Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
McAdams Bear Droppings
Out of curiosity I scanned McAdams' website and read his material. I can't believe what a dedicated obfuscator and liar that man is. Is he hired by CIA to do disinformation?

If you read his criticism of Douglass he makes many overtures of showing how Douglass commits the usual conspiracy theorist offenses with the suggestion that they have long been disproven. However if you read McAdams you realize he's implying a huge assumption of proven argument when, if you look closely, no such proof is ever provided. McAdams' trick is to argue at length the conspiracy violations committed and refer to alleged Lone Nut arguments that have disproven them, but once you are done with his voluminous submission you realize he never got around to actually saying anything or specifically showing why it wasn't true. McAdams is a major prevaricator with bad intent. I won't print my bear pit description of him.

Just from reading McAdams I can see right away what he is. He's a government disinformation agent put on the internet to provide enough verbal material to point to a counter opinion. Forget the fact that McAdams' fodder is completely void of any substantive content. Its purpose is just to be there so the denialists and truth saboteurs can point to something to validate themselves by. This dubious body of information will then be referenced as the winning side by official sources controlled by the government. I see Google places McAdams prominently in the Google search. Google is obviously influenced by CIA.

A perfect example of McAdams' insidious dishonesty is his article 'debunking' the hypnosis theories on Oswald. After reading a long offering of mendacious diversion from truth I realized McAdams never mentions Jensen - one of the main witnesses to Oswald's claimed MK-ULTRA experience. What the casual public doesn't know is that McAdams is a deliberate deceiver and fact-omitter. The whole purpose of McAdams, his website, and effort is to create a place for deniers to practice their denial. McAdams and his website are clearly a "dark-side" venue. He and his site are merely there to make sure the evil murderers of president Kennedy are concealed and protected.

I read two long debunking pieces on McAdams' website. I couldn't get half-way through either one without having to quit reading further due to the toxic nature of the material.

Albert Doyle Wrote:Is he hired by CIA to do disinformation? ... He's a government disinformation agent.

Neither the CIA nor the "government" played anything but Facilitator and False Sponsor roles in JFK's murder.

McAdams, like Rahn and von Pein, among others, likely are paid, programmed, and/or blackmailed disinformationalists -- in my Constitutionally-protected learned opinion, of course.

Their common mission is not to end the argument in favor of the LN lie, but rather to prolong the argument and its attendant, metasticizing uncertainty.

I may be wrong -- and by all means correct me if I am -- but I infer from your repeated references to the CIA within the larger context of this case that you see that agency not in the roles I've listed above, but as a true Sponsor of the assassination. So too do I infer that you have concluded that "the government" is a true Sponsor.

If so the latter ... which government?
Have to agree with you there Albert about the bear droppings. Toxic stuff indeed. I can barely go there to the bear den due to the rank smell of .......:fullofit: And it is unfortunate that it has that ranking, probably paid for, in the search engine because it must drag in quite a few unawares. Which is the point I am sure.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx

"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.

“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
The one thing McAdams does that he should be roasted in Hades for is casually make a case on his website for Bolden being guilty. He does so by casually omitting all the relevant material for Bolden's frame-up. The main advantage these prominent conspiracy deniers have is they ignore or omit all of the conspiracy evidence because they take a position it isn't real so therefore they don't have to address or acknowledge it. Their material therefore gains the appearance of believability because it never touches that which shows it to be untrue.

I'm against thought crimes laws, but if ever there were any in America these people would be the first to whom they should be applied. Of course, the ones they intend to apply them against are us.


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  McAdams gets new life Tom Bowden 3 14,204 11-07-2018, 01:05 AM
Last Post: Jim DiEugenio
  McAdams loses Round Two Jim DiEugenio 5 5,394 19-08-2017, 09:26 AM
Last Post: Jim DiEugenio
  John McAdams, Propagandist, to Publish "Critical Thinking" Disinformation Charles Drago 16 8,283 08-01-2011, 05:11 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Who Are: Mack, Perry, Russo, Zaid, Loomis, Pozner, McAdams, et al.?! Peter Lemkin 26 8,652 01-09-2009, 11:23 PM
Last Post: Myra Bronstein
  Debate: DiEugenio v McAdams John Geraghty 0 10,936 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  DiEugenio McAdams Debate Tonight 0 136 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  black op show mcADAMS AND JIM D..CANCELLED THIS EVENING Bernice Moore 0 1,840 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  McAdams gaffes again in Part 2 of Debate Gil Jesus 0 2,718 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  David Mantik vs. John McAdams Jim DiEugenio 0 2,285 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:
  December Programs at The Sixth Floor Museum with John McAdams and Gary Mack Bernice Moore 0 1,752 Less than 1 minute ago
Last Post:

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)