Interview With James Leavelle

Thu 05 Sep 2013, 7:26 pm

First topic message reminder :

http://stillwatergazette.com/2013/08/29/dallas-detective-still-answering-questions-about-jfk-assassination/

Tue 12 Nov 2013, 6:06 am

I'm sick of you causing this forum a disruption. I will not stand Lee Farley, one of the most respected members of this forum leaving. I have banned you from posting for two weeks, and maybe forever. Greg is absolutely free to undo it, but I won't.

Very sincerely yours,

Hasan Yusuf.

As for your smart arse comments, here is the first:

Bill Brown wrote:Every single piece of evidence in the Tippit case points to Lee Oswald as the culprit. Therefore, Leavelle and the others (knowing that all of the evidence points to Oswald, in the Tippit case) certainly wanted to be sure that Oswald was identified as Tippit's shooter. Pretty simple stuff, really.

Number 2:

Bill Brown wrote:Scoggins and Whaley both positively identified Oswald. Of course, you know that.

As for me being on a power trip, if that were the case, I would have deleted your membership, you troll!

Tue 12 Nov 2013, 6:35 am

I want to apologise to members for having to witness what just happened. As stated, it is for two weeks, and which can be easily undone by either Greg or Richard Gilbride.

Hasan.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 5:14 am

I would like to apologise to all of the honest and hard working members for my outburst yesterday.

I do not, however, apologise to Bill Brown, because I meant every word.

That being said I understand that there is a big difference between things that could be said versus things that should be said. The line between the two will vary based upon the individual members values system. I think we all have to remember and understand that we all come from different continents, different countries, different regions and different socio-economic and educational backgrounds.

Now, I'm sure we can relate to the following analogy. You are sitting in a restaurant with a group of close and like minded friends. The conversation is flowing and everyone is having both an interesting and fun night. There are different ideas being discussed concerning politics, economics, and current affairs. Not everyone agrees with each other but each is listened to and their opinions are pondered in an open and curious manner. Suddenly, a man pulls over a spare chair and plonks himself down. I've been listening to your conversation he says and I think you're a bunch of idiots. I disagree with everything each of you has said and you should all know better. He begins to help himself to the wine we have on the table and picks one specific individual to begin staring out. He continues staring before blurting out how moronic that persons views are. He can't verbalise what specifically is moronic about the views he instead speaks in broad generalities and keeps staring.

Now, each of us around the table will perhaps think of different ways to get rid of the gate crasher who has taken it upon himself to ruin everyone's evening. Some will
complain to the restaurant manager. Some will kindly ask him to leave. Some will ignore him.

Nothing works. He stays put. Staring. Repeating himself over and over again. Finally, one person has had enough. They stand up. Walk over to the creepy looking troll and they bang his lights out.

I'm sure our culture, our socio-economic background, our upbringing, and the region of
the world where we live will ultimately decide which role we assume when the strange troll appears. I banged him out.

If anyone believes banging him out was the wrong thing to do then I sincerely apologise. However, rest assured, if we all were actually sitting in a real restaurant, having a lovely evening, listening to each other respectfully and suddenly a strange belittling troll appeared to insult any of you and try spoiling our night - he certainly wouldn't be there long.

Maybe I could have handled my last post to him differently but even in the cold light of morning I wouldn't take a word of it back.

Let's hope the next "lone-nut" troll that's sent across has more than two brain cells.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 5:39 am

Lee & Hasan,

I have no problem with what you did in the abstract. But if I could offer a few observations here for all to ponder.

If one is dealing with school bullies, then an effective way to stop them is to kick their arses. If the agenda of the interference is of a different order, however, then that may not be the best tactic. If the person is looking to disrupt discussion, to sow dissension, or to be able to go back to others and say -- see, I told you, those guys are fascists, they threw me out -- then you may not want to use that approach.

There is one particular difference between your table analogy and this forum, and that is that we don't have to watch the person staring, there is no constant "physical presence". It occurs to me that if the goal is disruption or embarrassment, then the best thing to do is ignore the contributor entirely. If the person continues to drop dreck into the ongoing discussion, the admins can just move the comments out of the way, onto a separate thread. It's more work, but it does not take the bait.

Of course, I realize we cannot ask all members to behave the same way. And such a strategy would work only if everyone gave the person the cold shoulder. So in the end, this may not be a feasible tactic either.

Just my $0.02 here.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 6:47 am

Albert Rossi wrote:Lee & Hasan,

I have no problem with what you did in the abstract. But if I could offer a few observations here for all to ponder.

If one is dealing with school bullies, then an effective way to stop them is to kick their arses. If the agenda of the interference is of a different order, however, then that may not be the best tactic. If the person is looking to disrupt discussion, to sow dissension, or to be able to go back to others and say -- see, I told you, those guys are fascists, they threw me out -- then you may not want to use that approach.

There is one particular difference between your table analogy and this forum, and that is that we don't have to watch the person staring, there is no constant "physical presence". It occurs to me that if the goal is disruption or embarrassment, then the best thing to do is ignore the contributor entirely. If the person continues to drop dreck into the ongoing discussion, the admins can just move the comments out of the way, onto a separate thread. It's more work, but it does not take the bait.

Of course, I realize we cannot ask all members to behave the same way. And such a strategy would work only if everyone gave the person the cold shoulder. So in the end, this may not be a feasible tactic either.

Just my $0.02 here.

It's a difficult situation to find the best solution, Albert. Luckily this forum has only had a couple of disruptions recently. Although let's not kid ourselves - we're going to have more.

I have had dealings with Bill Brown in the past. He is one of the most inane and vacuous people who post on the topic of the JFK assassination. What he is though, in the strictest definition of the word, is a troll. He pesters people to answer his mind numbing questions. He is relentless and just keeps repeating himself over and over again. Go and check out his recent trolling of Sean Murphy over at the venue that Brown frequents. Bump after bump after bump of the same nonsensical question. Sean has taken to ignoring him but Sean has the patience of a saint.

I don't have Sean's patience. I wish I did, but I don't.

We can all sit around and pretend that we are giving the likes of Bill Brown the benefit of the doubt and that at some point he was going to start posting something of significance. But we know he wasn't. He was simply here to wipe his arse all over the walls and windows. How long do we allow someone to smear crap everywhere before a) we have to start cleaning it up and b) we have to remove the dirty arsed swine?

I don't know what the answer is but if it was my forum then Bill Brown would have disappeared before he typed his first letter. Would that make me a fascist? Not really. Just a realist. Brown has his venue for smearing excrement on history. He does not require a new one.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 7:07 am

Albert Rossi wrote:Lee & Hasan,

I have no problem with what you did in the abstract. But if I could offer a few observations here for all to ponder.

If one is dealing with school bullies, then an effective way to stop them is to kick their arses. If the agenda of the interference is of a different order, however, then that may not be the best tactic. If the person is looking to disrupt discussion, to sow dissension, or to be able to go back to others and say -- see, I told you, those guys are fascists, they threw me out -- then you may not want to use that approach.

There is one particular difference between your table analogy and this forum, and that is that we don't have to watch the person staring, there is no constant "physical presence". It occurs to me that if the goal is disruption or embarrassment, then the best thing to do is ignore the contributor entirely. If the person continues to drop dreck into the ongoing discussion, the admins can just move the comments out of the way, onto a separate thread. It's more work, but it does not take the bait.

Of course, I realize we cannot ask all members to behave the same way. And such a strategy would work only if everyone gave the person the cold shoulder. So in the end, this may not be a feasible tactic either.

Just my $0.02 here.

Albert,

Thank you for your advice. I will keep it in mind. However, I nevertheless feel that it was a completely justified decision. I remained quiet during the entire "bpete" situation, but got really pissed off when another troll decided to show his ugly face. What really got to me were his arrogant and snide remarks against Greg; hence my stern warning to him. I feel that it is important we set an example to other trolls who think it is ok to come here and start disrupting the forum. Hopefully, banning Brown will send a messege to them.

Hasan.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 7:09 am

Lee Farlee wrote:

I don't know what the answer is but if it was my forum then Bill Brown would have disappeared before he typed his first letter. Would that make me a fascist? Not really. Just a realist. Brown has his venue for smearing excrement on history. He does not require a new one.

I understand implicitly. You know well the gripes that drove me from another forum I was frequenting. But I have to say that the admin decision there not to allow Warren revivalists (to use Jim DiEugenio's term, which I just love) certainly makes a lot of sense, even though it might appear "anti-democratic". But appealing to democracy in this context also reminds me of how one of our two stupendously distinct political parties here in the U.S. is always willing to "compromise" and find a "grand bargain", after the which being astounded that the other party, responsible for all forms of political extortion, never reciprocates.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 7:10 am

Lee Farley wrote:

Albert Rossi wrote:Lee & Hasan,

I have no problem with what you did in the abstract. But if I could offer a few observations here for all to ponder.

If one is dealing with school bullies, then an effective way to stop them is to kick their arses. If the agenda of the interference is of a different order, however, then that may not be the best tactic. If the person is looking to disrupt discussion, to sow dissension, or to be able to go back to others and say -- see, I told you, those guys are fascists, they threw me out -- then you may not want to use that approach.

There is one particular difference between your table analogy and this forum, and that is that we don't have to watch the person staring, there is no constant "physical presence". It occurs to me that if the goal is disruption or embarrassment, then the best thing to do is ignore the contributor entirely. If the person continues to drop dreck into the ongoing discussion, the admins can just move the comments out of the way, onto a separate thread. It's more work, but it does not take the bait.

Of course, I realize we cannot ask all members to behave the same way. And such a strategy would work only if everyone gave the person the cold shoulder. So in the end, this may not be a feasible tactic either.

Just my $0.02 here.

It's a difficult situation to find the best solution, Albert. Luckily this forum has only had a couple of disruptions recently. Although let's not kid ourselves - we're going to have more.

I have had dealings with Bill Brown in the past. He is one of the most inane and vacuous people who post on the topic of the JFK assassination. What he is though, in the strictest definition of the word, is a troll. He pesters people to answer his mind numbing questions. He is relentless and just keeps repeating himself over and over again. Go and check out his recent trolling of Sean Murphy over at the venue that Brown frequents. Bump after bump after bump of the same nonsensical question. Sean has taken to ignoring him but Sean has the patience of a saint.

I don't have Sean's patience. I wish I did, but I don't.

We can all sit around and pretend that we are giving the likes of Bill Brown the benefit of the doubt and that at some point he was going to start posting something of significance. But we know he wasn't. He was simply here to wipe his arse all over the walls and windows. How long do we allow someone to smear crap everywhere before a) we have to start cleaning it up and b) we have to remove the dirty arsed swine?

I don't know what the answer is but if it was my forum then Bill Brown would have disappeared before he typed his first letter. Would that make me a fascist? Not really. Just a realist. Brown has his venue for smearing excrement on history. He does not require a new one.

If the two recent intruders masquerading as know-it-all bullies wish to go back and claim that ReopenKennedyCase are a bunch of fascists because they got spanked, I say let them. They already hate our guts. The only people they'll "convince" are people just like themselves.

They won't convince observers whose opinions are to be taken seriously. They've seen through the little game these two have to tried to play. They join Lee in saying "good riddance." (I don't know him, but from what I've seen, Lee Farley is one guy I want on my side in a street fight!)

I see much wisdom in what Albert says too. Ignore them. Don't feed the little darlings and perhaps they'll get hungry and waddle off. But if they persist, then drop kick 'em into next Tuesday because any forum that doesn't actively enforce its rules and police its membership will be invaded, taken over, and subverted by its opponents.

And I agree with Lee. We shall see more of this, because it's just who they are.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 7:17 am

Stan Dane wrote:
And I agree with Lee. We shall see more of this, because it's just who they are.

I'm sure that is true, Stan. A shame, because this place seemed largely untroubled by the likes of such "trolls", as they are referred to.

Et in Arcadia ego ...

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 8:11 am

Albert Rossi wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:
And I agree with Lee. We shall see more of this, because it's just who they are.

I'm sure that is true, Stan. A shame, because this place seemed largely untroubled by the likes of such "trolls", as they are referred to.
Et in Arcadia ego ...

I think Greg can back me up on this but I'm tired of it all. The amount of energy it takes to keep batting the shit back that these clowns keep slinging is exhausting. I've been battling these one dimensional fools for years now. And not just the Oswald-did-it brigade either. David Lifton. Paul Trejo. Raymond J. Carroll. Mike Rago. The list goes on and on. It's not just die hard "lone nuts" who propagate crap.

But the mentality of the likes of Bill Brown is completely crackers to me. These guys run a set of beliefs that a scruffy little wife beater who packed books in a warehouse for minimum wage woke up one morning and shot the President of the United States and he was then quickly arrested after shooting a cop before he himself was shot by a titty bar owner. That's it. The simplest solution to a crime ever. That's what they categorically believe happened but they then spend every waking minute on Internet forums banging the drum concerning this mundane solution.

To spend your life propping up such a simple story whilst at the same time ignoring every piece of evidence that demonstrates the story you believe to be true is actually false has to be the single most waste of time, energy and opportunity to learn that I can think of.

For the likes of Bill Brown this is simply a parlour game where the aim is to be the dumbest bastard alive. The sad thing is Brown has some tough competition.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 10:48 am

Thanks for all the feedback, guys.

I had never heard of Bill Brown. After it became obvious there were issues with his membership, I did check to see if he had a presence elsewhere, and was pretty much blown away when I saw that the indefatigable Sean Murphy had had enough of him.

Can I just say I don't see this as an issue of democracy. It's not. It's about where lines are drawn. The notion of pre-emptive strikes is not a notion I am happy with - whether it be drone attacks by US forces, or deleting a membership because of what might transpire.

There is now a scrolling message so that those who join, know what type of forum they are entering. Failure to adhere to the spirit of that message will, from here on, be sufficient to have the poster banned. No "ifs" no "buts" no excuses. Trolls who now come here with the intent of joining should know that it will not be tolerated. If they still join, they won't last long if old habits resurface.

As for Lee, yeah mate. I know how it gets you. And you know I don't want to lose you. But I think this is a good solution - and one where I do not need to compromise my own principles.

As a past long-time poster in the unmoderated jfk newsgroup - ignoring the trolls just doesn't work. They soon dominate the place. Engage them and you get tied up beating back the same old tired shit. Banning them is the only real solution.

Stan Dane wrote:(I don't know him, but from what I've seen, Lee Farley is one guy I want on my side in a street fight!)

Same here, Stan.

But don't let my conciliatory tones fool you. I may be past my best fighting weight... but how many people do you know who have been hospitalized after being beaten with a prosthetic leg by a one-legged gorilla-sized bikie? I fucking had the prick "on the ropes" so to speak when his damn leg fell off... next thing I'm being loaded into an ambulance...

How many people do you know put two people in hospital with one punch? I did. Myself and the guy I hit. I severed a tendon in my knuckle and he got his big buck teeth shoved up through his mouth...

As with banning people... I don't do anything without sufficient reason... and both crossed certain lines with me.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 11:00 am

greg parker wrote:
Can I just say I don't see this as an issue of democracy. It's not. It's about where lines are drawn. The notion of pre-emptive strikes is not a notion I am happy with - whether it be drone attacks by US forces, or deleting a membership because of what might transpire.

There is now a scrolling message so that those who join, know what type of forum they are entering. Failure to adhere to the spirit of that message will, from here on, be sufficient to have the poster banned. No "ifs" no "buts" no excuses. Trolls who now come here with the intent of joining should know that it will not be tolerated. If they still join, they won't last long if old habits resurface.

This is a reasonable solution, Greg. Transparency rather than preemption sounds eminently fair to me.

As a past long-time poster in the unmoderated jfk newsgroup - ignoring the trolls just doesn't work. They soon dominate the place. Engage them and you get tied up beating back the same old tired shit. Banning them is the only real solution.

While I've been around probably longer than you, I am a real latecomer to forums. So I certainly don't have your first-hand experience there. But I can easily believe what you are saying.

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 12:02 pm

greg parker wrote:But don't let my conciliatory tones fool you. I may be past my best fighting weight... but how many people do you know who have been hospitalized after being beaten with a prosthetic leg by a one-legged gorilla-sized bikie? I fucking had the prick "on the ropes" so to speak when his damn leg fell off... next thing I'm being loaded into an ambulance...

How many people do you know put two people in hospital with one punch? I did. Myself and the guy I hit. I severed a tendon in my knuckle and he got his big buck teeth shoved up through his mouth...

"Conciliatory tones" never did fool me none, Greg. No siree! As with Lee, I don't know you either. But I can tell by your intellect alone that you are not one to be fucked with (pardon my parlez-vous for all offended pussies out there).

Since you took out that ape with one punch, I think we ought to call you Rocky Parker!

What thinkest thou, my fellow members? Dost thou likest Rocky Parker?

PS: Did you keep that tooth as a souvenir, Rock?

Wed 13 Nov 2013, 12:21 pm

Stan Dane wrote:

greg parker wrote:But don't let my conciliatory tones fool you. I may be past my best fighting weight... but how many people do you know who have been hospitalized after being beaten with a prosthetic leg by a one-legged gorilla-sized bikie? I fucking had the prick "on the ropes" so to speak when his damn leg fell off... next thing I'm being loaded into an ambulance...

How many people do you know put two people in hospital with one punch? I did. Myself and the guy I hit. I severed a tendon in my knuckle and he got his big buck teeth shoved up through his mouth...

"Conciliatory tones" never did fool me none, Greg. No siree! As with Lee, I don't know you either. But I can tell by your intellect alone that you are not one to be fucked with (pardon my parlez-vous for all offended pussies out there).

Since you took out that ape with one punch, I think we ought to call you Rocky Parker!

No, sorry, Stan. The ape was the bikie who beat the crap out of me with his false leg. The one punch guy was a skinny buck-toothed dude giving one of sisters a hard time. I HAD the bikie (in my own mind!) UNTIL his leg fell off and it became a weapon... it's been a sometimes weird, sometimes wonderful life...

What thinkest thou, my fellow members? Dost thou likest Rocky Parker?

Ha! I had a one fight career as an amateur fighter. Believe it or not the kid I fought was an Italian named Rocco.... (I won... but only after just surviving the third round). Then the gym switched to karate and I gave up. Karate's not my chop...

PS: Did you keep that tooth as a souvenir, Greg?

No. But I still have the scar on the knuckle...:-)

Wed 08 Jan 2014, 1:27 am

Here is a recent CNN interview with Leavelle.

Thu 07 Feb 2019, 7:49 pm

Sat 02 Mar 2019, 2:45 am

Sat 02 Mar 2019, 9:59 pm

Leavelle's memory is like fine vine. It gets better with age.

Interview With James Leavelle

Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle

Re: Interview With James Leavelle