From the alt.assassination.jfk.uncensored 11/06/01
McAdams is not just a fraud as a teacher. He is a corrupt man.- Isabel Kirk,
It has not been a good week for Mr. McAdams. He's finally seen news he's
tried to bury for years hit this newsgroup (congrats, guys -- but better
late than never)] and he's very unhappy. So unhappy he's admitted the
news is "explosive". We'll come back to the news, but first let's take a
good, long look at John McAdams. It's long overdue.
Lord, where there is darkness [let me sow] light. -- From the Prayer of
St. Francis of Assisi
In many ways, John McAdams is a product of the times -- a symptom, not
the disease. The disease is the corruption of the American educational
system. It has become more and more difficult in recent times to tell the
truth in America; nowhere is that more true than in America's schools,
colleges and universities. There are many theories on when this began and
why it happened. Whatever the cause, the point is it has happened, and
the progess of a McAdams through the American educational system (both
public and private) to a teaching position at a university is a
cautionary tale of the new dark age we have entered in America.
McAdams has neither the educational preparation nor the ability for such
a position -- his language skills are abysmal; his analytical skills
non-existent. Not only has he done no research whatsoever on the
historical question he pretends to study, he has no knowledge of even the
basics of a research methodology. Thus, McAdams himself argues against
long established historical facts; on the other hand, he is incapable of
doing the research necessary to either confirm or dispute such facts.
In the academy, once a work is published in a fact-checked or
peer-reviewed venue in any discipline, long established practice is
this: Those who would challenge such published information must do a
complete and thorough review -- whether the case involves historical
research, scientific study, or a mathematical proof.
On this newsgroup, and on the website of Marquette University, McAdams
commits daily academic fraud. He pretends that evidence for a corpus of
facts drawn from HSCA records, most of which has been available in print
for at least six years, has never been provided. Instead, he argues with
knowing deceit that there are no documents to support a major story
appearing in the heavily fact-checked Washington Post (and later, in the
seminal book on the JFK assassination, Oswald Talked). An interesting
charge, if true; but of course it's not. The professor at the
distinguished university is an academic crackpot, and sadly, a fraud on
the public -- a base propagandist in scholar's robes.
For the record, I am posting separately the one official challenge to the
logjam-breaking Washington Post story of August 1994 by Ray and Mary La
Fontaine entitled (not by them) "The Fourth Tramp: Oswald's Lost Cellmate
and the Gunrunners of Dallas."
The challenge was written by an acknowledged "authority" on the FBI
reports from which the La Fontaine story was drawn: Oliver "Buck"
Revell, former number two man at the FBI, and by his own claim a JFK
assassination "buff." I have also posted the response of Ray La Fontaine
to Mr. Revell's attempt to challenge his story. Needless to say, Mr. La
Fontaine dispatched Mr. Revell's arguments with a swift, clean stroke.
(The same arguments were later recycled as part of the professor's
propaganda campaign against Oswald Talked.) I am told that a respected
scholar of the case called Mr. La Fontaine's letter "a stiletto to the
heart." Indeed it was. Just as the collected work of the La Fontaines,
Bill Adams and others is a "stiletto to the heart" of the "official"
historical case of the United States vs. [lonenut] Lee Harvey Oswald.
It is thus nothing short of amazing that John McAdams (along with his
parrot minions Dreitzes, Junkkarinen, et al.) is still attempting to
argue *for production of the evidence* outlined in the Washington Post a
full six years ago, and which has never been successfully challenged by
any serious historian or academician.
Mr. McAdams has been free for six years to obtain the documentation
extensively noted in the La Fontaines' book and to present his own
*interpretations* of that evidence. He has, of course, failed to do so --
because he knows that no interpretation other than the La Fontaines' is
possible, and, as is noted in his post below, it is indeed EXPLOSIVE.
McAdams says he teaches a university course on the JFK assassination. I
have no reason to doubt it -- but imagine, what a unique learning
opportunity it would be for his students to demonstrate the nonexistence
of the documents cited by the La Fontaines in the Washington Post and
Oswald Talked! Surely, with the dire doubts expressed by the professor
on these newsgroups, he's given such an assignment?
Well, no; of course not. He could not dare to do so. McAdams is not a
teacher. McAdams does not "sow light." Instead, his job is to sow
darkness. It is to hide, not to reveal *or* confirm, the truth. Thus,
McAdams is not just a fraud as a teacher. He is a corrupt man.
And not merely corrupt; he is an evangelist for corruption and fraud. He
has sought and enlisted disciples, and they employ his knowingly
fraudulent "methodology" in their writing "assignments," many of which
are posted to the website of Marquette University.
Incidentally, I wouldn't dream of playing this fraudulent little man's
fraudulent little game of "posting documentation" -- as if the HSCA
records weren't readily available at the National Archives, or amply
cited in the above publications. I suggest that students of the
assassination do what they should do anyway -- look up the documents for
themselves. Try it; it's good practice -- and the one thing McAdams
*doesn't* want you to do.
It is one final smarmy joke that McAdams has made the post below part of
a two-parter in a bald attempt to link what I have posted with James
Files and his sponser Bob Vernon. I know of no credible documentation for
the Files account, nor, more importantly, does it have any connection to
the vast body of now-known facts in this case.
But McAdams would have his audience believe that somehow what I have
posted is of a piece with the "Vernon/Files" story. While no one
sophisticated would ever make such an appraisal, McAdams does not aim
for the sophisticated or the knowledgeable. He appeals to the basest and
most ignorant instincts -- whether of the media or the general public.
Most here know what McAdams and his disciples are. It's time to say it,
once and for all.