12-07-2015, 04:19 PM
Scully, I consider your referring to me as "Long time respected member" to be trolling.
I notice you never responded to my last post which makes it impossible for Rizzuto to be L'eandes. The personality profile differences between those two men are so obvious that the two can't possibly be reconciled as being the same person. Again, I can't believe you are trying to get away with defending FBI files verbatim. All FBI files must be viewed in terms of a criminal, above suspicion government organization seeking to deceive and spin things their way. You might as well go and attack the HSCA in the CIA's favor and then finally do what you are getting at fully by defending the Warren Commission. Or praise the level of rule of law at the Dallas Police Station.
It's nice that you present the FBI's claim that they showed a photo of L'eandes to the interviewing agents and trust them at their word, but if you follow your own demands of scrutiny of evidence that photo violates just about every rule of evidence you can imagine. You are presenting a piece of evidence for which the total validation of it sourcing is an entry in an FBI file saying "a photo was obtained through a source of NYO". And this is in a case where intel forged backyard photos. Scully, how do you know that FBI didn't pull a dirty trick and get a photo of SH Landesberg and use it to frame him as the patsy he was intended to be? I've asked you several times if you ever wondered why those men had the same name? How dare you violate your own suggested level of rigor by taking the FBI at their word and referencing a photo that was then buried that you've never seen and can't produce as evidence. You're the worst example of the evidence standards you pretend to promote.
Meanwhile you ignore everything that was written in this thread. The FBI could have easily verified Rizzuto's identity by having the many friends of L'eandes that they were notified of, and in possession of their identities, come in and ID him. If you look at the FBI's behavior they used this identification of Rizzuto to quickly shut down any further investigation. This ruse was used to avoid any follow-through in a very precise manner that gives away its purpose. There's a very telling and precise fault line in the investigation that runs right along the boundary of this photo ID that was used to avoid investigating the rest of those leads. For you to use it as if it were credible and ignore all that exposes it is to come right out and employ the agenda and method of David Von Pein while pleading that you are only seeking rigor and confirmation of evidence. DiEugenio is pretty good at sniffing this stuff out. It has always puzzled me that he gives certain people a pass on it. If you study your pleas for rigor you will see you have just failed them worse than anybody in this bogus offering that blindly takes the word of the violators who were documented practicing wicked corruption in this case. Your Mr MaGoo reference to FBI documents misses the current understanding of them to a remarkable degree.
I suppose Scully is trying to hang an entire premise on the fact the report says Gray and Rizzuto met at a 42nd St restaurant (as if he's scored a big evidentiary coup) but that's just nitpicking t-crossing and i-dotting. Better researchers would be more concerned that the previous media article said that Rizzuto had gone to several other media outlets to tell his story. Those same researchers would ask why FBI chose to ignore those other media outlets and what Rizzuto said there or what people witnessed. More credible researchers would realize that FBI is trying to bury those other witnessings and this is the flavor and tone of those same FBI reports. In fact what this tells you is if Barry Gray had not reported Rizzuto that FBI probably would have ignored the whole incident. Just like they ignored the entire history of L'eandes' witnessing that Scully seems to have no problem with while he seeks uncredible outs by blindly defending FBI against their victim.
I notice you never responded to my last post which makes it impossible for Rizzuto to be L'eandes. The personality profile differences between those two men are so obvious that the two can't possibly be reconciled as being the same person. Again, I can't believe you are trying to get away with defending FBI files verbatim. All FBI files must be viewed in terms of a criminal, above suspicion government organization seeking to deceive and spin things their way. You might as well go and attack the HSCA in the CIA's favor and then finally do what you are getting at fully by defending the Warren Commission. Or praise the level of rule of law at the Dallas Police Station.
It's nice that you present the FBI's claim that they showed a photo of L'eandes to the interviewing agents and trust them at their word, but if you follow your own demands of scrutiny of evidence that photo violates just about every rule of evidence you can imagine. You are presenting a piece of evidence for which the total validation of it sourcing is an entry in an FBI file saying "a photo was obtained through a source of NYO". And this is in a case where intel forged backyard photos. Scully, how do you know that FBI didn't pull a dirty trick and get a photo of SH Landesberg and use it to frame him as the patsy he was intended to be? I've asked you several times if you ever wondered why those men had the same name? How dare you violate your own suggested level of rigor by taking the FBI at their word and referencing a photo that was then buried that you've never seen and can't produce as evidence. You're the worst example of the evidence standards you pretend to promote.
Meanwhile you ignore everything that was written in this thread. The FBI could have easily verified Rizzuto's identity by having the many friends of L'eandes that they were notified of, and in possession of their identities, come in and ID him. If you look at the FBI's behavior they used this identification of Rizzuto to quickly shut down any further investigation. This ruse was used to avoid any follow-through in a very precise manner that gives away its purpose. There's a very telling and precise fault line in the investigation that runs right along the boundary of this photo ID that was used to avoid investigating the rest of those leads. For you to use it as if it were credible and ignore all that exposes it is to come right out and employ the agenda and method of David Von Pein while pleading that you are only seeking rigor and confirmation of evidence. DiEugenio is pretty good at sniffing this stuff out. It has always puzzled me that he gives certain people a pass on it. If you study your pleas for rigor you will see you have just failed them worse than anybody in this bogus offering that blindly takes the word of the violators who were documented practicing wicked corruption in this case. Your Mr MaGoo reference to FBI documents misses the current understanding of them to a remarkable degree.
I suppose Scully is trying to hang an entire premise on the fact the report says Gray and Rizzuto met at a 42nd St restaurant (as if he's scored a big evidentiary coup) but that's just nitpicking t-crossing and i-dotting. Better researchers would be more concerned that the previous media article said that Rizzuto had gone to several other media outlets to tell his story. Those same researchers would ask why FBI chose to ignore those other media outlets and what Rizzuto said there or what people witnessed. More credible researchers would realize that FBI is trying to bury those other witnessings and this is the flavor and tone of those same FBI reports. In fact what this tells you is if Barry Gray had not reported Rizzuto that FBI probably would have ignored the whole incident. Just like they ignored the entire history of L'eandes' witnessing that Scully seems to have no problem with while he seeks uncredible outs by blindly defending FBI against their victim.