Message from discussion Lying The Mark Lane Way # 4 (Rush To Judgment Book)
Received: by 10.66.74.39 with SMTP id q7mr2556855pav.29.1349491389179;
Fri, 05 Oct 2012 19:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Lying The Mark Lane Way # 4 (Rush To Judgment Book)
Date: 5 Oct 2012 22:43:08 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
X-Original-Trace: 5 Oct 2012 20:41:44 -0500, 22.214.171.124
X-Trace: mcadams.posc.mu.edu 1349491389 126.96.36.199 (5 Oct 2012 21:43:09 -0500)
X-Original-Trace: 5 Oct 2012 21:43:09 -0500, 188.8.131.52
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 10/5/2012 9:06 PM, timstter wrote:
> Hi All,
> On page 108 of Rush To Judgment (Penguin edition) Lane states:
> QUOTE ON:
> What do we know about Oswald's proficiency with a rifle? That he was a
> relatively poor shot and betrayed a dislike of weapons to a Marine Corps
> QUOTE OFF
> The evidence, though, is that Oswald must have been a *fairly good
> shot* to have qualified as a USMC Sharpshooter, per this three page
> letter from the USMC's AG Folsom to the Warren Commission:
> In fact, Major Eugene Anderson, the assistant head of the Marksmanship
> Branch, Headquarters Marine Corps and himself a USMC shooting expert and
> master rifleshot in the NRA, testified that Oswald would have been
> *considered a good to excellent shot* in comparison to the average citizen
> in his WC testimony:
> Lane simply LIES by omission, by precluding any description of Oswald's
> shooting outside of the mediocre.
And what do you call it when you omit Folsom's letter where he states:
Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor "shot"
and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good "shot".
> Lying by OMISSION is Mark Lane's modus operandi.
> When he is not lying OVERTLY, that is...
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
> Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
> And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
> X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!