David Ferrie
David Von Pein
www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10477&relPageId=287
I've recently been reading through portions of Warren Commission
Document #75 (CD 75), which consists of various reports relating to
the FBI's investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy, and
I have been fascinated by the lengthy and very detailed interview of
David Ferrie that was conducted by two FBI special agents on November
25, 1963 (the day of JFK's funeral).
In the multi-page FBI interview, which begins on Page 285 of CD 75
(linked above), almost every minute of David Ferrie's activities and
whereabouts on the dates of 11/22/63 through 11/25/63 are discussed
and dissected, including the names and addresses of the various motels
that he and his two companions (Al Beauboeuf and Melvin Coffee) stayed
at during Ferrie's mini-"vacation" to multiple cities in the states of
Louisiana and Texas, which was a driving trip that commenced (per
Ferrie) approximately six hours after President Kennedy had been
assassinated in Dallas. According to the FBI report, Ferrie made the
excursion to "merely relax" [CD 75; p.288].
There are still many conspiracy theorists who firmly believe that
David W. Ferrie was a key "conspirator" in the murder of President
John F. Kennedy, with some of these same conspiracists also believing
that Ferrie was murdered in order to keep him from spilling any
additional beans concerning his alleged involvement in Kennedy's
assassination. (Ferrie's death on February 22, 1967, however, was
ruled a "natural" death by the New Orleans coroner.)
But after taking a detailed look at the 11/25/63 FBI interview of
Ferrie in CD 75, a logical question immediately entered my
head....this question:
If Dave Ferrie had been involved (in any way) as a conspirator
in the assassination of President Kennedy, then why on Earth didn't he
make arrangements to GET HIMSELF OUT OF THE COUNTRY immediately after
(or even BEFORE) the assassination?
But not only did Ferrie NOT flee the country on 11/22/63, he took a
three-day driving trip with two of his friends (who would be able to
confirm Ferrie's whereabouts and activities), which was a trip that
included many different stops in several cities and towns in Louisiana
and Texas (the latter state, of course, being the very same state
where Kennedy was killed).
And during this automobile trip, Ferrie came into contact with many
additional witnesses who can verify where he was located during the
days that immediately followed JFK's assassination.
Therefore, we aren't forced to accept ONLY Ferrie's word for the
things he told the FBI on 11/25/63, which I think is an important
point to be made, particularly when the following question is asked
(mostly by conspiracy theorists who want to implicate Ferrie in a plot
to kill JFK):
Did David Ferrie really travel to Houston and go ice skating
shortly after President Kennedy's assassination?
In Oliver Stone's movie "JFK", Stone almost certainly wants people
watching his film to believe that Ferrie was a liar when he told Jim
Garrison on November 25, 1963 (the very same day of Ferrie's lengthy
interview with the FBI, by the way), that he (Ferrie) drove to Houston
in a heavy thunderstorm on the evening of 11/22/63 and then went ice
skating at a local Houston skating rink.
In Stone's motion picture, Garrison tells Ferrie that he doesn't think
Ferrie's story about driving to Houston to go ice skating is
believable, and therefore Ferrie is detained by Garrison's office for
further questioning.
But what Oliver Stone doesn't tell his movie audience (naturally) is
that Ferrie's account about travelling to Houston and going ice
skating was FULLY CORROBORATED by other people and was proven to be a
factual story.*
* = Now I will admit that Garrison, at the precise time he interviewed
Ferrie on November 25th, couldn't have known for a fact whether
Ferrie's story was the truth or not, but I think it's fairly obvious
that Oliver Stone wanted the millions of people watching his 1991 film
to believe that Ferrie wasn't telling the truth about taking a trip to
Houston (and other cities) shortly after the assassination took place.
One of the witnesses who was able to verify a major portion of
Ferrie's 1963 statement to the FBI was Rowland Charles (Chuck)
Rolland, who was the President and General Manager of the Winterland
Ice Skating Rink in Houston, Texas.
On February 12, 1969, during the New Orleans trial of Clay Shaw,
Rolland testified that Ferrie (and two companions of Ferrie's) visited
the Winterland Rink in Houston on the afternoon of November 23, 1963,
with Ferrie staying for quite some time.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/rolland.htm
The 11/25/63 FBI report states that "Ferrie said that he had been
considering for some time the feasibility and possibility of opening
an ice skating rink in New Orleans" [CD 75; p. 288].
Later the same day (11/23/63), Ferrie visited another ice-skating rink
in the Houston area--the Bellaire Skating Rink--where Ferrie said he
stayed for "approximately 45 minutes to 1 hour" [CD 75; p.289].
Now, I suppose the conspiracy believers might be asking this: Well, so
what? What do Ferrie's actions and movements AFTER the assassination
have to do with whether or not he participated in a plot to kill
Kennedy?
But in response to the above question, I'd then pose the following
question to the conspiracy theorists who believe that David Ferrie was
part of a sinister plot to kill JFK in November 1963:
If Dave Ferrie had played a part in a conspiracy to murder John
F. Kennedy, what is the likelihood that he would have had a desire to
drive to Texas on the evening of 11/22/63 (the same day that such a
conspiracy to kill JFK was successfully accomplished in Dallas) in
order for Ferrie to visit a couple of ice-skating rinks in Houston?
Now, yes, I suppose it's POSSIBLE that a person who had just been
involved in a secretive plan to assassinate the President of the
United States MIGHT want to jump into his car and make tracks toward
the VERY SAME STATE in which the assassination had just taken place in
order to engage in a pleasurable activity such as ice skating.
But, in my opinion, if Mr. Ferrie had been involved (in even the
tiniest way) in a plot to kill Kennedy, taking such a trip to visit
two ice skating establishments in Houston at that particular point in
time is something that simply does not make any sense whatsoever.
Because at that particular point in time on November 22-25, 1963, if
he had been a behind-the-scenes conspirator in JFK's killing, Ferrie
would most certainly have been totally consumed with thoughts about
the Presidential assassination he had helped orchestrate, in addition
to the efforts he most certainly would have been making at that time
to ensure his future safety and freedom (while trying to avoid capture
for what he had done).
I ask: If David Ferrie was a guilty plotter, do his known actions
during the period of November 22-25, 1963, make any logical sense at
all? I say they do not.
In fact, if Ferrie had been guilty of conspiracy to murder JFK, it
really makes no sense at all for him to have still been anywhere
within the UNITED STATES at any point in time on the dates of November
22-25, 1963 (since Ferrie, himself, was certainly not one of the
actual "gunmen" in Dallas; and I know of no conspiracy theorist who
has ever alleged that Ferrie, himself, was one of the supposed
shooters in Dealey Plaza).
Ferrie would have very likely been thousands of miles from the scene
of President Kennedy's murder by the time the first shot was even
fired in Dealey Plaza if he had been involved in any kind of a plot to
assassinate Kennedy. And, being a pilot himself, he would probably
also have arranged for his "getaway" to be accomplished at an altitude
of several thousand feet.
Another point that I think is worth mentioning when talking about Dave
Ferrie is this:
On February 18, 1967, four days before he died, Ferrie was interviewed
in his apartment by Andrew Sciambra and Lou Ivon of the New Orleans
District Attorney's office. At one point during the interview,
Sciambra asked Ferrie, "Dave, who shot the President?" Ferrie's answer
was: "Well, that's an interesting question and I've got my own
thoughts about it."
Quoting directly from Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History":
"Ferrie then proceeded to sit up and draw a sketch of Dealey
Plaza and the Texas School Book Depository Building and [per the
memorandum of the interview supplied to Jim Garrison by Sciambra and
Ivon] "went into a long spiel about the trajectory of bullets in
relation to the height and distance." He then gave a "lecture on
anatomy and pathology [and] named every bone in the human body and
every hard and soft muscle area" and concluded that one bullet could
not have caused all the damage the Warren Commission claimed it did."
-- "Reclaiming History"; Page 1400
Now, I think a logical question to ask after reading the above
paragraph is: Why would Ferrie, if he was guilty of being part of a
conspiracy, have wanted to say ANYTHING at all of a derogatory nature
about the Warren Commission's investigation (which was, after all, an
investigation that ended with the determination that Oswald had acted
alone in killing JFK)?
When Ferrie told Sciambra and Ivon that, in essence, he didn't think
the Single-Bullet Theory was true, that was pretty much the same thing
as Ferrie saying a conspiracy did, in fact, exist in the murder of
John Kennedy.
And why would ONE OF THE CONSPIRATORS WHO HAD KENNEDY KILLED want to
say anything at all (to Jim Garrison's investigators, no less!) of a
negative or critical nature concerning the Warren Commission's "lone
assassin" conclusion?
In my opinion, that would have been a crazy and illogical thing for
Ferrie to do IF Ferrie had really played a role in some kind of a plot
to murder President Kennedy.
But, since it's fairly obvious that there isn't a scrap of evidence to
link David Ferrie to any JFK conspiracy plot, then Ferrie's anti-SBT
comments that he made to Sciambra and Ivon in February 1967 do not
really fall into the "crazy" or "illogical" categories at all. But
they certainly would belong in those two categories if Ferrie had been
guilty of conspiracy to murder John F. Kennedy.
David Von Pein
September 17, 2009
====================================================
ADDENDUM:
Author Vincent Bugliosi, in his 2007 book "RECLAIMING HISTORY",
devotes 90 pages in the main text of the book (and an additional 129
pages of endnotes) to the subjects of Jim Garrison's New Orleans
investigation into JFK's assassination and Oliver Stone's 1991 movie,
"JFK".
During the course of those 219 pages, of course, the name David Ferrie
surfaces quite a number of times. The quotes shown below are some of
my favorites from Mr. Bugliosi's book relating to the topic of David
W. Ferrie:
"Former assistant Warren Commission counsel Wesley Liebeler, who
helped conduct the New Orleans phase of the investigation into
Kennedy's death, told the New York Times on the day of Ferrie's death
in 1967 that Edward Voebel, a high school classmate of Oswald's, told
local and federal investigators on the day of the assassination back
in 1963 that he thought Oswald had served briefly in a New Orleans
Civil Air Patrol unit commanded by Ferrie, and three days later they
received reports that Ferrie had made a trip to Texas on the day of
the assassination.
"[Quoting Liebeler:] "We checked all of this out, and it just
did not lead anywhere. .... The FBI did a very substantial piece of
work on Ferrie. It was so clear that he was not involved that we
didn't mention it in the [Warren] Report. Garrison has a
responsibility to indicate just why he thinks Ferrie might have been
involved, and so far as I can determine he has given no reason." [End
Liebeler quote.]
"But Garrison did not do this because he could not do this. All
he could say to the media in a formal statement he issued to the press
later on the day of Ferrie's death [February 22, 1967] was that
"evidence developed by our office had long since confirmed that he was
involved in events culminating in the assassination of President
Kennedy."
"But what could that evidence have been, particularly
since...Perry Russo had not yet surfaced with his totally discredited
story about Ferrie conspiring with Shaw and Oswald?" -- Vincent
Bugliosi; Pages 1401-1402 of "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of
President John F. Kennedy" (©2007)
=================================
"In fairness to Oliver Stone, just as the New Orleans coroner's
medical conclusion that Ferrie died from a ruptured blood vessel in
the brain virtually forecloses his having been murdered, if, indeed,
the two notes found in his room were suicide notes, they would
likewise virtually foreclose his having died, as the coroner said,
from a ruptured aneurysm in the brain.
"Whether the notes were, in fact, suicide notes is not
completely clear, though the "To leave this life" one obviously goes
in that direction. Of course, Ferrie was in very ill health at the
time of his death, and he may very well have written the subject notes
at some earlier time in possible contemplation of impending death.
"In any event, there is absolutely no evidence that David Ferrie
was murdered. But in Oliver Stone's fine hands, there is no question
that he was. Stone shows Ferrie being murdered (which, as we've seen,
even Stone's hero, Garrison, didn't believe), obviously to silence him
before he elaborated on his incriminating statements to Garrison,
statements we know he never made." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 1402 of
"Reclaiming History"
=================================
"No credible evidence has ever emerged that Lee Harvey Oswald or
David Ferrie was associated in any way with the CIA or any other U.S.
intelligence agency. And the only connection Clay Shaw had with the
CIA was not as an agent or operative, but as one of well over 100,000
prominent Americans who traveled regularly in foreign countries (as
Shaw did as the managing director of the New Orleans International
Trade Mart) and who, upon their return to the states, furnished
information about these countries to the Domestic Contact Service
(DCS) of the CIA, a nonclandestine operation. As the HSCA said, “Such
acts of cooperation should not be confused with an actual Agency [CIA]
relationship” (HSCA Report, p.218)." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages
808-809 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)
=================================
"The Garrison devotees have apparently never been troubled by
the question of why Shaw and Ferrie would select Oswald, of all
people, as their hit man...or patsy when they had no way of knowing
that the president would even come back to New Orleans, where Oswald
lived at the time.
"Or were they planning to finance Oswald as he traveled, Carcano
in his violin case, all around the country stalking Kennedy for a good
opportunity to kill him or be the patsy for someone else who would? If
the latter, aren’t they troubled by the fact that we know, from
Oswald’s known whereabouts, that he never did travel around the
country?" -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 847 of "Reclaiming
History" (Endnotes)
=================================
"For all intents and purposes, Garrison’s entire case had...been
built around [Perry] Russo, specifically Russo’s testimony at the
[Clay Shaw] trial that on one occasion at a party in Ferrie’s home in
September of 1963, he heard Ferrie, Shaw, and Oswald conspire to
murder Kennedy.
"Not only was Russo himself, as we have seen, devoid of all
credibility, but also Garrison, during the trial, was unable to come
up with one single witness to corroborate Russo’s fable.
"Indeed...Garrison learned BEFORE the trial that one witness who
Russo said was at Ferrie’s house on the day in question, Lefty
Peterson, said that Shaw and Oswald were not at the party, and Sandra
Moffett, Russo’s one-time girlfriend, who he said accompanied him to
the party at Ferrie’s home, said that was impossible because she never
met Ferrie until 1965.
"The reader should know by now how conspiracy authors handle
inconvenient witnesses like Peterson and Moffett. It’s really very
simple...they simply don’t mention Peterson and Moffett.
"If we are to believe the conspiracy theorists who still cling
to Russo’s fable, apparently Russo needed truth serum and hypnosis to
recall hearing three people plot to murder President Kennedy. Without
truth serum and hypnosis, the twenty-five-year-old insurance salesman
had so many other things going on in his life that being witness to a
plot to murder the president of the United States just wasn’t
important enough to remember." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 850-851 of
"Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)
=================================
www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
www.Vincent-Bugliosi.blogspot.com
www.Garrison-Carson.blogspot.com
=================================
David Von Pein
>>> "Ferrie took no active part in the assassination. He made a few phone
calls to recruit people and connected Oswald with Marcello..." <<<
Dave Ferrie would have been thousands of miles from Dallas (in a different
country) BEFORE 12:30 ever arrived on 11/22/63 if he had been involved (in
ANY way) in a conspiracy plot to murder John F. Kennedy.
Don't you agree, Robert Harris, that the above statement I just made makes
a good deal of sense (vs. Ferrie travelling TO Texas to go ice skating six
hours after the assassination)?
As for Lee Oswald and "544 Camp St." -- the 544 Camp building was only one
block away from a place where Oswald worked in the summer of 1963-- the
Reily Coffee Company.
Plus: There's not a speck of evidence to show that Oswald ever rented an
office at 544 Camp either. He merely stamped the address on one of his
FPCC handbills.
The "Ferrie-Marcello" angle was a pure coincidence...yes. Ferrie was
working with Attorney Wray Gill on a legal case involving Marcello.
Nothing more than that.
Some CTers, however, apparently want to think that Ferrie and Marcello
"plotted" JFK's murder together. But I'd like to see Jim DiEugenio (or any
other Garrison supporter or any other conspiracy theorist, period) come
within 100 miles of PROVING that Ferrie and Marcello (either one) had a
single thing to do with JFK's assassination.
Naturally, since Oswald killed Kennedy by himself, nobody on Earth can
possibly prove such a thing regarding David Ferrie and Carlos Marcello.
All the CTers have is their collective imaginations.
==================================================
DAVID FERRIE AND HIS 11/25/63 INTERVIEW WITH THE FBI:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1a102b6ef1929ad3
==================================================
Robert Harris
David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
him to Oswald.
But if you believe Ferrie, then you must believe that it was a coincidence
that he and Oswald were in CAP together and you must believe that it was a
coincidence that Oswald chose the address of one building out of
thousands, where Ferrie worked, to put on his flyers.
And you must believe it was a coincidence that the HSCA concluded that
Ferrie called the apartments where people lived who met with Jack Ruby on
the eve of the assassination.
And that it was a coincidence that Ferrie worked out of the same floor of
the same building where Jim Braden worked - another guy who was with Ruby
at that Cabana hotel on 11/21/63, and whom I would stake everything I own,
on him being one of the shooters.
And you must explain why several people, including Banister's
secretary/mistress recalled Oswald being in their office.
And when Ferrie was told that Oswald had his library card, he didn't just
laugh it off. He raced out to Oswald's neighborhood and grilled the
neighbors and his landlady about it.
Why did he do that unless he believed Oswald could have had it David?
Ferrie took no active part in the assassination. He made a few phone calls
to recruit people and connected Oswald with Marcello - undoubtedly,
because he hoped that the attack could be blamed on Castro, something
Marcello probably didn't care one way or the other about.
As for his ice skating tour, I have no idea. But this guy worked for
somebody who was responsible for numerous murders and countless other
violent crimes. Ferrie was also a convicted pedophile.
I would trust his word on something like that about as much as any other
criminal.
Ferrie hated Kennedy almost as much as Marcello did, though for different
reasons. He was forced from the podium when he spoke before a veterans
group, for screaming out that Kennedy should be killed for failing to
support the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Robert Harris
In article
<f1b99643-a381-435b...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.MaryFerrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10477&relPageId=287
> President John F. Kennedy" (?2007)
> (DCS) of the CIA, a nonclandestine operation. As the HSCA said, ?Such
> acts of cooperation should not be confused with an actual Agency [CIA]
> relationship? (HSCA Report, p.218)." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages
> 808-809 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)
>
>
> =================================
>
>
>
> "The Garrison devotees have apparently never been troubled by
> the question of why Shaw and Ferrie would select Oswald, of all
> people, as their hit man...or patsy when they had no way of knowing
> that the president would even come back to New Orleans, where Oswald
> lived at the time.
>
> "Or were they planning to finance Oswald as he traveled, Carcano
> in his violin case, all around the country stalking Kennedy for a good
> opportunity to kill him or be the patsy for someone else who would? If
> the latter, aren?t they troubled by the fact that we know, from
> Oswald?s known whereabouts, that he never did travel around the
> country?" -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 847 of "Reclaiming
> History" (Endnotes)
>
>
> =================================
>
>
> "For all intents and purposes, Garrison?s entire case had...been
> built around [Perry] Russo, specifically Russo?s testimony at the
> [Clay Shaw] trial that on one occasion at a party in Ferrie?s home in
> September of 1963, he heard Ferrie, Shaw, and Oswald conspire to
> murder Kennedy.
>
> "Not only was Russo himself, as we have seen, devoid of all
> credibility, but also Garrison, during the trial, was unable to come
> up with one single witness to corroborate Russo?s fable.
>
> "Indeed...Garrison learned BEFORE the trial that one witness who
> Russo said was at Ferrie?s house on the day in question, Lefty
> Peterson, said that Shaw and Oswald were not at the party, and Sandra
> Moffett, Russo?s one-time girlfriend, who he said accompanied him to
> the party at Ferrie?s home, said that was impossible because she never
> met Ferrie until 1965.
>
> "The reader should know by now how conspiracy authors handle
> inconvenient witnesses like Peterson and Moffett. It?s really very
> simple...they simply don?t mention Peterson and Moffett.
>
> "If we are to believe the conspiracy theorists who still cling
> to Russo?s fable, apparently Russo needed truth serum and hypnosis to
> recall hearing three people plot to murder President Kennedy. Without
> truth serum and hypnosis, the twenty-five-year-old insurance salesman
> had so many other things going on in his life that being witness to a
> plot to murder the president of the United States just wasn?t
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "Ferrie took no active part in the assassination. He made a few phone
> calls to recruit people and connected Oswald with Marcello..." <<<
>
>
>
> Dave Ferrie would have been thousands of miles from Dallas (in a different
> country) BEFORE 12:30 ever arrived on 11/22/63 if he had been involved (in
> ANY way) in a conspiracy plot to murder John F. Kennedy.
>
Not if his job was to fly the team out of Texas. Ferrie was not a
mastermind. Only the mastermind need not be on the scene. Everyone else
involved must be on the scene. Look at Watergate. Plenty of conspirators
on the scene while the mastermind sits in the White House, not thousands
of miles away. You've been watching too many movies and not studying real
life.
> Don't you agree, Robert Harris, that the above statement I just made makes
> a good deal of sense (vs. Ferrie travelling TO Texas to go ice skating six
> hours after the assassination)?
>
Pure nonsense. Because you refuse to study history.
> As for Lee Oswald and "544 Camp St." -- the 544 Camp building was only one
> block away from a place where Oswald worked in the summer of 1963-- the
> Reily Coffee Company.
>
> Plus: There's not a speck of evidence to show that Oswald ever rented an
> office at 544 Camp either. He merely stamped the address on one of his
> FPCC handbills.
>
> The "Ferrie-Marcello" angle was a pure coincidence...yes. Ferrie was
> working with Attorney Wray Gill on a legal case involving Marcello.
> Nothing more than that.
>
So, everything's just a coincidence in your world. If you happened to
work for a certain government agency that would be just a coincidence.
> Some CTers, however, apparently want to think that Ferrie and Marcello
> "plotted" JFK's murder together. But I'd like to see Jim DiEugenio (or any
> other Garrison supporter or any other conspiracy theorist, period) come
> within 100 miles of PROVING that Ferrie and Marcello (either one) had a
> single thing to do with JFK's assassination.
>
> Naturally, since Oswald killed Kennedy by himself, nobody on Earth can
> possibly prove such a thing regarding David Ferrie and Carlos Marcello.
> All the CTers have is their collective imaginations.
>
Begging the question. Circular argument.
Steve Thomas
> David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
> up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
> him to Oswald.
>
Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
> <f1b99643-a381-435b-961b-4e973d101...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
> David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >www.MaryFerrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10477&relP...
> ...
>
> read more »
David Von Pein
Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
(regarding "thugs"):
"When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
"Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
Harris; 9/19/09
LOL.
So, it appears that early in the post, Robert Harris doesn't think it's
wise at all to believe much of anything that "thugs" like David Ferrie
have to say. But a few seconds later we find Mr. Harris ready and eager to
believe another "thug" (i.e., a mobster) named Carlos Marcello when
Marcello apparently confessed to being part of a plot to assassinate JFK.
I guess Marcello doesn't qualify as a "thug", is that it Robert?
Since Marcello was well ABOVE Ferrie's lowly station and class, Harris
wants to BELIEVE Marcello was telling the gospel truth, but he'll throw
Ferrie under the bus.
Nice logic, Bob. The way you get to pick and choose which scumbag/
crook/plotter/mobster/"thug" should be believed and which one should be
fed to the wolves is quite illuminating. (Not to mention hilarious.)
Also:
Evidently Bob Harris doesn't think it was unusual at all for David Ferrie
(whom Mr. Harris thinks was involved in a conspiracy to murder the
President) to travel for many hours by automobile with two of his friends
from New Orleans to Houston, Texas, just so Ferrie can use the telephone
at some ICE-SKATING RINK in Houston (presumably so that Ferrie could make
contact with other "conspirators" in Dallas).
Apparently the only telephone available to Ferrie was at Chuck Rolland's
ice-skating rink in Houston.
Time for another one of these ---> LOL!
To repeat the obvious --- If David Ferrie (OR CARLOS MARCELLO) had been
part of a plot to kill President Kennedy, both of those "thugs" would have
been thousands of miles from Texas (and out of the country) by the time
the first shot was even fired in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
David Von Pein
>>> "Not if his job was to fly the team out of Texas." <<<
So, let me try to get a handle on this idiocy you are suggesting here:
David Ferrie is supposedly the getaway pilot for the assassination "team"
(a team which was in DALLAS). So, what does Ferrie do? He decides he'll
stay in NEW ORLEANS until 6:30 PM on the day of the "big hit".
(Brilliant!)
Is that about the size of it, Tony??
Ferrie is desperately needed in DALLAS at 12:31 PM on 11/22/63, so he
stays in New Orleans until about 6:30 PM, and only then does he start to
drive to Texas (and then, he doesn't drive to DALLAS--he drives to
HOUSTON, 200 miles from Dallas).
Brilliant!
Maybe Ferrie got lost, huh? He didn't have the right road map perhaps?
Conspiracy-seeking people are always a howl. And Tony Marsh is no
exception.
Anthony Marsh
>
>>>> "Not if his job was to fly the team out of Texas." <<<
>
> So, let me try to get a handle on this idiocy you are suggesting here:
>
> David Ferrie is supposedly the getaway pilot for the assassination "team"
> (a team which was in DALLAS). So, what does Ferrie do? He decides he'll
> stay in NEW ORLEANS until 6:30 PM on the day of the "big hit".
> (Brilliant!)
>
Your construction was based on the use of the word WOULD. Hypothetical,
speculation.
> Is that about the size of it, Tony??
>
I am not advancing any theory. I am telling you WHY Ferrie would need to
be on the scene if he were part of the plot. That would be his job.
> Ferrie is desperately needed in DALLAS at 12:31 PM on 11/22/63, so he
> stays in New Orleans until about 6:30 PM, and only then does he start to
> drive to Texas (and then, he doesn't drive to DALLAS--he drives to
> HOUSTON, 200 miles from Dallas).
>
> Brilliant!
>
> Maybe Ferrie got lost, huh? He didn't have the right road map perhaps?
>
> Conspiracy-seeking people are always a howl. And Tony Marsh is no
> exception.
>
You are the one who said there Ferrie would NOT be in Dallas if he were
part of the plot. Well, he wasn't in Dallas, so you must think that proves
that he was part of the plot.
Steve Thomas
> Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> (regarding "thugs"):
>
> "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>
> And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>
> "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> Harris; 9/19/09
Not only that, but would it be out of the realm of possibility that
Marcello was trying to make himself appear to be more of a big shot than
he actually was?
David Von Pein
>>> "I am not advancing any theory. I am telling you WHY Ferrie would need to be on the scene if he were part of the plot. That would be his job." <<<
So you think JFK was killed in New Orleans, eh Tony?
What's your definition of "on the scene"? Is 441 miles away the same
as being "on the scene"?
Robert Harris
<f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> (regarding "thugs"):
>
> "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>
> And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>
> "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> Harris; 9/19/09
David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they believe
denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
accused.
But let me ask you a question that you evaded in the other newsgroup. If
Oswald had confessed to killing JFK, would you have the same attitude as
you do to Marcello's confession to a man he thought, was one of his own?
Unlike Marcello, Oswald never in his life, was known to have threatened
JFK or had a motive to kill him. But would you still accept Oswald's
confession, but not Marcello's???
Please answer the question David, instead of running from it.
Marcello was not the kind of guy to run around shooting his mouth off.
In fact, I don't believe that throughout his entire life, he is on the
record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting up the
assassination.
Marcello had lied on his passport David. He was from Sicily but claimed
he was from Guatemala, a place he had never even seen before.
Of course Bobby Kennedy knew that, but as a lark, he had his people
kidnap Marcello and "deport" him, dropping him in the middle of nowhere
in Guatemala. Reportedly, David Ferrie flew there and rescued the
humiliated Marcello, returning him to Louisiana.
Afterward, he was charged with being an illegal alien but thanks to
Ferrie and others, he managed to beat the rap. They celebrated his
victory with a big party on the evening of 11/22/1963.
David, I have never met any mafia dons and I'm sure you haven't either.
But we've all read about them and seen them in the movies. What would
you EXPECT a guy like that to do, under those circumstances?
In his "tail of the dog.." statement, he made it clear that it would do
no good to only kill Bobby. JFK would be all over him if he did. But by
killing JFK, he took Bobby's power away.
According to Waldron, there are other reasons why Bobby didn't go after
the mob. But I don't think he would have had LBJ's backing, if he did,
do you?
Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
Is your problem that you don't understand English grammar or that you
think the only way you can win an argument is to misrepresent what your
opponent said? I said WOULD need, IF. I was following up on your
hypothetical.
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
might want to check out this article of mine:
http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
When you discover the provenance of the conspiracy theories involving
Ferrie, you may think twice about spending any further time on them.
Dave
Steve Thomas
> In article
> <f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc-a618-1f019016f...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> > (regarding "thugs"):
>
> > "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> > they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>
> > And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>
> > "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> > Harris; 9/19/09
>
> David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
You don't think criminals make up stuff to sound more ruthless than
they actually are? Tell me Bob, in the criminal underworld, what would top
bragging about killing the President?
>
> And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
>
> It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they believe
> denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
> accused.
>
> But let me ask you a question that you evaded in the other newsgroup. If
> Oswald had confessed to killing JFK, would you have the same attitude as
> you do to Marcello's confession to a man he thought, was one of his own?
>
> Unlike Marcello, Oswald never in his life, was known to have threatened
> JFK or had a motive to kill him.
You don't think a guy with Oswald's history could have killed
the Prez? Come on Bob, its ridiculous to act like Oswald wasn't
somewhat nutty.
But would you still accept Oswald's
> confession, but not Marcello's???
They didn't find Marcello's gun in the TSBD did they?
>
> Please answer the question David, instead of running from it.
>
> Marcello was not the kind of guy to run around shooting his mouth off.
> In fact, I don't believe that throughout his entire life, he is on the
> record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting up the
> assassination.
WRONG, read Mafia Kingfish, the BRILAB tapes are full of Marcello
bragging about illegal activities. I even remember this off the top my
head, not exact but paraphrasing.
"i used to bring Beauregard H. Miller $50,000.00 cash money a month"
>
> Marcello had lied on his passport David. He was from Sicily but claimed
> he was from Guatemala, a place he had never even seen before.
>
> Of course Bobby Kennedy knew that, but as a lark, he had his people
> kidnap Marcello and "deport" him, dropping him in the middle of nowhere
> in Guatemala. Reportedly, David Ferrie flew there and rescued the
> humiliated Marcello, returning him to Louisiana.\
That is a rumor Bob, there is also one about coming back on a shrimp
boat, and one about him coming back on a Dominican Republic military jet,
and then there is Marcello's version of just flying into Miami on a
commercial flight.
>
> Afterward, he was charged with being an illegal alien but thanks to
> Ferrie and others, he managed to beat the rap. They celebrated his
> victory with a big party on the evening of 11/22/1963.
Didn't he bribe a juror to beat that rap?
>
> David, I have never met any mafia dons and I'm sure you haven't either.
> But we've all read about them and seen them in the movies. What would
> you EXPECT a guy like that to do, under those circumstances?
When you bribe jurors you don't have to worry about the laws.
>
> In his "tail of the dog.." statement, he made it clear that it would do
> no good to only kill Bobby. JFK would be all over him if he did. But by
> killing JFK, he took Bobby's power away.
>
> According to Waldron, there are other reasons why Bobby didn't go after
> the mob. But I don't think he would have had LBJ's backing, if he did,
> do you?
>
> Robert Harris
Hey Bob, why no response?
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article
><f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
>> (regarding "thugs"):
>>
>> "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
>> they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>>
>> And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>>
>> "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
>> Harris; 9/19/09
>
>
>David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
>criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
>
Are you assuming they tell each other the truth?
Naive.
>And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
>
The problem is that "confessing" is not necesarily "against interest."
Do you believe James Files, Bob? Yes or no?
"Confess" and you sound like a big shot. Of course, you are secure in
the knowledge that you could never be convicted. Indeed, it's
unlikely any prosecutor would bother with somebody making an obviously
bogus "confession."
>It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they believe
>denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
>accused.
>
See above.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2009 20:12:27 -0400, Robert Harris <reha...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> > David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> >> (regarding "thugs"):
> >>
> >> "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> >> they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
> >>
> >> And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
> >>
> >> "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> >> Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> >
> >David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> >criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
> >
>
> Are you assuming they tell each other the truth?
What difference does it make, john?
If it was a saint, appointed by Jesus himself, you'd call him a liar if
he said there was a conspiracy.
>
> Naive.
Nonsense.
In the history of the United States, NO mafia don was humiliated the way
Marcello was by Bobby Kennedy. His "take the stone from my shoe" and "tail
of the dog" statements were deadly serious to these Sicilian thugs. They
amounted to solid commitments that he intended to have JFK killed.
And why do you suppose that Marcello also made up a story about Ferrie's
involvement?
>
>
> >And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
> >
>
> The problem is that "confessing" is not necesarily "against interest."
>
> Do you believe James Files, Bob? Yes or no?
Why would I form an opinion without adequate evidence?
Only extremely dishonest people do that kind of thing john.
>
> "Confess" and you sound like a big shot.
Yes, of course. The mafia don for the entire SE United States was so
insecure that he needed to impress some guy posing as a bottom level thug.
And I guess he was just trying to impress people when he swore to kill
Kennedy too, eh?
> Of course, you are secure in
> the knowledge that you could never be convicted. Indeed, it's
> unlikely any prosecutor would bother with somebody making an obviously
> bogus "confession."
There is nothing "bogus" about it.
The FBI planted an informant in Marcello's cell in the hope that he WOULD
make confessions, and obviously, had every intention of believing them -
all except one of course.
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
<a890aa81-ded5-4a45...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 22, 7:12?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc-a618-1f019016f...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> > > (regarding "thugs"):
> >
> > > ? ? ? "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> > > they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > > And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
> >
> > > ? ? ? "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> > > Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> > criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
>
>
> You don't think criminals make up stuff to sound more ruthless than
> they actually are? Tell me Bob, in the criminal underworld, what would top
> bragging about killing the President?
Well, how about repeatedly swearing to have Kennedy killed, prior to the
assassination?
BTW, he never said he killed Kennedy himself, although he he wished he
had. He said he ordered the assassination, which required a phone call
or two. Ferrie did the recruiting for him.
>
>
> >
> > And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
> >
> > It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they believe
> > denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
> > accused.
> >
> > But let me ask you a question that you evaded in the other newsgroup. If
> > Oswald had confessed to killing JFK, would you have the same attitude as
> > you do to Marcello's confession to a man he thought, was one of his own?
> >
> > Unlike Marcello, Oswald never in his life, was known to have threatened
> > JFK or had a motive to kill him.
>
>
> You don't think a guy with Oswald's history could have killed
> the Prez?
Please read more carefully. I didn't say that Oswald was not involved in
the attack. He certainly was.
I asked David why he would accept a confession from Oswald, who never in
his life stated an intention or indicated a motive to kill Kennedy, but
reject a confession by Marcello, who had done exactly that, in spades.
Perhaps you would like to address that question for him, since David
doesn't seem very eager to reply.
> Come on Bob, its ridiculous to act like Oswald wasn't
> somewhat nutty.
Yes he was. He was obsessed with Herbert Philbrick and wanted to be
exactly like him, to the point that he tried to kill himself when his
first real assignment in Russia fell through.
>
>
>
> But would you still accept Oswald's
> > confession, but not Marcello's???
>
>
> They didn't find Marcello's gun in the TSBD did they?
Silly question. No-one is claiming that Marcello was a shooter.
>
>
> >
> > Please answer the question David, instead of running from it.
> >
> > Marcello was not the kind of guy to run around shooting his mouth off.
> > In fact, I don't believe that throughout his entire life, he is on the
> > record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting up the
> > assassination.
>
>
> WRONG, read Mafia Kingfish, the BRILAB tapes are full of Marcello
> bragging about illegal activities. I even remember this off the top my
> head, not exact but paraphrasing.
>
> "i used to bring Beauregard H. Miller $50,000.00 cash money a month"
LOL!! It is not "bragging" to talk about things that really happened.
Tell me, can you point to a single thing that Marcello ever said to his
associates that was demonstrably, a lie??
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 22, 7:12?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc-a618-1f019016f...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> > > ?David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> > > > (regarding "thugs"):
>
> > > > ? ? ? "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> > > > they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>
> > > > And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>
> > > > ? ? ? "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> > > > Harris; 9/19/09
>
> > > David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> > > criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
>
> > You don't think criminals make up stuff to sound more ruthless than
> > they actually are? Tell me Bob, in the criminal underworld, what would top
> > bragging about killing the President?
>
> Well, how about repeatedly swearing to have Kennedy killed, prior to the
> assassination?
Can you name the instances? Becker? I remember his account, but
that's the only one i can think of at the moment and he didn't report
it before hand. So who's to say that he isn't making it up? How many
people reported BEFORE the assassination, that Marcello had made a
threat to kill the President?
Not only that, but do you know how many politicians my dad
repeatedly swore he would kill? Now granted, none of them ended up
getting their head blown off, but still. If i had been thrown out of
the only country i had ever known, i am sure i would have repeatedly
swore to kill the SOB that did it "to anyone who would listen" as
Marcello said in his testimony before the HSCA. Maybe it's just the
New Orleans attitude, and the rest of the world doesn't think that
way.
>
> BTW, he never said he killed Kennedy himself, although he he wished he
> had. He said he ordered the assassination, which required a phone call
> or two. Ferrie did the recruiting for him.
Yeah Bob i know the instance, but still, if Bobby Kennedy had me
thrown out of the country, and some guy that worked for my lawyer at
the time of JFK's death had been investigated for participation in
said "plot," and i was sitting in jail years later, i might brag that
i had "the SOB" killed too.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
>
> > > It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they believe
> > > denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
> > > accused.
>
> > > But let me ask you a question that you evaded in the other newsgroup. If
> > > Oswald had confessed to killing JFK, would you have the same attitude as
> > > you do to Marcello's confession to a man he thought, was one of his own?
>
> > > Unlike Marcello, Oswald never in his life, was known to have threatened
> > > JFK or had a motive to kill him.
>
> > You don't think a guy with Oswald's history could have killed
> > the Prez?
>
> Please read more carefully. I didn't say that Oswald was not involved in
> the attack. He certainly was.
>
> I asked David why he would accept a confession from Oswald, who never in
> his life stated an intention or indicated a motive to kill Kennedy, but
> reject a confession by Marcello, who had done exactly that, in spades.
Because Oswald's gun was found in the building? And criminals are
known to lie.
>
> Perhaps you would like to address that question for him, since David
> doesn't seem very eager to reply.
>
> > Come on Bob, its ridiculous to act like Oswald wasn't
> > somewhat nutty.
>
> Yes he was. He was obsessed with Herbert Philbrick and wanted to be
> exactly like him, to the point that he tried to kill himself when his
> first real assignment in Russia fell through.
>
You'd have to first prove Oswald was an agent, i haven't seen
anything concrete on that, but i am open to anything new you might
have.
>
>
> > But would you still accept Oswald's
> > > confession, but not Marcello's???
>
> > They didn't find Marcello's gun in the TSBD did they?
>
> Silly question. No-one is claiming that Marcello was a shooter.
No you don't get it Bob, that's the reason i would believe
Oswald's confession over Marcello's. That and I know a lot of
criminals, they lie.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Please answer the question David, instead of running from it.
>
> > > Marcello was not the kind of guy to run around shooting his mouth off.
> > > In fact, I don't believe that throughout his entire life, he is on the
> > > record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting up the
> > > assassination.
>
> > WRONG, read Mafia Kingfish, the BRILAB tapes are full of Marcello
> > bragging about illegal activities. I even remember this off the top my
> > head, not exact but paraphrasing.
>
> > "i used to bring Beauregard H. Miller $50,000.00 cash money a month"
>
> LOL!! It is not "bragging" to talk about things that really happened.
>
> Tell me, can you point to a single thing that Marcello ever said to his
> associates that was demonstrably, a lie??
Can you prove that Marcello actually "brought Beauregard H. Miller
$50,000.00 cash money a month?" I'd like to see the evidence Bob!
>
> Robert Harris
tomnln
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:65434790-1806-4651...@z28g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
steve wrote;
You'd have to first prove Oswald was an agent, i haven't seen
anything concrete on that, but i am open to anything new you might
have.
I write;
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Thomas
You keep changing stuff Bob. You said "I don't believe that
throughout his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to
ANYTHING, other than setting up the assassination." When i point out
another "confession" you change your position to something about bragging.
Why can't you admit Marcello did in fact confess to illegal activities
that may or may not have actually taken place?
>
> Tell me, can you point to a single thing that Marcello ever said to his
> associates that was demonstrably, a lie??
Still waiting for you to prove he actually paid Miller 50k a
month.
>
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> "Steve Thomas" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote in message
I write:
Like i said,
"You'd have to first prove Oswald was an agent, i haven't seen anything
concrete on that, but i am open to anything new you might have."
>
tomnln
I steve write:
Like i said,
"You'd have to first prove Oswald was an agent, i haven't seen anything
concrete on that, but i am open to anything new you might have."
LIKE "I" SAID ! ! !
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
It seems like Helen Keller Reads better than You ! ! !
---------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ee53e981-03f3-4e5e...@h30g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I steve write:
Like i said,
"You'd have to first prove Oswald was an agent, i haven't seen anything
concrete on that, but i am open to anything new you might have."
I write;
LIKE "I" SAID ! ! !
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
It seems like Helen Keller Reads better than You ! ! !
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Harris
<bea937c8-1a8f-4e5e...@l35g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 9:13?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <a890aa81-ded5-4a45-ae3b-22e85c667...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 22, 7:12?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc-a618-1f019016f...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > ?David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> > > > > (regarding "thugs"):
> >
> > > > > ? ? ? "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of
> > > > > what
> > > > > they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > > > > And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
> >
> > > > > ? ? ? "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> > > > > Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > > > David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> > > > criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
> >
> > > ? ? ? ?You don't think criminals make up stuff to sound more ruthless
> > > than
> > > they actually are? Tell me Bob, in the criminal underworld, what would
> > > top
> > > bragging about killing the President?
> >
> > Well, how about repeatedly swearing to have Kennedy killed, prior to the
> > assassination?
> >
> > BTW, he never said he killed Kennedy himself, although he he wished he
> > had. He said he ordered the assassination, which required a phone call
> > or two. Ferrie did the recruiting for him.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > And do you know what the term, "against interest" means?
> >
> > > > It means that authorities believe confessions far more than they
> > > > believe
> > > > denials of guilt, because a confession is against the interest of the
> > > > accused.
> >
> > > > But let me ask you a question that you evaded in the other newsgroup.
> > > > If
> > > > Oswald had confessed to killing JFK, would you have the same attitude
> > > > as
> > > > you do to Marcello's confession to a man he thought, was one of his
> > > > own?
> >
> > > > Unlike Marcello, Oswald never in his life, was known to have threatened
> > > > JFK or had a motive to kill him.
> >
> > > ? ? ? ? You don't think a guy with Oswald's history could have killed
> > > the Prez?
> >
> > Please read more carefully. I didn't say that Oswald was not involved in
> > the attack. He certainly was.
> >
> > I asked David why he would accept a confession from Oswald, who never in
> > his life stated an intention or indicated a motive to kill Kennedy, but
> > reject a confession by Marcello, who had done exactly that, in spades.
> >
> > Perhaps you would like to address that question for him, since David
> > doesn't seem very eager to reply.
> >
> > > Come on Bob, its ridiculous to act like Oswald wasn't
> > > somewhat nutty.
> >
> > Yes he was. He was obsessed with Herbert Philbrick and wanted to be
> > exactly like him, to the point that he tried to kill himself when his
> > first real assignment in Russia fell through.
> >
> >
> >
> > > ?But would you still accept Oswald's
> > > > confession, but not Marcello's???
> >
> > > ? They didn't find Marcello's gun in the TSBD did they?
> >
> > Silly question. No-one is claiming that Marcello was a shooter.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > Please answer the question David, instead of running from it.
> >
> > > > Marcello was not the kind of guy to run around shooting his mouth off.
> > > > In fact, I don't believe that throughout his entire life, he is on the
> > > > record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting up the
> > > > assassination.
> >
> > > ? ?WRONG, read Mafia Kingfish, the BRILAB tapes are full of Marcello
> > > bragging about illegal activities. ?I even remember this off the top my
> > > head, not exact but paraphrasing.
> >
> > > ? "i used to bring Beauregard H. Miller $50,000.00 cash money a month"
> >
> > LOL!! It is not "bragging" to talk about things that really happened.
>
>
>
>
>
> You keep changing stuff Bob. You said "I don't believe that
> throughout his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to
> ANYTHING, other than setting up the assassination." When i point out
> another "confession" you change your position to something about bragging.
> Why can't you admit Marcello did in fact confess to illegal activities
> that may or may not have actually taken place?
This is a silly argument Steve. Of course he talked to associates about
other crimes. In fact, he ordered them to carry out countless crimes and
undoubtedly, talked about them.
But that is hardly the same as trying to impress them. Can you point to
a single, demonstrable lie he told his associates about such things?
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Tell me, can you point to a single thing that Marcello ever said to his
> > associates that was demonstrably, a lie??
>
>
>
>
> Still waiting for you to prove he actually paid Miller 50k a
> month.
LOL! You are the one with the liar, liar accusations. Prove em if you
can.
Look - Marcello ran the mafia for the entire SE part of the United States.
And he was HUGE on bribes. In fact, that is why he was in prison. Fifty
grand was pocket change to this guy.
Your tactics are very simple and rather pathetic, Steve. You accept
NOTHING as evidence. Photos, recorded phone calls, confessions, etc. etc.
etc, you just deny everything.
If this guy confessed to extortion, murder, peddling drugs, or dozens of
other crimes, you wouldn't hesitate to believe it. It is ONLY this crime
that puts you into denial.
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
<65434790-1806-4651...@z28g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 9:13?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <a890aa81-ded5-4a45-ae3b-22e85c667...@d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 22, 7:12?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc-a618-1f019016f...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > ?David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> > > > > (regarding "thugs"):
> >
> > > > > ? ? ? "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of
> > > > > what
> > > > > they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > > > > And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
> >
> > > > > ? ? ? "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> > > > > Harris; 9/19/09
> >
> > > > David, why do you pretend to not realize the difference between what
> > > > criminals tell the police and what they tell each other?
> >
> > > ? ? ? ?You don't think criminals make up stuff to sound more ruthless
> > > than
> > > they actually are? Tell me Bob, in the criminal underworld, what would
> > > top
> > > bragging about killing the President?
> >
> > Well, how about repeatedly swearing to have Kennedy killed, prior to the
> > assassination?
>
>
>
> Can you name the instances? Becker? I remember his account, but
> that's the only one i can think of at the moment and he didn't report
> it before hand.
Yes Steve, liars, liars everywhere... sigh.
There are two statements on the record, the "Take this stone from my
shoe", which those people take VERY seriously, and there is the "Kill
the dog and the tail stops wagging" statement.
If you can't look them up with Google in less that two minutes, let me
know.
> So who's to say that he isn't making it up?
No-one Steve. They are all liars or insane - most of the witnesses in
DP, most of the doctors and nurses and Parkland, countless cops and
other law enforcement professionals, including FBI employees, sheriff's
employees, etc. etc. etc.
Has it ever occurred to you that you guys sound a lot like OJ would if
there had been witnesses to his murders?
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> MIDDLE POST;
That hodgepodge of stuff does not prove Oswald was an agent. Nice
joke, but its not going to make anything concrete magically appear on your
worthless page of crap. If you want to play nasty i can go that rout also.
Steve Thomas
NO, NO, NO, NO, i'm not going to let you call something i said silly,
when YOU are the one who said ""I don't believe that throughout his entire
life, he is on the record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other than setting
up the assassination." And now your acting like, "well of course he
talked to associates about crimes." Make up your f'n mind, and stop
calling ME silly. By the way, the example i cited is not Marcello talking
to someone about a crime THEY are committing, but a crime HE
committed(supposedly) at an earlier time. In effect "bragging" about
something, that neither YOU, nor I, nor Joe Houser (the man who was
recording said conversation) can know as being a truthful statement.
Unless, and i ask again, you can prove he actually paid B.H. Miller 50K
cash a month? 3rd chance!
How about you not call something i said silly and instead just walk
back on the untrue statement you made ""I don't believe that throughout
his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to ANYTHING, other
than setting up the assassination." I didn't call the statement silly,
even though now your taking MY position on your obviously "silly" original
statement.
>
> But that is hardly the same as trying to impress them. Can you point to
> a single, demonstrable lie he told his associates about such things?
Bob in the example i cited, CAN YOU PROVE HE ACTUALLY PAID B.H.
MILLER 50K a month? I grew up in Gretna Bob, i know Miller's family, as
well as the current Chief, i do not believe Marcello paid B.H. Miller 50K
a month. I say that's a lie. Can you prove he DID pay it?
>
>
>
> > > Tell me, can you point to a single thing that Marcello ever said to his
> > > associates that was demonstrably, a lie??
>
> > Still waiting for you to prove he actually paid Miller 50k a
> > month.
>
> LOL! You are the one with the liar, liar accusations. Prove em if you
> can.
I didn't realize we were dealing with the Mafia family that went by
the motto "rules were meant to be followed." Your complete lack of
understanding of the criminal mind is astounding.
>
> Look - Marcello ran the mafia for the entire SE part of the United States.
> And he was HUGE on bribes. In fact, that is why he was in prison. Fifty
> grand was pocket change to this guy.
>
> Your tactics are very simple and rather pathetic, Steve. You accept
> NOTHING as evidence. Photos, recorded phone calls, confessions, etc. etc.
> etc, you just deny everything.
1. Photos? Explain that one. When has a photo been submitted that i
overlooked?
2. Recorded phone call? Explain that one, when have i overlooked a
recorded call?
3. Confessions of criminals made to other criminals mean absolutely
nothing. On this i don't get your "simple and rather pathetic" attempt to
attack me for something that is perfectly reasonable to disagree on.
>
> If this guy confessed to extortion, murder, peddling drugs, or dozens of
> other crimes, you wouldn't hesitate to believe it. It is ONLY this crime
> that puts you into denial.
Nope, i just understand that criminals lie. I wouldn't take a
criminal's word for anything. I'd like to see proof. As far as extortion,
murder, peddling drugs, or dozens of other crimes, i don't doubt Marcello
was involved in that business. I just think ANY Mafia boss would LOVE to
have "had President Assassinated" on his resume. Marcello was in a unique
position CLAIM that on his resume, whether it was true or not. I am
surprised a pathetic, silly, rational guy like you can't understand that.
>
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Wrong Bob, get your shit straight if your gonna attack me for holding
perfectly valid views. Those 2 statements were made at the same meeting,
AND Becker waited till AFTER the assassination to say anything. So you are
still stuck with ONE instance AND you are asking us to take as gospel, the
word of a man who in your view allowed JFK to be killed? And what, years
later and after many sessions to the confession booth at St. Louis
Cathedral, and after much repentance, Becker comes forward and spills the
beans? Yeah that's 100% believable, no doubt about it.
>
> If you can't look them up with Google in less that two minutes, let me
> know.
>
> > So who's to say that he isn't making it up?
>
> No-one Steve. They are all liars or insane - most of the witnesses in
> DP,
Well Bob, are we talking about the crime scene or Marcello? You change
subjects and opinions so much its getting hard to keep up.
most of the doctors
Did Marcello confess to a doctor? No? Then why are you bringing it
up in THIS conversation?
and nurses and Parkland, countless cops
What cops said Marcello was involved? I hadn't heard that one.
and
> other law enforcement professionals, including FBI employees, sheriff's
> employees, etc. etc. etc.
Please be specific in your allegations and stop throwing crap at
the wall hoping it will stick.
>
> Has it ever occurred to you that you guys sound a lot like OJ would if
> there had been witnesses to his murders?
Has it ever occurred to you that you guys sound like the typical,
homeless, CT, rambling on the corner of Dauphine and Canal, begging
for change, at 2 in the morning? All because you can't stick to one
subject or held opinion for more than 30 seconds.
>
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Marcello didn't even speak Italian, FYI! And they take it so
seriously, a google search in Italian only brings up reference to Marcello
saying it. Will you admit that you don't know what the hell you are
talking about?
Robert Harris
<94bfde45-e9bd-4cad...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 12:56?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <65434790-1806-4651-b9e0-dcd94649c...@z28g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > ? ? ?Can you name the instances? Becker? I remember his account, but
> > > that's the only one i can think of at the moment and he didn't report
> > > it before hand.
> >
> > Yes Steve, liars, liars everywhere... sigh.
> >
> > There are two statements on the record, the "Take this stone from my
> > shoe", which those people take VERY seriously, and there is the "Kill
> > the dog and the tail stops wagging" statement.
>
>
>
>
> Marcello didn't even speak Italian, FYI! And they take it so
> seriously, a google search in Italian only brings up reference to Marcello
> saying it. Will you admit that you don't know what the hell you are
> talking about?
Well, I certainly have no clue what your argument is. Yes, that is exactly
what Marcello said. And it doesn't matter that it was in Italian. It is a
statement that ANYONE in the mafia will immediately recognize. I only
speak English but I know what "E pluribus unum" and "Hasta la vista baby"
means.
These are very poor arguments, Steve.
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
What makes you think "ANYONE" in the mafia would know it? Can you
cite me any other instances of this phrase being used by a mobster? And a
movie won't cut it. ANYTHING other than the Becker allegation? I can't
find one. It's an ALLEGATION of Becker, after the assassination! So it
doesn't matter to you that Becker has Marcello speaking a phrase in
Italian? That's strange because as i said, i can only find 1 mobster
allegedly using it, and that's Marcello in Becker's account.
I only
> speak English but I know what "E pluribus unum" and "Hasta la vista baby"
> means.
>
> These are very poor arguments, Steve.
>
Only to someone dead set on having Marcello behind the crime, no
matter what. I'm open to the possibility, but its by no means a certainty
at this point, no matter what you want to believe at the moment.
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Poor arguments? Like stating AS FACT that Ferrie flew Marcello back to
the US after Bobby threw him out?
Poor arguments? Like making the statement ""I don't believe that
throughout his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to
ANYTHING, other than setting up the assassination?"
Poor arguments? Like making a statement "Marcello had lied on his
passport. He was from Sicily but claimed he was from Guatemala, a place he
had never even seen before." When he had never stepped foot in Sicily
either! Then man was born in Tunis Tunisia!
Poor arguments? Like saying "His "take the stone from my shoe" and
"tail of the dog" statements were deadly serious to these Sicilian thugs.
" When in fact the ONLY mafia person i ever heard supposedly say this is
Marcello.
Poor arguments? Like making a statement "And why do you suppose that
Marcello also made up a story about Ferrie's involvement?" And then
dropping the matter when asked to clarify. I'll ask you a third time to
cite when and where Marcello said this. I'v never heard the allegation
before. I'm AM curious, and YOU are just interested in calling me "silly,
poor, and pathetic"
Poor Arguments? Like being asked for examples of Marcello repeatedly
threatening to kill Kennedy, and then posting 2 sentences from the SAME
alleged meeting?
These poor arguments of yours are just the ones off the top of my head,
i am sure there are more if i go back and study.
Steve Thomas
Robert Harris
<01cc1bfd-7604-4165...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> might want to check out this article of mine:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
wish to read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
> When you discover the provenance of the conspiracy theories involving
> Ferrie, you may think twice about spending any further time on them.
>
> Dave
Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's old
neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
<affa6bd3-50c3-4548...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
> > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
> > him to Oswald.
> >
>
>
>
>
> Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
> says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
> a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
David, I notice that once again, you evaded my reply. But will you at
least answer a simple question?
Are you really incapable of understanding the difference between what a
professional criminal tells the police and what he says to his fellow
thugs?
If so David, then why would you make such a disingenuous argument?
Robert Harris
In article
<f9b1d2f6-b196-4dbc...@n2g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> Let's bask in the Pot & Kettle nature of Robert Harris' last post
> (regarding "thugs"):
>
> "When you deal with thugs like this, you believe about 1% of what
> they tell you, if that." -- Bob Harris; 9/19/09
>
> And then, just seconds later, Bob Harris tells us this:
>
> "Marcello admitted it [plotting JFK's murder], David." -- Bob
> Harris; 9/19/09
>
> LOL.
>
> So, it appears that early in the post, Robert Harris doesn't think it's
> wise at all to believe much of anything that "thugs" like David Ferrie
> have to say. But a few seconds later we find Mr. Harris ready and eager to
> believe another "thug" (i.e., a mobster) named Carlos Marcello when
> Marcello apparently confessed to being part of a plot to assassinate JFK.
>
> I guess Marcello doesn't qualify as a "thug", is that it Robert?
>
> Since Marcello was well ABOVE Ferrie's lowly station and class, Harris
> wants to BELIEVE Marcello was telling the gospel truth, but he'll throw
> Ferrie under the bus.
>
> Nice logic, Bob. The way you get to pick and choose which scumbag/
> crook/plotter/mobster/"thug" should be believed and which one should be
> fed to the wolves is quite illuminating. (Not to mention hilarious.)
>
> Also:
>
> Evidently Bob Harris doesn't think it was unusual at all for David Ferrie
> (whom Mr. Harris thinks was involved in a conspiracy to murder the
> President) to travel for many hours by automobile with two of his friends
> from New Orleans to Houston, Texas, just so Ferrie can use the telephone
> at some ICE-SKATING RINK in Houston (presumably so that Ferrie could make
> contact with other "conspirators" in Dallas).
>
> Apparently the only telephone available to Ferrie was at Chuck Rolland's
> ice-skating rink in Houston.
>
> Time for another one of these ---> LOL!
>
> To repeat the obvious --- If David Ferrie (OR CARLOS MARCELLO) had been
> part of a plot to kill President Kennedy, both of those "thugs" would have
> been thousands of miles from Texas (and out of the country) by the time
> the first shot was even fired in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
Robert Harris
<6dd24fe6-0fa8-4141...@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 11:45?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <94bfde45-e9bd-4cad-b6a5-aba6e40b1...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > ? ? ? Marcello didn't even speak Italian, FYI! ?And they take it so
> > > seriously, a google search in Italian only brings up reference to
> > > Marcello
> > > saying it. Will you admit that you don't know what the hell you are
> > > talking about?
> >
> > Well, I certainly have no clue what your argument is. Yes, that is exactly
> > what Marcello said. And it doesn't matter that it was in Italian. It is a
> > statement that ANYONE in the mafia will immediately recognize. I only
> > speak English but I know what "E pluribus unum" and "Hasta la vista baby" ?
> > means.
> >
> > These are very poor arguments, Steve.
> >
>
>
>
> Poor arguments? Like stating AS FACT that Ferrie flew Marcello back to
> the US after Bobby threw him out?
I did no such thing. I said, "REPORTEDLY, David Ferrie flew there and
rescued the humiliated Marcello, returning him to Louisiana."
By poor argument, I was referring to your claim that Marcello didn't make
the "Take the stone..." statement because he didn't know enough Italian to
say it.
He was not giving instructions on how to take care of his shoe. He was
repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which was very, very
mafia, by its nature. Marcello did not need to learn the Italian language
to know what that meant, and it is silly to claim he did.
> Poor arguments? Like making the statement ""I don't believe that
> throughout his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to
> ANYTHING, other than setting up the assassination?"
> Poor arguments? Like making a statement "Marcello had lied on his
> passport. He was from Sicily but claimed he was from Guatemala, a place he
> had never even seen before." When he had never stepped foot in Sicily
> either! Then man was born in Tunis Tunisia!
If you had lifted a finger to research this issue, you would have already
known that. A good place to start, for people like youself, is Wikipedia.
(quote)
It did not take Marcello long to get back into the United States.
Undercover informants reported that Marcello made several threats against
John F. Kennedy, at one time uttering the traditional Sicilian death
threat curse, "Take the stone from my shoe." Some of those who knew him,
however, suggested that Marcello did not know enough Italian to utter such
a threat. In September 1962, Marcello told private investigator Edward
Becker that, "A dog will continue to bite you if you cut off its tail...,"
(meaning Attorney General Robert Kennedy.), "...whereas if you cut off the
dog's head...," (meaning President Kennedy), "... it would cease to cause
trouble." Becker reported that Marcello, "clearly stated that he was going
to arrange to have President Kennedy killed in some way." Marcello told
another informant that he would need to take out "insurance" for the
assassination by, ".... setting up some nut to take the fall for the job,
just like they do in Sicily."
(unquote)
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> > > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
> > > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
> > > him to Oswald.
>
> > Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
> > says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
> > a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
>
> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
>
> Robert Harris
Is this a joke?
John McAdams
wrote:
Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Steve Thomas
> In article
> <affa6bd3-50c3-4548-b9d1-b26df44e1...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> > > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
> > > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
> > > him to Oswald.
>
> > Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
> > says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
> > a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
>
> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
>
> Robert Harris
Is this a joke?
Steve Thomas
You cherry picked! As i asked, what about the report of him coming back
on a shrimp boat? Or the Dominican air force jet? Or his version of flying
right into Miami on a commercial flight? You stated the one "report" that
fits your theory. The problem is your chosen "report" that you "reported"
here is probably the LEAST likely way he got back.
>
> By poor argument, I was referring to your claim that Marcello didn't make
> the "Take the stone..." statement because he didn't know enough Italian to
> say it.
The poor argument on your part is taking the stone and dog
statement and acting as if it were 2 different instances.
>
> He was not giving instructions on how to take care of his shoe. He was
> repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which was very, very
> mafia, by its nature. Marcello did not need to learn the Italian language
> to know what that meant, and it is silly to claim he did.
You are blowing smoke on crap you read on Wikipedia. Cite me
something other than the Beck allegation, something that even attempts to
suggest "He was repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which
was very, very mafia, by its nature. " I'll bet 10-1 you can't.
>
> > Poor arguments? Like making the statement ""I don't believe that
> > throughout his entire life, he is on the record EVER confessing to
> > ANYTHING, other than setting up the assassination?"
> > Poor arguments? Like making a statement "Marcello had lied on his
> > passport. He was from Sicily but claimed he was from Guatemala, a place he
> > had never even seen before." When he had never stepped foot in Sicily
> > either! Then man was born in Tunis Tunisia!
>
> If you had lifted a finger to research this issue, you would have already
> known that. A good place to start, for people like youself, is Wikipedia.
1. YOU SAID MARCELLO WAS BORN IN >SICILY< I corrected you and now your
acting like YOU know what you are talking about? LOL, Bob, i think you
ought to start reading what i am replying to, your coming off more and
more like you don't know what you say previously.
2.Remember lines like this next time you write something like this "I
will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm. "
>
> (quote)
>
> It did not take Marcello long to get back into the United States.
> Undercover informants reported that Marcello made several threats against
> John F. Kennedy, at one time uttering the traditional Sicilian death
> threat curse, "Take the stone from my shoe."
Which "informants?" The Becker allegation is the "stone from my
shoe." This reads plural but give only one instance. I don't care what
wikipedia says, but what you can prove. So name another instance besides
the Becker one.
Some of those who knew him,
> however, suggested that Marcello did not know enough Italian to utter such
> a threat. In September 1962, Marcello told private investigator Edward
> Becker that, "A dog will continue to bite you if you cut off its tail...,"
> (meaning Attorney General Robert Kennedy.), "...whereas if you cut off the
> dog's head...," (meaning President Kennedy), "... it would cease to cause
> trouble." Becker reported that Marcello, "clearly stated that he was going
> to arrange to have President Kennedy killed in some way."
Still on the Becker allegation, but the whole thing is worded as if
there are many others, yet won't name one. So ill ask again Bob even
though its getting to be a pain in the ass because you won't answer, or
you answer in a smart Alec way unknowingly citing the Becker allegation
AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Marcello told
> another informant that he would need to take out "insurance" for the
> assassination by, ".... setting up some nut to take the fall for the job,
> just like they do in Sicily."
What do you know, another part to the 3 part series that has to do
with the SAME allegation of one Edward Becker. And you call my arguments
silly? Pathetic? Lets alter your snarky remark from earlier
"If you had lifted a finger to research this issue, you would have already
known that. A good place to start, for people like youself, is Wikipedia."
and make it into something worth a crap!
"If you(Bob Harris) had lifted a finger to research this issue, you would
have already known that(this is all ONE allegation). A horrible place to
start would be Wikipedia, because they get shit wrong and some editors
with preconceived views(like you Robert Harris) will willingly mislead
readers by omitting some facts, and embellishing others."
>
> (unquote)
>
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> On 28 Sep 2009 22:47:35 -0400, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com>
If he doesn't want to back it up why post it?
>
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
> �"dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > might want to check out this article of mine:
http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
> Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> wish to read this:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
> > When you discover the provenance of the conspiracy theories involving
> > Ferrie, you may think twice about spending any further time on them.
>
> > Dave
>
> Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
> his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's old
> neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
>
> Robert Harris
David Blackburst answered this question a full decade ago. You didn't
care then and you don't care now.
Dave
Steve Thomas
<dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 10:15 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > > might want to check out this article of mine:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
>
> > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> > wish to read this:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
> Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
I haven't clicked on the Ferrie wikipedia link yet, not after what I
went through on the Marcello entry Bob directed me to. If the Ferrie one
is as bad as the Marcello one, it's no longer a surprise why Harris
doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. So please just tell me
Dave, is it as bad as the Marcello entry? Im afraid to look!
Robert Harris
<8ebb1f23-9923-46ab...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> On Sep 28, 10:15?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?"dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > > might want to check out this article of mine:
>
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
>
>
> > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> > wish to read this:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
>
> Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
ROFLMAO!!
No, what is "odd" is that David has such a short memory and doesn't recall
that I debunked his loony arguments a long time ago, including David's
totally unsupported claim that Robert Blakely was a liar and his failure
to even try to put forward a plausible explanation for why Oswald used the
address of the building where Ferrie and Banister worked, on his flyers.
Ferrie was a convicted criminal and a known liar. He worked in support of
one of the most vicious criminals in the United States - Carlos Marcello,
who admitted that he ordered the assassination and specifically described
Ferrie's involvement which included introducing him to Oswald.
I cannot imagine how any human being could assume the role of apologist
for that kind of scum.
>
>
> > > When you discover the provenance of the conspiracy theories involving
> > > Ferrie, you may think twice about spending any further time on them.
> >
> > > Dave
> >
> > Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
> > his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's old
> > neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
> >
> > Robert Harris
>
>
> David Blackburst answered this question a full decade ago. You didn't
> care then and you don't care now.
David, is the question too difficult for you?
Blackburst NEVER presented a plausible excuse for why Ferrie did that
and neither have you.
Why don't you just answer the question?
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
<f0181b4a-2451-480d...@a6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 9:19?am, "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)"
> <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 10:15 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > > > might want to check out this article of mine:
> >
> > http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
> >
> > > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> > > wish to read this:
> >
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
> >
> > Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
>
>
> I haven't clicked on the Ferrie wikipedia link yet, not after what I
> went through on the Marcello entry Bob directed me to. If the Ferrie one
> is as bad as the Marcello one, it's no longer a surprise why Harris
> doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. So please just tell me
> Dave, is it as bad as the Marcello entry? Im afraid to look!
LOL!!
Poor Steve:-)
It must be terrible to learn that there is a real world outside this
little group of fringies who still cling to the long discredited belief
that a lone nut killed JFK all by himself.
Steve, I suggest that you NEVER stray beyond this group or Bugliosi's
book. Of course, you can also watch carefully selected TV programs - you
know - the kind that claim that since JFK was shot from the rear, there
could only have been one assassin.
That's the kind of "logic" that you thrive on, isn't it Steve?
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 28 Sep 2009 22:47:35 -0400, Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Sep 28, 9:16?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <affa6bd3-50c3-4548-b9d1-b26df44e1...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> >> ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> >> > > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to
> >> > > setting
> >> > > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and
> >> > > introduced
> >> > > him to Oswald.
> >>
> >> > ? ?Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
> >> > says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
> >> > a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
> >>
> >> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
> >> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
> >>
> >> Robert Harris
> >
> >
> > Is this a joke?
>
> Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
>
> Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
>
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John, would you care to make a small wager?
Money is fine, but I would be just as happy to do humiliation, if you
choose.
Perhaps, a daily posting of sincere praise and deep, personal shame over
the next couple of weeks would be appropriate. What do you think?
Or if you lack the testicular abundance (as we know you will:-), perhaps
Steve will carry the LN banner for you?
Tell me something john. You seem to have enough courage to imply that I am
a liar. Do you also have enough courage to stand behind your accusation?
Robert Harris
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
> On Sep 29, 9:19�am, "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)"
>
> <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 28, 10:15 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > In article
> > > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > > > might want to check out this article of mine:
http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
> > > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> > > wish to read this:
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
> > Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
>
> I haven't clicked on the Ferrie wikipedia link yet, not after what I
> went through on the Marcello entry Bob directed me to. If the Ferrie one
> is as bad as the Marcello one, it's no longer a surprise why Harris
> doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. So please just tell me
> Dave, is it as bad as the Marcello entry? Im afraid to look!
It's not too bad, although it's a bit one-sided and credits statements
from some crazy witnesses, like Delphine Roberts (a Judyth Baker-like
figure):
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100delphine.html
Dave
Robert Harris
<55d4f61a-b943-4d6a...@o21g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 9:17?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <6dd24fe6-0fa8-4141-81c6-a0c0e4269...@31g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
> > > ? ?Poor arguments? Like stating AS FACT that Ferrie flew Marcello back to
> > > the US after Bobby threw him out?
> >
> > I did no such thing. I said, "REPORTEDLY, David Ferrie flew there and
> > rescued the humiliated Marcello, returning him to Louisiana."
>
>
>
>
>
> You cherry picked!
Bullshit!
You just said, "Poor arguments? Like stating AS FACT that Ferrie flew
Marcello back to the US after Bobby threw him out?"
You were flatly wrong, claiming that I stated that "AS FACT".
Why are you trying to slither out of once again, being totally wrong?
> As i asked, what about the report of him coming back
> on a shrimp boat? Or the Dominican air force jet? Or his version of flying
> right into Miami on a commercial flight? You stated the one "report" that
> fits your theory. The problem is your chosen "report" that you "reported"
> here is probably the LEAST likely way he got back.
If you think one of those are true, then state your case. Why are you
whining at me?
>
>
>
> >
> > By poor argument, I was referring to your claim that Marcello didn't make
> > the "Take the stone..." statement because he didn't know enough Italian to
> > say it.
>
>
>
>
> The poor argument on your part is taking the stone and dog
> statement and acting as if it were 2 different instances.
It was two totally different statements, one stating his intention and
the other, the reason why he would kill JFK instead of Bobby.
He also stated that he intended to set up a patsy to take the blame,
although I am quite sure that Oswald was an eager recruit, and didn't
have to be framed.
In addition to admitting that he set up the assassination, he also said
that Ferrie introduced him to Oswald.
>
>
>
> >
> > He was not giving instructions on how to take care of his shoe. He was
> > repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which was very, very
> > mafia, by its nature. Marcello did not need to learn the Italian language
> > to know what that meant, and it is silly to claim he did.
>
>
>
> You are blowing smoke on crap you read on Wikipedia.
ROFLMAO!!!
I'm sure everyone would rather believe you, than Wikipedia. Have you
even read a book on this subject?
> Cite me
> something other than the Beck allegation, something that even attempts to
> suggest "He was repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which
> was very, very mafia, by its nature. " I'll bet 10-1 you can't.
Well of course, I will just track down all the other mafia thugs for
you, who heard him say that.
I'm sorry Steve, but you are simply hopeless. You accept nothing, even
from statements by highly reliable FBI informants. Hell, you even think
Wikipedia is lying.
Has it ever occurred to you, Steve, to think about what you and everyone
else on the planet knows about mafia dons??
What in your opinion, would happen to ANYONE who grabbed one of those
guys and dumped him in the jungles of a third world country??
Do you think he would get a good laugh out of it?
Hell, this guy would very likely waste you if you gave him the finger:-)
It is predictable that he would hate the Kennedys. His promise to kill JFK
was exactly what we would expect a guy like that to do. And he only needed
to make a few phone calls to get the job done.
You're in denial Steve. You just deny anything and everything that proves
you are wrong.
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Bob, im not the one that posted a bunch of stuff that i can't back up,
or that was straight up wrong. I corrected you numerous times and you just
keep going like nothing happened LOL. Its pretty strange.
>
> Robert Harris
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
> �"dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 28, 10:15?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > ?"dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
> > > > might want to check out this article of mine:
>
> >http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
>
> > > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
> > > wish to read this:
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
> > Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
>
> ROFLMAO!!
>
> No, what is "odd" is that David has such a short memory and doesn't recall
> that I debunked his loony arguments a long time ago,
Here's that link again, folks:
http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
Feel free to ask Bob about all the things he's "debunked" there.
including David's
> totally unsupported claim that Robert Blakely was a liar
Bob is confusing the above-cited article with another. Bob can't support a
claim that Robert B-L-A-K-E-Y made (and isn't interested in even trying),
so he twists it around to have me say something about Blakey I never said.
Harris has simply been making up stories about me for a full decade (my
favorite being his claim that "Dave Reitzes" is a cover name for a team of
evil spooks), with no end whatsoever in sight.
and his failure
> to even try to put forward a plausible explanation for why Oswald used the
> address of the building where Ferrie and Banister worked, on his flyers.
I did so a decade ago, Bob. You didn't care then and you don't care
now.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/camp.htm
This won't stop Bob from making the same dopey claims in another
decade.
> Ferrie was a convicted criminal and a known liar.
If you say so.
He worked in support of
> one of the most vicious criminals in the United States - Carlos Marcello,
> who admitted that he ordered the assassination and specifically described
> Ferrie's involvement which included introducing him to Oswald.
>
> I cannot imagine how any human being could assume the role of apologist
> for that kind of scum.
Here's Bob Harris's evidence that David Ferrie conspired to kill JFK:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Want to see it again? \:^)
> > > > When you discover the provenance of the conspiracy theories involving
> > > > Ferrie, you may think twice about spending any further time on them.
>
> > > > Dave
>
> > > Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
> > > his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's old
> > > neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
>
> > > Robert Harris
>
> > David Blackburst answered this question a full decade ago. You didn't
> > care then and you don't care now.
>
> David, is the question too difficult for you?
>
> Blackburst NEVER presented a plausible excuse for why Ferrie did that
> and neither have you.
Never?
> Why don't you just answer the question?
>
> Robert Harris
Gee, if only there were some way of searching the Internet, some kind of
... I don't know ... "engine" that could power up an information-
gathering process . . . \:^)
Wow, it took me a whole five seconds:
http://www.jfk-online.com/dbdflibrfile.html
Harris doesn't care and he never will.
Dave
blackburst
> > > Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
> > > his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's old
> > > neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
>
> > > Robert Harris
>
> > David Blackburst answered this question a full decade ago. You didn't
> > care then and you don't care now.
>
> David, is the question too difficult for you?
>
> Blackburst NEVER presented a plausible excuse for why Ferrie did that
> and neither have you.
OK: You have the press, NOPD, NODA, FBI and USSS saying it has been
alleged that the accused assassin had your library card. You believe
that to be untrue (and don't yet know the source of the allegation).
Then, you find out from a former CAP cadet that the accused assassin
was once in your CAP squadron and may have attended a party at your
home (8 years earlier). Could he have picked up an old card at that
time? What would you do in this case - nothing?
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article <ubt2c5d6c0ervcrtq...@4ax.com>,
> John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>
>> >>
>> >> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
>> >> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
>> >>
>> >> Robert Harris
>> >
>> >
>> > Is this a joke?
>>
>> Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
>>
>> Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
>>
>
>
>John, would you care to make a small wager?
>
>Money is fine, but I would be just as happy to do humiliation, if you
>choose.
>
>Perhaps, a daily posting of sincere praise and deep, personal shame over
>the next couple of weeks would be appropriate. What do you think?
>
>Or if you lack the testicular abundance (as we know you will:-), perhaps
>Steve will carry the LN banner for you?
>
>Tell me something john. You seem to have enough courage to imply that I am
>a liar. Do you also have enough courage to stand behind your accusation?
>
LOL!
You *are* pulling a Shackelford. You are turning truculent to obscure
the fact that you are refusing to post a source.
Back up what you have to say, Bob.
Shackelford has never gotten anything but contempt with his "I say
this is true, but I'm not going to give *you* a source" nonsense.
So post a source, or look like Shackelford.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article
><8ebb1f23-9923-46ab...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> "drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <drei...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
>
>ROFLMAO!!
>
>No, what is "odd" is that David has such a short memory and doesn't recall
>that I debunked his loony arguments a long time ago, including David's
>totally unsupported claim that Robert Blakely was a liar and his failure
>to even try to put forward a plausible explanation for why Oswald used the
>address of the building where Ferrie and Banister worked, on his flyers.
>
Huh?
>Ferrie was a convicted criminal and a known liar. He worked in support of
>one of the most vicious criminals in the United States - Carlos Marcello,
>who admitted that he ordered the assassination and specifically described
>Ferrie's involvement which included introducing him to Oswald.
>
>I cannot imagine how any human being could assume the role of apologist
>for that kind of scum.
>
That's HarrisLogic(tm).
He decides who is "scum" and then tries to pin the assassination on
them.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article
><01cc1bfd-7604-4165...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> "drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <drei...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out there, you
>> might want to check out this article of mine:
>>
>> http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
>
>
>Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie might
>wish to read this:
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
>
>
Oh, my!
Harris is invoking the authority of Wikipedia!
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Sep 28, 9:49�pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 28 Sep 2009 22:47:35 -0400, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Sep 28, 9:16�pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> In article
>> >> <affa6bd3-50c3-4548-b9d1-b26df44e1...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> �Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> > > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
>> >> > > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
>> >> > > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
>> >> > > him to Oswald.
>>
>> >> > � �Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he
>> >> > says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
>> >> > a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
>>
>> >> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
>> >> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
>>
>> >> Robert Harris
>>
>> > � Is this a joke?
>>
>> Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
>>
>> Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
>
>
>
>
> If he doesn't want to back it up why post it?
>
>
I guess he thinks we'll accept it on his say-so.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Robert Harris
<reharris1-E2E4D...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,
Robert Harris <reha...@yahoo.com> wrote:
John?
Steve?
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Your problem is that you can't back up half of what you say, so
you get snarky.
>
> Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
Is citing something on Wikipedia an Argument by Authority?
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
You lay out an interesting scenario, but surely you are not prepared to
have Ferrie in a party with Oswald in his apartment, ala the Roman orgy
scene from the movie JFK.
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
Yes, and since Wikipedia has little credibility, it's a logical
fallacy.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
I'm sorry, john. I missed your reply.
Do we have a bet??
Robert Harris
>
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Steve Thomas
> On 29 Sep 2009 10:18:14 -0400, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sep 28, 9:49?pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 28 Sep 2009 22:47:35 -0400, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> In article
> >> >> <affa6bd3-50c3-4548-b9d1-b26df44e1...@o36g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >> >> > On Sep 19, 3:44?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> > > David, you need to read Waldron's book, "Legacy of Secrecy". He has
> >> >> > > documents from the FBI stating that Marcello not only confessed to setting
> >> >> > > up the assassination, but that Ferrie helped him set it up, and introduced
> >> >> > > him to Oswald.
>
> >> >> > says Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull
> >> >> > a Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
>
> >> >> I will be happy to type up a citation for you, after you make a respectful
> >> >> request without the insinuations of dishonesty or sarcasm.
>
> >> >> Robert Harris
>
>
> >> Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
>
> >> Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
>
>
> I guess he thinks we'll accept it on his say-so.
Well i don't doubt he ma have read the allegation in Waldron's
book, but everything depends on the source. His repeated cites of
wikipedia are strange as well, especially after i showed how screwed
up wiki is on the Marcello/JFK/Becker stuff.
>
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Robert Harris
<c00be7fc-576c-4d2f...@g31g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 9:24?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <f0181b4a-2451-480d-8c83-2f82b27a4...@a6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
> > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 29, 9:19?am, "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)"
> > > <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > On Sep 28, 10:15 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <01cc1bfd-7604-4165-9312-2c0e40e47...@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > "dreit...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > If there are any newcomers to the subject of David Ferrie out
> > > > > > there, you
> > > > > > might want to check out this article of mine:
> >
> > > >http://www.jfk-online.com/ferriepre.html
> >
> > > > > Lurkers interested in an infinitely less biased article on Ferrie
> > > > > might
> > > > > wish to read this:
> >
> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ferrie
> >
> > > > Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
> >
> > > ? ?I haven't clicked on the Ferrie wikipedia link yet, not after what I
> > > went through on the Marcello entry Bob directed me to. If the Ferrie one
> > > is as bad as the Marcello one, it's no longer a surprise why Harris
> > > doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. So please just tell me
> > > Dave, is it as bad as the Marcello entry? Im afraid to look!
> >
> > LOL!!
> >
> > Poor Steve:-)
> >
> > It must be terrible to learn that there is a real world outside this
> > little group of fringies who still cling to the long discredited belief
> > that a lone nut killed JFK all by himself.
> >
> > Steve, I suggest that you NEVER stray beyond this group or Bugliosi's
> > book. Of course, you can also watch carefully selected TV programs - you
> > know - the kind that claim that since JFK was shot from the rear, there
> > could only have been one assassin.
> >
> > That's the kind of "logic" that you thrive on, isn't it Steve?
>
>
>
> Bob, im not the one that posted a bunch of stuff that i can't back up,
> or that was straight up wrong. I corrected you numerous times and you just
> keep going like nothing happened LOL. Its pretty strange.
More bullshit.
I already told you that I would post a citation if you made a civil
request without implication that I am a liar. But that doesn't seem to be
something you are capable of doing.
I also generously extended my offer to you, as well as mr mcadams, to make
a friendly wager. If you actually believed that I "can't back up" my
statement, you should be eager to take the bet.
What's wrong Steve? You are certainly quick to say that I lied, but very,
very slow to stand behind your accusation.
Robert Harris
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article <jqr6c55bp5qf5th1f...@4ax.com>,
Bob, twist in the wind as long as you want.
Your bluff and bluster can't conceal the fact that you have refused to
post a source.
And nobody is going to believe you if you don't.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article
><c00be7fc-576c-4d2f...@g31g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> Steve Thomas <misled...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Bob, im not the one that posted a bunch of stuff that i can't back up,
>> or that was straight up wrong. I corrected you numerous times and you just
>> keep going like nothing happened LOL. Its pretty strange.
>
>
>More bullshit.
>
>I already told you that I would post a citation if you made a civil
>request without implication that I am a liar. But that doesn't seem to be
>something you are capable of doing.
>
Harris just twists in the wind.
Refusing to post a source always means that somebody like Shakelford
knows full well that, if people could see the source, they wouldn't
interpret it the way desired.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Steve Thomas
First, this is the only thing i said that was wrong, i admit that, you
should try it sometime. You DID cherry pick, which is what i was trying to
point out. You picked one of at least 4 ways Marcello got back into the
country. Why would you leave out the other 3? You had either never heard
of them, or you did it on purpose because the other 3 don't fit your
theory. Its not exactly being honest either way.
>
> > As i asked, what about the report of him coming back
> > on a shrimp boat? Or the Dominican air force jet? Or his version of flying
> > right into Miami on a commercial flight? You stated the one "report" that
> > fits your theory. The problem is your chosen "report" that you "reported"
> > here is probably the LEAST likely way he got back.
>
> If you think one of those are true, then state your case. Why are you
> whining at me?
Bob, i am not whining at you, im trying to get you to understand that
there are many "reports" on how Marcello got back to the USA. You keep
asking me to prove stuff that can never be proved. And you always seem to
do it when i question something you post. Why do i have to prove Marcello
got into the country by means other than Ferrie? Its an impossible
question to answer, but we know of 3 other "reports" one from a gov't
document. So why do you post only the Ferrie one? Is that the only one you
know of? You should find a copy of Ed Reid's "Grim Reapers" it has a lot
of stuff on Marcello, and is the basis on which most later Marcello work
is formed around. The ONE Becker allegation you cite was first reported in
Reid's book. It's way better than wikipedia thats for sure. And while you
are at it you should check out the allegation by someone(i cant recall who
but may have been lawyer Ed Morgan) making the allegation that Edward
Becker tried to blackmail him for 20k. If the person would only give Ed
Becker a bunch of money, Becker would keep his name out of Ed Reid's book,
the same book that ended up with Becker's Marcello allegation. I should
stop now before you ask something asinine like "Have you even read a book
on this subject?" or telling me to go to wikipedia.
>
>
>
> > > By poor argument, I was referring to your claim that Marcello didn't make
> > > the "Take the stone..." statement because he didn't know enough Italian to
> > > say it.
>
> > The poor argument on your part is taking the stone and dog
> > statement and acting as if it were 2 different instances.
>
> It was two totally different statements, one stating his intention and
> the other, the reason why he would kill JFK instead of Bobby.
So 2 statements at the same meeting constitute 2 "threats?" Who is being
silly now Bob? Why can't you seem to admit that the "stone/shoe"
"dog/head/tail" "setting up a nut" allegations were made Becker man and
cover ONE meeting? I don't think you realized till now that what you
thought were 3 instances are actually all the same allegation. Trying to
make it sound like its 3 different threats of Marcello "repeatedly" saying
he would kill the Prez makes your argument sound, i don't know, silly?
Pathetic? Poor?
Steve Thomas
Blackburst's "party" and your "party" are years apart.
Steve Thomas
> Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <ubt2c5d6c0ervcrtq0iu2gl4c23lesg...@4ax.com>,
> > John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>
> > > On 28 Sep 2009 22:47:35 -0400, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com>
What dude? A wager on what? Documents that prove Marcello admitted Ferrie
introduced him to Oswald? Why would i bet on something i'v already
admitted i'v never seen? I asked for a cite, which means im satan or a
retard in your book. How about you stop all the bullshit and just provide
the cite? Sheesh!
>
> Robert Harris
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
No, sometimes it means that the request is insulting and demeaning.
And other times it can mean that one does not think the requester is
worthy of making the effort to type up the citation.
On yet other occasions, a request is denied because any idiot can find
the cite on Google with seconds.
I'm sure there are other good reasons as well, john. Would you like me
to post them if I think of any more??
Oh and BTW, did you decide to accept my offer of a wager???
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
John, I asked you a very simple question. Why won't you reply?
Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
I didn't say it was the same party. "Ala" means in the style of. A
similar type of party.
Steve Thomas
Your refusal to acknowledge your mistakes is funny.
>
> I already told you that I would post a citation if you made a civil
> request without implication that I am a liar. But that doesn't seem to be
> something you are capable of doing.
I already did hotshot, on Sept 19, my first post in this thread. It was
very sort and sweet, you ignored it remember?
"Iv read the file where Marcello confessed, never seen one where he says
Ferrie introduced him to Oswald. Could you elaborate and not pull a
Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book?"
If you think the sentence "Could you elaborate and not pull a
Shackelford by telling us to "buy the book," was somehow implying YOU
were a liar, well, i can't help your comprehension skill any, but i was
more implying that i didn't want to go back and forth for 10 days trying
to get a cite for something. So i'll ask AGAIN for it, this time with
sugar on top, can you post the god damn cite now?
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article <1n58c5ta1ucee49mb...@4ax.com>,
>John, I asked you a very simple question. Why won't you reply?
>
You made an assertion and failed to provide a source.
And now you are engaged in a silly game of trying to distract from
that fact.
Post the source.
We all know why you won't. Deep down somewhere you know that the
source isn't that good, and would be torn apart if posted.
So you bluff and bluster.
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Sep 30, 2:41=A0pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In article
>> <reharris1-E2E4D3.16074029092...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,
>> =A0Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > > Harris is pulling a Shackelford.
>>
>> > > Martin, of course, always has an excuse.
>>
>>
>> > John, would you care to make a small wager?
>>
>> > Money is fine, but I would be just as happy to do humiliation, if you
>> > choose.
>>
>> > Perhaps, a daily posting of sincere praise and deep, personal shame ove=
>r
>> > the next couple of weeks would be appropriate. What do you think?
>>
>> > Or if you lack the testicular abundance (as we know you will:-), perhap=
>s
>> > Steve will carry the LN banner for you?
>>
>> > Tell me something john. You seem to have enough courage to imply that I=
> am
>> > a liar. Do you also have enough courage to stand behind your accusation=
>?
>>
>> John?
>>
>> Steve?
>
>
>What dude? A wager on what? Documents that prove Marcello admitted Ferrie
>introduced him to Oswald? Why would i bet on something i'v already
>admitted i'v never seen? I asked for a cite, which means im satan or a
>retard in your book. How about you stop all the bullshit and just provide
>the cite? Sheesh!
>
We all know why he won't.
People who really *have* a convincing source are happy to produce it
and make their point and (they hope) discredit those who doubted them.
Steve Thomas
My problem with you Bob is that its been 10 days since i first asked
for a cite. I didn't wager that you couldn't produce one. I asked a simple
question in a curious manner, because i am
.............well........................ CURIOUS ABOUT THE
CITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If after 5-10 days of asking i say something along the
lines of
"Bob, im not the one that posted a bunch of stuff that i can't
back up"
Maybe there is a connection between the 2? Ya think?
>
> What's wrong Steve? You are certainly quick to say that I lied, but very,
> very slow to stand behind your accusation.
>
10 days is quick? OK Bob! You're never wrong, even when you are!
I bet you 5 dollers, ok, will you provide the cite now?
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 28, 9:17?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:> > > > > <94bfde45-e9bd-4cad-b6a5-aba6e40b1...@z34g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Sep 25, 12:56?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > ?Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Sep 23, 9:13?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > on a shrimp boat? Or the Dominican air force jet? Or his version of flying
> > right into Miami on a commercial flight? You stated the one "report" that
> > fits your theory. The problem is your chosen "report" that you "reported"
> > here is probably the LEAST likely way he got back.
>
> If you think one of those are true, then state your case. Why are you
> whining at me?
>
>
>
> > > the "Take the stone..." statement because he didn't know enough Italian to
> > > say it.
>
> > The poor argument on your part is taking the stone and dog
> > statement and acting as if it were 2 different instances.
>
> It was two totally different statements, one stating his intention and
> the other, the reason why he would kill JFK instead of Bobby.
>
> although I am quite sure that Oswald was an eager recruit, and didn't
> have to be framed.
>
> In addition to admitting that he set up the assassination, he also said
> that Ferrie introduced him to Oswald.
>
>
>
> > > He was not giving instructions on how to take care of his shoe. He was
> > > repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which was very, very
> > > mafia, by its nature. Marcello did not need to learn the Italian language
> > > to know what that meant, and it is silly to claim he did.
>
> > You are blowing smoke on crap you read on Wikipedia.
>
> ROFLMAO!!!
>
> I'm sure everyone would rather believe you, than Wikipedia. Have you
> even read a book on this subject?
>
> > Cite me
> > something other than the Beck allegation, something that even attempts to
> > suggest "He was repeating an old, well known, Sicilian death curse, which
> > was very, very mafia, by its nature. " I'll bet 10-1 you can't.
>
> Well of course, I will just track down all the other mafia thugs for
> you, who heard him say that.
Im not asking for that. Stop being "silly" with your arguments. I
asked for a citation other than the Becker allegation, you haven't
provided one. Even though you claimed that Marcello threatened the life of
Kennedy "repeatedly." We are at the stage where you made a claim, and all
i am asking is for you to back it up. You haven't done so to date.
You have tried to claim that 3 sentences at the same meeting constitute
3 different threats. A rather "poor" argument if you ask me.
>
> I'm sorry Steve, but you are simply hopeless. You accept nothing, even
> from statements by highly reliable FBI informants. Hell, you even think
> Wikipedia is lying.
What statement, and by who? If you mention the Becker allegation
i will laugh in your face!
>
> Has it ever occurred to you, Steve, to think about what you and everyone
> else on the planet knows about mafia dons??
>
> What in your opinion, would happen to ANYONE who grabbed one of those
> guys and dumped him in the jungles of a third world country??
Well there is a reported conversation in JHD "Mafia Kingfish." After
the establishment of the Metropolitan Crime Commission which was an
independent privately funded criminal investigative body, set up to go
after the type of corruption/crimes Marcello was specifically known for, a
guy went to Marcello asking how to get rid of a body. Marcello explained
the best way to do it, then asked who the guy was gonna off. When the guy
said "Aaron Kohn" who was the head of the MCC, Marcello said "NO NO NO!
Not that guy, if something happens to that guy, everyone will be looking
at me."
So we are to believe that Marcello wouldn't kill a piss ant nobody,
but he would kill the Prez?
>
> Do you think he would get a good laugh out of it?
> Hell, this guy would very likely waste you if you gave him the finger:-)
1. I have no doubt Marcello and his buddies LAUGHED THEIR ASS OFF, when
Marcello was able to sneak back into the US, AND beat the rap! I am sure
with your stereotypical view of the mob you can picture it Bob. A smoke
filled room with all the top Dons, Marcello standing at the big table
giving HIS sayso. When he reaches the end, Giancana pipes out, "we'd throw
Marcello out of here, but he'd just sneak back in" and everyone laughs
hysterically.
2. Again with the poor understanding of the way criminals think. A real
mob guy wouldn't kill you for giving the finger. He'd break your finger,
unless you were in position to do something like throw him out of the
country, or bring attention to his other money making operations.
>
> It is predictable that he would hate the Kennedys. His promise to kill JFK
> was exactly what we would expect a guy like that to do. And he only needed
> to make a few phone calls to get the job done.
>
> You're in denial Steve. You just deny anything and everything that proves
> you are wrong.
LOL, whatever Bob.
>
> Robert Harris
blackburst
>
> >> Blackburst NEVER presented a plausible excuse for why Ferrie did that
> >> and neither have you.
>
> > OK: You have the press, NOPD, NODA, FBI and USSS saying it has been
> > alleged that the accused assassin had your library card. You believe
> > that to be untrue (and don't yet know the source of the allegation).
> > Then, you find out from a former CAP cadet that the accused assassin
> > was once in your CAP squadron and may have attended a party at your
> > home (8 years earlier). Could he have picked up an old card at that
> > time? What would you do in this case - nothing?
>
> You lay out an interesting scenario, but surely you are not prepared to
> have Ferrie in a party with Oswald in his apartment, ala the Roman orgy
No, I think that was one of the over-dramatized scenes. There was some
kid, a Garrison interviewee, who outlined a similar scenario, but Stone
added a few characters to it.
As some here may or may not know, the question of Ferrie knowing Shaw is
two-sided. There is some evidence that suggests they were acquainted, but
also some that suggests they were not.
Barb Junkkarinen
This particulat article at Wikipedia has been edited many many many
times. The last time was just a few days ago .... September 21, 2009.
Given that anyone can go up there and push the edit button, it's a tad
hard to rely on this for much of anything unless there is a source
listed and one checks it, eh?
Barb :-)
>
>.John
>--------------
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Is it possible for you to carry out a discussion on a reasoned and
"let's exchange ideas on what I perveive to be the truth" and "here's
what I believe and what backs me up" basis .... or is the nanny nanny
booger, chest thumping, doing the pee-pee dance around fire hydrants
in multiple time wasting posts all you have to offer?
If you have a citation for what you state ... post the dang thing.
That's what we supposedly DO here ... to further knowledge and
information for all.
Geesh.
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
>
> � � Bob, im not the one that posted a bunch of stuff that i can't back up,
> or that was straight up wrong. I corrected you numerous times and you just
> keep going like nothing happened LOL. Its pretty strange.
This is one of the reasons most of us gave up on Harris years ago.
Dave
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
This is another reason most of us gave up on Harris years ago.
Dave
dreitzes@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)
> John, would you care to make a small wager?
>
> Money is fine, but I would be just as happy to do humiliation, if you
> choose.
>
> the next couple of weeks would be appropriate. What do you think?
>
> Steve will carry the LN banner for you?
>
> a liar. Do you also have enough courage to stand behind your accusation?
>
> Robert Harris
IMO, this is pretty obviously not suitable for the moderated group.
Dave
Rudy Lasparri
<cb9b356e-eeed-40a3...@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
blackburst <black...@aol.com> wrote:
Yes, and just a few hundred years ago some people thought the earth was
round, and some thought the earth was flat.
Robert Harris
<193c9b18-f9a9-41ae...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
blackburst <black...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Sep 29, 10:21�pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Tell me something David. When Ferrie was told (rightly or wrongly) that
> > > > his library card was found on Oswald, why did he rush out to Oswald's
> > > > old
> > > > neighborhood and grill the neighbors and Oswald's landlady about it?
> >
> > > > Robert Harris
> >
> > > David Blackburst answered this question a full decade ago. You didn't
> > > care then and you don't care now.
> >
> > David, is the question too difficult for you?
> >
> > Blackburst NEVER presented a plausible excuse for why Ferrie did that
> > and neither have you.
>
> OK: You have the press, NOPD, NODA, FBI and USSS saying it has been
> alleged that the accused assassin had your library card. You believe
> that to be untrue (and don't yet know the source of the allegation).
> Then, you find out from a former CAP cadet that the accused assassin
> was once in your CAP squadron and may have attended a party at your
> home (8 years earlier). Could he have picked up an old card at that
> time? What would you do in this case - nothing?
Sorry, David. I didn't notice your posting until just now.
That's a good try, but don't you think that would be a strange thought
for a guy who was so absolutely certain that he never knew Oswald by
sight or name? This is what he told the FBI,
"FERRIE stated that he does not know LEE HARVEY OSWALD and to the best
of his knowledge OSWALD was never a member of the CAP Squadron in New
Orleans during the period he was with that group. FERRIE said that if
OSWALD was a member of the squadron for only a few weeks, as had been
claimed, he would have been considered a recruit and that he (FERRIE)
would not have had any contact with him.
...FERRIE said that to the best of his knowledge he does not know any
individual named LEE HARVEY OSWALD nor has he ever known the individual
represented by photograph presented to him as that of LEE HARVEY OSWALD
in the CAP, in any business connection or in any social capacity. He
said he does not recognized the name or the photograph as being anyone
he has ever had any contact with at any time."
Does that suggest to you that he suspected that he had Oswald out to his
apartment for a party???
And if he held such a suspicion, why didn't he tell the FBI about it?
Ferrie acted out of fear and desperation, David. What were the odds that
if Oswald had one of his library cards, he would have told his landlady
and neighbors about it??
An honest man would have talked to the authorities about the card, or
had Wrey contact them for him.
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
John McAdams <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 29 Sep 2009 22:21:55 -0400, Robert Harris <reha...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >In article
> ><8ebb1f23-9923-46ab...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "drei...@aol.com (Dave Reitzes)" <drei...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Odd that Bob can't isolate any actual errors in my article.
> >
> >ROFLMAO!!
> >
> >No, what is "odd" is that David has such a short memory and doesn't recall
> >that I debunked his loony arguments a long time ago, including David's
> >totally unsupported claim that Robert Blakely was a liar and his failure
> >to even try to put forward a plausible explanation for why Oswald used the
> >address of the building where Ferrie and Banister worked, on his flyers.
> >
>
> Huh?
>
>
> >Ferrie was a convicted criminal and a known liar. He worked in support of
> >one of the most vicious criminals in the United States - Carlos Marcello,
> >who admitted that he ordered the assassination and specifically described
> >Ferrie's involvement which included introducing him to Oswald.
> >
> >I cannot imagine how any human being could assume the role of apologist
> >for that kind of scum.
> >
>
> That's HarrisLogic(tm).
>
> He decides who is "scum" and then tries to pin the assassination on
> them.
I'm sorry .john. Why don't you take over on this one?
What exactly SHOULD we call a convicted pedophile who helped to defend a
mafia godfather who was responsible for numerous murders, extortion, and
drug sales, not to mention countless other crimes?
Come on, .john!
Suck it up and summon the courage to answer at least one tough question!
Robert Harris
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article <n1s6c5hb567prs72r...@4ax.com>,
I don't care what you call him, Bob, but don't blame him for killing
Kennedy unless you have evidence.
Which, of course, don't don't seem to want to provide.
Robert Harris
john.m...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
Hehe, I think it's pretty clear, who is doing the blustering around
here:-)
Why don't you answer the question, .john??
Robert Harris
Robert Harris
john.m...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
So, is it fair to say that when I called those people "scum", you fully
agreed?? If so, then why did you try to make it sound like it was all
about my personal, faulty interpretation???
..john, what exactly is wrong with speaking in a straightforward, honest
manner, rather than trying to score debate points??
And you know good and well that the FBI informant reported that Marcello
said Ferrie introduced him to Oswald.
You've already checked it out but you are still playing sophomoric debate
games, are you not??
Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
Steve Thomas
> In article <4ac533a5.1139051...@news.supernews.com>,
> john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 1 Oct 2009 18:54:40 -0400, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >In article <n1s6c5hb567prs72r8q14o9ga4qt03d...@4ax.com>,
How is this at all about McAdams? I asked you 12 days ago for the cite.
That was before pointing out numerous "facts" you can't get right,
outright misrepresentations of events, and omitted "reports." Couldn't you
WIN the debate with the evidence you speak of?
> Robert Harris
Steve Thomas
> In article <4ac4f135.1122043...@news.supernews.com>,
> john.mcad...@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 1 Oct 2009 10:43:39 -0400, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >In article <1n58c5ta1ucee49mbiisuvq66kpgk8d...@4ax.com>,
So i guess it's safe to say you think everything i posted in this
thread was crap?
blackburst
> > OK: You have the press, NOPD, NODA, FBI and USSS saying it has been
> > alleged that the accused assassin had your library card. You believe
> > that to be untrue (and don't yet know the source of the allegation).
> > Then, you find out from a former CAP cadet that the accused assassin
> > was once in your CAP squadron and may have attended a party at your
> > home (8 years earlier). Could he have picked up an old card at that
> > time? What would you do in this case - nothing?
>
> Sorry, David. I didn't notice your posting until just now.
>
> That's a good try, but don't you think that would be a strange thought
> for a guy who was so absolutely certain that he never knew Oswald by
> sight or name? This is what he told the FBI,
"That's a good try"? At what? Are you suggesting that I'm trying to
float something untrue? I know the chronology of the Ferrie matter
better than you, and you're misreading it. Read on...
>
> "FERRIE stated that he does not know LEE HARVEY OSWALD and to the best
> of his knowledge OSWALD was never a member of the CAP Squadron in New
> Orleans during the period he was with that group. FERRIE said that if
> OSWALD was a member of the squadron for only a few weeks, as had been
> claimed, he would have been considered a recruit and that he (FERRIE)
> would not have had any contact with him.
>
> ...FERRIE said that to the best of his knowledge he does not know any
> individual named LEE HARVEY OSWALD nor has he ever known the individual
> represented by photograph presented to him as that of LEE HARVEY OSWALD
> in the CAP, in any business connection or in any social capacity. He
> said he does not recognized the name or the photograph as being anyone
> he has ever had any contact with at any time."
>
> Does that suggest to you that he suspected that he had Oswald out to his
> apartment for a party???
This was from Ferrie's FIRST FBI interview, at 7pm on November 25.
On November 28, Ferrie spoke with former CAP cadet Eddie Voebel, who
told him that Oswald had briefly been a member of the Moisant CAP
squadron, and may have attended a party at Ferrie's home at that time.
>
> And if he held such a suspicion, why didn't he tell the FBI about it?
He did. On November 28, after speaking with Voebel, he called SA john
McCarthy and told him of Voebel's information.
>
> Ferrie acted out of fear and desperation, David. What were the odds that
> if Oswald had one of his library cards, he would have told his landlady
> and neighbors about it??
Ferrie had apparently heard (without knowing that Jack Martin was the
source) that such a card may have been found in Oswald's possessions.
With hindsight, WE KNOW TODAY that Oswald and his possessions had been
moved to Texas a couple of months previously, but this was not so
clear to the public in the days immediately following the
assassination. Ferrie saw some of Oswald's former addresses listed in
the newspapers, and went to see if the authorities had found any such
card there.
>
> An honest man would have talked to the authorities about the card, or
> had Wrey contact them for him.
Ferrie DID talk to the authorities about it, to the extent that he
knew about it.
John McAdams
wrote:
>In article <4ac4f135....@news.supernews.com>,
Post the citation, Bob.
Do that and I'll answer any question you want.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Steve Thomas
Can you add anything about the "report" Harris chose to cite about
Ferrie flying Marcello back into the country? Id like to hear your
take on that allegation.
blackburst
> take on that allegation.-
It's complicated and inconclusive, but let me give a quick synopsis. I've
written more about it in this group, if you search.
By all accounts, Ferrie met Marcello through G. Wray Gill. But Ferrie
didn't meet Gill until November 16, 1961. Marcello made his way back into
the US the previous June, about 5 months earlier. Consider that in light
of other accounts that Marcello used commercial flights, or was helped by
the Dominicans.
The ORIGINAL source of the allegation was a February 9, 1962 US Border
Patrol interview with Mike Crouchet, then the complaining witness against
Ferrie on morals charges - an enemy. But even Crouchet said that he heard
it as a SUGGESTION from Richard Robey, and FAA investigator who was trying
to nail Ferrie for something.
That's where things stood: I believed it was not likely that Ferrie flew
Marcello back, as he hadn't even met him yet, and that a wrong theory was
passed along from one person to another until it became a fact. UNTIL I
interviewed people who knew Ferrie. A couple said Ferrie TOLD them he flew
Marcello back.
My working theory: Ferrie did not fly him back; but in the face of rumors
that he did, he decided to leave that impression with people, because it
made him look important and mysterious.
I didn't say it was a GOOD theory...He apparently didn't do it, but he
claimed he did.
Steve Thomas
Don't let Bob Harris hear you say that. He does not believe people
lie about stuff like that. Even though both Ferrie and Marcello were
each in a position to credibly lie about 2 mysteries that anyone who
hears about wants to know the answer to.
Robert Harris
<3296871e-273c-47d9...@t32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
blackburst <black...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Oct 1, 6:53?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > OK: You have the press, NOPD, NODA, FBI and USSS saying it has been
> > > alleged that the accused assassin had your library card. You believe
> > > that to be untrue (and don't yet know the source of the allegation).
> > > Then, you find out from a former CAP cadet that the accused assassin
> > > was once in your CAP squadron and may have attended a party at your
> > > home (8 years earlier). Could he have picked up an old card at that
> > > time? What would you do in this case - nothing?
> >
> > Sorry, David. I didn't notice your posting until just now.
> >
> > That's a good try, but don't you think that would be a strange thought
> > for a guy who was so absolutely certain that he never knew Oswald by
> > sight or name? This is what he told the FBI,
>
> "That's a good try"? At what? Are you suggesting that I'm trying to
> float something untrue? I know the chronology of the Ferrie matter
> better than you, and you're misreading it. Read on...
Well, since my reply to this message seems to have evaporated, without any
notice of rejection from the censors, I will try again.
Yes, what you are claiming is obviously, untrue. In fact, you are trying
to justify Ferrie racing out to grill those people by an event that
happened after the fact.
>
> >
> > "FERRIE stated that he does not know LEE HARVEY OSWALD and to the best
> > of his knowledge OSWALD was never a member of the CAP Squadron in New
> > Orleans during the period he was with that group. FERRIE said that if
> > OSWALD was a member of the squadron for only a few weeks, as had been
> > claimed, he would have been considered a recruit and that he (FERRIE)
> > would not have had any contact with him.
> >
> > ...FERRIE said that to the best of his knowledge he does not know any
> > individual named LEE HARVEY OSWALD nor has he ever known the individual
> > represented by photograph presented to him as that of LEE HARVEY OSWALD
> > in the CAP, in any business connection or in any social capacity. He
> > said he does not recognized the name or the photograph as being anyone
> > he has ever had any contact with at any time."
> >
> > Does that suggest to you that he suspected that he had Oswald out to his
> > apartment for a party???
>
> This was from Ferrie's FIRST FBI interview, at 7pm on November 25.
>
> On November 28, Ferrie spoke with former CAP cadet Eddie Voebel, who
> told him that Oswald had briefly been a member of the Moisant CAP
> squadron, and may have attended a party at Ferrie's home at that time.
November 28th??
But that was AFTER he rushed out to grill Oswald's neighbors and
landlady. So, Voebel reminding him had absolutely nothing to do with
anything. He should STILL have believed that he never knew Oswald.
>
> >
> > And if he held such a suspicion, why didn't he tell the FBI about it?
>
> He did. On November 28, after speaking with Voebel, he called SA john
> McCarthy and told him of Voebel's information.
Yes, but only after the FBI had made him come in, three days earlier and
AFTER they had interviewed Voebel. Ferrie undoubtedly, was told by the FBI
that they were interviewing Voebel, so he rushed out, hoping to learn what
he told them.
His phone call to the FBI on the 28th was obviously, more damage control,
since he could not be certain what Voebel had told the feds.
Come on David, this is just NOT how innocent people do things.
Ferrie was obviously terrified, from 11/22, on, that his connections to
Oswald would be exposed. He showed that same paranoia in 2/64, when he was
overheard in Toronto, expressing his fear that Oswald had told his wife,
who was testifying then, about the assassination.
The simple fact is, that he went into a tizzy every time something
happened that might potentially, expose him.
Mr. Ferrie was obviously, very paranoic, but then he had good reason to
be.
Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
So, your theory is that David Ferrie wanted to brag and puff up his
importance by claiming a link to the Mafia even though such link might
link him to the JFK assassination?
blackburst
> Yes, what you are claiming is obviously, untrue. In fact, you are trying
> to justify Ferrie racing out to grill those people by an event that
> happened after the fact.
>
> > This was from Ferrie's FIRST FBI interview, at 7pm on November 25.
>
> > On November 28, Ferrie spoke with former CAP cadet Eddie Voebel, who
> > told him that Oswald had briefly been a member of the Moisant CAP
> > squadron, and may have attended a party at Ferrie's home at that time.
>
> November 28th??
>
> But that was AFTER he rushed out to grill Oswald's neighbors and
> landlady. So, Voebel reminding him had absolutely nothing to do with
> anything. He should STILL have believed that he never knew Oswald.
Lena Garner claimed he came to visit on the night of Nov 22, but
that's not possible. His whereabouts are accounted for, by Beaubouef
and Coffey, among others. It couldn't have been Nov 23, as he was in
Texas. It couldn't have been Nov 24, as he was, again, in transit with
Beaubouef and Coffey. It couldn't have been Nov 25, as he was in jail.
The earliest it could have been, if it was at night, was the night of
Nov 26. So Garner appears to have been very wrong about the date.
>
>
>
> > > And if he held such a suspicion, why didn't he tell the FBI about it?
>
> > He did. On November 28, after speaking with Voebel, he called SA john
> > McCarthy and told him of Voebel's information.
>
> Yes, but only after the FBI had made him come in, three days earlier and
> AFTER they had interviewed Voebel.
Voebel was interviewed by the press and the authorities several times,
after he appeared on WWL-TV Saturday November 23, on a number of
topics related to Oswald and the CAP. Whan do you have the first FBI
inverview of Voebel?
Ferrie undoubtedly, was told by the FBI
> that they were interviewing Voebel, so he rushed out, hoping to learn what
> he told them.
Er, you don't have a citation for that declaration, do you?
>
> His phone call to the FBI on the 28th was obviously, more damage control,
> since he could not be certain what Voebel had told the feds.
After he was released by the NOPD, he contacted several people: Roy
McCoy, Voebel, Bringuier, others. As soon as he got the info from
Voebel, he called the FBI. How is that suspicious?
>
> Come on David, this is just NOT how innocent people do things.
Is there a rule book?
>
> Ferrie was obviously terrified, from 11/22, on, that his connections to
> Oswald would be exposed. He showed that same paranoia in 2/64, when he was
> overheard in Toronto, expressing his fear that Oswald had told his wife,
> who was testifying then, about the assassination.
Wow, you've got that screwed-up. The ALLEGED sighting of Ferrie was in
Winnipeg, not Toronto. It is unlikely that it was Ferrie. He was at a
funeral in Cleveland.
>
> The simple fact is, that he went into a tizzy every time something
> happened that might potentially, expose him.
>
> Mr. Ferrie was obviously, very paranoic, but then he had good reason to
> be.
This is why I call Ferrie the perfect villain. Because certain CTs
will take ANY claim about him and believe it. You won't even consider
what an unjustly accused man might do.
blackburst
I explain above what I found. In a sense, it supports your case.
Ferrie CLAIMED that he flew Marcello back, if my interviewees told it
straight. Quit while you're ahead.
On the other hand, there's a whole body of evidence that Ferrie fell
in with Marcello in about March 1962, and stayed tight for a long
time. This also supports your case.
I am pointing out that meeting Marcello in March 1962 does not explain
how he could have flown him in June 1961. But it's a moot point.
Ferrie WAS tight with Marcello in 1962-3-4, etc. Quit while you're
ahead.