1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. ALT.CONSPIRACY.JFK

  • Re: Meathead is going to tell us who killed JFK

    From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to jecorbett4@gmail.com on Fri Dec 8 07:35:05 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 07:06:54 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
    <jecorbett4@gmail.com> wrote:

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/11/jfk-assassination-symposium-alec-baldwin-rob-reiner

    But he's not going to spill the beans all at once. We're going to have to listen
    to all ten parts of his podcast to find out.

    Oh, boy. I can hardly wait.

    Let's see if he offers more evidence than you do.

    (That'll be easy!)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to jecorbett4@gmail.com on Fri Dec 8 08:32:19 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 08:25:19 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
    <jecorbett4@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Friday, December 8, 2023 at 11:11:43?AM UTC-5, Steven Galbraith wrote:
    On Friday, December 8, 2023 at 10:06:55?AM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:
    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/11/jfk-assassination-symposium-alec-baldwin-rob-reiner


    Logical fallacies deleted. It must suck always trying to find new
    logical fallacies to post.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to stevemgalbraith@yahoo.com on Fri Dec 8 08:27:42 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 08:11:42 -0800 (PST), Steven Galbraith <stevemgalbraith@yahoo.com> wrote:

    On Friday, December 8, 2023 at 10:06:55?AM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:
    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/11/jfk-assassination-symposium-alec-baldwin-rob-reiner

    But he's not going to spill the beans all at once. We're going to have to listen
    to all ten parts of his podcast to find out.

    Oh, boy. I can hardly wait.

    He's done interviews where he's essentially repeated the Jefferson
    Morley claims about Oswald and CIA agent George Joannides and AMSPELL.
    Reiner says Joannides trained Oswald and blah blah blah. You can
    google and find the rest of the gibberish. Remember this theory:
    "they" framed a pro-Castro person (Oswald) in order to blame Castro
    and justify an invasion of Cuba in retaliation. Then "they" conducted
    a fake investigation that *cleared* Castro of any role. Huh? In this
    world that makes no sense; in conspiracy world it does.
    This is simply more of the reverse engineering by the conspiracy
    advocates. They start with their conspiracy belief and then find
    information to support that theory. It's why, again, we have 100
    different theories on what happened. Each conspiracist is simply
    projecting his or her own grievances onto this event and using it to
    promote those complaints. Same old same old....

    I find it amusing that you can't admit that George Joannides was quite
    the dishonest choice for the CIA to work with the HSCA.

    You clearly aren't interested in the truth, are you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to stevemgalbraith@yahoo.com on Fri Dec 8 08:35:06 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 08:32:00 -0800 (PST), Steven Galbraith <stevemgalbraith@yahoo.com> wrote:

    True. You have to give credit to Morley for this one. It's very
    "sexy": CIA and spies and intrigue and secrets. Very seductive.


    Was Joannides connected with Oswald?

    Yes or no.

    Or, as you ALWAYS do - you can run like the coward you are.


    None of what Morley/Reiner claim has a thing to do with November 22,
    1963 and the actual murder of JFK.

    Support that.

    But you won't.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Sat Dec 9 09:57:24 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 13:31:58 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirslick@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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 11 07:24:30 2023
    On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 14:52:44 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
    <hsienzant@aol.com> wrote:

    You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
    description of the *location* of the large head wound.

    Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
    paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

    You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

    Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

    Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

    Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
    and exited the back of his head.

    More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

    Are you proud of yourself?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)