"Regardless of WHERE the large exit wound was located (which was in the right-front of [JFK's] head, of course), and regardless of how many degrees the bullet deflected after striking Kennedy's cranium, the basic ironclad fact of "Only One Bullet HitJFK's Head From Behind" will never change, which makes all the arguments surrounding these sub-topics moot and rather meaningless when all is said and done."
-- David Von Pein; July 14, 2008
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 11:10:37 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:JFK's Head From Behind" will never change, which makes all the arguments surrounding these sub-topics moot and rather meaningless when all is said and done."
"Regardless of WHERE the large exit wound was located (which was in the right-front of [JFK's] head, of course), and regardless of how many degrees the bullet deflected after striking Kennedy's cranium, the basic ironclad fact of "Only One Bullet Hit
-- David Von Pein; July 14, 2008Delusional David Von Kook quotes stupid things he said 15 years ago, and calls it "common sense."
*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they wereallowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were
John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
"When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
Why is that so hard for you to understand ?
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were
John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
"When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
Why is that so hard for you to understand ?
"All of the post-assassination talk about the motorcade route is >Monday-morning quarterbacking, of course. The Secret Service had taken
JFK past tall buildings at slow speeds in an open car many, many times
during motorcades preceding the Dallas parade, and there's no reason
to think that the SS or the DPD felt there was anything remotely
dangerous or unusual about taking the President around those two
curves in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
For heaven's sake, Kennedy's car even came to a complete stop on two >occasions before reaching Dealey Plaza that day in Dallas, and yet
I've never heard even one CTer ever balk or gripe about those two
COMPLETE STOPS the President made.
The CTers don't seem to think that STOPPING the President's limo
completely was the slightest bit out of line or a violation of Secret
Service protocol
but many conspiracists do seem to feel that the hairpin turn from
Houston onto Elm WAS a terrible violation of some Secret Service rule
or regulation. Weird.
Do conspiracy theorists want to believe that the Secret Service
should have been of the opinion (as of the morning of 11/22/63) that
there was MORE danger to the President by taking him slowly through
Dealey Plaza (moving at about 11 MPH) than there was during those two complete stops that JFK made in his open limo that same afternoon?"
You and common sense seem to be complete strangers.
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 12:34:46?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:allowing the real killer or killers of Officer Tippit to get off scot-free? ***
*** Why on Earth would the Dallas Police Department have had any desire whatsoever to want to frame and railroad an innocent Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder of one of their FELLOW OFFICERS AND FRIENDS, all the while not caring at all that they were
John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
"When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Henry Wade even executed an innocent man.
https://www.dmagazine.com/publications/d-magazine/2016/may/henry-wade-executed-innocent-man/
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction.
Whoever they arrested was the right guy.
Why is that so hard for you to understand ?
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?No they didn't.
(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)
Name a *SINGLE* "bogus fact" that I've ever posted. Quote a *SINGLE* "far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inference" I've ever posted. Or
admit you're a liar.
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 10:42:38?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
Name a *SINGLE* "bogus fact" that I've ever posted. Quote a *SINGLE*
"far-fetched and wholly unreasonable inference" I've ever posted. Or
admit you're a liar.
That egotistical jackass can't refute a single thing.
No clue how the southern justice system worked in the 50s and 60s.
He has a long reputation as a loser.
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:Because that's what the evidence revealed. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
That's what the article says:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
No they didn't.
(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)I think you're a fucking asshole.
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote: >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Because that's what the evidence revealed.They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
murdered. And that makes sense to you?
And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
That's what the article says:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.
And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
No they didn't.
(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)I think you're a fucking asshole.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:35:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote: >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?Because that's what the evidence revealed.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans.
So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit wasROTFLMAO!!!
murdered. And that makes sense to you?
Yes ... you can't make this up, folks!!! Corbutt thinks a vast
conspiracy took the life of Tippit... planned months in advance...
And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
That's what the article says:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.You clearly aren't capable of following what someone is pointing out.
I've oft laughed at the thought of believers being able to use
reason...
And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
Logical fallacy deleted.No they didn't.
Gil spanks Corbutt again...(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)I think you're a fucking asshole.
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 3:45:09?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:35:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 11:34:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:ROTFLMAO!!!
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 4:47:15?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 3:44:02?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>>>> They didn't give a shit about getting the right guy, they just wanted to get a conviction. Whoever they arrested was the right guy. Why is that so hard for you to understand?So the CIA chose a patsy for the DPD to pin the murder of Tippit on months before Tippit was
How is it even possible for a person who has focused so much of his life on the JFK & Tippit murder cases (namely someone named Gilbert J. Jesus) to utter the nonsense he just uttered above?Because that's what the evidence revealed.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
Do you, Gil, think that the DPD just randomly chose Oswald to arrest for Tippit's murder on Nov. 22?Nope. He was chosen as the patsy by the CIA while he was in New Orleans. >>>
murdered. And that makes sense to you?
Yes ... you can't make this up, folks!!! Corbutt thinks a vast
conspiracy took the life of Tippit... planned months in advance...
No, thats the clear implication ...
You clearly aren't capable of following what someone is pointing out.And they were perfectly fine with their decision to charge an innocent person with the Tippit killing while giving the true murderers a free pass?
That's what the article says:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
The article doesn't even mention Tippit or the Dallas police in general. IOW, you lied.
I've oft laughed at the thought of believers being able to use
reason...
Johns claim is factual.
Logical fallacy deleted.And do you truly believe the DPD had no *REAL & VALID EVIDENCE* against Oswald in either the Kennedy or Tippit cases?
No they didn't.
Gil spanks Corbutt again...(I think Gil needs a new hobby.)I think you're a fucking asshole.
So do you think...
"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle describe it. It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in absolutely record time, in exactly the right length,and carried from the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work! And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it. You've got to admire the foresight of those cops. They really
-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 13:42:22 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessaryThis is simply their testimony. You *SPECULATE* that the bag was
for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle
describe it.
longer,
yet still not long enough to put the rifle in without being
taken apart.
You *SPECULATE* that there was a broken down rifle rifle in the paper
bag, DESPITE the evidence that contradicts this.
We don't have to "outline" a "scenario". We're dealing with the
evidence.
It is *YOU* who's desperate to "outline" a "scenario" that allows you
to get the rifle into the TSBD via Oswald's lunch bag. And helps your speculation...
It would require that the "phony bag" be forged inSupport that. Document when the bag was photographed being walked out
absolutely record time,
of the TSBD.
Then you can explain the folds in the paper bag...
(But you won't.)
in exactly the right length,But it *wasn't* in the length you need!
So this is simply an outright LIE on your part.
and carried fromDocument and source these empty claims of yours. Of course,
the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work!
Chickenshit has already stated that these are lies.
And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it.Not hard to do. He WORKED there.
You've got to admire theJust like **WHAT**? Sounds like another lie to me...
foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that Oswald had carried a bag just like that
into work that morning."
-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000Logical fallacies, speculations, and crying about the eyewitnesses who didn't say what you wanted them to say.
Not convincing anyone... according to polling...
"Conspiracists fail to outline the scenario that would be necessary
for the bag to have actually been as short as Frazier and Randle
describe it.
It would require that the "phony bag" be forged in
absolutely record time,
in exactly the right length,
and carried from
the Depository even before the Dallas cops in the Depository knew that Frazier was saying that Oswald had carried a bag in to work!
And somehow they got Oswald's prints on it.
You've got to admire the
foresight of those cops. They really lucked out when Frazier said that
Oswald had carried a bag just like that
into work that morning."
-- John McAdams; July 16, 2000
Stumps like Holmes can't figure out the easiest of the easy things connected with the JFK and Tippit murders ---- like:
....Oswald carrying his own rifle to work in a homemade paper bag on 11/22.
....Oswald shooting and killing Officer Tippit on 10th Street.
....Oswald purchasing his mail-order rifle from Klein's in March '63.
But if you're a Super Stump (like Holmes), none of the above facts
are to be considered "facts" at all --- even though all 3 things above
ARE, indeed proven and provable FACTS, without a shred of a doubt.
LNers rely on the evidence.
CT Stumps throw all the evidence in the toilet and pretend it was all faked.
IOW, LNers live in the real world.
CT Stumps reside in a Fantasy Land where everybody was out to frame a total stranger named Oswald.
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
of one bullet transitting both victims.
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
David Copperfield proud."
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
On Fri, 5 May 2017 09:51:02 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Has anyone noticed that Von Penis has joined Corbutt in being refuted,
but refusing to answer my refutations?
Cowards always run...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.lined up in the limo to receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, circa 1964) that both victims were generally
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated to a degree....and the WC did that. And did adamn good job at it too. Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THEFIRST PLACE. Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario of one bullet transitting both victims.
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork, involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make David Copperfield proud."
"IMO, the prayer man theory has the same fatal weakness as other JFK conspiracy theories: Instead of a narrative explaining how the evidence fits together to show what happened, we get a bunch of things that look “suspicious” and unseen plotterswho plant evidence, suborn perjury, and do anything else necessary to frame the poor patsy.
The problem is that the masterminds are, as usual, all-powerful and yet incredibly stupid. They plant a weapon they’ve tied to Oswald yet somehow neglect to keep the patsy from wandering outside
So now they have to get anyone who knew the truth to lie about it. But hey, no problem. With the right threats, who wouldn’t agree to help frame an innocent man in a president’s murder and keep quiet about it forever, right? Even better, Oswalddoesn’t mention his alibi either."
-- Jean Davison; May 1, 2016
Z210 is also the earliest Oswald would have had a clear line of sight to JFK. Had the WC had
the technology we have today and decades to observe the Z-film. I think they could have given
us a tighter bracket. The bulging of Connally's lapel at Z224 and the simultaneous arm flips of
the two victims at Z226 make be very confident the single bullet struck in the Z222-223 window.
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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 Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.
Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll.
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
A meaningless statement.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.
So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE. Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
of one bullet transitting both victims.
You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork, involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would makeSorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
David Copperfield proud."
Still no citations...
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
In your opinion.
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the
Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
A meaningless statement.
To you, a kook.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined,
circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Wheres your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.
This is a fringe reset.
So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated
to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too.
Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT
Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario
of one bullet transitting both victims.
You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...
Fringe reset.
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
David Copperfield proud."
Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
Still no citations...
Provided below. Again.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll.
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.
Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll."You’re not interested in a discussion of the facts and evidence in
the case, because you know it will go badly for you." - Huckster
Nor will *YOU* answer the question... you're TERRIFIED of the evidence
in this case, and clearly cannot defend Bugliosi's lies.
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 8:00:25 AM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 3:17:59 AM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 10:56:52 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 6:44:55 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 7:43:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2017 13:54:47 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 4:00:32 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote: >> On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 12:43:27 PM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 3:28:15 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 9:51:03 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
http://Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com
Latest inclusions....
"What kind of a sick mind needs to contrive complex and fantastic
explanations for every aspect of this case?" -- Bud; April 26, 2017
What kind of dishonest coward runs from even the most basic of questions concerning the evidence in this case?
What kind of retard sits around contriving loaded and begged questions?
Was there a policeman watching from a dozen feet away when JFK was shot?
Demonstrate how this is a "loaded" and "begged" question.
Well, that isn`t the full concept you expressed earlier. But even this sanitized version has difficulties.
You're lying again, "Bud"
Let the lurkers decide. The question was originally this...
"Why was the closest police eyewitness to the murder - who just coincidentally would have testified in contradiction to the SBT, never questioned by the FBI or Warren Commission prior to the release of the WCR?"
That was indeed the *original* question...
It's been greatly simplified since... which makes you a liar.
Is that how you think it works, if I catch you being dishonest that makes me a liar?
No... I don't need to explain.
You admitted the question changed, stupid.Your complaint about assumptions was later as well.
Run "Bud," RUNNNNNN!!!!
I merely point it out and move on.
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:57:54 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.
Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll."You’re not interested in a discussion of the facts and evidence in
the case, because you know it will go badly for you." - Huckster
Nor will *YOU* answer the question... you're TERRIFIED of the evidenceYou will do anything to avoid laying out precisely what you think happened that day.
in this case, and clearly cannot defend Bugliosi's lies.
That's why the men here don't take you seriously.
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
In your opinion.
There's no "opinion" about it... you can't cite where he did.
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the >>> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
A meaningless statement.
To you, a kook.
To you ... watch folks, as Chuckles ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to explain it.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the
Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, >>> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to
receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.
This is a fringe reset.
Nope. As Huckster points out: "...since you present no evidence in
support of your assertion, I feel free to reject your assertion."
Chuckles is afraid of upsetting Chickenshit... so he says nothing...So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated >>> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. >>> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT >>> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
Dead silence...JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the
digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario >>> of one bullet transitting both victims.
You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...
Fringe reset.Nope. As Huckster points out: "You’re not interested in a discussion
of the facts and evidence in the case, because you know it will go
badly for you."
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of
wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
David Copperfield proud."
Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
Still no citations...
Provided below. Again.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report
It's sad that I have to keep correcting morons... a cite to EVIDENCE
is what I **always* mean. Unless the topic is the WCR, citations *to*
the WCR are meaningless.
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 10:16:29 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
In your opinion.
There's no "opinion" about it... you can't cite where he did.
You know the tests, you know the story behind how the SBT was developed, who is the principal author of the SBT, and so on. You know the exhibit numbers by heart, the conclusions, and on and on. This is all well known and well discussed by all of us over"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the >>> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
A meaningless statement.
To you, a kook.
To you ... watch folks, as Chuckles ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to explain it.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via >>> a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the >>> Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, >>> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to >>> receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Where’s your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.
This is a fringe reset.
Nope. As Huckster points out: "...since you present no evidence in
support of your assertion, I feel free to reject your assertion."
Chuckles is afraid of upsetting Chickenshit... so he says nothing...So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be >>> right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the >>> event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated >>> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. >>> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT >>> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
Dead silence...JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the >>> digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario >>> of one bullet transitting both victims.
You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...
Fringe reset.Nope. As Huckster points out: "You’re not interested in a discussion
of the facts and evidence in the case, because you know it will go
badly for you."
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of >>> wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make >>> David Copperfield proud."
Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
Still no citations...
Provided below. Again.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report
It's sad that I have to keep correcting morons... a cite to EVIDENCEA summary of the FBI tests, the commission exhibit numbers, etc. is all provided in the WCR. The commission found persuasive evidence that the bullet which hit JFK in the upper back fired from above and behind went on to strike Connally. You know this.
is what I **always* mean. Unless the topic is the WCR, citations *to*
the WCR are meaningless.
You know what you still haven't provided? Any tests or links to tests, etc. to support your hobby point that a bullet was fired from in front of the limo, piercing the front limo windshield and striking JFK or JBC. Get busy. Get off your lazy ass anddo some work. Stop shifting the burden and provide back-up for your hobby points.
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.I hereby deny it.
Now what?
The WC deserve kudos for figuring all his out in a limited amount of time without modern
film enhancement techniques we have now. They missed what I think is the clincher for the
SBT. That would be the simultaneous raising of their arms by JFK and JBC. Looking at
the Z-film in normal speed without enhancements, it appears that JFK is already reacting
to his wound when he reappears from behind the sign at Z225. However, by enhancing the
frames and stabilizing the image, we can see JFK's right hand in Z224 even though his face
is not yet visible. It definitely has continued down in Z225. His reaction doesn't happen until
one frame later when his hand reverses direction as he begins to lift his arms. JBC described
his reaction in doubling over but that was a secondary reaction which occurred about a half
second later. His initial reaction which was completely reflexive and involuntary, was to flip
his right arm upward which he did at the exact moment JFK's arms came upward. This is
confirmation that the WC got it right despite missing this compelling clue.
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 10:16:29?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 08:04:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 6:46:24?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 16:24:16 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Von Penis ran from the ENTIRE refutation of his post...
In your opinion.
There's no "opinion" about it... you can't cite where he did.
"The 'bracketing' of when the SBT bullet struck the two victims in
the limousine, in fact, only further makes me think more highly of the >>>>> Warren Commission and its detailed study of the assassination.
A meaningless statement.
To you, a kook.
To you ... watch folks, as Chuckles ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to explain it.
The WC and FBI did very detailed angle measurements in May '64, via
a surveyor and "thru-the-Oswald-rifle-scope" determinations from the >>>>> Sniper's Nest. And it was determined (as best as could be determined, >>>>> circa 1964) that both victims were generally lined up in the limo to >>>>> receive the "SBT" bullet from approx. Z210 through approx. Z225.
"I see you offering your opinion, and nothing else. I also see you
making an attempt to shift the burden of proof. Wheres your
evidence? Your argument, your burden." - Huckster Sienzant
Von Penis keeps offering his own speculation, and simply forgets to
cite any evidence that supports it.
This is a fringe reset.
Nope. As Huckster points out: "...since you present no evidence in
support of your assertion, I feel free to reject your assertion."
Chuckles is afraid of upsetting Chickenshit... so he says nothing...So we know he's a liar, according to Chickenshit.
Conspiracy theorists scoff at this "bracketing", saying it can't be
right. But those CTers are attempting to place an EXACTITUDE on the
event that can't really be placed there. Some things MUST be estimated >>>>> to a degree....and the WC did that. And did a damn good job at it too. >>>>> Because "Z210-Z225" certainly encompasses the now-widely-accepted SBT >>>>> Z-Frame of Z224 (a frame I fully endorse for many, many reasons).
JFK was killed in the limo. An equally brilliant observational
analogy to your speculation.
Dead silence...
In other words, the WC got it perfectly correct DECADES prior to the >>>>> digital Z-Film copies fully backing up their findings of a SBT hit
somewhere between Z210 and Z225. So what's the big gripe, is my
question? The Warren Commission GOT IT RIGHT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Conspiracists just don't wish to accept the Occam's-like SBT scenario >>>>> of one bullet transitting both victims.
You are, of course, simply begging the question... not a SHRED of
evidence, and no citations in sight...
Fringe reset.
Nope. As Huckster points out: "Youre not interested in a discussion
of the facts and evidence in the case, because you know it will go
badly for you."
Instead, conspiracy advocates would rather rely on pure guesswork,
involving multiple disappearing bullets and an SBT-like alignment of >>>>> wounds on two men (created by two or three gunmen!) that would make
David Copperfield proud."
Sorry moron - the "guesswork" is entirely on your part.
Still no citations...
Provided below. Again.
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report
It's sad that I have to keep correcting morons... a cite to EVIDENCE
is what I **always* mean. Unless the topic is the WCR, citations *to*
the WCR are meaningless.
A summary of the FBI tests, the commission exhibit numbers, etc. is
all provided in the WCR.
You know what you still haven't provided? Any tests or links to
tests, etc. to support your hobby point that a bullet was fired from
in front of the limo,
-- David Von Pein; April 8, 2007
The coward runs when I refute his nonsense...
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Von Penis did indeed run. And Chuckles can't deny it.
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:57:54?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.
Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll.
"Youre not interested in a discussion of the facts and evidence in
the case, because you know it will go badly for you." - Huckster
Nor will *YOU* answer the question... you're TERRIFIED of the evidence
in this case, and clearly cannot defend Bugliosi's lies.
You will do anything to avoid laying out precisely what you think happened that day.
That's why the men here don't take you seriously.
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 11:03:25 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:57:54?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Notice that Huckster and I were right...
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 07:48:10 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, September 8, 2023 at 9:45:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 17:18:07 -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.
Bud owns you.
Back under your bridge, troll.
"You’re not interested in a discussion of the facts and evidence in
the case, because you know it will go badly for you." - Huckster
Nor will *YOU* answer the question... you're TERRIFIED of the evidence
in this case, and clearly cannot defend Bugliosi's lies.
You will do anything to avoid laying out precisely what you think happened that day.The Challenge - Part 1 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/x4n7Di-GBd8/_WbEfALeAAAJ The Challenge - Part 2 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/WVBtmUQkx6c/9ZdyxAPeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 1 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/y0hdkKgWvtI/3uukYgXeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 2 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/jSfe1BrGfJc/SOXAOQbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 2a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/kGfZPR4C-Lw/AlnRq1HeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 3 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/IShoUFao5OU/VuYGWFTeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 3a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/JFuasrnWRqA/l1vih03eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 4 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/LRMeWBFE1ug/bfjGTAbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 5 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/S1ddVKc3Jj4/IESJbFPeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 6 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/b5ODl3yA4uk/g77N-UreAAAJ My Scenario - Part 7 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/rwmZjz92YC8/P-9Mn07eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 8 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c6e29olW6XA/Os29-FveAAAJ My Scenario - Part 9 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/ixNqGISHbrU/gd06wVHeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 10 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/3Di6kuseb2Q/aHbAQmLeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/sYEyPH0A_eI/IH-UZgbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/aGduj6uaGUk/3eDp513eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11b https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8rAmKZBOCiY/yCELq27eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 12 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/OnrH5R6ryHE/stjdfgbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 12a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/J0A8N12PPHU/CcxpiU7eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 13 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8hD-q0gTa_c/Co3ZJE7eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 14 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/lsaXwhPRbEg/hZ7ZmEveAAAJ My Scenario - Part 15 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UA86YdJXEgY/JhG8o0reAAAJ My Scenario - The Conclusion https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UWfco_sGxYw/yApSPFXeAAAJ
You will do anything you can to lie about it...
That's why the men here don't take you seriously.Another logical fallacy... And amusingly, Chuckles ran again... no
scenario - he's TERRIFIED of answering his own questions.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 121:22:15 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,489 |