Jump to content
The Education Forum

Gary Mack


Guest Duncan MacRae
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anyone who makes room for Gary Mack runs the risk of being under his control, looking for his approval.

Now Pamela, surely you know that life has always been a risky business. People afraid of running risks are remembered as COWARDS.

I am not afraid of Gary Mack. I cannot speak for Bill Miller, but I have a feeling BIll Miller is afraid of nobody.

So who exactly are you referring to, and WHY?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Maybe its time to repost my articles on Gary to remind everyone just how bad he is.

http://www.ctka.net/2009/target_car_jd3.html

http://www.ctka.net/2009/ruby_mack_3.html

hey THanks Jim. FOr the benefit of those in a hurry, maybe you would be so kind as to select what you consider to be the HIGHLIGHTS of this indictment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ray ... some folks cannot see the forest for the trees. There are lots of images at the Museum that Mack hasn't even had time to study. For these guys to act like he should throw away a once in a lifetime opportunity to see all this stuff so he can confirm to their good-ol'-boy mentality is ludicrous in my view. Maybe they should ask Mack if one day after leaving the Museum if he would want to write a book? Who knows ... maybe he has already started one.

I often wonder if these individuals have considered who would replace Mack at the Museum and how would that benefit researchers everywhere, if at all. Mack has sat and spoken one on one with many of the witnesses and at times with their families. Gary not only knows what was said in the record, but he also has had the opportunity to get bits of information, if available, that we just wouldn't find in the official story. So who could replace him as curator and be able to offer us the references to source materials that we continually seek from him? I have had countless conversations with Gary on source materials and evidence that I am certain that I could not have gotten from someone of lesser experience. Of course once this happenes, then the same people can say how the Museum pressured Gary Mack out of his job so he could no longer assist CTs ... it will never end with these people.

Bill

And once again Bill Miller proves my point that some people are able to put a price on their principles.

Let me ask you a question, Bill. Do you think Harold Weisberg would have taken that job?

Didn't Robert Groden turn the job down?

That's what he said.

Principles and values, I guess.

Or making it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Principles and values, I guess.

Gary Mack has accused person(s)unknown within the the Dallas Police department of collaboration in the murder of Lee Oswald. It takes no great moral courage to attack the DPD if you live in England, but it is an entirely different matter if you live in Dallas, as Gary does. I doubt if any of the GM character assassins can boast of any comparable act of moral courage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon. Show me some respect.

OK Jim read the two articles, very interesting. Somehow I missed the Ruby program on discovery channel, and based on your description it may be that Gary's views on this area of the case have matured. He certainly seems very definite about DPD involvement based on the exchange with David Von Pein that I posted earlier.

I think Gary's opinions related to Lee Oswald are wrong-headed, but I feel the same about the opinions of Jim Garrison and his followers. Being wrong-headed is not a crime, and that does not make them bad people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And once again Bill Miller proves my point that some people are able to put a price on their principles.

Let me ask you a question, Bill. Do you think Harold Weisberg would have taken that job?

I personally got to know Harold in his later years and I think I am the last person to ever interview him before his death. In my interview with him, Harold didn't have a kind word about researchers who waste time arguing over theories, but rather felt that the evidence was what should be everyone's focus. Harold was a man who wouldn't want Mack to do anything but what he currently does in my view. In fact, it was Harold that helped change my thinking which allowed me to see the bigger picture so I can distinguish the difference between citing the history of the assassination from the rumors and speculation which many theories are built on. This is not to say that one cannot speculate and be right .... it's just that we must be able to first prove our findings and then push for an official investigative body to recognize it so it too can be part of the official record.

Bill Miller

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marina told the SS that Oswald's only rifle had no scope and that she didn't know rifles with scopes existed. Months later she testified to the WC that CE193 was Oswald's rifle (specifically identifying the scope when asked). Were both of these statements by Marina true or was one of them a lie?

I assume the above comment was Gary Mack related somehow, so I will steer it that way. As Curator of a historical Museum, I would expect Gary to say that Marina said two contradictory things pertaining to the rifle. What Gary can't do is to give his own personal feelings on which one was a lie, if either because that would not be the job duty he was hired to carry out. How hard is it to understand that the Museum isn't supposed to have a stand one way or the other ... its function is to be a record of what history has written.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, you kinda talked around my question there. But whatever, I'm really quite bored of talking about Gary Mack. I sincerely hope that one day soon he leaves all us "narrow-minded infiltrators" with egg on our face, I really do.

But your final point is quite interesting. Do you honestly think there will ever be another "official" investigation of the assassination? From an outsiders perspective (I'm English) it looks incredibly unlikely.

Harold was a historian of the assassination in his own right and I doubt that he would have speculated on what he might or might not do. I do believe that Harold would want Mack to do just as he has done for I recorded my Interview with Harold and he didn't have nice things to say about the conspiracy pushers. Harold's criticism of CTs wasn't a personal attack on them in my view, but rather an attack on all the time they waste focusing on things that cannot be proven Vs those things that can be. Harold focused on the official records and their inconsistencies. If Harold could have, then yes I think he would have certainly considered having Gary Mack's job and probably for the same reasons Mack took it.

I do believe that if someone comes forward with evidence that has been peer reviewed by distinguished individuals that shows something more than what we already know from the official findings, then I do believe that it could lead to an official inquiry which its result one way or the other would then become part of the historical record.

And yes, I knew your previous response was not Gary Mack related, but seeing how the thread is .... I applied it to the topic.

Bill

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...