Facts LNT'ers Just *HATE* (#1)
Ben Holmes
Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's only
purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message
threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
These trolls include (but are not limited to):
Baldoni
Bigdog
Bill
Bud
Burlyguard
Cdddraftsman
Chuck Schuyler
Chu...@amcmn.com
David Von Pein
Justme1952
Miss Rita
Muc...@Gmail.com
Muc...@Hotmail.com
Sam Brown
Tims...@Gmail.com
YoHarvey
Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply deny
the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply run
with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
**********************************************************************
The only physical evidence which could show any "transit" of a bullet through
JFK, the photograph showing the interior of JFK's chest; disappeared while under
government control. The testimony 'connected' three wounds - the back, the tip
of the lung, and the throat - into a single trajectory. But the only evidence
for this damage to the lung simply disappeared.
Here's Dr. Humes testimony:
Commander Humes: ... The area of discoloration on the apical portion of the
right upper lung measured five centimeters in greatest diameter, and was wedge
shaped in configuration, with its base toward the top of the chest and its apex
down towards the substance of the lung. Once again Kodachrome photographs were
made of this area in the interior of the President's chest.
Official investigations have long known of this missing photograph:
"A phone call on January 21, 1967, 10 weeks after the inventory was signed,
reveals the importance of Clark’s private proceedings. Clark had LBJ on the
line. In the declassified, tape-recorded call, Clark reported, “Ah, we had the
three pathologists that performed the autopsy on the evening of November 22nd
come in. We had to bring Finck from Vietnam … They went into archives last night
[sic, January 20, 1967] … Now, we’ve run into one problem last night [sic] that
we didn’t know of. That is, there may be a photo missing. Dr. Humes … testified
before the Warren Commission that this one photo [was] made of the highest
portion of the right lung. The other two doctors don’t recall if such a photo
was made. They do recall discussing the desired ability of making such a photo.
But there is no such photo in these exhibits.”[147] Thus, 10 weeks after Humes
and Boswell had signed an affidavit that said that none of JFK’s autopsy
photographs were missing, Humes was apparently grousing about a missing autopsy
photograph."
http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_2.htm
So the only "evidence" that could conceivably demonstrate a transiting bullet in
JFK has disappeared. LNT'ers just *HATE* that...
justm...@gmail.com
> **********************************************************************
> Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's only
> purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message
> threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> Baldoni
> Bigdog
> Bill
> Bud
> Burlyguard
> Cdddraftsman
> Chuck Schuyler
> Chu...@amcmn.com
> David Von Pein
> Justme1952
> Miss Rita
> Much...@Hotmail.com
> Sam Brown
> Timst...@Gmail.com
> YoHarvey
>
> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply deny
> the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply run
> with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
> **********************************************************************
>
> The only physical evidence which could show any "transit" of a bullet through
> JFK, the photograph showing the interior of JFK's chest; disappeared while under
> government control. The testimony 'connected' three wounds - the back, the tip
> of the lung, and the throat - into a single trajectory. But the only evidence
> for this damage to the lung simply disappeared.
>
> Here's Dr. Humes testimony:
> Commander Humes: ... The area of discoloration on the apical portion of the
> right upper lung measured five centimeters in greatest diameter, and was wedge
> shaped in configuration, with its base toward the top of the chest and its apex
> down towards the substance of the lung. Once again Kodachrome photographs were
> made of this area in the interior of the President's chest.
>
> Official investigations have long known of this missing photograph:
>
> "A phone call on January 21, 1967, 10 weeks after the inventory was signed,
> reveals the importance of Clark's private proceedings. Clark had LBJ on the
> line. In the declassified, tape-recorded call, Clark reported, "Ah, we had the
> three pathologists that performed the autopsy on the evening of November 22nd
> [sic, January 20, 1967] ... Now, we've run into one problem last night [sic] that
> we didn't know of. That is, there may be a photo missing. Dr. Humes ... testified
> before the Warren Commission that this one photo [was] made of the highest
> portion of the right lung. The other two doctors don't recall if such a photo
> was made. They do recall discussing the desired ability of making such a photo.
> But there is no such photo in these exhibits."[147] Thus, 10 weeks after Humes
> and Boswell had signed an affidavit that said that none of JFK's autopsy
> photographs were missing, Humes was apparently grousing about a missing autopsy
>
> So the only "evidence" that could conceivably demonstrate a transiting bullet in
> JFK has disappeared. LNT'ers just *HATE* that...
ROFLMAO he even put our names in alphabetical order. Well lurkers, let
me respond with a list of the morons on this NG that will twist
witness testimony to fit their agendas, post theories and have no
support for them, make absurd comments that have abolutely no proof
and (Holmes) will alter your original post when responding to you and
then use the excuse that he cleans up posts before responding. Certain
members of this group LIE and decieve, oh wait that would be just one
member Gil Jesus with his 10 other aliases.
Gil Jesus aka Justin, justinsmom, hotrod, robcrap, curious george,
samlappacunt, justacunt, jmoore..etc.
Tom Rossley aka tomnln
David Healy aka aeffects
Ben Holmes
Lazuli
walt
lone
herbert blenner
Come to think of it, just about all the CT's on this NG are full of
themselves. That's why they don't post on any other forums, they've
already been laughed off them for stupidity.
Nice work Holmes, thanks for pointing out the intelligent LNs on
here...gave me the chance to list the idiots.
Gil Jesus
> Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's only
> purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message
> threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> Baldoni
> Bigdog
> Bill
> Bud
> Burlyguard
> Cdddraftsman
> Chuck Schuyler
> Chu...@amcmn.com
> David Von Pein
> Justme1952
> Miss Rita
> Much...@Hotmail.com
> Sam Brown
> Timst...@Gmail.com
>
> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply deny
> the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply run
> with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
> **********************************************************************
>
> The only physical evidence which could show any "transit" of a bullet through
> JFK, the photograph showing the interior of JFK's chest; disappeared while under
> government control. The testimony 'connected' three wounds - the back, the tip
> of the lung, and the throat - into a single trajectory. But the only evidence
> for this damage to the lung simply disappeared.
>
> Here's Dr. Humes testimony:
> Commander Humes: ... The area of discoloration on the apical portion of the
> right upper lung measured five centimeters in greatest diameter, and was wedge
> shaped in configuration, with its base toward the top of the chest and its apex
> down towards the substance of the lung. Once again Kodachrome photographs were
> made of this area in the interior of the President's chest.
>
> Official investigations have long known of this missing photograph:
>
> "A phone call on January 21, 1967, 10 weeks after the inventory was signed,
> reveals the importance of Clark's private proceedings. Clark had LBJ on the
> line. In the declassified, tape-recorded call, Clark reported, "Ah, we had the
> three pathologists that performed the autopsy on the evening of November 22nd
> [sic, January 20, 1967] ... Now, we've run into one problem last night [sic] that
> we didn't know of. That is, there may be a photo missing. Dr. Humes ... testified
> before the Warren Commission that this one photo [was] made of the highest
> portion of the right lung. The other two doctors don't recall if such a photo
> was made. They do recall discussing the desired ability of making such a photo.
> But there is no such photo in these exhibits."[147] Thus, 10 weeks after Humes
> and Boswell had signed an affidavit that said that none of JFK's autopsy
> photographs were missing, Humes was apparently grousing about a missing autopsy
>
> So the only "evidence" that could conceivably demonstrate a transiting bullet in
> JFK has disappeared. LNT'ers just *HATE* that...
You're right, of course, Ben. The scumbags that you listed will NOT
discuss evidence or testimony. They'll only distract and insult. They
prove that every time they post. They think that they're fooling the
lurkers, but the lurkers are not stupid.
Miss Rita
> Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's only
> purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message
> threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> Baldoni
> Bigdog
> Bill
> Bud
> Burlyguard
> Cdddraftsman
> Chuck Schuyler
> Chu...@amcmn.com
> David Von Pein
> Justme1952
> MissRita
> Much...@Hotmail.com
> Sam Brown
> Timst...@Gmail.com
>
> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply deny
> the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply run
> with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
Oh, good Lord, this is the same person who started calling names and
ran when faced with the fact that the majority of Americans don't know
who killed JFK or if there was a conspiracy.
You'd better killfile yourself. Holmes, you're a self-described
"troll."
Rita
Miss Rita
Actually I was very willing to discuss the difference between knowing
and believing because Ben Holmes puts great stock in polls. Then he
started calling names and ran.
Hypocrite.
Rita
They'll only distract and insult. They
> prove that every time they post. They think that they're fooling the
> lurkers, but the lurkers are not stupid.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gil Jesus
>
> > You're right, of course, Ben. The scumbags that you listed will NOT
> > discuss evidence or testimony.
>
> Actually I was very willing to discuss the difference between knowing
> and believing
Discussing the "difference between knowing and believing" is not the
same as discussing evidence and testimony.
In other words, you want a chance to distract the discussion from
evidence and testimony.
>
> They'll only distract and insult. They
> prove that every time they post. They think that they're fooling the
> > lurkers, but the lurkers are not stupid
>
> Hypocrite.
>
> Rita
Once again, a troll proves my point.
justm...@gmail.com
It's discussing the evidence when your fellow idiot Ct Holmes bases
half of his comments on what the polls show little sissy. Stop trying
to play the big man, your NOTHING but scum. The 4 stooges continue to
make asses of themselves with their ring leader bigot boy Jesus
Miss Rita
There are no other words.
If it walks like a hypocrite and talks like a hypocrite -- it's a
hypocrite. Now you'd better killfile yourself, you're calling names,
too.
Rita
Miss Rita
wrote:
> On Jan 1, 11:45 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 1, 11:35�am, Miss Rita <r_hans...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > You're right, of course, Ben. The scumbags that you listed will NOT
> > > > discuss evidence or testimony.
>
> > > Actually I was very willing to discuss the difference between knowing
> > > and believing
>
> > Discussing the "difference between knowing and believing" is not the
> > same as discussing evidence and testimony.
>
> > In other words, you want a chance to distract the discussion from
> > evidence and testimony.
>
> > > They'll only distract and insult. They
> > > prove that every time they post. They think that they're fooling the
> > > > lurkers, but the lurkers are not stupid
>
> > > Hypocrite.
>
> > > Rita
>
> > Once again, a troll proves my point.
>
> It's discussing the evidence when your fellow idiot Ct Holmes bases
> half of his comments on what the polls show little sissy.
Yeah, but when someone can't win, and can't admit being wrong, yapping
about distractions, trolls, queers, making lists, blocking senders,
and God only knows what else, is the "courageous" thing to do.
I don't think some of these folks get out very much.
:)
Rita
Stop trying
> to play the big man, your NOTHING but scum. The 4 stooges continue to
> make asses of themselves with their ring leader bigot boy Jesus- Hide quoted text -
aeffects
wrote:
stay on point puss...... simple fact is: you've posted not ONE posting
concerning the JFK assassination, that my little lovely means you're a
lower than whale shit troll.... this board is about the JFK
assassination, not your obvious limited IT bullshit, especially if
your a IT maroon that's never heard of remailers..... IF you're a IT
dolt, whoever is paying you has been robbed....
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Your tax money moron...live with it. Are you here to discuss John
FRANCIS Kennedy now??? LMAO
aeffects
if you don't know the material Rita, don't expect a passing grade...
simple as that.... Just*puke*me1952 has been on the receiving end of
that for nearly a year now...
If you haven't noticed by know, not much advance has been made by the
Lone Neuter's... the last real Nutter folks that knew the case ran and
I mean RAN to alt.assassination.jfk, they kept getting their asses
kicked here.... Only *specific* freaks of Lone Nut Nature exist here
now (we call them agent provocateurs).... Holmes has listed a good
many of them above...
So get caught up with Sammy and Just*puke*me1952 neither of which are
lesbians, btw... maybe a couple of cross-dressing guys interested in
cyber-sex, throwback to 10 years ago.... talk about not getting out
much, I'm sure their keyboards are public health matters
for the benefit in JFK research.....
aeffects
aeffects
really? by all means present your case, Rita.....I believe the case
is: between 70-90% believe a conspiracy killed JFK. Now IF you can
refute that please cite the appropriate source and quoting David Von
Pein aka Dave Reitzes doesn't count
> Rita
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
If you haven't noticed by know, not much advance has been made by the
Lone Neuter's... the last real Nutter folks that knew the case ran
and
We already won idiot...now we can continue to spend our time educating
those that haven't made up their mind yet and humiliated idiots like
you.
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -
Healy? Silicon Valley phoned. Windows need cleaning.
Holmes? "To Tell the Truth" TV show phoned. They say you're the
BEST liar they've ever seen.
Jesus/Robcap? Your father phoned. He disavows any knowledge of your
existence.
Rossley? The funeral home called. They await you.
What are the odds of this one NG having the finest four liars in JFK
Conspiracy? Gee, almost as if they were planted on here. Sure glad
the government is paying me what they do. TY CT's for supporting
their efforts with your tax dollars......
aeffects
I don't think many will buy your "willingness" Rita.... And of course,
you being a writer care what folks believe.... BHolme's is NOT one to
call names, Rita -- he has years of posts here, you might want to
check (or not) his archive...... this isn't latter day
alt.war.vietnam, Rita...
Miss Rita
I know the difference between opinion and knowing. Fuck a passing
grade from a bunch a hypocrites who have nothing better to do with
their lives except make lists of who they consider worthy of reading
when someone rocks their little world.
I don't care "who" they are.
> If you haven't noticed by know, not much advance has been made by the
> Lone Neuter's...
Again, that's not my concern.
the last real Nutter folks that knew the case ran and
> I mean RAN to alt.assassination.jfk, they kept getting their asses
> kicked here.... Only *specific* freaks of Lone Nut Nature exist here
> now (we call them agent provocateurs).... Holmes has listed a good
> many of them above...
>
> So get caught up with Sammy and Just*puke*me1952 neither of which are
> lesbians, btw... maybe a couple of cross-dressing guys interested in
> cyber-sex, throwback to 10 years ago.... talk about not getting out
> much, I'm sure their keyboards are public health matters
You're just going to have to understand, David, I don't care what
anyone does with their sex life. That you do suggests a lot about your
own state of mind. Why in hell would you even want to think about the
state of someone's keyboard? Do you ever plan on having dinner with
any of these people, or even meeting them for any reason whatsoever?
It's nothing but strangers screaming in the dark. Try to have some fun
with it ferchrissakes. Hell, I don't even really care about self-
appointed "troll" list outers. I was just wasting time getting ready
for my mother-in-laws New Year dinner.
Rita
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
As you can see Rita, Holmes rabid lapdog Healy quotes the polls as his
proof there was a conspiracy too. It's all they have. Your reasoning
of the polls consisting of "not knowing" and actually voting
conspiracy is right. Without polls Holmes has NOTHING.....Healy never
had anything to begin with so he doesn't count. He's just here to
sniff butts.
Miss Rita
Uh, you have me confused with someone else. I care how my writing is
presented, and anyone who wants to be taken seriously should do the
same. Anyway, though, I'm not a writer, I'm a banker. Ol' ted is the
writer.
BHolme's is NOT one to
> call names, Rita --
You'd better check the "evidence," punkin'.
>he has years of posts here,
Oh, whoopie.
you might want to
> check (or not) his archive...... this isn't latter day
> alt.war.vietnam, Rita...
It isn't history class in graduate school, either!
Rita
>
>
>
> > Hypocrite.
>
> > Rita
>
> > They'll only distract and insult. They
>
> > > prove that every time they post. They think that they're fooling the
> > > lurkers, but the lurkers are not stupid.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Miss Rita
I've already presented my case, David. "Believing" is not the same as
knowing. If you can refute that, do something better than recite the
stupid polls again and again and again.
Do you understand now? There is only "one" majority. You can't have a
majority that knows and a majority which believes at the same time.
Did you fail high school logic?
Rita
>
>
>
> > Rita- Hide quoted text -
muc...@gmail.com
> **********************************************************************
> Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's only
> purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change message
> threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> Baldoni
> Bigdog
> Bill
> Bud
> Burlyguard
> Cdddraftsman
> Chuck Schuyler
> Chu...@amcmn.com
> David Von Pein
> Justme1952
> Miss Rita
> Much...@Hotmail.com
> Sam Brown
> Timst...@Gmail.com
>
> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply deny
> the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply run
> with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
> **********************************************************************
Ben? Did you killfile these fine people because they were:
(a) hurting your feelings, or:
(b) asking you to support your assertions?
Take your time...
-Mark
> The only physical evidence which could show any "transit" of a bullet through
> JFK, the photograph showing the interior of JFK's chest; disappeared while under
> government control. The testimony 'connected' three wounds - the back, the tip
> of the lung, and the throat - into a single trajectory. But the only evidence
> for this damage to the lung simply disappeared.
>
> Here's Dr. Humes testimony:
> Commander Humes: ... The area of discoloration on the apical portion of the
> right upper lung measured five centimeters in greatest diameter, and was wedge
> shaped in configuration, with its base toward the top of the chest and its apex
> down towards the substance of the lung. Once again Kodachrome photographs were
> made of this area in the interior of the President's chest.
>
> Official investigations have long known of this missing photograph:
>
> "A phone call on January 21, 1967, 10 weeks after the inventory was signed,
> reveals the importance of Clark's private proceedings. Clark had LBJ on the
> line. In the declassified, tape-recorded call, Clark reported, "Ah, we had the
> three pathologists that performed the autopsy on the evening of November 22nd
> come in. We had to bring Finck from Vietnam ... They went into archives last night
> [sic, January 20, 1967] ... Now, we've run into one problem last night [sic] that
> we didn't know of. That is, there may be a photo missing. Dr. Humes ... testified
> before the Warren Commission that this one photo [was] made of the highest
> portion of the right lung. The other two doctors don't recall if such a photo
> was made. They do recall discussing the desired ability of making such a photo.
> But there is no such photo in these exhibits."[147] Thus, 10 weeks after Humes
> and Boswell had signed an affidavit that said that none of JFK's autopsy
> photographs were missing, Humes was apparently grousing about a missing autopsy
> photograph."http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5I...
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
really? by all means present your case, Rita.....I believe the case
is: between 70-90% believe a conspiracy killed JFK. Now IF you can
refute that please cite the appropriate source and quoting David Von
Pein aka Dave Reitzes doesn't count
roflmao...Healy is SO ignorant, that even I am continually amazed how
he apparently chooses to validate this.
Just a day or so ago, I posted the thread to the latest Scripps-Howard
polling data showing it is now 40% of the American public who believes
a conspiracy killed JFK. Healty is so dumb, dumb people disavow his
existence lol.
Of course one must understand the following about Healy:
1. No education.
2. No ability to be coherent (due to no education).
3. Cleaned latrines in Vietnam.
4. Cleaned windows ands floors for Silicon Valley (he won awards for
this. Must be damn good at floors)
5. Believes JFK's middlle name is Francis.
6. Believes the famous Zapruder film couldn't exist because he
doesn't believe Zapruder existed.
If anybody here needs windows or floor cleaned, I'll provide Healys
actual on line resume. Like his foors and windows, it's spotless
roflmao.
Whatcha think toots?
Miss Rita
Alright, Healy was in Vietnam right before my ex-husband. His service
record was listed not so long ago on this board. Whatever he does out
here concerning carpet munchers and queers shouldn't degrade his
military service. Whatever I've seen of him in the past, I've never
seen him lower himself to that. If you think he deserves it, for
whatever reason, he don't.
Rita
>
> Whatcha think toots?- Hide quoted text -
YoHarvey
Yes, he should be degraded as he himself has degraded other veterans.
Ed Cage being a prime example.
justm...@gmail.com
Apparently you've missed some of his posts then Rita where he has
accused people of lying about being Vietnam Vets and degraded them.
This is a topic I have to disagree with you on. He does deserve it
because he has dished it out in the past. Other then that, I couldn't
agree with you more on your posts.
Miss Rita
Are you a veteran? If you are, you'll know the language: What they do
concerning their peers is not the same as civilians going after them.
What I saw Healy do, and yes, I have lurked here a lot, is question
Cage's medals. It's not an unfair challenge. I think Bill Clarke also
said that it would just be easier to list one's specs so they can be
verified than keep on carrying on about it, and Bill Clarke degrades
anyone's service very little, if any.
I don't know Ed Cage. If he served honorably, I'm for it. If he's
lying about medals, he'd better hope he don't get caught. There's a
law that's been signed into effect making that a felony now.
Rita
Miss Rita
I saw him question some claims about medals. That's not a problem.
> This is a topic I have to disagree with you on. He does deserve it
> because he has dished it out in the past. Other then that, I couldn't
> agree with you more on your posts.- Hide quoted text -
You might be right, although Healy and I have gotten into some cuss
fights, and he's never gone the REMF bit with anybody I know, and that
includes me and mine, whether he agreed or not, and I've seen more
than a few of them jump him.
Rita
aeffects
come now, you ole draft dodger you.
A enlisted guy (Ed Cage) claims 4 Bronze Stars during a one year tour
in Vietnam, none for valor.....he was called on it, simple proof of a
DD214** to a uninterested entity (at the time Bill Clarke because of
his Texas local) would clear up the issue.... what happens? Fearless
Eddy-Texas-Cage disappears after his latter day photo-op with
Oceanographer Ken Rahn (famous for his now-defunct NAA study).....
A few of us have a thing about combat vet's claiming things they can
substaniate.... dolt!
** in the interest of fairness, Fast Eddy Cage did offer to show his
DD214 to a Chiropractor on alt.assassination.jfk. The aforemention
Chiropractor didn't even KNOW what a DD214 is...... I suggested Bill
Clarke take a look at it...[after I queried BillC. via email/off
board].
aeffects
we want the WCR record cleaned up, Rita..... these dolt's haven't a
clue concerning ANYTHING regarding the JFK assassination... the best
they can do is cut-n-paste and PRAY Bugliosi sells a few more
books......
Miss Rita
I can't help you there. All I can do is look how each side presents
its case and try to make up my own mind. I'm just not obsessed with
the WCR or even who killed Kennedy. I find the subject interesting at
times, but that's about it. I will defend your service, though.
Rita
Sam Brown
"Ben Holmes" <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote in message
news:fldmt...@drn.newsguy.com...
> **********************************************************************
> Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's
> only
> purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change
> message
> threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> Baldoni
> Bigdog
> Bill
> Bud
> Burlyguard
> Cdddraftsman
> Chuck Schuyler
> Chu...@amcmn.com
> David Von Pein
> Justme1952
> Miss Rita
> Muc...@Gmail.com
> Muc...@Hotmail.com
> Sam Brown
> Tims...@Gmail.com
> YoHarvey
>
> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will simply
> deny
> the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or simply
> run
> with insults. These trolls are only good material for the killfiles.
> **********************************************************************
>
> come in. We had to bring Finck from Vietnam . They went into archives last
> night
> [sic, January 20, 1967] . Now, we've run into one problem last night [sic]
> that
> we didn't know of. That is, there may be a photo missing. Dr. Humes .
> testified
> before the Warren Commission that this one photo [was] made of the highest
> portion of the right lung. The other two doctors don't recall if such a
> photo
> was made. They do recall discussing the desired ability of making such a
> photo.
> But there is no such photo in these exhibits."[147] Thus, 10 weeks after
> Humes
> and Boswell had signed an affidavit that said that none of JFK's autopsy
> photographs were missing, Humes was apparently grousing about a missing
> autopsy
> photograph."
> http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_2.htm
aeffects
> Fuck off Holmes.
Sammy's nads are showing...... YANK that Neuter's CHAIN
> "Ben Holmes" <ad...@websitewealthcollege.com> wrote in message
>
> news:fldmt...@drn.newsguy.com...
>
> > **********************************************************************
> > Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's
> > only
> > purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to change
> > message
> > threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
>
> > These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> > Baldoni
> > Bigdog
> > Bill
> > Bud
> > Burlyguard
> > Cdddraftsman
> > Chuck Schuyler
> > Chu...@amcmn.com
> > David Von Pein
> > Justme1952
> > Miss Rita
> > Much...@Gmail.com
> > Much...@Hotmail.com
> > Sam Brown
> > Timst...@Gmail.com
> >http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5I...
Sam Brown
you beg.
"aeffects" <aeffe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1bc8d9e0-ab27-48e3...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
aeffects
> Stop stalking me Junkie. I'm not going to lend you a cent no matter how much
> you beg.
do you know ANYTHING about the JFK case, toots-e-roll -- after 1600
posts to this board and nary a syllable concerning the JFK murder--
what does that make you toots-e-roll? Some say a cross dressing
wannabe lesbian that can't get her sorry "arse" out of the closet....
I say agent-provocateur fits nicely, a horrible one but one just the
same
> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
tomnln
"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1091ba81-0405-458a...@21g2000hsj.googlegroups.com...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rossley? The funeral home called. They await you.
Your wife called;
No need for you to Ever come home.
The BOA had babies. (she's set for life)
She's Living Large since she sold copies of the sex videos of me & her.
ps;
She said your AIDS Dr. called;
He advises you to "Cram Fer your FINALS")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sam Brown
> On Jan 2, 1:01 am, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> Stop stalking me Junkie. I'm not going to lend you a cent no matter how
>> much
>> you beg.
>
> do you know ANYTHING about the JFK case, toots-e-roll -- after 1600
> posts to this board and nary a syllable concerning the JFK murder--
> what does that make you toots-e-roll? Some say a cross dressing
> wannabe lesbian that can't get her sorry "arse" out of the closet....
> I say agent-provocateur fits nicely, a horrible one but one just the
> same
Stop stalking me Junkie. I WILL NOT GIVE YOU MONEY FOR DRUGS. GOT IT?
aeffects
> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:67318968-4c50-469f...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jan 2, 1:01 am, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> Stop stalking me Junkie. I'm not going to lend you a cent no matter how
> >> much
> >> you beg.
>
> > do you know ANYTHING about the JFK case, toots-e-roll -- after 1600
> > posts to this board and nary a syllable concerning the JFK murder--
> > what does that make you toots-e-roll? Some say a cross dressing
> > wannabe lesbian that can't get her sorry "arse" out of the closet....
> > I say agent-provocateur fits nicely, a horrible one but one just the
> > same
>
> Stop stalking me Junkie. I WILL NOT GIVE YOU MONEY FOR DRUGS. GOT IT?
>
Sammy from down-undah -- you're chasing me hon! What is a muncher
chasing a he-man like me for? Give us your best muncher reasoning.....
Sam Brown
> On Jan 2, 12:46 pm, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:67318968-4c50-469f...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Jan 2, 1:01 am, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> >> Stop stalking me Junkie. I'm not going to lend you a cent no matter
>> >> how
>> >> much
>> >> you beg.
>>
>> > do you know ANYTHING about the JFK case, toots-e-roll -- after 1600
>> > posts to this board and nary a syllable concerning the JFK murder--
>> > what does that make you toots-e-roll? Some say a cross dressing
>> > wannabe lesbian that can't get her sorry "arse" out of the closet....
>> > I say agent-provocateur fits nicely, a horrible one but one just the
>> > same
>>
>> Stop stalking me Junkie. I WILL NOT GIVE YOU MONEY FOR DRUGS. GOT IT?
>>
>
> Sammy from down-undah -- you're chasing me hon! What is a muncher
> chasing a he-man like me for? Give us your best muncher reasoning.....
"he-man". ROTFLMAO
aeffects
> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:92fe9feb-9067-41b7...@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jan 2, 12:46 pm, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:67318968-4c50-469f...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Jan 2, 1:01 am, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> >> Stop stalking me Junkie. I'm not going to lend you a cent no matter
> >> >> how
> >> >> much
> >> >> you beg.
>
> >> > do you know ANYTHING about the JFK case, toots-e-roll -- after 1600
> >> > posts to this board and nary a syllable concerning the JFK murder--
> >> > what does that make you toots-e-roll? Some say a cross dressing
> >> > wannabe lesbian that can't get her sorry "arse" out of the closet....
> >> > I say agent-provocateur fits nicely, a horrible one but one just the
> >> > same
>
> >> Stop stalking me Junkie. I WILL NOT GIVE YOU MONEY FOR DRUGS. GOT IT?
>
> > Sammy from down-undah -- you're chasing me hon! What is a muncher
> > chasing a he-man like me for? Give us your best muncher reasoning.....
>
> "he-man". ROTFLMAO
of course.... see what your missing, real men in your life.... lead a
life of denial, shit happens.... got a bit more than you expected on
this board, eh? Every now and then it turns into a Dear (poor me) Abby
board.....her column is in the Fresno Bee...