MCADAMS CITES "FACTOID" DURING THE DEBATE
Gil Jesus
likes to call them ) during part one of the debate regarding Oswald
threatening Eisenhower.
(CE 1386 )
The FBI found that Oswald was in the Marines at Atsugi during the time
that Palmer McBride claimed that Oswald made the threat at Mcbride's
home in New Orleans.
( CE 1961 )
http://i36.tinypic.com/357edjc.jpg
Apparently, Professor McAdams didn't know that this "factoid" had been
"debunked" a long time ago.
David Von Pein
www.Box.net/shared/le6s7nttbp
>>> "I was shocked to hear Professor [John] McAdams state a "factoid" (as he likes to call them) during part one of the [above-linked] debate regarding [Lee Harvey] Oswald threatening [President] Eisenhower. The FBI found that Oswald was in the Marines at Atsugi during the time that Palmer McBride claimed that Oswald made the threat at McBride's home in New Orleans." <<<
Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
[which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
early 1958" means very little.
CE1386:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0370b.htm
But the big reason that we can know that McBride was merely mixed up a
little about the dates is because he claimed that Oswald started to
work at Pfisterer's in "about December 1957", which is a year when we
know Oswald was in the Marines and was not in New Orleans.
So, unless CTers want to believe that Palmer McBride (for some unknown
reason) would want to lie and make up a story about a make-believe
conversation between himself and LHO, then where do conspiracy
theorists want to go with this McBride topic anyway? (Are we REALLY
supposed to swallow author John Armstrong's "Double Oswald" nonsense?
Thanks, but no thanks.)
In the final analysis, it's as obvious as obvious can be that McBride
was merely mistaken (by one single year) as to the date when he heard
Oswald threaten President Eisenhower.
==================================================
"On the resolution of this issue, we don’t need Marguerite
Oswald’s testimony and Robert Oswald’s recollection to show that
[Palmer] McBride made a simple error. Although the original employment
records way back in 1956 at Pfisterer are not available, partly
because a fire destroyed or damaged many of them, we still know that
McBride was wrong and Oswald went to work at Pfisterer in 1956 because
Oswald’s 1956 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, signed and filed by
him on February 7, 1957, shows that he worked at Pfisterer in 1956,
with wages of $612.00 and taxes withheld of $69.30.
"His return also shows wages of $80.16 at Tujague’s and $7.10
withheld, and wages of $80.00 at J. R. Michaels (where Oswald worked
very briefly as an office boy after leaving Tujague’s and before being
employed at Pfisterer’s) with $5.00 withheld. (CD 90a; WC Record
179-40004-10446; HSCA Record 180-10110-10130, December 19, 1978) And
Oswald’s 1956 W-2 form at Pfisterer also survives." -- Vincent
Bugliosi; Pages 570-571 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)
==================================================
www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
==================================================
Chuck Schuyler
> Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
> [which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
> to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
> with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
> early 1958" means very little.
>
> CE1386:http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0...
>
> But the big reason that we can know that McBride was merely mixed up a
> little about the dates is because he claimed that Oswald started to
> work at Pfisterer's in "about December 1957", which is a year when we
> know Oswald was in the Marines and was not in New Orleans.
>
> So, unless CTers want to believe that Palmer McBride (for some unknown
> reason) would want to lie and make up a story about a make-believe
> conversation between himself and LHO, then where do conspiracy
> theorists want to go with this McBride topic anyway? (Are we REALLY
> supposed to swallow author John Armstrong's "Double Oswald" nonsense?
> Thanks, but no thanks.)
>
> In the final analysis, it's as obvious as obvious can be that McBride
> was merely mistaken (by one single year) as to the date when he heard
> Oswald threaten President Eisenhower.
Further corroboration that McBride was simply wrong on the year comes
in the form of the William Wulf story. McBride introduced Oswald to
Wulf and took him to Wulf's home as a prospective member to a local
astronomy club. Oswald was so vociferous in his pro-Communism rants
that Wulf's father showed Oswald the door. Wulf and McBride lost track
of Oswald in July, 1956, when Oswald moved (again).
Kook Gil can open up the hardcover edition of Reclaiming History to
page 546/547 for the noted information, or he can believe in the odd
Two Oswalds theory, or McBride/Wulf are liars and part of the
Megaplot, etc.
mucher1
Gilly will, of course, ignore the corroborating evidence and 'bump'
the thread when the urge to troll for attention hits again. (Can't be
long now)
Gil Jesus
First of all, Oswald enlisted in the Marine Corps in Dallas, not New
Orleans.
( CE 1961 )
Secondly, Oswald attended the Marine Corps boot camp in San Diego
beginning on October 26, 1956
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0414b.htm
Oswald wasn't in New Orleans in "late '56 or early '57"
Oswald wasn't in New Orleans in "late '57 or early '58"
Oswald wasn't in New Orleans in "late '58 or early '59"
Oswald didn't work with McBride in December 1957
Oswald didn't work with McBride in December 1958
Oswald didn't work with McBride in December 1959
This guy gets the year wrong.
This guy gets the time of the year wrong.
This guy gets the month wrong.
ONLY A FEW SHORT YEARS LATER, he knows what was said and who said it,
he just doesn't know when it was said.
ROFLMAO
NO WONDER THE FBI DIDN'T FIND HIM CREDIBLE !!!!
The reason why he was never called to tesify before the Warren
Commission was because the FBI did not find his story credible. They
took the report, as they always did, but they didn't deem him credble
enough to appear before the Committee.
Gil Jesus
>
> Further corroboration that McBride was simply wrong on the year comes
> in the form of the William Wulf story. McBride introduced Oswald to
> Wulf and took him to Wulf's home as a prospective member to a local
> astronomy club. Oswald was so vociferous in his pro-Communism rants
> that Wulf's father showed Oswald the door. Wulf and McBride lost track
> of Oswald in July, 1956, when Oswald moved (again).
>
hey numbnut:
Did Wulf testify that he heard Oswald threaten Eisenhower ?
Yes or no ?
Gil Jesus
> Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
> [which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
> to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
> with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
> early 1958" means very little.
If McBride was "off by one year", McAdams shouldn't have repeated that
error.
End of story.
Gil Jesus
> On Oct 1, 1:23 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
> > [which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
> > to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
> > with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
> > early 1958" means very little.
Hey Von Pinhead:
One year earlier, in the "late '56 or early '57" timeframe, Oswald was
in boot camp in San Diego.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0414b.htm
Wanna try for TWO years off ?
David Von Pein
Any more meaningless chaff you'd like to chew on today, Gil-Kook?
David Von Pein
>>> "ONLY A FEW SHORT YEARS LATER, he [Palmer McBride] knows what was said and who said it, he just doesn't know when it was said. ROFLMAO" <<<
Yes, exactly. Nothing could be more common than a person losing track
of time in the manner in which McBride did.
Chuck Schuyler
This is one of many reasons why no one takes you seriously.
McBride noted that the young Oswald threatened Eisenhower. It's pretty
obvious that this threat, however serious you want to take it, occured
in 1956. There's all sorts of corroboration for the year being 1956.
If you want to argue that McBride made up the Eisenhower threat for
some obscure fifteen minutes of fame, or that he was put up to it or
part of a plot to frame Oswald or whatever goofy thing you're trying
to point out, fine. It's a silly thing to hammer on, but you're known
for wacky theories and twisted logic.
However, Oswald also wrote the following to his brother Robert while
he was in the Soviet Union:
"In the event of war I would kill any american who put a uniform on in
defense of the american government--any american."
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0423a.htm
Oswald obviously exhibited a very violent streak towards authority and
towards his country at an early age.
I think the person spouting "factoids" is you.
Again.
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:36be121b-a69e-4b20...@s6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
>>> "I was shocked to hear Professor [John] McAdams state a "factoid" (as he
>>> likes to call them) during part one of the [above-linked] debate
>>> regarding [Lee Harvey] Oswald threatening [President] Eisenhower. The
>>> FBI found that Oswald was in the Marines at Atsugi during the time that
>>> Palmer McBride claimed that Oswald made the threat at McBride's home in
>>> New Orleans." <<<
Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
[which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
early 1958" means very little.
But the big reason that we can know that McBride was merely mixed up a
little about the dates is because he claimed that Oswald started to
work at Pfisterer's in "about December 1957", which is a year when we
know Oswald was in the Marines and was not in New Orleans.
So, unless CTers want to believe that Palmer McBride (for some unknown
reason) would want to lie and make up a story about a make-believe
conversation between himself and LHO, then where do conspiracy
theorists want to go with this McBride topic anyway? (Are we REALLY
supposed to swallow author John Armstrong's "Double Oswald" nonsense?
Thanks, but no thanks.)
In the final analysis, it's as obvious as obvious can be that McBride
was merely mistaken (by one single year) as to the date when he heard
Oswald threaten President Eisenhower.
==================================================
"On the resolution of this issue, we don�t need Marguerite
Oswald�s testimony and Robert Oswald�s recollection to show that
[Palmer] McBride made a simple error. Although the original employment
records way back in 1956 at Pfisterer are not available, partly
because a fire destroyed or damaged many of them, we still know that
McBride was wrong and Oswald went to work at Pfisterer in 1956 because
Oswald�s 1956 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, signed and filed by
him on February 7, 1957, shows that he worked at Pfisterer in 1956,
with wages of $612.00 and taxes withheld of $69.30.
"His return also shows wages of $80.16 at Tujague�s and $7.10
withheld, and wages of $80.00 at J. R. Michaels (where Oswald worked
very briefly as an office boy after leaving Tujague�s and before being
employed at Pfisterer�s) with $5.00 withheld. (CD 90a; WC Record
179-40004-10446; HSCA Record 180-10110-10130, December 19, 1978) And
Oswald�s 1956 W-2 form at Pfisterer also survives." -- Vincent
Gil Jesus
Eisenhower in "late '57 or early '58" listen beginning at the 26:30
mark of this debate:
Gil Jesus
McBride's report of Oswald's threat to kill Eisenhower has always been
uncorroborated.
But McAdams presented it as fact.
Of course, McAdams' evil minion of mindless trolls would argue that
McBride simply got the date wrong.
Von Pein claimed that he was "one year off".
But guess what, kiddies ?
A year before, Oswald was STILL in boot camp in San Diego.
It couldn't have been late 56 - early 57 because Oswald was in boot
camp as of October 26, 1956. ( CE 1961 )
So where are we now, back to 55-56 ?
Does anyone REALLY believe that someone could have been a witness to
something so shocking being said by a kid who would become the most
famous assassin of the 20th century ------ and seven or eight years
later could actually miss the time he witnessed it BY TWO YEARS ?
C'mon, now. I'm not buying it.
Neither did the FBI.
Bud
> On Oct 1, 7:13 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Anyone wanna hear McAdams state as fact that Oswald threatened
> > Eisenhower in "late '57 or early '58" listen beginning at the 26:30
> > mark of this debate:
>
> >www.blackopradio.com/black442a.ram
>
> McBride's report of Oswald's threat to kill Eisenhower has always been
> uncorroborated.
So you are saying that you disregard all information in this case
that can`t be corroborated by an independent source? The little you
have will disappear.
> But McAdams presented it as fact.
It is in evidence that a witness said he heard Oswald make this
threat. McAdams can choose to believe this witness. McBride having the
date wrong does not establish that Oswald never made the threat.
> Of course, McAdams' evil minion of mindless trolls would argue that
> McBride simply got the date wrong.
>
> Von Pein claimed that he was "one year off".
>
> But guess what, kiddies ?
>
> A year before, Oswald was STILL in boot camp in San Diego.
>
> It couldn't have been late 56 - early 57 because Oswald was in boot
> camp as of October 26, 1956. ( CE 1961 )
>
> So where are we now, back to 55-56 ?
>
> Does anyone REALLY believe that someone could have been a witness to
> something so shocking being said by a kid who would become the most
> famous assassin of the 20th century ------ and seven or eight years
> later could actually miss the time he witnessed it BY TWO YEARS ?
Only a retard would try to make the case that a person should
remember when something was said in the fifties because of something
that happened in the sixties.
> C'mon, now. I'm not buying it.
You can`t afford it. You don`t have two brain cells to rub together.
> Neither did the FBI.
The FBI concluded McBride never heard Oswald make this threat?
lazu...@webtv.net
very believable and highly intelligent. John Armstrong had asked him to
appear...anyway he said as I recall that he and Wulf were big on
Astronomy, and it was before my time, but Sputnik was huge in 1957,not
something you'd likely forget if you were really interested in the space
race , and he was certain Oswald was there, he had worked with him for
many months at Pfisterer Dental lab.in N.O..and that's how he remembered
it. Oswald was supposed to be in Japan in '57 at the time..so I don't
know..Lifton doesn't believe him, but I don't find it particularly
compelling that he was mistaken either, after observing and hearing him
speak up close. Interesting that McBride's description of Oswald is of a
Marxist nut that was already talking about killing a President. I am
certain there were Oswald imposters and a conspiracy, but I am not fully
convinced of Armstrong's hypothesis, though it would certainly tie
things together that will probably, always remain ambiguous and open to
interpretation... yet his work is outstanding...
Gil Jesus
toward McBride.
The ALLEGATION was part of a conversation that reportedly occurred at
a time when Oswald was not in New Orleans. ( CE 1961 )
Trolls who are trying to pass it off as an error in date need to show
us the correct date in which Oswald threatened Eisenhower.
So far they have provided no evidence that the threat occurred at any
time other than the incorrect "late '57 or early '58" timeframe that
McBride reported.
The point is that McAdams cited an ALLEGATION that was NOT
CORROBORATED by another witness and PRESENTED IT AS FACT.
Anyone wishing hear McAdams state as fact the FACTOID that Oswald
threatened Eisenhower in "late '57 or early '58" can do so by
listening beginning at the 26:30 mark of this debate:
www.blackopradio.com/black442a.ram
Sam McClung
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:162b8f0d-d85f-47a9...@b15g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
>>> "McAdams' evil minion of mindless trolls would argue that McBride simply got the date wrong." <<<
Which is exactly what obviously happened, of course.
>>> "Von Pein claimed that he was "one year off"." <<<
And he was.
1957 minus 1956 = 1 year.
Gil apparently doesn't even know that 56 plus 1 = 57.
Bud
> The trolls have tried hard to steer this thread away from McAdams and
> toward McBride.
Ok, retard, lets take this slow for your sake. A factoid is a widely
held belief that can be shown to be erroneous. Since you can`t show
that Oswald never made the threat McBride said he had, it can`t be a
factoid. It can only be something you choose not to believe, but it
isn`t something you can show never occurred.
> The ALLEGATION was part of a conversation that reportedly occurred at
> a time when Oswald was not in New Orleans. ( CE 1961 )
>
> Trolls who are trying to pass it off as an error in date need to show
> us the correct date in which Oswald threatened Eisenhower.
Showing that McBride`s guess at the time the threat was made was
wrong does nothing to disprove the threat was made, idiot.
> So far they have provided no evidence that the threat occurred at any
> time other than the incorrect "late '57 or early '58" timeframe that
> McBride reported.
>
> The point is that McAdams cited an ALLEGATION that was NOT
> CORROBORATED by another witness and PRESENTED IT AS FACT.
So you agree that when Wesley Buell Frazier said Oswald carried the
paper bag into work that day with his hand under the bag, this is not
a fact, but just an uncorroborated claim.
> Anyone wishing hear McAdams state as fact the FACTOID that Oswald
> threatened Eisenhower in "late '57 or early '58" can do so by
> listening beginning at the 26:30 mark of this debate:
Did McAdams say the threat occurred betwen "late `57 and early `58"?
timstter
Say, I didn't hear you complaining when tomnln claimed the Bledsoe
document was real on the Anton Batey radio show.
That was a comprehensively debunked factoid that your mate simply
trotted out as fact!
You are nothing but a TOTAL hypocrite, you nauseating Bald Goose.
KUTGW, Gilly!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
tomnln
"timstter" <tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5b314ff8-713c-437a...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
KUTGW, Gilly!
Regards,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
rob/tim/Azcue/justme/HUGO....
Never proved it was a forgery.
Never explained why nobody was Arrested for Forgery
Never proved WHEN those numbers were put on that DPD Report.
rob/tim/Azcue/justme/HUGO is just another LN'r who is too gutless to debate
me in my Liveaudio Chat Room.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/invitation.htm
Most Likely due to>>>
Looks like you're Really upset with me for making you look Bad on these>>>
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/rob_spencer_page.htm
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/guess_who_wrote.htm
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/secret_service_drinking.htm
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/eusebio_azcue.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gil Jesus
These are some of the things Palmer McBride said about Oswald to the
FBI.
( CE 1386 )
1. Palmer McBride told the FBI that OSWALD first visited his home in
late 1957 or early 1958, and threatened to kill Eisenhower.
OSWALD was already in the Marines in late 1957 or early 1958.
2. McBride said OSWALD resided with his mother in the Senator Hotel or
a rooming house next door to the Senator Hotel in the 200 block of
Dauphine Street.
According to Weberman, OSWALD and his mother never lived at this
address.
3. McBride said that in about August 1958, he received a letter from
Oswald saying he was employed as a shoe salesman in Ft. Worth. In this
letter he stated he had gotten mixed-up in an anti-Negro or an anti-
Communist riot in a high school grounds in Ft. Worth, Texas.
There's no evidence that this ever happened, nor does that letter
exist.
4. McBride said OSWALD had large ears and a mustache.
This does not fit OSWALD'S description.
IT'S ALL IN CE 1386
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0371a.htm
If one chooses to believe McBride, one must accept the "two Oswald"
theory or else admit that McBride was somewhat less than truthful.
As someone has suggested, perhaps McAdams should not drive or operate
machinery.
Bud
> Tom:
>
> These are some of the things Palmer McBride said about Oswald to the
> FBI.
>
> ( CE 1386 )
>
> 1. Palmer McBride told the FBI that OSWALD first visited his home in
> late 1957 or early 1958, and threatened to kill Eisenhower.
>
> OSWALD was already in the Marines in late 1957 or early 1958.
>
> 2. McBride said OSWALD resided with his mother in the Senator Hotel or
> a rooming house next door to the Senator Hotel in the 200 block of
> Dauphine Street.
>
> According to Weberman, OSWALD and his mother never lived at this
> address.
>
> 3. McBride said that in about August 1958, he received a letter from
> Oswald saying he was employed as a shoe salesman in Ft. Worth. In this
> letter he stated he had gotten mixed-up in an anti-Negro or an anti-
> Communist riot in a high school grounds in Ft. Worth, Texas.
>
> There's no evidence that this ever happened, nor does that letter
> exist.
>
> 4. McBride said OSWALD had large ears and a mustache.
>
> This does not fit OSWALD'S description.
>
> IT'S ALL IN CE 1386
>
>
> If one chooses to believe McBride, one must accept the "two Oswald"
> theory or else admit that McBride was somewhat less than truthful.
Only a retard who conclude those are the only choices available.
Since it is nearly impossible for a person to relate events from 7-8
years ago perfectly, only a retard would claim that finding some
details incorrect must mean that nothing related can be true.
What you are suggesting is that if a woman is raped, and she
describes the attacker as wearing a brown jacket, and the assailant is
caught shortly thereafter wearing a green jacket, everything the woman
related must be discarded because she got that detail wrong.
timstter
> "timstter" <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5b314ff8-713c-437a...@2g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 1, 10:27 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 1, 1:23 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > Palmer McBride was merely off by one year in his statement to the FBI
> > > [which can be seen in CE1386, linked below]. It seems pretty obvious
> > > to me that McBride wasn't exactly clear as to when his conversation
> > > with Lee Oswald took place. So the fact that he said "late 1957 or
> > > early 1958" means very little.
>
> > If McBride was "off by one year", McAdams shouldn't have repeated that
> > error.
>
> > End of story.
>
> Say, I didn't hear you complaining when tomnln claimed the Bledsoe
> document was real on the Anton Batey radio show.
>
> That was a comprehensively debunked factoid that your mate simply
> trotted out as fact!
>
> You are nothing but a TOTAL hypocrite, you nauseating Bald Goose.
>
> KUTGW, Gilly!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> rob/tim/Azcue/justme/HUGO....
>
> Never proved it was a forgery.
>
Dave Perry pretty comprehensively did. Certainly there is far more
weight to his case that it's fake than your's that it is genuine.
> Never explained why nobody was Arrested for Forgery
>
You never showed where the fact that it was a forgery was brought to
the attention of the police.
> Never proved WHEN those numbers were put on that DPD Report.
>
Obviously put on when the rest of the document was typed and they
spell out the message *U R A Fink*, LOL! Still, if this is the
standard of document you want to tout on the radio as genuine, go
right ahead.
> rob/tim/Azcue/justme/HUGO is just another LN'r who is too gutless to debate
> me in my Liveaudio Chat Room.
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/invitation.htm
>
Aww, say I told you what to do if you want me to go on the radio with
you. The ball is in your court, tomnln.
> Most Likely due to>>>
>
> Looks like you're Really upset with me for making you look Bad on these>>>
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>
LOL! Naw, proves you lied about evidence/testimony in the form of CE
2121 and CE 2123. This is one of the things you're going to have to
correct if you want to debate me.
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/rob_spencer_page.htm
>
Nothing to do with me, I'm not Rob Spencer. Don't forget who made the
ID in the first place; Gil *Bald Goose* Gesus, LOL!
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/guess_who_wrote.htm
>
Nothing to do with me, I'm not JustMe52.
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/secret_service_drinking.htm
>
Ditto. LOL! That was a TOTALLY brainless misidentification by you, far
worse than Gil's. You don't realise people cut and paste and repost
things from other posters occasionaly? How long have you been posting
on newsgroups?
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/eusebio_azcue.htm
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Que? Senor tomnln muchos locos! LOL!
KUTGW, tomnln!
Spence
Tim, they still think I'm you! HA!
timstter
Hey Rob, tomnln has based his identification on the sleuthing skills
of Gil Jesus, LOL!
That's gotta be a recipe for disaster...
KUTGW, Gilly/tomnln! The laffs are on you! :-)
Gil Jesus
> �I was shocked to hear Professor McAdams state a "factoid" ( as he
> likes to call them ) during part one of the debate regarding Oswald
> threatening Eisenhower.
>
> (CE 1386 )
>
> The FBI found that Oswald was in the Marines at Atsugi during the time
> home in New Orleans.
>
> ( CE 1961 )
>
> http://i36.tinypic.com/357edjc.jpg
>
> Apparently, Professor McAdams didn't know that this "factoid" had been
> "debunked" a long time ago.
Palmer McBride was contacted in June 1993.
He persisted in his errors: "I knew OSWALD in 1958. I NEVER KNEW
OSWALD IN 1955. I knew him in the Summer of 1958 for about two weeks;
he worked at the dental lab. I quit Pfisterer Dental Lab in August
1958 when I went off to the summer camp with the Air Force Reserve.
And that's when I knew him, just before I left the lab."
It was pointed out to Palmer McBride that OSWALD was overseas at this
time.
He responded: "Why'd I think it was 1958 all these years? Well,
whatever. I knew him for about two weeks and he came and visited my
house once and expounded on the glories of communism and said he
wanted to kill President Eisenhower 'cause of exploiting the people.
The testimony of Palmer McBride regarding his alleged contact with
OSWALD in 1958 was read to him. He stated: "That's when I knew him, in
April 1958 and May 1958 - that's when I knew him."
He was asked about the letter OSWALD had mailed to him and where it
was today.
"Hell, I don't know. I didn't get it." If Palmer McBride didn't
receive it, who did?
He finally commented, "I don't remember receiving a letter."
It was pointed out to Palmer McBride that OSWALD never worked as a
shoe salesman.
He stated: "Hell, I don't know."
Palmer McBride was asked about OSWALD'S alleged threats on President
Eisenhower: "Hell, people are thinking the same thing about the
President today. They are already talking about Clinton. Look what
happened the other day at the ceremony at Arlington. Bunch of veterans
turned their back on him. All he did was alienate Congress with this
gay military thing, and then what happens is they won't pass the jobs
bill. But I'm not about to go out and shoot the son of a bitch because
of it."
In 1964 the FBI asked Palmer McBride why he made no report of OSWALD'S
threat concerning President Eisenhower to any law enforcement agency:
"McBride now assumes that at the time he felt the statement was made
by OSWALD to emphasize his anti-Eisenhower feelings and not made in
the nature of an actual threat on the life of the President."
Palmer McBride said "maybe I did receive a letter that said he was
working as a shoe salesman in Fort Worth - but look at the dates. You
said it was April 1958. That's when I remember him leaving the dental
lab. I left the dental lab about August 13, 1958. We were friends for
a couple of weeks - sort of an intellectual thing. It couldn't have
been 1955 or 1956."