VIDEO: Mr. Truly's Rifle
Gil Jesus
that the TSBD supervisor, Roy Truly, brought a rifle into the building
a day or two before the assassination, and what the FBI found out when
they investigated Oswald's claim
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:b401dd22-9521-461b...@n58g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Bud
Gil Jesus wrote:
> Dallas FBI agent James Hosty discusses Oswald's comment to Capt. Fritz
> that the TSBD supervisor, Roy Truly, brought a rifle into the building
> a day or two before the assassination, and what the FBI found out when
> they investigated Oswald's claim
The kooks are funny. They only believe what they want to out of the
interrogations of Oswald, they ignore what they don`t like (like his
claim to own a rifle, his claim to have eaten lunch the "colored
boys", like his claim not to have carried a long bag into work that
day, like his claim that have been out from with Shelley, ect).
Walt
Gil, this is one of those moments that sends chills up my
spine...Earlier this morning, before I went to breakfast, I was
thinking about posting information about the rifles that were in the
TSBD on Wedneday November 20, 1963. More specifically I wanted to
call readers attention to page 209 of Liar Myer's book "With
Malice".
It is an established fact that there were rifles in Mr. Truly's office
at lunchtime on Nov 20th. Oswald saw them there at the time, and he
immediately told the cops about seeing those rifles when they asked
him if he'd ever seen the Mannlicher Carcano that was found under a
pile of boxes on the sixth floor of the TSBD.
It is standard operating procedure to confront a suspect with the
murder weapon and watch his reaction when the weapon is displayed to
him.
At about 2:30 Lt Day left the TSBD, he was on his way to the police
station with the Carcano.
At 3:15 the cops displayed the rifle to Oswald and asked him if he'd
ever seen it before.
Here's what FBI agent James Hosty jotted down in his note book at that
time. ( see page 209 With Malice)
Hosty quote on......." 11/20 day before yesterday Mr Truely had
rifle & two others 1st floor outside office.....Hosty quote off
Captain Fritz also made a hand written notation of Oswald's reply to
the question ---"Have you ever seen this rifle before?"
Fritz note is nearly identical to Hosty's which indicates they both
jotted down what Oswald said.
aeffects
Dudster this isn't about Oswald, its about rifles in the TSBD a few
days in advance of the assassination, do you follow now? Want to
change the subject, start a new thread hon.....?
Bud
If the drugs ever leave your system long enough, you can look above
to see Gil used the phrase "Oswald`s claim". Who do you suppose that
claim was made to? The same source that is considered unreliable about
other things Oz said when questioned.
aeffects
dudster, you can't shuck and jive forever.... we're there other
rifle[s] in the TSBD a day or so in advance of the assassination? Why
does that scare you?
Bud
It`s common knowledge, Truly testified about it....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/truly2.htm
Why are the kooks treating it as if it were a revelation?
Being in the building doesn`t make these weapons murder weapons,
Oz`s rifle became the murder weapon when Oz used it to kill JFK with.
Oz being in the building didn`t make him the murderer, Oz committing
the murder made him the murderer. The drugs don`t make you a junkie,
you taking the drugs make you a junkie.
> Why
> does that scare you?
It doesn`t, I just pointed out the hypocrisy of the kooks using
information derived from the police questioning of Oz when it suits
them, but disregarding other things Oz told the DPD.
aeffects
son, you gotta stop taking those stewpid pills.... getting tired
giving you good direction, if I'm gonna pay for your sorry assed
education stop tearing the damn pages outta the books, ya dipshit
Gil Jesus
>
> � �It doesn`t, I just pointed out the hypocrisy of the kooks using
> information derived from the police questioning of Oz when it suits
> them, but disregarding other things Oz told the DPD.-
Hey smokes-too-much-Bud:
How about the hypocrisy of using information that the cops said Oswald
LIED about, but ignoring the information that indicated that Oswald
was telling the truth, as in this case.
That door swings both ways.
Gil Jesus
bump
Bud
Who said that nothing Oz supplied during the interrogations was
true? It`s well known there were other rifles in the TSBD a few days
before the assassination. Only kooks believe that being in the TSBD
makes a person an assassin, or that a weapon being in the TSBD makes
that weapon a murder weapon.
> That door swings both ways.
As, I expect, do you.
Walt
> Gil Jesus wrote:
> > On Mar 23, 2:01�pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > � �It doesn`t, I just pointed out the hypocrisy of the kooks using
> > > information derived from the police questioning of Oz when it suits
> > > them, but disregarding other things Oz told the DPD.-
>
> > Hey smokes-too-much-Bud:
>
> > How about the hypocrisy of using information that the cops said Oswald
> > LIED about, but ignoring the information that indicated that Oswald
> > was telling the truth, as in this case.
>
> Who said that nothing Oz supplied during the interrogations was
> true?
Wow!... Did Dud actually admit that Oswald told the truth? Is he
finally starting to see the errors of his ways?.....Perhaps he's
realized that somewhere in the future his progeny may be reading what
he's written.
It`s well known there were other rifles in the TSBD a few days
> before the assassination. Only kooks believe that being in the TSBD
> makes a person an assassin,
Wow!... Wow!.... This is amazin,... Dud admits that just because a
person was in the TSBD doesn't make that person an assassin. Lner's
have always pointed to the fact that Oswald was in the building as
incriminating evidence...
or that a weapon being in the TSBD makes
> that weapon a murder weapon.
Oh Lord, am I witnessing a repentance??... How many times have we
tried to get the Dud to see this simple fact?? Simply because a
Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor
does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon. In fact the EVIDENCE
indicates that it couldn't have been fired accurately that day.
David Von Pein
Nothing like being an ABO kook, is there? And nothing like turning
Bud's observation on its head.
Walt thinks that "simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under
a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the
murder weapon", EVEN THOUGH that Carcano that was found on the 6th
Floor was linked to ALL of the bullet evidence in this case (that was
big enough to be tested in this way)!
This is a howl indeed....and just shows the desperate CT mindset of
kooks like Walt, who will go to ANY lengths to avoid the obvious truth
re. that Mannlicher-Carcano.
I'm going to have to prop up the words of Vince Bugliosi once again
here, because the analogy fits so nicely....
What Walt The Kook said above -- "Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano
was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that
it was the murder weapon" -- reminds me of VB's humorous story of a
man being caught in the bedroom closet--naked--by the husband of the
naked woman who was in the bed in the same bedroom.
When asked by the husband: "What are you doing here?", the naked guy
in the closet replies: "Well, everybody's got to be SOMEWHERE, don't
they?"
If that "husband" had been Walt, I'm guessing that the naked man's
off-the-cuff explanation would have sufficed brilliantly.
Right, Walt?
Now....how does that story relate to that Mannlicher-Carcano found on
the 6th Floor that was linked ballistically to bullets and shells that
were found in THREE DIFFERENT PLACES (the limo, the hospital, and the
same 6th Floor of the Book Depository where that Carcano rifle was
also found)?
I'll now replay Walt's inane comment about the Carcano, in light of my
last paragraph above, to illustrate just how laughable (and desperate)
Walter truly is:
"Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of
boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon."
-- Walt
aeffects
> >>> "Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon." <<<
>
> Nothing like being an ABO kook, is there? And nothing like turning
> Bud's observation on its head.
>
> Walt thinks that "simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under
> a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the
> murder weapon", EVEN THOUGH that Carcano that was found on the 6th
> Floor was linked to ALL of the bullet evidence in this case (that was
> big enough to be tested in this way)!
you've elevated yourself above Lone Nut **KOOK**status to that of Lone
Nut **MORON**, congrat's. Maybe Vin will send you a copy of the cinder-
block, eh?
David Von Pein
>>> "Maybe Vin will send you a copy of ["Reclaiming History"], eh?" <<<
He already has. Nicely inscribed too.
Walt
> >>> "Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon." <<<
>
> Nothing like being an ABO kook, is there? And nothing like turning
> Bud's observation on its head.
>
> Walt thinks that "simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under
> a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the
> murder weapon", EVEN THOUGH that Carcano that was found on the 6th
> Floor was linked to ALL of the bullet evidence in this case (that was
> big enough to be tested in this way)!
Are you referring to the pristine bullet that was found far removed
from any victim of the gunfire? Is that what you mean by "linked".
In your simple mind is it enough for the bullet to be somewhere in the
same hospital that the shooting victims were in..... And is the mere
presence of a rifle in a building proof enough that it was the murder
weapon? Do you mind if I ask if your IQ is lower than your age?
Walt
>
> Nothing like being an ABO kook, is there? And nothing like turning
> Bud's observation on its head.
>
> Walt thinks that "simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under
> a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the
> murder weapon", EVEN THOUGH that Carcano that was found on the 6th
> Floor was linked to ALL of the bullet evidence in this case (that was
> big enough to be tested in this way)!
>
> This is a howl indeed....and just shows the desperate CT mindset of
> kooks like Walt, who will go to ANY lengths to avoid the obvious truth
> re. that Mannlicher-Carcano.
>
> I'm going to have to prop up the words of Vince Bugliosi once again
> here, because the analogy fits so nicely....
>
> What Walt The Kook said above -- "Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano
> was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that
> it was the murder weapon" -- reminds me of VB's humorous story of a
> man being caught in the bedroom closet--naked--by the husband of the
> naked woman who was in the bed in the same bedroom.
>
> When asked by the husband: "What are you doing here?", the naked guy
> in the closet replies: "Well, everybody's got to be SOMEWHERE, don't
> they?"
>
> If that "husband" had been Walt, I'm guessing that the naked man's
> off-the-cuff explanation would have sufficed brilliantly.
A good story, but a poor analogy...... But I'm not surprised that you
would think there is even a remote comparison to the two events,
because In one event there is no good explanation for the woman too
have ran naked into the bedroom while the plumber was changing out the
clothes that had become saturated with offal, while he was clearing a
plugged drain.
On the other hand it's very easy to see that the Carcano wasn't fired
that day, nor was it simply dropped carelessly behind a pile of
boxes. The cops who found the Carcano said that they had to remove
boxes that had been stacked over it, before they could see the gun.
( makes ya wonder how they had the faintest idea that the rifle would
still be on the sixth floor)
The fact that the rifle bolt had been closed on a spent shell that was
in the chamber reveals that the rifle was not fired that day. Photos
taken at the time the rifle was recovered show the bolt in the
position a Carcano bolt sticks at when the attempt is made to close
the bolt with a round in the chamber. The cops opened the bolt and a
live round fell out. That live round had to have been in the clip or
there would have been nothing to hold the clip in the rifle.
You really should get yerself a Carcano so you can can become familiar
with the rifle. Then perhaps you won't make more stupid
statements.
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 24 Mar, 03:57, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Gil Jesus wrote:
> > > On Mar 23, 2:01�pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > � �It doesn`t, I just pointed out the hypocrisy of the kooks using
> > > > information derived from the police questioning of Oz when it suits
> > > > them, but disregarding other things Oz told the DPD.-
> >
> > > Hey smokes-too-much-Bud:
> >
> > > How about the hypocrisy of using information that the cops said Oswald
> > > LIED about, but ignoring the information that indicated that Oswald
> > > was telling the truth, as in this case.
> >
> > Who said that nothing Oz supplied during the interrogations was
> > true?
>
> Wow!... Did Dud actually admit that Oswald told the truth?
No, he asked a question, idiot. You want another crack at it? "Who
said that nothing Oz supplied during the interrogations was true?"
> Is he
> finally starting to see the errors of his ways?....
Are you having trouble addressing what I wrote? It isn`t the truth
that Oz told that exposes him as a liar, it`s the lies he told that
do.
>.Perhaps he's
> realized that somewhere in the future his progeny may be reading what
> he's written.
Attention people of the future: Oswald killed Kennedy. Now get back
to your work at Spaceley Sprockets.
> It`s well known there were other rifles in the TSBD a few days
> > before the assassination. Only kooks believe that being in the TSBD
> > makes a person an assassin,
>
> Wow!... Wow!.... This is amazin,... Dud admits that just because a
> person was in the TSBD doesn't make that person an assassin.
Correct, I don`t think Mrs Reid was an assassin.
> Lner's
> have always pointed to the fact that Oswald was in the building as
> incriminating evidence...
If the shots came from that building, then it had to be someone in
that building that took the shoots, idjit.
> or that a weapon being in the TSBD makes
> > that weapon a murder weapon.
>
> Oh Lord, am I witnessing a repentance??... How many times have we
> tried to get the Dud to see this simple fact?? Simply because a
> Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor
> does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon. In fact the EVIDENCE
> indicates that it couldn't have been fired accurately that day.
JFK`s brain all over the backseat indicates otherwise.
David Von Pein
>>> "Are you referring to the pristine bullet that was found far removed from any victim of the gunfire?" <<<
That's one of the six pieces of ballistics evidence I was talking
about that is irrevocably linked to Oswald's rifle...yes, of course.
>>> "Is that what you mean by "linked"." <<<
So, is it your contention that Bullet CE399 is NOT "linked" to Rifle
C2766?
>>> "In your simple mind, is it enough for the bullet to be somewhere in the same hospital that the shooting victims were in?" <<<
As usual, a kook can't even figure out the extremely easy parts of the
"puzzle".
Walt must REALLY be the "husband" in VB's joke that mentioned in
another post:
"A man is caught in a bedroom closet--naked--by the husband of
the naked woman who was in the bed in the same bedroom. When asked by
the husband: "What are you doing here?", the naked guy in the closet
replies: "Well, everybody's got to be SOMEWHERE, don't they?"
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/aa35fa7dc32e45fa
Walt doesn't seem to sense any garden-variety type of "linkage" (or
coincidence) at all to a bullet from OSWALD'S RIFLE showing up on or
near the stretcher used by one of the two shooting victims who were
shot by RIFLE BULLETS within one hour of this bullet from OSWALD'S
RIFLE showing up in the hospital the victims were transported to. And
the victims just happened to be shot from a building that contained--
guess what??--OSWALD'S RIFLE!
And--guess what??--three spent bullet shells from OSWALD'S RIFLE show
up underneath the same window from where the victims were shot.
And--guess what??--large bullet fragments from OSWALD'S RIFLE just
happened to show up in the limousine that the two victims were riding
in when they were shot from the rear (from a building which contained
OSWALD'S RIFLE).
But, Walt's explanation probably goes something like this:
Well, gee, every 1940 Mannlicher-Carcano with serial number
C2766 has got to be SOMEWHERE, doesn't it? What's wrong with that
"somewhere" being the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository
Building? It doesn't mean anybody was SHOOTING that rifle on November
22nd, does it?
And, well, gosh, every Mannlicher-Carcano bullet from Western
Cartridge Company bullet Lots 6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003 has got to be
SOMEWHERE, doesn't it? Just because one of those bullets just happened
to show up in the same hospital where JFK & JBC were taken after being
shot (within an hour of the victims entering the hospital) doesn't
mean a damn thing. Oswald might have plugged MANY different people on
November 22nd who were taken to Parkland and ended up with the C2766
bullets falling onto their stretchers, with those stretchers ending up
in that first-floor hallway right by Governor Connally's stretcher.
Happens almost every blamed day of the week, for Pete sake!
>>> "And is the mere presence of a rifle in a building proof enough that it was the murder weapon?" <<<
Yeah, as I just said (via my "mock Walt-Kook" version of the
argument), every C2766 Carcano has got to be SOMEWHERE....right Walt?
>>> "Do you mind if I ask if your IQ is lower than your age?" <<<
Do you mind if I call you a kook for the fourteenth time today?
Gil Jesus
> � �If the drugs ever leave your system long enough, you can look above
> to see Gil used the phrase "Oswald`s claim". Who do you suppose that
> claim was made to? The same source that is considered unreliable about
> other things Oz said when questioned
Hey, "smokes too much Bud", just one question :
Was Oswald's "claim" about Truly's rifle a lie or the truth ?
Walt
You seem to have ignored this portion of my post, so I'll repeat it.
David Von Pein
What a bunch of double-talking nonsense/bullshit/horse manure/
gobbledygook/hogwash (take your pick of terms, they all apply).
Walt will continue to:
Ignore the shells.
Ignore CE399.
Ignore CE567.
Ignore CE569.
And, instead, rely on this mishmash:
>>> "The fact that the rifle bolt had been closed on a spent shell that was in the chamber reveals that the rifle was not fired that day. Photos taken at the time the rifle was recovered show the bolt in the position a Carcano bolt sticks at when the attempt is made to close the bolt with a round in the chamber. The cops opened the bolt and a live round fell out. That live round had to have been in the clip or there would have been nothing to hold the clip in the rifle." <<<
Walt is certainly a chaff-happy loon, isn't he? The above Walter-
quoted lunacy demonstrates that fact quite nicely indeed.
Great work, Walt. Just great.
tomnln
CE 399 NOT tracebale to CE 139.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6ce4f03d-18ee-4bc2...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5f10a7a0-eee0-43b5...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Bud
What is the source of this "claim", Gil?
Walt
> >>> "The fact that the rifle bolt had been closed on a spent shell that was in the chamber reveals that the rifle was not fired that day. Photos taken at the time the rifle was recovered show the bolt in the position a Carcano bolt sticks at when the attempt is made to close the bolt with a round in the chamber. The cops opened the bolt and a live round fell out. That live round had to have been in the clip or there would have been nothing to hold the clip in the rifle." <<<
>
> What a bunch of double-talking nonsense/bullshit/horse manure/
> gobbledygook/hogwash (take your pick of terms, they all apply).
>
> Walt will continue to:
>
> Ignore the shells.
> Ignore CE399.
> Ignore CE567.
> Ignore CE569.
>
> And, instead, rely on this mishmash:
>
> >>> "The fact that the rifle bolt had been closed on a spent shell that was in the chamber reveals that the rifle was not fired that day. Photos taken at the time the rifle was recovered show the bolt in the position a Carcano bolt sticks at when the attempt is made to close the bolt with a round in the chamber. The cops opened the bolt and a live round fell out. That live round had to have been in the clip or there would have been nothing to hold the clip in the rifle." <<<
I'm not surprised that the above would look like "mish mash" to you.
You obviously know nothing about rifles, and you certainly don't know
anything about a Mannlicher Carcano. And moreover you allow pseudo
experts to lead you by the nose. If you would just educate yourself
and LEARN how a Carcano operates then perhaps you wouldn't allow those
"experts" like Robert Frazier to make a fool of you.
I know your response will be that Frazier was one of Hoover's lap dog
"experts" and therefore he has more credibility than I..... However
I'd invite you to check with any real expert on the Carcano and ask
them if the Model 91/38 MC can be used as a single shot rifle.
Frazier told the Warren Commission that the MC didn't need an
ammunition clip and could be used as a single shot rifle, and that
statement exposed his ignorance of how a MC operates. Any young
private in the Italian army could have told him that it can't be used
as a single shot rifle.
Technically the MC could have a single cartridge loaded into the
chamber and fired .......but PRACTICALLY it's not something a person
would do if he's concerned about his safety.
At anyrate... Photos taken of the rifle at the time it was found
reveal that it could NOT have been fired that day.
Walt
> last paragraph above, to illustrate just how laughable (and desperate)
> Walter truly is:
>
> "Simply because a Mannlicher Carcano was found under a pile of
> boxes on the sixth floor does NOT mean that it was the murder weapon."
> -- Walt
Duh..... Von Pea Brain.... Let's just state the facts ...
A 6.5mm, Model 91/38, Mannlicher Carcano, Short Rifle was discovered
under a pile of boxes on the sixth floor of the TSBD about 1:22 on 11 /
222/ 63.
Dave The Pea Brain wrote:.... (The) "Mannlicher-Carcano found on
the 6th Floor --- was linked ballistically to bullets and shells that
were found in THREE DIFFERENT PLACES (the limo, the hospital, and the
same 6th Floor of the Book Depository where that Carcano rifle was
also found)"
Those bullets may have been ballistically linked to that
rifle ..HOWEVER they were NOT NOT linked to the victims. As the Pea
Brain himself wrote the bullets were found in THREE DIFFERENT PLACES
and NONE of those places were in the body of a victim.
Gil Jesus
> Gil Jesus wrote:
>
> > Hey, "smokes too much Bud", just one question :
>
> > Was Oswald's "claim" about Truly's rifle a lie or the truth ?
>
> � �What is the source of this "claim", Gil?
HERE IT IS FOR THE SECOND TIME BUDNIK:
Dallas FBI agent James Hosty discusses Oswald's comment to Capt. Fritz
that the TSBD supervisor, Roy Truly, brought a rifle into the building
a day or two before the assassination, and what the FBI found out when
they investigated Oswald's claim
David Von Pein
>>> "As [DVP] himself wrote, the bullets were found in THREE DIFFERENT PLACES and NONE of those places were in the body of a victim." <<<
Walt actually is implying (as incredible as this kooky logic is) that
since THREE SEPARATE AREAS of Dallas (all of which were inexorably
linked to JFK's murder -- the limo, the TSBD, and the hospital) were
littered with evidence that shows beyond all doubt that OSWALD'S
CARCANO RIFLE was the murder weapon that killed JFK....this TRIPLE
PLAY re. the evidence placement somehow means (per Walter) that
Oswald's Carcano was NOT involved in the crime AT ALL!
Don't you just love the backward logic utilized by ABO kooks like
Walt?! I can't get enough of it. (But my poor bladder sure can. LOL.)
Walt
Hey Maggot.....Where's the PROOF that any of those bullets are in fact
the bullet that struck any of the victims????
C'mon smart guy....show me the PROOF that the bullet that was found in
a different part of the hospital on a different floor caused any wound
in any victim...... Put up or shut up!
David Von Pein
Per Walt (and Rob), evidently we have to believe that O.J. Simpson is
innocent of the two murders he obviously committed in 1994 too (yes,
the jury voted him Not Guilty, but we all know we can ignore that
silly trial, because it was turned into a farce about the "N" word,
etc.).
So, when following Walt's logic, we have to ignore all of the
circumstantial evidence (and the DNA blood evidence) against Simpson
because the knife that O.J. used to kill his 2 victims wasn't found
embedded in one of the bodies (with Simpson's fingerprints on it)
after the murders.
And even if the knife HAD been found protruding from Nicole Brown's
body, we'd then have no choice but to declare Simpson innocent of Ron
Goldman's murder, because no knife was found in his body at the crime
scene.
This same (il)logic of Walt's evidently applies to the JFK case (and
its bullet evidence). Since none of the bullet fragments that were
found inside the three victims (JFK, JBC, & JDT) can be definitively
traced to LHO's guns, Walt thinks his hero named Lee Harvey is off the
hook.
Well, as Vince B. is wont to tell a jury -- "It's not quite that
easy!"
Regarding JFK's murder specifically -- C2766 bullet evidence is in two
places where the assassination took place (limo, TSBD)--and also
extending into the hospital where the victims were transported. And
yet, incredibly, some CTers still think that Oswald's C2766 rifle
cannot be linked to the murder.
I guess CE399 walked into the hospital on its own after being fired in
Oswald's rifle, huh Walt?
BTW, linked below are two pages of a July 1964 letter sent by the FBI
to the WC regarding the chain of custody for the stretcher bullet.
In the FBI letter, both Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright (who both
initially handled the bullet before it was turned over by Wright to
Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen at Parkland) are said to have
made remarks to the FBI to the effect that the bullet shown to each of
them on June 12, 1964, appeared to be the same bullet that each man
(Tomlinson and Wright) saw at Parkland on 11/22/63.
Hoover and his boys are just a pack of rotten liars here, right
Walty?:
Walt
> >>> "Where's the PROOF that any of those bullets are in fact the bullet that struck any of the victims?? C'mon smart guy....show me the PROOF that the bullet that was found in a different part of the hospital on a different floor caused any wound in any victim. Put up or shut up!" <<<
>
> Per Walt (and Rob), evidently we have to believe that O.J. Simpson is
> innocent of the two murders he obviously committed in 1994 too (yes,
> the jury voted him Not Guilty, but we all know we can ignore that
> silly trial, because it was turned into a farce about the "N" word,
> etc.).
Hey Pea Brain, do you have trouble staying focused on the subject
under discussion??
We are talking about the murder of President Kennedy ...not the OJ
Simpson case.
Apparently because of your limited ability to think, you can think of
only one way for the bullets to be found NEAR (but not in ) the
victims. Apparently you think the only way those bullets could get
NEAR the victims was by being fired from the rifle into those
positions.
Do you believe that it would be feasible for the bullets to have been
fired into bullet traps and then recovered and transported to Parkland
Hospital?? Or would it be feasible to fire a 6.5mm (.264") bullet
from a 6.5mm rifle into a bullet trap, and then recover the bullet and
then put that bullet in a .30 caliber sabot and reload it into a .30
caliber (.308") cartridge.
David Von Pein
Good job with all of the "feasibles", Walt.
IOW--ignore Occam (i.e., the "obvious") and reach for the absurdly-
complicated alternate scenarios instead.
Incredible.
Walt
I believe ya just cut yer throat with Oscar's razor...... Because it's
not at all "obvious" that the bullets found far removed from the
bodies of the victims were the bullets that caused the wounds.
aeffects
aeffects
you really are fucking stewpid, aren't ya...... Bugliosi really knows
how to pick'em.... you're bringing him lower than Reclaiming
History... keep up that marvelous Conspiracy Theorist work.... LMFAO!