My reply to DVP's attack

[Robert Harris]

I am looking forward to David's reply.

David Von Pein wrote:
> ROBERT HARRIS SAID:
>
> The ONLY thing you should be concerned about is the evidence.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Then why aren't you, Bob, more "concerned" about all of that evidence
that
> points directly at Lee Oswald and NOBODY ELSE?

I didn't know that such evidence existed.

Why don't you tell us about it?

>
> If the truth be told, I think Bob Harris is more concerned about
promoting
> his own unique rewriting of the "evidence" in the case than he is about
> the *actual* evidence.

If the truth be told, you ALWAYS try to turn the discussion away from
evidence, to ad hominem and attacks and personal insults.

This is not about Robert Harris, no matter how hard you try to make it
that way:-)

>
> The actual evidence is too mundane and straightforward for most CTers
like
> Bob. He thinks he needs to *add* something to it --- like a make-believe
> gunshot at Z285, or a phantom bullet that falls off of Governor
Connally's
> stretcher at Parkland.

So far, you have posted nothing but insults and blurtations which you
couldn't prove if your life depended on it.

When does everyone get to see this evidence, that Oswald acted alone?

And when do you intend to post a refutation to my 285 analysis? If it is
as bad as you claim, it should be easy to put me in my place. So, why is
it that NO-ONE has ever been able to do that?

And finally, when do you intend to prove that John Connally, DA Henry
Wade, officer Nolan and nursing supervisor Audrey Bell were all full of
crap?

And when do you intend to explain the absence of the initials carved
into the Tomlinson bullet, on CE399, by agents Johnsen and Todd?

Oh wait!! I almost forgot.

You only do trashtalk and insults.

You don't do evidence, do you David?

>
> I'm beginning to think that a better term for "JFK Conspiracy Theorist"
> might be "JFK Conspiracy Craftsman". They "craft" and "mold" their
> theories by hand until the desired amount of "conspiracy" is reached.

Many do, I'm sure.

But if I did that, you would be able to refute me quite easily. Why is
it that you won't even try?

>
> What a silly hobby indeed. (Don't you think so, Bob?)

Beats the hell out of reviewing Hanna Barbera cartoons, don't you think:-)

Actually, this has been a fascinating murder mystery and there are still
parts that I have yet to figure out.

>
> And now a couple of CTers over at The Education Forum have informed me of
> their belief that the person we see in the photo below might not be John
> F. Kennedy at all!

Yes David, and there are people who think they see Jesus in their pancakes.

And some who pretend there is evidence which isolates Oswald as the only
shooter.

At least the holy pancakes folks have some kind of evidence to show:-)


> It's apparently some imposter posing for the autopsy

David, all this blather is a waste of time and bandwidth. Do you realize
that throughout your entire post, you have referenced NO evidence, NO
testimony, and NO analysis of any kind.

You have posted pure BS, with no foundation in any kind of evidence.

That's exactly the kind of poor thinking that you accuse your
adversaries of.




Robert Harris

[David Von Pein]

Bob H.,

Your post doesn't really require a response from me. All you did is repeat
the same old topics that you've been repeating for years (e.g., Z285 and
Wade and Nolan and Bell and CE399, etc.) -- as if those things haven't
already been addressed by me many times in the past (and by many others
too). Here once again are links to my direct responses to you on those
specific topics....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Harris+Z285

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Robert-Harris-Audrey-Bell-Bobby-Nolan

So I think I'll just repeat Bob Harris' own words that he directed at me.
These words certainly apply to this needless/superfluous new thread:

"...all this blather is a waste of time and bandwidth."

[BOZ]

Are you still here>

[Robert Harris]

David Von Pein wrote:
> Bob H.,
>
> Your post doesn't really require a response from me. All you did is repeat
> the same old topics that you've been repeating for years (e.g., Z285 and
> Wade and Nolan and Bell and CE399, etc.) -- as if those things haven't
> already been addressed by me many times in the past (and by many others
> too). Here once again are links to my direct responses to you on those
> specific topics....
>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Harris+Z285

There is nothing at that link which addresses the issues you
just snipped.

>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Robert-Harris-Audrey-Bell-Bobby-Nolan

There is nothing at that link which addresses the issues you
just snipped.

You just make your 7 year old statement that Will Fritz's
initials are on the envelope, upside down.

THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUES IN THIS THREAD.

Stop running David. Address the issues and the evidence.
Don't snip it.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/15/2017 9:56 PM, Robert Harris wrote:
> David Von Pein wrote:
>> Bob H.,
>>
>> Your post doesn't really require a response from me. All you did is
>> repeat
>> the same old topics that you've been repeating for years (e.g., Z285 and
>> Wade and Nolan and Bell and CE399, etc.) -- as if those things haven't
>> already been addressed by me many times in the past (and by many others
>> too). Here once again are links to my direct responses to you on those
>> specific topics....
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Harris+Z285
>
> There is nothing at that link which addresses the issues you just snipped.
>
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Robert-Harris-Audrey-Bell-Bobby-Nolan
>>
>
> There is nothing at that link which addresses the issues you just snipped.
>
> You just make your 7 year old statement that Will Fritz's initials are
> on the envelope, upside down.
>

And who are you to say upside down. It looks rightside up to Fritz.