Further proof that Chico and robocrap are the same person
bigdog
this reply from robocrap to DVP from aaj and am posting it here
because I would never be allowed to make that comment on aaj. The
following post speaks for itself.
On Jan 11, 1:35 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
wrote:
> On Jan 10, 9:18 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> "DO CTers THINK A DIFFERENT, UNMUTILATED, WHOLE BULLET FOUND ON A
> PARKLAND STRETCHER INJURED JOHN CONNALLY ON 11-22-63, INSTEAD OF
> CE399?"
>
> No, I think the bullet that is presented as CE399 was NOT found on the
> stretcher JBC was on during 11/22/63.
>
> (A CURIOUS NOTION, PER THE BELIEFS OF MOST CTers)......
>
> ==================================================
>
> "Warren Commission Exhibit #399 remains the only whole bullet
> connected with JFK's murder and Connally's injuries."
>
> No, it isn't. In addition to the one Tomlinson found, which he stated
> repeatedly was NOT the one the WC presented as CE399, TWO other bullets
> were found as well. Elizabeth Goode Wright, director of nursing at
> Parkland, told researcher Wallace Millam in 1993 that her husband, O.P.
> Wright (director of security) found TWO bullets on 11/22/63. He handled
> the "magic bullet" before the Secret Service > received it, but he also
> found a unfired, "whole" .38 with manufacturer's case markings ".38 SP
> WCC" -- the very same markings as 2 of the 4 shell casings allegedly
> retrieved from the Tippit scene and supposedly and supposedly matched to
> the pistol found on LHO at the time of his arrest. This was found on a
> hospital gurney and Wright did NOT turn it over to the authorities, and he
> showed it to Millam during the interview. To me, this is further proof of
> the frame being placed on LHO, as they planted a bullet matching the
> pistol he would be found with as well. Explain this.
>
> "And we know, for a fact, that CE399 was fired from Oswald's rifle."
>
> It was fired from the Carcano found in the TSBD, BUT you have failed
> to prove this rifle was really LHO's.
>
> "And Oswald's rifle was found in a building overlooking the motorcade
> route."
>
> Again, you have NOT proved the 40.2 inch Carcano found WAS LHO's.
>
> "These are the raw facts surrounding Bullet 399."
>
> Facts? How about proving these assertions?
>
> "Now, to believe that CE399 was a "plant" of some kind is to believe
> that one or more individuals had a desire to remove from evidence the
> real stretcher bullet found by Darrell C. Tomlinson in Parkland
> Hospital, and replace it with a bullet that was fired from Oswald's
> gun."
>
> Yes, this is called a "conspiracy" to commit a crime and cover it up.
>
> "Is it MORE reasonable to believe in the latter scenario which has
> people doing illegal, underhanded things CONNECTED TO A PRESIDENTIAL
> ASSASSINATION (of all things)?"
>
> It is more reasonable, and the evidence proves this scenario --
> conspiracy -- so you will have to deal with it.
>
> "Or is it (perhaps) more reasonable to believe that people who saw the
> bullet on November 22 had trouble later confirming with 100% accuracy
> that that exact bullet was, indeed, the bullet they saw in November?"
>
> No, a bullet is NOT that hard to remember. Why are you not asking if
> it is more reasonable to believe a bullet can cause 8 wounds, break
> two major bones, and come out virtually intact?
>
> "We must also consider what I believe to be a very important fact
> regarding the Tomlinson stretcher bullet -- Every person who saw the
> stretcher bullet on 11/22/63 saw a WHOLE, INTACT BULLET. They didn't
> see a banged-all-to-hell, fragmented bullet."
>
> So? Was it the same one presented as CE399 later on? According to
> Tomlinson, the man who found it, NO, but according to the WC, who were
> NOT there, yes. Now, since you are always talking about CS&L, who
> should know better, the man who found it or a bunch of guys who never
> laid eyes on it on 11/22/63?
>
> "And almost all CTers seem to think that if a bullet had done the
> damage it did to Governor Connally, the bullet (no matter whether it
> was CE399 or some OTHER bullet) would have been badly deformed and
> damaged."
>
> Yes, and it goes beyond CTers, actual ballistic experts have said this
> as well! Good ole CS&L says it must be so as well.
>
> "Most of the CTers who offer up an opinion on this subject certainly
> don't think that ANY bullet (pointed or otherwise) would have ended up
> in the fairly-good condition it was found in by Tomlinson after
> breaking the bones that we know the ONE bullet that struck Connally
> did break."
>
> You bet, nor do ballistic experts, that is why your side relies on a
> "Vet" and a Urologist to make your case. You have to be totally
> ignorant of bullets to make the claim you are making.
>
> "And whether you think the stretcher bullet was CE399 or some pointy-
> tipped bullet from some other non-Oswald gun....a major point to be
> made here is: There WAS a "stretcher bullet" found by Tomlinson in a
> Parkland hallway on or near Connally's stretcher at approx. 1:30 PM
> CST on 11/22/63."
>
> This is very misleading, now you are admitting that another bullet
> could have been found, and you are trying to gloss over it. The main
> point is the man who found the bullet on 11/22/63, Tomlinson, said he
> could NOT say it was the governer's stretcher it came from, and he he
> said the bullet he found was NOT the bullet presented by the WC as
> CE399. This is fact based on the testimony of Tomlinson. You are
> trying to minimize these facts.
>
> "That, to me, is a key point. Because if that bullet found by
> Tomlinson WASN'T inside Governor Connally on November 22....then where
> did the one bullet go that went into (and fell out of) John B.
> Connally's body that day?"
>
> Probably in the trash as it was NOT from a Carcano, just food for
> thought. How about Hoover saying the bullet found on the stretcher
> was from JFK's? How about the .38 bullet found? Where did that come
> from?
>
> "Food for (399) thought anyway."
>
> There sure is, but you won't address it.
Gil Jesus
> There couldn't be two people on the planet this fucking stupid.
That's opinion, not proof. There's a difference, ASSHOLE.
bigdog
It's also a fact, Jack.
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d0757c47-aa25-49f2...@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 11, 9:12�pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> There couldn't be two people on the planet this fucking stupid.
That's opinion, not proof. There's a difference, ASSHOLE.
HOLY COW! ! ! !
Did Lapdog Dodge evidence/testimony AGAIN???
http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
tomnln
YoHarvey
> "bigdog" <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:d4dd1848-c497-439e...@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> On Jan 12, 7:02 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 11, 9:12�pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > There couldn't be two people on the planet this fucking stupid.
>
> > That's opinion, not proof. There's a difference, ASSHOLE.
>
> It's also a fact, Jack.
>
> You Forgot "Muck 'n Mire"
>
> justme
> Yo(Momma)Harvey
>
> ps;
> Watch your language or, Burly will be ALL over you. (NOT)
That's opinion, not proof. There's a difference, ASSHOLE.
WTF would an idiot like YOU know about proof? You're a joke....you
know it; we know it. Now, go find some young boy to abuse. It's your
specialty, is it not?
tomnln
Gil Jesus
PROVE IT. Post our IP (not ISP) addresses and prove once and for all
that our postings are coming from the same computer.
You got the FACTS, then it shouldn't be difficult for you to do it.
It's time to put up or be seen for the LIARS that you are.
aeffects
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your
opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an
answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works
extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments
where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without
having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or
other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any
subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
carry on toots-e-roll
Gil Jesus
>
> WTF would an idiot like YOU know about proof? �You're a joke....you
> know it; we know it. �Now, go find some young boy to abuse. �It's your
> specialty, is it not?-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also
known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods
qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with
unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-
wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia",
"racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth.
This
makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same
label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
I abuse you all the time, does that count ? Oh my, I feel that urge
coming on again......
LET'S LOOK AT THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS UPSTANDING CITIZEN:
YOHARVEY AS AN IDIOT
1.It was YoHarvey, under the screenname baileynme who claimed that the
Oswald rifle had no scope when
found. Baileynme-spiffy-YoHarvey wrote:
"In addition, when the weapon was found, the scope was NOT on the
MC."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e3aedb4b219289ad
But a photo of Lt. Day in the TSBD picking the rifle up by the strap
SHOWS a scope ATTACHED:
http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1Lw8sYt--F*VUv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/
YOHARVEY AS A SNEAK
2. he/she tried to infiltrate JFKconspiracy under a different
screenname
YOHARVEY AS AN IDIOT
3. he/she claimed that Operation White Star began in Cambodia in 1962,
when in fact it began in Laos in 1958 and ended with the
Declaration of Neutrality in 1962
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f1e7c24a013b01d0
at which time I corrected his/her lack of historical knowledge
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/fc6cacfb427769c5
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
4. he/she posted a false "letter" and attributed the author as my
third grade teacher, who claimed to have me in her class at a time
when I was in kindergarten, proving himself/herself once again as a
liar.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4f6f846cc8f05f54
YOHARVEY AS A SNEAK
5. posted an article by Dave Reitzes
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100custody.html
as his own without giving Reitzes any credit
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/293de06a42d2729e
YOHARVEY AS AN IDIOT
6. Then he/she perpetrated a falsehood that::
" In the mid 1950's Lee Oswald spoke about killing an American
President. Palmer MacBride testified to the WC, in 1956 he befriended
Oswald and they often discussed politics. MacBride said that one
central theme discussed was the "exploitation of the working class"
and one one occassion after they began discussing President
Eisenhower, Oswald made a statement that he would like to kill the
President because he was exploiting the working class.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/275a8c64ca997ce4
but in fact:
McBride's affidavit given to the FBI alleged that Oswald made the
statement in "late 1957 or early 1958", not in 1956 as YoHarvey
claimed. The 1957-58 timeframe conflicted with Marine records that
clearly showed that Oswald was in Japan at that time.
http://www.jfkresearch.com/jfk_101.html
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
7. In one post YoHarvey calls the Education Forum the "research
community"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/48acfed5de8ec2ac
then he refers to it as a "demented group of misfits"
in another post he refers to it as "major kook central"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/605057d1f9873de2
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
8. YoHarvey lied when he/she said that I was arrested in March 1994
for not paying a cable TV bill.
He/she would like the reader to believe that the theft of cable TV
would go on for 2 or 3 years without their knowing.
He/she provides no evidence to support this charge except his say so.
No links to any police records, court records, newspaper accounts of
the theft. No links. No info.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/515311a1bd65759b
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
9. YoHarvey lied when he said that I believed that Santos Trafficante
meant that JFK was going to be hit by Jackie because she found a bra
under JFK's pillow. I never said that. YOHARVEY DID THEN ATTRIBUTED IT
TO ME!!
Here's the link to YoLarvae's ridiculous post:
and my response was:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8140300091f92867
YOHARVEY AS A LIAR
10. YoHarvey claimed that I said that Connally shot JFK. The post that
was cited is here.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/dd783b571f900c24
But as the post shows, I didn't actually say it, I implied it.
Implying something is not the same as actually saying something.
Once again, YoHarvey and his fellow falsifiers took something that I
implied and tried to spin it. In fact, if you do a search of this
newsgroup of the phrase "Connally shot JFK", you'll find that most, if
not all of the posts were made by the trolls and that I never actually
said any such thing.
I put to rest any notion that I ever actually said any such thing
here:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/25bc946d919d2937
causing another round of troll tears.
YoHarvey/justme1952 makes up LIES as he/she goes along...like these:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bc526ae91bd97331
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/54b99cbd78e1b516
Not only is he/she a liar, he/she admits to living a lie:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d8a4e3914459a3e9
ANTICHRIST YOHARVEY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3e955da36f61d10f
Given his/her propensity for being a sneak, an idiot and lying, can we
believe ANYTHING YoHarvey/baileynme/spiffy says ?
robcap...@netscape.com
"There couldn't be two people on the planet this fucking stupid. I cut
this reply from robocrap to DVP from aaj and am posting it here
because I would never be allowed to make that comment on aaj. The
following post speaks for itself."
Of course it will speak for itself as you have no knowledge of the
case to dispute what I'm saying, and your alter ego, YoHarvey, doesn't
either. Thanks for posting my reply again so the readers are sure to
see it.
> > There sure is, but you won't address it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Von Pein
>>> "Thanks for posting my reply again so the readers are sure to see it." <<<
<chuckle time, kids>
Rob is, in effect, saying the following --- "I love having my posts re-
posted by people on the newsgroup so that I can repeatedly fall on my
face in the conspiracy mud, time and time again via the same inane
material."
After all, who would want to miss out on all that stellar research
(i.e., made-up excrement) exhibited by Robcap in every post he writes?
robcap...@netscape.com
Yeah, that is why you have been running lately, right? You can't
defend your position, which is made-up of excrement. I thought you
would be a challenge, but now it is obvious you can't even defend your
own nutty theory.
justm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hey Chico, time to let that alter boy out of your closet LOL run sissy
run before he tells his mommy
robcap...@netscape.com
wrote:
sissy run before he tells his mommy."
So what do you think of CE399, why don't you share your view on that
bullet for us?
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think it was fired out of LHO's rifle and it was the bullet that hit
JFK and Connally. No need to respond, I"m not going to argue hogwash
with you. All evidence points to LHO...you CT's have nothing but talk
and what I hear is nothing more then blah blah blah....kinda like
Charlie Browns teacher if you get my drift.
Now did you let the alter boy out of your closet???
David Von Pein
>>> "I thought you would be a challenge, but now it is obvious you can't even defend your own nutty theory." <<<
Oh, you mean the "LHO WAS GUILTY AS HITLER" theory?
That's certainly not a "theory" at all. Nor is it a scenario that *I*
authored in the slightest way, Mr. Idiot.
All official Government inquiries have declared Lee Oswald guilty of 2
murders in 1963.
You "ABO" kooks think the Government went 0-for-4 (i.e., 0-for-2 for
the WC on the two murder charges in questions against Sweet Ozzie; and
0-for-2 for the HSCA as well). That's a lot of cover-up agents. (Or a
lot of useless, ignorant "investigators", huh?)
But at least we have the stellar case-solving power of Mr. Robert
Caprio to set the WC and the HSCA straight re. Ozzie's guilty status.
Thank the Maker for that.
But back in the arena called "Reality".....
The evidence says Oswald killed two people and probably did it all by
his lonesome.
But, being the crazy kook you (Robby) are, you don't like the evidence
of course....so you and kooks like you have decided (with no proof
whatever) to wipe out every stitch of evidence by pretending it's all
shady and faked.
Gee, what a surprise.....a kook thinks ALL the evidence against a
double-murderer was faked/planted/manipulated/coerced/manufactured/
never existed.
You wouldn't be the kook you currently are without believing that the
above paragraph is the absolute Gospel.
Amen.
bigdog
> >>> "I thought you would be a challenge, but now it is obvious you can't even defend your own nutty theory." <<<
>
> Oh, you mean the "LHO WAS GUILTY AS HITLER" theory?
>
> That's certainly not a "theory" at all. Nor is it a scenario that *I*
> authored in the slightest way, Mr. Idiot.
>
> All official Government inquiries have declared Lee Oswald guilty of 2
> murders in 1963.
>
> You "ABO" kooks think the Government went 0-for-4 (i.e., 0-for-2 for
> the WC on the two murder charges in questions against Sweet Ozzie; and
> 0-for-2 for the HSCA as well). That's a lot of cover-up agents. (Or a
> lot of useless, ignorant "investigators", huh?)
>
investigation. That way they would have the government tell them again
what bunch of morons they are and they would have some new material to
complain about.
robcap...@netscape.com
No wonder you never discuss the case from the LN side, it is all
HOGWASH. Prove it hit JFK and JBC, that's all I'm asking. Why are
you afraid to attempt this if you KNOW it happened? IF all the
evidence supports you point of view why do you NEVER discuss it? I
would think you would bash us CTers over the head with it. The fact
that you DON'T speaks volumes about what the evidence really shows.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "I thought you would be a challenge, but now it is obvious you can't even defend your own nutty theory." <<<
"Oh, you mean the "LHO WAS GUILTY AS HITLER" theory?"
No, that LHO was guilty of the murders of JFK, JDT and the wounding of
JBC.
"That's certainly not a "theory" at all. Nor is it a scenario that *I*
authored in the slightest way, Mr. Idiot."
I never said LHO was as guilty as Hitler, so I don't know what you
are stammering about. In terms of the crimes of 11/22/63, they are
merely theories as there is no conviction I am aware of.
"All official Government inquiries have declared Lee Oswald guilty of
2 murders in 1963."
So what? They are not the same as a court of law where LHO would have
had representation and a rules of law for all evidence and witnesses.
You have NO conviction, therefore, you are putting forth theories like
us CTers.
"You "ABO" kooks think the Government went 0-for-4 (i.e., 0-for-2 for
the WC on the two murder charges in questions against Sweet Ozzie; and
0-for-2 for the HSCA as well). That's a lot of cover-up agents. (Or a
lot of useless, ignorant "investigators", huh?)"
Pretty much, there were NO real investigations, or in terms of the
HSCA, there were NO real investigations that saw the light of day. We
all know how poor government investigations are don't we?
"But at least we have the stellar case-solving power of Mr. Robert
Caprio to set the WC and the HSCA straight re. Ozzie's guilty status.
Thank the Maker for that."
Hey, I am just pointing out the "evidence" you claim to have to show
guilt is tainted and woud NOT have been allowed in many cases or would
NOT have convicted LHO in court. It is tough for you to swallow since
you really don't care about justice, you just are interested in
promoting a propsterous story.
"But back in the arena called "Reality"....."
Like I would rely on someone who believes in fairy tales to tell me
what is reality or not. Come on.
"The evidence says Oswald killed two people and probably did it all by
his lonesome."
Only in the sick, twisted world of DVP it does, as anyone with the
thinking ability God gave us knows differently.
"But, being the crazy kook you (Robby) are, you don't like the
evidence of course....so you and kooks like you have decided (with no
proof whatever) to wipe out every stitch of evidence by pretending
it's all shady and faked."
Most of what you present is NOT evidence at all, and the record shows
this, so of course I don't like your "evidence." I believe in our
courst system, and if LHO was really guilty I would expect the court
to find so, but the evidence has to be solid, and in this case it is
NOT, therefore, I don't want to hang an innocent person, but you of
course have no quandry over that fact. Who is the kook again?
"Gee, what a surprise.....a kook thinks ALL the evidence against a
double-murderer was faked/planted/manipulated/coerced/manufactured/
never existed."
I can't help they conspirators where so sloppy, but they are the ones
that made it so apparent it was all those things. I guess when you
have people at the very top levels in on it, you don't really worry
about being "caught" do you?
"You wouldn't be the kook you currently are without believing that the
above paragraph is the absolute Gospel.
Amen."
It sickens me to see someone who judges and finds guilt with a person
when there is NO proof or evidence use the term "Amen" as you are NOT
a follower of Christ's that is very obvious.
Gil Jesus
These assholes can't produce the IP addresses of our computers to
prove that our posts are coming from the same source and thus, the
same computer.
All they can do is provide commentary and insults.
They are irrelevent and so are their posts.
Their foolishness does not warrant responses.
When they want to debate the evidence with citations, then I'll
respond.
Otherwise, they're wasting my time.
tomnln
DANG GIL;
Don't eliminate my TARGETS.