UMBRELLA WEAPON
tomnln
Confirmation of an Umbrella weapon being operational in 1963.
Confirmed by Church Report.
Confirmed by HSCA.
All HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
justm...@gmail.com
Oh lord, here we go again
tomnln
Try THESE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Official/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
Then, try THESE>>> 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
http://whokilledjfk.net/orders_of_silence.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/tramps.ht
<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184856879.7...@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Lone
Walt
So What???.... If an umbrella weapon had been used to shoot JFK, it
would have been a dead give away that the CIA had been the culprit.
They were the only ones who had such a weapon in 63.
The Umbrella man was a Cuban survivor from the BOP who felt JFK had
betrayed them by not pulling the umbrella of air cover at BOP. He
wanted JFK to know why he was being executed.
Walt
aeffects
now THAT makes sense! Tnx, Walt....
> Walt
tomnln
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186513297.6...@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Steven Witt?
>
justm...@gmail.com
> On Aug 7, 5:09 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > Steven Witt was Neither Cuban NOR, the Umberlla Man.
>
>
> Stop dodging, it's a simple question:
>
> Was the 'umbrella' involved in the assassination in any way, shape or
> form as a weapon or a signaling method?
>
> I want your opinion, not a link to your website.
Good luck on that one Chuck, If its beyond one sentance and not an
insult you won't get a response from Rossely
bigdog
Do you really think that in the few seconds from the time JFK might
have spotted Umbrella man until he was shot he would have figured out
the meaning of the umbrella?
As for the theory that JFK got shot with an umbrella gun, can anyone
show anyone pointing an umbrella at JFK.
The umbrella gun theory falls in the category of the lunatic fringe
along with Sewer man and Greer did it.
Walt
> On Aug 7, 10:15 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 18 Jul, 15:40, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > > In case McAdams don't post this one.
>
> > > Confirmation of an Umbrella weapon being operational in 1963.
> > > Confirmed by Church Report.
> > > Confirmed by HSCA.
>
> > > All HERE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
>
> > So What???.... If an umbrella weapon had been used to shoot JFK, it
> > would have been a dead give away that the CIA had been the culprit.
> > They were the only ones who had such a weapon in 63.
>
> > The Umbrella man was a Cuban survivor from the BOP who felt JFK had
> > betrayed them by not pulling the umbrella of air cover at BOP. He
> > wanted JFK to know why he was being executed.
>
> > Walt
>
> Do you really think that in the few seconds from the time JFK might
> have spotted Umbrella man until he was shot he would have figured out
> the meaning of the umbrella?
It's not important if JFK recognized the significance of the Cuban
pulling the umbrella, the killers hoped he would know what that
umbrella meant, but it was more for their psychological benefit as
last curse on JFK. They were extracting revenge for their betrayal
at BOP.......... Only they focused on the wrong entity.... They
should have went after the renigade CIA agents like E howard Hunt, who
were really responsible for the fiasco at BOP.
Walt
>
> As for the theory that JFK got shot with an umbrella gun, can anyone
> show anyone pointing an umbrella at JFK.
>
> The umbrella gun theory falls in the category of the lunatic fringe
> along with Sewer man and Greer did it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Von Pein
Walt's the same guy who thinks that Brennan was DESCRIBING the West-
End TSBD window where Oswald was. (Oops...sorry, it can't be Oswald! I
forgot. I should have just said "the assassin". It was "Anybody BUT
Oswald", of course.) ;)
tomnln
And, I don't speculate.
When people speculate, they are discussing a subject they can NOT prove.
Which in turn destroys their credibility.
Like page 541 of the WCR when discussing JFK's throat/back wounds they
state>>>
"presumably of entrance/presumably of exit".
Their credibility has been goin Down-Hill ever since.
Would you care to address the Lies of Officer Baker?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
Yo've been Dodging that part of YOUR official records for 2 years.
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186553500.5...@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 7, 5:09 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Steven Witt was Neither Cuban NOR, the Umberlla Man.
>
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
Near bottom of ther page.
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1186577057.3...@l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> On Aug 8, 8:12 am, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > It's not important if JFK recognized the significance of the Cuban
> > pulling the umbrella, the killers hoped he would know what that
> > umbrella meant, but it was more for their psychological benefit as
> > last curse on JFK. They were extracting revenge for their betrayal
> > at BOP.......... Only they focused on the wrong entity.... They
> > should have went after the renigade CIA agents like E howard Hunt, who
> > were really responsible for the fiasco at BOP.
>
> > Walt
>
>
> Boy, that's really something, Walt. I can't believe you actually
> believe the umbrella man had anything to do with the assassination.
OK..... Ley's hear a LOGICAL reason why that man was right there
beside the car pulling an umbrella
( the way JFK pulled to umbrella of protective aircover at BOP) What
LOGICAL reason would there have been for this guy to be the ONLY
person in Dealey plaza waving an unbrella in JFK's face?? There's no
doubt that he was right there and witnessed the bullets striking JFK,
yet neither he nor his companion stuck around to tell the police what
they had seen. All other witnesses stepped up and reported what they
saw, only TUM and his accomplice slithered away from the scene. Even
your villian ( Oswald) never slithered away like these two did.
Walt
Walt
Sorry if you can't comprehend what Brennan wrote and said.....
Perhaps a course in logical thinking might help.
Walt
Walt
> On Aug 8, 11:14 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > Not being one of the conspirators, I don't have an answer for you.
>
>
>
>
> > And, I don't speculate.
>
>
> > When people speculate, they are discussing a subject they can NOT prove.
> > Which in turn destroys their credibility.
>
> objectivity?
>
>
>
> > Like page 541 of the WCR when discussing JFK's throat/back wounds they
> > state>>>
> > "presumably of entrance/presumably of exit".
>
> you people, the WCR is an infinitely malleable ever-changeable report
> that you slam when it doesn't agree with your agenda and that you use
> as 'proof' of conspiracy when it honestly points out dissenting views
> or evidence that doesn't always cleanly jibe with their final
> conclusions. That is a disgusting, superficial way of dealing with the
> WC efforts.
>
>
>
> > Their credibility has been goin Down-Hill ever since.
>
> basic conclusions-Oswald alone, no help-has held up.
>
>
>
> > Would you care to address the Lies of Officer Baker?>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
>
> not address why this has any true bearing on Oswald Alone.
>
> Are you a 'liar' when you call yourself tomnln? You play silly, silly
> word games and twist things around to fit your agenda-America is evil
> and killed JFK-instead of looking at the other side.
No America is not evil.... Some MEN are evil.... Many evil men rise
to positions of power, and use that power to advance their personal
agenda. Lyndon Baines Johnson was one of those men....J. Edgar
Hoover was another..... They knew that there were other evil men who
wanted JFK's head for the perceived betrayal at BOP. Johnson and
Hoover took advantage of the smouldering hatred for JFK and
capitalized on the ignorance of the Cubans who had been deceived by
their CIA handlers.
Walt
>
> > Yo've been Dodging that part of YOUR official records for 2 years.
>
> I've answered the question. You just don't like the answer. Like
> Holmes, you set up false premises and when someone points that out or
> answers in a way you do not expect, you claim they are dodging or
> lying.
>
> Now...answer the question.
>
> Here it is again, and I'll refine it.
>
> Based on what you've read and what you know, was the umbrella man
> involved in any way, shape or form in the assassination of JFK?
>
> No referring me to your website, please. I want to know what you think.
Walt
> On Aug 8, 8:29 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > No America is not evil.... Some MEN are evil.... Many evil men rise
> > to positions of power, and use that power to advance their personal
> > agenda. Lyndon Baines Johnson was one of those men....J. Edgar
> > Hoover was another..... They knew that there were other evil men who
> > wanted JFK's head for the perceived betrayal at BOP. Johnson and
> > Hoover took advantage of the smouldering hatred for JFK and
> > capitalized on the ignorance of the Cubans who had been deceived by
> > their CIA handlers.
>
> > Walt
>
>
> You are in the same fantasyland that these 9/11 Truthers occupy. It
> doesn't matter how oftern you point out the ridiculous notion of
> planted explosives in the WTC or the fact that bin Laden and others
> have admitted they helped mastermind 9/11.
>
> You just believe what you believe.
No Chuck, I'm by nature a very suspicious person.... I've studied the
case very throughly and there are many questions that I don't have
answers for, BUT the key question about Oswald's guilt is very clear
to me. He was FRAMED.... pure and simple. Apparently it's too
painful for you to accept that, but if you examine the facts for
yourself and disreguard the opinions of all others, including me, and
all of the "experts" I believe you'll also come to realize that Oswald
was a patsy.
Walt
tomnln
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186612125....@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 8, 11:14 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Not being one of the conspirators, I don't have an answer for you.
>
> That's lame, Rossley.
>>
>> And, I don't speculate.
>
> You're speculating that there was a conspiracy.
>
>> When people speculate, they are discussing a subject they can NOT prove.
>> Which in turn destroys their credibility.
>
> Yes, but don't you see that this applies to you? Where is your
> objectivity?
>>
>> Like page 541 of the WCR when discussing JFK's throat/back wounds they
>> state>>>
>> "presumably of entrance/presumably of exit".
>
> The words they wrote wouldn't change your opinions/speculations. For
> you people, the WCR is an infinitely malleable ever-changeable report
> that you slam when it doesn't agree with your agenda and that you use
> as 'proof' of conspiracy when it honestly points out dissenting views
> or evidence that doesn't always cleanly jibe with their final
> conclusions. That is a disgusting, superficial way of dealing with the
> WC efforts.
>>
>> Their credibility has been goin Down-Hill ever since.
>
> Their credibility has grown over the years. 44 years later, and the
> basic conclusions-Oswald alone, no help-has held up.
>>
>> Would you care to address the Lies of Officer
>> Baker?>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
>
> I have. You set up a false premise when you say he lied. You also do
> not address why this has any true bearing on Oswald Alone.
>
> Are you a 'liar' when you call yourself tomnln? You play silly, silly
> word games and twist things around to fit your agenda-America is evil
> and killed JFK-instead of looking at the other side.
>
>> Yo've been Dodging that part of YOUR official records for 2 years.
>
Ben Holmes
>
>On 8 Aug, 20:43, chuck schuyler <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 8, 8:29 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > No America is not evil.... Some MEN are evil.... Many evil men rise
>> > to positions of power, and use that power to advance their personal
>> > agenda. Lyndon Baines Johnson was one of those men....J. Edgar
>> > Hoover was another..... They knew that there were other evil men who
>> > wanted JFK's head for the perceived betrayal at BOP. Johnson and
>> > Hoover took advantage of the smouldering hatred for JFK and
>> > capitalized on the ignorance of the Cubans who had been deceived by
>> > their CIA handlers.
>>
>> > Walt
>>
>> This guy Oswald is absolutely guilty, Walt.
>>
>> You are in the same fantasyland that these 9/11 Truthers occupy. It
>> doesn't matter how oftern you point out the ridiculous notion of
>> planted explosives in the WTC or the fact that bin Laden and others
>> have admitted they helped mastermind 9/11.
Strangely enough, you occupy a position much more in common with those silly
beliefs...
They *ALL* have roughly the same number of "true believers".
>> You just believe what you believe.
>
>No Chuck, I'm by nature a very suspicious person.... I've studied the
>case very throughly and there are many questions that I don't have
>answers for, BUT the key question about Oswald's guilt is very clear
>to me. He was FRAMED.... pure and simple.
All of the impersonations of LHO in the weeks before the assassination can never
be explained away on any other basis.
>Apparently it's too
>painful for you to accept that, but if you examine the facts for
>yourself and disreguard the opinions of all others, including me, and
>all of the "experts"
LNT'ers only believe "experts" that support their faith.
>I believe you'll also come to realize that Oswald
>was a patsy.
>
>Walt
It really wouldn't affect any essential element of a conspiracy to believe that
Oswald was in it up to his eyeteeth.
The problem is that the evidence simply doesn't support it.
Walt
> On Aug 8, 9:07 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
> > No Chuck, I'm by nature a very suspicious person.... I've studied the
> > case very throughly and there are many questions that I don't have
> > answers for, BUT the key question about Oswald's guilt is very clear
> > to me. He was FRAMED.... pure and simple. Apparently it's too
> > painful for you to accept that, but if you examine the facts for
> > all of the "experts" I believe you'll also come to realize that Oswald
> > was a patsy.
>
>
> Can I ask you what level of education you've reached?
>
> College? Degree? Trade school?
Not relevant to the discussion......
>
> Just curious, and I'm not going to belittle your answer.
This is just another way of saying...." trust me'... Are you nuts??
I wouldn't trust any of you gullible idiots, who will believe anything
if it's professed to be factual by "experts'
For the
> record, I have some college, but I do not have a degree. I have no
> experience in law, forensics, firearms, police procedures, etc.
None of this is necessary...... Do you have a functioning God given
computer??
>
> How about you?
>
> Also, what is your backround? What have you done for a living most of
> your life?
Robbed Banks........
Walt
David Von Pein
And it doesn't matter how many "experts" profess it to be "factual"
either.....by God. Walt still ain't gonna buy any of it (by gum).
Not that "polls" mean a whole lot (they don't, obviously...since we've
still got 75% of America believing JFK was snuffed out via a "plot",
despite the complete lack of hard evidence to support such a loony
belief), but I'm wondering if there's even ONE other person alive who
shares the same mindset as Walt when it comes to Howard Leslie
Brennan.
Walt, remember, thinks Brennan saw a WEST-end TSBD sniper even though
Howard never once even HINTED at seeing a man in any window other than
the SE/SN window.
Polls stink most of the time...yeah. But I'm just wondering if even
one other human being on the planet thinks the same strange way Walter
does in this Brennan regard? If so, I've yet to be introduced to him/
her.
Walt
> >>> "I wouldn't trust any of you gullible idiots, who will believe anything if it's professed to be factual by "experts'." <<<
>
> And it doesn't matter how many "experts" profess it to be "factual"
> either.....by God. Walt still ain't gonna buy any of it (by gum).
>
> Not that "polls" mean a whole lot (they don't, obviously...since we've
> still got 75% of America believing JFK was snuffed out via a "plot",
> despite the complete lack of hard evidence to support such a loony
> belief), but I'm wondering if there's even ONE other person alive who
> shares the same mindset as Walt when it comes to Howard Leslie
> Brennan.
>
> Walt, remember, thinks Brennan saw a WEST-end TSBD sniper even though
> Howard never once even HINTED at seeing a man in any window other than
> the SE/SN window.
Howard Brennan described the stance of the gunman he saw firing a
rifle out a sixth floor window.
He described the man as STANDING and bracing the rifle against the
side of the window as he aimed the rifle. He said he could see ALL OF
THE UPPER PORTION of the man's body, from his hips to the top of his
head. Brennan could only have been describing a man STANDING behind a
WIDE OPEN window, and the ONLY window that was wide open on the sixth
floor was at the South WEST end of the building.
It's a pity that youre too obtuse to understand what Brennan
said......
Howard Brennan also described the man's rifle as a "high powered
rifle" which is exactly the way Arnold Rowland described the rifle
that he saw in the hands of the gunman he saw behind the WEST end
window of the sixth floor. Rowland also described the rifle as a
"HUNTING RIFLE" and a "DEER RIFLE"
You are very quick to say the CT's have no evidence that would clear
Oswald of the crime....but you are forced to ignore the testimonies of
many witnesses to make that claim. If you were honest with yourself
you'd realize that the "experts" have made a fool out of you by
leading you to believe in fantasies, like the W.R.
Walt
bigdog
> Your Stupidity is showing bigdog>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
>
> Near bottom of ther page.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
OK, tomnln, are you saying you believe JFK got shot with an umbrella
gun?
tomnln
You/Yours said there was NO such weapon.
I just proved you WRONG AGAIN.
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1186698127.6...@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
bigdog
> I Never said that bigdog;
>
> You/Yours said there was NO such weapon.
>
> I just proved you WRONG AGAIN.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
tomnln, are you trying to compete with Ben Holmes for the biggest liar
on this board. Produce just one post by me in which I denied the
existence of an umbrella gun. Let me save you the trouble. There isn't
one. It would be much easier to admit you are wrong.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Another red herring from Holmes. Brennan did believe the sniper was
standing because he could see his whole upper body above the window
sill. What Brennan couldn't know is that the sill is only about a foot
off the floor which is much lower than most windows. It is only
natural that someone not knowing about the low sill would believe that
a kneeling shooter was standing.
Ben Holmes
says...
Rather difficult for me to do - since not a *SINGLE* word in the above post was
written or inspired by me.
My guess is that Bigdog is getting scared at how easily I'm showing his lies,
and citing for what I assert.
Ben Holmes
says...
And yet, Bigdog can't quote a *SINGLE* statement I've made, and present the
citation that makes it a "lie."
Although I've done so more than once with his foolish misrepresentations...
Walt
Nice try Bighog..... But Brennan SPECIFICALLY said he could see the
whole upper portion of the man's body as he braced the rifle against
the side of the window. He said he could see the man's body from his
hips to the top of his head. The W.C. claimed Oswald sat on a box
back away from the window and steadied the rifle on the top of a
box. The ignored their own star witness to frame Oswald.
Furthermore Brennan described the gunman man as between 30 and 35
years old ( Oswald was just 24) Brennan said the gunman weighed about
165 to 175 pounds ( Oswald weighed 140 pounds) Brennan said the
gunman was dressed in a light colored shirt, possibly a dingy white,
and trousers that were a shade lighter than his shirt. ( Oswald was
dressed in a DARK colored rusty red shirt and dark gray trousers.
You really should learn the facts .....perhaps then you wouldn't
appear to be a gullible fool.
Walt
It is only
> natural that someone not knowing about the low sill would believe that
> a kneeling shooter was standing.- Hide quoted text -
tomnln
Brennan requestered "IMMUNITY" from the HSCA.
All you Criminals support each other.
You also Dodge evidence/testimony>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186713339....@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 9, 8:55 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>> Nice try Bighog..... But Brennan SPECIFICALLY said he could see the
>> whole upper portion of the man's body as he braced the rifle against
>> the side of the window. He said he could see the man's body from his
>> hips to the top of his head. The W.C. claimed Oswald sat on a box
>> back away from the window and steadied the rifle on the top of a
>> box. The ignored their own star witness to frame Oswald.
>> Furthermore Brennan described the gunman man as between 30 and 35
>> years old ( Oswald was just 24) Brennan said the gunman weighed about
>> 165 to 175 pounds ( Oswald weighed 140 pounds) Brennan said the
>> gunman was dressed in a light colored shirt, possibly a dingy white,
>> and trousers that were a shade lighter than his shirt. ( Oswald was
>> dressed in a DARK colored rusty red shirt and dark gray trousers.
>>
>> You really should learn the facts .....perhaps then you wouldn't
>> appear to be a gullible fool.
>>
>> Walt
>
> Brennan is a pretty good witness Walt.
>
> Coupled with the evidence on the 6th floor, and Oswald's rapid
> departure from the TSBD, things don't look too favorable for your
> hero, wife-beating Marxist Lee Oswald.
>
David Von Pein
499th time, Walt. The first 498 times were more than enough to reserve
you a spot in the "Kook Hall-Of-Fame".
aeffects
whine, whine, whine, WHINE -- come on dabug Pimp -- give it a rest.....
Walt
Hey asshole you asked for it.....I delivered.
If you don't want to hear the FACTS and the truth, don't ask for it.
Walt
David Von Pein
Yep....you (an "asshole/kook combo") delivered the same old CT
guesswork that you're best known for....right on cue. Nice job.
Brennan never ever hinted he saw anyone in any 6th-Floor window except
the southeast corner window and everybody knows it....even you.
But you, being a kook, have invested way too many useless Google posts
on your nutsville "BRENNAN SAW A WEST-END SHOOTER" bullshit that you
can't simply stop cold-turkey. So....you'll continue to peddle your
nonsense.
You'll continue this charade despite the fact that Brennan HIMSELF is
on camera (during his one TV interview) telling America he looked
straight across Elm St. and looked up at the sniper (i.e., at the east
side of the TSBD). Not to mention Brennan's circling two different WC
exhibits showing where the gunman was located...in the SN.
Anyone who thinks Vince Bugliosi has "re-written history" should take
a good look at Walt's crackpot posts of make-believe events. It's
certainly not the LNers who have done any re-writing of history...it's
the CT fruitcakes like Walt & Co.
Walt
> On Aug 9, 8:55 pm, Walt <papakochenb...@evertek.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > whole upper portion of the man's body as he braced the rifle against
> > the side of the window. He said he could see the man's body from his
> > hips to the top of his head. The W.C. claimed Oswald sat on a box
> > back away from the window and steadied the rifle on the top of a
> > box. The ignored their own star witness to frame Oswald.
> > Furthermore Brennan described the gunman man as between 30 and 35
> > years old ( Oswald was just 24) Brennan said the gunman weighed about
> > 165 to 175 pounds ( Oswald weighed 140 pounds) Brennan said the
> > gunman was dressed in a light colored shirt, possibly a dingy white,
> > and trousers that were a shade lighter than his shirt. ( Oswald was
> > dressed in a DARK colored rusty red shirt and dark gray trousers.
>
> > You really should learn the facts .....perhaps then you wouldn't
> > appear to be a gullible fool.
>
> > Walt
>
Brennan clearly DESCRIBED the gunman and the location from which he
was firing a rifle, but you want to ignore his descriptions and
IMAGINE that Oswald was sitting on a box and resting a rifle on top of
it.
You're too damned dumb to realize that he could not have declined the
muzzle enough to hit anything on Elm street using that IMAGINED
scenario. Brennan's ACTION during the shooting also support his
statements, because he said he looked up and saw the gunman firing the
rifle and then dived to the EAST side of a concrete wall to take
refuge from the gunman's hunting rifle. His ACTION indicates that the
gunman was to the WEST of his location. In other words the gunman was
at the WEST end of the TSBD.
On page 62 0f The Warren Report there is a photo of Brennan sitting
on the wall where he was sitting at the time of the murder. It's
obvious that if the gunman had been Oswald, and he had been firing
from the location IMAGINED by the Warren Commission Brennan's actions
of diving to the EAST side of that wall would not have offered any
protection at all..... because Oswald's IMAGINED location is directly
across the street from where Howard Brennan is seen sitting in that
photo. (CE 477)
Walt
>
> Coupled with the evidence on the 6th floor, and Oswald's rapid
> departure from the TSBD, things don't look too favorable for your
> hero, wife-beating Marxist Lee Oswald.- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Brennan's testimony is important in that it provides eyewitness
corroboration of a shooter in the SE corner window of the sixth floor
where spent shells were later found and also supports those who heard
shots coming from the direction of the TSBD. His description of the
shooter is far less important since from his vantage point, any
description about height and weight would be at best guesstimates. I
don't even find his later ID of Oswald as the shooter to be that
compelling even though it is consistent with the body of evidence. If
this was the primary piece of evidence against Oswald, I would not be
convinced of his guilt. This is just one more piece of to add to the
mountain of evidence against Oswald. Every piece of physical evidence
fits Oswald as the shooter. There is no physical evidence of any other
shooter from anywhere else in DP despite CT ramblings to the contrary.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt, explain why Euins saw a shooter firing from the same window as
Brennan?
bigdog
> In article <1186707430.785594.324...@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oops. Walt's statement was so ridiculousI guess I just assumed it was
yours, Holmes. My bad. Looks like someone is trying to compete with
you for the title of biggest liar on this board.
Ben Holmes
says...
But there *IS* evidence. Bugs you, doesn't it?
David Von Pein
Plus Bob Jackson...plus Mal Couch....who both saw a rifle in the SN
window.
And Walt needs to explain the crazy logic of setting up a patsy in the
SE window when, per Walter, the shooter was on the WEST side of the
building. Did the nutty plotters just FORGET where the shooter shot
from? Or were the patsy-framers just freakin' idiots?
aeffects
makes no difference if the building was built with rifles on the
exterior wall-face. Get LHO in the 6th window with a MC in HIS hand.
If the Dallas PD can't do it, and they were there, what makes you
think Lone Nut authors, wankers and Nutter idiot sticks who post to
the USNET, can?
aeffects
good to see you back and posting Walt...The Nutter kids are a bit less
frisky the past few weeks. Handwriting is on-the-wall, sort of speak?
By my count there is 5 Nutters that post to this board and have been
for months, that have posted nothing, NIL, concerning the JFK's
assassination and evidence related to the case. Such is the state of
Lone Nut affairs....
> Walt
Walt
Well Ok Bighog..... Suppose I just post what Euins said.....That will
be the easiest way to presnt it. If you are of average intelligence I
shouldn't have to "explain" it to you.
Mr. Euins.
Then I was standing here, and as the motorcade turned the corner, I
was facing, looking dead at the building. And so I seen this pipe
thing sticking out the window. I wasn't paying too much attention to
it. Then when the first shot was fired, I started looking around,
thinking it was a backfire. Everybody else started looking around.
Then I looked up at the window, and he shot again. So--you know this
fountain bench here, right around here. Well, anyway, there is a
little fountain right here. I got behind this little fountain, and
then he shot again.
So after he shot again, he just started looking down this, you know.
Mr. Specter.
Who started looking down that way?
Mr. Euins.
The man in the window. I could see his hand, and I could see his other
hand on the trigger, and one hand was on the barrel thing.
The man in the window. I could see his hand, and I could see his other
hand on the trigger, and one hand was on the barrel thing.
Can you comprehend that Bighog?? Euins is saying he could SEE BOTH of
the gunmans hands.
Now visualize what Euins would have seen if the gunman had been firing
from the SE corner window ( the so called sniper's nest which was
invented by the authorities) The Warren Commission said Oswald sat on
a box behind the window and rested a rifle on a box on the window
sill. If that IMAGINED scenario were accurate Euins could NOT have
seen BOTH of the gunmans hands, in fact he could not have seen EITHER
of the gunman's hands because the box would have obstructed his view.
Therefore he was describing the man's stance just as Brennan described
it.
Mr. Specter.
All right.
Now, at the time the second shot was fired, where were you looking
then?
Mr. Euins.
I was still looking at the building, you know, behind this--I was
looking at the building.
Mr. Specter.
Looking at anything special in the building?
Mr. Euins.
Yes, sir. I was looking where the barrel was sticking out.
Mr. Specter.
How many shots did you hear altogether?
Mr. Euins.
I believe there was four, to be exact.
How many shots did Euins hear Bighog??
Mr. Specter.
Now, where were you looking at the time of the third shot, if you
remember?
Mr. Euins.
After he shot the first two times, I was just standing back here. And
then after he shot again, he pulled the gun back in the window. And
then all the police ran back over here in the track vicinity.
Walt
Walt
Yer probably not smart enough to recognize that you are concurring
that the gunman was firing from the WEST end window.....or you
wouldn't ask why the shells were planted behind the SE corner window.
I don't need to explain anything..... Who knows why the shells were
planted in the smoker's nook, when the gunman actually fired from a
different location?? Perhaps he realized at the last minute after he
had already planted the shells that he didn't have a clear field of
fire from the SE window, because the trees obstructed his field of
fire, and decided to fire from the WEST end window.
Incidentally..... I don't believe this gunman actually hit anybody in
the Lincoln.
Walt
MSwanberg
I think Brennan was either a goofball, a liar, or else he's very
myopic.
First, we KNOW he lied, directly to the DPD when he claimed he refused
to ID Oswald in the lineup because he felt that Oswald might have
compatriots who would come and hurt Brennan and his family. Contrast
that with the idea that the cops told him straight out that LHO
couldn't see Brennan in the lineup, but he was still scared. And then
suddenly, after counseling with the cops et al, he pegs Oswald in a
bogus lineup. Yeah, he's an ace witness. <rolls eyes>
He also said he could see the entire upper torso and face of the
assassin through the open window, even though photographic evidence
shows that window to be open only about a foot or so. With him
standing a few hundred feet away, that puts the shooter about 400+
feet back from the window.
Answer: Brennan didn't see squat, or else what he did see was
completely bastardized by the cops, the Feds, or someone else.
-Mike
Lone
CShyler wrote
> Do you think the umbrella was used as part of the assassination
> attempt (as either some sort of signaling device or as a weapon) in
> any way, shape or form?
Lone:
Let me answer this question. It was a sunny day in Dallas. There where
200 000 people watching the parade. And this guy was the only one out
of this 200 000 visitors with his umbrella open. Just on the spot
where JFK was murdered. Where he was first shot in the neck from the
front. This guy was pumping up his umbrella seconds before the
motorcade made its turn to elm, and he closed his umbrella pronto
after the Lincoln Limo passed by. And now you are allowed to start
thinking.
Ben Holmes
The trajectory through Connally suggests that he did... my opinion, of course.
Walt
> On Aug 10, 10:47 am, aeffects <aeffe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 10, 6:42 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> "Explain why Euins saw a shooter firing from the same window as Brennan?" <<<
>
> > > Plus Bob Jackson...plus Mal Couch....who both saw a rifle in the SN
> > > window.
>
> > > And Walt needs to explain the crazy logic of setting up a patsy in the
> > > SE window when, per Walter, the shooter was on the WEST side of the
> > > building. Did the nutty plotters just FORGET where the shooter shot
> > > from? Or were the patsy-framers just freakin' idiots?
>
> > makes no difference if the building was built with rifles on the
> > exterior wall-face. Get LHO in the 6th window with a MC in HIS hand.
> > If the Dallas PD can't do it, and they were there, what makes you
> > think Lone Nut authors, wankers and Nutter idiot sticks who post to
> > the USNET, can?
>
> I think Brennan was either a goofball, a liar, or else he's very
> myopic.
Brennan was just an average Joe.... Perhaps a little more honest than
average. His immediate reaction after the shooting was to help the
cops apprehend the man he's seen firing the rifle from the WEST end
window of the sixth floor. He gave a description of that man, and that
description did NOT match Oswald.
In his affidavit which he wrote only about an hour after the murder he
said he was sure he could identify that sixth floor gunman if he ever
saw him again. HE WAS CERTAIN THAT HE WOULD BE ABLE TO ID THE
MAN ...... A couple of hours later he was taken to view a line up in
which Oswald was one of the men being viewed. Brennan told the cops
that the man he's seen firing the high powered rifle was NOT NOT
in that line up.
>
> First, we KNOW he lied, directly to the DPD when he claimed he refused
> to ID Oswald in the lineup because he felt that Oswald might have
> compatriots who would come and hurt Brennan and his family. Contrast
> that with the idea that the cops told him straight out that LHO
> couldn't see Brennan in the lineup, but he was still scared. And then
> suddenly, after counseling with the cops et al, he pegs Oswald in a
> bogus lineup. Yeah, he's an ace witness. <rolls eyes>
Hey, put yourself in his shoes.... It became quickly apparent to
Howard Brennan that the cops were framing Oswald and therefore the
real killers were still at large. And since it was the authorities
who were covering up the crime he knew he'd better keep his mouth shut
just as they "suggested" or his family could be in danger. What
would you do if you knew the truth but the cops weren't interested in
the facts they just wanted you to put the finger on their patsy??
>
> He also said he could see the entire upper torso and face of the
> assassin through the open window, even though photographic evidence
> shows that window to be open only about a foot or so.
You're thinking about the WRONG window..... Brennan saw the gunman in
the WIDE OPEN window at the WEST end of the sixth floor.
With him
> standing a few hundred feet away, that puts the shooter about 400+
> feet back from the window.
>
> Answer: Brennan didn't see squat, or else what he did see was
> completely bastardized by the cops, the Feds, or someone else.
That's exactly right......
Walt
>
> -Mike- Hide quoted text -
Walt
Hello Dave.... Yer right the LNer's have dug themselves a hole and
are being buried alive by diggin deeper. They can't HONESTLY refute
the facts so they either resort to lying or ad hominem attacks on the
messenger. That's why I took a hiatus..... There was almost nothing
of substance being posted, just a lot of middle school antics, and
name calling. I love a good HONEST debate, but there are no LNer's
that can provide an HONEST debate. When they are hit with facts they
either fold like a cheap lawn chair, or resort to lying or name
calling.... Who needs that?
Walt
>
>
>
> > Walt- Hide quoted text -
tomnln
evidence/testimony>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186770119.7...@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> Shots fired by a man from the SN, and this is Walt's proof that Oswald
> is innocent.
>
> Amazing.
>
>
tomnln
Chuckie, try THESE>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1186770376.1...@q4g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
> Wouldn't a little radio/walkie-talkie type of device have been more
> effective?
>
> The biggest "hit" in hsitory, and the plotters are going to leave the
> coup de grace shot to a guy pumping an umbrella!
>
> Do you even realize how dumb that stuff sounds?
>
Walt
> On Aug 10, 11:35 am, Lone <amseikci...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> effective?
Yes it would have if JFK had been listening to a receiver...... But
this was the only way they thought they could get the message to JFK
before they killed him for betraying them at BOP, by pulling the
protective aircover.
Walt
bigdog
Why would Euins not be able to see Oswald's hands if he was resting
the rifle on the front box. The rifle and Oswald's hands would have
been above the box, not behind it. As I have said in another post, the
value of Brennan's and Euins's testimony is not in indentifying the
shooter but identifying where the shots came from. Quite a coincidence
that two separate witnesses would both erroneously identify the same
window as the source of the shots. And the two reporters in the
motorcade also identified that same window. Are you suggesting they
all got it wrong and amazingly all made the same error as to where the
shots were fired from.
Yes, Euins did say four shots. He is not the only one who counted
wrong. Others said four. Some said two. The consensus was three. The
fact he got one aspect wrong does not mean he got everything wrong.
His statement regarding the source of the gunshots is supported by 3
other witnesses and the 3 spent shells at the window he said the shots
came from.
Walt
Duh..... Yes yer right if Oswald had been the gunman and he had fired
a rifle as the W.c. claimed his hands would have bee ABOVE the box as
you correctly pointed out. Euins was down on the street BELOW the
window therfore he could not have seen Oswald's hands as he said in
his testimomy.
But he testified that he DID see both of the gunman's hands, therefore
he was describing exactly the same stance that Howard Brennan
described. They both were referring to a gunman at the wide open west
end window.
Walt
As I have said in another post, the
> value of Brennan's and Euins's testimony is not in indentifying the
> shooter but identifying where the shots came from. Quite a coincidence
> that two separate witnesses would both erroneously identify the same
> window as the source of the shots. And the two reporters in the
> motorcade also identified that same window. Are you suggesting they
> all got it wrong and amazingly all made the same error as to where the
> shots were fired from.
>
> Yes, Euins did say four shots. He is not the only one who counted
> wrong. Others said four. Some said two. The consensus was three. The
> fact he got one aspect wrong does not mean he got everything wrong.
> His statement regarding the source of the gunshots is supported by 3
> other witnesses and the 3 spent shells at the window he said the shots
> came from.- Hide quoted text -
David Von Pein
No, he didn't. He saw Lee Harvey Oswald pulling the trigger from this
6th-Floor circled window ("A")....which Howard Brennan himself circled
in front of the WC.....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0112a.htm
You, Walt, are a disgrace to "JFK Research".
David Von Pein
Buried by the LN truth, huh? A curious notion.
>>> "They can't HONESTLY refute the facts..." <<<
Such as Brennan seeing a shooter on the WEST end? Just exactly HOW
have you, Sir Walter The Kook, established beyond all reasonable doubt
that Howard Leslie Brennan saw ANYONE on the west side of the
Depository's sixth floor on 11/22/63?
I'd really like to know how Walt has established that beyond
reasonable doubt.
Obviously, he has not established any such thing.....and never
will....because he cannot establish something that never happened. But
that never stopped a CTer from trying. (Just watch Oliver Stone's film
for proof of that last statement.)
>>> "There was almost nothing of substance being posted..." <<<
Bullshit. .....
http://davidvonpein.blogspot.com
>>> "I love a good HONEST debate, but there are no LNer's that can provide an HONEST debate." <<<
We're about as likely to get some "HONEST" debating out of Walt as we
were to get the truth out of Lee Harvey Oswald, circa November 1963.
Walt is a total disgrace. He believes stupid shit that not only never
happened, but he believes in ultra-stupid shit that never would have
even been contemplated by any of Walter's make-believe idiot plotters
who were preparing to kill JFK, even if such plotters REALLY DID exist
in 1963.
For some reason, Walt cannot seem to see the illogic that surrounds
most of the stupid theories he has placed his faith in. Or, more
likely, he just doesn't WANT to see it.
The same goes for Oliver Stone (and Jim Garrison before him) and
millions of other CTers worldwide.
Walt
> >>> "The LNer's have dug themselves a hole and are being buried alive by diggin' deeper." <<<
>
> Buried by the LN truth, huh? A curious notion.
>
> >>> "They can't HONESTLY refute the facts..." <<<
>
> Such as Brennan seeing a shooter on the WEST end? Just exactly HOW
> have you, Sir Walter The Kook, established beyond all reasonable doubt
> that Howard Leslie Brennan saw ANYONE on the west side of the
> Depository's sixth floor on 11/22/63?
Did Brennan say that he dived to the EAST side of the wall to shield
himself from the gunman he'd seen firing a high powered rifle from a
sixth floor window?? An honest... simple "yes" or "no" answer
please.
Walt
Walt
> >>> "Brennan saw the gunman in the WIDE OPEN window at the WEST end of the sixth floor." <<<
>
> No, he didn't. He saw Lee Harvey Oswald pulling the trigger from this
> 6th-Floor circled window ("A")....which Howard Brennan himself circled
> in front of the WC.....
Let's examine the facts.....
Fact...The W.C. imagined that Oswald sat on a box behind the window in
the SE corner of the TSBD and rested a rifle on top of a box sitting
on the window sill.
Fact .... If the IMAGINED scenario were accurate Bennan could not
have seen his hands because Brennan was BELOW the sixth floor window
and Oswald's hands would have been ABOVE the box.
Fact.... If the imagined scenario were true, Oswald could not have
declined the muzzle of the rifle low enough to hit anything on Elm
street.
Walt
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
David Von Pein
FACT -- Prior to the assassination, one of the very last places that
anyone saw LHO on Nov. 22 was near the southeast corner of the 6th
Floor of the TSBD.
FACT -- Oswald's rifle was found on that same 6th Floor of the TSBD.
FACT -- Oswald's prints were on that MC rifle found on the sixth
floor.
FACT -- Shells from that same MC rifle were found beneath the SE/SN
window.
FACT -- A bullet from that same MC rifle was found in the same
hospital where both limo victims were transported on 11/22.
FACT -- Bullet fragments from that very same MC rifle were found in
the VERY SAME VEHICLE where the two victims were wounded!
FACT -- Oswald was the only employee who was positively known to have
been INSIDE the Depository at the time JFK was killed to flee the
building right after the shooting.
FACT -- Oswald killed J.D. Tippit.
FACT -- Oswald fiercely resisted arrest in the Texas Theater, and
tried to shoot more cops within the theater.
FACT -- Oswald tried to distance himself as much as humanly possible
from BOTH the Tippit murder weapon and the JFK murder weapon.
FACT -- Oswald told one provable lie after another about important
substantive matters concerning the 2 murders he was charged with.
FACT -- Walt is a kook who seems to WANT a conspiracy in the JFK case,
despite the lack of hard evidence (or even semi-soft evidence) to
support such a wish.
FACT -- Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty of 2 murders in 1963....and all
of the crazy theories piled one on top of another won't change this
last FACT.
Stamp it -- "MARK VII".
Walt
> FACT -- Oswald was INSIDE the TSBD at 12:30 PM on 11/22/63.
>
> FACT -- Prior to the assassination, one of the very last places that
> anyone saw LHO on Nov. 22 was near the southeast corner of the 6th
> Floor of the TSBD.
False.... Givens said he saw Oswald near the elevator.... Odd that he
didn't see Jack Dougherty, who claimed he was right there also.
>
> FACT -- Oswald's rifle was found on that same 6th Floor of the TSBD.
False.... It has never been proven to have been Oswald's rifle. In
fact CE 133A shows a Mannlicher Carcano in Oswald's hands that IS NOT
the TSBD rifle.
>
> FACT -- Oswald's prints were on that MC rifle found on the sixth
> floor.
False.... Oswald's prints were never found on the TSBD rifle.
>
> FACT -- Shells from that same MC rifle were found beneath the SE/SN
> window.
True.... When were those shells fired? They could have been fired
anytime before the murder and planted beneath the window to make it
appear that Osewald had fired from thar site.
>
> FACT -- A bullet from that same MC rifle was found in the same
> hospital where both limo victims were transported on 11/22.
False .... The original bullet ( CE 399) that was found at Parkland is
not the same bullet now in the archives.
>
> FACT -- Bullet fragments from that very same MC rifle were found in
> the VERY SAME VEHICLE where the two victims were wounded!
False .....The bullet fragments could NOT be balistically traced to
the TSBD rifle.
>
> FACT -- Oswald was the only employee who was positively known to have
> been INSIDE the Depository at the time JFK was killed to flee the
> building right after the shooting.
False.....Several employees Left the building immediately after the
shooting.
>
> FACT -- Oswald killed J.D. Tippit.
False..... Eyewitnesses DESCRIBED the killer who was NOT Lee Oswald.
>
> FACT -- Oswald fiercely resisted arrest in the Texas Theater, and
> tried to shoot more cops within the theater.
False.... Oswald's reflexes took over when Nick Mc Donald grabbed
Lee's balls and he hit Mc Donald. He did not resist arrest and the
cops were the ones who pulled the pistol from Oswald's waist band.
>
> FACT -- Oswald tried to distance himself as much as humanly possible
> from BOTH the Tippit murder weapon and the JFK murder weapon.
Of course..... He said he was just being made the patsy.
>
> FACT -- Oswald told one provable lie after another about important
> substantive matters concerning the 2 murders he was charged with.
Oswald did lie .... He was a trained intelligence agent whose stock in
trade is lying.
Walt
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/03c779ad2b952d1a
=====================================
A nice batch of lies there, Walt. You should go to work for Oliver
Stone. You've skewed, mangled, and misrepresented every single point
above. Nice job.
And there's one particular bald-faced lie on Walt's last list of
insanity that I'm not sure I've ever seen any nutcase CTer have the
balls to purport in the past (it's a 100% lie without any doubt
too)....this one:
>>>"The bullet fragments {in the limo} could NOT be balistically [sic] traced to the TSBD rifle." -- QUOTE FROM WALT-KOOK<<<
Now let's listen to what the FBI's Bob Frazier had to say......
========================
Mr. McCLOY - As a result of all these comparisons, you would say that
the evidence is indisputable that the three shells that were
identified by you were fired from that rifle {CE139}?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY - And you would say the same thing of Commission Exhibit
399, the bullet 399 was fired from that rifle?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY - And the fragment 567---
Mr. FRAZIER - 567, the one we have just finished.
Mr. McCLOY - Was likewise a portion of a bullet fired from that rifle?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY - You have no doubt about any of those?
Mr. FRAZIER - None whatsoever.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet fragment
{CE569} with a view to determining whether it had been fired from the
rifle, Exhibit 139?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG - What was your conclusion?
Mr. FRAZIER - This bullet fragment, Exhibit 569, was fired from this
particular rifle, 139.
=======================
Therefore, per Walt, if something is proven beyond ALL doubt to be
true (such as CE567/569 having positively come from Rifle #C2766 "to
the exclusion", and that very same rifle having been THE ONE AND ONLY
RIFLE found on the 6th Floor of the Depository, per every credible
police official who testified regarding that matter), a kook like
Walter will just simply claim the EXACT OPPOSITE to be true.
Typical.
Sad....but typical.
Walt
Ok Mr. Gullible.. HOW did Frazier determine that CE 569 was fired from
the TSBD rifle?
Do you know anything about how bullets are identified as having been
fired from a particulat gun??
Walt
>
> Typical.
> Sad....but typical.
David Von Pein
Oh, I'm sure you (a kook) think you know a whole lot more about
firearms identification techniques than the guy who was assigned as
the LEAD F.B.I. FIREARMS EXPERT IN THE BIGGEST MURDER CASE OF THE 20TH
CENTURY.
Right, kook? You must know WAY more than Robert A. Frazier of the FBI.
Right?
So, why not tell us how Frazier lied through his teeth...over and over
again.
I like fantasy. And Walt's good for a whole library of such fiction.
Just read his next-to-last post for proof of this.
Walt
> >>> "Do you know anything about how bullets are identified as having been fired from a particular gun?" <<<
>
> Oh, I'm sure you (a kook) think you know a whole lot more about
> firearms identification techniques than the guy who was assigned as
> the LEAD F.B.I. FIREARMS EXPERT IN THE BIGGEST MURDER CASE OF THE 20TH
> CENTURY.
Nope...I don't claim to be an "expert"....
I believe the definition of an "expert" is anybody who spouts off on a
subject that he knows his listeners know nothing about.
His listeners believe him because they are in no position to challenge
him.
I'm not surprised that you would believe Hoovers cronies..... You're
a gullible simpleton who can be taken in by an "expert"
Walt
David Von Pein
plot too...right? (And Nicol wasn't even one of Hoover's "cronies",
remember...he was an independent expert from Illinois.)
But Joe Nicol just went along with the Govt. "Let's Get Oswald" cover-
up plan too, right Mr. Kook? Even to the point of going FURTHER than
Hoover's boys, with Nicol claiming that 1 of the Tippit bullets
positively matched Oswald's revolver.
Now, what were you saying about "gullible simpletons", Mister Mega-
Kook?
Walt
Oh, you didn't understand..... Let's see if you can understand, if I
tell you that Hoover was THE ultimate "Godfather" who nobody
challenged. He had the most ruthless "family" in the world, and to
challenge him meant political ruin or death.... You gullible
simplton.
Walt