: You may be right on some of your assertions, but you are a novice in this case and should be more respectful of your elders, among whom is Gary Mack.

Gary mack is PERFECTLY CORRECT in accusing the DPD of complicity in the murder of Lee Oswald, and his comments are worthy of every researchers attention.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-did-jack-ruby-enter-basement.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/how-did-jack-ruby-enter-basement.html

Here is what J. Raymond Carroll who supposedly thinks Lee Harvey Oswald is completely INNOCENT (and absolutely not an US intelligence agent - very key) posted on the profile of David von Pein here at Education Forum. David von Pein of course thinks Lee Harvey Oswald is completely GUILTY of both the JFK assassination and the murder of Officer Tippit.

J. Raymond Carroll

11 Aug 2010 - 22:31

"Hello David. You may feel like an outlaw here, but IMO you are closer to the truth than most of the members. You are correct in thinking that Lee Oswald acted alone."

I think those contradictory positions tell us a lot about J. Raymond Carroll, whose definitely thinks Lee Harvey Oswald was not a US intelligence agent.

Of course, Lee Harvey Oswald almost certainly WAS a US intelligence agent.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Robert Morrow

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Of course, Lee Harvey Oswald almost certainly WAS a US intelligence agent.

As a defender of Lee Oswald, I make no distinction between the Warren Commission & those who accuse him of being a spy, i.e. Robert Morrow & Co.

You are both Oswald accusers, and from where I sit you are both accusing an innocent man.

Sorry Robert, until you mend your ways, I think you are in company that STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN!

[David Josephs]

Dean,

Because he “talks trash” to you, he’s SCARED to post...? that’s rubbish.

The last thing this forum needs, as you (and I for that matter) so often prove, is more trash talking. So if anything, those messages belong in PM’s to you and in emails or other private communications to anyone else.

If we would stick to a discussion of the facts instead of the constant bashing, the archives of this website would be 1/3 the size.

Poor Dean... big bad GaryM attacked you. You have a past. That's nice. You know what you know and present your case quite well, what difference does it make what GMack PMs you? I disagree with much of what he sends me, and have encountered the same kind of off-topic “discussion” from him as with others on the live forum.

History or not, you posted your thoughts on an open forum and I defended Gary’s position, criticized his support of the “official” conclusions, and discussed options and alternatives. Being SCARED has nothing to do with it. Bill Miller presents Gary’s difficult position quite well - thanks Bill. And let’s try to remember, Gary’s actions are nothing compared to the likes of Bugliosi, Myers and Posner who’s influence is much more substantial and who'se opposition must remain ever vigil - and I thank them all for it.

and They don’t post here either... they scared? or just smart to steer clear of the insult fest that would be heaped upon them? Even for those of us “on the same side” - insults are the norm... there is no CT consensus... and as Salandria put it, that was one of the main objectives of leaking the conspiracy to begin with. I tend to agree.

It’s interesting how you can read thru my posts and call me “naïve”.

Great job? You got that right. Thanks.

---------

Mr Carroll... thank you too for putting Gary’s situation into a better perspective. We don’t have to agree with it but in terms of presenting the “government’s case” he is most assuredly the more generous in his allowed concessions than DVP, or his ilk.

Furthermore, to address your “topic rehash” comment. I’ve been in and around this and other forums for 10 years, this one just over 6... my experience is that the main topics do get revisited quite often and are routinely debated. So what... don’t read them and don’t post on them if this is just old hat. But rest assured, NEW MEMBERS or lurkers will read what’s on the first page of topics well before searching the archives for old, outdated information.

So I’d like to know, with all the success and money from presenting the conspiracy side of JFK (Lane, Stone, Costner, Ventura) – where’s the CIA/LBJ/JEH/MAFIA Museum in Dealey Plaza? or wherever it should be....

-----

Robert... cutting and pasting what is an excellent presentation was not the intent of this thread. And as I elude to... the museum can not, and should not present every far out scenario that comes along.... but we must agree, like your conviction about LBJ, that there are 3-5 very solid possibilities as suggested by the evidence. Interpretation and analysis of this evidence results in disagreement among CTers which in turn fuels the non-CTers to sit back and laugh.

But interpretation and analysis is what has brought the majority of the world to an overwhelming understanding that “something ain’t right”.

The question is whether or not it’s Gary role thru the Museum to expand it’s presentation to include the available information in support of the other Theories that DON’T rely in the Single Bullet THEORY, and let people decide for themselves...

Or just stick to history as it is written?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Mr. Carroll... thank you too for putting Gary’s situation into a better perspective. We don’t have to agree with it but in terms of presenting the “government’s case” he is most assuredly the more generous in his allowed concessions than DVP, or his ilk.

Seems you missed what I wrote, David. Gary Mack is accusing the DPD of involvement in the MURDER of Lee Oswald. Gary is not promoting the "Government Case" on that issue, although he IS promoting the absurd theory that Lee Oswald -- who had no motive -- murdered JFK.

[David Josephs]

Mr. Carroll... thank you too for putting Garys situation into a better perspective. We dont have to agree with it but in terms of presenting the governments case he is most assuredly the more generous in his allowed concessions than DVP, or his ilk.

Seems you missed what I wrote, David. Gary Mack is accusing the DPD of involvement in the MURDER of Lee Oswald. Gary is not promoting the "Government Case" on that issue, although he IS promoting the absurd theory that Lee Oswald -- who had no motive -- murdered JFK.

And I think you missed mine Ray.

If you are saying that Gary Mack has publically accused the DPD of involvement in the murder of Oswald, I see this as a prime example of how he is much more willing to see other possibilities than "Ruby did it out of Love for the Kennedy's" and the rest of the government's position. He is obviously willing, when he feels the evidence supports it, to present an opinion contrary to the official story.... we don't have to give him a medal, but he's not Dale Myers or VB either.

And yes, I believe his position is that there has been no "official evidence" to show that Oswald did not shoot the president... or that others did... just as you say there is no evidence proving he was involved with any intelligence agencies.

Why are his dismissals of the evidence any different than yours?

Edited December 17, 2010 by David Josephs

[Dean Hagerman]

Dean,

Because he “talks trash” to you, he’s SCARED to post...? that’s rubbish.

The last thing this forum needs, as you (and I for that matter) so often prove, is more trash talking. So if anything, those messages belong in PM’s to you and in emails or other private communications to anyone else.

If we would stick to a discussion of the facts instead of the constant bashing, the archives of this website would be 1/3 the size.

Poor Dean... big bad GaryM attacked you. You have a past. That's nice. You know what you know and present your case quite well, what difference does it make what GMack PMs you? I disagree with much of what he sends me, and have encountered the same kind of off-topic “discussion” from him as with others on the live forum.

History or not, you posted your thoughts on an open forum and I defended Gary’s position, criticized his support of the “official” conclusions, and discussed options and alternatives. Being SCARED has nothing to do with it. Bill Miller presents Gary’s difficult position quite well - thanks Bill. And let’s try to remember, Gary’s actions are nothing compared to the likes of Bugliosi, Myers and Posner who’s influence is much more substantial and who'se opposition must remain ever vigil - and I thank them all for it.

and They don’t post here either... they scared? or just smart to steer clear of the insult fest that would be heaped upon them? Even for those of us “on the same side” - insults are the norm... there is no CT consensus... and as Salandria put it, that was one of the main objectives of leaking the conspiracy to begin with. I tend to agree.

It’s interesting how you can read thru my posts and call me “naïve”.

Great job? You got that right. Thanks.

Lame

[David Josephs]

That's so eloquent Dean....

Thanks for sharing the extent of your insight and knowledge on yet another thread.

Your valuable contribution continues.

Read the entire post and address the question about the museum's responsibility if you want to contribute,

Otherwise, start your own thread about Gary and blast away... this one's about his dilemna, and the CTer's dilemna of getting what we feel is factual information to a wider audience.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

J. Raymond Carroll

11 Aug 2010 - 22:31

"Hello David. You may feel like an outlaw here, but IMO you are closer to the truth than most of the members. You are correct in thinking that Lee Oswald acted alone."

If this is true, I sure a heck would liketo see Mr Carroll explain it. Instead of sidestepping it.

Of course it's true. Just go see the post over at David von Pein's profile page:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=6334

You can always count on J. Raymond Carroll to chime in often to say US intelligence was not involved in the JFK assassination and that US intelligence agent Lee Harvey Oswald was not US intelligence.

[Guest Tom Scully]

IMO, it is 2010 and the main sources of influence on the subjects, - JFK _ and the Kennedy Assassination do not revolve around Gary Mack. The results of a google search of the term, JFK, show the wikipedia.org article in the top spot and McAdams's url.: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,18167,27084&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=jfk&cp=2&pf=p&sclient=psy&site=&source=hp&aq=0&aqi=&aql=&oq=jf&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=83f87efc6f926f13 displayed above the link for the Sixth Floor Museum. This is quite a feat, considering that the url of the Sixth Floor Museum is JFK.org!

For all of the criticism directed at Gary Mack, and this is not intended to be a post supporting or defending him;

compared to the right wing extemist, catholic conservative activism plaguing the POV and the agenda of John McAdams, Gary Mack is not controversial. To my knowledge, unlike McAdams, Gary Mack has no alliance with an obsessed, wikipedia administrator who literally controls the content of wikipedia articles on LHO and on the Kennedy Assassination.

IMO, McAdams and his buddy at wikipedia are today and tomorrow's challenges, Gary Mack and the ongoing conflict with Robert Groden are challenges of the past. This is not my conclusion, it is what google serves up to the tens of millions who search these terms. Threats cannot be effectively confronted and weakened unless they are prioritized.

It doesn't take much time, reading McAdams's blog posts and his reaction to the appointment of Marquette's new president, to recognize that McAdams is nuts....incoherent compared to almost any serious researcher. The results of the edits of the wikipedia articles on LHO and the Kennedy Assassination by wiki admin gamaliel are extremist disinformation, compared to what Gary Mack brings to the table. I think too much attention is devoted to objecting to Gary Mack, and not enough to objecting to the much bigger problems of McAdams and gamaliel, and in determining the actual level of support for McAdams's "work" by the Marquette Univ. administration and the Jesuit organization it answers to.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Tom Scully