Jump to content
The Education Forum

John McAdams has passed on


Josh Cron
 Share

Recommended Posts

BTW, I think this thread has veered off course. It is supposed to be about the death of a man who was very accomplished and respected and who had a family and many friends. Whether you are religious or not, I think the golden rule-do unto others-is applicable here. A number of people have chosen to ignore this basic human tenant in pursuit of their political beliefs or their beliefs regard the JFK case. For better or worse, their comments are now a part of the public record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 365
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

BTW, I think this thread has veered off course. It is supposed to be about the death of a man who was very accomplished and respected and who had a family and many friends. Whether you are religious or not, I think the golden rule-do unto others-is applicable here. A number of people have chosen to ignore this basic human tenant in pursuit of their political beliefs or their beliefs regard the JFK case. For better or worse, their comments are now a part of the public record.

Yes, and I don't recall any vindictive, bitter, grave-dancing comments on the recent deaths of Vincent Salandria and Gerald McKnight, two long time Conspiracy Advocates. As I stated earlier, there are those on the Conspiracy side who DO have self decency and morals not to publicly make bitter comments upon someone's death out of respect and courtesy to the grieving family members and friends. Sadly, as you stated Tracy, it's now public record.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Calvin Ye said:

The problem with Parnell is that he is an disinformation artist and loyalist of McAdams

Tracy and I disagree on many aspects of the assassination, including how he has represented McAdams in this thread. But it is ignorant and downright wrong of you to call him a "disinformation artist." If anything, we are all in his debt for his superlative work destroying John Armstrong's ridiculous Oswald doppelganger theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

As I stated earlier, there are those on the Conspiracy side who DO have self decency and morals not to publicly make bitter comments upon someone's death out of respect and courtesy to the grieving family members and friends.

Yes there are Steve and thanks for making that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Tracy and I disagree on many aspects of the assassination, including how he has represented McAdams in this thread. But it is ignorant and downright wrong of you to call him a "disinformation artist." If anything, we are all in his debt for his superlative work destroying John Armstrong's ridiculous Oswald doppelganger theory.

Thank you Jonathan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps true TP ... to a point.

But this isn't John McAdam's obituary memorial site.

It's a forum of high passion and at times hotly debated JFK assassination issues and opinions. With many true believers on the conspiracy side.

And McAdams aggressively charged the issues ( and these true believers ) with unbridled energy and at times antagonistic incitement. 

Nobody on here is going to go outside of the forum to criticize JM at his time of passing.

I think everyone here, even those who have railed against McAdams doesn't also keep in mind the man has passed into the realm of higher spiritual existence or non-existence where judgement is probably beyond our Earthly comprehension.

Just my perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

There is a unified conspiracy theory? Could someone please point me to that?

Hey Tracy- If you're going to reply to something I said, do so in an honest manner or I won't be responding in a pleasant way. You seem like a smart enough guy, so take that advice.

Nowhere did I say there was a unified conspiracy theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the following passage that caused the friction TP complains about:

Brilliant man who fought misinformation and stood up for what he believed in. He said he would win the lawsuit against Marquette and he did. Simply an irreplaceable loss for the LN community-God bless him and his family.

The last thing I would call McAdams would be brilliant.

He fought "misinformation"?  Hmm

He won the lawsuit for two reasons, neither having anything to do with him or the merits of the case:

1.) He had a Koch sponsored law firm to handle it for him

2.) The Wisconsin Supreme Court was rigged by Koch sponsored candidate Gov. Scott Walker and was probably one of the worst in America at the time.  That was the only court in the state he could win at. He lost every decision prior. 

In other words, at the start, TP was being provocative.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2021 at 12:08 PM, Josh Cron said:

McAdams and I disagreed on everything right from the start.  But we eventually found a way to agree-to-disagree. I am saddened by this news...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2021 at 10:58 PM, James DiEugenio said:

The first is Martin Schotz.

 

The second is Kissinger.

 

Though the name sounded familiar I had to google Martin Schotz.  I had seen something about his book before but never looked into it.  Looks like it may need to go onto my to read list.  Copies available for under $10 it says in this article.  Or, on line in the second link.  Cool looking cover with Dulles in shadow in the background looking over JFK's shoulder.

E. Martin Schotz: History Will Not Absolve Us, 1996 (ratical.org)

Contents: History Will Not Absolve Us (ratical.org)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

BTW, I think this thread has veered off course. It is supposed to be about the death of a man who was very accomplished and respected and who had a family and many friends. Whether you are religious or not, I think the golden rule-do unto others-is applicable here. A number of people have chosen to ignore this basic human tenant in pursuit of their political beliefs or their beliefs regard the JFK case. For better or worse, their comments are now a part of the public record.

LOL

Your attempt at gaslighting and revisionism is duly noted.

"Do unto others" huh? How do you write this stuff with a straight face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

Hey Tracy- If you're going to reply to something I said, do so in an honest manner or I won't be responding in a pleasant way. You seem like a smart enough guy, so take that advice.

Nowhere did I say there was a unified conspiracy theory.

Tracy is trying to put words in your mouth, Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole issue about the critics not being able to present a unified concept of what really happened to JFK is used by the other side a lot.  People like Dan Rather for example.

I have never been able to understand the basis for it.

It took about four years to expose the evidence chasms within the WR.  But it was done not by the MSM--who never read the volumes.  But by private citizens who did:  Lane, Meagher, Weisberg for example.

It then took another 30 years to get the documents declassified. Again, not by the MSM.  But by a man who was bitterly attacked by the MSM, Oliver Stone. It was only through the controversy created by his film, that these documents saw the light of day.  

But even at that, the ARRB did not finish the job in its four year run time.  And therefore many important documents were placed on a phased withdrawal program.  Therefore we did not find out that the mayor of Dallas was a CIA asset until the new millenium, or that Clay Shaw's file had been severely altered, or that, contrary to what the FBI said,  there was no chain of custody at all on CE 399.

The other side does not acknowledge any of this, either in general or the specifics. But in a high profile homicide case, how can you be sure who the culprit is if the record is being covered up 58 years later? And when people like Jim Garrison and Richard Sprague tried to penetrate this wall of secrecy, we know what happened to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Tracy and I disagree on many aspects of the assassination, including how he has represented McAdams in this thread. But it is ignorant and downright wrong of you to call him a "disinformation artist." If anything, we are all in his debt for his superlative work destroying John Armstrong's ridiculous Oswald doppelganger theory.

tsk-tsk... ya can put three sentences together, thus you have 50+ years of JFK assassination research figured out, eh?  Is there any wonder why this is dark comedy? You have an **opinion** regarding the topic and as we know opinions are like...  Ya dig?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2021 at 6:18 PM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Brilliant man who fought misinformation and stood up for what he believed in. He said he would win the lawsuit against Marquette and he did. Simply an irreplaceable loss for the LN community-God bless him and his family.

I started my study of the JFK case with the McAdams website and once I had read further its dishonesty slowly became obvious. It's omissions also became obvious. 

I hope that McAdams was employed to promote disinformation because I accept the view that some may hold, that the truth could be damaging to the fabric of the USA. If honestly held, then that is a misguided but understandable position. 

To be dishonest for any other reason is a sad waste of a life. 

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...