CTs are irrelevant
bigdog
for a conspiracy, they have become irrelevant, assuming they ever were
relevant. They do nothing except contribute to noise pollution. Most
of them are so ludicrous they refute themselves. Even the extremely
small minority of them who are actually thoughtful and well meaning
have failed, despite decades of efforts, to unearth any concrete
evidence that anyone except Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the
assassination of JFK. The CTers believe they have achieved some sort
of public relations victory because polls show, depending on which one
you believe, 70 to 90 per cent of the public believes there was a
conspiracy. What they don't seem to grasp is that this is a public
that is largely uninformed and appathetic about an event that happened
44 years ago. They've moved on. They have no interest whatsoever in
reopening the case. The small rabble of of fanatical CTs who still
carry on as if they are actually doing anything worthwhile will
continue to be ignored both by the American people and future
historians. They will continue to build sandcastle theories as I
alluded to in another thread and those theories will continue to
collapse. The CTs just don't matter. Never have. Never will.
CASE CLOSED!!!
curtjester1
Funny, I could envision a Conspirator saying the same thing.
Of course if CT's don't matter, why do we have this huge following of
the CT'er when it 'doesn't matter'?
CJ
tomnln
There have been SIX (6) official views into this case over the past 44 years
Warren Commission
Rockefeller Commission
Pike Committee
Church Committee
House Select Committee
ARRB
Over 2000 books on this subject (Both sides)
Even bigdog posts his lies here Every Day. (Does that look like "nobody
cares?)
The LN's will Continue to RUN from their own evidence/testimony.
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1193936498.3...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>On 1 Nov, 12:01, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Although it can be amusing to see the CTs try in vain to make a case
>> for a conspiracy, they have become irrelevant, assuming they ever were
>> relevant. They do nothing except contribute to noise pollution. Most
>> of them are so ludicrous they refute themselves. Even the extremely
>> small minority of them who are actually thoughtful and well meaning
>> have failed, despite decades of efforts, to unearth any concrete
>> evidence that anyone except Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the
>> assassination of JFK. The CTers believe they have achieved some sort
>> of public relations victory because polls show, depending on which one
>> you believe, 70 to 90 per cent of the public believes there was a
>> conspiracy. What they don't seem to grasp is that this is a public
>> that is largely uninformed and appathetic about an event that happened
>> 44 years ago. They've moved on.
Of course, presuming that this were actually true, the polls would reflect the
traditional mass media, and the educational system. Instead, Americans *reject*
this to embrace a belief in conspiracy.
Rather embarrassing that the LNT'er side hasn't been able, despite the massive
amount of PR they have - to convince anyone.
>> They have no interest whatsoever in
>> reopening the case. The small rabble of of fanatical CTs who still
>> carry on as if they are actually doing anything worthwhile will
>> continue to be ignored both by the American people and future
>> historians. They will continue to build sandcastle theories as I
>> alluded to in another thread and those theories will continue to
>> collapse.
Considering that trolls like this one are completely unable to answer simple
questions regarding the evidence - and how to fit it into a *non* conspiratorial
viewpoint, it would seem that the dog isn't barking.
>> The CTs just don't matter. Never have. Never will.
>>
>> CASE CLOSED!!!
>
>Funny, I could envision a Conspirator saying the same thing.
>
>Of course if CT's don't matter, why do we have this huge following of
>the CT'er when it 'doesn't matter'?
>
>CJ
I wonder why, if we don't matter - we are bombarded by our 'troll' fans...
justm...@gmail.com
> In article <1193938304.423602.324...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>, curtjester1
Because you are entertainment, and so easy to insult. Not to mention
the fact that if there are lurkers reading these posts they know
exactly what type of hypocritical idiots their listening too. Bigots,
liars, decievers and just plain morons never get very far. That's why
you're stuck in the little newsgroup thinking you're making a
difference. Thanks for the entertainment and laughs, it's all you and
your ilk are good for.
robc...@netscape.com
wrote:
> Because you are entertainment, and so easy to insult. Not to mention
> the fact that if there are lurkers reading these posts they know
> exactly what type of hypocritical idiots their listening too. Bigots,
> liars, decievers and just plain morons never get very far. That's why
> you're stuck in the little newsgroup thinking you're making a
> difference. Thanks for the entertainment and laughs, it's all you and
> your ilk are good for.
So full of hate. Sad. If you truly believe in the official theory,
why not try to educate people who have less knowledge (lurkers, not
the CTers on this board) about the case. Do you really think any
lurker would read your hate filled posts and side with you?
Ben Holmes
robc...@netscape.com says...
Shame on you, Rob! Haven't you learned yet that these people aren't
*interested* in the facts? Or interested in trying to 'convince' anyone? Every
once in a while they actually slip and let it be known that their only purpose
is to disrupt.
So the only real purpose they can serve is to be a "blackboard" upon which we
write the true facts of this case - citing the evidence, providing eyewitness
testimony, refuting their silly and illogical arguments.
That's all the trolls are good for.
justm...@gmail.com
> In article <1193948297.182956.314...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
> - Show quoted text -
So full of hate. Sad. If you truly believe in the official theory,
why not try to educate people who have less knowledge (lurkers, not
the CTers on this board) about the case. Do you really think any
lurker would read your hate filled posts and side with you?
YEP
So the only real purpose they can serve is to be a "blackboard" upon
which we
> write the true facts of this case - citing the evidence, providing eyewitness
> testimony, refuting their silly and illogical arguments.
ROFLMAO...you wish you wrote the facts....you write garbage
Gil Jesus
The CTers believe they have achieved some sort
> of public relations victory because polls show, depending on which one
> you believe, 70 to 90 per cent of the public believes there was a
> conspiracy. What they don't seem to grasp is that this is a public
> that is largely uninformed and appathetic about an event that happened
> 44 years ago. They've moved on. They have no interest whatsoever in
> reopening the case. The small rabble of of fanatical CTs who still
> carry on as if they are actually doing anything worthwhile will
> continue to be ignored both by the American people and future
> historians. They will continue to build sandcastle theories as I
> alluded to in another thread and those theories will continue to
> collapse. The CTs just don't matter. Never have. Never will.
In 2001, 82% of America believed that John F. Kennedy was murdered as
a result of a conspiracy.
In the last 8 months, I've educated over 562,000 of the other 18 %.
Like these folks who wrote me:
I've just recently viewed your video on your theory of the JFK
assassination. I thought it was a very good way of describing it, and
that video had totally changed my opinion on that issue. I couldn't
agree more on how you explained the forward motion of the president
and the coughing. Good Job.
I just wanted to drop you a line to let you know that I felt that your
three videos concerning the JFK assasination of JFK.I thought they
were very well done especially the third (last) part.Your videos were
very intriguing and informative and really made me think.I`ll keep a
more open mind towards things thanks to you from now on.
I have seen the frames before so many times and I could never figure
out what exactly Kennedy was attempting to do with his hands and why
his arms were in this position, also the bullet going right past
Connelly's left ear his movements are obvious now. Great job.
Good observation and conclusion. I was trying to figure out what he
was doing with his elbows horizontal like that. I agree he was choking
on something.
over 60,000 people have viewed my videos in the past three weeks
Nobody cares anymore...yeah, right.
Bigdog is just another liar.
aeffects
KUTGW, Gil.....
curtjester1
>
> - Show quoted text -
Houston, I think we have a low entertainment threshhold problema here.
CJ
robc...@netscape.com
> Shame on you, Rob! Haven't you learned yet that these people aren't
> *interested* in the facts? Or interested in trying to 'convince' anyone? Every
> once in a while they actually slip and let it be known that their only purpose
> is to disrupt.
>
> So the only real purpose they can serve is to be a "blackboard" upon which we
> write the true facts of this case - citing the evidence, providing eyewitness
> testimony, refuting their silly and illogical arguments.
>
> That's all the trolls are good for.
You're right Ben, and one other thing, DVP has all the time in the
world to pre-write his posts so he likes to mock those of us who can
think on the fly and recite the case from memory (for the most part)
and may occasionally make a typo. I guess if I stayed all night
posting I could be a perfect typer too.
robc...@netscape.com
> over 60,000 people have viewed my videos in the past three weeks
>
> Nobody cares anymore...yeah, right.
>
> Bigdog is just another liar.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/GJJdude
Thanks for educating the people Gil. I guess this is why the attacks
have stepped up in the last few weeks.
David Von Pein
<chuckle time once more>
Rob-Kook thinks I've "pre-written" all of my lengthy responses to the
individual points brought up in his individual posts.
No wonder Rob's such a Mega-Kook....he can't get ANYTHING right.
Bud
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <1193938304.4...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>, curtjester1
> says...
> >
> >On 1 Nov, 12:01, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Although it can be amusing to see the CTs try in vain to make a case
> >> for a conspiracy, they have become irrelevant, assuming they ever were
> >> relevant. They do nothing except contribute to noise pollution. Most
> >> of them are so ludicrous they refute themselves. Even the extremely
> >> small minority of them who are actually thoughtful and well meaning
> >> have failed, despite decades of efforts, to unearth any concrete
> >> evidence that anyone except Lee Harvey Oswald was involved in the
> >> assassination of JFK. The CTers believe they have achieved some sort
> >> of public relations victory because polls show, depending on which one
> >> you believe, 70 to 90 per cent of the public believes there was a
> >> conspiracy. What they don't seem to grasp is that this is a public
> >> that is largely uninformed and appathetic about an event that happened
> >> 44 years ago. They've moved on.
>
>
> Of course, presuming that this were actually true, the polls would reflect the
> traditional mass media, and the educational system. Instead, Americans *reject*
> this to embrace a belief in conspiracy.
In typical kook fashion Ben takes information, strips it of
context, misunderstands and misrepresents it, and shows that in all
things related to this case, he isn`t the least bit interested in an
honest understanding of the facts. What, exactlly, do the American
people believe in regards to this case? They seem to reject the kook
idea that Oz was a patsy. They believe that something fishy happened,
don`t want to see it pursued, and don`t think we`ll ever know the
truth. Kooks led them out into the wilderness, and thats where they
are today. They followed willingly, because it was the answer they
were comfortable with. It`s like belief in the afterlife, there isn`t
much support for the idea, but people just choose to believe it
because that is the answer that appeals to them.
> Rather embarrassing that the LNT'er side hasn't been able, despite the massive
> amount of PR they have - to convince anyone.
Ben knows this how? Many a former CT is now an LN. Even longtime
kook Vince Palmayra (probable spelled wrong) said he had his faith
shaken by reading Bugliosi`s book. If it has this power with a kook,
what about the mildly interested reader? The fact is that people
reached for conspiracy books because that was where their interest
lay. The answers are on the table for those who want them, for those
more comforatble with questions, suspicions and the unknown, there is
your position.
> >> They have no interest whatsoever in
> >> reopening the case. The small rabble of of fanatical CTs who still
> >> carry on as if they are actually doing anything worthwhile will
> >> continue to be ignored both by the American people and future
> >> historians. They will continue to build sandcastle theories as I
> >> alluded to in another thread and those theories will continue to
> >> collapse.
>
> Considering that trolls like this one are completely unable to answer simple
> questions regarding the evidence - and how to fit it into a *non* conspiratorial
> viewpoint, it would seem that the dog isn't barking.
You approach is flawed. You need to show conspiracy, not demand
others show that something isn`t conspiratorial. You are proposing the
fantastic premise, you need to produce the support for that huge,
massive concept with something sturdier than "answer these questions
to my satisfaction or my stupid shit is proven". You need people
saying they partook in this conspiracy, you need people saying they
were made to say things they didn`t believe, you need all the things
you haven`t got. And the reason you don`t have them (and you would
have it if the conspiracy you imagine occurred) is because there was
none of this activity to expose.
> >> The CTs just don't matter. Never have. Never will.
> >>
> >> CASE CLOSED!!!
> >
> >Funny, I could envision a Conspirator saying the same thing.
> >
> >Of course if CT's don't matter, why do we have this huge following of
> >the CT'er when it 'doesn't matter'?
> >
> >CJ
>
> I wonder why, if we don't matter - we are bombarded by our 'troll' fans...
For myself, I hate the stupid thinking you kooks display.
robc...@netscape.com
Too bad you can't respond to Kellerman say there was a flurry of
bullets (and he was in the car) and JFK was missing the right back of
his head. Oh and yeah Clint Hill said this too and he was upclose to
JFK. Kellerman said JFK was wounded four times from what he saw and
read, but Dave is too busy picking on my typing skills to respond to
that.
bigdog
Damn, I threw one hooked worm into the water and five fish jumped in
my boat. Six if Chico and robocrap are really two different people.
You just can't appreciate how entertaining that is to watch. Notice it
is the same cast of characters. No lurkers or newbies chiming in and
saying, "Hey wait a minute, I still give a shit about this case."
Wow, 60,000 hits on Chico's/robocrap's videos. Let's just assume that
those are actually 60,000 different people, not the same ones coming
back for multiple looks (OK, I know that's a stretch but work with me
here). Let's assume those are also all CT's (I said it's a stretch,
OK). And let's assume that all of those people are Americans (Quit
giggling). That means in a country of 300 million people, Chico/
robocrap has actually come across two hundreds of 1% of the American
people who still give a rat's ass. One in 5000 Americans for those who
are mathematically challenged.. And to think I said you guys were
irrelevant.
robc...@netscape.com
> Wow, 60,000 hits on Chico's/robocrap's videos. Let's just assume that
> those are actually 60,000 different people, not the same ones coming
> back for multiple looks (OK, I know that's a stretch but work with me
> here). Let's assume those are also all CT's (I said it's a stretch,
> OK). And let's assume that all of those people are Americans (Quit
> giggling). That means in a country of 300 million people, Chico/
> robocrap has actually come across two hundreds of 1% of the American
> people who still give a rat's ass. One in 5000 Americans for those who
> are mathematically challenged.. And to think I said you guys were
> irrelevant.
What are you smoking? You just better hope CTers don't turn violent,
you'd get a sense of the numbers than when you are running to save
your sorry ass.
bigdog
Sorry to throw high level mathematics at you. I realize that is a real
brain strain for CTers who are used to dealing in abstracts.
bigdog
> On Nov 1, 1:01?pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
bigdog
Hey, Chico, when you write these posts to yourself, do you use two
different PCs or do they all come from the same place?
YoHarvey
People, this is not rocket science. The deviates such as Jesus/
Robcap, Healy, Holmes et al all share commonality. Misfits of
society, no education, a remarkable ability to lie pathologically and
continue doing so. A need to exaggerate EVERTHING towards
conspiracy. These people will lie continuously as demonstrated on
this newsgroup. Examples? Healy claimsms to have won numerous awards
in the fields of broacasting and animation. When asked for proof of
this, he runs and hides. Jesus/ Robcap, the racist misfit continually
posts BS and outright lies and when challenged to debate them, he runs
and hides. Holmes entire life is based on 45 questions with NO
relevance to anything after 44 years. Everything that can possibly be
written about this event HAS BEEN WRITTEN. The ZAP film is THE single
most watched film in history and yet, it cannot be challenged because
NOBODY can prove it was altered. Why? Quite simply because it
wasn't. Had it been altered, it would have been proven by now. Had
JFK been shot from the front, it would have been proven by now. Had
badgeman, umbrella man, spaghetti man, voodoo or ANY other man
existed, it would have been proven by now. The point is, THE ONLY WAY
CT'S can at this point keep interest in a case the American public
could care less about IS TO CONTINUALLY LIE. To attempt to even
converse with these types of people is absurd. We own this
newsgroup. Simple fact. These CT's simply post THE VERY SAME CRAP
DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY and why??? They have nothing better to do in
their lives. 44 years, 44 years and NOT one conspiracy theory EVER
PROVEN. Not one. This is how stupid these people are. Damn amazing.
Now, they will post on this thread and say this, and say that...they
will AGAIN repeat all of the bullshit we've read on here ....and you
know what????? It will only confirm what I've written above. These
people are like a disease. Our job now is to expose these people for
what they are and what they represent. And that my dear LN's is going
to be a pleasure.
bigdog
I could see the back of JFK's head in the Z-film after the head shot.
It was still right where it was before the head shot, except for one
small hole where the bullet went in. Now the upper right SIDE of his,
yeah, that was pretty much blown away.
Bud
It`s only a matter of time before he signs a "Gil post" as Rob, or
vice versa.
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -
Statement of Humes to the Journal of the American Medical Association
October, 1991
"In 1963, we proved at the autopsy table that President Kennedy was
struck from above and behind by the fatal shot. The pattern of
entrance and exit wounds in the skull prove it, and if we stayed here
until hell freezes over nothing on earth will change this proof. It
happens 100 times out of 100, and I will defend it until the day I
die. This is the essence of our autopsy, and it is supreme ignorance
to argue any other scenario. This is a law of physics (referring to
the fact that with a through and through wound of the crainium, it is
always the pattern he said that the beveling or crater effect occurs
on the inside of the skull at the entrance wound and the outside of
the skull at the exit wound...and it is foolproof --- absolutely,
unequivically and without question. The conspiracy crowd have totally
ignored this central scientific fact and everything else is hogwash."
David Von Pein
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman, you said earlier that there were at least
two additional shots. Is there any area in your mind or possibility,
as you recollect that situation, that there could have been more than
two shots, or are you able to say with any certainty?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker
report and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots.
But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four
wounds, Governor Connally three, there have got to be more than three
shots, gentlemen. .... President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the
head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports,
had three. There have got to be more than three shots. ....
Mr. SPECTER. You have drawn a conclusion, in effect, by saying that
there were four wounds for the President and three wounds for the
Governor; and from that, you say there must have been more than three
shots in your opinion or your view. But my question is: Do you have
any current recollection of having heard more than three shots?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, I don't. I will have to say no.
Senator COOPER. Has that been your recollection from the very time of
the shooting?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; it has been my opinion.
Senator COOPER. Not your opinion, but from the time of the shooting
you think then that you heard only three shots, or did you--
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes.
Senator COOPER. Or did you ever think that you heard more than three?
Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; I can't say that, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, you referred to four wounds, Mr. Kellerman,
realizing, of course, your characterization is only lay opinion.
Mr. KELLERMAN. Very true.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm
~~~~~~~~
So, let's go back and evaluate Kellerman's testimony a little bit
more.....
Via the totality of Kellerman's words, he said he heard a total of
"three shots" (the "flurry" notwithstanding).
And Kellerman's opinion (re-printed below) regarding the number of
gunshots (bullets) that in his opinion MUST have caused all of these
various wounds on the two victims (with Kellerman saying that more
than 3 shots HAD to have been fired in order to cause that many wounds
in 2 victims) has been proven to be factually incorrect, because tests
have positively shown that just TWO bullets could have caused all of
the wounds suffered by JFK & JBC. .....
"President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder
and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There
have got to be more than three shots."
Therefore, other than the "flurry" comment, Roy Kellerman isn't a bad
witness for the "LN" side at all.
>>> "And JFK was missing the right back of his head." <<<
Where is that huge BOH hole? Where? No autopsy photo (or X-ray) shows
a large BOH wound (including the picture that centers on the hole in
JFK's upper back, which is a photo that I do not believe has any of
the doctors HOLDING ON TO KENNEDY'S SCALP, which is occurring in the
color photo of Kennedy's head below).......
www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg
www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/autop04.jpg
And where's that "BOH hole" mentioned within the text of the autopsy
report, Mr. Kook? Where?......
www.jfklancer.com/autopsyrpt.html
You conspiracy kooks have no choice but to believe in MULTIPLE
extraordinary things......
If you want to believe that there was really a large hole in the back
part of John Kennedy's head, and if you want to believe that JFK was
shot in the head from the FRONT instead of from BEHIND (which are
things that all of you kooks DO, of course, want to believe)....then
you've got no choice but to think that ALL THREE autopsy doctors lied
many different times, including the whopper of a lie they must have
told, per you kooks, in the official autopsy report, when they said
this:
"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two
perforating gunshot wounds. .... The projectiles were fired from a
point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."
And then you kooks must also think that Dr. Humes continued the lie
four years later when he said this to Dan Rather and a CBS-TV audience
of millions in 1967:
DR. JAMES J. HUMES -- "There was only one entrance wound in the head;
yes, sir."
DAN RATHER -- "And that was where?"
DR. HUMES -- "That was posterior, about two-and-a-half centimeters to
the right of the mid-line posteriorly."
DAN RATHER -- "And the exit wound?"
DR. HUMES -- "And the exit wound was a large, irregular wound to the
front and right side of the President's head."
DAN RATHER -- "Now can you be absolutely certain that the wound you
describe as the entry wound was in FACT that?"
DR. HUMES -- "Yes, indeed, we can. Very precisely and
incontrovertibly. The missile traversed the skin and then traversed
the bony skull....and as it passed through the skull it produced a
characteristic coning or bevelling effect on the inner aspect of the
skull. Which is scientific evidence that the wound was made from
behind and passed forward through the President's skull."
DAN RATHER -- "This is very important....you say there's scientific
evidence....is it conclusive scientific evidence?"
DR. HUMES -- "Yes, sir; it is."
DAN RATHER -- "Is there any doubt that the wound at the back of the
President's head was the entry wound?"
DR. HUMES -- "There is absolutely no doubt, sir."
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b2a00b13bdc81ae
And then, too, the JFK conspiracy-loving kooks of the universe must
also believe that the autopsy photos AND the X-rays of President
Kennedy's head (which depict no large BOH wound at all) are fakes,
despite the HSCA saying this in 1978:
"To summarize, the skull and torso radiographs taken at autopsy
match the available ante mortem films of the President in such a
wealth of intricate morphological detail that there can be no
reasonable doubt that they are in fact X-rays of John F. Kennedy, and
no other person. ....
"The experts concluded that the autopsy photographs and X-rays
were authentic and unaltered, confirming the observations of the
autopsy personnel and providing additional support for the conclusions
of the medical consultants." -- HSCA Report; Volume VII
I guess the kooks must also think that this entire lengthy HSCA report
(linked below) re. the autopsy pictures/X-rays is nothing but a pile
of shit, right?.....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/autopsy2.txt
That's a lot of "extraordinary" stuff to believe, don't you think?
E.G.: Fake official autopsy photographs, fake X-rays, an autopsy
report which is nothing but a total pack of lies with respect to the
key issues that need to be determined via JFK's autopsy (i.e., where
were the wounds on the body and which wounds were entry wounds and
which were exit wounds), a batch of autopsy doctors who told one lie
after another about the President's wounds, and a batch of no-good,
useless investigators for both the WC and the HSCA.
Yeah....believing in all of the above extraordinary things (one on top
of the other) is a lot more reasonable than to think that a couple of
Secret Service agents (in the heat of a traumatic moment) got a few
things wrong on November 22nd.
But to a CT-Kook worth his salt, it's always best to gobble up that
chaff, while allowing every scrap of wheat to roll right on by.
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/42a0bbac40f320f5
justm...@gmail.com
Lets all ask Jesus why he has the comment section of his "Video
Attractions" disabled....to keep out the negative comments he was
getting from people who thought he was nuts. He quickly deleted them
all, just a tad too late because we did see some of them. Now that his
comments section is disabled he's going to try and lie that he's
getting emails from people praising his work. With the track record of
Gil Jesus and stealing identities, faking names and pretending to be
someone else, etc....who in their right mind would ever believe these
little love notes are real? When Chico was first confronted about
disabling the comments, he used the excuse it was because he was
getting porn and spam. (Defects moment) ROFLMAO....ok Chico so you're
getting spam...delete the spam and leave the comments positive and
negative. You can't stand the fact that you're fighting a losing
battle. You can pat yourself on the back till your arm falls off, we
all know better. We all know your a LIAR, RACIST and BIGOT. Your bible
preaching is a joke, as Burlyguard said, practice what you preach or
stfu!
Sam Brown
<robc...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:1193956052.6...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Sam Brown
"YoHarvey" <bail...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193960793....@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
Beautifully and accurately put Yo.
Gil Jesus
The frequency and strength of attacks from trolls are a good measuring
device. The more of a threat they perceive you, the more they step it
up.
Remember one thing about trolls: They only posy two things ---
comments and insults.
And they seldom post links, unless it's to themselves.
bigdog
In your case, Chico, it is impossible to post comments without them
being insults.
robc...@netscape.com
> Mr. SPECTER. You have drawn a conclusion, in effect, by saying that
> there were four wounds for the President and three wounds for the
> Governor; and from that, you say there must have been more than three
> shots in your opinion or your view. But my question is: Do you have
> any current recollection of having heard more than three shots?
>
> Mr. KELLERMAN. No, I don't. I will have to say no.
What is this question? He is asking about a current recollection. So
another words he is asking, "Despite the four wounds you saw with your
very own eyes on 11/22/63, (I'm asking now becasue this doesn't jive
with our official theory and you want to keep your job right?), I am
giving you one more chance, today do you remember hearing more than 3
shots? What a leading and loaded question. In a court of law it
would have been thrown out.
> Senator COOPER. Has that been your recollection from the very time of
> the shooting?>
> Mr. KELLERMAN. No, sir; it has been my opinion.
> Senator COOPER. Not your opinion, but from the time of the shooting
> you think then that you heard only three shots, or did you--
> Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes.
The witness says his opinion and then Cooper say "Not your opinion",
what crap is this. He is leading and forcing the witness to answer a
certain way.
> So, let's go back and evaluate Kellerman's testimony a little bit
> more.....
>
> Via the totality of Kellerman's words, he said he heard a total of
> "three shots" (the "flurry" notwithstanding).
No, he was guided to say no more than 3 shots total, can't you read?
The whole line of questioning above would not have been allowed in a
real trial, this is the part you don't seem to comprehend. You basing
your whole case on a set of documents that make a mockery of our
judicial system and then act like their findings are proof. Baloney.
With defense attorneys this would have all been very different. The
key point is that three people who were the closest to the president
all saw a gaping hole in the back of his head (Hill, Kellerman and
Jackie). No amount of quick side-stepping lawyer work is going to
change that.
> "President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder
> and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There
> have got to be more than three shots."
>
> Therefore, other than the "flurry" comment, Roy Kellerman isn't a bad
> witness for the "LN" side at all.
Not a bad witness? You must be laughing your butt off right now. He
said JFK had 4 wounds, you guys say 2, how is this good for you? He
is saying there had to be more than 3 shots, but later when they make
it clear he needs to change his story then he says only 3 shots. The
first response is always the true one.
>
> >>> "And JFK was missing the right back of his head." <<<
>
> Where is that huge BOH hole? Where? No autopsy photo (or X-ray) shows
> a large BOH wound (including the picture that centers on the hole in
> JFK's upper back, which is a photo that I do not believe has any of
> the doctors HOLDING ON TO KENNEDY'S SCALP, which is occurring in the
> color photo of Kennedy's head below).......
It is there, but it is covered up with a layover in the photos and
been replaced with chicanery in the X-rays. I'll go with all of the
doctors and nurses at Parkland any day. Jackie said you was trying to
hold his head intact too right after the shooting, they deleted this
from her testimony in the Warren Report.
> And where's that "BOH hole" mentioned within the text of the autopsy
> report, Mr. Kook? Where?......
Kellerman said he saw it, so again the report did not mention it. How
many times do you have to be told this?
> You conspiracy kooks have no choice but to believe in MULTIPLE
> extraordinary things......
Like faking evidence is so far fetched, isn't that what got O.J. off?
You act this stuff has never happened in the history of criminal
justice.
> If you want to believe that there was really a large hole in the back
> part of John Kennedy's head, and if you want to believe that JFK was
> shot in the head from the FRONT instead of from BEHIND (which are
> things that all of you kooks DO, of course, want to believe)....then
> you've got no choice but to think that ALL THREE autopsy doctors lied
> many different times, including the whopper of a lie they must have
> told, per you kooks, in the official autopsy report, when they said
> this:
>
> "It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two
> perforating gunshot wounds. .... The projectiles were fired from a
> point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."
Absolutely. We have said for years they lied. Had to, as they were
ordered to do it. Probably threatened as well. So what? You're
calling a heck of alot more people liars, like the emergency room team
at Parkland, Jackie, Hill, Kellerman, all the people who prepped JFK
for Bethesda, and the embalmer. You're calling way more people liars
than I am.
>
> And then you kooks must also think that Dr. Humes continued the lie
> four years later when he said this to Dan Rather and a CBS-TV audience
> of millions in 1967:
Of course we do, just like we know that Rather lied to all of America
when he said JFK went forward when being hit with the head shot.
Remember that? It was long before any of us got to see the Zapruder
film for ourselves. Like Rather is trustworthy? Please. This is why
he is really suing CBS, it is hush money. He lied way back when to
support a lie and now he wants money to keep his mouth shut.
> And then, too, the JFK conspiracy-loving kooks of the universe must
> also believe that the autopsy photos AND the X-rays of President
> Kennedy's head (which depict no large BOH wound at all) are fakes,
> despite the HSCA saying this in 1978:
Let's turn it around to show what nutjobs you guys are, you think all
the people I listed about are liars. They all were very close to the
president and would know better than a bunch of politicians that
weren't there.
> I guess the kooks must also think that this entire lengthy HSCA report
> (linked below) re. the autopsy pictures/X-rays is nothing but a pile
> of shit, right?.....
Just totally false. You think the people who saw with their own eyes
are liars. What does that make you?
> That's a lot of "extraordinary" stuff to believe, don't you think?
> E.G.: Fake official autopsy photographs, fake X-rays, an autopsy
> report which is nothing but a total pack of lies with respect to the
> key issues that need to be determined via JFK's autopsy (i.e., where
> were the wounds on the body and which wounds were entry wounds and
> which were exit wounds), a batch of autopsy doctors who told one lie
> after another about the President's wounds, and a batch of no-good,
> useless investigators for both the WC and the HSCA.
I think what is extraordinary is the lengths they went to to cover up
this crime.
>
> Yeah....believing in all of the above extraordinary things (one on top
> of the other) is a lot more reasonable than to think that a couple of
> Secret Service agents (in the heat of a traumatic moment) got a few
> things wrong on November 22nd.
Of course, when it doesn't fit the official theory they always just
got it wrong. So Jackie got it wrong, all the doctors and nurses at
Parkland got it wrong, the staff that prepared the body for its flight
to Bethesda got it wrong, the non-doctors at Bethesda who have said
they saw a major wound in the back of the head got it wrong and the
embalmer got it wrong. Who's the kook now? You think all these
people couldn't see a wound right in front of thier face? Amazing.
bigdog
prosecution team. But even Marcia Clark could have got Oswald
convicted.
> > If you want to believe that there was really a large hole in the back
> > part of John Kennedy's head, and if you want to believe that JFK was
> > shot in the head from the FRONT instead of from BEHIND (which are
> > things that all of you kooks DO, of course, want to believe)....then
> > you've got no choice but to think that ALL THREE autopsy doctors lied
> > many different times, including the whopper of a lie they must have
> > told, per you kooks, in the official autopsy report, when they said
> > this:
>
> > "It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two
> > perforating gunshot wounds. .... The projectiles were fired from a
> > point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."
>
> Absolutely. We have said for years they lied. Had to, as they were
> ordered to do it. Probably threatened as well. So what? You're
> calling a heck of alot more people liars, like the emergency room team
> at Parkland, Jackie, Hill, Kellerman, all the people who prepped JFK
> for Bethesda, and the embalmer. You're calling way more people liars
> than I am.
>
Who ordered them to lie, Chico? What is your evidence such an order
was given?
> Of course we do, just like we know that Rather lied to all of America
> when he said JFK went forward when being hit with the head shot.
> Remember that? It was long before any of us got to see the Zapruder
> film for ourselves. Like Rather is trustworthy? Please. This is why
> he is really suing CBS, it is hush money. He lied way back when to
> support a lie and now he wants money to keep his mouth shut.
>
No, Rather was correct. The initial movement of JFK was forward when
the head shot hit.
>
> Let's turn it around to show what nutjobs you guys are, you think all
> the people I listed about are liars. They all were very close to the
> president and would know better than a bunch of politicians that
> weren't there.
>
Excuse me Chico/robocrap, the people close to the president were a
bunch of politicians.
> > I guess the kooks must also think that this entire lengthy HSCA report
> > (linked below) re. the autopsy pictures/X-rays is nothing but a pile
> > of shit, right?.....
>
> Just totally false. You think the people who saw with their own eyes
> are liars. What does that make you?
The Zapruder film has made us all witnesses to the crime. I can see
from the Zapruder file there is no large wound in the back of the
head. I can see the autopsy was correct when they described the large
irregular head wound was chiefly in the parietal but extending
somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions.
>
> Of course, when it doesn't fit the official theory they always just
> got it wrong. So Jackie got it wrong, all the doctors and nurses at
> Parkland got it wrong, the staff that prepared the body for its flight
> to Bethesda got it wrong, the non-doctors at Bethesda who have said
> they saw a major wound in the back of the head got it wrong and the
> embalmer got it wrong. Who's the kook now? You think all these
> people couldn't see a wound right in front of thier face? Amazing.
It isn't a question of whether someone got it wrong but who got it
wrong. There is so much conflicting testimony that somebody has to be
wrong. The physical evidence shows who was right and who was wrong.
David Von Pein
>>> "He {Roy Kellerman} said JFK had 4 wounds, you guys say 2." <<<
You're an idiot.
LNers know that President Kennedy had FOUR separate "wounds" on his
body -- 2 inshoots (entries) and 2 outshoots (exits).
Kellerman didn't say he thought JFK had "four ENTRY holes" in his
body.
Worth repeating....
You're an idiot.
>>> "Like faking evidence is so far fetched....isn't that what got O.J. off?" <<<
No. It certainly didn't. Because not a single piece of evidence was
"faked" in the O.J. case at all. And furthermore, Simpson's Scheme
Team of defense lawyers failed miserably to prove that any evidence
was faked (or even significantly "mishandled" in any fashion).
O.J. "got off" due to the slimy, underhanded tactics of Johnnie
Cochran and Company....plus the fact that the prosecution team was
pretty much totally inept and failed to present some of the BEST
evidence favoring Simpson's obvious guilt (e.g., the police interview,
where O.J. admitted to dripping blood on the very night of the
murders; and the Bronco chase, which reeks of Simpson's guilt).
Plus, the jury was awful and filled with halfwits as well, which
certainly didn't make things any better for the prosecution either.
>>> "You're calling a heck of a lot more people liars, like the emergency room team at Parkland, Jackie, Hill, Kellerman, all the people who prepped JFK for Bethesda, and the embalmer. You're calling way more people liars than I am." <<<
I never once called any of those people "liars". Never.
And that's because none of them were "liars". They were merely WRONG
about certain things. Simple as that.
>>> "So Jackie got it wrong, all the doctors and nurses at Parkland got it wrong, the staff that prepared the body for its flight to Bethesda got it wrong, the non-doctors at Bethesda who have said they saw a major wound in the back of the head got it wrong and the embalmer got it wrong. Who's the kook now?" <<<
Oh, you still are. Without question. (I'm surprised you had to ask.)
You're still the kook mainly due to the following two things:
1.) Because you fail to accept the BEST evidence in the case (e.g.,
the AUTHENTICATED photos of the dead President, the autopsy report,
the never-wavering "LN-favoring" comments from the autopsy doctors
themselves over the years, the huge amount of "IT WAS ONLY OSWALD"
evidence that's piled up against the door, plus Oswald's own guilty
actions and provable lies that show him to be guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt).
--And:--
2.) Because you actually believe that a vast number of people (from
various organizations and law-enforcement departments and other
entities) wanted to frame some innocent "patsy" named Oswald for John
F. Kennedy's murder.
The belief in that kind of an all-encompassing "LET'S GET OSWALD" plot
will make you a "kook" for all time. Bank on it.
www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=8792&SectionName=In%20Depth&PlayMedia=Yes
aeffects
> Giwwy the bigot humps the dwarfs leg again..... get a room!<robcap...@netscape.com> wrote in message
sitdown puss.... you're cluttering up the bandwidth.... we can't see!
aeffects
oh bigdog, someone cut a 1/2 inch off your dickeroo, you'd have a scab
on the back of your ass..... Truck on son!
aeffects
ah Dave, you're the dumpkoff, er idjit......things must be slowing
down at the office, these day's, eh? -- Got your PR releases ready
for the daBug big preview on Brian's C-SPAN Book Notes, thios Sunday?
Is daBug taking questions or is he demanding the program be pre-
recorded (bet it is) LMFAO.....
aeffects
I've got one call regarding my resume posted in another thread today,
shame I retired....
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Someones toilet backed up and they need their sewer cleaned?