https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jzexamines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gun in theYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly, then
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
You're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 3:44:39 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:Everything I believe about the assassination is supported by real, hard evidence. Not the shit
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
you whip up because it sounds good to you. The kind of evidence that tells us Oswald was the
assassin is the same kind that is used to solve countless other murders. Ballistics matching
bullets and shells to the suspected murder weapon. A paper trail establishing the primary
suspect was the owner of the weapon. The suspects prints on the murder weapon and at the
scene of the crime. Fiber evidence linking the suspect's shirt to the weapon and the bag to the
weapon. Medical evidence that proves conclusively where the fatal shots were fired from. We
also have things that we don't normally have in a murder case. Photos of the primary suspect
with both murder weapons. A film record of one of the murders.
And what do you counter with. A litany excuses for dismissing all that damning evidence.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:05:44 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
I'm not on any team, you Nutter Retard.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
How can somebody so stupid and ignorant as you presume to think he knows anything about the JFK assassination? You're only here because you're a lonely old asshole at the end of your empty and stupid life, the very flower of godless capitalism.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:59:56 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:05:44 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
But you are in a group. There are two groups represented here, rational, reasonable people and retards. If you don`t know what group you are in look to the other members of your group for clues.I'm not on any team, you Nutter Retard.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
How can somebody so stupid and ignorant as you presume to think he knows anything about the JFK assassination? You're only here because you're a lonely old asshole at the end of your empty and stupid life, the very flower of godless capitalism.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 5:25:14 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:That's all a moron like you can muster.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:59:56 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:05:44 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
It's only in your little pea of a brain that I am in a group. Your crude intellect requires you to group people together because you are too stupid to deal with individuals as individuals. You can only attack individuals as members of a group you hate.But you are in a group. There are two groups represented here, rational, reasonable people and retards. If you don`t know what group you are in look to the other members of your group for clues.I'm not on any team, you Nutter Retard.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
How can somebody so stupid and ignorant as you presume to think he knows anything about the JFK assassination? You're only here because you're a lonely old asshole at the end of your empty and stupid life, the very flower of godless capitalism.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 5:39:25 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:hate. That's all a moron like you can muster.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 5:25:14 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:59:56 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:05:44 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
It's only in your little pea of a brain that I am in a group. Your crude intellect requires you to group people together because you are too stupid to deal with individuals as individuals. You can only attack individuals as members of a group youBut you are in a group. There are two groups represented here, rational, reasonable people and retards. If you don`t know what group you are in look to the other members of your group for clues.I'm not on any team, you Nutter Retard.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
How can somebody so stupid and ignorant as you presume to think he knows anything about the JFK assassination? You're only here because you're a lonely old asshole at the end of your empty and stupid life, the very flower of godless capitalism.
If you wish to leave your assigned group, the solution is simple. Stop being a retard.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not
working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing suchYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not
working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing suchYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:15:03 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not
working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing suchYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
And there you go again, resorting to ad hominem because your argument fell apart once more (and irony of ironies, it was a fellow CT that helped expose it).Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:not there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:15:03 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is
working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing suchYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
actually, or would be if you were 2 years old.https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Everybody knows you're an obnoxious dick, while at the same time criticizing the ad hominems of others. Now you're just throwing up a smokescreen to hide that fact that you're upset over Gil's superiority in explaining stuff. It's kind of cute,And there you go again, resorting to ad hominem because your argument fell apart once more (and irony of ironies, it was a fellow CT that helped expose it).Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
it was a fellow CT that helped expose it
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:35 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:not there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:15:03 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is
was working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. AmazingYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
actually, or would be if you were 2 years old.https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Everybody knows you're an obnoxious dick, while at the same time criticizing the ad hominems of others. Now you're just throwing up a smokescreen to hide that fact that you're upset over Gil's superiority in explaining stuff. It's kind of cute,And there you go again, resorting to ad hominem because your argument fell apart once more (and irony of ironies, it was a fellow CT that helped expose it).Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
Your frustration is showing.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:22:03 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:introduced by Ben was demolished. And he apparently is going to attempt to ride those dead horses.
But CTs argue Oswald couldn’t do this, no way, no how, not with his war-surplus weapon and not with his rusty skill set. That’s another nonsense argument. We saw SkyThrone trot out those two arguments above once the clip argument recently re-
Ben didn't post a "clip argument".
He posted that the Warren Commission lied when it published a citation that didn't exist.
And it did do that several times in its Report.
Try to keep up, Hank.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.
The video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.
I didn't post it to put him down.
But CTs argue Oswald couldn’t do this, no way, no how, not with his war-surplus weapon and not with his rusty skill set. That’s another nonsense argument. We saw SkyThrone trot out those two arguments above once the clip argument recently re-introduced by Ben was demolished. And he apparently is going to attempt to ride those dead horses.
The Warren Commission found that Oswald alone killed JFK. If you disagree with that finding,
you have two other options. Some other lone assassin killed JFK or there was a conspiracy.
Which when do you believe?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:27:08 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:introduced by Ben was demolished. And he apparently is going to attempt to ride those dead horses.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:22:03 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
But CTs argue Oswald couldn’t do this, no way, no how, not with his war-surplus weapon and not with his rusty skill set. That’s another nonsense argument. We saw SkyThrone trot out those two arguments above once the clip argument recently re-
Ben didn't post a "clip argument".Hank addressed that. Try to keep up, Gil.
He posted that the Warren Commission lied when it published a citation that didn't exist.
And it did do that several times in its Report.
Try to keep up, Hank.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:46:54 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:is not there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:35 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:15:03 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it
was working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. AmazingYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
actually, or would be if you were 2 years old.https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Everybody knows you're an obnoxious dick, while at the same time criticizing the ad hominems of others. Now you're just throwing up a smokescreen to hide that fact that you're upset over Gil's superiority in explaining stuff. It's kind of cute,And there you go again, resorting to ad hominem because your argument fell apart once more (and irony of ironies, it was a fellow CT that helped expose it).Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
shooting at targets 200 and 500 yards away, could make one of three shots fired a kill shot at 86 yards (the longest shot in the Commission’s scenario). Those are two issues he deflected to upon conceding the clip argument.Your frustration is showing.All he can do, having admitted the six-decade CT clip argument is nonsense, is attack the messenger.
It’s either that, or start to re-examine some other six-decade old CT arguments and see if they are likewise nonsense… like whether Oswald’s weapon was as accurate as then-modern military weapons, and whether Oswald, who trained in the Marines
Never mind the argument that the evidence establishes Oswald did accomplish the shooting, so arguing he couldn’t because of his poor skills or an inadequate weapon is foolish. It’s akin to arguing that steel is heavier than water and sinks, soboats made of steel can’t float, and ignoring the evidence indicating they can.
The weapon fired bullets traveling at about 2200 feet per second, and they obeyed the same Newtonian laws as all other bullets, they travel in a straight line unless acted upon by an outside force. In this case, the two outside forces are airresistance and gravity. Air resistance slows the bullet and gravity pulls it toward the earth. What therefore absolutely prevented Oswald from using his rusty Marine skills, firing three shots, and making one kill shot? Nothing.
But CTs argue Oswald couldn’t do this, no way, no how, not with his war-surplus weapon and not with his rusty skill set. That’s another nonsense argument. We saw SkyThrone trot out those two arguments above once the clip argument recently re-introduced by Ben was demolished. And he apparently is going to attempt to ride those dead horses.
Either that, or call me more names. What recourse does he have?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:41:35 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:not there when Day first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:15:03 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:54:31 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:35:22 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:20:48 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:41:18 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:01:19 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:57:12 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:47:24 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 1:42:06 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03 PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is
was working properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. AmazingYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it
Shit happens, hence the shit-eating grin on your boy Oswald's face as he raised his clenched fists in the Commie solidarity salute while cuffed and under arrest. Look at that smirk. Here's a man proud of his work that day:
actually, or would be if you were 2 years old.https://www.columbiamissourian.com/visuals/photos/lee-harvey-oswald-holds-up-his-manacled-hands/image_c5a86702-bb51-11e7-8585-abef03615d45.html
You are just upset at Gil for exposing your nonsense, and now you’re taking it out on John.I.This is the kind of grammar used by senile "conservative" morons.These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.No. I think he was JC Price's Running Man, the guy Price saw run from the picket fence to behind the TSBD. Plenty of time for Oswald to get up to the 2nd floor before Baker and Truly, and even before Vickie Adams came down.Don't be silly. Oswald scored his hit from behind the picket fence.He wasn't getting a soda when the shooting happened or something like that?
So we’re done with the clip nonsense and you won’t be asking about again?
And Ben will concede that clip issue with a ‘mea colpa’ and likewise never argue again that the clip wasn’t in the rifle?
One silly conspiracy argument dead and buried.
Not at all. That is exactly what I was arguing in favor of, and he did establish my argument with a YouTube video.But let’s see how long it takes until a conspiracy theorist resurrects it.You're just upset that Gil can explain something that you can't.
So I therefore thank Gil for posting that and helping to bury one hoary conspiracy argument.
Everybody knows you're an obnoxious dick, while at the same time criticizing the ad hominems of others. Now you're just throwing up a smokescreen to hide that fact that you're upset over Gil's superiority in explaining stuff. It's kind of cute,And there you go again, resorting to ad hominem because your argument fell apart once more (and irony of ironies, it was a fellow CT that helped expose it).Let’s see how long it stays buried before some CT resurrects it (most likely Ben).You're just upset that Gil was able to explain what you were allegedly trying to explain, but could not articulate, being too occupied with being the obnoxious dick you always are.
Your frustration is showing.
You're just upset that Gil is smarter than you, waaaaaay smarter.
You're just upset because you're a paranoid case without a conspiracy theory!I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.Of course not. CTs rarely lay out an argument and attempt to support it with evidence. They snipe around the edges, playing “just asking questions”. We are both adult enough to recognize that.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:41:19 AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
You're just upset that Gil is smarter than you, waaaaaay smarter.Thank you but you're giving me way too much credit.
Its not hard being smarter than those with an IQ in the single digits.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.
The video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.
I didn't post it to put him down.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:He's stated here before that the Birchers in Dallas killed JFK, that they were allowed to do so by the militarists in Washington in order to prevent JFK from ending their Cold War policies. People like Earl Warren (!!?) and others knew ahead of time that
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:The pot denies he’s black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.By their deeds shall you know them.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
Your argument recently was the bullets were CIA ammo. You weren’t arguing for a conspiracy there?
If not, what exactly were you arguing for?
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.Of course not. CTs rarely lay out an argument and attempt to support it with evidence. They snipe around the edges, playing “just asking questions”. We are both adult enough to recognize that.
Sky Throne did exactly that here: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/RGLu7IqwAQAJ
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.As a means to suggest it wasn’t in the weapon during the shooting, therefore Oswald couldn’t accomplish what the Commission said he did. We both know where that argument was heading, trodding the same well-worn path.
The video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.Which was exactly my point, and what I was telling Sky Throne he needed to establish the converse of for his argument to go anywhere… he needed to show it would be visible. He never did.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.A rabbit hole of CT’s creation… as Ben pointed out in his original thread…
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ …Sylvia Meagher was arguing for the supposed clip mystery six decades ago. It took that long to get ONE conspiracy theorist to concede the argument. How long do you think it will be for the other CTs to fall in line?
I didn't post it to put him down.Nobody suggested you did. But by bringing that up, you’re suggesting that was the end result.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:17:04 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
The Warren Commission found that Oswald alone killed JFK. If you disagree with that finding,Oh Boy another comment from the King of our resident mental-midgets.
you have two other options. Some other lone assassin killed JFK or there was a conspiracy.
Which when do you believe?
This time he has a question, and one I've already answered quite a few times.
Maybe I should type it slower, so it can penetrate his cement head.
MY-RESEARCH-IS-ON-THE-EVIDENCE-IN-THE-CASE-AGAINST-OSWALD.
Maybe you don't understand English. In that case, here it is:
In Spanish:
Mi investigación es sobre las pruebas en el caso contra Oswald.
In French:
mes recherches portent sur les preuves dans l'affaire contre Oswald
In German:
Meine Recherchen beziehen sich auf die Beweise im Fall gegen Oswald
In Russian:
мое исследование посвящено доказательствам по делу против Освальда
In Portuguese:
minha pesquisa é sobre as evidências do caso contra Oswald
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:50:26 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:that this was going to happen. Some of them, like members of the Secret Service, changed their protection procedures to make it happen. He later stated that "the Russians got it right" in their *investigation* (using that word loosely) that concluded the
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:The pot denies he’s black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.By their deeds shall you know them.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
Your argument recently was the bullets were CIA ammo. You weren’t arguing for a conspiracy there?
If not, what exactly were you arguing for?
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.Of course not. CTs rarely lay out an argument and attempt to support it with evidence. They snipe around the edges, playing “just asking questions”. We are both adult enough to recognize that.
Sky Throne did exactly that here: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/RGLu7IqwAQAJ
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.As a means to suggest it wasn’t in the weapon during the shooting, therefore Oswald couldn’t accomplish what the Commission said he did. We both know where that argument was heading, trodding the same well-worn path.
He's stated here before that the Birchers in Dallas killed JFK, that they were allowed to do so by the militarists in Washington in order to prevent JFK from ending their Cold War policies. People like Earl Warren (!!?) and others knew ahead of timeThe video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.Which was exactly my point, and what I was telling Sky Throne he needed to establish the converse of for his argument to go anywhere… he needed to show it would be visible. He never did.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.A rabbit hole of CT’s creation… as Ben pointed out in his original thread…
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ
…Sylvia Meagher was arguing for the supposed clip mystery six decades ago. It took that long to get ONE conspiracy theorist to concede the argument. How long do you think it will be for the other CTs to fall in line?
I didn't post it to put him down.Nobody suggested you did. But by bringing that up, you’re suggesting that was the end result.
So, after making three different claims about who was behind the assassination he says here that "I am not a conspiracy theorist."
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39?PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 3:44:39?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
Everything I believe about the assassination is supported by real, hard evidence.
All he can do, having admitted the six-decade CT clip argument is nonsense, is attack the messenger.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:38:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:17:04?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
Oh Boy another comment from the King of our resident mental-midgets.The Warren Commission found that Oswald alone killed JFK. If you disagree with that finding,
you have two other options. Some other lone assassin killed JFK or there was a conspiracy.
Which when do you believe?
This time he has a question, and one I've already answered quite a few times.
Maybe I should type it slower, so it can penetrate his cement head.
MY-RESEARCH-IS-ON-THE-EVIDENCE-IN-THE-CASE-AGAINST-OSWALD.
Maybe you don't understand English. In that case, here it is:
In Spanish:
Mi investigacin es sobre las pruebas en el caso contra Oswald.
In French:
mes recherches portent sur les preuves dans l'affaire contre Oswald
In German:
Meine Recherchen beziehen sich auf die Beweise im Fall gegen Oswald
In Russian:
??? ???????????? ????????? ??????????????? ?? ???? ?????? ????????
In Portuguese:
minha pesquisa sobre as evidncias do caso contra Oswald
What's the point of researching the evidence if you aren't going to follow it to a logical
conclusion? Is researching the evidence just a hobby for you like stamp collecting with no
real purpose?
So, after making three different claims about who was behind the assassination he says here that "I am not a conspiracy theorist."
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:39:47 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:that this was going to happen. Some of them, like members of the Secret Service, changed their protection procedures to make it happen. He later stated that "the Russians got it right" in their *investigation* (using that word loosely) that concluded the
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:50:26 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:The pot denies he’s black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.By their deeds shall you know them.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
Your argument recently was the bullets were CIA ammo. You weren’t arguing for a conspiracy there?
If not, what exactly were you arguing for?
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.Of course not. CTs rarely lay out an argument and attempt to support it with evidence. They snipe around the edges, playing “just asking questions”. We are both adult enough to recognize that.
Sky Throne did exactly that here: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/RGLu7IqwAQAJ
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.As a means to suggest it wasn’t in the weapon during the shooting, therefore Oswald couldn’t accomplish what the Commission said he did. We both know where that argument was heading, trodding the same well-worn path.
He's stated here before that the Birchers in Dallas killed JFK, that they were allowed to do so by the militarists in Washington in order to prevent JFK from ending their Cold War policies. People like Earl Warren (!!?) and others knew ahead of timeThe video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.Which was exactly my point, and what I was telling Sky Throne he needed to establish the converse of for his argument to go anywhere… he needed to show it would be visible. He never did.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.A rabbit hole of CT’s creation… as Ben pointed out in his original thread…
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ
…Sylvia Meagher was arguing for the supposed clip mystery six decades ago. It took that long to get ONE conspiracy theorist to concede the argument. How long do you think it will be for the other CTs to fall in line?
I didn't post it to put him down.Nobody suggested you did. But by bringing that up, you’re suggesting that was the end result.
In his defense (this is pro bono work), I guess it's true that he doesn't have "a" conspiracy theory. He has *three* theories not one (at least). He's a conspiracies theorist.So, after making three different claims about who was behind the assassination he says here that "I am not a conspiracy theorist."Well at least that's good to know.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:34:26 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:time that this was going to happen. Some of them, like members of the Secret Service, changed their protection procedures to make it happen. He later stated that "the Russians got it right" in their *investigation* (using that word loosely) that
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 9:39:47 AM UTC-4, Steven Galbraith wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:50:26 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53 AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:The pot denies he’s black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.
it was a fellow CT that helped expose itI'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
Conspiracy theorists see conspiracies everywhere. I don't.By their deeds shall you know them.
I consider myself a Warren Commission critic.
Your argument recently was the bullets were CIA ammo. You weren’t arguing for a conspiracy there?
If not, what exactly were you arguing for?
I don't believe Sky Throne ever said there was no clip in the rifle.Of course not. CTs rarely lay out an argument and attempt to support it with evidence. They snipe around the edges, playing “just asking questions”. We are both adult enough to recognize that.
Sky Throne did exactly that here: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/RGLu7IqwAQAJ
He was asking why the clip was not visible in the ejection port.As a means to suggest it wasn’t in the weapon during the shooting, therefore Oswald couldn’t accomplish what the Commission said he did. We both know where that argument was heading, trodding the same well-worn path.
He's stated here before that the Birchers in Dallas killed JFK, that they were allowed to do so by the militarists in Washington in order to prevent JFK from ending their Cold War policies. People like Earl Warren (!!?) and others knew ahead ofThe video showed that it was possible for the clip to be in the rifle and at the same time not be visible in the port.Which was exactly my point, and what I was telling Sky Throne he needed to establish the converse of for his argument to go anywhere… he needed to show it would be visible. He never did.
I posted it for Sky Throne's benefit, so he wouldn't be taken down some never ending rabbit hole.A rabbit hole of CT’s creation… as Ben pointed out in his original thread…
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ
…Sylvia Meagher was arguing for the supposed clip mystery six decades ago. It took that long to get ONE conspiracy theorist to concede the argument. How long do you think it will be for the other CTs to fall in line?
I didn't post it to put him down.Nobody suggested you did. But by bringing that up, you’re suggesting that was the end result.
In his defense (this is pro bono work), I guess it's true that he doesn't have "a" conspiracy theory. He has *three* theories not one (at least). He's a conspiracies theorist.So, after making three different claims about who was behind the assassination he says here that "I am not a conspiracy theorist."Well at least that's good to know.
In his defense (this is pro bono work), I guess it's true that he doesn't have "a" conspiracy theory. He has *three* theories not one (at least). He's a conspiracies theorist.
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jzexamines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:57:53 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:46:15?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:41:19?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
You're just upset that Gil is smarter than you, waaaaaay smarter.Thank you but you're giving me way too much credit.
Its not hard being smarter than those with an IQ in the single digits.
And Gil likewise resorts to ad hominem.Tell us a lie, Huckster, and complain that you never use logical fallacies...
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:25:13 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote: >> On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Logical fallacy deleted.
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:50:24 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote: >> > it was a fellow CT that helped expose it
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
The pot denies he’s black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.Lie, Huckster, and claim you aren't using ad hominem...
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 13:05:43 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39?PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
This *is* what you have to believe in order to account for the
evidence.
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 02:20:46 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
And Ben will concede ...
You still haven't conceded that the WCR used two fake cites to support
their "clip." You've not conceded that the one photo *YOU* cited is
hardly definitive, and in fact, doesn't make sense. What's holding
the "clip" in place in that photo???
No, I feel no need to "concede" anything -
as you've not proven a
thing - other than finding *one* citation that the WC could have used.
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:57:03 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Ben said this: >https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ >“There are many more problems with this alleged clip - but it wouldall.
take a separate post to detail. See Silvia Meagher's Accessories After
the Fact for one discussion of the problems of evidence for this clip.” Indeed. And like the coward you are, you've not addressed this at
But let's get back to the original topic.
CAN YOU PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WC CLAMED TWO INDEPENDENT CITATIONS/SOURCES FOR THEIR CLAIM ABOUT THE CLIP?
You still haven't, you know.
That means that you're a dishonest coward.
You need to address what I point out.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:57:02?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:57:03 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
Ben said this:Indeed. And like the coward you are, you've not addressed this at
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/4-nD2oIxfg8/m/T02VahYBAQAJ >> >There are many more problems with this alleged clip - but it would
take a separate post to detail. See Silvia Meagher's Accessories After
the Fact for one discussion of the problems of evidence for this clip.
all.
False.
But let's get back to the original topic.
CAN YOU PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WC CLAMED TWO INDEPENDENT
CITATIONS/SOURCES FOR THEIR CLAIM ABOUT THE CLIP?
You still haven't, you know.
That means that you're a dishonest coward.
No...
You need to address what I point out.
Already did.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:29?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:50:24 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:02:38?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:Lie, Huckster, and claim you aren't using ad hominem...
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 6:28:53?AM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote: >>>>> it was a fellow CT that helped expose it
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, Hank.
The pot denies hes black. Even the tea kettle can see otherwise.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:55:10?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 04:57:53 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:46:15?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 7:41:19?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
You're just upset that Gil is smarter than you, waaaaaay smarter.Thank you but you're giving me way too much credit.
Its not hard being smarter than those with an IQ in the single digits.
And Gil likewise resorts to ad hominem.
Tell us a lie, Huckster, and complain that you never use logical
fallacies...
Ben ...
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:47?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 02:20:46 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
And Ben will concede ...
You still haven't conceded that the WCR used two fake cites to support
their "clip." You've not conceded that the one photo *YOU* cited is
hardly definitive, and in fact, doesn't make sense. What's holding
the "clip" in place in that photo???
No, I feel no need to "concede" anything -
as you've not proven a
thing - other than finding *one* citation that the WC could have used.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:21?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:25:13 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
Ben changes the subject rather than discuss the rifle clip.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:22?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 14:17:07 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 3:44:39?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
Everything I believe about the assassination is supported by real, hard evidence.
No it isn't.
You continually REFUSE to cite this alleged "real, hard evidence."
Weigh in on the clip evidence, why don't you?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:44?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 13:05:43 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:44:39?PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:22:46?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
These are the kind of conclusions one reaches when they substitute imagination for evidence.
And you should know because you always use evidence, right ?
Your Team Oswald co-member Sky Throne believes Oswald fired a shot from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD, unseen, in time for his Baker and Truly encounter. Why don't you "school" him?
This *is* what you have to believe in order to account for the
evidence.
Cite that evidence. We both know you won't, of course.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:23?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't know.
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote: >>>> On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph.
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day first
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Logical fallacy deleted.
Ben deletes ...
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:52:22 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzantfirst examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:23?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph. >>>>>>
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Logical fallacy deleted.
Ben deletes ...
Sure. Happy to.
What was holding the clip out in the photo you cited?
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:52:22 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzantfirst examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:23?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph. >>>>>>
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there.
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Logical fallacy deleted.
Ben deletes ...
Sure. Happy to.
What was holding the clip out in the photo you cited?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:21:50 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:52:22 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:23?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>>> On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph. >>>>>>
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shitty old gunYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there. >>>>>
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working properly,
Ben raises the meaningless issue of what's holding it in place, as if that is pertinent to resolving the issue of whether there is a conspiracy of not.Logical fallacy deleted.
Ben deletes ...
Sure. Happy to.
What was holding the clip out in the photo you cited?Never-ending nonsense.
I am glad however that you finally admitted there is a clip visible in the rifle that was photographed as J.C. Day walked the weapon found in the Depository back to the Crime Lab. But of course, like good acts everywhere, answers are never enough. Now
Elsewhere, CTs will and have complained about the condition of the rifle, stressing how it was a WWII weapon, how it was over two decades old, how it apparently needed to be well-oiled to function, how there was a rusty firing pin, how the scope wasmisaligned, and how there was supposedly rust in the barrel. But of course for a dedicated CT like Ben, none of that comes close to answering why the clip didn't fall out after the last shell was ejected as the mechanism was designed to work.
I guess Ben is forever doomed to curse the darkness and wallow in these mysteries he is unable to solve rather than light a single candle.
Light a candle, Ben.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 5:03:31 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:first examines the rifle https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. Why can't Hank, who sees the clip when Day is walking out, say that he sees it when Day is examining the rifle? If it's there, tell me it's there. Maybe it is. I don't
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 5:21:50 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 11:52:22 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant <hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 10:56:23?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:42:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:25:03?PM UTC-5, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 12:49:43?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>>> On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 11:19:44?AM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
https://postimg.cc/ZB3YG9jz
Yes, it is the frame of a film, but that still is a photograph. >>>>>>
Maybe it's there. I don't know. But Hank has asserted that the clip can be seen in a photo of Lt. Day leaving the building https://www.jfk-assassination.net/images/day_clip.gif. I see that. But, to me, it looks like it is not there when Day
properly, then it should have fallen out by the window. But the gun is an old piece of crap, so maybe it stayed put...until Day carried it out of the building and then it peaked out a bit. That must be Hank's explanation, I imagine. Amazing such a shittyYou're right that you can't see it, but it still could be there. >>>>>
In this video, notice that although the clip is in the rifle, it is not visible in the ejection port at the bottom of the weapon.
https://youtu.be/eD9PRba_wAk
Well, that's all Hank had to do. Pity he's not as clever as you. Yes, at least from that angle, the clip cannot be seen until it falls out. And it falls out when the last cartridge is chambered, before it is fired. So, if it was working
Now Ben raises the meaningless issue of what's holding it in place, as if that is pertinent to resolving the issue of whether there is a conspiracy of not.Logical fallacy deleted.
Ben deletes ...
Sure. Happy to.
What was holding the clip out in the photo you cited?Never-ending nonsense.
I am glad however that you finally admitted there is a clip visible in the rifle that was photographed as J.C. Day walked the weapon found in the Depository back to the Crime Lab. But of course, like good acts everywhere, answers are never enough.
misaligned, and how there was supposedly rust in the barrel. But of course for a dedicated CT like Ben, none of that comes close to answering why the clip didn't fall out after the last shell was ejected as the mechanism was designed to work.Elsewhere, CTs will and have complained about the condition of the rifle, stressing how it was a WWII weapon, how it was over two decades old, how it apparently needed to be well-oiled to function, how there was a rusty firing pin, how the scope was
I guess Ben is forever doomed to curse the darkness and wallow in these mysteries he is unable to solve rather than light a single candle.
Light a candle, Ben.You and Holmes have been doing Never Ending Nonsense for years, like it's sex.
I post evidence and a reasoned argument in support of my conclusions. I attempt to have a civil discussion with all comers.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 119:45:45 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,210 |
| Messages: | 5,334,369 |
