Ricland : " And this is not a rule I'm making up " Heheheheh ! ( Ricland's Gone Right Ahead And Done It Again ! )
cdddraftsman
like
Rossley ! Mr. limp wrist personified .
Not to get technical at this late stage of your astonishing and
astounding
breakthru methodology in solving this case .......but who in the hell
is
Dallas Police Chief Jesse Cutty ?
The good prof. was right , you do have serious problems with
logic ,
comprehension and above all , investigative experience .
Try looking at it like this :
(1) The FBI inteviewed over 20,000 people for the WCR .
(1.1) Agreed ?
(2) In a case this massive you could expect 1 to 3% of the
testimony/evidence not to jive ( minimum and conservative (*)
(2.1) If you don't agree , please cite a study that contradicts this
well known fact .
(3) You had only 50 pieces of the puzzle that went missing and you
call it a failure ?
(3.1) How'd you do dat ? ........:-(
(3.2) Are these ( 50 pieces ) important ? Would they change the big
picture ?
(3.3) If you could list some of them . I think 5 would be sufficient
to tell me all I need to know .
(4) Don't tell me . Once you've written something , you consider it
chizeled in stone ?
(4.1) Wince , oouch , poo ; your post is serious dumpster material .
You do have I thing going for you . When you post , your
message is clear " I'm bowling for a 1 " !
(*) Remember , the more people involved , the more contradictions
are going to show up . Not the other way around . This is
indicative ,
not of a convenient free ride for you , a green light for you not to
use
your brain , but indicates people are human and that's all .
Silly boy ! , Heheheh !...................tl
PS : I believe in finishing on a positive note :
The good news is , your web site really is starting to take
shape .
I think it accurately reflects the overall mindset , critical thinking
skills and IQ of it's owner .
The bad news is , to best describe your web site ,
........well seriously it gets a A for looks , but a F
for substance :
It looks like a submarine without a periscope .
One oar short of the Titanic , definately !
..............:-( ........blub blub blub ,
Shock without the awe .
A ' B ' rated floperroo .
( Did you study when you went to college ?
Or did you just watch Godzilla vs.reruns )
> I'm not quite sure what you're supposed to be doing here, Chuck, but it
> seems like it's not working very well.
>
> In essence, you lone nutters say none of the approximately 50 pieces of
> the puzzle that don't fit are of consequence, and you do it using
> sophistry like the above.
>
> Few here would disagree that a single piece of the puzzle obliterates
> the Lone Nutter case, but 50 is something else again; 50 points to an
> unsolved mystery.
>
> And this is not a rule I'm making up, this is what any > criminology
> professional will tell you and have told you-- the more > questions,
> the more complex the answer.
>
> Dallas Police Chief Jesse Cutty said it would be "difficult or
> impossible" to convict Oswald on what the police had at the time.
> District Attorney Henry Wade said Oswald was part of a larger
> conspiracy. Again, not a slam dunk against the lone nutter theory by
> themselves, but added to all the other contradictory facts, evidence
> that it's irresponsible to think the Warren Commission got it 100% correct.
>
> ricland
RICLAND
I've spared the public the horror of your descent into schizophrenia by
deleting your post; that is, all except this fleeting instant of clarity:
"Remember , the more people involved , the more contradictions
are going to show up . Not the other way around."
--cddraftsman
No, cddraftsman, that's not the adage goes. It's the more people
involved, the more different interpretations told, not the more
contradictions that show up.
You just made that part up.
Worse still, the stories we hear from assassination witnesses are the
very opposite of that -- they're strikingly consistent. Moreover, the
only disagreement we get is from the Warren Commission's version of
things, not among the witnesses.
Indeed, as far as we can tell, not one of the witnesses or people
connected to the case is a lone nutter; not one. In fact, the very idea
of a lone assassin was a notion created by a group of men who were no
where in the state when the assassination occurred.
More astonishingly still, not one witness' testimony is consistent with
the Warrren Commission version of things, not one.
To sum up, the only people who contradicted what the witnesses claimed
they saw, heard, knew, were the members of the Warren Commission --
Specter, Ford, Earl Warren.
ricland
>> ricland
>
--
Reclaiming History ...???
The Rebuttal to Bugliosi's JFK Assassination Book
http://jfkhit.com
David Von Pein
Such as:
>>> "No, cddraftsman, that's not the adage goes. It's the more people involved, the more different interpretations told, not the more contradictions that show up." <<<
(Which, of course, pretty much amounts to the very same thing that Tom
said. Duh.)
>>> "As far as we can tell, not one of the witnesses or people connected to the case is a lone nutter; not one." <<<
(Astonishing ignorance here. But, what's new?)
>>> "In fact, the very idea of a lone assassin was a notion created by a group of men who were nowhere in the state when the assassination occurred." <<<
(More astonishing ignorance here. Let's just ignore all of that
"OSWALD DID IT" evidence...right Ric? Since Warren, Ford, McCone,
Russell, et al, were not in the state of Texas when JFK was killed, it
means we should just let Oswald off the hook. Right?)
>>> "Not one witness' testimony is consistent with the Warren Commission version of things, not one." <<<
(Still more astonishing ignorance. Is it POSSIBLE to be this ignorant
of the facts....and yet still post on a JFK Forum like this as if
you're some kind of expert on these events?
Gobs of witnesses interviewed by the WC favored the LHO-Did-It-All
scenario. Including every single WC witness connected with the Tippit
murder.)
>>> "To sum up, the only people who contradicted what the witnesses claimed they saw, heard, knew, were the members of the Warren Commission -- Specter, Ford, Earl Warren." <<<
(And yet another layer of incredible idiocy spouted by a stupid kook
who hasn't the SLIGHTEST idea what he's saying.
This nut Ricland might as well be talking about the Lindbergh
Kidnapping case here at alt.jfk. Because the stuff he says applies to
that case about as much as it does to the Kennedy assassination.
And yet he keeps right on a-blabbin', never fazed by the lack of
credibility attached to anything he spews. And not a sign of internal
embarrassment for being the freakin' kook he is, or pretending to be.
Remarkable.)
cdddraftsman
> cdddraftsman wrote:
>
> I've spared the public the horror of your descent into schizophrenia by
> deleting your post; that is, all except this fleeting instant of clarity:
>
>
> > suscient , poignant and a plathora of bulls eye's has not gone un
> > noticed . I take that as a sign of your overall ingenious behavior
> > that isn't going to pull your sorry ass out of last place on the big
> > board . Sounded like a convenient way of not explaining why I was
> > wrong , when we all know your explanation wouldn't sound too
> > convincing anyway . Heheheh !
>
> "Remember , the more people involved , the more contradictions
> are going to show up . Not the other way around."
> --cddraftsman
>
> No, cddraftsman, that's not the adage goes. It's the more people
> involved, the more different interpretations told, not the more
> contradictions that show up.
>
>
> > " more contradictions " are basically the same thing , except
> > for the fact that you subscribe to outlandish notions of memory
> > recall that are a impossibility .
>
> You just made that part up.
>
>
> > Believe it or not Bonehead , there's been over 100 years of research
> > that you carelessly , clumsilly and intentionally ingore to prop up your
> > silly , failed world view :
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/witnesses.htm
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/memory.htm
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/zaid.htm
>
>
>
>
> Worse still, the stories we hear from assassination witnesses are the
> very opposite of that -- they're strikingly consistent. Moreover, the
> only disagreement we get is from the Warren Commission's version of
> things, not among the witnesses.
>
>
> > Hahahahah ! " strikingly consistent " ? The only thing that's strikingly
> > consistent is the way these peoples testimony have been distorted by
> > publicity seekeing moondoggy's that couldn't find there own dick unless
> > it had blonde pubic hairs on it .
>
> Indeed, as far as we can tell, not one of the witnesses or people
> connected to the case is a lone nutter; not one. In fact, the very idea
> of a lone assassin was a notion created by a group of men who were no
> where in the state when the assassination occurred.
>
>
> > Care to read how the ones in Dealey Plaza saw the Assassination ?
> > They were consistantly wrong about events more then 50% of the time .
> > JC Price : http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jcprice2.gif
> > Sam Holland : http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/holland.gif
> > Bill Newman : http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/newman.gif
> > Austin Miller is one of my all time favorite consistant witness , who
> > thought the shots came from within the limo itself :
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/html/WC_Vol6_0118a.htm
> > Heheheh !
> > Want more Bozo ? :
> > Mrs. Joeseph Eddie Dean :
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0435a.htm
> > Jack Franzen :
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0435b.htm
> > Marvin Faye Chism :
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/chism.gif
> > A. J. Millican :
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0252b.htm
> > Want still more ? Okee dokee you big old silly windbag :
> > James Simmons :
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/simmons.gif
> > Clyde Haygood :
> > http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/haygood.htm
> > How's that for you big old Bozo Head !
> > Hahahaah !
>
>
>
>
> More astonishingly still, not one witness' testimony is consistent with
> the Warrren Commission version of things, not one.
>
>
> > Astounding isn't it ! Especially when conspiracy writers are no more
> > accurate about what they actually said !
>
> To sum up, the only people who contradicted what the witnesses claimed
> they saw, heard, knew, were the members of the Warren Commission --
> Specter, Ford, Earl Warren.
>
>
>
> > I hope your not expecting us to take your word on that ?
tomnln
NEVER any evidence/testimony>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/spy.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/danrather.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/horne__report.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/RACE%20TO%20TSBD.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/media_page.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1177568715.3...@n35g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Gil Jesus
> Not to get technical .......but who in the hell is Dallas Police Chief Jesse Cutty ?
I'm glad you're not getting technical, Lowry. It's not one of your
strong points. You misspell more sh*t than anyone on this forum. But
while we're on the subject,
what is an "assignation" ?