John Judge interview on JFK

[MrMickeysMom]

This has to be one of the most interesting interviews I've heard from Black Op Radio in a long time...

http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2009.html

(Link to "part two")

# Some history of COPA
# COPA conference, speakers & details for 2009 in Dallas, Nov 20th to the 22nd
# There was an inference of detente with the USSR in JFK's last American University speech
# John believes this was the final thing that sealed JFK's fate
# There are organized disturbances at every Dealey Plaza JFK event
# John believes the Sixth Floor Museum is behind the disturbances
# The Sixth Floor and the MLK rooming house 'sniper's nests' are altered
# Northwoods and other military plots concocted to allow a US invasion of Cuba
# How Oswald was set up at the Texas Theater
# John believes Oswald was to have been killed in the Texas Theater
# That went wrong and Ruby was forced to do the job
# Oswald never fired a gun that day... The fingerprints were planted
# Ruby, Tippett and Oswald knew each other
# 9 defectors were in the USSR at the time Oswald was there.
# All 9 came home the same month as Oswald
# Marina testified with information about Robert Webster and not Oswald's story
# The Sixth Floor is an accessory after the fact
# The loss of Democracy, with the trillions in resources wasted on war
# The Paul Wellstone crash... Very suspicious
# The Dorothy Hunt crash... Very suspicious as well
# The Reagan shooting: The .38 disappears and a .22 appears
# People that were at the Reagan shooting were also at the Wellstone crash
# Rove, Cheney and political dirty tricks
# John's helping Cynthia McKinney in her recent jailing by the Israelis
# Everything the Israelis did violated international law
# John's views on American Imperialism
# The comparison between Bush's policy and Obama's policy
# John's website is Judge For Yourself.US or he can be found at COPA

[SDuderstadt]

1. ."Oswald never fired a gun that day... The fingerprints were planted"

Two small problems (among many) with Judge's (and by extension, your) claim:

1) There are numerous eyewitnesses who saw Oswald shoot and kill Officer Tippit with his revolver.

2) When Oswald was cornered in the Texas Theater, he drew the same revolver and tried to kill the officer who apprehended him.

Given those facts, the notion that his fingerprints were "planted" is amazingly stupid.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/firearms_hsca.htm

[jakeXT]

2. I think it's about the rifle which he supposedly used to kil JFK

Dallas Police : Rifle had NO Fingerprints
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEasB7IRZJs

The Fingerprinting of Oswald's dead body
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqyufPSuWXY

[SDuderstadt]

4. First of all, anyone who believes that...

fingerprints are automatically left on anything someone touches doesn't know very much about fingerprints.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid4.htm

[MrMickeysMom]

11. Wow!

SDuderstadt uses ..... the SAME reference.... !

SDuderstadt makes no sense when typing today, "anyone who believes that fingerprints are automatically left on anything someone touches doesn't know very much about fingerprints."

Really? Do tell~

:wtf:

[SDuderstadt]

14. It's funny you're castigating me for "using the same reference"...

when you provide none whatsoever other than your initial reference to a radio program you listened to. It's also fumy how you try to make it sound like it's only the source when MC Adam's site is a repository for the work of a lot of people.

As far as the fingerprint issue, it's pretty stupid to claim that people consistently leave fingerprints when they handle something.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020320.html

[MrMickeysMom]

27. Are you really this ill informed?

You haven't read a single thing from the OP down-thread, or checked the links, have you?

No, you have not.

[SDuderstadt]

31. No, you are....

I've read everything AND checked the links. Just because you read and believe something hardly makes it true. If what I am saying is false, you could easily refute it, but you can't.

[MrMickeysMom]

41. Cry me a river...

...with that malarky where others are supposed to show how you failed.

You do that well without anyone's help.

[jakeXT]

20. Obviously you can use gloves

[SDuderstadt]

22. You don't even have to do that.

The notion that people automatically leave readable fingerprints merely by handling something is a myth.

[MrMickeysMom]

28. Is this an urban myth?

Or does it only exist where YOU have looked (hint: that doesn't prove to be a wide radius).

[SDuderstadt]

32. Let me make sure I get this straight....

so, you believe that EVERYTIME someone handles something, they always leave a readable fingerprint, yes? Maybe you need to take a criminology class.

[MrMickeysMom]

40. It doesn't matter what I THINK, it's what the evidence shows

[SDuderstadt]

42. And the evidence (Brewer's affidavit) shows...

you are dead wrong about your claim. Sorry.

[MrMickeysMom]

55. You're not sorry...

On second thought... yeah, you're acting pretty sorry.

[SDuderstadt]

57. Why can't you simply admit you're wrong about basic things?

Instead, it's YOU who results to insults.

[MrMickeysMom]

63. I don't see where I've come after you with insults at all...

I just stand up for what I believe in, which includes laughing at people when they try to bully and belittle what I have to say.

Don't you understand the rules here?

[MrMickeysMom]

3. Ah.. I see you've used the same bullshit reference to accompany the blatant lies

Bullshit statement of the "Dude" number 1 is false because:

First of all, there were no eyewitnesses who saw OSWALD shoot and kill Officer Tippit. However, there WERE eyewitnesses who described the shooter. The most obvious thing Dude choose not recall, probably because you he examined it, was the closest eyewitness, who from her short distance front porch chair described a shorter, stocky man with sandy colored hair. Interestingly, the were numerous Oswald sightings leading up to the ones described that day, which support the strong theory that different Oswalds were being put together, probably by the CIA. Of those descriptions, a supposed Oswald matching the one seen shooting Tippit had been spotted out of the country months before. This further supports Lee Harvey Oswald being set up as a patsy, with a completely different role to play if indeed he was playing one with the Kennedy assassination as a spook.

These Lee Harvey Oswald records have been held up for public view due to "national security". People like the "Dude" who are led around by the nose are more willing to believe our national security would be breached by understanding Lee Harvey Oswald's records, including his fucking tax returns!

Bullshit statement of the "Dude" number 2 is false:

Oswald went to a seat in that theater, and when pointed out when the lights when on, and then approached, stated, "This is it!", physically punching the approacher in the face. More to the point of the bullshit statement here how fast and how MANY police responded to the theater call. This police response was for someone who was seen entering that theater (there no one at the window as he walked in not paying, thus someone saw him walk in without paying). This resulted in a police response of more than 20 policemen who descended within minutes... Ummm... Gee... let me think about THIS reaction from the police while everything else was going on in Dallas that hour. :think: ....Duuuuuhhhh!

And for all you sports fans, here's an Extra, bonus BULLSHIT ending "Dude" statement- so funny and so evident of someone who takes little or NO time to read, but wants you to THINK he does:

Finger/palm prints did not EXIST on any record of that Manual Carcano rifle until 2 officers had been allowed into the morgue, unaccompanied.

Silliest stuff I've yet read here YET. Get serious if you're going to examine the assassination of JFK. Don't be one of those people who thinks this 911 thread/dungeon is some part of a narrow little domain. Unbelievable bullshit like this won't pass anymore.

Reading is a good thing, so try a few references. Maybe you'll learn a thing or two.

[SDuderstadt]

5. That's funny...

MMM urges you to read, yet gives you no source for any of her assertions. Here's why:

Did Helen Markham (the front porch witness that MMM fails to identify) really describe Tippit's killer as "a shorter, stocky man with sandy colored hair"? Umm, no. That's what author Mark Lane told the Warren Commission that Markham told him. But, did she? Here's an excerpt from Lane's interview with Markham:

Mr. Lane. But, well, just, could you just give me one moment and tell me. I read that you told some of the reporters that he was
short, stocky, and had bushy hair.

Mrs. Markham. No, no. I did not say this.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt

Gee, MMM If you can't even get basic facts right, why should we believe the rest of your standard JFK CT drivel? That's what you get for relying on Mark Lane.

More importantly, you've had nearly 46 years to expose JFK's actual killer. What are you waiting for?

To anyone who reads MMM's drivel, do you ever notice the "source" of her nonsense is always something like " Black Ops Radio"? Does it surprise you then that it's fucking goofy Standard CT bullshit?

[MrMickeysMom]

8. Well, you fail to understand the obvious...

Nice try, Mr. Duderstadt, as you try to insult and insert lies into what I have said. Quite typical, too, by the way. Here's a news flash:

It was not Helen Markham who witnessed from her house, but Acquila Clemmons who heard shots, ran into the street saw a man with a gun who was "chunky, heavy and short". She also saw ANOTHER many on the opposite side of the street who was waved on by the gunner with a "Go on!" and who did go on in an opposite direction from the gunner! Please read a broader range of references. It's good for your very funny debating skills.

I can tell you've never looked at the referenced material (not just Lane) inside BOR, both in audio and and written format. That is one great website BECAUSE it compiles MANY references to assassination science, as opposed to those consistent and ridiculous reference you keep using over and over again. If you're going to make a point, then don't keep using these very lame attempts to bully other people. It makes you look foolish and hateful. Hateful, I can take because I take it from where it comes. People are not blind here, even though you think they are.

You not only fail to make any debatable points as you spin around out of control, but I'm guessing you'll continue to do it while I continue to WOOT at your next comment.

By all means, if it amuses you, continue to exercise, but try to read more and devote more time to understand. It can't be good for you to just be insulting ALL the time.

[SDuderstadt]

12. I read Lane's book...

And now you're trying to say it's Aquila Clemmons. Okay. If it was her you meant to refer to instead of Markham, where does Clemmons say the shooter had red hair? You also referenced the witness being on her front porch but here you're claiming she ran into the street. I think you're getting your bullshit mixed up.

Just so you know, I've been to the site where Tippit was murdered, so it's had for you to put your bullshit over on me. I've also read (and have)"Rush to Judgment" as well as "Plausible Denial". I'm willing to bet you have not read Bugliosi's book and, if so, that shows I've read both sides far more than you have.

[MrMickeysMom]

43. The problem is, that you've only read Bugliosi's book!

Who said red hair? I believe earlier I described short and stocky with sandy hair, which sure enough was described as chunky, short and stocky, minus a hair description. Great detective work!

Now, explain to me why you only read Rush to Judgment and Plausible Denial. These two books were reviewed on BOR (by different researchers) and were found to have left out entire pieces of the timeline to support biased single bullet theories. You might want to read more than books that support single bullet theories in order to make a fair analysis of the single bullet theory.

You don't do stuff like that. It's not your preference, when you don't want to analyze, just harass people.

You have probably read more Bugliosi than I have, that's fer shizzel. :eyes:

[SDuderstadt]

48. "Now, explain to me why you only read Rush to Judgment and Plausible Denial"

My, this really does show how limited your reasoning abilities are. Did I ever say those are the only books about the assassination I ever read? Um, no. If I said, "I read 'The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich' last year", does that mean I've never read "Hitler : A Study in Tyranny"? In fact, I am starting to believe your poor reasoning powers are the source of most of these bullshit arguments here.

For the record, I have not only read "Plausible Denial" and "Rush To Judgment", I have also read:

"Best Evidence"
"Case Closed"
"Crossfire"
"The Killing of a President"
"Double Cross"
"High Treason"
"JFK and Vietnam"
"Reclaiming History"


and many more that I can't remember off the top of my head because I am out of town.

Here's a gentle hint: Maybe you should avoid conclusions about me that you have no way of knowing. I avoid doing so with you.

As far as the description of Oswald is concerned, I did say "red hair" by mistake. But, it turns out that it really makes no difference whether we're referring to Markham or Clemmons. Clemmons can say whatever she wants and you can believe her, if you want. What you left out, however, is that there were TEN eyewitnesses on the scene who POSITIVELY identified Oswald as Tippit's killer, of which Markham was one. If you want to somehow prove Clemmons right, you're going to have to trump ten witnesses who contradict her testimony.

[OnTheOtherHand]

13. "foolish and hateful"

I'm sure you're winning this cage match in your own mind, but back here on planet Earth, you seem more irony-impaired than anything else.

[MrMickeysMom]

44. huh?

Whatever do you mean? irony-impaired? What's that about?

[OnTheOtherHand]

46. perfect n/t

[SDuderstadt]

49. Priceless...

n/t

[SDuderstadt]

15. Vigorous debate isn't trying to...

"bully" people, dudette.

[MrMickeysMom]

45. Since when is someone who stands up to you a bully?

Do you know HOW to debate?

[SDuderstadt]

50. WTF???

YOU called ME a bully, remember? And I agree with your subject line and suggest you quit calling me a bully, dudette.

[SDuderstadt]

6. WTF is...

a "Manual Carcano" rifle? More to the point, why is your post so incoherent?

[MrMickeysMom]

9. I think you can figure this out...

Incoherency is something you can correct by reading more.

Go on... read more.

[SDuderstadt]

16. How in the world would you use the phrase...

"Manual Carcano" when you meant "Mannlicher Carcano" ? They're not ever Close, so you can't claim you made a typo.

[MrMickeysMom]

47. You're right-

Yeah, you're right.

Having gotten the description of the rifle Oswald never used was sure right.

Where you then not able to understand the point of the sentences surrounding that error?

[SDuderstadt]

51. Simple question....

if you're so knowledgeable about the assassination, how in the world could you have made such a stupid mistake?

[MrMickeysMom]

53. You mean the mistake to take you off "ignore"

Yeah.... that was a doozy. :rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

59. No, I mean the mistake of you making absolute bullshit claims that...

are so easily disproven. If you're going to be dishonest about things, you should at least be dishonest about things that aren't so easily refuted.

[MrMickeysMom]

64. Prove the dishonesty...

Just like, prove your claim. Ask a question instead of trying to belittle me or anyone else who has claim to present THOUGHTFUL interviews, or meaningful papers, or DEBATES YOU.

Maybe you think a person is honest when they openly debate you. Who else do you treat like this? I hope you never treated your mother that way.

[SDuderstadt]

66. Gladly....I'll start with one example....

then when you start thrashing about and claiming that I'm bullying you, you can decide whether you want to throw in the towel or have me present the deluge of posts in which your dishonesty is apparent. Of course, there are so many of them, it's difficult to know where to start.

Okay, let's take your goofy claims about Officer McDonald (the officer who arrested Oswald in the Texas Theater).


I made the point that Oswald tried to shoot McDonald in my very first post.

2) When Oswald was cornered in the Texas Theater, he drew the same revolver and tried to kill the officer who apprehended him.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x256718

Some posts down you responded thusly:

Furthermore, I don't know where you pulled that evidence of Oswald trying to kill his apprehender with a gun in the theater. You might want to check your facts on that one. I'm sure the reference was a class offered by McAdams!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x256718

Of course, you'll live to regret uttering those words. I then answered by citing McDonald's testimony to the Warren Commission and linked you to it:

And my source for the comment about Oswald trying to shoot the officer who arrested him comes from the officer's testimony. Again, I find it amazing that you hold yourself out as such an expert on the assassination, yet you are unaware of some of the most basic facts of the case.


http://www.jfk-online.com/mcdonald.html

The you came back with the utterly dishonest comment as follows:

Your Mr. Ball interview also implies Oswald might have reached for his gun, not that he did reach for it, which is what you said earlier in one of your rants.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x256718#256934


First of all, Mr. Ball is not merely "interviewing" McDonald. McDonald is testifying before the Warren Commission. And "Mr. Ball" was not merely some "interviewer", he was, in fact, senior counsel to the Warren Commission, which you would know if you knew a mere fraction of what you claim to know about the assassination.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-548177.html

Of course, it gets better from here. Let me remind you of your actual words:

Your Mr. Ball interview also implies Oswald might have reached for his gun, not that he did reach for it, which is what you said earlier in one of your rants.

Now, let's review the relevant parts of McDonald's WC testimony:

Mr. BALL. Which hand was -- was his right hand or his left hand on the pistol?

Mr. McDONALD. His right hand was on the pistol.

Mr. BALL. And which of your hands?

Mr. McDONALD. My left hand, at this point.

Mr. BALL. And had he withdrawn the pistol.

Mr. McDONALD. He was drawing it as I put my hand.

Mr. BALL. From his waist?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What happened then?

Mr. McDONALD. Well, whenever I hit him, we both fell into the seats. While we were struggling around there, with this hand on the gun --

Mr. BALL. Your left hand?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. Somehow I managed to get this hand in the action also.

Mr. BALL. Your right hand?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. Now, as we fell into the seats, I called out, "I have got him," and Officer T. A. Hutson, he came to the row behind us and grabbed Oswald around the neck. And then Officer C. T. Walker came into the row that we were in and grabbed his left arm. And Officer Ray Hawkins came to the row in front of us and grabbed him from the front.

By the time all three of these officers had got there, I had gotten my right hand on the butt of the pistol and jerked it free.

Mr. BALL. Had you felt any movement of the hammer?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. When this hand -- we went down into the seats.

Mr. BALL. When your left hand went into the seats, what happened?

Mr. McDONALD. It felt like something had grazed across my hand. I felt movement there. And that was the only movement I felt. And I heard a snap. I didn't know what it was at the time.

Mr. BALL. Was the pistol out of his waist at that time?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Do you know any way it was pointed?

Mr. McDONALD. Well, I believe the muzzle was toward me, because the sensation came across this way. To make a movement like that, it would have to be the cylinder or the hammer.

Now, how ANYONE could read that, then claim the "Your Mr. Ball interview also implies Oswald might have reached for his gun, not that he did reach for it" defies belief. McDonald didn't "imply", he stated it outright and the statement was not that Oswald "might" have withdrawn his revolver, McDonald said Oswald DID withdraw his revolver. He also states very clearly that he managed to get his hand into the "action" (again, the area between the hammer of the gun and the firing pin), which he could not have done had Oswald not already been pulling the trigger.

Now, if that's not enough "punishment" for you (punishment is what I call it when your goofy bullshit is being refuted by actual facts), McDonald's account is corroborated by the testimony of other officers, as well as civilians. Note: "Mr. Belin" was not a mere "interviewer" but was, in fact, David Belin, assistant counsel to the Warren Commission. Here's is Officer T.A. Hutson's testimony:

Mr. HUTSON. McDonald was at this time simultaneously trying to hold this person's right hand. Somehow this person moved his right hand to his waist, and I saw a revolver come out, and McDonald was holding on to it with his right hand, and this gun was waving up toward the back of the seat like this.

Mr. BELIN. Now you had your left hand, or was it McDonald's left hand, on the suspect's right hand?

Mr. HUTSON. McDonald was using both of his hands to hold onto this person's right hand.

Mr. BELIN. Okay.

Mr. HUTSON. And the gun was waving around towards the back of the seat, up and down, and I heard a snapping sound at one time.

Mr. BELIN. What kind of snapping sound was it?

Mr. HUTSON. Sounded like the snap of a pistol, to me, when a pistol snaps. . . . The gun was taken from the suspect's hand by Officer McDonald and somebody else. I couldn't say exactly. They were all in on the struggle, and Officer Hawkins, in other words, he simultaneously, we decided to handcuff him.

We had restrained him after the pistol was taken, but he was still resisting arrest, and we stood him up and I let go of his neck at this time and took hold of his right arm and attempted to bring it back behind him, and Officer Hawkins and Walker and myself attempted to handcuff him.

Here's what Johnny Brewer testified. You remember him, of course. He was the guy that "followed Oswald because he was afraid Oswald was going to go to a theater and try to get in without paying" (sorry, I couldn't resist tweaking you a bit):

Mr. BREWER. He knocked McDonald down. McDonald fell against one of the seats. And then real quick he was back up.

Mr. BELIN. When you say he was --

Mr. BREWER. McDonald was back up. He just knocked him down for a second and he was back up. And I jumped off the stage and was walking toward that, and I saw this gun come up and -- in Oswald's hand, a gun up in the air.

Here's what a patron of the theater, John Gibson, testified:

Mr. GIBSON. Well, I was standing there watching all this going on and then the policeman started down the aisle -- I would say there was another -- I don't know, maybe six or eight--started down the aisles. . . . and then the next thing was -- Oswald was standing in the aisle with a gun in his hand.

Mr. BALL. . . . What was he doing?

Mr. GIBSON. Well, he had this pistol in his hand.

Mr. BALL. Was anybody near him?

Mr. GIBSON. Just the officers.

Now, how anyone could read the testimony and report back that McDonald "implied" that Oswald "might" have withdrawn his revolver, can only be described as dishonest, but I've come to expect no less from you. Accordingly, when you post your usual misinformation and dishonesty, I'll respond so that the reader will not be swayed by your absolute nonsense. But I have no intention of engaging with anyone as dishonest as you.

[SDuderstadt]

21. "Incoherency is something you can correct by reading more"

this truly has to win an award for unintentional irony. One might be able to compensate for incoherent writing by reading more to develop context so as to decipher what a poor writer might be trying to say. However, the only one who can correct incoherency in this case is the author of the words.

[SDuderstadt]

7. "Truther Logic"....

Since JFK had just been assassinated, the DPD should have just ignored a cop killing.

[MrMickeysMom]

10. Now Duderstadt, you do know we were talking about the movie theater, don't you?

Let me remind you, the many policeman responded to a call about someone walking in without paying for a ticket, not the Tippit killing, which had been reported at the SAME TIME Oswald (the real Oswald) was found in the theater.

See, you can't follow logic because you might have to resort to some research on the time line.

Please do your homework instead of frothing at the mouth with "uuuhhh... see? truther logic!" You didn't even read the thread upstream.

Calm down and read. It might be a leap of faith, but I'm pretty sure you can read for comprehension.

[SDuderstadt]

17. Jesus...

Oswald was not apprehended at the Texas Theater merely because he didn't pay for his ticket. He came under suspicion because he was observed acting nervous by Johnny Brewer, a clerk at a shoe store, who saw him trying to avoid being seen by the police. When Oswald left the front of the shoe store, the clerk followed Oswald to the Texas Theater and saw him go in without paying. Why would Brewer have already been following Oswald? Merely because he was psychic and had a premonition someone he didn't know was going to walk down the street and enter & movie theater without paying? Your dishonesty here is stunning.

In the commercial district, he ducked into the entrance of a shoe store after hearing sirens. Suspicious, the shoe store clerk followed Oswald and saw him sneak into a movie theater. The clerk informed the ticket taker and the police were called. Oswald was arrested in the theatre after pulling his pistol.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/faq.txt

[MrMickeysMom]

25. Oh, Jesus, yourself, you just made my point- AGAIN!

The shoe clerk reported someone walking into a theater without having bought a ticket.

There are such things as Dallas police records, so who are YOU reading? Ah, it's that same reference again, as that is apparently the best you can do, giving the little you seem to relay.

Looking at the response by counting the number of responders was not dishonest. Refusing to believe anything that doesn't come from YOUR ONE REFERENCE YOU KEEP USING OVER AND OVER AGAIN seems to be very silly, and certainly less than objective.

So then, would just prefer to resort to your own theory, "Why would Brewer have already been following Oswald?" ... changing the nature of that phone call. You now try to convince others he was really relaying more than he did with the phone call to the police. Oh please, blah, blah, blah coming from, what? Is it your tired and worn out reference? Who's being dishonest? At least I read text of testimony and like I said up-thread, there are many varied references from BOR to back it up. You don't need to read all of them, because the whole span of witnesses (who lived to have interviews) are archived in audio.

You'd rather say I AM dishonest? What about these incessant ignorant statements and your insults?

You ain't a kidding anyone!

[SDuderstadt]

33. What bullshit....

Why was Brewer following Oswald down the street?

And your ONE reference seems to be BOR. You seem to be implying that McAdams authored everything on his website. You also ignore the fact that he teaches a class on the JFK assassination at a well-respected university.

But, beyond all that, let's return to the subject at hand. Can you give us ANY reason why Brewer was following Oswald down the street? Are you denying that the DPD launched a manhunt in the aftermath of the murder of Officer Tippit? Are you denying that what arose Brewer's suspicion was the fact that Oswald got nervous and tried to avoid notice when he heard the sirens? Are you saying Brewer was not aware of the manhunt? Are you denying that Oswald matched the description of Tippit's killer that was being broadcast? Do you honestly expect people to believe that the only reason Oswald was surrounded at the Texas Theater was because someone called the DPD and told them he entered a movie theater without paying?

The problem with CTers is that if 20 people witnessed something and 19 of them agree on a salient point which is corroborated with the physical evidence, yet one person contradicts a small detail, in the mind of the CTer, that trumps the consensus view and the physical evidence. I'll be blunt. I don't know if you are merely playing games or if your reasoning powers are actually this limited.

[MrMickeysMom]

52. And I'll be as blunt with you...

You have demonstrated such little ability to reason about the original subject I posted!

You must either be out to lunch, with a fever or in denial about what is a good interview and what is not. That was the point of the OP, not about YOUR reason to make me disprove Brewer was following Oswald down the street! How crass... The Dallas Police time line (such good fellows, you know) where do you get this load of poop? Honest? You mean launching the manhunt at the theater a la the Tippit shooting? I take this to mean this is your reason they went to Oswald in the theater. Shit, they had no idea it was Oswald in the theater. Furthermore, I don't know where you pulled that evidence of Oswald trying to kill his apprehender with a gun in the theater. You might want to check your facts on that one. I'm sure the reference was a class offered by McAdams!

Here's a laugh-

You actually insist that McAdams, who you admit authors everything on his website is a better reference than a website run by a Canadian who conducts not only interviews, but plays and displays a complete collection of texts, papers, and books by those wanting a fair analysis of JFK's assassination?

Then you announce (as if anybody actually cared here) to the anxiously awaiting masses... "the problem with CTers"... This alone give a new meaning to the condition of- DAMN IT... I'M RIGHT"AND YOU'RE WRONG.

The difference between you and the people who want dialog here is really, really W I D E.

[SDuderstadt]

56. "You actually insist that McAdams, who you admit authors everything on his website"

Now you're proving you can't even read. Show me where I EVER said that McAdams authored everything on his website. Here's what I actually said:

You seem to be implying that McAdams authored everything on his website

I also said:

It's also fumy how you try to make it sound like it's only the source when MC Adam's site is a repository for the work of a lot of people.

So, I said the OPPOSITE of what you accuse me of saying.

And my source for the comment about Oswald trying to shoot the officer who arrested him comes from the officer's testimony. Again, I find it amazing that you hold yourself out as such an expert on the assassination, yet you are unaware of some of the most basic facts of the case.

Mr. BALL. Right hand?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes. I went at him with this hand, and I believe I struck him on the face, but I don't know where. And with my hand, that was on his hand over the pistol.

Mr. BALL. Did you feel the pistol?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Which hand was -- was his right hand or his left hand on the pistol?

Mr. McDONALD. His right hand was on the pistol.

Mr. BALL. And which of your hands?

Mr. McDONALD. My left hand, at this point.

Mr. BALL. And had he withdrawn the pistol.

Mr. McDONALD. He was drawing it as I put my hand.

Mr. BALL. From his waist?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What happened then?

Mr. McDONALD. Well, whenever I hit him, we both fell into the seats. While we were struggling around there, with this hand on the gun --

Mr. BALL. Your left hand?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. Somehow I managed to get this hand in the action also.

Mr. BALL. Your right hand?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. Now, as we fell into the seats, I called out, "I have got him," and Officer T. A. Hutson, he came to the row behind us and grabbed Oswald around the neck. And then Officer C. T. Walker came into the row that we were in and grabbed his left arm. And Officer Ray Hawkins came to the row in front of us and grabbed him from the front.

By the time all three of these officers had got there, I had gotten my right hand on the butt of the pistol and jerked it free.

Mr. BALL. Had you felt any movement of the hammer?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. When this hand -- we went down into the seats.

Mr. BALL. When your left hand went into the seats, what happened?

Mr. McDONALD. It felt like something had grazed across my hand. I felt movement there. And that was the only movement I felt. And I heard a snap. I didn't know what it was at the time.

Mr. BALL. Was the pistol out of his waist at that time?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Do you know any way it was pointed?

Mr. McDONALD. Well, I believe the muzzle was toward me, because the sensation came across this way. To make a movement like that, it would have to be the cylinder or the hammer.

Mr. BALL. Across your left palm?

Mr. McDONALD. Yes, sir. And my hand was directly over the pistol in this manner. More or less the butt. But not on the butt.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mcdonald.html

Simple question. How much more punishment and embarrassment do you want?

[MrMickeysMom]

65. I didn't insist at all. Read what you just copied yourself, SDuderstadt...

My implying you said something is not equal to insisting you said it.

Your Mr. Ball interview also implies Oswald might have reached for his gun, not that he did reach for it, which is what you said earlier in one of your rants.

So, this is supposed to be a "punishing" retort? What- do you have a sadistic wish to punish people who start threads that you don't like here? Do you think this is championship wrestling?

No matter, it's a good reason to call you on your so called punishment. I think Lithos is as sick of you as he is of me. I already reported and blew away one of your insulting posts.

This is getting pretty awful. No wonder very few continue to put up with your crass and asinine comments. They are JUST THAT.

Learn some normal course of debating skills, not this WWF stuff. It's wearing itself out.

[SDuderstadt]

39. "Why would Brewer have already been following Oswald?"

So then, would just prefer to resort to your own theory, "Why would Brewer have already been following Oswald?" ... changing the nature of that phone call. You now try to convince others he was really relaying more than he did with the phone call to the police. Oh please, blah, blah, blah coming from, what? Is it your tired and worn out reference? Who's being dishonest? At least I read text of testimony and like I said up-thread, there are many varied references from BOR to back it up. You don't need to read all of them, because the whole span of witnesses (who lived to have interviews) are archived in audio.

No, dudette. It's coming from Brewer himself:



Now, in case you can't read (which I am beginning to suspect), let's excerpt what Brewer said:

The reason I noticed the man in front of the store was because he acted so nervous, and I thought at the time he might be the man that had shot the policeman.

I have to say that it's fun to watch your fucking goofy bullshit go down in flames. I also just have to ask you. Do you even bother to do a simple fact-check when you hear this bullshit before you just start passing it on?

[MrMickeysMom]

54. What makes it "fucking goofy bullshit"?

Because the man's statement is not compared with others also interviewed?

Sorry I can't pull the interview and plop it up on the screen for you to listen to. You'll have to spend time adding at least a few books to your reading list. True, you may read more than a lot of people read, but it is certainly not conclusive where in JFK. If I use your logic, how come you haven't proved single bullet theory in the years since the assassination? It's because it is inconclusive. It's also because evidence has been tampered with.

I just love how one witness' statement trumps any of other statement. DPD still did not know it was anyone more than someone who didn't pay a ticket in the theater, and you still have it wrong about what Oswald did before he was apprehended in that theater. Why are you so ridiculously angry over something that should be a debate?

Maybe it's because you like to watch people go down in flames? Well, goodie for you! At least you have a something to do before you go to bed.

Sweet dreams of goofy arguments that go around and around and never end up anywhere but making you angry.

[SDuderstadt]

58. Jesus Fucking Christ, MMM...

Who would you think would know more about why Brewer followed Oswald and why he alerted the DPD than Brewer himself???

You have put forth bullshit claim after bullshit claim and I have patiently refuted them by pointing to actual, verifiable evidence that I also link to the source. You, in contrast, just keep trying to wriggle out of your gross misstatements and pretend you won. Again, have you had enough punishment or do you want to put up even more easily disproved bullshit?

[MrMickeysMom]

61. Calm down, and take a powder, and examine your own statement-

"Who would you think would know more about why Brewer followed Oswald and why he alerted the DPD than Brewer himself?"

Well, then, we should extend this belief system of yours to every single person who was interviewed about what they saw coming from the grassy knoll (cause they were there and THEY also talked to the DPD), or who heard how many shots (again, testimony is collected, so who should know better than the people testifying to the authorities?)

The Brewer believability is as good as anyone else's testimony. So fucking what? Cause you said it's believable, it's so?

You need to go pound salt and consult with "yer boyz" who hop on this pussy wagon with you. While you're at it, back off the, "...have you had enough punishment, or do you want to put up even more easily disproved bullshit?"because that sounds like you have some issues where you can't join a thread, but would rather HIJACK it. Go start another thread if you are incapable of having a conversation.

[SDuderstadt]

18. why the fuck do you think police were swarming the area already?

A policeman had just been murdered nearby. Your trying to make this sound like they were merely responding to a report of someone not paying for a movie ticket is utterly dishonest.

[MrMickeysMom]

26. Wrong again...

The timeline suggests that Oswald was detained between 1 pm and 1:07pm, the latter being the same time of Tippits's shooting.

Get your timeline straight, SDuderstadt!

[Bolo Boffin]

30. Why was Oswald watching a movie when he was supposed to be at work? n/t

[SDuderstadt]

37. Now why would you question Oswald's going to see a movie...

after the President had been assassinated from his workplace?

I'm assuming the sarcasm emoticon is not necessary here.

[SDuderstadt]

34. More bullshit....

Are you honestly claiming Oswald was arrested for Tippit's murder BEFORE Tippit was actually murdered????

Nevermind, this is pointless.

[SDuderstadt]

36. You need to get YOUR timelines straight.....

At 1:45 p.m., the police radio stated, "Have information a suspect just went in the Texas Theatre on West Jefferson." Patrol cars bearing at least 15 officers converged on the Texas Theatre. Patrolman M. N. McDonald, with Patrolmen R. Hawkins, T. A. Hutson, and C. T. Walker, entered the theatre from the rear. Other policemen entered the front door and searched the balcony. . . . Brewer met McDonald and the other policemen at the alley exit door, stepped out onto the stage with them and pointed out the man who had come into the theatre without paying. The man was Oswald. He was sitting alone in the rear of the main floor of the theatre near the right center aisle. About six or seven people were seated on the theatre's main floor and an equal number in the balcony.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mcdonald.html

Your absolute bullshit is also directly contradicted by Brewer's affidavit which you can see here:

[SDuderstadt]

38. Let's put Brewer's words in larger type so MMM can see them...

that is, assuming she even bothers to read them.

Brewer:

The reason I noticed the man in front of the store was because he acted so nervous, and I thought at the time he might be the man that shot the policeman.

Well, so much for your fucking goofy bullshit contention that Brewer had the police called simply because Oswald didn't buy a ticket.

I have a couple of questions for you, MMM. Is this all a game to you? How can you even show your face here after your fucking goofy bullshit has been exposed for the sham that it is? What's interesting here is the very witness who you claim notified the DPD ONLY did so because Oswald did not pay for his ticket totally and directly contradicts your claim.

[SDuderstadt]

23. "Bullshit statement of the 'Dude' number 2 is false"

Please point out anywhere where I made a false statement in ANYTHING I said.

The irony here is YOUR false statement as follows:

This police response was for someone who was seen entering that theater (there no one at the window as he walked in not paying, thus someone saw him walk in without paying). This resulted in a police response of more than 20 policemen who descended within minutes... Ummm... Gee... let me think about THIS reaction from the police while everything else was going on in Dallas that hour.

I have addressed this elsewhere, but it bears repeating on the off chance that anyone would be swayed by your nonsense.

1) The DPD was ALREADY swarming the area after the murder of Tippit.
2) It is utter dishonesty for you to maintain the reason that the DPD surrounded Oswald in the Texas Theater is merely because he entered without buying a ticket. Johnny Brewer, a clerk at a nearby shoe store had already noticed Oswald trying to avoid being seen after he heard sirens (and, of course, the sirens could NOT have been in response to Oswald's failure to pay for a movie ticket, since that hadn't even happened yet. Instead the sirens were from patrol cars looking for Tippit's killer). So much for your fucking goofy theory.

When Oswald left the front of the shoe store, Brewer followed him as he continued to look around furtively for a place to hide. Brewer's suspicions were heightened when Oswald entered the theater without paying and someone from the theater called the DPD and informed them.

3)When the arresting officer approached Oswald, Oswald pulled his revolver from his waistband and tried to kill his apprehender. The only thing that saved the officer was that he managed to get the web of his hand (area between the thumb and index finger) and jam it between the hammer and firing pin of Oswald's gun or there most likely would have been a third death.

4) As noted above, since the reason Oswald even sought shelter in the theater is because of his nervousness at hearing sirens, so for you to maintain they were anything other than coincidental to Oswald failing to pay for his movie ticket has been shown once more to be fucking goofy bullshit.

I sincerely beg you to stop embarrassing DU with this nonsense. It's already too late to stop embarrassing yourself.

[MrMickeysMom]

29. The argument of my second point is well supported, but how would you know?

I could care less if you think what I've relayed is embarrassing! Besides, how do you weigh that? The evidence and time-line and the fact that you have refused to check the source supporting this (again, you seem to think it's a radio program without knowing what the radio program consists of).

You have not bothered to see that each interview and paper represents practically an entire spectrum beginning in the middle 1960's on JFK research. This means all the references I keep pointing to or linking to here are in addition to those people who were interviewed (or whose interview was not included) in all 24 volumes of the Warren Commission's reporting! G'AH! Jesus, you don't even want to know. You just want to argue aimlessly and then say I'm presenting unsupported evidence. If you find this embarrassing, then I suggest starting another thread, SDuderstadt.

By the way, do you think YOU'RE the spokesperson for DU, or do you just think you speak for the 911 thread?

Can't wait to hear THAT response!

[SDuderstadt]

35. I'm talking to you...

and I have a simple question. Do you expect we're going to believe you when all you do is make assertions and provide no proof of your assertions? Have you read ANYTHING other than CT nonsense on the case? I mean, how else could you maintain that Oswald was actually arrested BEFORE Tippit was murdered? If your claim was remotely true, the mainstream media would have been all over it. Your claim is simply not plausible but the larger question is whether you're even capable of recognizing that.

[MrMickeysMom]

62. Question-

... Who's this "we" you refer to? Do you represent some official 911 thread sub-thread group? Are you the president?

[SDuderstadt]

60. "First of all, there were no eyewitnesses who saw OSWALD shoot and kill Officer Tippit."

There is no way to put this mildly. This claim is fucking goofy bullshit. In fact, there were`+/- TEN eyewitnesses who directly or indirectly identified Oswald as Tippit's killer. Why do the JFK CT's try so strenuously (and, I might add, unsuccessfully) to discredit this? Well, once they have to concede on Tippit, they have to start backpedaling on Oswald killing JFK, as there are few credible reasons for Oswald to kill Tippit unless he did kill JFK. Of course, the CT's will immediately go for the "Tippit was sent to eliminate Oswald" gambit which, of course, fails to answer the question why Tippit never withdrew his service revolver and just let Oswald murder him in cold blood.

Mrs. Helen Markham saw Oswald murder Officer Tippit, and picked him out of a lineup only hours later. Despite endless attacks on her credibility, she has never wavered in her identification of Oswald as the murderer.(15)

Domingo Benavides saw Oswald shoot Tippit; Benavides was not taken to a lineup, but positively identified Oswald as the culprit during his Warren Commission deposition.(16)

William Scoggins saw Oswald approach Tippit's patrol car; his view obstructed by shrubbery, he did not see Oswald fire, but he heard the shots and saw Oswald flee the scene. The following day, Scoggins picked Oswald out of a lineup.(17)

Jack Ray Tatum saw Oswald shoot Tippit, and, though he did not come forward with his story at the time, supplied key details of the shooting that confirm his presence at the scene.(18)

No less than six additional witnesses positively identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man they saw flee the murder scene, revolver in hand.(19) Several of these witnesses saw Oswald unload spent cartridges from his revolver and drop them on the ground; these shells were later linked ballistically to the revolver owned by Lee Harvey Oswald, to the exclusion of all other weapons.(20)

http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100tippit.html

You REALLY ought to quit while you'rer behind, MMM.

[SDuderstadt]

19. I was just reading through...

this laundry list of goofy claims again and it poses an obvious question:

Is there ANY conspiracy theory so goofy, even YOU won't embrace it?

[SDuderstadt]

24. "Ruby, Tippett and Oswald knew each other"

Of course, Ruby knew a Tippit...but it wasn't J.D. Tippit but, rather, G.M. Tippit of the DPD Special Services Bureau.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/kilgallen.txt

So, if neither you nor Judge can get basic facts straight, why we take your word on anything seriously?