Myra Bronstein

"...Even with large turnout at political rallies, the desire to move the crowd into an event does not override security, the Obama campaign says. "The Secret Service would never put anybody in a position of minimizing security for any other goal," the senior campaign advisor said. "They (the Secret Service) have one job to do and they do it 100 percent without cutting any corners."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/st...0538&page=1

'Scuse me while I laugh 'til I cry.

More from the article:

""It is of the utmost importance now that the Secret Service provides the most rigorous protection for Sen. Obama," said ABC News consultant Fawaz Gerges, author of numerous books on national security and the terrorist threat. "It is a serious concern for many Americans in light of the historical precedents with Martin Luther King and President John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy."

To reporters traveling with the candidate, it seems there are visible signs that security around the senator is increasing. On a few recent occasions, armed snipers were spotted on rooftops, including at an outdoor rally in Wilmington, Del., and another in Clemson, S.C., in January. Reporters traveling with the candidate have noted an increase in protective measures, with background checks performed on reporters who have already been with the campaign on a daily basis for months."

...

"Obama said that Lozada-Tirado had previously helped the Obama campaign during their stop in the Dallas area, as well.

"We all have security details whenever we go to a particular city, and Sen. Clinton and I have Secret Service, but it's all done in cooperation with local law enforcement, and oftentimes we get motorcycle details who help set up motorcades and ease traffic when we're traveling into a city and out of a city," Obama said. "It's a reminder of the outstanding work that law enforcement does for us each and every day."

Amen. Sorta.

Hoping for the best...

...

The FBI could enter the case if there was a conspiracy. Of course, the only way to find a conspiracy (other than a small local one) was if the resources of a federal agency could be thrown into the breech to investigate. However, an early "loophole" seemed to get them in the door until LBJ could give Hoover the official go-ahead. This was because the FBI also had the authority to enter if a federal employee or agent had been hit - a law that Hoover himself had pushed for. And as luck would have it - an early report said a Secret Service agent had been killed.

Excellent excellent point Greg.

The (seemingly bogus) report of a dead SS agent served as a mechanism to get the Hoover, best bud of LBJ and kindred spirit, to sic the FBI on the case and take charge of the cover up by telling the WC what to conclude.

Does anyone know when, or if, the report of the dead secret service agent was officially (by FBI and/or news agency) retracted?

If there is benefit to be discerned from the exchanges I recently initiated regarding Gary Mack, I suggest it lies within consideration of the passionately and self-righteously delivered claim by so many posters ostensibly on the side of truth and justice that conspiracy is simply a matter of opinion.

And so Housman is brought to mind ...

What can I do, what can I write

Against the fall of night?

I have reached the conclusion that the fight, at least for me, is best fought elsewhere than in these cyberpages.

The truth may be rendered as a simple statement of fact and is inescapable save through ignorance and/or corruption:

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in the JFK assassination who does not conclude that President Kennedy was murdered by conspirators is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

The field is not mine to cede. I simply move to a different line to stage what passes for an offensive of my own choosing.

To those who, as a consequence of their dementia and/or criminal intent, deny conspiracy, I offer only this: Pray for a cure and/or forgiveness.

To those who choose to continue the fight on this, a ground that your sacrifices have hallowed, I offer my solidarity and respect.

As for me, I shall continue in a different manner to speak and to write against the fall of night.

Watch your newspapers.

Charles R. Drago

February 25, 2008

Charles,

I really hate to lose you, at least in the context of this forum.

There is a middle ground between total withdrawal from the forum and sparring with each and every Mack clone.

Like, maybe say your piece and put the obvious disinfo agents on ignore.

That type won't be persuaded by all the logic in the world because they have an agenda that has nothing to do with truth.

And if you're concerned about undecided third parties being swayed by the propaganda then maybe you can just hope that they can weigh words, the quality not quantity, and decide for themselves.

Maybe you can sleep on it, so to speak.

Myra

Jack White -- I was reading the Gary Mack-Olberman thread and you said you didn't want to buy a book Mack is selling, particularly Brothers by David Talbot. Let me tell you it's well worth it. The book shows how alone Kennedy was in his administration because his Military Joint Chiefs of Staff wanted to bomb Cuba and then invade it. Had they done this, we'd all be dead.

I remember there was a thread here about Brothers, but I doubt I'll ever find it with the lousy search engine. Terry Mauro sent me a copy of the book for which I'm eternally grateful. Brothers shows you what John Kennedy was up against as President. How he had to deal with Curtis LeMay and his other Military Chiefs who hated him. The part about the Cuban Missile Crisis is spellbinding and shocking, to such a degree I believe LeMay was behind the assassination. I think the military ordered it and planned it in minute detail. Kennedy had no friends in his administration. LeMay wanted to bomb Cuba and invade it. Kennedy said the Russians would strike back and then that's the end of the world.

Kennedy also feared that the Military Chiefs would strike Cuba without his knowledge. He had big enemies -- the Military-Industrial Complex, Big Business (US Steel, Bell Helicopter), the richest families ever, especially from Texas, the Cuban Exiles, the CIA and the Mafia.

The book is quite an eye-opener.

Kathy

Kathy...you have misquoted me regarding the Talbot book. What I said was that if the Sixth

Floor museum store sells it, IT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE "ESTABLISHMENT". That is, they

only sell NON-CONTROVERSIAL NON-CONSPIRACY BOOKS. I did not say it was not a good book.

Please quote me correctly. I would not condemn a book I have never seen.

Jack

Kathy, NOW you know that the above is not true. If you think Brothers is a conspiracy book (and I do) then, see, they DO sell conspiracy books at the 6th Floor Museum Bookstore!!!

Hi Kathy:

Well apparently, perhaps Gary does not consider "Brothers" to be a conspiracy book......

He has never referred that they sell, such as Weisberg's, which have been reprinted and are available, nor any of Penn Jones, nor Prouty,

Dr.J.Fetzer's, has he Meager's I forget...as well as others....But has recommended such a Posner's, that has been sold there for some years..

which is the sorriest book ever written on the assassination, with all it's lies, no other word to call them..

Gary has told me and another, in an email a few years back, that he reads the books and then recommends them to the books store, or not..

There have been many in that not pile...and before I am asked yes I do have the email.....

So what it comes down to is what Gary recommends and thinks about a book...

B....

So how can we trust a book if it's peddled in Mack's sham shack?

I thought that this article gives a balanced view of Castro. It is important to realize that Castro is first and foremost a nationalist. He only became a communist because of Eisenhower's reaction to his revolution. That is something JFK eventually grasped and that is why he was involved in negotiations with Castro via Jean Daniel and Lisa Howard in 1963. What JFK was trying to do was to prise Castro away from the communist camp.

The quote by Caleb McCarry is very significant and indicates why the election of Barack Obama is so important.

...

Every Cuban understands that Fidel's resignation, even his death, will not necessarily end their nation's long stand-off with the United States and that, in one way or another, Cuba's future will be, as it has always been, shaped directly or indirectly by decisions made in Washington.

A couple of years ago, Caleb McCarry, the Bush administration's appointee to the post of "Cuba transition coordinator," told me that even if Raul Castro took steps to open up Cuba's economy, such as China has done, it wouldn't alter US policy toward Cuba. "Economic freedoms are important," said McCarry, "but there has to be political freedom too - multiparty democracy. Ultimately, that is what will help Cubans face the legacy of the dictatorship they've lived under and to define a future where reconciliation and freedom is possible. In other words, the solution is a genuine transition which returns sovereignty to the Cuban people, to allow them to decide who their leaders will be." In the absence of that, the administration would "continue to offer a real transition in Cuba, and we will remain firm with the regime".

Such open talk in Washington about promoting "regime change" strikes most of the Cubans I know, including Fidel's detractors, as gallingly interventionist. But this is nothing new; such talk is, in fact, as old as Cuba's nationhood, which was itself brought about by US intervention during the Spanish-American War. With Cuban independence came a mostly unbroken succession of pro-American regimes, some of them cravenly so.[/color]

In other words, until Cuba allows US style predatory capitalism with pillage and plunder privatization, the US will continue to ostracize Cuba.

Did I miss anything?

Writing for the Jamaica Gleaner, Hartley Neita writes:

History Will Absolve Castro: http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/200.../cleisure4.html

Neita's bio: http://www.prsj.org/prsj.dti?page=bios/hartleyneita

Fantastic commentary.

"Education is free. Not just tuition, but all aspects of education. We are just about to return to free tuition.

Health care is free. We are about to introduce this here."

History will not absolve us unless, like Churchill, the guilty write it.

"... It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. ...".

Theodore Roosevelt

"Citizenship in a Republic"

Speech at the Sorbonne, Paris

April 23, 1910

And with that I leave you in Peace.

This quote says is perfectly.

And it reminds me of my all time favorite quote, which is at the top of my sig line.

Secret Service defends security at Obama rally in Dallas: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/489920.html

Thanks Mike.

A noteworthy blurb from the article you linked to:

"This relaxed security was unbelievably stupid, especially in Dallas," Jeff Adams of Berkeley, Calif., said in an e-mail to the Star-Telegram, noting the assassination of President Kennedy in Dallas more than four decades ago.

Others said they had recently attended large political events, many for Obama, where security screening was halted. Jeremy Dibbell of Boston said in an e-mail that he attended an Obama event in Boston at which "the same thing happened there. We waited for hours in line as people were screened, and then suddenly everyone was just allowed in without going through any inspection at all."

May I have the distinction of being the first to say on this forum that Obama is going to be killed? When I mentioned it, another member said we shouldn't be talking about it because anyone can be reading this Forum and get ideas... When I heard this morning that Obama was in Dallas, I felt like I was going to puke.

There is no way the rich families: DuPont, Morgan, Murchison, Rockefeller, Rothschilds, Bush, Hunt, et al, are going to allow a black man with an Arab name, brought up in Islam, get anywhere near the Presidency. I'm surprised no one on this Forum really thought about this happening before today. When I see him on TV I think I'm looking at a dead man. I can't believe he got this far. So I'm bracing myself and nothing will surprise me. Obama is young. So if he doesn't get near enough this time, there's always the next time. Sorry to say it: he's a marked man.

Kathy

Oh Kathy, you have so many distinctions; this is but the latest.

Clearly the topic isn't off limits, because we have a prominent thread on it. What is incredibly offensive, at least to me however, is your gleeful tone when you write off Senator Obama as a dead man walking.

Yes, you were the first you were the FIRST. By all means crow about it. Add it to your friggin sig line.

Secret Service defends security at Obama rally in Dallas: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/story/489920.html

Thanks Mike.

A noteworthy blurb from the article you linked to:

"This relaxed security was unbelievably stupid, especially in Dallas," Jeff Adams of Berkeley, Calif., said in an e-mail to the Star-Telegram, noting the assassination of President Kennedy in Dallas more than four decades ago.

Others said they had recently attended large political events, many for Obama, where security screening was halted. Jeremy Dibbell of Boston said in an e-mail that he attended an Obama event in Boston at which "the same thing happened there. We waited for hours in line as people were screened, and then suddenly everyone was just allowed in without going through any inspection at all."

name='William Plumlee' date='Feb 22 2008, 04:19 AM' post='138209']

http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008

Police concerned about order to stop screening

By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.

Star-Telegram Staff Writer

DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

...

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

...

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event."

Ahem.

Perhaps history repeating itself. Could this be a type of "security probe" before a main event located somewhere else?

I worry about the man as he gathers momentum. I worder if he or his advisors knew about this at the time. I do not think they would have O.K'ed that. If they did then he had better get new advisors. I was told by a DP who was on detail that the feds should not have been in charge.. "..they took charge..". Sounds familiar to me.

__________________________________

Tosh: excellent points.

This story must be spread far and wide. Lots of people have been worried about Obama. Of course it could happen again. And of course Dallas would be perfect. Who'd stop it? Who'd tell the truth? Our press? History has already repeated too many times in our damn lifetimes. A good friend of mine compared Obama to "JFK MLK and Bobby" a few days ago. Perhaps the powers that be are making the same comparisons. No Myra you're not overreacting. "Lone nuts" are everywhere. I think this is also a warning to someone else .

Dawn

You might recall some 8-12 mos. ago a Ku Klux Klan leader, [if there is such a thing] threatened or made threatening comments re Barrack Obama, the story came and went, but I never heard whether the KKK figure was arrested, detained or held for questioning, which, in itself is disturbing; If the threat had been leveled at a GOP candidate, do you think it would not be widely known what happened then?

The bottom line, and that which is patently obvious is that Obama is the candidate of change, not the candidate of the status quo, [see The rest of the Field.]

And that my friends makes Barrack a clear and present danger to those who would like to continue the madness of the last seven? [just seven] years.

There needs to be an investigation........and at the very least, the word needs to go forth........

Agreed Robert.

Let the word go forth...

This will be my project for the day, and likely for much longer.

name='William Plumlee' date='Feb 22 2008, 04:19 AM' post='138209']

http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008

Police concerned about order to stop screening

By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.

Star-Telegram Staff Writer

DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

...

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

...

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event."

Ahem.

Perhaps history repeating itself. Could this be a type of "security probe" before a main event located somewhere else?

I worry about the man as he gathers momentum. I worder if he or his advisors knew about this at the time. I do not think they would have O.K'ed that. If they did then he had better get new advisors. I was told by a DP who was on detail that the feds should not have been in charge.. "..they took charge..". Sounds familiar to me.

__________________________________

Tosh: excellent points.

This story must be spread far and wide. Lots of people have been worried about Obama. Of course it could happen again. And of course Dallas would be perfect. Who'd stop it? Who'd tell the truth? Our press? History has already repeated too many times in our damn lifetimes. A good friend of mine compared Obama to "JFK MLK and Bobby" a few days ago. Perhaps the powers that be are making the same comparisons. No Myra you're not overreacting. "Lone nuts" are everywhere. I think this is also a warning to someone else .

Dawn

I guess we're not the only ones reacting this way.

Get a load of DU today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/

Multiple threads on the subject, above the fold.

http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008

Police concerned about order to stop screening

By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.

Star-Telegram Staff Writer

DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

...

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

...

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event."

Ahem.

Perhaps history repeating itself. Could this be a type of "security probe" before a main event located somewhere else?

I worry about the man as he gathers momentum. I worder if he or his advisors knew about this at the time. I do not think they would have O.K'ed that. If they did then he had better get new advisors. I was told by a DP who was on detail that the feds should not have been in charge.. "..they took charge..". Sounds familiar to me.

I think we need to do everything possible to insure that he and his advisors know about this now. I plan to phone and email his team, as well as write letters to media, and post on blogs and forums to publicize this incident. I'm also considering starting a website to monitor this situation.

...

I don't know what else to do at the moment.

I know Obama's message is all about hope, but this is too alarming to just hope he's safe.

As one of the 20,000+ people who stood outside of the Target Center in frigid weather on 2.2.08 in Minneapolis for over 2 hours, waiting for the doors to open, I can tell you that no diligence was spared for the sake of expediency. There are only approximately 8 lanes of entry into the TC, which is used for basketball and is a relatively cozy venue, and each of us (who were told ahead of time not to bring backpacks or bags) had our purses searched, and we were also wanded before being allowed to enter.

I am uncomfortable and dismayed that there would be any less security in Texas, of all places, especially when the weather certainly cannot be as severe as it was here that day.

I think Obama needs our prayers.

I'm trying not to freak out here, and I've been telling myself that if something happened to Senator Obama it'd just be too blatant... But this is beyond ominous.

Am I over reacting?

Perhaps it's a warning to him?

Or a mind game. The kind of thing that can make you edgy and put you off your stride.

Well, I'm certainly edgy now.

...

This is not a joke is it? This is ......insane.

Dawn

As far as I know it's legit Dawn.

...

Perhaps it's a warning to him?

http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

Posted on Thu, Feb. 21, 2008

Police concerned about order to stop screening

By JACK DOUGLAS Jr.

Star-Telegram Staff Writer

DALLAS -- Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

...

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

...

Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event."

Ahem.

It is being speculated that Castro is trying to influence the US elections. John McCain has made it clear that he is unwilling to enter into negotiations with Cuba. However, Barack Obama, is willing to talk to the Cuban government.

That is really interesting, and plausible, speculation.

Stephen, Duncan, Bill and anyone else who is defending Gary Mack,

If you understood what Gary Mack used to believe, not so long ago, about the JFK assassination, you might also question his motives for spouting the nonsense he does now on a regular basis. Jack White could provide the details much better than I, but for those of you who were familiar with Penn Jones' "The Continuing Inquiry" (I was a subscriber from the first issue to the last), then you would be familiar with the kind of research Mack once did. I think Jack and Gary Shaw were the main ones responsible for editing TCI, but Mack wrote many articles and some of them were pretty "extreme" in nature. I recall in particular some stuff he wrote about the shooting of Reagan, which addressed the claim that some witnesses had seen a second shooter there besides Hinckley. I may be confusing Mack with Shaw on that one, but I'm pretty sure it was Mack.

As Charles reminds us so often, the evidence in this case is quite clear. Most of us realized that Oswald couldn't have done it within weeks (if not days) of first examining the "evidence" that the official case was built on. Cliff is right to focus on the bullet holes in JFK's shirt and coat; they are about as solid as evidence can get. When you combine that with Boswell's original autopsy face sheet, which locates the back wound in the exact same location, and Admiral Burkley's report that located it there as well, then no one without an agenda can seriously contest the fact that the back wound was far too low to exit from JFK's neck.

In response to hard evidence like bullet holes in clothing, backed by other independent sources like the autopsy face sheet and the president's personal physician's own identification, we are given the "bunching" theory. While perhaps not as ridiculous and impossible as the single-bullet theory, or the "jet effect" theory (which "explains" why JFK's head broke the laws of physics by going back towards the shooter), it is pretty lame.

The reality, Mr. Mack, is that had Oswald gone to trial, and had a competent defense attorney, any honest judge would have thrown out all the "evidence" against him. The chain-of-possession on the rifle, "magic bullet," and anything allegedly found in the limousine was hopelessly tainted and this would have been the first thing any real defense counsel pointed out to the court. In other words, none of the "hard evidence" that Mack refers to could have even been introduced into the record at trial. It would have been pretty hard to convict anyone, even a supposed commie in 1963 Dallas, without a weapon in the record.

Okay, Gary- please give us some specifics about this "hard evidence."

Great post Don.

...

Yes, important information. Along with several other bits of evidence puts final nail in coffin of SS having done it.

-Several persons saw another man with gun drawn, sometimes identified as Cesar.

-Sirhan's gun not pointed in right direction, nor correct distance to explain shots to RFK.

-Too many bullet holes at scene - probably main reason door jamb was destroyed, along with other evidence

-Cesar's gun not taken as evidence or tested and he lied about when he 'sold' it.

-inability to match bullets to supposed assassin's gun

-and several other annomalies.

The RFK is as compelling a case of a fabricated scenario as Dallas...not surpising as the same people were beind both. The RFK case is in even a bigger black-hole than is that of JFK, sadly. I think it is an easier one to 'solve'.

Then there's the niggling little detail of Coroner Thomas Noguchi's finding that the killing shot came from 2-3 inches behind Senator Kennedy's right ear, exactly where Cesar was standing, whereas Sirhan was many feet in front of the RFK.

Great post John. This is huge. And once conspiracy is proven in the RFK case, the whole thing crumbles.

And let's not forget one of the very first eyewitness accounts of the shooting, from a KNX (now KCBS) soundman. Not exact, but I'll put it in quotes anyway. "When the shooting started, a security guard, returning fire, hit the Senator."

I now work at KCBS; I've looked high and low for footage of that night, with no success.

Really interesting quote Frank.

Aside from the tape, likely scrubbed by now, do you have a reference for this?

Or do you just remember hearing it?

Charles is correct. TRUTH IS TRUTH. Some see it clearly. Some through a glass, darkly*.

Some not at all. Opinions that do not discern truth are useless. Opinion is not research.

Truth is not changed by those who study it or opine about it.

Jack

*courtesy St. Paul

Agreed.

An opinion is something like what food tastes good.

Research into President Kennedy's murder, by contrast, starkly reveals that the official stories (there are multiple official stories) are impossible. Therefore...

The part after "therefore" is what we're discussing here.

[For the record: Some months ago I initiated a thread in which discussion of the appropriateness of sharing of private messages was encouraged. I took the position that, in the final analysis and absent any agreement to the contrary between correspondents, it is appropriate to make such exchanges public if a greater good is served by doing so.]

The following exchange of private messages took place this morning.

Mack to Drago:

Hey Charles,

Would you kindly supply me with the hard evidence that someone other than Oswald was firing? Evidence, Charles, not opinions. My comment referred to hard evidence, hence the qualifier virtually. Just something short and simple so I can relay it in an upcoming media interview.

Thanks,

Gary Mack

Drago to Mack:

Right after you provide me with hard evidence that Oswald was firing,

Mr. Mack was not quite clever enough when he constructed his question on the false premise that "hard" evidence exists to establish that LHO fired at President Kennedy on 11/22/63.

The burden is yours, sir. You are making the accusation, Mr. Mack. Where is your proof?

"We don't have any proof that Oswald fired the rifle. No one has been able to put him in that building with a gun in his hand." --Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry, quoted by United Press International, November 5, 1969

There is no reliable eyewitness testimony placing LHO in the "assassin's nest" during the shooting.

There is no sustainable explanation for how LHO could have done the shooting, paused to admire his work (as eyewitnesses described a "figure" in the "assassin's window" doing after the final shots), wiped down and hidden his weapon beneath boxes, descended from the sixth to the second floor of the TSBD without being seen by individuals on the only available staircase during the time frame, and arrived in the lunchroom to enjoy a soft drink no later than 90 seconds after the shooting ceased.

CE 399 -- the so-called "magic" or "pristine" bullet -- may be ballistically linked to a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle allegedly purchased and owned by LHO. However, there is no sustainable evidence whatsoever to support the contentions that LHO ever transported that weapon to the TSBD, that the bullet now in evidence was the projectile found in Parkland Hospital, and that it struck either JFK or JBC.

No sustainable evidence whatsoever.

Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) tests linking bullet fragments recovered from assassination victims to LHO's alleged ammunition have been fully discredited, have ZERO scientific reliability, and thus have no bearing on this case in terms of establishing LHO's guilt or innocence.

There is no sustainable forensic evidence to indicate that LHO fired a rifle on 11/22/63. Positive parrafin tests of his hands are just as likely to have resulted from his handling of printed materials during the performance of his TSBD job as from firing a pistol.

Parrafin tests of his cheeks -- where evidence of having fired a rifle would be expected to be noted -- were negative.

The presence of LHO's palm print on a portion of the rifle barrel that is not visible when the weapon is fully assembled is suspect. The print was not noted during initial intense examination by the FBI in the Bureau's state-of-the-art lab; rather, it was miraculously discovered after LHO was killed, and after a suspicious visit to the funeral home by government agents who may have applied the print post mortem.

LHO's post-assassination behavior hardly can be described as "flight." He went home, and in a relatively unhurried manner.

No one ever has suggested a plausible motive for LHO to kill JFK.

So, then ...

No means.

No motive.

No opportunity.

No physical evidence.

No photographic evidence.

No eyewitness evidence.

The only argument in support of LHO firing at JFK is an argument from false authority -- the state.

Charles Drago

Excellent response Charles!

"Virtually all the hard evidence leads to Lee Harvey Oswald."

Thus Gary Mack gives away his game.

Mr. Mack spoke those words, as I type this, some three minutes ago, at the end of the Monday, February 18 edition of "Countdown" on MSNBC.

Once more for emphasis:

"Virtually all the hard evidence leads to Lee Harvey Oswald." -- Gary Mack

Contrast this with the truth:

No hard evidence whatsoever leads to Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin -- lone or otherwise -- of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

I reiterate: Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in the JFK case who does not conclude conspiracy is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

Without any room for equvication, Mr. Mack's access to said evidence is reasonable in the extreme.

Let there be no doubt, from this day and time, about whose side Mr. Mack is on.

Charles,

Olberman has an actual brain and a spine, I mean for someone on mainstream news.

Did he rebut Mack's Big Lie in any way?

Alas, Myra, Keith and Gary seemd joined at the hip.

Well then Olberman is a fraud.

One's view on the JFK assassination is the litmus test.

He flunked it.

Myra,

FYI, Olbermann has made it known on his show that he accepts the lone assassin fairy tale. Imho, he is just another example of "fake opposition." He reminds me of the Saturday Night Live writers, or Michael Moore; their mantra is that the Democrats are the good guys and we only need to elect enough of them to solve our problems. I don't see a dime's worth of difference between our carbon-copy two mainstream parties.

Thanks for the perspective Don.

I see Noam Chomsky as "fake opposition" too.

Although that is being discussed at length in another thread.

...

Let there be no doubt, from this day and time, about whose side Mr. Mack is on.

I never doubted for a second.

His MO is so transparent.

He lurks in the shadows of forums for hours a day, targets individuals and pelts them with private propaganda, refusing to engage in straightforward discussion and open himself up to questions.

What is the Sixth Floor Museum if not a tangible symbol of an official cover-up?

Oh look, Mack is in the forum right now monitoring the situation.

Hey Gary, why don't you post if you have something to say instead of slinking about PM'ing people?

"Virtually all the hard evidence leads to Lee Harvey Oswald."

Thus Gary Mack gives away his game.

Mr. Mack spoke those words, as I type this, some three minutes ago, at the end of the Monday, February 18 edition of "Countdown" on MSNBC.

Once more for emphasis:

"Virtually all the hard evidence leads to Lee Harvey Oswald." -- Gary Mack

Contrast this with the truth:

No hard evidence whatsoever leads to Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin -- lone or otherwise -- of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

I reiterate: Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in the JFK case who does not conclude conspiracy is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

Without any room for equvication, Mr. Mack's access to said evidence is reasonable in the extreme.

Let there be no doubt, from this day and time, about whose side Mr. Mack is on.

Charles,

Olberman has an actual brain and a spine, I mean for someone on mainstream news.

Did he rebut Mack's Big Lie in any way?