what happened to gary shaw?

[Edwin Ortiz]

Yes my interest in mr shaw was to ask him why he quit and whether he has heard anything new ...especially since he was at the forefront of the investigation...

[Peter Lemkin]

Yes my interest in mr shaw was to ask him why he quit and whether he has heard anything new ...especially since he was at the forefront of the investigation...

Mr Gary Shaw is not now and never has been a member here. Good luck asking him anything, as it is extremely difficult to even get him to beg off answering. It took me [a longtime researcher who had been in contact with Shaw in the past] a lot of work and time through Shaw's better current friends to even make a brief contact. In short, he is not speaking on JFK any more. I and others have outlined why we think this is so. The voice of the unspeakable also chimed in via a backdoor route with the officially sanctioned rationale [which I for one do NOT buy for a second]. R. White remains, IMHO, a prime suspect as an important operative [along with many others] doing certain things to set-up the patsy and hide the real assassins, while facilitating the murder of the President and the coup d'etat that it was. White met his own strange and suspicious end some years after [as did so many others]. Jack White is, I believe, correct in thinking that White played some role in the Backyard photos and may well have also played a role in events around Tippit. There are suspicions, not fully nailed down, that he was seen on the Knoll at the time of the shooting. Much of what was presented in the press confernces on R. White were, I believe, work on (in part) planted and false evidence - planted to entrap certain researchers and to muddy the waters as to R. White's real roles - as well as those of others; thus, to perpetuate the Big Lie that LHO was the lone assassin - as the Unspeakable would have us believe for all time. The cover-up is continuing and active; in fact, it is picking up its pace as the 50th nears. While most researchers only meet with provocateurs, planted evidence, lack of attention by the MSM, dirty tricks and such, on occasion the following of certain trails or the possession of certain information has proved dangerous [in a variety of ways] to fatal for witnesses and researchers, both. If you believe all the strange and convenient deaths were coincidence you don't know anything about statistics and probability....let alone about how our corrupt 'system' works.

[Peter Lemkin]

To the Forum and Internet lookeeloos - I just got another email from Mr. Dunkel [Gary Mack = former TV Stage Name and current Stage Name for 6th Floor Mausoleum] in which he calls me a 'Buff' and not a Researcher and other things - including a link to a Shaw interview they have at the Mausoleum which he makes certain claims about. My response to Mr. Dunkel/Mack was the following:

Dunkel, you're back on 'blocked'. Real people use real names - not stage names. REAL patriots do not have fake museums that twist the truth toward the Big Lie. When your mausoleum sells books like JFK and the Unspeakable and removes the moniker of and display of the sniper's window [implying Oswald's window] then perhaps we can talk again. Your group's attempts to dominate the 50th and to keep persons like Groden off balance now, and all researchers off balance as the 50th nears is despicable. You do NOT use history - you use PROPAGANDA and dirty tricks. Jack White and others who know Gary Shaw well in current times differ with you on G. Shaw's reasons for discontinuing his active research. Funny how when I posted *********** related to the RW matter on the EF, within days I was removed as were all my posts. Oh, yes, a cover story was invented - aren't they always.

You work with and for the Bad Guys. Shame on YOU! You sold out, as once you seemed to do real research [badgeman, for example] - but who knows perhaps that was just to ingratiate yourself to the real research community - who know that OSWALD was Naval Intel, CIA, FBI and likely Customs - a false defector to the USSR; a patsy who never ordered that M-C rifle; never fired at the President and was murdered two days later than originally planned so he couldn't defend himself; and so that the REAL perpetrators in the coup that stole America [and has it in its grips still!] secretly could proceed with their Big Lies, cover-up, and march toward what we have now....a neo-fascist corporate-financial-MIC police state with perpetual war and ever diminution of our Rights and Freedoms. Time for you to look at which side YOU are on! Don't bother further communication. I'm blocking your email [again]. It got through only because I changed email programs. Over and out. There is much more I could say, but don't think you can 'hear'. From a Patriot to a person I consider a traitor to the Truth. P.L.

To Mr. Dunkel/Mack [who is obviously surreptitiously monitoring this and other threads on JFK] - If you want to discuss this or any other matter, fine - do so like everyone else - IN PUBLIC - on an open Forum and stop hiding in the shadows. I don't buy your excuse [apparently] that your contract with the mausoleum forbids you to post. Were that true, that would be even more evidence that they and you fear the light of day and hide in the shadows with 'shadow' emails, shadow legal maneuvers against Groden and others, shadow attempts to steer the debate and research, and shadow attempts to take over DP and the message it represents past, present, on the 50th - and beyond.

[Magda Hassan]

Unfortunately Gary Mack can't have membership here as we don't take lone nutters as members.

[Peter Lemkin]

Unfortunately Gary Mack can't have membership here as we don't take lone nutters as members.

Its moot, anyway, as he has not every been on any Forum since taking his current position....so there is nothing to refuse. :mexican:

[Edwin Ortiz]

Interesting reply it is food for thought ....however who is the Unspeakable...is "he" similar to The Absolute....in theosophical terms....

Yes my interest in mr shaw was to ask him why he quit and whether he has heard anything new ...especially since he was at the forefront of the investigation...

Mr Gary Shaw is not now and never has been a member here. Good luck asking him anything, as it is extremely difficult to even get him to beg off answering. It took me [a longtime researcher who had been in contact with Shaw in the past] a lot of work and time through Shaw's better current friends to even make a brief contact. In short, he is not speaking on JFK any more. I and others have outlined why we think this is so. The voice of the unspeakable also chimed in via a backdoor route with the officially sanctioned rationale [which I for one do NOT buy for a second]. R. White remains, IMHO, a prime suspect as an important operative [along with many others] doing certain things to set-up the patsy and hide the real assassins, while facilitating the murder of the President and the coup d'etat that it was. White met his own strange and suspicious end some years after [as did so many others]. Jack White is, I believe, correct in thinking that White played some role in the Backyard photos and may well have also played a role in events around Tippit. There are suspicions, not fully nailed down, that he was seen on the Knoll at the time of the shooting. Much of what was presented in the press confernces on R. White were, I believe, work on (in part) planted and false evidence - planted to entrap certain researchers and to muddy the waters as to R. White's real roles - as well as those of others; thus, to perpetuate the Big Lie that LHO was the lone assassin - as the Unspeakable would have us believe for all time. The cover-up is continuing and active; in fact, it is picking up its pace as the 50th nears. While most researchers only meet with provocateurs, planted evidence, lack of attention by the MSM, dirty tricks and such, on occasion the following of certain trails or the possession of certain information has proved dangerous [in a variety of ways] to fatal for witnesses and researchers, both. If you believe all the strange and convenient deaths were coincidence you don't know anything about statistics and probability....let alone about how our corrupt 'system' works.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Interesting reply it is food for thought ....however who is the Unspeakable...is "he" similar to The Absolute....in theosophical terms....

My my - Edwin Ortiz is leading us towards strange waters....

Theosophy (from Greek θεοσοφία theosophia, from θεός theos, divine + σοφία sophia, wisdom; literally "divine wisdom"), refers to systems of speculation or investigation seeking direct knowledge of the mysteries of being and nature, with particular concern on the nature of Divinity. Theosophy is also considered a part of the broader field of esotericism, referring to hidden knowledge or wisdom that offers the individual enlightenment and salvation. The theosophist seeks to understand the mysteries of the universe and the bonds that unite the universe, humanity and the divine world. The goal is to explore the origin of divinity and humanity (theogony and anthropogony) including the end of world, life and humanity (eschatology). Then, from investigation of these discover a coherent description of the purpose and origin of the universe (cosmogony). The theosophist inquires into the hieroglyphs of nature (insights, or poetic meaning, in flowers, rainbows etc.), using a method of interpretation founded upon a specific myth or revelation, to apply active imagination in order to draw forth symbolic meanings and further their pursuit of knowledge toward a complete understanding of these mysteries.

Edwin Ortiz - perhaps you would like to provide your own understanding of the "Unspeakable", to enlighten us all.

[Charles Drago]

Interesting reply it is food for thought ....however who is the Unspeakable...is "he" similar to The Absolute....in theosophical terms....

Define ... define ... define ... prove prove prove ... that which has been defined and proven repeatedly over many years.

And now "theosophical" comes from the flying fingers of the humble newbie ...

Here's an exercise for you, Mr. Ortiz: Read JFK and the Unspeakable, by James Douglass, and post your best review here. Include your best definition of "the Unspeakable." Then we'll have at it.

Until then, I shall read your "who is the Unspeakable ... is 'he' similar to The Absolute" query as an implicit denigration of the work of Douglass rendered in classic agent provocateur form.

I eagerly await your review.

[Edwin Ortiz]

Mr drago always looking for something that is not there ...i didnt realize that the lemkin reply on the unspeakable had to do with the book ..i have heard good things about the book and i plan to get it ..i thought "unspeakable" meant something mystical or spiritual or a little voice ..obviously i was off base...but than arent great ideas often divinely inspired....
ingharles Drago;51233]

Interesting reply it is food for thought ....however who is the Unspeakable...is "he" similar to The Absolute....in theosophical terms....

Define ... define ... define ... prove prove prove ... that which has been defined and proven repeatedly over many years.

And now "theosophical" comes from the flying fingers of the humble newbie ...

Here's an exercise for you, Mr. Ortiz: Read JFK and the Unspeakable, by James Douglass, and post your best review here. Include your best definition of "the Unspeakable." Then we'll have at it.

Until then, I shall read your "who is the Unspeakable ... is 'he' similar to The Absolute" query as an implicit denigration of the work of Douglass rendered in classic agent provocateur form.

I eagerly await your review.[/QUOTE]

[Charles Drago]

Mr drago always looking for something that is not there ...i didnt realize that the lemkin reply on the unspeakable had to do with the book ..i have heard good things about the book and i plan to get it ..i thought "unspeakable" meant something mystical or spiritual or a little voice ..obviously i was off base...but than arent great ideas often divinely inspired....

Indeed. I was looking for intelligence, awareness, and above all honest inquiry.

So use of the word "Unspeakable" did not immediately direct your laser-like intellectual focus to the Douglass book?

So you have "heard ... about" the Douglass book, but still the reference to "Unspeakable" meant nothing more to you than an opportunity to imply that Peter Lemkin is a psychotic who hears "little voice[s]."

Bullshit!

All you bring to DPF is ignorance and arrogance. Yet we toy with you for greater purposes. But only for so long.

So long.