Jump to content

John McAdams has passed on


Josh Cron
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ed Haslam has not, in the years since versions of his book have been available, provided any identification of the Tulane visiting faculty member that presented herself to him as Judyth Vary Baker.

As I've said before: universities build reputations on their visiting faculty, and make records of their residencies.  There would be archived photographs of this professor, or at least suspicious lacunae, for Haslam to present did he care to establish his book's bona fides in at least this area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 377
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Extreme legal action or acquiesce of the Kennedy family, both highly unlikely imho. 

What would "extreme legal action" enatil if somebody could present physical, scientific hard evidence (not just document or witness evidence) against the autopsy findings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
12 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Come on, this dude dies and 1 month later his website no longer works? That website was actually useful. I know it's easy to laugh at the prospect of new truth-seekers having to get through McAdams in the search results, but his website was good for some things.

New site address:

JFK / McAdams's Kennedy Assassination Home Page (jfk-assassination.net)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/17/2021 at 10:45 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Richard that is unbelievable.

In the memo that I have there is no qualification to it. Kohn says that Shaw is identical to Bertrand.  Then there is a second source in the memo, who has a digraph code, who says the same thing. Then in the memo, the FBI has printed the name Bertrand under the first paragraph dealing with Shaw's arrest. 

In the real world, Litwin would be laughed out of court. 

 

On 4/17/2021 at 10:45 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Richard that is unbelievable.

In the memo that I have there is no qualification to it. Kohn says that Shaw is identical to Bertrand.  Then there is a second source in the memo, who has a digraph code, who says the same thing. Then in the memo, the FBI has printed the name Bertrand under the first paragraph dealing with Shaw's arrest. 

In the real world, Litwin would be laughed out of court. 

 

On 4/17/2021 at 10:45 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Richard that is unbelievable.

In the memo that I have there is no qualification to it. Kohn says that Shaw is identical to Bertrand.  Then there is a second source in the memo, who has a digraph code, who says the same thing. Then in the memo, the FBI has printed the name Bertrand under the first paragraph dealing with Shaw's arrest. 

In the real world, Litwin would be laughed out of court. 

DSL Note:  Spell check: Its "diagraph", not "digraph"; therefore, correct usage would be "diagraph code" (but which I believe would be redundant," since "diagraph"--in most contexts --implies its already been encoded). Not sure.  DSL

Edited by David Lifton
Getting details right. DSL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
38 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Wow.  What a piece of dooky thing to say.

 

John McAdams had, imo, an agenda. So did Jim Fetzer. I think they intended to rout out the CTs and attack their credibility. 

I happened to be one caught in their crossfire. It was very stressful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pamela Brown said:

John McAdams had, imo, an agenda. So did Jim Fetzer. I think they intended to rout out the CTs and attack their credibility. 

I happened to be one caught in their crossfire. It was very stressful. 

Absolutely. I spent a lot of time on his newsgroup and got to know John a bit. He saw discussion of the assassination as an  avenue through which he could assault and insult liberals. He wasn't interested in truth as much as he was interested in attacking the libs, who he saw as morally weak, and intellectually compromised socialist ninnies. He was not a Catholic. But he was a missionary. 

I mean, anyone who followed his court case, in which he unrepentantly hid behind claims of free speech to excuse his bullying and terrorizing a female student teacher, should realize that this was just the tip of the iceberg. On his personal blog, John would spew on in defense of Big Oil and Big Tobacco. On his newsgroup he would attack men like Mark Lane and Jim Garrison as XXXXX when they claimed something that was probably incorrect, but defend men like Lattimer and Baden when they claimed something that was undoubtedly incorrect (because they had no reason to lie, you see). 

Anyhow, I met him in person once and he was pleasant enough. And he could at times be surprisingly candid (such as when he admitted the Tippit killing was not the Rosetta Stone, seeing as Oswald may have killed Tippit while in fear for his life.) And I think the research community as a whole suffered a loss with his demise.

Now, why would I say that? Well, despite his leanings, John would at times unite with those on the other side of the fence in their efforts to gain the release of hidden documents, etc. If a bunch of CTs signed a petition, it looked like whining. But if John signed it along with them, it looked like a serious issue that needed to be addressed. 

So, RIP. 

 

 

 

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

He was Protestant. His funeral service can be viewed here with some of his children speaking fondly of him:

RIP

Thanks for the correction. I got mixed up because Marquette is Catholic. But I knew John was Protestant. He was an aficionado of Christian a cappella music. Very Protestant. 

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Wow Gerry, is there any specific reason that you accessed that particular ceremony?

I know of no one else who did.

Pat Speer said John McAdams was a Catholic. I was trying to confirm that McAdams was actually a Protestant. That led me to John McAdams funeral service to demonstrate it was in fact a Protestant service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2021 at 10:01 PM, David Andrews said:

Ed Haslam has not, in the years since versions of his book have been available, provided any identification of the Tulane visiting faculty member that presented herself to him as Judyth Vary Baker.

As I've said before: universities build reputations on their visiting faculty, and make records of their residencies.  There would be archived photographs of this professor, or at least suspicious lacunae, for Haslam to present did he care to establish his book's bona fides in at least this area.

Ed Haslam and Judyth Baker both come from Bradenton, FL.  I think Ed created a parallel universe and Judyth walked right into it. I don't think there was a 'false' JVB.  I think he made that up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2022 at 12:27 PM, Pat Speer said:

Absolutely. I spent a lot of time on his newsgroup and got to know John a bit. He saw discussion of the assassination as an  avenue through which he could assault and insult liberals. He wasn't interested in truth as much as he was interested in attacking the libs, who he saw as morally weak, and intellectually compromised socialist ninnies. He was not a Catholic. But he was a missionary. 

I mean, anyone who followed his court case, in which he unrepentantly hid behind claims of free speech to excuse his bullying and terrorizing a female student teacher, should realize that this was just the tip of the iceberg. On his personal blog, John would spew on in defense of Big Oil and Big Tobacco. On his newsgroup he would attack men like Mark Lane and Jim Garrison as XXXXX when they claimed something that was probably incorrect, but defend men like Lattimer and Baden when they claimed something that was undoubtedly incorrect (because they had no reason to lie, you see). 

Anyhow, I met him in person once and he was pleasant enough. And he could at times be surprisingly candid (such as when he admitted the Tippit killing was not the Rosetta Stone, seeing as Oswald may have killed Tippit while in fear for his life.) And I think the research community as a whole suffered a loss with his demise.

Now, why would I say that? Well, despite his leanings, John would at times unite with those on the other side of the fence in their efforts to gain the release of hidden documents, etc. If a bunch of CTs signed a petition, it looked like whining. But if John signed it along with them, it looked like a serious issue that needed to be addressed. 

So, RIP. 

 

 

 

A fair assessment, Pat. McAdams did do some good things, and he had a right to his opinions, whatever they were.

At the same time, based on my experience, I see the possibility of some sort of mind-control experiment to attempt to decimate the CT movement once and for all.  Both McAdams and Fetzer were U profs, supposedly people we would find credible.  Once Fetzer got done with us, trolling the. most ridiculous theories, then we would be turned over to McAdams.  We would then 'see' that the only true reality had to be the lone-nut agenda.

When Marina defected from the WCR in the 80's, that was a disaster for the WC apologists.  To cover that up, in waltzes Judyth Baker.  She went after every credible researcher and tried to destroy them.  That created a seismic wave in the CT community.  

However, now McAdams is gone, and Fetzer, who mentored Judyth, has stepped aside.  Judyth has made herself irrelevant.

And we can all move on...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...