A NEW QUESTION FOR THE TROLLS TO RUN FROM
Gil Jesus
a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
sling ?
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwOzgYzfZIWSv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
Gil Jesus
> 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
>
>
> Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
bump
Gil Jesus
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
>
>
> Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
bump
Gil Jesus
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
>
>
> Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
bump
Walt
Hey Gil, You don't seem to be getting any of the Warren Commission
apologists to respond. Do you think they're smart enough to stay away
from this graphic evidence? Or maybe they lack the guts and
intellectual honesty to engage in a discussion about the differences
between the two rifles.
There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the rifle in Oswald's hand
in CE 133A is NOT the same rifle that was found BENEATH a stack of
boxes in the TSBD.
Many people try to compare the three Back Yard photos in an effort to
find information about the rifle. Comparing an authentic item with a
fake item is an exercise in futility, and will achieve nothing. A
foundation must be established before the structure can be built. So
let's first establish the truth about CE 133A.
Did Marina take that photo?
If she took that photo at Lee's request---- How many copies of it did
Lee produce?
Two simple and elementary questions.....but crucial to establishing a
foundation.
aeffects
seems like a great question for markey-mark. Barring markey-mark
Muchmore, perhaps Timmy-hon can give it a whirl.... Timmy has a new
found interest, DP assassination relateds films photos
Gil Jesus
> On 18 Sep, 05:25, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > sling ?
>
> > >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
>
> > > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
>
> > bump
>
> Hey Gil, You don't seem to be getting any of the Warren Commission
> apologists to respond. �Do you think they're smart enough to stay away
> from this graphic evidence? �Or maybe they lack the guts and
> intellectual honesty to engage in a discussion about the differences
> between the two rifles.
>
Perhaps they hope their wisdom to stay away from the question is cover
enough for their gutlessness.
Bud
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
Walt
> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > sling ?
>
The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
>
>
>
> >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
>
> > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bud
> On 18 Sep, 19:03, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > sling ?
>
> The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
>
> Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
Far be it from me to argue with kooks about what they want to see in
blurry photos. A few points, though...
Where do you see a sling going through the "ring" in that photo Gil
produced?
Why doesn`t Gil produce blow-ups of the sling in all the BY photos?
And lastly, couldn`t the ring just be the ring shown on the end of
the sling itself shown here in this photo of the disassembled
assassination rifle...
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/disassembledrifle.JPG
Gil Jesus
> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > sling ?
>
> � �The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
SMOKIN DA BUD is in denial, but can he deny this ? :
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwOzgYzfZIWSv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
Walt
> On Sep 18, 8:47 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > On 18 Sep, 19:03, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > > sling ?
>
> > The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
>
> > Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
>
> Far be it from me to argue with kooks about what they want to see in
> blurry photos. A few points, though...
>
> Where do you see a sling going through the "ring" in that photo Gil
> produced?
>
> Why doesn`t Gil produce blow-ups of the sling in all the BY photos?
>
> And lastly, couldn`t the ring just be the ring shown on the end of
> the sling itself shown here in this photo of the disassembled
> assassination rifle...
>
> http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/disassembledrifle.JPG
This GRRRRRREAT!!..... First the Dud says... "The backyard photo
shows no bottom mounted sling."
Then he asks...... "Where do you see a sling going through the "ring"
in that photo Gil produced?"
His question reveals that he extracted his head long enough to see the
"ring" in that photo, and he acknowledged that the rifle has bottom
sling swivels. Thanks for being stupid Dud.
>
> Why doesn`t Gil produce blow-ups of the sling in all the BY photos?
The photo ( CE 133A ) that shows the sling swivel on the bottom of the
rifle is THE ONLY authentic Back Yard photo.
The other two photos are fakes created by the DPD. Marina took CE
133A at the request of Lee. Lee used the negative to produce at least
four copies of that photo. He signed one for George De M., one for his
daughter June, he sent one to the Daily Worker, and he gave one to
Mike Paine. Since there is only ONE authentic back yard photo what
would it prove if Gill provided blow ups of the two fake photos???
>
> And lastly, couldn`t the ring just be the ring shown on the end of
> the sling itself shown here in this photo of the disassembled
> assassination rifle...
Once again Dud reveals that he knows there is a sling swivel on the
bottom of that rifle.... But NO Dud the "D" rings on the TSBD rifle
are no where near that front barrel band and what's more they can not
be slid up to that position.
Ha, ha, ha, Dud ...I caught ya extracting yer head and peeking.
>
>
>
> > > >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
>
> > > > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Gil Jesus
ignore the barrel band with the mount for the ring and the ring itself
and instead argues that he cannot see the sling.
The point is that the backyard Carcano was EQUIPPED for a bottom-
mounted sling and the Depository Carcano was not.
That's what the photos show.
That's what Bud tries to avoid.
Walt
> Once again we're left to wonder if Bud is smokin' da bud. He tries to
> ignore the barrel band with the mount for the ring and the ring itself
> and instead argues that he cannot see the sling.
Well maybe he can't see that "sling" ( light colored and added to CE
133A) I've heard that some drugs cause blurred vision, and allow the
doper to see only with his peripheral vision.
Bud
> On 18 Sep, 20:05,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 18, 8:47 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
> > > > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > > > sling ?
>
> > > The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
>
> > > Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
>
> > Far be it from me to argue with kooks about what they want to see in
> > blurry photos. A few points, though...
>
> > Where do you see a sling going through the "ring" in that photo Gil
> > produced?
>
> > Why doesn`t Gil produce blow-ups of the sling in all the BY photos?
>
> > And lastly, couldn`t the ring just be the ring shown on the end of
> > the sling itself shown here in this photo of the disassembled
> > assassination rifle...
>
> > http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/disassembledrifle.JPG
>
> This GRRRRRREAT!!..... First the Dud says... "The backyard photo
> shows no bottom mounted sling."
You and Gil haven`t shown that that is what it is. You`ve merely
said thats what it is. Kooks say a lot of stupid shit.
I remember you bringing this up before, and I was familiar with the
issue. Kooks pretend that if they say something, that makes it an
established fact. Kooks saying "This is a bottom sling swivel" is
meaningless." Expecting LN to proceed as if this is an established
fact is retarded.
One final note. I`ve looked at clearer photos of that particular BY
photo, and it seems that along with blowing up that "ring", some
"enhancement" has been done to make it appear more "ring-like".
> Then he asks...... "Where do you see a sling going through the "ring"
> in that photo Gil produced?"
>
> His question reveals that he extracted his head long enough to see the
> "ring" in that photo, and he acknowledged that the rifle has bottom
> sling swivels. Thanks for being stupid Dud.
That, of course, is not what I said. And you, of course, did not
answer the question. If that is a sling swivel, why isn`t the sling
attached to it?
> > Why doesn`t Gil produce blow-ups of the sling in all the BY photos?
>
> The photo ( CE 133A ) that shows the sling swivel on the bottom of the
> rifle is THE ONLY authentic Back Yard photo.
Thats what an idiot thinks.
> The other two photos are fakes created by the DPD. Marina took CE
> 133A at the request of Lee. Lee used the negative to produce at least
> four copies of that photo. He signed one for George De M., one for his
> daughter June, he sent one to the Daily Worker, and he gave one to
> Mike Paine. Since there is only ONE authentic back yard photo what
> would it prove if Gill provided blow ups of the two fake photos???
Kooks say it`s a bottom sling mount. Kooks say only one BY photo is
genuine. Kooks say a lot of stupid shit.
> > And lastly, couldn`t the ring just be the ring shown on the end of
> > the sling itself shown here in this photo of the disassembled
> > assassination rifle...
>
> Once again Dud reveals that he knows there is a sling swivel on the
> bottom of that rifle....
No, he doesn`t know what it is, whether it is attached to the rifle,
or if it is attached, where. It is the nature of small blurry details
in photos. Kooks are just making absolute statements the evidence
doesn`t support, it`s nothing new.
>But NO Dud the "D" rings on the TSBD rifle
> are no where near that front barrel band and what's more they can not
> be slid up to that position.
It doesn`t have to be the mounting at all, but merely a feature of
the sling itself. There are buckles and clips, and as I pointed out,
the sling on the assassination rifle appears to have a round, hollow
latch the attaches to the mount.
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/disassembledrifle.JPG
Bud
> Once again we're left to wonder ifBudis smokin' dabud. He tries to
> ignore the barrel band with the mount for the ring and the ring itself
> and instead argues that he cannot see the sling.
>
> The point is that the backyard Carcano was EQUIPPED for a bottom-
> mounted sling and the Depository Carcano was not.
No, the point I raised was that if that is a sling mount like you
contend it is, and the photo shows a sling, why isn`t the sling
attached to that mount?
> That's what the photos show.
Ok, lets do it this way. I say that the round "ring" is actually the
circular part of the sling clasp shown in this photo (the sling itself
being against the rifle, and perpendicular to the camera, so it is
unseen). Prove me wrong.
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/disassembledrifle.JPG
> That's whatBudtries to avoid.
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why in the exploded photos does that thing Gilly Girl is calling a
ring look exactly like the shadows or whatever they are all over the
fence in the background??? Looks more to me like that is just a
shadow behind the rifle that happens to line up with where a sling
ring would be. It is the same exact shape, especially in the second
photo as the other markings on the fence that look like big spiders.
Here's a project for you Gilly Girl....explode those other markings on
the fence and compare them to your first exploded picture. Prove it's
a ring....because it sure as hell doesn't look like one. Furthermore,
in your first blown up picture the so called ring has no ring at all
and it is very dark (open at the bottom)...as you continue to blow it
up more the top gets lighter and the distortion makes it look like
there is something there when there isn't.
Did you doctor up these photos to fit your agenda Gilly Girl??
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Gil,
I think that photo is too indistinct to make the claim you're making.
The other two backyard photos appear to show the sling is side
mounted, just like when Day took it out of the TSBD.
Oswald may have made a few changes to the sling between March and
November of 1963, Gil. Have you ever thought of that?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 18, 7:36 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
> 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
>
> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7753ac6e-306a-4efe...@r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi Gil,
I think that photo is too indistinct to make the claim you're making.
The other two backyard photos appear to show the sling is side
mounted, just like when Day took it out of the TSBD.
Oswald may have made a few changes to the sling between March and
November of 1963, Gil. Have you ever thought of that?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timmy;
Are you claiming that CE-139 had Both "Bottom/Side Sling Swivels?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walt
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7753ac6e-306a-4efe...@r15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi Gil,
>
> I think that photo is too indistinct to make the claim you're making.
>
> The other two backyard photos appear to show the sling is side
> mounted, just like when Day took it out of the TSBD.
Don't care what the other two fake photos show...... But you may be
interested in what the FBI said about the "sling in CE 133B. (they
didn't agree with your observation. Perhaps a new pair of glasses
will help.
>
> Oswald may have made a few changes to the sling between March and
> November of 1963, Gil. Have you ever thought of that?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Timmy;
> Are you claiming that CE-139 had Both "Bottom/Side Sling Swivels?
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Sep 18, 7:36 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > sling ?
>
> >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
>
> > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?- Hide quoted text -
Gil Jesus
> a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> sling ?
>
>
> Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
CE 134 is an enlargement of CE133-A. I invite everyone to look at it
and see the mounting and ring on the borttom of the rifle.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0267b.htm
Likewise, the rifle advertised in the ad ( February 1963 ) that Oswald
ordered the rifle from was clearly equipped for a bottom mounted
sling:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=222208
Oswald ordered and was photographed with a rifle that was clearly
equipped for a a bottom mounted sling.
Now maybe the trolls can explain why the Depository Carcano was not.
Bud
> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:> 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > sling ?
>
> >http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwO...
>
> > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
>
> ====================================================
>
> CE 134 is an enlargement of CE133-A. I invite everyone to look at it
> and see the mounting and ring on the borttom of the rifle.
You can say thats what it is all day long. What you can`t do is
establish that is what it is.
> http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol...
>
> Likewise, the rifle advertised in the ad ( February 1963 ) that Oswald
> ordered the rifle from was clearly equipped for a bottom mounted
> sling:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId...
As everyone should know by now, Oswald did not receive the model of
rifle shown in the ad.
> Oswald ordered and was photographed with a rifle that was clearly
> equipped for a a bottom mounted sling.
The evidence is inconclusive. The only thing that is clear is that
kooks very much want to believe what is shown is a bottom mounted
sling. But if this is a bottom mounted sling, why isn`t the sling
attached to what you claim is the mount?
> Now maybe the trolls can explain why the Depository Carcano was not.
It`s simple. They are both the same rifle with the sling mounted the
same.
Gil Jesus
> � It`s simple. They are both the same rifle with the sling mounted the
> same.
ROFLMAO..... this asshole denies even what he sees with his own eyes.
This is what happens when you LIE kids. You have to stick with the lie
even when it becomes obvious to anyone with a brain that it is a lie.
Then you look like a fool like this jerk.
Bud
> On Sep 20, 8:10 am,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > It`s simple. They are both the same rifle with the sling mounted the
> > same.
>
> ROFLMAO..... this asshole denies even what he sees with his own eyes.
What I see is inconclusive.
> This is what happens when you LIE kids. You have to stick with the lie
> even when it becomes obvious to anyone with a brain that it is a lie.
<snicker> You`ve established this as fact because you say it looks
like a mount for a bottom mounted sling to you? How much weight do you
think that carries?
And you keep ducking this question... why isn`t the sling attached
to this mount if it is what you say it is?
> Then you look like a fool like this jerk.
Kook claims are a dime a dozen. Wake me when you can establish your
claim as fact.
justm...@gmail.com
Wow...thats twice the hypocritical Christian has used foul language.
It appears you're getting under his skin Bud LOL. Proving hes full of
shit is easy...I will repost for Gilly Girl once again what I posted
earlier, because he obviously ignored it for some reason....could it
be because I'm right and what he's trying to pawn off as a sling ring
really is just a shadow from the fence?? Hop to it Gilly Girl...blow
up those other little shadows or whatever they are on the fence.
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:6ea8bd84-7749-4757...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 20, 8:32 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 20, 8:10 am,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>> > It`s simple. They are both the same rifle with the sling mounted the
>> > same.
>>
>> ROFLMAO..... this asshole denies even what he sees with his own eyes.
>
> What I see is inconclusive.
>
>> This is what happens when you LIE kids. You have to stick with the lie
>> even when it becomes obvious to anyone with a brain that it is a lie.
>
> <snicker> You`ve established this as fact because you say it looks
> like a mount for a bottom mounted sling to you? How much weight do you
> think that carries?
> And you keep ducking this question... why isn`t the sling attached
> to this mount if it is what you say it is?
Whoever owned it didn't attach it YET! ! !
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Walt
Bud......."Kooks say a lot of stupid shit."
Translation:.... Kooks say things contrary to the Warren Report and
attempt to destroy my belief in fairy tales.
Gil Jesus
>
> Bud......."Kooks say a lot of stupid shit."
Translation: I can't answer the questions.
Walt
> On Sep 18, 9:41 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 18 Sep, 20:05,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 18, 8:47 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On 18 Sep, 19:03,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > > > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > > > > sling ?
>
> > > > The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
>
> > > > Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
>
> > > Far be it from me to argue with kooks about what they want to see in
> > > blurry photos. A few points, though...
>
> > > Where do you see a sling going through the "ring" in that photo Gil
> > > produced?
OK Dud......Let's start at this point, where you acknowledge that the
rifle in CE 133A has a sling swivel hanging empty ( no leather strap
throught the loop) below the front barrel band.
We are in complete agreement on that point.......
Next point.... What color was the leather sling on the rifle that was
found in the TSBD?? Black? Blackish brown? Dark brown? I'll assume
that you'll concur that it was a very dark color.....(Unless ya wanna
lie and make a fool of yourself)
What color was the rifle that was found in the TSBD? Black? Blackish
brown? Dark brown? I'll assume that you'll
agree that it was a very dark color.
Now then.... Can you give me a LOGICAL explanation why two objects
that are similarly colored appear to be totally different colored in
CE 133A?
justm...@gmail.com
For the third time I will post this for Gilly Girl to either answer or
do as i requested. He has ignored this twice already....will he run
and hide a 3rd time and pretend he isn't seeing it? My guess is yes,
or he will sidetrack with one of his usual Joey comments to get his
ass off the hook.
Walt
Well would ya looky here!!!..... A Lner claiming tha Back Yard photo
is a fake!!
"Did you doctor up these photos to fit your agenda Gilly Girl??"
Will wonders never cease?? A CT points out a serious problem that is
revealed by a Back Yard photo, and a LNer says the photo is a fake.
I'll be damned..... the world's turned upside down.
justm...@gmail.com
I see you have a reading disability too Walt. I did NOT say the photo
was a fake, I said the thing Gil is claiming to be the ring for the
sling looks just like the other shadows on the fence. No wonder you
idiots never get anywhere with your CT crap. That "Shape" is NOT
connected at the bottom as a ring would be and it is dark enough where
if it were a ring it would show up very well. Only until Gilly Girl
exploded the picture did it look like there was something connecting
this shadow to make it look like a ring.
Walt? Once again, I did not say the photo was a fake...I said Gils
interpetation of the photo is BULLSHIT.
Bud
<snicker> Fairy Tales? Who need fantastic components like switched
rifles and faked photos in their theories?
Bud
> > On 19 Sep, 15:21,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >Bud......."Kooks say a lot of stupid shit."
>
> Translation: I can't answer the questions.
I answered the question twice. Do you need my answer translated
into "idiot" for you?
Walt
Liar!..... Here's what you wrote:...."Did you doctor up these photos
to fit your agenda Gilly Girl??"
Clearly you're saying that the photos are "doctored" and therefore
they are fakes.
Damned Liar!
Walt
Who needs bizarre theories that defy the laws of physics to support
their stupid theory that a single bullet transversed through two mens
bodies, created 7 wounds, and smashed bones, and then crawled back out
of a thigh wound to emerge in pristine condition on a stretcher that
had no connection to the victims?
Bud
> On 19 Sep, 15:21,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 18, 9:41 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > On 18 Sep, 20:05,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 18, 8:47 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On 18 Sep, 19:03,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > > > > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > > > > > sling ?
>
> > > > > The backyard photo shows no bottom mounted sling.
>
> > > > > Hey Dud.... Ya can't see with yer head in yer ass...
>
> > > > Far be it from me to argue with kooks about what they want to see in
> > > > blurry photos. A few points, though...
>
> > > > Where do you see a sling going through the "ring" in that photo Gil
> > > > produced?
>
> OK Dud......Let's start at this point, where you acknowledge that the
> rifle in CE 133A has a sling swivel hanging empty ( no leather strap
> throught the loop) below the front barrel band.
This is the problem with discussing things with idiots. Even though
I clearly state my position, the idiots still can`t help but
misrepresent it. The question i asked was that if that is what you say
it is, why isn`t the sling attached to it? I made several different
points, from different approaches, which seems to overload the minds
of the kooks. I made the point that the isolated detail you are
referring to is inconclusive, it doesn`t bear the weight of your
claim. I also made the point that the preponderance of evidence (the
other backyards photos, along with other things too numerous to
mention) shows that the rifle shown is the same rifle found in the
TSBD.
> We are in complete agreement on that point.......
You should try to understand the point before you agree with it.
> Next point.... What color was the leather sling on the rifle that was
> found in the TSBD?? Black? Blackish brown? Dark brown? I'll assume
> that you'll concur that it was a very dark color.....(Unless ya wanna
> lie and make a fool of yourself)
>
> What color was the rifle that was found in the TSBD? Black? Blackish
> brown? Dark brown? I'll assume that you'll
> agree that it was a very dark color.
>
> Now then.... Can you give me a LOGICAL explanation why two objects
> that are similarly colored appear to be totally different colored in
> CE 133A?
You think CE 133A is a color photo?
Or are you just are unaware of how lighting can make a dark item
appear light in a B&W photo?
<SNIP>
Walt
The Dud sidestepped and slithered away.......Pretending to be an
imbecile. No, I retract that ...maybe he wasn't pretending.
Perhaps he really is to stupid to realize that both the dark surface
of the rifle and the dark surface of the sling SHOULD reflect the
sunlight in a similar manner. He's already on record as
acknowledging that there is no leather strap passing throught the
"ring" on the bottom of the rifle in CE 133A. He's also on record as
acknowledging that the "sling" and the rifle appear to be different
colored. He's just too damned dumb to connect the dots and admit that
the "sling" that seems to be on the rifle in CE 133A was not actually
in the photograph when Marina snapped the shutter. That light colored
"sling" was drawn onto the photo after it was developed.
>
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
justm...@gmail.com
Walt? You're out of your feaking mind!!! Listen up incoherent
idiot....I asked Jesus if HE doctored up the photo to make that shadow
look like a ring....not that the photo is a fake! So Walt
cakebread...if the photo is a FAKE then your buddie Gilly Girl Jesus,
has posted a ficticious picture of the BY photo on the net and is
trying to pawn it off as being the real deal.
As you keep telling others....GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS
WALT...it's showing what a total jackass you are.
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
ROFLMAO...did you use magic markers or your new box of Crayola Crayons
idiot????
Walt
Dear stupid..... If a photo has been altered (doctored) and it no
longer depicts the original scene then it delivers false information.
The photo is said to be a fake. For example If someone were to take
a photo of your face and place it on the body of a jackass ....would
that photo be fake?
Anxiously awaiting your reply Damned liar.
So ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
muc...@gmail.com
> > was a fake, I said the thing Gil is claiming to be the ring for the
> > sling looks just like the other shadows on the fence. No wonder you
> > idiots never get anywhere with your CT crap. That "Shape" is NOT
> > connected at the bottom as a ring would be and it is dark enough where
> > if it were a ring it would show up very well. Only until Gilly Girl
> > exploded the picture did it look like there was something connecting
> > this shadow to make it look like a ring.
>
> > Walt? Once again, I did not say the photo was a fake...I said Gils
> > interpetation of the photo is BULLSHIT.-
>
> Liar!..... Here's what you wrote:...."Did you doctor up these photos
> to fit your agenda Gilly Girl??"
>
> Clearly you're saying that the photos are "doctored" and therefore
> they are fakes.
>
> Damned Liar!
One of the images in Gil's composite looks like it may have been
digitally "enhanced" to make the alleged swivel appear more ring-like.
Just asked him if he had doctored the photo - which can't be
considered an unreasonable question, considering Gil's history of
making things up. Only an imbecile would think that she was implying
that the original image was a fake.
Is there no limit to the depths you're prepared to sink to, trying to
deflect attention from your friend's deception? Disgusting...
justm...@gmail.com
My reply is then I would look like the species you belong too....more
jackass then human.
Gil Jesus faked the photo then, is that what your saying Jackass?
Here, let me put words in your mouth like your trying to do to
me....WALT HAS ANNOUNCED THAT GIL JESUS HAS FAKED THIS PHOTO TO MAKE
EVERYONE THINK THAT THE SHADOW FROM THE FENCE IS ACTUALLY A RING TO
HOLD A SLING.
Now Walt...prove to us that this is not what you meant when telling me
that I said the photo was a fake when I didn't. Come on idiot....we're
all waiting.
Walt Quote On:
If a photo has been altered (doctored) and it no
> longer depicts the original scene then it delivers false information
Quote Off
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thank you Mark....Walt appears to have difficulty with reading
comprehension like most of the kooks on this board. They either ignore
what they can't defend (as Jesus has done with my comment/question) or
they show their ignorance by trying to twist around what is in plain
English and any 5 year old could understand.
Walt
It's a shame that you're ignorant..... If you knew that Gil did NOT
even work with those photos, then you wouldn't ask ignorant questions
like " did you doctor those photos, Gil" I know who worked with those
photos and I believe him to be very honest. As I recall he
acknowledged "enhancing" one of the photos as a way of demonstrating
some obscure point about photography. ( I don't remember the point)
But You can get off gil's back, and stop accusing him of being
dishonest simply because you are ignorant.
justm...@gmail.com
I don't care who enhanced the photos, they were enhanced to show
something that isn't really there and your butt buddy Gilly posted
them as a fact when he has no proof what so ever except a photo that
someone played around with. And btw, the photos have Gils name
attached to them and his little writeup on them so he has taken them
as his own and is posting them on the net...therefore they are his and
this misleading tale he is telling is his ignorance, not mine. You
idiots always see things in photos that aren't really there....I'll
bet you believe in the boogie man too. You're like a 3 ring
circus...one clown leading another.
Walt
What have you got against circus's?? and clowns? I thought a LNer
who lives in a fantasy world would like circus's.
justm...@gmail.com
Ah....changing the subject matter which as far as I'm concerned means
you realized what an idiot you were by not comprehending what I
typed....Now let's see how long Gilly Girl is going to keep those
satin sneakers in motion.
Walt
Naw.... Just don't see any reason to debate a liar.... What's to be
gained??
you wrote:...."Did you doctor up these photos to fit your agenda
Gilly Girl??"
That question clearly indicates that you think the photos are
fakes...... Of course you deny and that makes you a liar.
Only a fool would argue with a liar....And I'm not a fool.
Bud
In context, it`s clear she was referring to the enhanced detail
being doctored to look more "ring-like", not the backyard photo
itself.
muc...@gmail.com
I don't really care who performed the actual photoshopping. The point
is that Gil used the image to argue his case - without pointing out
the manipulation - and you call *me* ignorant for impugning *his*
honesty?!
Bud
Your idiot expectations are not evidence, Walt.
> He's already on record as
> acknowledging that there is no leather strap passing throught the
> "ring" on the bottom of the rifle in CE 133A.
I`m on record asking that if it is a sling mount, why isn`t the
sling attached to it? You are on record running from this question.
> He's also on record as
> acknowledging that the "sling" and the rifle appear to be different
> colored.
I never said a word about the color of the rifle in that photo.
Idiot.
> He's just too damned dumb to connect the dots and admit that
> the "sling" that seems to be on the rifle in CE 133A was not actually
> in the photograph when Marina snapped the shutter. That light colored
> "sling" was drawn onto the photo after it was developed.
Yah, this is the stupid shit we should abandon the WCR for.
Bud
Well, it is bizarre when you misrepresent the evidence. There was no
pristine bullet found on a stretcher in this case, there was a bullet
showing trauma found. The stretcher the bullet was found on did have a
connection to the victims, it was a stretcher in the hospital the
victims were taken, and there is the very real possibility that one of
the victims was placed on that very stretcher. As far as the wounds
this bullet made, bullets causing wounds is not remarkable.
aeffects
the ONLY thing your on record for (and who really gives a shit about
what your on the record for) Dudster, is being the ultimate no-nothing
troll. Carry on, son
Bud
Pay attention, Walt brought that phrase into the discussion,
stoner.
>is being the ultimate no-nothing
> troll. Carry on, son
Yet it was you injected this nonsense that doesn`t pertain in any
way to the topic being discussed, in a very "say-nothing" troll
manner, while I was addressing the issues Walt and Gil raised.
David Von Pein
>>> "the ONLY thing your on record for (and who really gives a shit about what your on the record for) Dudster, is being the ultimate no-nothing troll. Carry on, son" <<<
Here we have a two-line post from The Crackpipe with six grammatical
errors. Lovely.
So, in addition to being one of the kookiest conspiracy-happy idiots
to set up shop at this asylum (which couldn't be more obvious, even if
a "lurker" were to spend just a single day reading the posts here),
Mr. D.G. Healy can also rest comfortably in his syringe-filled bed in
knowing that he is easily the most dictionary-challenged kook this
forum has ever seen.
Congrats, Crackpipe! Another great achievement to be proud of --
illiteracy!
aeffects
> >>> "the ONLY thing your on record for (and who really gives a shit about what your on the record for) Dudster, is being the ultimate no-nothing troll. Carry on, son" <<<
>
> Here we have a two-line post from The Crackpipe with six grammatical
> errors. Lovely.
stricke upp da Lone Neut bandd -- da trol Steven Keeting still
briathes.... ROTFLMFAO
> So, in addition to being one of the kookiest conspiracy-happy idiots
> to set up shop at this asylum (which couldn't be more obvious, even if
> a "lurker" were to spend just a single day reading the posts here),
> Mr. D.G. Healy can also rest comfortably in his syringe-filled bed in
> knowing that he is easily the most dictionary-challenged kook this
> forum has ever seen.
all you troll-losers sound the same lately, hon. What's with that? Run
out of lies?
> Congrats, Crackpipe! Another great achievement to be proud of --
> illiteracy!
ROTFLMFAO -- you fuck wad ya can't win based on the evidence so you
moan to the GAWDS of Nutterism..... Carry on, hon!
David Von Pein
Another prize Healy wins (hands-down) is this one:
"The Most Incoherent Stoner On The Internet--2008."
He's typed out three or four posts in the last several minutes, and I
haven't located a coherent sentence in any of them. Quite a remarkable
feat, really. Of course, when you're filled with drugs 24/7, I guess
sounding incoherent comes pretty easy.*
* = And based on all of Healy's posts, what other conclusion could a
reasonable person reach--other than to conclude that illegal
substances inhabit his withered body nearly each minute of every day.
Sad.
aeffects
son, my fans love it.... "anything to make lone nut trolls look
like...er, lone nut trolls, of course" Carry on, hon! ROTFLMFAO
David Von Pein
>>> "son, my fans love it.... "anything to make lone nut trolls look like...er, lone nut trolls, of course" Carry on, hon!" <<<
Add yet another incoherent hunk of drivel to the long list of such
posts from The Crackpipe.
And the remarkable thing is, Healy doesn't seem to mind.
<double shrug>
aeffects
> >>> "son, my fans love it.... "anything to make lone nut trolls look like...er, lone nut trolls, of course" Carry on, hon!" <<<
>
> Add yet another incoherent hunk of drivel to the long list of such
> posts from The Crackpipe.
empty words from and empty suit with an (what else?) empty mind!
Carry on troll..... LMFAO!
> And the remarkable thing is, Healy doesn't seem to mind.
Healy left the room with Von Pein's brother, now carry on Steve
Keating.....
> <double shrug>
Sam Brown
"Walt" <papakoc...@evertek.net> wrote in message
news:a0a71df5-e10c-43dd...@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
She answered you moron. She asked if your fellow idiot Gilbert had altered
the photo. Are you retarded? Or just a dishonest old fool.
black...@aol.com
> On 18 Sep, 05:25, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > sling ?
>
>
> > > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?
>
>
> Hey Gil, You don't seem to be getting any of the Warren Commission
> apologists to respond. Do you think they're smart enough to stay away
> from this graphic evidence? Or maybe they lack the guts and
> intellectual honesty to engage in a discussion about the differences
> between the two rifles.
>
> There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the rifle in Oswald's hand
> in CE 133A is NOT the same rifle that was found BENEATH a stack of
> boxes in the TSBD.
>
You mean the rifle that was ordered and owned by Oswald, had his
fingerprints on it, and was determined to have fired the shots that
struck JFK to the exlusion of all other weapons? You mean that rifle?
tims...@gmail.com
Hi,
Say, good points you raise there. Sounds like the very SAME rifle that
the HSCA photographic panel determined was in BOTH the backyard photos
AND in the many photos of Oswald's rifle being removed from the TSBD,
shown thereafter etc etc.
It would be interesting if a poster like Gil Jesus could point to any
specific training that he possessed in the questioned/forensic
documents field that would overturn the determinations of the HSCA
photographic panel on this particular issue.
I don't believe that it would be possible for Gil to do that. Still,
perhaps he can...
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Go away flea..... you obviously know NOTHING......
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Swat that pesky flea.... he's been sittin on a pile of bullshit and
he's absorbed too much of it.
Gil Jesus
wrote:
> On Sep 21, 9:15�am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 19 Sep, 15:21, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 18, 9:41 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On 18 Sep, 20:05,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
> > > > > > On 18 Sep, 19:03,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:> On Sep 17, 5:36 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > 50. Why does the Mannlicher-Carcano in the "backyard" photograph show
> > > > > > > > a bottom mounted sling and the TSBD Carcano have a side-mounted
> > > > > > > > sling ?
>
>
> > > > > > > > Is the backyard photo a fake, or is the TSBD Carcano not Oswald's ?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> do as i requested. He has ignored this twice already....will he run
> and hide a 3rd time and pretend he isn't seeing it? My guess is yes,
> or he will sidetrack with one of his usual Joey comments to get his
> ass off the hook.
>
> Why in the exploded photos does that thing Gilly Girl is calling a
> ring look exactly like the shadows or whatever they are all over the
> fence in the background??? �Looks more to me like that is just a
> shadow behind the rifle that happens to line up with where a sling
> ring would be. It is the same exact shape, especially in the second
> photo as the other markings on the fence that look like big spiders.
> Here's a project for you Gilly Girl....explode those other markings
> on
> the fence and compare them to your first exploded picture. Prove it's
> a ring....because it sure as hell doesn't look like one. Furthermore,
> in your first blown up picture the so called ring has no ring at all
> and it is very dark (open at the bottom)...as you continue to blow it
> up more the top gets lighter and the distortion makes it look like
> there is something there when there isn't.
The photos were "exploded" a long time ago.
Photo analysis showed the ring NOT to be part of the background:
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L*LOZAQv5p0vv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
Sam Brown
Walt is intimidated. Another LN who thinks rationally and clearly. Oh dear.
Nervous Wally?
aeffects
> "Walt" <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote in message
Is this Samantha the Perv, is she preparing to utter something about
assassination? After 3000+ post what a surprise.... Don't let us down
Perv!
Sam Brown
"aeffects" <aeffe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c406c632-a66d-467e...@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
Don't you have some smack to inject junkie? Run along theres a good boy.
black...@aol.com
> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Wow. Its feels like I'm back in high school again. Is it always like
this here?
Walt
Sometimes it's worse..... Wait til you encounter Tomnln. .... You'll
see some really sick adolescent behavior
But stick around..... I think you're going to make a great punching
bag.
- Hide quoted text -
Bud
No, usually it`s grade school.