John McAdams and Tom Rossley JFK assassination
snl1...@yahoo.com
Anton Batey asked me to pass this on to the forums.
These are the complete radio broadcast.
AntonBatey
...
Re: Re: John McAdams/Tom Rossley/radio program
...
Here is the entire, uncut debate between Professor John McAdams and
Mr. Tom Rossley on April 5th, 2009. As youll probably notice, nothing
significant was edited out of the 2 hour debate that was posted, but
nevertheless, there it is.
You will need to download an rar player. http://www.shapeshifter.se/code/vlc-unrar/
There are two parts of the debate
Part 1 - http://rapidshare.com/files/219864254/FULL1.mp3.html
Part 2 - http://rapidshare.com/files/219903064/FULL2.mp3.html
Please copy and paste the above in the forums.
Gil Jesus
>
> Here is the entire, uncut debate between Professor John McAdams and
> Mr. Tom Rossley on April 5th, 2009. As youll probably notice, nothing
> significant was edited out
Let's see, an "uncut" version where nothing "significant" was edited
out.
And I always thought that an uncut version meant NOTHING was edited
out.
Silly me.
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/f6390831d3336316
>>> "Let's see, an "uncut" version where nothing "significant" was edited out. And I always thought that an uncut version meant NOTHING was edited out." <<<
I see that Gil Jesus needs to be talked through something else that he
has managed to completely mangle and misinterpret.....
When radio host Anton Batey used the word "significant" above, he was
talking about how nothing that he deemed "significant" was cut out of
the shorter TWO-HOUR version of the 4/5/09 McAdams/Rossley radio
debate that Anton previously posted on his YouTube channel (it was
actually 1:45, but there's no need to bicker over that).
Anton was saying when you compare the shorter YouTube version to the
uncut MP3 version, you'll find that nothing "significant" was trimmed
by Anton for the shorter version. (And I agree, there wasn't; I
listened to the whole uncut version last night.)
Maybe Gil needs new reading glasses (or new comprehension
glasses...one or the other).
A FEW MORE "DEBATE" NOTES:
There were two additional good-sized "LOL" moments that occurred
within the uncut WHPR radio debate that Mr. Batey was nice enough to
provide (via the RapidShare links below):
1.) One of the LOL moments was when Tom Rossley exclaimed to the
Internet world that he believes that "Doorway Man" IS, indeed, guess
who? ---- Yep, ol' Tom thinks it was his favorite patsy, Lee H.
Oswald.
Despite Billy Lovelady's sworn testimony in front of the Warren
Commission in April 1964 (just five months after the assassination),
Rossley still thinks that the group of brainless morons known as "The
Patsy-Framing Team" just simply allowed their one and only patsy to
wander around without keeping him on a leash during the shooting, with
LHO then free to be photographed in the doorway by James Altgens.
And we must also remember, too, that these so-called before-the-
shooting "patsy framers", per the stupid things that Rossley believes,
had been attempting to "set up" Patsy Oswald for many, many months
prior to November 22, since Rossley believes in ALL of the other
crackpot theories about Oswald being framed WELL IN ADVANCE of
November 22 too -- such as the "fake backyard photos" nonsense, to
name just one.
In short -- anyone still believing the "Oswald Was In The Doorway"
myth in 2009 must have several loose screws upstairs.
2.) This one might have actually been in the truncated version of the
debate (I can't really recall)...but, anyway, Professor McAdams
brought up an excellent point about Rossley's willy-nilly, all-over-
the-map beliefs when it comes to certain things relating to the JFK
case, to wit:
McAdams got in a good laugh as he illustrated for the radio audience
how Rossley seems to want to believe that President Kennedy's upper-
back wound was a wound of EXIT (which is a belief that is, in and of
itself, hilarious), but at the same time Rossley ALSO likes to prop up
the testimony of Secret Service Agent Glen A. Bennett, who had stated
in his 11/23/63 report that he thought JFK was hit IN THE BACK (i.e.,
from THE REAR, of course) "about four inches down from the right
shoulder" (quote from Bennett).
Therefore, Rossley seems to want to believe that Kennedy's upper-back
wound was BOTH an entry wound AND an exit wound at the same time.
I wish John McAdams had pressed Rossley harder on this contradiction
of beliefs that Tom seems to possess, but after a brief chuckle,
McAdams moved on to something else. But I enjoyed the jab that .John
was able to get in there.
jblubaugh
> These are the complete radio broadcast.
>
> AntonBatey
> ...
>
> Re: Re: John McAdams/Tom Rossley/radio program
> ...
>
> Here is the entire, uncut debate between Professor John McAdams and
> Mr. Tom Rossley on April 5th, 2009. As youll probably notice, nothing
> significant was edited out of the 2 hour debate that was posted, but
> nevertheless, there it is.
>
>
> There are two parts of the debate
>
> Part 1 -http://rapidshare.com/files/219864254/FULL1.mp3.html
>
>
> Please copy and paste the above in the forums.
I have listened to this all very closely and it is clear to me that
Rossley backed up just about everything he said with evidence and quoted
page and verse of his references. McAdams seems to have done the debate
off the top of his head with nothing to back up his statements. The debate
about parafin tests is a good example. I do not think McAdams was ready
for someone as well prepared as Rossley was.
JB
aeffects
LMAO Gil.... and this is Steve-o the Nutter audio guy OMG!
snl1...@yahoo.com
Contact Anton! Silly you!
David Von Pein
>>> "I have listened to this all very closely and it is clear to me that Rossley backed up just about everything he said with evidence and quoted page and verse of his references. McAdams seems to have done the debate off the top of his head with nothing to back up his statements. The debate about parafin [sic] tests is a good example. I do not think McAdams was ready for someone as well prepared as Rossley was." <<<
Oh, brother. Those blinders are very thick today, aren't they?
Let's take just a quick (off-the-top-of-my-head) inventory of some of
Tom Rossley's debate points:
Rossley magically turned EVERY single verified ENTRY wound into an
EXIT wound, and every verified EXIT wound into an ENTRY wound (by
waving his hand and saying it was so)....and yet you think that
Rossley "backed up just about everything he said with evidence"??
And Rossley performed this "wound magic" with respect to BOTH victims
too -- including CONNALLY! Rossley actually said he thinks that
Connally's huge, gaping chest wound was a wound of ENTRANCE!
And yet certain people actually think that Rossley won that radio
debate, even though he spouted unbelievable fairy-tale beliefs like
THAT?!
Come on! You must be dreaming!
Plus:
Rossley thinks it was Oswald in the doorway.
Rossley thinks all the autopsy photos are fakes.
Rossley thinks the backyard photos are fakes.
Rossley thinks numerous people lied like cheap rugs (for decades on
end).
Rossley thinks Jack Ruby was "FORCED" to kill Lee Oswald BECAUSE OF
SOMETHING THAT DAN RATHER SUPPOSEDLY SAID!
And yet ROSSLEY won that debate, huh?
(There must be a full moon this evening.)
justm...@gmail.com
DVP I posted the same thing to Jesus only not as nicely as you
did....what more would you expect from an idiot? He's so set on
ripping up the LN's on this group that he doesn't even know what the
hell he's talking about when he tries to do it. That's what makes it
even funnier. He never disappoints us with making a total ass of
himself. He posted the same message on McAdams NG and I replied there
too but for some reason neither post ever showed up.
Jesus is an idiot...bottom line.
muc...@gmail.com
Silly, illiterate, snip-happy...
aeffects
hoosier, your full of shit, again..... ya really need to get
educated.... you've been copy & pasting around here for 10 years, you
don't know shit, hon!
aeffects
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/f6390831...
uh-uh-huh dipshit..... .john I suspect has retired from active
participation, he served his LN purpose.
justm...@gmail.com
Who would expect Healy to interpet something correctly....if Jesus
says shit is purple Healy will post it all over the net. Healy has no
brains of his own, he's like a little rabid puppy...pull that choke
chain!
David Von Pein
MESSAGE SENT TO RADIO HOST ANTON BATEY:
If you ever get that kook named [Thomas] Rossley to debate on your
radio station again, you should press him [and ridicule him] (hard)
about his ridiculous theory about John Connally being shot from the
FRONT.
Your WHPR listeners should not be left with the impression (even by a
kook like Rossley) that there was even the SLIGHTEST chance that John
Connally was hit in the chest from the front.
Unfortunately, John McAdams is often a little too "soft" on the CT
nuts he debates. He should have taken Rossley apart on many different
issues (especially the insane idea that Connally was shot from the
FRONT), but instead McAdams was too polite to do so (for the most
part).
DVP
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/7b9a03f8b1e3d964
>>> "You have to realize, however, that more than 75% of the listening audience were already predisposed towards a conspiracy." <<<
Yes, that's certainly true. But, much to the chagrin of Mr. Rossley,
that "more than 75%" is not really in his "Anybody But Oswald" corner
at all. Not even close, in fact (at least when based on the
assassination poll I'm going to be talking about next).
A "JFK Assassination" poll conducted by ABC News in November 2003
shows us that 83% of the 1,031 people participating in that particular
poll said they thought that Rossley's favorite innocent patsy (i.e., a
man named Oswald) was, indeed, firing a gun at JFK on 11/22/63, with
only 7% of those same 1,031 individuals saying they thought Oswald was
not a gunman.
Rossley must hate polls like the one below, because stuff like this
(with a specific question being asked about "GUNMAN"/"GUNMEN") only
goes to show that the type of crazy Anybody-But-LHO mentality that is
possessed by so many CTers within the cyber walls of Internet forums
is certainly not even close to being the mentality of Americans in
general (at least when based on the 2003 ABC News poll below, at any
rate):
POLLING QUESTION:
"Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald was the only gunman in the
Kennedy assassination, do you think there was another gunman in
addition to Oswald there that day, or do you think Oswald was not
involved in the assassination at all?"
POLLING RESULTS:
ONLY OSWALD ----------- 32%
ANOTHER GUNMAN ------- 51%
OSWALD NOT INVOLVED -- 7%
NO OPINION ------------- 10%
www.pollingreport.com/news2.htm#Kennedy
===========================================
RELATED LINKS:
83% THINK OSWALD WAS SHOOTING AT JFK, PER ABC'S 2003 POLL:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c0189f6da4be3133
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7c280d9b25ca6a96
===========================================
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d776c40f-f43f-4145...@3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
Sounds like David V P wants to Challange the Champion ! ! !