Yet Another Debate With Rossley
John McAdams
I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
show.
It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
newsgroup. Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
I'll post the link when I get it.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
tomnln
news:mosnp59vglsl6stcv...@4ax.com...
AGAIN;
MCADAMS Just Blathered on & on & on & on when asked a question about
evidence/testimony.
AGAIN;
McAdams gave NO official Citations for his "claims" when asked.
j leyden
> I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
> show.
>
> It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
> several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
> newsgroup. �Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>
> I'll post the link when I get it.
>
> .John
I'll make a prediction here and now, John. Rossley will claim victory and
tell everyone he mopped the floor with you. Of course, you don't gotta
post that one.
JGL
WhiskyJoe
When's the big debate between McAdams and Rossley
on Black Op Radio? Let me guess. There is not
going to be such a debate on Black Op Radio,
is there. Why? Because Batey doesn't care who
does better. But Osanic does.
In any case, Rossley, let us know when you get
a firm invite from Osanic to debate McAdams.
I won't be holding my breath.
tomnln
"WhiskyJoe" <jr...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:f1a7e83d-09c2-4a3d...@t34g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
As Usual, you're a Dollar Short & a Day Late.
I debated McAdams for 1 1/2 hours this afternoon.
Anton will post McAdams' "wake" later tonight on Youtube.
John McAdams
>On Mar 13, 3:23?pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
>> show.
>>
>> It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
>> several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
>> newsgroup. ?Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>>
>> I'll post the link when I get it.
>>
>> .John
>
>I'll make a prediction here and now, John. Rossley will claim victory and
>tell everyone he mopped the floor with you. Of course, you don't gotta
>post that one.
>
>
Tom can claim victory if he wants, anybody who cares at all can simply
listen to the debate.
I caught him misrepresenting some sources, and he turned really
hostile.
He actually embraced Horne's book.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
<john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>
>I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
>show.
>
>It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
>several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
>newsgroup. Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>
>I'll post the link when I get it.
>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
WhiskyJoe
> As Usual, you're a Dollar Short & a Day Late.
> I debated McAdams for 1 1/2 hours this
> afternoon.
> Anton will post McAdams' "wake" later tonight
> on Youtube.
And as usual, you are dodging the question.
I understand why Anton invited you to debate.
He doesn't care whether you are McAdams's
does better.
My questions is, why doesn't Osanic give an
invitation to you and McAdams to debate.
If you really clobbered McAdams, as you so
plainly believe, he should be eager to have
you two debate on Black Op Radio, which has
a different audience.
Tell us, what arrangements has Osanic made
to set up such a debate on Black Op Radio.
Don't dodge, tell us. Or at least tell us
the excuses Osanic has given you.
tomnln
After admitting that he had NOT read Horne's book, I'm wondering HOW McAdams
could Reject it ! ! !
It seems that McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the Facts ! ! !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Schuyler
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:23:23 -0600, John McAdams
>
>
> >I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
> >show.
>
> >It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
> >several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
> >newsgroup. Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>
> >I'll post the link when I get it.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
>
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I just listened to most of the debate. Tom even trotted out the so-
called "black bar across the bottom of the Zapruder film that hides a
bunch of action" nonsense.
Tom, how many times does this need to be explained to you before you
drop it? It's really stunning.
And not only does Rossley feel Oswald wasn't on the 6th floor of the
TSBD at 12:30pm, he also feels the killer(s) moved boxes around for
some reason before apparently vanishing into thin air. Just
straightening up, I guess. Nice killers.
I was dissapointed Tom didn't bring up his Jim Garrison/Marina Oswald-
Porter/Ken Porter connections/interview(s). If it was discussed, and I
missed it, I'll definitely need to re-listen.
Tom, why do you have space at your website for cut-and-paste copies of
your profane laced acj. "debates" with Tom Lowry, but you can't find
the space or time to tell us the stories behind your encounters with
some of the most seminal people in the JFK saga?
David Von Pein
>>> "After admitting that he had NOT read [Doug] Horne's book, I'm wondering HOW [John] McAdams could Reject it!!! It seems that McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the Facts!!!" <<<
Nobody needs to read Horne's nonsense to know that his whole 5-volume
series is total malarkey which goes against EVERY PREVIOUS OFFICIAL
GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATION OF THE KENNEDY MURDER.
Besides, Mr. McAdams doesn't need to read all five of Horne's fantasy
volumes, because the main thrust of all of those volumes is right
there in the ARRB Memos that Horne wrote from 1996 to 1998.
And there's certainly enough laughable stuff in these memos [linked
below] to convince any reasonable, rational person that Douglas P.
Horne was thoroughly brainwashed by David S. Lifton:
http://history-matters.com/archive/contents/arrb/contents_arrb_staff-memos.htm
As I wrote in a prior Internet posting, my guess is that the entire 5-
member panel which headed up the Assassination Records Review Board
was very likely totally embarrassed by Douglas P. Horne's ridiculous
memos.
And as I also stated previously, it's also my guess that Horne was
very lucky he wasn't tossed out the front door by one of the top-level
members of the ARRB once it became common knowledge where Horne was
going with his ludicrous "Humes Altered The Body" and "Altered
Zapruder Film" hogwash.
Horne was extremely fortunate, IMO, to have been given the space in
the ARRB report he was given (in the form of "memos"), because those
memos certainly do not deserve to take up ANY space at all within the
contents of a U.S. Government report (or any of its addendums).
Horne's memos (and book) belong in only one place -- an incinerator.
==================================================
THE CLAPTRAP OF DOUGLAS P. HORNE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0e2e36113ce98e6b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/155a3a578f5005f5
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2bdfb1d377432d7e
==================================================
John McAdams
>
>"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
>news:qsrop5t9q4t6ptigl...@4ax.com...
>> On 13 Mar 2010 18:38:49 -0500, j leyden <JLeyd...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 13, 3:23?pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>>> I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
>>>> show.
>>>>
>>>> It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
>>>> several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
>>>> newsgroup. ?Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>>>>
>>>> I'll post the link when I get it.
>>>>
>>>> .John
>>>
>>>I'll make a prediction here and now, John. Rossley will claim victory and
>>>tell everyone he mopped the floor with you. Of course, you don't gotta
>>>post that one.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Tom can claim victory if he wants, anybody who cares at all can simply
>> listen to the debate.
>>
>> I caught him misrepresenting some sources, and he turned really
>> hostile.
>>
>> He actually embraced Horne's book.
>>
>> .John
>> --------------
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>After admitting that he had NOT read Horne's book, I'm wondering HOW McAdams
>could Reject it ! ! !
>
>It seems that McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the Facts ! ! !
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've read the ARRB stuff, Tom. I know what his sources say.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
I can't believe I let Rossley get away with something that I nailed
him on in the first debate:
He insisted that Glenn Bennett saw Kennedy hit in the back, when it
was convenient for saying the back wound was too low to be consistent
with the SBT.
But then he insisted Connally was hit from the front!
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j leyden
> Tom can claim victory if he wants, anybody who cares at all can simply
> listen to the debate.
>
> I caught him misrepresenting some sources, and he turned really
> hostile.
>
> He actually embraced Horne's book.
>
> .John
Well, let this be a lesson for you. When I'm in the city and see one of
those disheveled guys standing on the corner holding a sign that says "The
End Is Near," I try to avoid him, not engage him in debate.
JGL
John McAdams
That, I have decided, is good advice.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
tomnln
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:908qp5t83h6qj5tjj...@4ax.com...
You have already admitted in the second radio debate that you have NOT
read Doug Horne's Book "Inside the ARRB" (5 volumes)
That's WHY you speak only in Generalities ! ! !
NEVER including any official Citations.
Prompting my comment>>> "McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the
Facts" !
tomnln
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:908qp5t83h6qj5tjj...@4ax.com...
McAdams wrote;
> I've read the ARRB stuff, Tom. I know what his sources say.
>
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I write;
Had you read Horne's 5 volume book you would have learned that the ARRB
did NOT publish all of the information that Horne got out of the
witnesses.
You seem to ALWAYS love the "Half Story" John ! ! !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:778qp5p16jljf3ijp...@4ax.com...
bigdog
> On 13 Mar 2010 18:38:49 -0500, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mar 13, 3:23?pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
> >> show.
>
> >> It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
> >> several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
> >> newsgroup. ?Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>
> >> I'll post the link when I get it.
>
> >> .John
>
> >I'll make a prediction here and now, John. Rossley will claim victory and
> >tell everyone he mopped the floor with you. Of course, you don't gotta
> >post that one.
>
> Tom can claim victory if he wants, anybody who cares at all can simply
> listen to the debate.
>
> I caught him misrepresenting some sources, and he turned really
> hostile.
>
> He actually embraced Horne's book.
>
> .John
Rossley embraced Horne's book? I didn't know that was an official
record.
Bud
> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:23:23 -0600, John McAdams
>
>
> >I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
> >show.
>
> >It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
> >several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
> >newsgroup. Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>
> >I'll post the link when I get it.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
>
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
I just watched (listened, really) a good bit of it. After over four
decades of intense effort, this is what the CTers have to offer. I
think the WC`s findings are safe.
Anthony Marsh
He keeps making that same mistake and we keep correcting him here. He
intentionally misinterprets witness statements.
Or cherry picks which statement to accept as the absolute proof.
You'll notice that I don't make his mistake and claim that because one
doctor or one reporter said that Kennedy was hit in the front of the
head that this proves the shot came from the grassy knoll.
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:281d4ac5-b5c8-4004...@b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
bigdog wrote;
Rossley embraced Horne's book? I didn't know that was an official
record.
I write;
Apparently John Corbett doesn't know that Doug Horne served on the
official ARRB ! ! !
Anyone Surprised???
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Marsh
>
>
>
>
>>>> "After admitting that he had NOT read [Doug] Horne's book, I'm wondering HOW [John] McAdams could Reject it!!! It seems that McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the Facts!!!"<<<
>
> Nobody needs to read Horne's nonsense to know that his whole 5-volume
> series is total malarkey which goes against EVERY PREVIOUS OFFICIAL
> GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATION OF THE KENNEDY MURDER.
>
Didn't I make that perfectly clear when his name first came up and I
said that he is a Liftonite? That's all you need to know.
> Besides, Mr. McAdams doesn't need to read all five of Horne's fantasy
> volumes, because the main thrust of all of those volumes is right
> there in the ARRB Memos that Horne wrote from 1996 to 1998.
>
> And there's certainly enough laughable stuff in these memos [linked
> below] to convince any reasonable, rational person that Douglas P.
> Horne was thoroughly brainwashed by David S. Lifton:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/contents/arrb/contents_arrb_staff-memos.htm
>
> As I wrote in a prior Internet posting, my guess is that the entire 5-
> member panel which headed up the Assassination Records Review Board
> was very likely totally embarrassed by Douglas P. Horne's ridiculous
> memos.
>
Fun to guess, isn't it? Even more fun to smear by false attribution and
mob mentality.
> And as I also stated previously, it's also my guess that Horne was
> very lucky he wasn't tossed out the front door by one of the top-level
> members of the ARRB once it became common knowledge where Horne was
> going with his ludicrous "Humes Altered The Body" and "Altered
> Zapruder Film" hogwash.
>
Exactly when did the ARRB learn this? What day, what date?
> Horne was extremely fortunate, IMO, to have been given the space in
> the ARRB report he was given (in the form of "memos"), because those
> memos certainly do not deserve to take up ANY space at all within the
> contents of a U.S. Government report (or any of its addendums).
>
You want them to hide the memos and then have us conspiracy kooks accuse
them of a cover-up?
tomnln
Marsh can also commit Suicide HERE>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/invitation.htm
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b9d75ed$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:953cd493-c8a3-4d20...@e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
> On Mar 13, 11:56 pm, John McAdams<john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:23:23 -0600, John McAdams
>>
>> <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I just finished with another debate with Tom Rossley on Anton Batey's
>>> show.
>>
>>> It was much less congenial than the last one, with Rossley making
>>> several comments that would have got rejected here on the moderated
>>> newsgroup. Batey seemed a bit embarrassed by it.
>>
>>> I'll post the link when I get it.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
>>
>> .John
>> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> I just listened to most of the debate. Tom even trotted out the so-
> called "black bar across the bottom of the Zapruder film that hides a
> bunch of action" nonsense.
>
> Tom, how many times does this need to be explained to you before you
> drop it? It's really stunning.
>
> And not only does Rossley feel Oswald wasn't on the 6th floor of the
> TSBD at 12:30pm, he also feels the killer(s) moved boxes around for
> some reason before apparently vanishing into thin air. Just
> straightening up, I guess. Nice killers.
>
Was it the killers who rearranged the boxes four times or was it the
klutzy police? I don't think the police were the killers.
Anthony Marsh
It is not necessary to read a book to reject the concept. I don't need to
read a book saying that the Earth is only 5,000 years old and I certainly
don't want such a book as the required reading in schools.
John Fiorentino
Obviously Rossley is out to lunch and you held up quite well.
My only technical point is your emphatic statement that Oswald could not
have been at the Selective Service in Austin 25/Sept. Admittedly, the
overwhelming weight of the evidence says he most likely was not.
However, in a court of law, you couldn't make your case with the available
evidence. And the WC conclusion re: Dannelly is rather artfully worded.
The Commission indicated Dannelly may have been mistaken and simply got
her information from various news reports by the time she gave statements
to the FBI. The problem with that is the FBI didn't get around to Dannelly
until December, so far so good. But the Commission fails to mention that
she called her boss on 24/Nov., giving essentially the same story. Her
boss backed it up.
There is no concrete evidence Oswald was ever on Continental Trailways Bus
No. 5121.
Oswald's neighbor saw him leave his apartment 24/Sept
Oswald's Unemployment check was indeed cashed in NO on 25/Sept. but the
FBI failed to link the endorsement on that warrant check to Oswald.
So, technically speaking...........he COULD have been in Austin 25/Sept.
John F.
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:8juop5dnnte5i6gda...@4ax.com...
David Von Pein
>>> "Apparently John Corbett doesn't know that Doug Horne served on the
official ARRB!!!" <<<
Apparently Tom Rossley thinks Doug Horne's 5 volumes of nonsense ARE,
indeed, official Govt. records (just because Horne served on the ARRB).
Anyone surprised?
Horne was fortunate he wasn't thrown out the door by John Tunheim.
David Von Pein
>>> "You want them [the ARRB] to hide the [Horne] memos and then have us
conspiracy kooks accuse them of a cover-up?" <<<
Tony must have missed my post from last month when I said this:
"After finding out that Doug Horne was a conspiracy kook to end ALL
conspiracy kooks, the ARRB probably was dying to fire him (to save the
Review Board any further embarrassment), but they decided it might not
look too good to fire the only conspiracy theorist on the Review Board
staff (it might look like the Board was "covering up" something), so they
let the kook named Horne stay on the staff and they let him run wild with
his own unique speculation by allowing him lots of space in the Report in
the form of "memos"." -- David R. Von Pein; February 24, 2010
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2bdfb1d377432d7e
tomnln
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/invitation.htm
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b9d8514$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
tomnln
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b9d84bc$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>> some of the most seminal people in the JFK saga.
Marsh seems to think the Police was on the 6th floor within 2 minutes.
Marsh doesn't seem to be aware of the ARRB report that the boxes in the
window were moved within 2 minutes.
tomnln
"John Fiorentino" <johnfio...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b9d7adf$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
tomnln
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b9d8514$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>> After admitting that he had NOT read Horne's book, I'm wondering HOW
>> McAdams could Reject it ! ! !
>>
>
> It is not necessary to read a book to reject the concept. I don't need to
> read a book saying that the Earth is only 5,000 years old and I certainly
> don't want such a book as the required reading in schools.
>
>> It seems that McAdams reaches conclusions BEFORE Gathering the Facts ! !
>> !
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
TERRIFIC KARNAK !
Tell about McAdams' book coming out next November?
Good/Bad/Indifferent?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Marsh
> BIRDS OF A FEATHER = McAdams/Marsh ! ! !
>
> Marsh can also commit Suicide HERE>>>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/invitation.htm
>
>
>
You don't seem to understand the concept of a debate. The idea is to
have both sides represented. I represent the conspiracy side. I already
had a radio debate with a WC defender and I cut him to shreds.
tomnln
Claims with NO Citations.
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b9db3d3$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
David Von Pein
A FEW RANDOM COMMENTS ABOUT JFK ASSASSINATION "DEBATE #2" BETWEEN JOHN
McADAMS AND TOM ROSSLEY ON MARCH 13, 2010:
http://YouTube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
=====================================================
RE: JOHN CONNALLY'S CHEST:
Tom Rossley is unique (in a way), because there's not another
conspiracy theorist alive (that I'm aware of) who actually believes
Governor Connally was shot in the chest from the FRONT.
And there's also not another conspiracy theorist alive (to my
knowledge) who thinks that Connally's chest wound was a very small
"round" wound.
The following quotes can easily be found in the Warren Commission
testimony of one of Connally's Parkland physicians, Dr. Robert R.
Shaw:
"A large sucking wound in the front of his right chest." -- Dr.
Robert Shaw
"We knew this [an area below the right nipple on the body] was
the wound exit...by the fact of its size, the ragged edges of the
wound."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm
=====================================================
RE: ROBERT FRAZIER:
As John McAdams said, Tom Rossley has completely misinterpreted some
of the testimony of FBI firearms expert Robert A. Frazier (with
respect to the topic of "tumbling" bullets).
Rossley wants the unsuspecting listener to believe that when Bob
Frazier of the FBI said that there was "no evidence at all of tumbling
or yaw" [3H438] of the many test bullets fired from Lee Harvey
Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (CE139), this comment by Frazier is
supposed to prove (per Rossley) that a Carcano bullet could not and
would not tumble or yaw AFTER THE BULLET HAD STRUCK AN INTERVENING
OBJECT IN ITS PATH.
But that, quite obviously, is not at all what Bob Frazier meant when
he said what he said on page 438 of WC volume 3. Frazier was talking
about the stability of a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet in flight BEFORE it
reaches its target.
Frazier certainly wasn't suggesting in his testimony at 3H438 that a
Carcano bullet would NEVER tumble or yaw AFTER it had struck an
object. And Tom Rossley is just silly if he believes that IS what
Frazier meant in that testimony.
3H438:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0223b.htm
=====================================================
RE: JOSEPH MILTEER:
Another very good point brought up by Professor McAdams was the point
he made regarding Joseph Milteer.
As McAdams pointed out (which is something I had never really thought
about from this particular POV before), the shooting scenario that
Milteer speculated about to William Somersett in 1963 was certainly a
LONE-ASSASSIN PLOT.
I.E., what Milteer was talking about certainly wasn't a MULTI-GUN
plot, and therefore, according to virtually all conspiracy theorists,
it's the kind of shooting scenario that is DID NOT OCCUR in Dallas on
November 22.
Plus, as Mr. McAdams also rightly pointed out to Mr. Rossley, Milteer
was most definitely talking about an assassination attempt that was
supposedly going to be made in FLORIDA, not in TEXAS. That fact is
very clear when listening to Milteer's recorded words.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/milteer.htm
=====================================================
FINAL DEBATE RESULTS:
John McAdams, quite naturally, very easily won the 3/13/10 debate. And
that's not too surprising, since Mr. McAdams has ALL of the evidence
on his "Oswald Did It Alone" side, while Mr. Rossley is left looking
mighty desperate by not only having to speculate about things that
nobody else on Planet Earth believes (such as John Connally being shot
in the chest from the FRONT), but by also being forced to misrepresent
testimony to suit his conspiratorial purposes (such as the blatant way
Rossley distorted the "tumbling" testimony of FBI agent Robert
Frazier).
All in all, it was a predictable 90 minutes worth of debating, with
the lone-assassin advocate using the facts and evidence in conjunction
with a whole lot of common sense and logic, while the conspiracy
theorist continues to believe in stupid stuff (including the
intolerable theories of one Douglas P. Horne). A typical day at the
office for a JFK conspiracist.
=====================================================
RELATED "DEBATE" LINKS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8576bff5a6682062
http://Box.net//static/flash/box_explorer.swf?widget_hash=88cm88qq0r
http://Battling-A-Conspiracy-Kook.blogspot.com
=====================================================
John Fiorentino
XIV and a summation in the WCR pg. 732.
There are additional FBI reports somewhere else relating to the warrant
checks, but I don't have those cites handy.
I also have (somewhere, again forgive me) memoranda from Hoover, wherein he
was rather heavy handed with the Dannelly matter, essentially inferring that
she was a kook.
There is no evidence that I've seen indicating that Dannelly was anything
other than an upright citizen. Of course, she may have been mistaken.
However, from a strictly evidentiary point of view, the Commission's
conclusions re: Oswald's movements 24/25 Sept., are on somewhat shaky
ground.
The strongest indicator in support of the Commission is the cashing of the
warrant check in NO 25/Sept. But it wouldn't stand up as evidence in a court
of law.
John F.
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:w9inn.74369$wr5....@newsfe22.iad...
John McAdams
<johnfio...@optonline.net> wrote:
>.John:
>
>Obviously Rossley is out to lunch and you held up quite well.
>
>My only technical point is your emphatic statement that Oswald could not
>have been at the Selective Service in Austin 25/Sept. Admittedly, the
>overwhelming weight of the evidence says he most likely was not.
>
>However, in a court of law, you couldn't make your case with the available
>evidence. And the WC conclusion re: Dannelly is rather artfully worded.
>
>The Commission indicated Dannelly may have been mistaken and simply got
>her information from various news reports by the time she gave statements
>to the FBI. The problem with that is the FBI didn't get around to Dannelly
>until December, so far so good. But the Commission fails to mention that
>she called her boss on 24/Nov., giving essentially the same story. Her
>boss backed it up.
>
>There is no concrete evidence Oswald was ever on Continental Trailways Bus
>No. 5121.
>
>Oswald's neighbor saw him leave his apartment 24/Sept
>
>Oswald's Unemployment check was indeed cashed in NO on 25/Sept. but the
>FBI failed to link the endorsement on that warrant check to Oswald.
>
>So, technically speaking...........he COULD have been in Austin 25/Sept.
>
Well . . . we went over this, and I *think* I posted the paper trail
where the FBI meticulously traced the route of the check from Austin
to New Orleans. It could not have been in Oswald's box before 5:00
a.m. on the 25th.
*Now:* if we posit that Oswald travelled by private car, or even
better by a private plane, we can get all sorts of interesting
results. :-)
But I'll go with the simple theory: he was in New Orleans, and then
he was in Houston. The timing works for the bus. He couldn't drive,
and there is no evidence that anybody drove him or flew him.
But the simple theory is, almost by definition, the least interesting.
:-)
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
>
>
> A FEW RANDOM COMMENTS ABOUT JFK ASSASSINATION "DEBATE #2" BETWEEN JOHN
> McADAMS AND TOM ROSSLEY ON MARCH 13, 2010:
>
> http://YouTube.com/watch?v=yjoVcZ9H_PA
>
> =====================================================
>
>
> RE: JOHN CONNALLY'S CHEST:
>
>
> Tom Rossley is unique (in a way), because there's not another
> conspiracy theorist alive (that I'm aware of) who actually believes
> Governor Connally was shot in the chest from the FRONT.
>
Now wait a cotten picking minute there. Lifton said that all the shots
came from the front, none from the back. He even denied seeing the blood
pool on the back of Connally's jacket in the Zapruder film. So his only
solution must also be that Connally was shot in the chest from the front.
And he does have a couple of sycophants.
> And there's also not another conspiracy theorist alive (to my
> knowledge) who thinks that Connally's chest wound was a very small
> "round" wound.
>
Define "small." Do you mean 5 cm?
> The following quotes can easily be found in the Warren Commission
> testimony of one of Connally's Parkland physicians, Dr. Robert R.
> Shaw:
>
>
>
> "A large sucking wound in the front of his right chest." -- Dr.
> Robert Shaw
>
> "We knew this [an area below the right nipple on the body] was
> the wound exit...by the fact of its size, the ragged edges of the
> wound."
>
Jagged edges do not guarantee that it is an exit wound. Do you know what a
contact wound is? Dr. Henry Lee had a case where the wife was accused of
murder because the wound in the back was so small and neat and the wound
in the chest was so large and ragged. Dr. Lee proved that the back wound
was merely an exit wound of a very small piece of shrapnel and the chest
wound was a contact wound. Have you ever seen a contact wound? It was
ruled a suicide.
Wrong. You just accidentally revealed your flaw in thinking that I
pointed out before. You equate a lone shooter with a lone assassin.
> I.E., what Milteer was talking about certainly wasn't a MULTI-GUN
> plot, and therefore, according to virtually all conspiracy theorists,
> it's the kind of shooting scenario that is DID NOT OCCUR in Dallas on
> November 22.
>
Virtually all? Wrong. The theory that everyone in Washingon believed was
that Oswald was the lone shooter, but part of a conspiracy. It is not
necessary to have multiple shooters for it to be a conspiracy. Just as
the polls make clear. But you still can't seem to understand that.
> Plus, as Mr. McAdams also rightly pointed out to Mr. Rossley, Milteer
> was most definitely talking about an assassination attempt that was
> supposedly going to be made in FLORIDA, not in TEXAS. That fact is
> very clear when listening to Milteer's recorded words.
>
Maybe that's why they took better security precautions in Florida and
prevented a possible assassination.
Anthony Marsh
> You're just like McAdams;
>
> Claims with NO Citations.
>
>
You're just like McAdams.
Relying on official WC lies.
Anthony Marsh
I don't believe that. And in fact the boxes seen in the window from the
street in photographs taken from the street just after the shooting
appear to be in a slightly different orientation than any of the four
arrangements made by the police.
Anthony Marsh
>
>
>>>> "You want them [the ARRB] to hide the [Horne] memos and then have us
> conspiracy kooks accuse them of a cover-up?"<<<
>
> Tony must have missed my post from last month when I said this:
>
> "After finding out that Doug Horne was a conspiracy kook to end ALL
> conspiracy kooks, the ARRB probably was dying to fire him (to save the
> Review Board any further embarrassment), but they decided it might not
> look too good to fire the only conspiracy theorist on the Review Board
First of all, how do you even know that the ARRB officially decided that
Horne was a conspiracy theorist and second how do you know that he was
the ONLY conspiracy theorist on the Review Board?
> staff (it might look like the Board was "covering up" something), so they
> let the kook named Horne stay on the staff and they let him run wild with
> his own unique speculation by allowing him lots of space in the Report in
> the form of "memos"." -- David R. Von Pein; February 24, 2010
>
And your speculation just confirms my point.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2bdfb1d377432d7e
>
Anthony Marsh
You seem to have this wacky notion that all the ARRB were WC defenders.
tomnln
Laredo TX.
FBI Gemberling Report September 19, 1964.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
Citations are what counts John.
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:4b9e95cd.2345973141@news.supernews.com...
John Fiorentino
.John:
And I agree the simple theory is most likely the correct one. I'm simply
pointing out that the evidence for that theory would not hold up in court.
And my second point specifically re: Dannelly was to show that the WC,
whose conclusion I support wholeheartedly and Hoover, whom I was never
particularly fond of, could have handled this incident much better than
they did.
The specific reasoning used by the Commission in discounting Dannelly is
flawed.
John F.
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:4b9e95cd.2345973141@news.supernews.com...
tomnln
> On 3/15/2010 12:38 AM, tomnln wrote:
>> You're just like McAdams;
>>
>> Claims with NO Citations.
>>
>>
>
> You're just like McAdams.
>
> Relying on official WC lies.
YOU are just like McAdams;
WCR Apologist !
tomnln
You left out Oswald's visit to Sylvia Odio in Dallas.
You left out that the HSCA Believed Odio (HSCA Report page 139)
You left out that Oswald cashed his unemployment check in Dallas on the
25th.
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:4b9e95cd.2345973141@news.supernews.com...
David Von Pein
>>> "Lifton said that all the shots came from the front, none from the
back." <<<
Touche. That makes Rossley and Lifton birds of a feather. Very fitting.
yeuhd
> There's also the "UNUSED" portion of the bus ticket From Mexico City TO
> Laredo TX.
>
> FBI Gemberling Report September 19, 1964.
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
>
> Citations are what counts John.
Since the question here is how Oswald got from New Orleans to Houston
on Sept. 25, 1963, and not how he got from Mexico City to Laredo on
September 30, how is this relevant?
David Von Pein
>>> "You seem to have this wacky notion that all the ARRB were WC defenders." <<<
Most (if not all) were. Horne has said that himself.
tomnln
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7ead2c22-c872-4669...@u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
The Warren Commission told us he travelled BOTH Ways by Commercial bus
lines.
Oswald was NOT in Houston on the 25th yeuhd.
Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
Oswald was at Sylvia odio's on the Evening of the 25th.
The HSCA Report page 139 Believes Odio.
Oswald cashed his umemployment check in Dallas on the 25th.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
tomnln
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7ead2c22-c872-4669...@u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Fiorentino
You're also confused on the Twiford matter.
John F.
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4b9fc7d2$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
tomnln
"John Fiorentino" <johnfio...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b9fccde$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
tomnln
YOU are the one who's Confused.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
"John Fiorentino" <johnfio...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b9fccde$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
yeuhd
> Oswald was NOT in Houston on the 25th yeuhd.
> Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
>
> Oswald was at Sylvia odio's on the Evening of the 25th.
>
> The HSCA Report page 139 Believes Odio.
>
> Oswald cashed his umemployment check in Dallas on the 25th.
1. Interesting that you did *not* link to these two affidavits:
Affidavit of Estelle Twiford, and affidavit of Horace Elroy Twiford:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0095a.htm
Why is that? Could it be because in those affidavits, the Twifords say
that the call occurred in late September?
2. It's a 3-1/2 to 4-hour drive from Dallas to Houston. Oswald could have
been at Odio's door in Dallas circa 9 p.m. on Sept. 25 and still have been
driven to Houston in time for his bus at 2:35 a.m. on Sept. 26. Even have
enough time for a late-night meeting with Horace Twiford, whom Oswald
could have called from Dallas before meeting with Odio.
tomnln
"John Fiorentino" <johnfio...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4b9fccde$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Anthony Marsh
>
>
>>>> "You seem to have this wacky notion that all the ARRB were WC defenders."<<<
>
> Most (if not all) were. Horne has said that himself.
>
Horne never said all.
yeuhd
> Oswald cashed his Unemployment check in "DALLAS" on the 25th !
Warren Report, p. 731:
Oswald remained in New Orleans until September 25. His precise
whereabouts on the night of September 24 are uncertain, but in view of
his limited finances, he probably returned to the apartment to sleep
after checking his luggage at a bus station or spent the night at an
inexpensive hotel or roominghouse. Some time after 5 a.m. on September
25, he collected a Texas unemployment compensation check for $33 at
his New Orleans post office box. He cashed the check between 8 a.m.
and noon at a store about six blocks from his apartment on Magazine
Street. This gave him about $200 for the trip to Mexico.
Commission Exhibit 2131:
It has been determined that Oswald received a warrant from the Texas
Employment Commission, Austin, Texas, addressed to his Post Office Box
30061, New Orleans, Louisiana.… The Winn-Dixie Store, #1425, 4303
Magazine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, the place where the warrant
dated September 23, 1963 was cashed, was not open to the public on
September 25, 1963 until 8:00 AM. J. D. Fuchs, Manager, Winn-Dixie
Store #1425, who approved the warrant for cashing, worked from 6:00
AM until noon and from 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM, on September 25, 1963. Mrs.
Thelma F. Fisher, Cashier #3, Winn-Dixie Store #1425, who
actually cashed the warrant, worked from 8:00 AM until 1:00 PM on
September 25, 1963.
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0367b.htm
John Fiorentino
cashed Sept. 25 in New Orleans at a Winn Dixie.
John F.
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:lLQnn.36972$mn6....@newsfe07.iad...
tomnln
Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
(ITEM # 5)
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2c4b3e61-3545-4cdc...@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Marsh hasn't read Horne's book EITHER ! ! !
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
YOURS are TEN Months after the Assassination.
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2c4b3e61-3545-4cdc...@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
yeuhd
> Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
> Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
> Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
> Mrs. Twifford said he called in Late October.
When you stop chanting, and you take your fingers out of your ears, you
can read:
Affidavit of Estelle Twiford, and affidavit of Horace Elroy Twiford:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0095a.htm
In those affidavits, the Twifords say that Oswald called in late
September.
David Von Pein
>>> "Horne never said all." <<<
Maybe that's why I said this:
"Most (if not all) were. Horne has said that himself." -- DVP;
03/16/10
Do you need the word "most" defined for you, Anthony?
Anthony Marsh
Maybe if you didn't constantly snip out the context lurkers could see
that your original statement did not qualify it by saying MOST. Only
after I objected.
Anthony Marsh
Nor do I intend to. Nor do I intend to buy any of Judyth's books.
tomnln
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh11/html/WC_Vol11_0095a.htm
Better Memory ONE month after the Assassination than EIGHT month after the
Assassination.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm (Item # 5)
tomnln
Mr. RANKIN. Turning to the period when you were in New Orleans, just before you went back to Dallas with Ruth Paine, do you recall that time?*
*Mrs. OSWALD Yes--faintly.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember that was the latter part of September?*
Mrs. OSWALD. **Possibly.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember what date you went back to Dallas from New Orleans?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. It wasn't the 26th of September?
Mr. RANKIN. Wasn't it about the 23rd of September that you went back?* **
Mrs. OSWALD. The 23rd?
*I do not know.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you remember that you had a discussion with your husband about the unemployment check that he was to receive about that time?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. I remember Lee told me that he was expecting an unemployment check just before he left for Mexico.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he had changed the postal address and that that check would probably come to Ruth Paine's?*
*Mrs. OSWALD. He told me that he was going to change his address and that the letters would come to that new address of Ruth Paine.
Mr. RANKIN. Did the unemployment check ever come to Ruth Paine's?*
*Mrs. OSWALD. When he returned from Mexico, he asked me if the unemployment check arrived, and I replied that I did not know. No; there was no check.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about getting the check at New Orleans and cashing it himself?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not remember it right now, but if I mentioned that to the Commission before, then it was so.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection about it now?*
*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not recall distinctly now, but I think there was some conversation about the check being long in transit, that the check was sent from Dallas to New Orleans and from New Orleans to Irving.
Mr. RANKIN. Well apparently, Mrs. Oswald, the facts show that the check was cashed by your husband with a stamped mark of the bank, dated the 26th of September, in New Orleans. Does that refresh your memory at all?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. I was not with Lee at that time.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever tell you anything about it?*
*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not remember at this moment.
Mr. RANKIN. Apparently he cashed the check at the little store, or the supermarket, near where you lived there in New Orleans. Did he every tell you that?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. No; he did not tell me. I do not remember that he told me.yeuhd
Thank you for establishing that neither Ruth Paine nor Marina Oswald
knew where Lee Oswald cashed the unemployment check that week. And
that Ruth Paine saw no unemployment check come by forwarded mail to
Irving that week. And for establishing that you have zero evidence
that Oswald cashed the unemployment check in Dallas.
John McAdams
>I Quote Your Official Records ! ! !
>
>YOU are the one who's Confused.
>
>SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
>
I see nothing on that page that says Oswald cashed the check in
Dallas.
Kindly explain where that is, or drop that claim.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message news:zkion.44529$_v6....@newsfe08.iad...
tomnln
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:92c5ea4f-580c-4a5a...@z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
-------------------------------------------------------------------
yeuhd wrote;
Thank you for establishing that neither Ruth Paine nor Marina Oswald
knew where Lee Oswald cashed the unemployment check that week. And
that Ruth Paine saw no unemployment check come by forwarded mail to
Irving that week. And for establishing that you have zero evidence
that Oswald cashed the unemployment check in Dallas.
I write;
You keep missing the point;
McAdams said Oswald was in Houston on the 25th to call Twifford, on his
way to Mexico City.
I said Oswald was in Dallas on the 25th at Odio's, and cashed his check in
Dallas on the 25th.
Even WC Lawyer Rankin knew Oswald was NOT in Houston to call the
Twifford's.
Citations are what Counts ! ! !
------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about getting the check at New Orleans and cashing it himself?* **
*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not remember it right now, but if I mentioned that to the Commission before, then it was so.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you have any recollection about it now?*
*Mrs. OSWALD. I do not recall distinctly now, but I think there was some conversation about the check being long in transit, that the check was sent from Dallas to New Orleans and from New Orleans to Irving.
Mr. RANKIN. Well apparently, Mrs. Oswald, the facts show that the check was cashed by your husband with a stamped mark of the bank, dated the 26th of September, in New Orleans. Does that refresh your memory at all?* **
tomnln
yeuhd wrote;
Thank you for establishing that neither Ruth Paine nor Marina Oswald
knew where Lee Oswald cashed the unemployment check that week. And
that Ruth Paine saw no unemployment check come by forwarded mail to
Irving that week. And for establishing that you have zero evidence
that Oswald cashed the unemployment check in Dallas.
tomnln
Volume V page 613.
Mr. RANKIN. Well apparently, Mrs. Oswald, the facts show that the check was cashed by your husband with a stamped mark of the bank, dated the 26th of September, in New Orleans. Does that refresh your memory at all?* **
Proving Oswald was NOT in Houston on the 25th calling Twifford.
Thanks for asking !
ps;
New Orleans FURTHER from Houston that Dallas is.
yeuhd
>
> So it looks like Oswald was NOT in Houston on the 25th ! ! !
You keep missing the point:You have yet to give any evidence that
Oswald cashed his unemployment check in Dallas.