I suspect that you're a nut case.

Pardon me, Mark, but this cannot be ignored. Tommy is wearing his disability on his sleeve. If TDS, vote fraud, antifa, or Biden era "lawfare" actually existed,
Tommy could be a true believer in all of them and still not be as divorced from reality as he is in his suspicion of you, quoted above!

Tommy, regardless your position on the influence of nature vs nurture,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture

....Mark has an unrivaled background, either way.
(Mark, I'll delete the text following this line, if you prefer....)

His grandma's obit, which I located, motivated by my own curiousity. In the more than the dozen years I have known Mark, I am confident I would
have had to pry out the details of what shaoed his development, if I had not established a starting point to question him.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/143570513/katherine-m-mcandrew

Consider who Mark's grandma's two siblings were, as well as her son, Mark's uncle Bill. A hint... who did Garrison complain to the FCC was not willing
to grant him "equal time"?

Google AI

Jeremiah Aloysius O'Leary Sr. (1897–1969) was a long-time congressional reporter for the Washington Star, spending 45 years covering the U.S. House and Senate.Career and Life Newspaper Career: Began his reporting career at age 15 and spent nearly half a century working in the Capitol press galleries before retiring in 1964.

Google AI :

Michael W. (Mike) Flynn was a veteran Washington journalist who served as city editor of the Washington Herald and later as managing editor. He passed away in May 1962 at the age of 74, which generated prominent obituaries in the local press that year.Career HighlightsEarly Start: Became city editor of the Washington Herald at age 21.

Mark's first cousin, uncle Bill's daughter.:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/1999/01/19/mary-mcandrew-53-longtime-newswoman/
PUBLISHED: January 19, 1999

...The daughter of one-time .... McAndrew Sr., who vowed his daughter would never be a journalist, Ms. McAndrew politely defied his wishes after graduating from Marymount College in Arlington, Va., and went to work for United Press International, Roberts said.

Two years later, she joined the Associated Press and worked for its New York City bureau for three years. While there, she worked undercover assignments and was shot at while covering a sniper’s attack in Central Park.

“She dictated half the lead when a bullet from the sniper snapped off her antenna,” said Roberts, a reporter for WMAQ-AM in Chicago. “The people back at the bureau thought she was shot. But she was behind a tree, unable to transmit.”

During the 1968 convention, she was working for AP but on loan to NBC News. One year later, she began an 18-year career with the company, working her way up to being a bureau chief in Newark and Connecticut, Roberts said.

When U.S. journalist Nicholas Daniloff was taken into custody by the KGB in 1986, Ms. McAndrew sought out Vice President George Bush at the U.S. Open tennis championships to get the first Reagan administration reaction to the event, Roberts said.

In 1988, McAndrew relocated to Chicago, where she worked for WBBM-FM, was a field producer for the Chicago bureau of USA Today on Television and anchored, reported and produced news for WGCI-AM/FM, he said.

In 1993 she moved into public relations, working for the American Red Cross and the American Medical Association...

Mark was author Leo Damore's researcher. He attempted to talk some sense into Princeton educated psychologist, Peter Janney, son of the personnel director
of the CIA. Obviously Dr. Janney "knew what he knew," and was beyond Mark's fact supported counsel.

I suspect that you're a nut case.

yeah?….. well I think we’re all bozos on this bus…….. so there, haha.  What say you, Duncan? Amnesty time yet? no wait…….

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM
It is remarkable that WC apologists who (correctly) accept the EOP entry site refuse to admit that the EOP site proves the autopsy brain photos are fraudulent.

JC: It is remarkable that MTG considers himself to be competent to make such a judgement.

Given that you can't speak English at a high-school level, and given how many times you've been caught committing inexcusable gaffes, it is remarkable that you consider yourself competent to be judging anyone else's arguments, much less mine.

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

Yes, I agree: The evidence strongly favors the EOP site. I was encouraged to see Lance Payette state that he is convinced by Pat Speer's arguments for the EOP site. Dr. Larry Sturdivan, the former HSCA wound ballistics consultant, argues for the EOP site in his book The JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation of the Kennedy Assassination. Dr. David Mantik likewise argues for the EOP site in his 2024 book The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis. Dr. Joseph Riley, a neuroanatomist, argued for the EOP site and noted that the area of the brain beneath the phantom cowlick entry site is undamaged:

We have autopsy photographs that show the top of JFK's head. Everyone agrees (including Dr. Bob Artwohl) that intact cerebral cortex is visible. If you are a neuroanatomist, you can identify the cerebral cortex (superior parietal lobule visible). What's the significance of that? Simple: that is the part of cortex that is immediately under the high entrance wound -- so, the brain at the point of the high entrance wound is not damaged. Now that is indeed a magic bullet. ("What Struck John?" pp. 4-5, https://kenrahn.com/Marsh/Autopsy/riley.html)

Five autopsy witnesses -- Sibert, O'Neill, Lipsey, Stringer, and Kellerman -- said the rear head entry wound was near the EOP or the hairline. The three autopsy doctors insisted to their dying days that the EOP site was correct.

JC: Not surprising that a person totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence would cite other people totally unqualified to render judgements about the medical evidence.

LOL! Uh, so the autopsy doctors were "totally unqualified to render judgments about the medical evidence"?! Sheesh, did you just skim over those paragraphs and miss the citation of the autopsy doctors?! Your replies are just one clown show after another.

Dr. Joseph Riley was "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! Really?! Dr. Riley was a highly respected neurologist who specialized in neuroanatomy and neuropathology. His neuroscience research was published in several peer-reviewed scientific journals, including the Journal of Comparative Neurology, Cell and Tissue Research, and Brain Research, and his research was cited by many other neuroscientists. He taught neuroscience at the University of Florida, the University of California, and the State University of New York.

Dr. David Mantik is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! He has viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives more often than any other medical expert, 29 times in all, and has been studying the medical evidence longer than any other medical expert who has written about the JFK case. He is one of only three medical experts who have done optical-density (OD) measurements on the autopsy skull x-rays, and he has done more OD measurements than either of the two other experts. He's board-certified in radiation oncology, licensed in radiology, holds a doctorate in physics, and is a former professor of physics at the University of Michigan.

And Dr. Larry Sturdivan, who was the HSCA's wound ballistics consultant, is "totally unqualified" to talk about the medical evidence?! He worked as a physical scientist at the Wound Ballistics Branch of the Aberdeen Proving Grounds for years. You realize that Sturdivan is a lone-gunman theorist, right? You know this, right?

Ah, but here's the problem with Sturdivan for your side: He has admitted that the 6.5 mm object cannot be a bullet fragment and that no FMJ bullet would ever deposit a fragment on the outer table of the skull upon entry. Those are two devastating admissions that your side just can't stomach.

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

The problem is that the brain photos show no damage whatsoever to the right occipital lobe, but a bullet that entered near the EOP could not have missed tearing through the right occipital lobe, as the HSCA FPP correctly pointed out. The FPP hammered the autopsy doctors on this point, and they had no explanation for it. However, the FPP argument against the EOP site only works if the brain photos are authentic.

JC: MTG tries to substitute his judgement of what the medical evidence is based on a few leaked photos and x-rays for the unanimous judgement of a panel of some of the most highly qualified forensic medical examiners of their day who saw ALL the photos and ALL the x-rays. So who should we believe? MTG or the FPP? Of course, the question answers itself.

Virtually every word of this dodge is false. Drs. Mantik, Chesser, Aguilar, and McClellan have seen the autopsy photos and x-rays at the National Archives. Moreover, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that several decent copies of the autopsy photos became available in 1981 (i.e., from the Fox Set) and that the HSCA released decent copies of the autopsy x-rays in 1978.

You again ignore the fact that Dr. Michael Baden, the FPP chairman, admitted to Vincent Bugliosi in a recorded interview that the autopsy brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of missing brain tissue, and that this fact has been confirmed by Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser, both of whom examined the brain photos at the National Archives. 

Let me remind you that the autopsy doctors saw the actual head wounds in person, and handled the skull and the skull fragments with their own hands, whereas the FPP doctors could only rely on an incomplete set of autopsy photos and x-rays. The FPP doctors did not see "all" the photos and x-rays because we know for an absolute fact that a number of photos and x-rays are missing from the extant collection of autopsy materials.

If you're now back-pedaling to the view that the FPP was correct about the location of the rear head entry wound ("So who should we believe? MTG or the FPP?"), then you need to explain how the brain tissue directly under the cowlick site is undamaged in the autopsy photos, a fact confirmed by WC apologist Dr. Robert Artwohl when he viewed the autopsy materials at the National Archives. You need to deal with the fact that the FPP, like the Clark Panel, relocated the entry wound up to the cowlick site based on the now-debunked assumption that the 6.5 mm object was a bullet fragment that was deposited in the outer table of the skull as the bullet entered the skull. You need to deal with the fact that nobody at the autopsy reported seeing an entry wound in the cowlick area, that every single witness who commented on the wound's location said it was much farther down on the skull, near the EOP/hairline.

I notice you made no attempt to explain how the brain photos could be authentic when the skull x-rays show about 2/3 of the right brain to be missing, a fact first noticed way back in 1975 by Dr. Fred Hodges, one of the leading radiologists in the world at the time, a fact later also confirmed by Humes himself in 1992, and when multiple sets of OD measurements have proven that 2/3 of the right brain is missing in the skull x-rays.

I notice you also ducked the fact that numerous eyewitnesses saw brain matter from JFK's brain on 16 surfaces, and that Jackie Kennedy brought a "large chunk of brain" into the Parkland ER and handed it to Dr. Jenkins, a fact that even Bugliosi did not dispute. I guess even you realize it would be discrediting and hilarious for you to claim that all that brain matter added up to no more than 2 ounces.

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM

The evidence that the brain photos are fraudulent is truly impressive. As experts from both sides have confirmed, the brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of missing brain tissue. Yet, multiple sets of optical-density measurements have confirmed that about 2/3 of the right brain is missing in the autopsy skull x-rays, a fact that Dr. Fred Hodges noted in 1975 when he served on the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel. Humes himself told JAMA that 2/3 of the right cerebrum was blasted away. A number of witnesses who saw the brain said that 1/4 to 1/2 of it was missing. And, we have a veritable mountain of eyewitness testimony that bits of JFK's brain were blown or fell onto 16 surfaces, and that's not counting the "large chunk of brain" that Jackie brought into the ER and handed to Dr. Jenkins.

JC: The evidence that MTG is an amateur hack trying to perform analysis that requires years of medical training and experience is truly impressive.

Perhaps you lack the capacity to grasp the obvious fact that the brain photos cannot be authentic because the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and because so much brain tissue was blown from JFK's brain, but you only make yourself look foolish and disingenuous when you float your flim-flam about needing "years of medical training" to understand this fact.

You don't need "years of medical training" to understand that a brain with less than 1-2 ounces of missing tissue cannot be the same brain (1) that is missing 2/3 of its substance on its righthand side in the skull x-rays, (2) that had pieces of tissue blown from it that fell onto 16 surfaces, and (3) that had a "large chunk" blown from it that was handed to Dr. Jenkins by Jackie Kennedy.

Furthermore, medical experts, i.e., people who have "years of medical training," have pointed out that the brain photos cannot be authentic for the above-mentioned reasons.

I notice you said nothing, not one word, about the OD measurements of the skull x-rays, about Dr. Hodges' finding that the x-rays show a large part of the right brain to be missing, about Dr. Humes's statement to JAMA that 2/3 of the right cerebrum was blasted away, and about the numerous eyewitness accounts of a large amount of brain tissue being blown from JFK's brain.

Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Yesterday at 01:23:20 PM
Only those who are emotionally committed to believing in the lone-gunman theory will continue to believe the autopsy brain photos are genuine.

JC: Only extremely gullible CT fanatics would believe MTG is competent to make such judgements based an a smattering of the medical evidence he has seen.

Yeah, uh-huh. You bet. Too bad for you and your ducking and dodging that so many medical experts have likewise observed that the brain photos cannot be authentic given that the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain to be missing and given the large amount of brain tissue that numerous witnesses saw blown from JFK's brain.

so what?  6 others won as well. More "Richard Smith" 
He was;  "Recognized for a lifetime of achievement, including his leadership on HIV research, AIDS relief, and communicating essential public health measures."

Meanwhile;
"Trump minimized the severity of the virus by stating that 99% of COVID-19 cases are "totally harmless"

"Trump aggressively promoted the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a "game changer," even claiming he took it prophylactically. His promotion caused a temporary run on the drug, which complicated access for lupus and arthritis patients who relied on it."

In July 2020, Trump retweeted a video featuring doctors making false claims about a coronavirus "cure" and dismissing "the efficacy of masks. He defended the presenters as "very respected" after social media platforms removed the video for violating misinformation policies."

“Our doctors get more money if somebody dies from COVID. You know that, right?” Trump told a crowd in Michigan, falsely asserting that doctors purposefully chose to blame COVID-19 for terminal illnesses like cancer or heart attacks."

"Trump speculated about whether disinfectants could be used internally to treat the virus."

"Donald Trump downplayed the virus and blocked Fauci from appearing on several television programs. Trump called Fauci part of a group of "idiots" and suggested he might fire him after the presidential election, which Trump lost."

Trump has taught you to hate and it serves him well.

"So what"?  First, it is a crime for federal employees to solicit cash awards.  Second, he took time and resources away from dealing with an ongoing pandemic to instruct his employees to spend their time seeking awards on his behalf.  Third, he didn't deserve the awards because he was either an incompetent and/or complicit in a pandemic that resulted in the deaths of millions.  Other than that I guess it was fine.

My Hendrix research would be a vast improvement for The Education Forum but when I inquire why they are preventing my posting it I get no answer...I suspect they are loyalists who don't want to damage their home nation's reputation...