Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

EMBARRASSED McADAMS

0 views

Skip to first unread message

tomnln

unread,

Nov 7, 2009, 11:11:06 PM11/7/09

In case McAdams don't post this one;

I'm NOT surprised that McAdams allowed this personal attack on me by tom
lowery.

I just attribute it to my "Embarrassing" him during our 3 1/2 hour radio
debate.

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/radio_debate.htm

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c26d4355-66a5-4acb...@b25g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 6, 6:32 pm, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:40 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>
> OK, thanks for the heads up. At the moment, we have no rule that
>
> > would allow us to reject "troll" posts.
>
> > One might define a "troll" post as anything utterly absurd.
>
> > If that's true, we might have trouble distinguishing the "troll" from
> > some of the other posters. :-(
>
> > .John
>
> As a follow-up to bigdog, you need to take a look at ACJ. It's gone
> way beyond "nuthouse."
>
> JGL
>
>
>
> > On 5 Nov 2009 21:19:12 -0500, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >On Nov 5, 5:24 pm, Cdddddraftsman <stanmoff...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> go to flickr-sugarm-laws rocket or go to assassination research-
> > >> costello combined and it shows a laws rocket on a mans left shoulder
> > >> being fired complete with backblast( horizontal flash)
>
> > >It is apparent that somebody or several persons are trying to bombard
> > >this newsgroup with absurd posts as they have been doing the past week
> > >on acj. "Nobody" is one alias being used and this poster has used
> > >"Cddddraftsman", similar to that of a long time regular. I guess some
> > >people have no life and this is how they get their jollies. Moderators
> > >please take note.
>
> > OK, thanks for the heads up. At the moment, we have no rule that
> > would allow us to reject "troll" posts.
>
> > One might define a "troll" post as anything utterly absurd.
>
> > If that's true, we might have trouble distinguishing the "troll" from
> > some of the other posters. :-(
>
> > .John
> > --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I can almost guarantee it may get worse .

Using tomnln's full proof method of determining who's guilty I'm ready to
state on ACJ soon that tomnln was the possible grassy knoll shooter . That
when JFK was hit from the front , it didn't agree with him so he tried to
"cough up a bullet".

Also , this may shock and amaze you but .....

JFK is not really dead , he's in a incubator in Poland and tomnln saved
the day in the end , by making ammends for his spell of bad manners by his
medical treatment of JFK using 'out of the box' means that baffles science
to this day :

http://s212.photobucket.com/albums/cc291/cdddraftsman/?action=view&current=GilsCoughDrops.jpg

Comments ?

cdddraftsman

unread,

Nov 8, 2009, 3:09:47 AM11/8/09

Hahahahah ! Sent the little dirty communist jew boy fudge packing back
to Jesus !

Teehehehehe !

Answer For your CRIMES Rosstards !

cdddraftsman

unread,

Nov 8, 2009, 4:05:26 AM11/8/09

Talk about embarrassed ? Rosstards is running scared embarrassed !

On Nov 6, 6:38 pm, davidemerling <davidemerl...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

> On Nov 6, 5:06 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:

> > The only thing Missing from John's website is the debate I did with him.

> > SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/radio_debate.htm

> Stop flattering yourself into thinking there was anything earth-
> shattering in that debate. You simply made the same old tired
> conspiratorial arguments that have been circulating for decades - most of
> which I didn't realize anybody with any knowledge of this case still
> adopted.

> You did not raise any original points that are not already addressed on
> John's website.

> C'mon - the Oswald in the doorway thing? Pfft! Are you kidding me?

> The Mauser on the 6th floor thing? Asked and answered! Geez.

> Putting that debate on the website would be nothing more than a novelty -
> but it was hardly scholarly.

> It's almost comical how you thought that was some major achievement for
> you. Just in YOUR world, Tom. In OUR world (you know, the one where the
> sky is blue and the sun rises in the east and sets in the west), that
> debate only served to illustrate how dogmatic and wild your theories were.
> It also illustrated a certain rigid, impractical, and irrational side of
> you: i.e. "Why didn't they prosecute him/her for perjury?" Ridiculous!

> I hate to pop your bubble, but that debate hardly represented a seminal
> moment in the JFK assassination debate. I'm sure Professor McAdams would
> agree with me on that.

> But I'm sure you enjoyed playing the game.

> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

Good post . I've pointed out to tomnln repeatedly that the 'Warren
Report'
* is crammed stem to stern with invocations , incantations and
superflorous citations indicating conspiracy because of it's 'Report'
nature that includes innuendo , contradictions , mistakes ,
fabrications
and hearsay evidence and testimony retained as a contemporanous record
of
those four days . Lost on him ? More like avoided at all costs . Did
he
research my claims further ? He went on a seek and avoid mission .

The time to look for a cover-up is when evidence and testimony all
jives
completely , AND NOT THE OPPOSITE ! Not surprising seeing he has no
investigative skills , no resources to verify his contrieved
conspiracy
and he doesn't care to correct this 5000 Ib white elephant swaying
back
and forth in his living room . All this he conveniently ignores as
the
derilect vessel JFK Conspiracy has sprung a thousand leaks , is
slowly
being abandoned by women and children first , and I suspect tomnln is
the
captain that will leave last . A bitter end to a story that 'died of
a
theory' **.

Keynotes :

* WR denied as evidence of 'no conspiracy' by the defence in the Jim
Garrison persecution trial of Clay Shaw . Denied immediately as
"inadmissible" due to being ruled "hearsay" .

** The theory is simple in it's logical absurdity and breathtaking in
it's
scope : In a nutshell : It took 46 years to reach a conclusion that
JFK
was killed by many different people , for many different reasons and
in
many different ways and this happened ALL AT THE SAME TIME ? In short
conspiracy literature constitutes the largest body of fraudulent work
ever
created that has caused the largest mass failure in thinking ever
recorded
by humans any one given subject . This part , I'm sure tomnln is an
expert
in .

tomnln

unread,

Nov 8, 2009, 3:33:46 PM11/8/09

HOHOHOHO lowery>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/radio_debate.htm

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:f2ae18e5-21de-47f4...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

tomnln

unread,

Nov 8, 2009, 3:34:39 PM11/8/09

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:8a0b5f35-8d99-447d...@y10g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

> Talk about embarrassed ? Rosstards is running scared embarrassed !
>
> On Nov 6, 6:38 pm, davidemerling <davidemerl...@gmail.com> wrote:

The only thing Missing from John's website is the debate I did with him.

SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/radio_debate.htm

HAHAHAHAHAH lowery

0 new messages