Re: The *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory
muc...@gmail.com
salvage your *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory?"
Ben replied: "The troll is too embarrassed to even define what the
theory is."
Mark tries again:
According to the *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory, the presence of a
certain figure ("Looks like a woman wearing yellow pants" [BH 3/5/08])
in the Nix film indicates Zapruder film alteration.
In the post (linked to below) that kicked off the "Z-369 and Proof
that Zapruder & Nix Have Been Altered" thread, you outlined a two-
component theory, according to which
(1) the couple behind the Franzen group appearing in Nix and not
Zapruder, and
(2) the *Lady in Yellow Pants* appearing in Nix and not Zapruder
proved that one or both films had been altered.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5b900b35211f89d8
It appears that you abandoned the first component when you later
realized that the couple behind the Franzen group *is* visible in the
Zapruder film, but you never seem to have admitted that you were wrong
about the *Lady in Yellow Pants*. In a 3/7/08 newsgroup post, for
example, you had this to say to Bob Harris:
QUOTE ON
Nor, for example, have you *EVER* responded to the point I made about
the lady wearing yellow pants. Too cowardly and too dishonest... for
as we have all been told repeatedly, "There's no question an honest
man will evade," but that's not true, is it Bob?
You're a coward, Bob - you keep top-posting and avoiding questions you
can't answer... so I moved it to the top to watch you squirm. I
predict that you'll simply refuse to answer this entire post...
QUOTE OFF
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ed3607b19e5a70d7
No more dodging, Ben. It's time to fess up:
Do you still believe your own *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory?
-Mark
Gil Jesus
FRONT of the skull ?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bda6dc1bb3c89c6a
muc...@gmail.com
How cute. Ben's new lap dog to the rescue. Wuf wuf.
Bud
At least Gil performed the service of getting your post past Ben`s
killfilter. Now, it will be hard for Ben to claim ignorance, leaving
only cowardice if he doesn`t respond.
muc...@gmail.com
Not really. Gil left nothing for his master to see.
Bud
You`re right, my bad. These kooks don`t even want to discuss issues
*they* bring up. They either change the subject (like Gil here), or
stop responding altogether (like Ben did). There doesn`t seem to be
much to do by trade observations of kook behavior. Lately, I`ve
seen...
Laz (presumably the younger) say that since his tiny mind has
trouble processing the information of Bugliosi and Posner `s stances
on different issues, that his confusion leads him to believe that the
CIA is behind it.
Healy, claiming his military shooting experience conveys special
powers of insight about Oswald`s shooting ability, but offers no such
insight.
Ben, speaking in tongues, cryptically alluding to information on the
same subject, but never quite able to bring himself to actually say
anything. Apparently the truth requires that you talk in a weasely
lawyer manner.
Gil, triumphantly producing information he thought indicated
Johnson`s quilt, needing it pointed out to him that the information
strongly indicated Johnson`s innocence.
tims...@gmail.com
Hi Mark,
That is a good question. Ben has now been running from further
discussion of his *Lady In Yellow Pants* theory since around March, by
my calculations. I thought only cowards ran, according to Ben.
BTW, did you see the post from *Phil Ossofee* naming Ben, Healy and
Jesus as the three best JFK researchers ever? Can you believe Phil
would fail to list Tom *tomnln* Rossley's name with such an august
body of, er, *researchers*? I'm outraged!
I won't stand for this injustice for a New York Minute, whatever, in
fact, a New York Minute is. I want tomnln elevated to his rightful
place immediately!
:-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:33298c2f-63b9-46a7...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi Mark,
That is a good question. Ben has now been running from further
discussion of his *Lady In Yellow Pants* theory since around March, by
my calculations. I thought only cowards ran, according to Ben.
BTW, did you see the post from *Phil Ossofee* naming Ben, Healy and
Jesus as the three best JFK researchers ever? Can you believe Phil
would fail to list Tom *tomnln* Rossley's name with such an august
body of, er, *researchers*? I'm outraged!
I won't stand for this injustice for a New York Minute, whatever, in
fact, a New York Minute is. I want tomnln elevated to his rightful
place immediately!
:-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thank You, Thank You Very Much"
(sounded just like him)
After all, it was tomnln who pointed out that Timmy believed the Oswald in
Mexico City was;
5 ft 3 inches tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
(scroll half way down the page)
Then, ask Timmy WHY he RUNS from the issues of the authorities
"Evidence/Tampering"?
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
Is Timmy Condoning Felonies?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
Bump
aeffects
my goodness markey-mark.... you can't debate the evidence, you haven't
read the WCR... what are you doing here markey-mark? Holding Timmy the
dolt from down-undahs' jopckstrap-a-roo?
we're wondering about you markey-mark.... LMFAO!
> -Mark
aeffects
a master, not! Yep, that's the dolt!
muc...@gmail.com
You know my opinion of Ben's theory. What do *you* think?
> we're wondering about you markey-mark.... LMFAO!
Keep wondering, Sparky.
> > -Mark
muc...@gmail.com
muc...@gmail.com
aeffects
not to bad markey-mark, especially for a moron who doesn't even know
what double 8mm film is -- keep coming back toots-e-roll, it does
indeed get better....
muc...@gmail.com
Much obliged, Sparky. It will be interesting to see if Ben is man
enough to (finally) admit that his *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory is
(demonstrably) wrong, and apologize for his cowardly behaviour over
the last few months.
Gil Jesus
Wil you EVER stop harping on this issue ?
It seems that your obsessed with this lady in yellow pants, so much so
that you've mentioned this in 87 POSTS.
Will you EVER let it go, or are you just going to continue to be an
asshole about it ?
(we know the answer to THAT one )
I guess you arer what you are.
muc...@gmail.com
> YOYO:
>
> Wil you EVER stop harping on this issue ?
>
> It seems that your obsessed with this lady in yellow pants, so much so
> that you've mentioned this in 87 POSTS.
Funny. It seems to me that Ben is running like a man possessed from
discussion of his own theory. Thank you for confirming that Ben has
dodged 87 of my posts.
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=yellow+pants&qt_s=Sear...
>
> Will you EVER let it go, or are you just going to continue to be an
> asshole about it ?
A bigger asshole than Ben? Impossible.
> (we know the answer to THAT one )
>
> I guess you arer what you are.
An awfully nice guy?
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
It's amusing that the very same people who are demanding my response now simply
refused to debate the issue when I first brought it up. The evidence that the
extant Z-film doesn't match other films is quite clear to anyone who studies the
relevant films...
The extant Z-film is a fraud - and no-one other than trolls will defend it. The
"serious" researchers, such as Tony or Martin, have given up on trying to defend
the authenticity of the extant Z-film.
tims...@gmail.com
This post doesn't sound very civil Gil. Do you still condone
*civility* in newsgroup posting, Gil?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Aug 15, 8:58 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
> YOYO:
>
> Wil you EVER stop harping on this issue ?
>
> It seems that your obsessed with this lady in yellow pants, so much so
> that you've mentioned this in 87 POSTS.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&q=yellow+pants&qt_s=Sear...
Bud
> In article <8d82a4ba-ad03-4a2a-8e50-c64d437ec...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
> Gil Jesus says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >YOYO:
>
> >Wil you EVER stop harping on this issue ?
>
> >It seems that your obsessed with this lady in yellow pants, so much so
> >that you've mentioned this in 87 POSTS.
>
>
> >Will you EVER let it go, or are you just going to continue to be an
> >asshole about it ?
>
> >(we know the answer to THAT one )
>
> >I guess you arer what you are.
>
> It's amusing that the very same people who are demanding my response now simply
> refused to debate the issue when I first brought it up. The evidence that the
> extant Z-film doesn't match other films is quite clear to anyone who studies the
> relevant films...
What a pussy! Doesn`t even try to address the issue, instead props
up a few strawmen and runs. I seem to remember numerous proclamations
about cowards not supporting their assertions coming from this
asshole. A person of character might say that even if he was wrong on
this issue, the idea that the z-film is altered is still supported by
other issues. But, he can`t bring himself to admit he was wrong on any
issue. Afraid Healy might think he is a fallible, I guess.
> The extant Z-film is a fraud - and no-one other than trolls will defend it. The
> "serious" researchers, such as Tony or Martin, have given up on trying to defend
> the authenticity of the extant Z-film.
How long can you maintain "Is too / Is not"?
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a8e1ad39-1d0e-4385...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
This post doesn't sound very civil Gil. Do you still condone
*civility* in newsgroup posting, Gil?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
Forgive him;
He got hung up on trying to find YOUR Oswald that was....
5 ft. 3 inches tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds.
ps;
How long are you gonna RUN from these?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
> In article <8d82a4ba-ad03-4a2a-8e50-c64d437ec...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
> Gil Jesus says...
>
> >YOYO:
>
> >Wil you EVER stop harping on this issue ?
>
> >It seems that your obsessed with this lady in yellow pants, so much so
> >that you've mentioned this in 87 POSTS.
>
>
> >Will you EVER let it go, or are you just going to continue to be an
> >asshole about it ?
>
> >(we know the answer to THAT one )
>
> >I guess you arer what you are.
>
> It's amusing that the very same people who are demanding my response now simply
> refused to debate the issue when I first brought it up.
Not true. I, for one, have been trying to debate your *Lady in Yellow
Pants* theory ever since the day it was (rather boastfully)
introduced. Not only that, but some of us have carefully demonstrated
that your theory is flat out wrong. Tim Brennan's posts have been
particularly effective in that regard (perhaps you managed to read a
few before deciding to killfile him).
Btw, why do *you* refuse to debate your theory *now*. Too embarrassed?
> The evidence that the
> extant Z-film doesn't match other films is quite clear to anyone who studies the
> relevant films...
Is this a weasel way of saying (without really saying it) that you
*still* consider your *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory valid?!
> The extant Z-film is a fraud - and no-one other than trolls will defend it. The
> "serious" researchers, such as Tony or Martin, have given up on trying to defend
> the authenticity of the extant Z-film.
Or perhaps they simply choose to ignore you because you're not worth
their while. In any case, it's extremely disingenuous of you to imply
that they're buying any part whatsoever of your terribly flawed *Lady
in Yellow Pants* theory.
Bud
Ben doesn`t state anything of substance clearly. He alludes to
things, he hints at things, always phrased with wiggle room for an
evasion, or hasty retreat. Why would someone with the truth on their
side need to mask their arguments in such a way? Its the mark of a
dishonest commentator.
muc...@gmail.com
muc...@gmail.com
muc...@gmail.com
Bump (Repost 0006).
muc...@gmail.com
Bump (Repost 0007).
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Say, I just noticed that you're STILL claiming on your Mexico City
page that, as of 25 November, 1963, the Dallas FBI had CIA audiotapes
from Mexico City.
You then say that *then and only then* did Mrs Duran say that Oswald
was the man she met in September at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.
But we both know that CE 2121 shows that Mrs Duran signed a statement
the evening of 23 November, 1963, saying that it was Oswald she met.
I told you this six months ago, tomnln, and you've done nothing. You
quite clearly have turned your back on the evidence/testimony tomnln,
the evidence/testimony.
Now why is that, tomnln?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Aug 10, 1:59 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:33298c2f-63b9-46a7...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> That is a good question. Ben has now been running from further
> discussion of his *Lady In Yellow Pants* theory since around March, by
> my calculations. I thought only cowards ran, according to Ben.
>
> BTW, did you see the post from *Phil Ossofee* naming Ben, Healy and
> Jesus as the three best JFK researchers ever? Can you believe Phil
> would fail to list Tom *tomnln* Rossley's name with such an august
> body of, er, *researchers*? I'm outraged!
>
> I won't stand for this injustice for a New York Minute, whatever, in
> fact, a New York Minute is. I want tomnln elevated to his rightful
> place immediately!
>
> :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Thank You, Thank You Very Much"
> (sounded just like him)
>
> After all, it was tomnln who pointed out that Timmy believed the Oswald in
> Mexico City was;
> 5 ft 3 inches tall
> Blond Haired
> 119 pounds.
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
> (scroll half way down the page)
>
> Then, ask Timmy WHY he RUNS from the issues of the authorities
> "Evidence/Tampering"?http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>
> Is Timmy Condoning Felonies?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -Mark- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
muc...@gmail.com
Bump (Repost 0008).
muc...@gmail.com
Bump (Repost 0009).
aeffects
no traction sonny.... ya gotta deal with the evidence toots-e-roll. Ya
want legs? Its the evidence, troll! ROTFLMFAO!
muc...@gmail.com
How exactly do you suggest we deal with the evidence? Sadly, it
doesn't support Ben's theory, and the poor sap has been running from
any discussion thereof since March...
Harry
Why DISCUSS things with trolls? It's a waste of time.
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
It would be fun to debate this with LNT'ers - but I had trolls that refused to
even *admit* seeing someone in a particular frame.
How can you debate idiots like that?
Ben Holmes
Harry says...
True. I've got the trolls killfiled. No need to even read their garbage. Every
single troll on my killfile list has been nailed in lies - and they consistently
refuse to support their own words.
I leave Eddie Dolan off the killfile list for his amusing quality, but he's
certainly as big a liar as the rest of them... as well as being caught providing
a faked citation. (and *continuing* to refuse to support his words)
justm...@gmail.com
> In article <2060d42d-f048-478a-9eae-ba818eeba...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
But you citing a fake author "John Welsh Hodges" and a fake book that
your lapdog quoted having the galley proofs of makes you any different
from those you accuse of lying? ROFLMAO go take a few more kicks to
the head Holmes.
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:77e967ee-5be7-412c...@a8g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Say, I just noticed that you're STILL claiming on your Mexico City
page that, as of 25 November, 1963, the Dallas FBI had CIA audiotapes
from Mexico City.
You then say that *then and only then* did Mrs Duran say that Oswald
was the man she met in September at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.
But we both know that CE 2121 shows that Mrs Duran signed a statement
the evening of 23 November, 1963, saying that it was Oswald she met.
I told you this six months ago, tomnln, and you've done nothing. You
quite clearly have turned your back on the evidence/testimony tomnln,
the evidence/testimony.
Now why is that, tomnln?
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your official records speak for themselves Timmy;
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
ps;
WHY do you keep RUNNING from these?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
Looks like your position is NOT defensible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
> In article <ab3f4f71-75c1-4e17-a8a8-c76051713...@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
Ridiculous. No one "refuses to admit" seeing the *Lady in Yellow
Pants* figure (YPL) in the Nix film. Allow me to quote your original
question (posted in the "Where in this "lady in yellow pants" Ben
Holmes is talking about?" thread on March 8th) below.
Ben Holmes ON
The Zapruder film shows how many people in the grass at Z-377?
How many people does the Nix film show in the same location?
Ben Holmes OFF
(http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/
4375be1606567904)
I seem to remember having explained this before, but apparently not
well enough. The two people seen standing in the grass in Z-377
http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37568840.html
can also be seen in several Nix frames, beginning with N-101,
http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567052.html
and YPL enters the picture in N-104.
http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567055.html
The patch of grass occupied by YPL was, however, never filmed by
Zapruder, so the only reasonable answer to your question is: two and
two. Arguing that YPL was out of view from Zapruder is obviously not
the same as "refusing to admit" she can be seen in the Nix film. Can
you *admit* that your above accusation was fiction, Ben?
There is nothing suspicious about YPL not appearing in Zapruder. I'd
be happy to repeat the arguments, and, If you ask politely, I'll even
draw you a picture! Would you like that, Ben?
> How can you debate idiots like that?
You can start by answering a few questions for a change.
1) Can you show us the approximate location of YPL on a map?
2) A lamp post comes into view in Z-368. Can it be seen in the Nix
film?
3) Why would YPL necessarily appear in Z-377 (or any other frame after
Z-368 when Main Street comes into view)?
Thank you in advance.
-Mark
muc...@gmail.com
BUMP
aeffects
> Mark asked: "Ben? Are you still working furiously around the clock to
> salvage your *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory?"
>
> Ben replied: "The troll is too embarrassed to even define what the
> theory is."
>
one can never underestimate the power of Ben Holmes 45 Questions....
the trolls of acj run.... oh-wee marky-mark, oh-wee
muc...@gmail.com
That's lovely. You guys are forever going to dance divinely (to borrow
one of your pet phrases) around the, rather substantial, holes in
Ben's ridiculous theory, aren't you?
muc...@gmail.com
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Say, why have you, in your reply, TWICE linked to the page I already
showed you has the error in it?
That's no sort of a reply, tomnln.
You'll have to do better than that.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Aug 29, 1:39 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:77e967ee-5be7-412c...@a8g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Say, I just noticed that you're STILL claiming on your Mexico City
> page that, as of 25 November, 1963, the Dallas FBI had CIA audiotapes
> from Mexico City.
>
> You then say that *then and only then* did Mrs Duran say that Oswald
> was the man she met in September at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.
>
> But we both know that CE 2121 shows that Mrs Duran signed a statement
> the evening of 23 November, 1963, saying that it was Oswald she met.
>
> I told you this six months ago, tomnln, and you've done nothing. You
> quite clearly have turned your back on the evidence/testimony tomnln,
> the evidence/testimony.
>
> Now why is that, tomnln?
>
> Concerned Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your official records speak for themselves Timmy;
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>
> ps;
>
> WHY do you keep RUNNING from these?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
> > "Evidence/Tampering"?http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20T...
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
Or Gil's recent addition - the 20 Questions that they're running from as well.
CT'ers don't have to run from the facts... the facts DEMONSTRATE the conspiracy
in this case.
muc...@gmail.com
aeffects
my goodness you girls DO need recognition, don't ya?
love ya snookums
Bud
Ben is still running from this issue "snookums". Since you are one
of the few people he doesn`t have killfiled, perhaps you can prevail
upon him to retract or support his assertions on this issue.
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a59d9a72-8299-4d17...@s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Say, why have you, in your reply, TWICE linked to the page I already
showed you has the error in it?
That's no sort of a reply, tomnln.
You'll have to do better than that.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I point out my website so people can see Your Lies Timmy.
I want people to see that you believe that the Oswald seen in Mexico City by
Sylvia Duran was.......
5 ft' 3 inches tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds.
I also want then to see you RUN from these>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
I want people to see that you Condone destruction od evidence.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
Hi Bud,
To facilitate discussion of Ben's theory, I have made the following
(very rough) sketch to illustrate the relative positions of some of
the people and objects that appear in the Zapruder and Nix films.
http://www.geocities.com/dkcherdk/ypl.gif
[Points of reference]
Z: Abraham Zapruder
N: Orville Nix
Y: Yellow Pants Lady
G1: Couple (1)
G2: Franzen group
G3: Couple (2)
LP1: Lamp post (1)
LP2: Lamp post (2)
[Film frame events]
Enter LP1:
N-74: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567021.html
Enter G1:
Z-342: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37568805.html
N-83: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567031.html
Enter LP2 (and Main Street):
Z-368: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37568831.html
Enter G3:
Z-373: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37568836.html
N-101: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567052.html
Enter Y:
N-104: http://jfk.fotopic.net/p37567055.html
[Sequence of events]
From Z perspective: (LP1)-G1-(Y)-LP2-G3
From N perspective: LP1-G1-G3-Y-(LP2)
[Comments]
There is nothing strange about Yellow Pants Lady appearing in one film
(Nix) and not the other. This is perfectly consistent with the
Zapruder film placing her before Z-368 (where Main Street comes into
view), and the Nix fil showing her much farther from Elm Street than
the G1 couple (visible only from their knees down in the Zapruder
film). Probably the simplest way to understand that she was never
inside Zapruder's (or rather his camera's) field of view is by
imagining a line in the grass between G1 and LP2.
-Mark
Bud
<snicker> Ben is discussing this issue he raised? Where can I find
this? My guess is, when this diagram is finally brought to his
attention, his response will be a simple "LOL". The man has no shame,
he is the poster boy for intellectual cowardice.
Real nice, Mark. It seems to me that instead of speaking to z-film
tampering, it speaks loudly to z-film authenticity, because who could
think to coordinate all these variables between the two films?
aeffects
feel the chill in the air, Dudster..... 'nother winter is
approaching.
Now you two amateurs get markey-mark's material published, then we'll
do a little peer review -- ought to keep you busy till April '09....
carry on!
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
another dodge and avoidance by the lapdog.....woof woof, what a
worthless piece of crap you are other then to Holmes who you keep
trying to protect from his lies
muc...@gmail.com
Well, that's mighty considerate of you, but the only appropriate place
to publish my "material" seems to be here, since no one outside this
forum has ever heard of the *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory (or Ben
Holmes for that matter).
aeffects
wrote:
sitdown troll, your a simple minded dingleberry, hanging around
waiting to lapup sweat from Lone Nut testicles.... carry on toots-e-
roll
aeffects
April '09 toots-e-roll, keep your chin up, you can do it....
Bud
It`s still hot here, Junk. Perhaps you sat down on your Big Gulp
again.
> 'nother winter is
> approaching.
You are so fucking astute. Do you water your pot plants with
Gatorade because it has electrolytes?
> Now you two amateurs get markey-mark's material published, then we'll
> do a little peer review -- ought to keep you busy till April '09....
> carry on!
Well, since you responded, the material Mark presented is available
to the coward you worship. How do you think he will respond? My money
is on him running away from it, what do you say?
muc...@gmail.com
It's hard to imagine a safer bet.
muc...@gmail.com
BUMP
muc...@gmail.com
...and the crickets go chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp
chirp chirp chirp chirp
muc...@gmail.com
Ben has been mulling over his reply to this thread for three
consecutive days now. Methinks it's about time you lent the poor sap a
hand. He seems to need all the help he can get, and you *are*, after
all, a published author on <snicker> Z film alteration!
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Well I don't think anyone going down to your website is going to reach
THAT conclusion, tomnln. Simply because, tomnln, YOU are the person
that has cobbled the 5' 3" Oswald description together, tomnln.
Nothing to do with me.
You don't like the fact that in the VERY SAME HSCA interview with Mrs
Duran that you cite, she twice identified Oswald as the man she
met.She picked out his New Orleans Police Department mughsot photo in
doing so, tomnln. TWICE, tomnln.
You don't like the fact that she unequivocally identified Oswald in
the WC volumes as the man she met, tomnln. It's in CE 2121, a document
you totally ignore on your website.
You don't like evidence/testimony anymore, do you tomnln? It doesn't
agree with the nonsense on your website, tomnln.
As for the other nonsense you link to, I've never bothered to read it.
Still plenty of damage to do to your Mexico City page yet, tomnln. It
really is a dreadful effort, isn't it tomnln?
Another day ticks by and you haven't corrected it, have you tomnln?
Oh dear...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 1, 2:09 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a59d9a72-8299-4d17...@s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Say, why have you, in your reply, TWICE linked to the page I already
> showed you has the error in it?
>
> That's no sort of a reply, tomnln.
>
> You'll have to do better than that.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I point out my website so people can see Your Lies Timmy.
>
> I want people to see that you believe that the Oswald seen in Mexico City by
> Sylvia Duran was.......
> 5 ft' 3 inches tall
> Blond Haired
> 119 pounds.
>
> I also want then to see you RUN from these>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/mexcit...
aeffects
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Well I don't think anyone going down to your website is going to reach
> THAT conclusion, tomnln. Simply because, tomnln, YOU are the person
> that has cobbled the 5' 3" Oswald description together, tomnln.
> Nothing to do with me.
oh timster, ducking and running, AGAIN? Why are we NOT surprised... ya
need some grit, son! Suck it up and read the WCR.... you're B-O-R-I-N-
G....
<snip the Nutter whine>
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:882d1efc-18dd-4bc8...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Well I don't think anyone going down to your website is going to reach
THAT conclusion, tomnln. Simply because, tomnln, YOU are the person
that has cobbled the 5' 3" Oswald description together, tomnln.
Nothing to do with me.
You don't like the fact that in the VERY SAME HSCA interview with Mrs
Duran that you cite, she twice identified Oswald as the man she
met.She picked out his New Orleans Police Department mughsot photo in
doing so, tomnln. TWICE, tomnln.
You don't like the fact that she unequivocally identified Oswald in
the WC volumes as the man she met, tomnln. It's in CE 2121, a document
you totally ignore on your website.
You don't like evidence/testimony anymore, do you tomnln? It doesn't
agree with the nonsense on your website, tomnln.
As for the other nonsense you link to, I've never bothered to read it.
Still plenty of damage to do to your Mexico City page yet, tomnln. It
really is a dreadful effort, isn't it tomnln?
Another day ticks by and you haven't corrected it, have you tomnln?
Oh dear...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information on my website comes from the evidence/testimony in the /WC's
26 volumes Timmy.
Duran said;
5 ft. 3 inchesw tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds
You beieve that portrays the REAL Oswald.
Duran was arrested TWICE;
First time was 11/23/63.
Then she was arrested AGAIN along with her Whole FAMILY.
No wonder you RUN from the authorities destroying evidence Repeatedly>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
Looks like Timmy Endorses FELONIES.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"aeffects" <aeffe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a48c382c-2152-4ea8...@1g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
<snip the Nutter whine>
Timmy always reaches "Conclusions" BEFORE gathering the Facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bud
> On Sep 5, 3:07 pm, timst...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > TOP POST
>
> > Hi tomnln,
>
> > Well I don't think anyone going down to your website is going to reach
> > THAT conclusion, tomnln. Simply because, tomnln, YOU are the person
> > that has cobbled the 5' 3" Oswald description together, tomnln.
> > Nothing to do with me.
>
> oh timster, ducking and running, AGAIN?
Kooks operate in some bizarre upside-down reality. Whenever an LN
directly addresses the issues the kooks bring up, they charge that we
are ducking and running.
> Why are we NOT surprised... ya
> need some grit, son! Suck it up and read the WCR....
He was quoting from it. The problem is, all he can do is provide
information. The comprehending part is out of Tim`s control.
> you're B-O-R-I-N-
> G....
You`re high. Again.
> <snip the Nutter whine>
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:db6205c5-d035-4563...@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 5, 6:44 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 5, 3:07 pm, timst...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > TOP POST
>>
>> > Hi tomnln,
Timmy wrote;
>> > Well I don't think anyone going down to your website is going to reach
>> > THAT conclusion, tomnln. Simply because, tomnln, YOU are the person
>> > that has cobbled the 5' 3" Oswald description together, tomnln.
>> > Nothing to do with me.
I write;
Timmy is Denying that it was Sylvia Duran that described Oswald as....
5 ft. 3 inches tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds.
It's "SOOOOO Embarrassing" to him that he's Forced to attribute it to me.
Timmy even turns his back on the FBI Report stating that the guy in Mexico
City was "NOT Oswald".
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
No wonder Timmy RUNS from the authorities Repeatedly Destroying Evidence.
Looks like Timmy Endorses Felonies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3WJuk.23508$Rs1....@newsfe08.iad...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you Denying that the FBI heard those audio tapes from Mexico City Timmy?
(the ones that were supposedly REUSED in October of 1963?
WHY did the CIA LIE Timmy?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
(Choke on it Timmy)
Say, Timmy;
You wouldn't really be Rob Spencer would you?
You remember him?
I beat the snot outta him HERE>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/rob_spencer_page.htm
It would be just like him to post under ANOTHER NAME! ! !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> You then say that *then and only then* did Mrs Duran say that Oswald
>> was the man she met in September at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.
>>
>> But we both know that CE 2121 shows that Mrs Duran signed a statement
>> the evening of 23 November, 1963, saying that it was Oswald she met.
We BOTH also know that Duran signed that statement During/After her
Arrest/Intimidation don't we Timmy! ! !
Tell us WHY the CIA requested the Mexicam authorities Arrest Duran?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> I told you this six months ago, tomnln, and you've done nothing. You
>> quite clearly have turned your back on the evidence/testimony tomnln,
>> the evidence/testimony.
>>
>> Now why is that, tomnln?
>>
>> Concerned Regards,
>>
>> Tim Brennan
>> Sydney, Australia
>> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
WHICH of Your official Records do you Reject Timmy?
muc...@gmail.com
BUMP
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
LOL, we have sure *gathered the facts* on your ridiculous Oswald in
Mexico City page, tomnln.
It doesn't agree with *evidence/testimony* tomnln.
Evidence/testimony in the form of CE 2121.
Interesting that you continue to reject your precious <snicker>
*evidence/testimony*, tomnln.
Very interesting indeed...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 6, 9:20 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> "aeffects" <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote in message
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Say, if the information on your <snicker> website comes from the
*evidence/testimony* in the WC's 26 volumes, as you claim, tomnln,
then you'll be able to show us where Mrs Duran gives a description in
the 26 volumes of Oswald as 5' 3" tall, blond haired and weighing 119
pounds, won't you tomnln?
I mean, you've got an actual copy of the 26 volumes, haven't you
tomnln? Shouldn't be too hard.
We all saw what you just posted, tomnln.
Volume and page number from the 26 volumes for Mrs Duran's description
of the 5' 3" Oswald please tomnln.
Chop, chop you ol' evidence/testimony (from the 26 volumes!) lover
you! Cite please!
Looking forward to your reply, tomnln! LOL!
:-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 6, 9:19 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>
> Looks like Timmy Endorses FELONIES.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On Sep 1, 2:09 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:a59d9a72-8299-4d17...@s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> > TOP POST
>
> > Hi tomnln,
>
> > Say, why have you, in your reply, TWICE linked to the page I already
> > showed you has the error in it?
>
> > That's no sort of a reply, tomnln.
>
> > You'll have to do better than that.
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Tim Brennan
> > Sydney, Australia
> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > I point out my website so people can see Your Lies Timmy.
>
> > I want people to see that you believe that the Oswald seen in Mexico City
> > by
> > Sylvia Duran was.......
> > 5 ft' 3 inches tall
> > Blond Haired
> > 119 pounds.
>
> > I also want then to see you RUN from
> > these>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE...
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Say, I was having another read of Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony today,
tomnln.
She says her handwriting is on Oswald's Cuban transit visa
application, tomnln.
You know, the one with Oswald's actual photo attached and his genuine
signature on it.
Looks like yet another bit of evidence that Duran and Oswald actually
met in September of 1963, doncha think tomnln?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 6, 10:02 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote in message
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fa9c5281-d005-4cb5...@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
LOL, we have sure *gathered the facts* on your ridiculous Oswald in
Mexico City page, tomnln.
It doesn't agree with *evidence/testimony* tomnln.
Evidence/testimony in the form of CE 2121.
Interesting that you continue to reject your precious <snicker>
*evidence/testimony*, tomnln.
Very interesting indeed...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That page makes you look like A TOOL TIMMY.
Because it's from YOUIR Official Reports.
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:123e5063-e9ea-44db...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Say, if the information on your <snicker> website comes from the
*evidence/testimony* in the WC's 26 volumes, as you claim, tomnln,
then you'll be able to show us where Mrs Duran gives a description in
the 26 volumes of Oswald as 5' 3" tall, blond haired and weighing 119
pounds, won't you tomnln?
I mean, you've got an actual copy of the 26 volumes, haven't you
tomnln? Shouldn't be too hard.
We all saw what you just posted, tomnln.
Volume and page number from the 26 volumes for Mrs Duran's description
of the 5' 3" Oswald please tomnln.
Chop, chop you ol' evidence/testimony (from the 26 volumes!) lover
you! Cite please!
Looking forward to your reply, tomnln! LOL!
:-)
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody is surprised that Timmy doesn't know that that testimony from Duran
comes from
Volume III of the HSCA.
Pages 6 through 119.
http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c804decc-f2c2-419f...@x1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Say, I was having another read of Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony today,
tomnln.
She says her handwriting is on Oswald's Cuban transit visa
application, tomnln.
You know, the one with Oswald's actual photo attached and his genuine
signature on it.
Looks like yet another bit of evidence that Duran and Oswald actually
met in September of 1963, doncha think tomnln?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timmy;
Is this your Denial that Duran described Oswald as...
5 ft. 3 inches tall?
Blond hair?
119 pounds?
Are you DENYING this Timmy?
WHY do you keep Running from these?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
>
> <tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c804decc-f2c2-419f...@x1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Say, I was having another read of Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony today,
> tomnln.
>
> She says her handwriting is on Oswald's Cuban transit visa
> application, tomnln.
>
> You know, the one with Oswald's actual photo attached and his genuine
> signature on it.
>
> Looks like yet another bit of evidence that Duran and Oswald actually
> met in September of 1963, doncha think tomnln?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
You Really have trouble Understanding questions dontcha Timmy! ! !
Timmy;
Is this your Denial that Duran described Oswald as...
5 ft. 3 inches tall?
Blond hair?
119 pounds?
Are you DENYING this Timmy?
WHY do you keep Running from these?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
That's Nothing I "cobbled" Timmy.
That's Duran's testimony isn't it Timmy?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
WHY do continue Running from These Timmy?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
Are you tired of looking like a Fool?
Are you So Embarrassed by Duran's testimony that you attribute it to me?
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Say, doesn't Mrs Duran, in her HSCA testimony, say that the person she
met is depicted in HSCA photo # 57?
Shall we take a look at HSCA photo # 57, tomnln?:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
That sure looks like LHO's 9 August, 1963, NOPD mugshot to me, tomnln.
What do you think?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 8, 3:35 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c804decc-f2c2-419f...@x1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Say, I was having another read of Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony today,
> tomnln.
>
> She says her handwriting is on Oswald's Cuban transit visa
> application, tomnln.
>
> You know, the one with Oswald's actual photo attached and his genuine
> signature on it.
>
> Looks like yet another bit of evidence that Duran and Oswald actually
> met in September of 1963, doncha think tomnln?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Timmy;
> Is this your Denial that Duran described Oswald as...
>
> 5 ft. 3 inches tall?
> Blond hair?
> 119 pounds?
>
> Are you DENYING this Timmy?
>
> WHY do you keep Running from these?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
muc...@gmail.com
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5fb99b1d-6200-4b6a...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Say, doesn't Mrs Duran, in her HSCA testimony, say that the person she
met is depicted in HSCA photo # 57?
Shall we take a look at HSCA photo # 57, tomnln?:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
That sure looks like LHO's 9 August, 1963, NOPD mugshot to me, tomnln.
What do you think?
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's also Long after she was "Arrested & Intimidated" Timmy.
Timmy;
Is this your Denial that Duran described Oswald as...
5 ft. 3 inches tall?
Blond hair?
119 pounds?
Are you DENYING this Timmy?
WHY do you keep Running from these?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
Your Honor;
Instruct the witness to answer the question! ! ! !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
LOL! I know where the Duran testimony is, tomnln.
It's YOU we're worried about tomnln, given what you posted above.
BTW, she says in that testimony that the person she met is photo # 57
in the HSCA photo book.
Shall we take another look at photo # 57 in the HSCA photo book,
tomnln?
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
That's Lee Harvey Oswald's August 1963 New Orleans mugshot, tomnln.
And you're stuck with it!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE...
> ...
>
> read more »
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Yes, long after, fifteen years after, but she's STILL saying that
Oswald was the man she met, tomnln.
Was she being tortured by the HSCA when she told them that the person
she met in September 1963 was depicted in photo # 57 in the HSCA photo
book, tomnln?
Do you need a link to the HSCA photo book, tomnln?
Here it is:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Your cobbled together 5' 3" description comes from the VERY SAME
interview that she makes the photo identification of Oswald in,
tomnln.
Multiple times in her HSCA interview she says it WAS Oswald who she
met, tomnln. Including by by photo ID.
You can't even produce her saying 5' 3" in so many words, tomnln.
I can produce her saying HSCA photo # 57, tomnln.
LOL! No researcher could read her HSCA testimony and come away with
the impression that she HADN'T met Lee Harvey Oswald, tomnln.
Even the guys who interviewed her, Lopez and Cornwell, conceded that
in their final report.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 9, 3:15 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5fb99b1d-6200-4b6a...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Say, doesn't Mrs Duran, in her HSCA testimony, say that the person she
> met is depicted in HSCA photo # 57?
>
> Shall we take a look at HSCA photo # 57, tomnln?:
>
> http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
>
> That sure looks like LHO's 9 August, 1963, NOPD mugshot to me, tomnln.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> It's also Long after she was "Arrested & Intimidated" Timmy.
>
> Timmy;
> Is this your Denial that Duran described Oswald as...
>
> 5 ft. 3 inches tall?
> Blond hair?
> 119 pounds?
>
> Are you DENYING this Timmy?
>
> WHY do you keep Running from these?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:85545080-9840-4720...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
LOL! I know where the Duran testimony is, tomnln.
It's YOU we're worried about tomnln, given what you posted above.
BTW, she says in that testimony that the person she met is photo # 57
in the HSCA photo book.
Shall we take another look at photo # 57 in the HSCA photo book,
tomnln?
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
That's Lee Harvey Oswald's August 1963 New Orleans mugshot, tomnln.
And you're stuck with it!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timmy, ole bloke;
You forgot to mention that I D took place Long After she was Arrested &
INTIMIDATED/THREATENED.
But, then Again;
You've been Endorsing Felonies for a Long Time.
That's why you RUN from these>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/altering_evidence.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c05a20bc-f0cb-45c2...@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Here it is:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Regards,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duran's testimony Frightens you So Much that you attribute her words to ME!
You're defending people who "Intimidate Women & Children".
(Making you an "Accessory After the Fact")
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
That's Duran's Official Testimony in Your Official Report.
And, YOU'RE STUCK WITH IT! ! !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Tommy, ol' fella, you forgot to mention that that identification was
made at EXACTLY the same time as the 5' 3" nonsense you seem to put so
much stock into.
Which identification would be more convincing to a researcher, tomnln?
That very inexact description you've desperately wrung from her words,
or her identification of him from a photo in the HSCA photo book?
Let's have another look at the HSCA photo book, shall we? Photo # 57
was the one she picked out, BTW:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Looks like Oswald's August 1963 mugshot, tomnln, and you're stuck with
it!
All from official evidence/testimony too, tomnln.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 9, 5:37 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:85545080-9840-4720...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> LOL! I know where the Duran testimony is, tomnln.
>
> It's YOU we're worried about tomnln, given what you posted above.
>
> BTW, she says in that testimony that the person she met is photo # 57
> in the HSCA photo book.
>
> Shall we take another look at photo # 57 in the HSCA photo book,
> tomnln?
>
> http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
>
> That's Lee Harvey Oswald's August 1963 New Orleans mugshot, tomnln.
>
> And you're stuck with it!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Timmy, ole bloke;
>
> You forgot to mention that I D took place Long After she was Arrested &
> INTIMIDATED/THREATENED.
>
> But, then Again;
> You've been Endorsing Felonies for a Long Time.
>
> That's why you RUN from these>>>
>
> ...
>
> read more »
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
It makes me look a TOOL does it, Tommy?
Is that your denial that your Mexico City page disagrees with CE 2121
tomnln?
In other words your page disagrees with evidence/testimony, tomnln.
Yes or no answer, tomnln.
Does your webpage disagree with CE 2121, tomnln?
If so, why?
Especially since you so vehemently advocate evidence/ testimony,
tomnln.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 8, 3:21 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
LOL! Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony doesn't frighten me, tomnln.
Especially as she says that the man she met is depicted in photo # 57
in the HSCA photo book.
Here's the HSCA photo book, tomnln:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Photo # 57 is a photo of Oswald, tomnln.
Speaking of Oswald, this is an exchange from page 119 of Mrs Durans'
HSCA testimony, tomnln:
------------------
Cornwell: Did you see him being killed by Ruby on television:
Duran: Yes, yes.
Cornwell: Was there anything about him that looked different to you?
Duran: No. It was black and white. So I couldn't see the color. But he
looks like the one that I met.
-------------------
That's from the last page of her HSCA testimony, tomnln.
Your ridiculous 5' 3" Oswald nonsense is kaput, tomnln. You've cherry
picked one very inexact reference from her HSCA testimony and tried to
twist it around to claim she met an imposter, tomnln, when MULTIPLE
times elsewhere in the same document she identifies the person she met
as Lee Harvey Oswald.
The person in Oswald's NOPD mugshot, tomnln.
The person Jack Ruby shot on live TV, tomnln.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE...
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/CASE...
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d2437186-fbcb-4cbd...@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Tommy, ol' fella, you forgot to mention that that identification was
made at EXACTLY the same time as the 5' 3" nonsense you seem to put so
much stock into.
Which identification would be more convincing to a researcher, tomnln?
That very inexact description you've desperately wrung from her words,
or her identification of him from a photo in the HSCA photo book?
Let's have another look at the HSCA photo book, shall we? Photo # 57
was the one she picked out, BTW:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Looks like Oswald's August 1963 mugshot, tomnln, and you're stuck with
it!
All from official evidence/testimony too, tomnln.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timmy;
I thought you were intelligent enough to see that TWO Different descriptions
from the SAME witness of the SAME Subject
would constitute "Reasonable Doubt".
Even if she "weren't" Arrested/Intimidated! ! ! (TWICE)
Apparently you're NOT that Intelligent.
Even the FBI believed Oswald was being "Impersonated" in Mexico City.
ALL here>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
Coupled with the "Evidence Tampering" Repeatedly by the authorities>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/altering_evidence.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
No wonder you RUN from them.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2475e197-f70a-4774...@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
It makes me look a TOOL does it, Tommy?
Is that your denial that your Mexico City page disagrees with CE 2121
tomnln?
In other words your page disagrees with evidence/testimony, tomnln.
Yes or no answer, tomnln.
Does your webpage disagree with CE 2121, tomnln?
If so, why?
Especially since you so vehemently advocate evidence/ testimony,
tomnln.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep Running from the fact that Duran was Arrested/Intimidated TWICE
before that Timmy.
(they even hinted something could happen to her daughter)
How long have you been Condoning Felonies?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
The people you're making Excuses for Tampered with evidence Repeatedly.
http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/altering_evidence.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
Of course, you don't have the guts to address those! ! !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:faabeb2f-f60f-4218...@w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
LOL! Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony doesn't frighten me, tomnln.
Especially as she says that the man she met is depicted in photo # 57
in the HSCA photo book.
Here's the HSCA photo book, tomnln:
http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
Photo # 57 is a photo of Oswald, tomnln.
Speaking of Oswald, this is an exchange from page 119 of Mrs Durans'
HSCA testimony, tomnln:
------------------
Cornwell: Did you see him being killed by Ruby on television:
Duran: Yes, yes.
Cornwell: Was there anything about him that looked different to you?
Duran: No. It was black and white. So I couldn't see the color. But he
looks like the one that I met.
-------------------
That's from the last page of her HSCA testimony, tomnln.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your ridiculous 5' 3" Oswald nonsense is kaput, tomnln. You've cherry
picked one very inexact reference from her HSCA testimony and tried to
twist it around to claim she met an imposter, tomnln, when MULTIPLE
times elsewhere in the same document she identifies the person she met
as Lee Harvey Oswald.
That description is NOT "mine" Timmy;
It's from Duran's testimony AFTER she was Arrested/Intimidated TWICE.
And, YOU'RE Stuck with it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
>
> <tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:d2437186-fbcb-4cbd...@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Tommy, ol' fella, you forgot to mention that that identification was
> made at EXACTLY the same time as the 5' 3" nonsense you seem to put so
> much stock into.
>
> Which identification would be more convincing to a researcher, tomnln?
> That very inexact description you've desperately wrung from her words,
> or her identification of him from a photo in the HSCA photo book?
Timmy wrote;
> Let's have another look at the HSCA photo book, shall we? Photo # 57
> was the one she picked out, BTW:
>
> http://www.cuban-exile.com/doc_226-250/doc0244.html
>
> Looks like Oswald's August 1963 mugshot, tomnln, and you're stuck with
> it!
>
> All from official evidence/testimony too, tomnln.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
The best you can do with Citations is from a source who got all of his
information from "Anti-Castro Cubans" who Hated JFK.
WHY do you keep attributing Duran's description of the Oswald in mexico City
to ME???
Because it's so Embarrassing to you ! ! !
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
How long have you been condoning "Threats/Intimidation" against
Women/Children?
NOT very "manly" of you Timmy.
muc...@gmail.com
> On 1 Sep., 17:22, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 1, 4:43 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 1, 6:39 am, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On 31 Aug., 20:51, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 31, 12:39 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Aug 31, 4:21 am, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On 29 Aug., 13:39, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 28 Aug., 16:09, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > In article <ab3f4f71-75c1-4e17-a8a8-c76051713...@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > > aeffects says...
>
> > > > > > > > > >On Aug 27, 8:25=A0am, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Mark asked: "Ben? Are you still working furiously around the clock to
> > > > > > > > > >> > salvage your *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory?"
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Ben replied: "The troll is too embarrassed to even define what the
> > > > > > > > > >> > theory is."
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Mark tries again:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > According to the *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory, the presence of a
> > > > > > > > > >> > certain figure ("Looks like a woman wearing yellow pants" [BH 3/5/08])
> > > > > > > > > >> > in the Nix film indicates Zapruder film alteration.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > In the post (linked to below) that kicked off the "Z-369 and Proof
> > > > > > > > > >> > that Zapruder & Nix Have Been Altered" thread, you outlined a two-
> > > > > > > > > >> > component theory, according to which
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > (1) the couple behind the Franzen group appearing in Nix and not
> > > > > > > > > >> > Zapruder, and
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > (2) the *Lady in Yellow Pants* appearing in Nix and not Zapruder
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > proved that one or both films had been altered.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5b900b35211f89d8
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > It appears that you abandoned the first component when you later
> > > > > > > > > >> > realized that the couple behind the Franzen group *is* visible in the
> > > > > > > > > >> > Zapruder film, but you never seem to have admitted that you were wrong
> > > > > > > > > >> > about the *Lady in Yellow Pants*. In a 3/7/08 newsgroup post, for
> > > > > > > > > >> > example, you had this to say to Bob Harris:
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > QUOTE ON
>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Nor, for example, have you *EVER* responded to the point I made about
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Whether she was arrested/intimidated twice has nothing to do with
whether your website agrees with evidence/testimony, tomnln.
The fact of the matter is that your website DOESN'T agree with
evidence testimony in the form of CE 2121, tomnln.
This was pointed out to you months ago, and you've done nothing about
it, all the while continuing to lecture other posters about *evidence/
testimony*, tomnln.
Going off on some tangent isn't going to obscure that fact, tomnln.
You either need to correct your webpage or admit that you only agree
with evidence/testimony when it suits your purpose.
Leaving that nonsense up that it was sometime after 25 November, 1963
that Duran *then and only then* identified Oswald as the man she met
is absurd, tomnln. LOL! Before Oswald was shot Duran was prepared to
confront him, should the US and/or Mexican governments have so
desired.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 9, 6:41 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2475e197-f70a-4774...@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> It makes me look a TOOL does it, Tommy?
>
> Is that your denial that your Mexico City page disagrees with CE 2121
> tomnln?
>
> In other words your page disagrees with evidence/testimony, tomnln.
>
> Yes or no answer, tomnln.
>
> Does your webpage disagree with CE 2121, tomnln?
>
> If so, why?
>
> Especially since you so vehemently advocate evidence/ testimony,
> tomnln.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> You keep Running from the fact that Duran was Arrested/Intimidated TWICE
> before that Timmy.
>
> (they even hinted something could happen to her daughter)
>
> How long have you been Condoning Felonies?
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>
> The people you're making Excuses for Tampered with evidence Repeatedly.
>
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b7801e12-5f94-4452...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Whether she was arrested/intimidated twice has nothing to do with
whether your website agrees with evidence/testimony, tomnln.
The fact of the matter is that your website DOESN'T agree with
evidence testimony in the form of CE 2121, tomnln.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WRONG AGAIN Timmy;
CE 2121 "DOESN'T" agree with Duran's testimony when she described the Oswald
Impersonator in Mexico City as....
5 ft. 3 inches tall
Blond hair
119 pounds.
NOR does it agree with the FBI Report stating that the Mexico City
photos/audio tapes do NOT Match the Real Oswald.
You also dodged my question about Endorsing the
Arresting/Intimidating/Threatening Women/Children?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Eynwk.36411$9u1....@newsfe09.iad...
>
> "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:3WJuk.23508$Rs1....@newsfe08.iad...
>>
>> <tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:a59d9a72-8299-4d17...@s20g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> TOP POST
>>
>> Hi tomnln,
>>
>> Say, why have you, in your reply, TWICE linked to the page I already
>> showed you has the error in it?
>>
>> That's no sort of a reply, tomnln.
>>
>> You'll have to do better than that.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tim Brennan
>> Sydney, Australia
>> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> I point out my website so people can see Your Lies Timmy.
>>
>> I want people to see that you believe that the Oswald seen in Mexico City
>> by Sylvia Duran was.......
>> 5 ft' 3 inches tall
>> Blond Haired
>> 119 pounds.
>>
>> I also want then to see you RUN from these>>>
>> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
>>
>> I want people to see that you Condone destruction od evidence.
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 29, 1:39 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:77e967ee-5be7-412c...@a8g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> TOP POST
>>>
>>> Hi tomnln,
>>>
>>> Say, I just noticed that you're STILL claiming on your Mexico City
>>> page that, as of 25 November, 1963, the Dallas FBI had CIA audiotapes
>>> from Mexico City.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Are you Denying that the FBI heard those audio tapes from Mexico City
> Timmy?
> (the ones that were supposedly REUSED in October of 1963?
> WHY did the CIA LIE Timmy?
>
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
>
> (Choke on it Timmy)
>
> Say, Timmy;
> You wouldn't really be Rob Spencer would you?
>
> You remember him?
> I beat the snot outta him HERE>>>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/rob_spencer_page.htm
>
> It would be just like him to post under ANOTHER NAME! ! !
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> You then say that *then and only then* did Mrs Duran say that Oswald
>>> was the man she met in September at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City.
>>>
>>> But we both know that CE 2121 shows that Mrs Duran signed a statement
>>> the evening of 23 November, 1963, saying that it was Oswald she met.
>
>
> We BOTH also know that Duran signed that statement During/After her
> Arrest/Intimidation don't we Timmy! ! !
>
> Tell us WHY the CIA requested the Mexicam authorities Arrest Duran?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>>> I told you this six months ago, tomnln, and you've done nothing. You
>>> quite clearly have turned your back on the evidence/testimony tomnln,
>>> the evidence/testimony.
>>>
>>> Now why is that, tomnln?
>>>
>>> Concerned Regards,
>>>
>>> Tim Brennan
>>> Sydney, Australia
>>> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
>
>
> WHICH of Your official Records do you Reject Timmy?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your official records speak for themselves Timmy;
>
> SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>
> ps;
>
> WHY do you keep RUNNING from these?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20Tamp.htm
> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>
>
> Looks like your position is NOT defensible.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> On Aug 10, 1:59 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> > <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> >news:33298c2f-63b9-46a7...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>> > TOP POST
>>>
>>> > Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> > That is a good question. Ben has now been running from further
>>> > discussion of his *Lady In Yellow Pants* theory since around March, by
>>> > my calculations. I thought only cowards ran, according to Ben.
>>>
>>> > BTW, did you see the post from *Phil Ossofee* naming Ben, Healy and
>>> > Jesus as the three best JFK researchers ever? Can you believe Phil
>>> > would fail to list Tom *tomnln* Rossley's name with such an august
>>> > body of, er, *researchers*? I'm outraged!
>>>
>>> > I won't stand for this injustice for a New York Minute, whatever, in
>>> > fact, a New York Minute is. I want tomnln elevated to his rightful
>>> > place immediately!
>>>
>>> > :-)
>>>
>>> > Regards,
>>>
>>> > Tim Brennan
>>> > Sydney, Australia
>>> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > "Thank You, Thank You Very Much"
>>> > (sounded just like him)
>>>
>>> > After all, it was tomnln who pointed out that Timmy believed the
>>> > Oswald in
>>> > Mexico City was;
>>> > 5 ft 3 inches tall
>>> > Blond Haired
>>> > 119 pounds.
>>>
>>> > SEE>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
>>> > (scroll half way down the page)
>>>
>>> > Then, ask Timmy WHY he RUNS from the issues of the authorities
>>> > "Evidence/Tampering"?http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/Evid%20T...
>>>
>>> > Is Timmy Condoning Felonies?
>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
CE 2121 cetainly agrees with Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony where she says
that the person she met was Lee Harvey Oswald.
Your ridiculous 5' 3" nonsense is trumped by Duran's photo and film
identification of Oswald in the very same interview you cite cite.
That's not even taking into account evidence like the visa application
with both Oswald's and Duran's handwriting on it. Or the finding of
Duran's name and phone number in Oswald's notebook after his arrest.
LOL! In an evidential sense, tomnln, you don't have a leg to stand on
in trying to make your case.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/altering...
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ccae0c50-041e-4966...@a18g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
CE 2121 cetainly agrees with Mrs Duran's HSCA testimony where she says
that the person she met was Lee Harvey Oswald.
****************************************************************************
Your ridiculous 5' 3" nonsense is trumped by Duran's photo and film
identification of Oswald in the very same interview you cite cite.
That 5 ft 3 inch
Blond Haired
119 pounds
Description of the Oswald in Mexico City is NOT from me Timmy.
It's from YOUR Witness Sylvia Duran
ALL Here>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
And, You're Stuck with it.
*******************************************************************************
That's not even taking into account evidence like the visa application
with both Oswald's and Duran's handwriting on it. Or the finding of
Duran's name and phone number in Oswald's notebook after his arrest.
LOL! In an evidential sense, tomnln, you don't have a leg to stand on
in trying to make your case.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tims...@gmail.com
Hi tomnln,
Well she gives the descriptions and makes the identifications in the
SAME interview with the HSCA, tomnln.
Those investigators concluded that she had most likely met Oswald,
tomnln.
She wasn't being *arrested/intimidated* in 1978 when she made those
identifications to the HSCA in 1978, tomnln.
BTW, she also said it was Oswald she met when she was interviewed for
the documentary *Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?*, tomnln.
I wonder if the TV producers tortured her to get that interview,
tomnln? LOL!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
On Sep 9, 6:36 am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> <timst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htmhttp://whokilledjfk.net/altering...
> ...
>
> read more »
tomnln
<tims...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d91cdd06-3eb8-45f1...@a18g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
TOP POST
Hi tomnln,
Well she gives the descriptions and makes the identifications in the
SAME interview with the HSCA, tomnln.
Those investigators concluded that she had most likely met Oswald,
tomnln.
She wasn't being *arrested/intimidated* in 1978 when she made those
identifications to the HSCA in 1978, tomnln.
BTW, she also said it was Oswald she met when she was interviewed for
the documentary *Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?*, tomnln.
I wonder if the TV producers tortured her to get that interview,
tomnln? LOL!
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When someone of power you FEAR "intimidates/threatens" you/your daughter,
how long would you Retain that FEAR Timmy?
Your Chivalry towards women/children Underwhelms me Timmy.
Did Duran describe the Oswald in Mexico City as....
5 ft. 3 inches tall
Blond Haired
119 pounds?
YES OR, NO?
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muc...@gmail.com
> TOP POST
>
> Hi tomnln,
>
> Well she gives the descriptions and makes the identifications in the
> SAME interview with the HSCA, tomnln.
>
> Those investigators concluded that she had most likely met Oswald,
> tomnln.
>
> She wasn't being *arrested/intimidated* in 1978 when she made those
> identifications to the HSCA in 1978, tomnln.
>
> BTW, she also said it was Oswald she met when she was interviewed for
> the documentary *Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?*, tomnln.
>
> I wonder if the TV producers tortured her to get that interview,
> tomnln? LOL!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> When someone of power you FEAR "intimidates/threatens" you/your daughter,
> how long would you Retain that FEAR Timmy?
>
> Your Chivalry towards women/children Underwhelms me Timmy.
>
> Did Duran describe the Oswald in Mexico City as....
> 5 ft. 3 inches tall
> Blond Haired
> 119 pounds?
>
> YES OR, NO?
Instead of hijacking this one, why don't you create a separate thread
and post your drivel there, tomnln?
This thread is about Ben's *Lady in Yellow Pants* theory.
muc...@gmail.com
> On 1 Sep., 17:22, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 1, 4:43 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 1, 6:39 am, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > On 31 Aug., 20:51, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 31, 12:39 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Aug 31, 4:21 am, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On 29 Aug., 13:39, much...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 28 Aug., 16:09, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > In article <ab3f4f71-75c1-4e17-a8a8-c76051713...@s1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > > aeffects says...
>
> > > > > > > > > >On Aug 27, 8:25=A0am, much...@gmail.com wrote: