06-01-2014, 04:08 PM
Daniel Gallup Wrote:Ken Garretson Wrote:edits: 1.paragraph beginning with Newman, second sentence, 'along the *why," 2. subsequent paragraph, 4th sentence, beginning with Therefore. 3. paragrpah beginning with 'What makes the shell evidence', 4th sentence, 'extracted from a*weapons",
thanks for the article, especially like the indictment of the msm.
interesting omission in your evidenciary rundown--Feister's work. Any significance there?
Feister's work depends on the authenticity of the Z-film, which, after Horne's Inside the ARRB and other works, is very much a debatable point. Her particular form of psychobabble regarding the limo stop has all the depth of a parking-lot puddle. I would say DiEugenio's failure to credit Horne is the far more egregious omission, but then, alas, Horne is a "Liftonite." Certainly DiEugenio's State of the Case is a good effort, but to this reader very much an incomplete account.
I have it on good authority that she- Sherry Feister- obtained her "credentials" from some mail order op. (Not naming my source however.) And this is second hand so I should be hesitant in posting it.
Dawn