STUPID PLOTTERS & STUPID CONSPIRACY-HUNGRY KOOKS
David Von Pein
>>> "But we are trying the murder of the President and not Tippit. LNers LOVE to link the two, because the murder, they say, of Tippit is the Rosetta Stone of the case! "If he killed Tippit, he MUST have killed JFK!" WRONG." <<<
Anybody who can say the two murders aren't inexorably linked is one of
two things -- Brain-dead or a liar. No third option possible.
>>> "As for Oswald's presence in the 6th floor window, you have Brennan. And he did not pick Oswald out of a lineup that day. Sure, later he did, his second attempt, after Oswald was convicted in the court of public opinion." <<<
And I guess it was just a coincidence that Brennan's 11/22/63
affidavit was a SPOT-ON MATCH for the physical description that
Officer Marrion Baker gave for Oswald after Baker saw Oswald in the
lunchroom.
And we KNOW Baker saw the "Real Oswald" in the lunchroom, or would you
like to deny that too?
"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165
pounds." -- Via Marrion L. Baker's 11/22 Affidavit
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
"He was a white man in his early 30's, slender, nice looking, and
would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds." -- Via Howard Brennan's 11/22
Affidavit
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan1.htm
I guess Brennan must have seen one of the many "Oswald Imposters" who
were roaming around Dallas (and the Book Depository) in November 1963,
huh?
>>> "As for the bullet fragments, David, no one is sure where they came from. You can't prove it, and neither can I. But that leaves reasonable doubt." <<<
<huge laugh>
The front-seat fragments came from Oswald's Carcano "to the
exclusion". Are you actually purporting that the 2 front-seat
fragments are "plants" too?
Geez, those plotters were busy bees on Nov. 22! They've got to plant
EVERY dang thing in the whole case it would seem....seeing as how the
stupid "real killers" (per some CTers) were total boobs and decided to
frame their one patsy by not even using the patsy's own gun!
Silly plotters indeed. Whatever they were paid....they were overpaid,
that's for darn sure.
BTW, I cannot really prove beyond all doubt that my mother is REALLY
my mother. She says she is....but why should I believe her? Anyone
could be my "real" mother.
(Conspiracy fever can be kinda qwazy, huh?)
>>> "As for CE 399, it is impossible on its face (or are you STILL trying to convince everyone the wound was actually in the neck rather than T3?)" <<<
The back wound was just where Boswell said it was -- "14 cm. below tip
of right mastoid process".....which makes things line up very nicely
for CE399 to go through JFK on a 17.43-degree downward path and on
into Connally (which, of course, ANY bullet that hit Connally had to
do before entering Connally--simply due to the plain fact that KENNEDY
WAS IN THE GUNMAN'S WAY WHEN CONNALLY WAS SHOT IN THE BACK WHERE WE
KNOW HE WAS SHOT).
>>> "LNers...believing the lie. Buying the swampland." <<<
CTers...Theorize and accuse now; Prove never.
David Von Pein
October 2007
robcap...@netscape.com
> http://www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/29/ref=cm_...
>
> >>> "But we are trying the murder of the President and not Tippit. LNers LOVE to link the two, because the murder, they say, of Tippit is the Rosetta Stone of the case! "If he killed Tippit, he MUST have killed JFK!" WRONG." <<<
>
> Anybody who can say the two murders aren't inexorably linked is one of
> two things -- Brain-dead or a liar. No third option possible.
Talk is cheap Dave! How about laying some proof on us for a change?
I have waited for many a year to see this "proof", but folks like you
NEVER seem to get around to providing it. You are like bad lawyers
who prosecute through the media but never in a court of law. IF you
have so much proof, why not share it with the rest of us?
> >>> "As for Oswald's presence in the 6th floor window, you have Brennan. And he did not pick Oswald out of a lineup that day. Sure, later he did, his second attempt, after Oswald was convicted in the court of public opinion." <<<
> And I guess it was just a coincidence that Brennan's 11/22/63
> affidavit was a SPOT-ON MATCH for the physical description that
> Officer Marrion Baker gave for Oswald after Baker saw Oswald in the
> lunchroom.
Brennan's affadavit was a "SPOT-ON MATCH" for THOUSANDS of men in
Dallas that day. Nice try Dave. Dave fails to mention, or perhaps he
is ignorant of, the fact that if a witness has seen the accused in the
media PRIOR to ID'ing them this is NOT permitted to be entered into
court. IOW, Brennan's "change of heart" wouldn't have been allowed in
a trial of LHO.
> And we KNOW Baker saw the "Real Oswald" in the lunchroom, or would you
> like to deny that too?
Why would we? This is great for the case others shot JFK. How does
one get from the sixth floor to the lunchroom in 90 seconds, all the
while hiding the rifle, and purchase a COKE to boot? Yeah, I just
shot the President so I guess I'll get me a Coke. This, like all
other things in your theory makes no sense. LHO was there because he
was either there the whole time, or after witnessing the shooting
(from the front steps) he went to use the phone.
> "The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165
> pounds." -- Via Marrion L. Baker's 11/22 Affidavit
Very generic, could be thousands of men.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/baker_m3.htm
>
> "He was a white man in his early 30's, slender, nice looking, and
> would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds." -- Via Howard Brennan's 11/22
> Affidavit
I go back to the question I always ask, how did Brennan get a height
and weight from a chest up view (one that was from ground level to six
stories up) only? How did he get "nice-looking" as this was quite a
longs ways off. Do you think LHO was "nice looking" Dave? This
decription could be thousands of people, you can't say he saw LHO
based on this.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/brennan1.htm
> I guess Brennan must have seen one of the many "Oswald Imposters" who
> were roaming around Dallas (and the Book Depository) in November 1963,
> huh?
Who knows who he saw, but the point is he was a long ways away and
only got a chest up view of the person. We do know he did NOT pick
LHO out of the police lineup on 11/22/63.
> >>> "As for the bullet fragments, David, no one is sure where they came from. You can't prove it, and neither can I. But that leaves reasonable doubt." <<<
>
> <huge laugh>
F.Y.I. - Dave always emits "large laughs" or chuckles when he is about
to lie through his teeth.
> The front-seat fragments came from Oswald's Carcano "to the
> exclusion". Are you actually purporting that the 2 front-seat
> fragments are "plants" too?
1) Prove it was LHO's Carcano. 2) Prove he fired it on 11/22/63 at
12:30 PM CST. 3) Prove the chain of custody for the two fragments.
> Geez, those plotters were busy bees on Nov. 22! They've got to plant
> EVERY dang thing in the whole case it would seem....seeing as how the
> stupid "real killers" (per some CTers) were total boobs and decided to
> frame their one patsy by not even using the patsy's own gun!
If you want to tie one person to the crime this is what has to happen
if they did NOT actually commit the crime Dave.
> Silly plotters indeed. Whatever they were paid....they were overpaid,
> that's for darn sure.
I like how Dave has totally ignored the initial question of actually
proving the trajectories and is babbling like a "kook" he calls
everyone else. Prove the trajectories for us again Dave.
> BTW, I cannot really prove beyond all doubt that my mother is REALLY
> my mother. She says she is....but why should I believe her? Anyone
> could be my "real" mother.
>
> (Conspiracy fever can be kinda qwazy, huh?)
Is everyone satisfied with Dave's "proof" of the shots coming from the
sixth floow East window of the TSBD? Why your mother would actually
claim you is beyond my comprehension, but it has NOTHING to do with
the man's question. Dave, like the WC, totally ignored it.
> >>> "As for CE 399, it is impossible on its face (or are you STILL trying to convince everyone the wound was actually in the neck rather than T3?)" <<<
> The back wound was just where Boswell said it was -- "14 cm. below tip
> of right mastoid process".....which makes things line up very nicely
> for CE399 to go through JFK on a 17.43-degree downward path and on
> into Connally (which, of course, ANY bullet that hit Connally had to
> do before entering Connally--simply due to the plain fact that KENNEDY
> WAS IN THE GUNMAN'S WAY WHEN CONNALLY WAS SHOT IN THE BACK WHERE WE
> KNOW HE WAS SHOT).
Good, prove it. Show me and the rest of us a probe picture linking
the back wound with the throat wound. You said it was easy to do, so
do it.
> >>> "LNers...believing the lie. Buying the swampland." <<<
>
> CTers...Theorize and accuse now; Prove never.
Dave, don't give us credit for your MOTTO!
David Von Pein
>>> "Talk is cheap Dave! How about laying some proof on us for a change? .... IF you have so much proof, why not share it with the rest of us?" <<<
That's been done thousands of times. It's not my fault you cannot
process information (and evidence) properly. That's your problem; not
mine.
robcap...@netscape.com
> On Aug 26, 11:20 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>
> The case against Oswald is overwhelming. There isn't proof of Oswald's
> guilt in your eyes only because you have a belief system that says
> thousands and thousands of your neighbors decided to kill the POTUS
> for dozens of different reasons.
Dave is like a black magician in the sense of him thinking if he says
this stuff enough we will be hypnotized into believing it. Dave, I
have a belief system in PROOF, EVIDENCE AND MOTIVE(S). Where is
yours? Where is the proof I asked for? The time for cheap talk is
over, provide proof or scurry along to some other locale. I'm here,
along with many others, because of JFK, I owe him the decency to look
into his death seriously. He fought all pressures to avoid a nuclear
conflict where our side said "20 to 30 million dead" was ACCEPTABLE if
we won. If Nixon had won, I would have very likely never been born.
You may feel no obligation to really look into his death, but I do.
You have failed miserably to produce any real proof since I have bee
here (and I'm sure long before that). Why you want to proceed this
way when JFK was so good for this country in terms of saving lives, is
beyond me. You are a sick puppy I guess who is driven by the almighty
dollar.
> If Oswald had ran up to the limo and had fatally stabbed JFK in the
> chest with a knife-all caught on film-you'd still believe there was a
> conspriacy.
IF, if, if, what is this got to do with the proof I askd for? Dave is
so oblivious (or such a liar) to the facts of the world. If one
person does the deed this does NOT exclude others from being
involved. Why is Dave such a blind person?
> Even when assassins are caught in the act-like Sirhan Sirhan killing
> Bobby-you kooks believe in mind control, shooters hiding up in the
> ceiling panels, security guards administering the coup d' grace, etc.
I think the simple fact the M.E. said the fatal shot came from BEHIND
RFK when Sirhan Sirhan was always in FRONT of RFK has something to do
with it. I think the fact 13 bullets were recovered and Sirhan's gun
could only handle 8 has something to do with it. Sure, IF one ignores
the true facts you can reach your own conclusion very easily, but it
doesn't work that way Dave. Where is my probe picture?
> In many of your posts, you espouse the belief that the ENTIRE case
> against Oswald is wrong...almost every fact, detail and item is false,
> planted, misread, altered, etc. How in the world would this be
> possible?
Because it is, now you can prove your point in one quick fashion,
provide the probe picture showing the back wound and the throat wound
are CONNECTED.
> In many of your other posts, you seem to have a worldview that
> indicates a level of childish paranoia about all the big events of the
> day, and an odd habit of connecting the events of the 50's/60's
> together with today's politics.
Nothing childish about it, it is seeing the world as it really is.
Anyone who doesn't believe man, who is the most destructive creature
of all time, would seek to controll things is just a lunatic.
Paranoid is simply having the ability to see things connecting when
they are not obviously so.
> Your world is a dark, spooky place where you are kept down by the man,
> devoid of free will, and trapped in an evil AmeriKKKa inhabited by men
> all around you that wish to extend the cover-up in JFK's murder.
For once you are speaking the truth. Now, where is my probe picture?
robcap...@netscape.com
Probe picture please? I don't recall you EVER producing this, I
demand it now or you will be shown to be the lair you are.
robcap...@netscape.com
Sorry, Bud and Dave sound much alike I thought it was Dave. Same
things apply though.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Von Pein
>>> "Sorry, Bud and Dave sound much alike I thought it was Dave. Same things apply though." <<<
LOL. The kook can't even get things right AFTER he puts in his
CORRECTED addendum. Bud hasn't even posted in this thread (to date).
The kook named Rob was responding to Chuck, but apparently he thought
he was responding to me during his last lengthy say-nothing batch of
Anybody-But-Oswald kookshit. Then the kook named Rob puts in an "[I'm]
sorry" addendum, with Bud's name included, who hasn't said a word in
this thread at all.
Is it any wonder Robcap is in a constant state of "kookdom"? He can't
get anything right....even AFTER he corrects himself!
What's not to love about kooks like this? I ask you.
>>> "Sorry, Bud and Dave sound [so] much alike I thought it was Dave." <<<
That's one of the nicest compliments I've ever had. Thanks.
Then again, since Rob thought "Chuck" was "Bud" earlier.....is my
"thanks" misplaced here? Chuck, however, always posts very good,
common-sense stuff too, don't get me wrong.
Maybe I'm caught in Rob's Twilight Zone of confusion!
Oh, the humanities!
Harry
> On Aug 26, 11:20 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> The case against Oswald is overwhelming. There isn't proof of Oswald's
> guilt in your eyes only because you have a belief system that says
> thousands and thousands of your neighbors decided to kill the POTUS
> for dozens of different reasons.
>
> chest with a knife-all caught on film-you'd still believe there was a
> conspriacy.
>
> Bobby-you kooks believe in mind control, shooters hiding up in the
> ceiling panels, security guards administering the coup d' grace, etc.
>
> against Oswald is wrong...almost every fact, detail and item is false,
> planted, misread, altered, etc. How in the world would this be
> possible?
>
> indicates a level of childish paranoia about all the big events of the
> day, and an odd habit of connecting the events of the 50's/60's
> together with today's politics.
>
> devoid of free will, and trapped in an evil AmeriKKKa inhabited by men
> all around you that wish to extend the cover-up in JFK's murder.
The case against Oswald is overwhelming.
The "case" against Oswald....
What about the EVIDENCE that would be presented in court in an
adversary procedure? I'm not talking about some "soap opera" starring
vincent "Hey-I'm-Full-of-Bullshit" bugliosi.
Where's your EVIDENCE that could convince a jury of Oswald's guilt?
We're waiting.
Tick, tick, tick...
Harry
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
Let's START with a jury, then go from there. Shall we, Chuckie?
Walt
> http://www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/29/ref=cm_...
>
Hey Von Pea Brain.... Yer desperation is showing. Yer reduced to cut
a paste the same stale arguments of a year ago. Is this the best ya
got?? If it is .... Ya better exit stage left, cuz the shows over.
Harry
> On Aug 26, 6:40 pm, Harry <harryfreeloa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Let's START with a jury, then go from there. Shall we, Chuckie?
>
> that, unfortunately>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why unfortunately? If Oswald had gone to trial, you wouldn't be
flaming people on the internet.
>
> However, all of the major investigations have found Oswald fired the
> shots that killed JFK, wounded JBC and killed JDT.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not with evidence that would convict LHO in court. ALL of the
investigations were flawed from beginning to end. Even members of the
WC wouldn't sign that fairy tale of a report. LBJ and SEN. RUSSELL did
NOT believe that fairy tale, the SBT and stated so.
>
> Unlike you, I have a hard time believing that this many people could
> look into this and find nothing even close to what you kooks think
> happened.
Well, YOU KOOKS are willingly wearing blinders.
>
> A man resembling Oswald was seen firing a rifle at the motorcade.
> Oswald fled the building, and his rifle was found on the 6th floor.
> The rifle is ballistically matched to the bullets recovered from the
> limo.
UNTRUE on ALL counts. You keep repeating the same 'ol horse shit
without any evidence. The FBI had no credible evidence, the WC had no
credible evidence, the HSCA had no credible evidence that would
convict LHO in court.
The rest of your post is nothing but the same drivel you LONE-NUT
LIARS always post. Back to the drawing board, YOU LYING KOOKARINO.
David Von Pein
Walt,
My thread-opening (re-)post is a very good commonsense-filled post and
you know it. But you won't admit that, of course, Walter, because
you've devoted a large chunk of your adult life toward being a JFK
Conspiracy Mega-Kook who wants to believe in all kinds of crazy, nutty
things when it comes to President Kennedy's demise -- like your insane
theory labelled: "A White Speck On The Croft Photo Proves JFK Was Shot
From The Front".
That kind of craziness is supposedly MORE believable than the stuff I
wrote in the thread-starting post up above?
Is Walt's world REALLY this topsy-turvy?! Is that humanly possible??
Evidently it is.
Harry
>
> So in your mind, there is no credible evidence linking Oswald to
> Kennedy's death? None?
>
> And all of the men investigating it were willing to lie and cover it
> up? All of these men-many that fought for their country in WW2 and
> were willing to sacrifice everything for the cause of freedom-suddenly
> decided to turn America into AmeriKKKa and usher in the new facist
> state that still casts its long shadow over liberty loving patriots
> like you?
>
> Did they love LBJ that much?
>
> (Summer 1963)
>
> LBJ: Colonel, I want you to set up a plot to kill JFK. Be creative.
> Involve the FBI, CIA and the mob. Let's strike in the fall, perferably
> Dallas.
>
> Colonel: (Salutes smartly) I'll get on it right way!
If you're going to make a speech, have the courtesy to let us know
ahead of time so we can leave the room and saunter down to the bar and
hoist a few in GOOD company while you spew your subject BULLSHIT!
Thanks,
Harry
aeffects
Chuckles, lest I remind you: this is YOUR bubble, we come and go as we
please. You on the other hand are ASSIGNED here. Hope you enjoy the
fall sememster.... LMFAO
aeffects
you bet Walt.... the very best he can do and has done for years --
he's treading water with no water-wings.... not a pretty sight!
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "Sorry, Bud and Dave sound much alike I thought it was Dave. Same things apply though." <<<
>
> LOL. The kook can't even get things right AFTER he puts in his
> CORRECTED addendum. Bud hasn't even posted in this thread (to date).
Chuckle away, but I'm still waiting for the probe picture showing the
back wound and the throat wound are connected. Why can't Dave produce
this? He has all those other links on his blog.
> The kook named Rob was responding to Chuck, but apparently he thought
> he was responding to me during his last lengthy say-nothing batch of
> Anybody-But-Oswald kookshit. Then the kook named Rob puts in an "[I'm]
> sorry" addendum, with Bud's name included, who hasn't said a word in
> this thread at all.
You both attended the same mind control classes, so what is the
difference? Now about that picture....
> Is it any wonder Robcap is in a constant state of "kookdom"? He can't
> get anything right....even AFTER he corrects himself!
Dave is the real kook as he believes in things he can't PROVE!!! All
I ask for his a picture to PROVE his beliefs and he CAN'T produce it.
Hmmm.
> What's not to love about kooks like this? I ask you.
Where is the picture Dave?
> >>> "Sorry, Bud and Dave sound [so] much alike I thought it was Dave." <<<
>
> That's one of the nicest compliments I've ever had. Thanks.
>
> Then again, since Rob thought "Chuck" was "Bud" earlier.....is my
> "thanks" misplaced here? Chuck, however, always posts very good,
> common-sense stuff too, don't get me wrong.
>
> Maybe I'm caught in Rob's Twilight Zone of confusion!
Who cares which mind controlled drone I was responding to, how about
that picture big mouth?
> Oh, the humanities!
Oh, the lack of proof to back up ones beliefs. You are a liar!
robcap...@netscape.com
> On Aug 26, 1:56 pm, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
Thanks, but I wasn't trying to be.
> Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of good men and women gave JFK the
> 'decency' of looking into his death. You ascribe nothing but pure,
> patriotic motives for yourself, and look at all of the investigations,
> all of the FBI agents, DPD cops, etc. as crooked and cowardly.
You can settle it once and for all, for if you can PROVE the SBT to be
true you will able to work on proving it is possible LHO was the man
who did it (although you still totally lack any proof in this area as
well) by himself. Post the probe picture showing the two wounds are
connected. Surely if the prosectors said it was possible they would
have photographed it, right?
> > You may feel no obligation to really look into his death, but I do.
> > You have failed miserably to produce any real proof since I have bee
> > here (and I'm sure long before that). Why you want to proceed this
> > way when JFK was so good for this country in terms of saving lives, is
> > beyond me. You are a sick puppy I guess who is driven by the almighty
> > dollar.
>
> Listen to your comments. How sad.
Don't worry aboutt my comments traitor, just start posting some
proof. Start with the probe picture.
> You're not looking into anything, Rob. This is a HOBBY.
Wrong, you are the one who is supposedly spending his day posting here
in between ripping people off with bad mortgages, what is this too
you? Why don't you ever post any proof?
> > > If Oswald had ran up to the limo and had fatally stabbed JFK in the
> > > chest with a knife-all caught on film-you'd still believe there was a
> > > conspriacy.
>
> > IF, if, if, what is this got to do with the proof I askd for? Dave is
> > so oblivious (or such a liar) to the facts of the world. If one
> > person does the deed this does NOT exclude others from being
> > involved. Why is Dave such a blind person?
>
> He isn't blind. He's driven by commonsense. Logic. An understanding
> that facts are stubborn things. An understanding that this has been
> looked into by good people, and the conclusions that Oswald is a
> double murderer are sound.
LOL!!! The mind controlled drone is trying to make a funny! You
claim the SBT is valid, you claim the back wound and the throat wound
are connected. Great. Now, how about an autopsy probe picture to
prove these claims? Failure to post a picture will show everyone you
are a liar.
> > > Even when assassins are caught in the act-like Sirhan Sirhan killing
> > > Bobby-you kooks believe in mind control, shooters hiding up in the
> > > ceiling panels, security guards administering the coup d' grace, etc.
>
> > I think the simple fact the M.E. said the fatal shot came from BEHIND
> > RFK when Sirhan Sirhan was always in FRONT of RFK has something to do
> > with it. I think the fact 13 bullets were recovered and Sirhan's gun
> > could only handle 8 has something to do with it. Sure, IF one ignores
> > the true facts you can reach your own conclusion very easily, but it
> > doesn't work that way Dave. Where is my probe picture?
>
> I'm not Dave, dunce. You can't even respond to posts correctly, and
> yet you have the skills to solve the Crime of the 20th Century!
Six of one, half-a-dozen of another? A drone is a drone is a drone?
Dave, Bud, Chuck, it matters not, as NONE OF YOU CAN POST A PICTURE TO
BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS. A simple picture.
robcap...@netscape.com
> On Aug 26, 6:40 pm, Harry <harryfreeloa...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
Unfortunately??? Why didn't the police protect him then? Why did
nearly 80 cops stand around with their thumbs up their butts and let
Ruby walk in and shoot him if they cared about a trial?
> However, all of the major investigations have found Oswald fired the
> shots that killed JFK, wounded JBC and killed JDT.
So what??? The word "investigation" is an insult to people who do real
investigative work. NONE of these groups ever allowed much real
investigation (save the HSCA under the inital leaders before Blakey
came). You are wrong in this lie as the HSCA did say there was
another shooter which meets the definition of a CONSPIRACY!
> Unlike you, I have a hard time believing that this many people could
> look into this and find nothing even close to what you kooks think
> happened.
A better example of a utter confusion is how a small minority, like
you, could look at the "evidence" and really believe it. Of course
this is not the case, you folks are either afraid of injury, losing
your jobs, losing your prestige, paid to say it is true or in your
case, you are a drone.
> A man resembling Oswald was seen firing a rifle at the motorcade.
> Oswald fled the building, and his rifle was found on the 6th floor.
> The rifle is ballistically matched to the bullets recovered from the
> limo.
I always love this one - "a man resembling Oswald" - in these drone's
minds if you resemble someone (along with thousands of others) you are
guilty. Everyone reading this better hope no one who slightly
resembles them ever commits a crime! Why did the witnesses see NO
scope when LHO's alleged rifle had one (albeit a "loose" one)?
Matching bullets to a rifle means nothing when you can't prove the
accused fired them and that they were EVER INSIDE the victim(s).
> There are a hundred other things that point directly to Oswald, but in
> the real world-not your fantasy world where everything is forged,
> planted, falsified, distorted, made up, lied about, mistaken and so on-
> this is enough to convict.
Let's start with the probe picture. Post that to begin with.
> How do you know Oswald wouldn't have confessed at trial?
If he didn't confess during the stress of interrogations with no
lawyer, he wouldn't have confessed at trial.
> In your world, you are a brave truth-teller, and all of the
> Congressmen, Senators, lawyers, cops, agents, forensic lab workers,
> newspapers, television networks, etc. are lying.
It is how the world works, you lie to make a living too.
> Why should anyone believe you when you've never investigated a crime
> in your life? What are your credentials? "Concerned citizen" doesn't
> cut it.
No investigation needed. Treat us CTers as small kids if you like.
Small kids love PICTURES! Post the probe picture from the atuopsy
showing the back wound and the throat wound were connected in JFK's
body.
> The JFK 'conspiracy' tale is a fable. The lore around the case-the
> Three Tramps, the Grassy Knoll, Umbrella Man, Black Dog Man, the
> switched body, the supposed Mauser on the 6th floor, Oswald didn't
> have time to do it, Oswald in the doorway, Oswald worked for the CIA,
> mysterious witness deaths, etc. is so ingrained on the minds of those
> that have a casual interest in the case that these factoids will never
> be fully stamped out. New guys like you come to this forum spewing the
> same old stuff that the HSCA/WCR answered decades ago. It never goes
> away.
Blah, blah, blah, this guy can't even post a picture that supports his
THEORY, yet we are the ones off base.
> And I hate to break it to you, but there isn't anything spooky about
> the Bermuda Triangle, Bigfoot doesn't exist, Bush/Cheney aren't
> complicit in 9/11, Republicans didn't use an energy beam to shoot down
> Senator Paul Wellstone's plane, there is no Loch Ness Monster, and the
> empty house down the street from you isn't haunted.
How do you know, have you "investigated" all of them?
Why did Atta bring a suitcase to the airport when he was going to die
on the plane? Why did Atta and cohorts go to a stripclub and brag
like the LHO imposters that they were going "to cause blood to flow in
the streets tomorrow" when they supposedly planned this thing for five
years? Why did Atta have 3 Kurans? How did Atta's passport get
retrieved intact and not smeared OUTSIDE of the towers? Why did Atta
have a passport on him when he was planning on dying? There are many
more questions, but these few certainly show some doubt in the
official version.
> I won't even burst your bubble about Santa Claus. Go ask your mommy
> about that one.
A guy who believes in fairy-tales is saying this!!! LOL!!!
Priceless!!!