Walt`s admission
Bud
Recently Walt said something in a response to Healy that I think
bears isolation.
"At one time I thought Brennan`s testimony was devastating to
Oswald being a patsy, so I wanted him to be a liar"
Read it a few times, this is a classic example of someone
accidentially telling the truth. Walt evaluates evidence strictly on
the grounds of what supports Oz`s claim of being a patsy.
Walt
Hey Dud..... I KNEW that Lee Oswald had NOT shot JFK, Yes that's
right.... KNEW!!
But it seemed to me that the Warren Commission's STAR witness, (the
ONLY person who had come forward to say he'd actually seen a gunman
firing toward the limo) Howard Brennan was saying he saw Oswald firing
the rifle. I KNEW that had to be a lie, but the Warren Report seemed
so convincing about what Howard had said, so I could only conclude
that he was a liar. But he seemed to be just a joe average citizen
and above average in honesty and integrity....so I was in quandry.
When I studied his statements to the Warren Commission it became clear
to me that it wasn't Howard brennan who lacked honesty and
integrity....It was David Belin, the Warren Commissions silver tongued
lawyer.
Since we've gone through Howard Brennan's Testimony several times I
don't think I need to tell you again that the DESCRIPTION that Howard
gave of the gunman did NOT fit Lee Oswald ( though David Belin and the
W.C.said it did) and the place that Brennan said he saw the gunman
firing from did NOT fit the fabricated "sniper's nest".
Walt
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 16 Mar, 21:31, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Recently Walt said something in a response to Healy that I think
> > bears isolation.
> >
> > "At one time I thought Brennan`s testimony was devastating to
> > Oswald being a patsy, so I wanted him to be a liar"
> >
> > Read it a few times, this is a classic example of someone
> > accidentially telling the truth. Walt evaluates evidence strictly on
> > the grounds of what supports Oz`s claim of being a patsy.
>
> Hey Dud..... I KNEW that Lee Oswald had NOT shot JFK, Yes that's
> right.... KNEW!!
You admit you make the evidence conform to your preconceived
notions. You admit being guity of what you accuse the WC of. You`re a
hypocrite, Walt, and I`m tossing you off the case.
Walt
> Walt wrote:
> > On 16 Mar, 21:31, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > Recently Walt said something in a response to Healy that I think
> > > bears isolation.
>
> > > "At one time I thought Brennan`s testimony was devastating to
> > > Oswald being a patsy, so I wanted him to be a liar"
>
> > > Read it a few times, this is a classic example of someone
> > > accidentially telling the truth. Walt evaluates evidence strictly on
> > > the grounds of what supports Oz`s claim of being a patsy.
>
> > Hey Dud..... I KNEW that Lee Oswald had NOT shot JFK, Yes that's
> > right.... KNEW!!
>
> You admit you make the evidence conform to your preconceived
> notions. You admit being guity of what you accuse the WC of. You`re a
> hypocrite, Walt, and I`m tossing you off the case.
Ok ...Bring plenty of help. You may find that I'm a little too heavy
for you to toss anywhere.
Walt
>
>
>
> > But it seemed to me that the Warren Commission's STAR witness, (the
> > ONLY person who had come forward to say he'd actually seen a gunman
> > firing toward the limo) Howard Brennan was saying he saw Oswald firing
> > the rifle. I KNEW that had to be a lie, but the Warren Report seemed
> > so convincing about what Howard had said, so I could only conclude
> > that he was a liar. But he seemed to be just a joe average citizen
> > and above average in honesty and integrity....so I was in quandry.
>
> > When I studied his statements to the Warren Commission it became clear
> > to me that it wasn't Howard brennan who lacked honesty and
> > integrity....It was David Belin, the Warren Commissions silver tongued
> > lawyer.
>
> > Since we've gone through Howard Brennan's Testimony several times I
> > don't think I need to tell you again that the DESCRIPTION that Howard
> > gave of the gunman did NOT fit Lee Oswald ( though David Belin and the
> > W.C.said it did) and the place that Brennan said he saw the gunman
> > firing from did NOT fit the fabricated "sniper's nest".
>
> > Walt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ben Holmes
>
>On 17 Mar, 13:43, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> Walt wrote:
>> > On 16 Mar, 21:31, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> > > Recently Walt said something in a response to Healy that I think
>> > > bears isolation.
>>
>> > > "At one time I thought Brennan`s testimony was devastating to
>> > > Oswald being a patsy, so I wanted him to be a liar"
>>
>> > > Read it a few times, this is a classic example of someone
>> > > accidentially telling the truth. Walt evaluates evidence strictly on
>> > > the grounds of what supports Oz`s claim of being a patsy.
>>
>> > Hey Dud..... I KNEW that Lee Oswald had NOT shot JFK, Yes that's
>> > right.... KNEW!!
>>
>> You admit you make the evidence conform to your preconceived
>> notions. You admit being guity of what you accuse the WC of. You`re a
>> hypocrite, Walt, and I`m tossing you off the case.
>
>Ok ...Bring plenty of help. You may find that I'm a little too heavy
>for you to toss anywhere.
>
>Walt
What the trolls *really* want is to toss aside the *evidence*. Walt - shame on
you for continually bringing up the evidence.
Bud
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <1174161696.3...@p15g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, Walt says...
> >
> >On 17 Mar, 13:43, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> Walt wrote:
> >> > On 16 Mar, 21:31, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> > > Recently Walt said something in a response to Healy that I think
> >> > > bears isolation.
> >>
> >> > > "At one time I thought Brennan`s testimony was devastating to
> >> > > Oswald being a patsy, so I wanted him to be a liar"
> >>
> >> > > Read it a few times, this is a classic example of someone
> >> > > accidentially telling the truth. Walt evaluates evidence strictly on
> >> > > the grounds of what supports Oz`s claim of being a patsy.
> >>
> >> > Hey Dud..... I KNEW that Lee Oswald had NOT shot JFK, Yes that's
> >> > right.... KNEW!!
> >>
> >> You admit you make the evidence conform to your preconceived
> >> notions. You admit being guity of what you accuse the WC of. You`re a
> >> hypocrite, Walt, and I`m tossing you off the case.
> >
> >Ok ...Bring plenty of help. You may find that I'm a little too heavy
> >for you to toss anywhere.
> >
> >Walt
>
>
> What the trolls *really* want is to toss aside the *evidence*. Walt - shame on
> you for continually bringing up the evidence.
It`s good to see Ben come out in favor of Walt`s "Oz is a patsy,
make all information conform to that assumption" approach.
David Von Pein
Amen.
And even when Howard Brennan PENCILS IN A SPECIFIC RIFLE ANGLE on
CE482 (a photo of the SOUTHEAST corner window, not Walt's precious
WEST-End window!), Walt still insists that Brennan REALLY meant the
assassin (with that rifle Brennan is penciling in via re-construction
to the WC) was on the OTHER end of the building....without Brennan
saying a single word about his pencil markings being on a picture of a
window that represented the WRONG window!
How's that for CTer conforming?
CE482, with Brennan's "rifle angle" marking:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0113b.htm
Walt....what about this? Was Brennan just stupid re. which window he
was really marking that had a rifle sticking out of it? Or did he just
not give a damn that he was marking the wrong window, and therefore
didn't bother mentioning that picky little detail to Mr. Belin and the
WC? (Belin sure got lucky if you want to choose that latter option,
huh?)
Let's see how Walt wiggles his way out of this one, via lots and lots
of make-believe kook-talk. Just wait and see.
Walt
> >>> "It's good to see Ben come out in favor of Walt`s "Oz is a patsy, make all information conform to that assumption" approach." <<<
>
> Amen.
>
> And even when Howard Brennan PENCILS IN A SPECIFIC RIFLE ANGLE on
> CE482 (a photo of the SOUTHEAST corner window, not Walt's precious
> WEST-End window!), Walt still insists that Brennan REALLY meant the
> assassin (with that rifle Brennan is penciling in via re-construction
> to the WC) was on the OTHER end of the building....without Brennan
> saying a single word about his pencil markings being on a picture of a
> window that represented the WRONG window!
>
> How's that for CTer conforming?
>
>
> Walt....what about this? Was Brennan just stupid re. which window he
> was really marking that had a rifle sticking out of it? Or did he just
> not give a damn that he was marking the wrong window, and therefore
> didn't bother mentioning that picky little detail to Mr. Belin and the
> WC? (Belin sure got lucky if you want to choose that latter option,
> huh?)
>
> Let's see how Walt wiggles his way out of this one, via lots and lots
> of make-believe kook-talk. Just wait and see.
Dear Dumbass.... I've already told you that Brennan wasn't given an
option. He was handed a photo of the upper EAST portion of the south
face of the TSBD and asked to depict the angle of the rifle as the
gunman held it when he fired. Belin cleverly did NOT give him a
photo of the TSBD that showed the entire south face of the TSBD as it
appeared at 12:30 on 11 /22 / 63
so Brennan was forced to depict the rifle angle on that cropped Tom
Dillard photo.
If you were just half as smart and superior as you think you are you
would have had better sense than to post the link to CE 482, because
now you've messed in your own bed. Anybody who looks at CE 482 can
clearly see that it would have been impossible for Oswald to fire from
that window. Howard Brennan drew an arrow depicting the angle of the
rifle as the gunman fired. It a very easy task to slide that 45
degree angle line down, and try to make it fit with the Warren
Commossions scenario of Oswald sitting on a box behind the window and
resting his rifle on a stack of boxes in front of him, and find that
it can't be done as the Warren Commission SPECULATED. Thank you for
making a fool of yourself once again.
Incidently, I do sincerely want to thank you for inadvertantly post a
link to a photo that absolutely demolishes the Warren Commissions
THEORY that Lee Oswald was guilty, and he fired from that window to
kill President Kennedy. I"m sure you don't have a clue what I'm
referring to, but if you goggle back about ten years you may get a
shock.
Walt
Walt
David Von Pein
>>> "Belin cleverly did NOT give him a photo of the TSBD that showed the entire south face of the TSBD as it appeared at 12:30 on 11/22/63; so Brennan was forced to depict the rifle angle on that cropped Tom Dillard photo." <<<
And was Belin GAGGING Brennan too? Was Brennan prohibited from saying:
"Mr. Belin, this is not the window with the gunman"?
It's obvious why Belin didn't need to use photos depicting any WEST-
side windows.....it's because there was nothing going on in those
windows at all, and therefore the west-end windows were meaningless as
far as Brennan's testimony was concerned. So Belin, naturally, used
this large blow-up of the Dillard picture, which (of course) shows in
zoomed form THE ONLY WINDOW WHERE BRENNAN SAW ANYONE ON 11/22/63....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0113b.htm
>>> "If you were just half as smart and superior as you think you are you would have had better sense than to post the link to CE 482...<snip>..." <<<
And if you get any kookier, Nurse Ratched will come a-callin' for ya.
>>> "Anybody who looks at CE 482 can clearly see that it would have been impossible for Oswald to fire from that window." <<<
<sigh> There's that word "impossible" again. CT-Kooks love that word.
<sigh>
>>> "Howard Brennan drew an arrow depicting the angle of the rifle as the gunman fired." <<<
Yep. And on CE482, the exact window from which Oswald was firing. Go
figure.
>>> "It a very easy task to slide that 45-degree angle line down, and try to make it fit with the Warren Commission's scenario of Oswald sitting on a box behind the window and resting his rifle on a stack of boxes in front of him, and find that it can't be done as the Warren Commission SPECULATED." <<<
Walt evidently (per his vast knowledge here) has gone up to the SN,
raised the window half-way, and then fired a Carcano rifle toward the
Underpass....and he has verified that Oswald's feat was "impossible".
(Kooks love that word.)
>>> "Thank you for making a fool of yourself once again." <<<
And thank you for being the best butt any joke ever had.
~tips cap~
>>> "Incidently, I do sincerely want to thank you for inadvertantly post{ing} a link to a photo that absolutely demolishes the Warren Commission's THEORY that Lee Oswald was guilty, and he fired from that window to kill President Kennedy." <<<
<chuckles warmly at the idiocy of above statement>
And you, yourself, are incapable of posting links to pictures and
sites and articles, right? Weird.
Note how Walt, in true kook fashion, labels one photo as proof that
the WC scenario is "demolished". Of course just HOW the Dillard photo
"demolishes" the LN scenario is a mystery. But Walt KNOWS. That's what
counts....a kook KNOWS that Lee is innocent! He KNOWS!
Even though multiple people saw a rifle sticking out of that window
seen in CE482, and shells were below that very window, and Oswald's
prints were all over the nest (plus bag), and Oswald is seen at that
window, and Oz's bullets are IN THE LIMO and IN THE HOSPITAL --- this
(in a kook's world) adds up to:
A TOTALLY-DEMOLISHED THEORY BY WAY OF THIS IMAGE:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0113b.htm
It is now time (officially) to call for Nurse Ratched. ....
http://www.gonemovies.com/WWW/Drama/Drama/OneFlewRatched2.jpg
>>> "...If you goggle [sic; LOL added; I might need "goggles" for this; that shit COULD be dangerous to my eyeballs!] back about ten years you may get a shock." <<<
You mean I might see some stuff posted by Walt that ISN'T full of
kookshit??! (Because that's the only way you'll shock me at this stage
of the game.)
BTW, once more (for effect)....the following exchange between Belin &
Brennan "absolutely demolishes" Walt-Kook's Brennan theory:
BELIN -- "Did you see any other people in any other windows that you
can recollect?"
BRENNAN -- "Not on that floor. There was no other person on that floor
that ever came to the window that I noticed. There were people on the
next floor down, which is the fifth floor, colored guys. In
particular, I only remember two that I identified."
===============
NEXT ON "THE KOOK CHANNEL" --- WALT DECLARES BRENNAN TOTALLY BLIND AS
OF 11/22/63!! AND WALT CAN PROVE IT!! DETAILS AT 10!!
Walt
> Just as I predicted.....more "make-believe kook-talk" from Wacky Walt:
>
> >>> "Belin cleverly did NOT give him a photo of the TSBD that showed the entire south face of the TSBD as it appeared at 12:30 on 11/22/63; so Brennan was forced to depict the rifle angle on that cropped Tom Dillard photo." <<<
>
> And was Belin GAGGING Brennan too? Was Brennan prohibited from saying:
> "Mr. Belin, this is not the window with the gunman"?
>
> It's obvious why Belin didn't need to use photos depicting any WEST-
> side windows.....it's because there was nothing going on in those
> windows at all, and therefore the west-end windows were meaningless as
> far as Brennan's testimony was concerned. So Belin, naturally, used
> this large blow-up of the Dillard picture, which (of course) shows in
> zoomed form THE ONLY WINDOW WHERE BRENNAN SAW ANYONE ON 11/22/63....
>
>
> It is now time (officially) to call for Nurse Ratched. ....
>
> http://www.gonemovies.com/WWW/Drama/Drama/OneFlewRatched2.jpg
>
> >>> "...If you goggle [sic; LOL added; I might need "goggles" for this; that shit COULD be dangerous to my eyeballs!] back about ten years you may get a shock." <<<
>
> You mean I might see some stuff posted by Walt that ISN'T full of
> kookshit??! (Because that's the only way you'll shock me at this stage
> of the game.)
>
> BTW, once more (for effect)....the following exchange between Belin &
> Brennan "absolutely demolishes" Walt-Kook's Brennan theory:
>
> BELIN -- "Did you see any other people in any other windows that you
> can recollect?"
>
> BRENNAN -- "Not on that floor. There was no other person on that floor
> that ever came to the window that I noticed. There were people on the
> next floor down, which is the fifth floor, colored guys. In
> particular, I only remember two that I identified."
>
"Not on that floor. There was no other person on that floor
The only person I saw on that floor was the 5 ' 9", 30 to 35 year old,
165 to 175 pound gunman who was dressed in that dingy white khaki
shirt, and white trousers. I never saw anybody else come to the
window where I saw the gunman before Kennedy's motorcade arrived.
> that ever came to the window that I noticed.
> ===============
David Von Pein
"twisted" testimony that's needed from the lone "I Saw Oswald"
witness.....when all the Patsy Plotters needed to do is to "plant" a
couple of "fake" witnesses in Dealey Plaza, and then have these
witnesses rush to the police just after the shooting and give some
very good "Oswald" details re. the man they say they saw firing a gun
in the SN.
The WC would surely have called these regular citizens to
testify...right?
Voila!
Proof via TWO eyewitnesses (maybe more, if you want still more plants)
that Oswald was the killer!
Why didn't the plotters think of that?
They must have been too busy thinking of ways to justify going forward
with a MULTI-SHOOTER, ONE-PATSY plot in the first place, huh? (That
would have given me a migraine too, if I'd been on the Patsy-Framing
Team of goofballs who dreamed up that pre-11/22 scheme.)