Lying By Omission The Mark Lane Way # 4

[timstter]

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 friend.

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:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0017b.htm

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0018a.htm

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0018b.htm

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:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0158a.htm

Lane simply lies by omission, by precluding any description of
Oswald's shooting outside of the mediocre.

Lying by omission is Mark Lane's modus operandi.

Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*