Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Corbutt Has REPEATEDLY Lied About The FBI Summary Report...
102 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 3:52:30 PM10/6/23
to
If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an
SBT - Corbutt can't seem to understand that simple fact.
And since he was terrified of having to defend Bugliosi, and ran away,
he pretends he doesn't need to answer me.
But his lies are posted for all to see, AND NOT ONE SINGLE BELIEVER
DARES TO TRY TO DEFEND CORBUTT'S LIE.
SBT - Corbutt can't seem to understand that simple fact.
And since he was terrified of having to defend Bugliosi, and ran away,
he pretends he doesn't need to answer me.
But his lies are posted for all to see, AND NOT ONE SINGLE BELIEVER
DARES TO TRY TO DEFEND CORBUTT'S LIE.
Gil Jesus
Oct 6, 2023, 5:04:37 PM10/6/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
It says it on the very first page:
> If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
"....three shots were fired. Two struck President Kennedy and one wounded Governor Connally." ( CD 1, pg. 1 )
Of course the idiot trolls either can't comprehend what is being said here.
The FBI didn't say that two shots hit Kennedy and one of these shots also hit Connally.
And then avoided saying where the third shot ended up.
This is what the trolls interpret it to mean.
But as usual, their interpretation is wrong.
The FBI gave a total number of shots fired, then broke them down:
3 shots fired
2 hit Kennedy
1 wounded Connally
-----------------------------------
That totals 3.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
No mention of a missed shot or a bullet splitting or any other nonsense.
3 shots,
2 hit the President,
1 wounded the governor
3 shots
The trolls claim that this doesn't preclude the SBT. It most certainly does.
These trolls time and time again misinterpret what the evidence says.
As far as Corbett goes, every time he posts something, you can believe it's a lie, especially when he doesn't back it up with evidence.
Bud
Oct 6, 2023, 5:20:54 PM10/6/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
Bud
Oct 6, 2023, 5:24:02 PM10/6/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:04:37 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
> It says it on the very first page:
>
> "....three shots were fired. Two struck President Kennedy and one wounded Governor Connally." ( CD 1, pg. 1 )
>
> Of course the idiot trolls either can't comprehend what is being said here.
I see no problem in what is being said.
> On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
> It says it on the very first page:
>
> "....three shots were fired. Two struck President Kennedy and one wounded Governor Connally." ( CD 1, pg. 1 )
>
> Of course the idiot trolls either can't comprehend what is being said here.
> The FBI didn't say that two shots hit Kennedy and one of these shots also hit Connally.
> And then avoided saying where the third shot ended up.
> This is what the trolls interpret it to mean.
> But as usual, their interpretation is wrong.
>
> The FBI gave a total number of shots fired, then broke them down:
> 3 shots fired
> 2 hit Kennedy
> 1 wounded Connally
> -----------------------------------
> That totals 3.
>
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
>
> No mention of a missed shot or a bullet splitting or any other nonsense.
> 3 shots,
> 2 hit the President,
> 1 wounded the governor
>
> 3 shots
>
> The trolls claim that this doesn't preclude the SBT. It most certainly does.
> These trolls time and time again misinterpret what the evidence says.
> As far as Corbett goes, every time he posts something, you can believe it's a lie, especially when he doesn't back it up with evidence.
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 5:29:00 PM10/6/23
to
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 14:04:36 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
The FBI report also makes it crystal clear that the shot hitting JFK
in the back only went in a short distance - IT DID NOT TRANSIT.
Morons are those who simply make up things, and can't support them
with citations to the evidence.
Corbutt is one such moron, but he isn't the only one - watch as not a
SNGLE other believer is willing to correct Corbutt's lie.
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
in the back only went in a short distance - IT DID NOT TRANSIT.
Morons are those who simply make up things, and can't support them
with citations to the evidence.
Corbutt is one such moron, but he isn't the only one - watch as not a
SNGLE other believer is willing to correct Corbutt's lie.
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 5:29:29 PM10/6/23
to
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 14:24:01 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 5:29:41 PM10/6/23
to
Bud
Oct 6, 2023, 6:15:02 PM10/6/23
to
John Corbett
Oct 6, 2023, 6:41:28 PM10/6/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:04:37 PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Person A and Person B are in a direct line with Person C.
Person C fires a shot at Person A and misses both Person A and Person B.
Person C fires another shot at Person A which goes through him and strikes Person B.
Person C fires another shot at Person A which also goes through him but misses Person B who
has already fallen to the ground.
How many shots did Person C fire?
How many shots hit Person A?
How many shots hit Person B?
Take your time. These are toughies.
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 6:43:49 PM10/6/23
to
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 6:45:19 PM10/6/23
to
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 15:41:26 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:04:37?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
NO STUPID!!! We don't need your hypothetical questions...
What we *NEED* is a citation for your claim that the FBI Summary
Report doesn't rule out the SBT.
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 5:04:37?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
What we *NEED* is a citation for your claim that the FBI Summary
Report doesn't rule out the SBT.
Bud
Oct 6, 2023, 6:51:14 PM10/6/23
to
> What we *NEED* is a citation for your claim that the FBI Summary
> Report doesn't rule out the SBT.
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 7:28:27 PM10/6/23
to
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 7:31:28 PM10/6/23
to
Chickenshit refuses to defend or refute Corbutt either.
No-one has stepped up to the plate to defend Corbutt's lie.
Bud
Oct 6, 2023, 7:45:08 PM10/6/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 7:31:28 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Oct 2023 12:52:28 -0700, Ben Holmes
> <Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
>
> >If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an
> >SBT - Corbutt can't seem to understand that simple fact.
> >
> >And since he was terrified of having to defend Bugliosi, and ran away,
> >he pretends he doesn't need to answer me.
> >
> >But his lies are posted for all to see, AND NOT ONE SINGLE BELIEVER
> >DARES TO TRY TO DEFEND CORBUTT'S LIE.
> Nothing has changed...
True, you`re still a blowhard.
> On Fri, 06 Oct 2023 12:52:28 -0700, Ben Holmes
> <Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
>
> >If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an
> >SBT - Corbutt can't seem to understand that simple fact.
> >
> >And since he was terrified of having to defend Bugliosi, and ran away,
> >he pretends he doesn't need to answer me.
> >
> >But his lies are posted for all to see, AND NOT ONE SINGLE BELIEVER
> >DARES TO TRY TO DEFEND CORBUTT'S LIE.
> Nothing has changed...
Ben Holmes
Oct 6, 2023, 7:53:10 PM10/6/23
to
David Von Pein
Oct 7, 2023, 12:53:37 AM10/7/23
to
The FBI Report of 12/9/63 did definitely determine (incorrectly, of course) that each of the 3 bullets fired by Oswald hit a victim (either JFK or Connally). This FBI conclusion is confirmed on Page 18 of the 12/9/63 FBI Report [linked below], which says (incorrectly, of course) that the bullet which entered Kennedy's upper back had "no point of exit"....
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
The silly FBI men (as of early December 1963 at any rate) evidently hadn't even bothered to read the official JFK Autopsy Report, which says, plain as day, that the bullet that entered JFK's back "made its exit" at the front of the neck.
I talk about the various errors in the FBI Report here:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/12-9-63-fbi-report.html
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
The silly FBI men (as of early December 1963 at any rate) evidently hadn't even bothered to read the official JFK Autopsy Report, which says, plain as day, that the bullet that entered JFK's back "made its exit" at the front of the neck.
I talk about the various errors in the FBI Report here:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/12-9-63-fbi-report.html
John Corbett
Oct 7, 2023, 8:42:40 AM10/7/23
to
I made it a point not to dispute the fact the FBI's initial conclusions were that the men were hit
by separate shots because I knew they were. I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted
passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
David Von Pein
Oct 7, 2023, 9:07:14 PM10/7/23
to
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:42:40 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> On Saturday, October
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Ergo, the passage cited by Gil from Page 1 of that same report is obviously attempting to get across to the reader that (in the FBI's opinion as of 12/9/63 anyway) Connally was definitely not hit by any of the bullets that struck JFK.
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/12-9-63-fbi-report.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/fbi-errors.html
> On Saturday, October
> I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
Well, no, not really. Unless you want to just totally ignore what the VERY SAME FBI REPORT said on page 18 of that SAME report, which states (incorrectly) that the upper-back bullet had "no point of exit" on JFK's body.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Ergo, the passage cited by Gil from Page 1 of that same report is obviously attempting to get across to the reader that (in the FBI's opinion as of 12/9/63 anyway) Connally was definitely not hit by any of the bullets that struck JFK.
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/12-9-63-fbi-report.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/fbi-errors.html
John Corbett
Oct 8, 2023, 7:51:04 AM10/8/23
to
On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:07:14 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:42:40 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> > On Saturday, October
> > I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
> Well, no, not really. Unless you want to just totally ignore what the VERY SAME FBI REPORT said on page 18 of that SAME report, which states (incorrectly) that the upper-back bullet had "no point of exit" on JFK's body.
>
> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Gil's link was limited to one page and one highlighted line from that page. My comments were
> On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:42:40 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
> > On Saturday, October
> > I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
> Well, no, not really. Unless you want to just totally ignore what the VERY SAME FBI REPORT said on page 18 of that SAME report, which states (incorrectly) that the upper-back bullet had "no point of exit" on JFK's body.
>
> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
directed specifically at that one passage and I was pointing out to him that the line he highlighted did not conflict with the SBT. Nothing more should be read into my comments than
that. I was not ignoring something that was not present in what I was addressing. Had Gil cited
the entire report, I would have addressed that, but he didn't. He was illogically concluding that
the one passage he highlighted conflicted with the SBT.
Chuck Schuyler
Oct 8, 2023, 11:31:30 PM10/8/23
to
On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 4:04:37 PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
> It says it on the very first page:
>
> "....three shots were fired. Two struck President Kennedy and one wounded Governor Connally." ( CD 1, pg. 1 )
>
> Of course the idiot trolls either can't comprehend what is being said here.
What's being "said" is that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK.
> On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 3:52:30 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > If the FBI Summary Report is accepted, there is no such thing as an SBT -
> It says it on the very first page:
>
> "....three shots were fired. Two struck President Kennedy and one wounded Governor Connally." ( CD 1, pg. 1 )
>
> Of course the idiot trolls either can't comprehend what is being said here.
>
> The FBI didn't say that two shots hit Kennedy and one of these shots also hit Connally.
> And then avoided saying where the third shot ended up.
> This is what the trolls interpret it to mean.
JFK conspiracy hobbyists like your fellow buff Ben Holmes think JFK and Connally may have been struck by up to six bullets, yet you and your fellow JFK Truthers feel no need to explain your vague claims. Why?
> The FBI didn't say that two shots hit Kennedy and one of these shots also hit Connally.
> And then avoided saying where the third shot ended up.
> This is what the trolls interpret it to mean.
>
> But as usual, their interpretation is wrong.
>
> The FBI gave a total number of shots fired, then broke them down:
> 3 shots fired
> 2 hit Kennedy
> 1 wounded Connally
> -----------------------------------
> That totals 3.
Ben says up to eight shots fired with six possible hits from three locations or more. Sky Throne/Flag says Oswald shot at the limo from the grassy knoll and scampered back inside the TSBD. He also thinks Tippit was killed in Dealey Plaza. Don Willis thinks the shots fired from the TSBD were fired from the fifth floor and the spent shells, etc. were quickly trundled upstairs for some weird reason. Sometime poster and 9/11 Truther as well as JFK conspiracy hobbyist, Boris the Truther, a/k/a David Drummond, thinks Oswald was complicit, but shuts up when pressed how. Gil, you fantasize about being Oswald's Johnny Cochrane and having the evidence thrown out in court for a trial which will never happen. You are like tiny children grabbing Lego blocks and snapping the pieces together in random configurations, each one convinced they've designed an Eiffel Tower.
> But as usual, their interpretation is wrong.
>
> The FBI gave a total number of shots fired, then broke them down:
> 3 shots fired
> 2 hit Kennedy
> 1 wounded Connally
> -----------------------------------
> That totals 3.
You are all different captains on different ships carrying different cargo in different directions to different ports on different oceans, yet you all pretend to be part of the same convoy: Team Oswald. And you insist on focusing on the preliminary FBI report.
>
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
>
> No mention of a missed shot or a bullet splitting or any other nonsense.
> 3 shots,
> 2 hit the President,
> 1 wounded the governor
>
> 3 shots
>
> The trolls claim that this doesn't preclude the SBT. It most certainly does.
Gil Jesus
Oct 9, 2023, 5:29:40 AM10/9/23
to
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
< more bullshit comments that were deleted >
The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
< more bullshit comments that were deleted >
The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
Chuck Schuyler
Oct 9, 2023, 10:07:05 AM10/9/23
to
On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 4:29:40 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>
> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
Now what, Mr. Hobbyist?
> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30 PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>
> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:34 AM10/9/23
to
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 21:53:36 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>The FBI Report of 12/9/63 did definitely determine (incorrectly, of course) that each of the 3 bullets fired by Oswald hit a victim (either JFK or Connally). This FBI conclusion is confirmed on Page 18 of the 12/9/63 FBI Report [linked below], which says (incorrectly, of course) that the bullet which entered Kennedy's upper back had "no point of exit"....
>
>https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Sorry stupid, I've already pointed this out. You are *NOW* calling
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>The FBI Report of 12/9/63 did definitely determine (incorrectly, of course) that each of the 3 bullets fired by Oswald hit a victim (either JFK or Connally). This FBI conclusion is confirmed on Page 18 of the 12/9/63 FBI Report [linked below], which says (incorrectly, of course) that the bullet which entered Kennedy's upper back had "no point of exit"....
>
>https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Corbutt a liar, and acknowledging the truth of what Gil pointed out.
You're going to lose Corbutt's respect if you keep telling the truth.
>The silly FBI men (as of early December 1963 at any rate) evidently hadn't even bothered to read the official JFK Autopsy Report, which says, plain as day, that the bullet that entered JFK's back "made its exit" at the front of the neck.
too dishonest to acknowledge this fact, and lurkers wouldn't know the
truth if they had you to rely on.
The Autopsy Report quite clearly underwent a number of revisions - we
can see the proof of this in the classified Executive Sessions... I've
discussed this before.
You're whining about the FBI contradicting a report that YOU CANNOT
SHOW WAS IN EXISTENCE AT THAT TIME.
If you can't post it here, AND DEFEND IT HERE, then there's no need to
cite your cowardice.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:34 AM10/9/23
to
On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 05:42:38 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:53:37?AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> The FBI Report of 12/9/63 did definitely determine (incorrectly, of course) that each of the 3 bullets fired by Oswald hit a victim (either JFK or Connally). This FBI conclusion is confirmed on Page 18 of the 12/9/63 FBI Report [linked below], which says (incorrectly, of course) that the bullet which entered Kennedy's upper back had "no point of exit"....
>>
>> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
>>
>> The silly FBI men (as of early December 1963 at any rate) evidently hadn't even bothered to read the official JFK Autopsy Report, which says, plain as day, that the bullet that entered JFK's back "made its exit" at the front of the neck.
>>
>> I talk about the various errors in the FBI Report here:
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blo
>
Here's the original:
******************************************************
> Corroborated by the FBI
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were
hit by separate shots.
******************************************************
Notice that Gil didn't say it was corroborated by "this passage" ...
he clearly cited the FBI's Summary Report.
You clearly stated that AN FBI REPORT ...
You lied.
Pretending that you've been saying something else all along is simply
how a liar tries to evade the consequences of his lying.
>and specifically at the passage he highlighted.
"Why do you keep citing **AN FBI REPORT** that doesn't say JFK and JBC
were hit by separate shots."
You're a proven liar, Corbutt.
>I made it a point not to dispute the fact the FBI's initial conclusions were that the men were hit
>by separate shots because I knew they were.
You cannot quote any evidence whatsoever for this outrageous lie.
>I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted
>passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
You're a blatant liar. You're trying to change what you said.
You can't.
It's been posted.
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 12:53:37?AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> The FBI Report of 12/9/63 did definitely determine (incorrectly, of course) that each of the 3 bullets fired by Oswald hit a victim (either JFK or Connally). This FBI conclusion is confirmed on Page 18 of the 12/9/63 FBI Report [linked below], which says (incorrectly, of course) that the bullet which entered Kennedy's upper back had "no point of exit"....
>>
>> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
>>
>> The silly FBI men (as of early December 1963 at any rate) evidently hadn't even bothered to read the official JFK Autopsy Report, which says, plain as day, that the bullet that entered JFK's back "made its exit" at the front of the neck.
>>
>> I talk about the various errors in the FBI Report here:
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blo
>
>My comments were directed at the link Gil provided
You're lying again, Corbutt
Here's the original:
******************************************************
> Corroborated by the FBI
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/page-1.png
Why do you keep citing an FBI report that doesn't say JFK and JBC were
hit by separate shots.
******************************************************
Notice that Gil didn't say it was corroborated by "this passage" ...
he clearly cited the FBI's Summary Report.
You clearly stated that AN FBI REPORT ...
You lied.
Pretending that you've been saying something else all along is simply
how a liar tries to evade the consequences of his lying.
>and specifically at the passage he highlighted.
were hit by separate shots."
You're a proven liar, Corbutt.
>I made it a point not to dispute the fact the FBI's initial conclusions were that the men were hit
>by separate shots because I knew they were.
>I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted
>passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
You can't.
It's been posted.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:36 AM10/9/23
to
On Fri, 06 Oct 2023 12:52:28 -0700, Ben Holmes
<Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
<Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
does indeed conflict with the SBT - and Corbutt starts lying about
ever denying it.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:37 AM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 02:29:37 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
Let's not forget Huckster, who's reading all this, and remaining
silent like the coward he is...
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
silent like the coward he is...
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:37 AM10/9/23
to
On Sun, 8 Oct 2023 04:51:02 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:07:14?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
The reference was to the the ENTIRE FBI Summary Report - you've
already acknowledged that in your very first lie.
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 9:07:14?PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:42:40?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
>>> On Saturday, October
>>> I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
>> Well, no, not really. Unless you want to just totally ignore what the VERY SAME FBI REPORT said on page 18 of that SAME report, which states (incorrectly) that the upper-back bullet had "no point of exit" on JFK's body.
>>
>> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
>
>Gil's link was limited to one page and one highlighted line from that page...
>>> On Saturday, October
>>> I was merely pointing out to Gil that his highlighted passage was perfectly compatible with the SBT.
>> Well, no, not really. Unless you want to just totally ignore what the VERY SAME FBI REPORT said on page 18 of that SAME report, which states (incorrectly) that the upper-back bullet had "no point of exit" on JFK's body.
>>
>> https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
>
The reference was to the the ENTIRE FBI Summary Report - you've
already acknowledged that in your very first lie.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:16:39 AM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 07:07:03 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 4:29:40?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 4:29:40?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
>> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>
>> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>
>> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>
>> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
>>
>> Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
Logical fallacy removed...
>>
>> Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
John Corbett
Oct 9, 2023, 10:18:42 AM10/9/23
to
one page you cited from that report, and specifically the line you highlighted. There is nothing
in that passage which is in conflict with the SBT. That passage says three shots were fired, JFK
was hit by two of those bullets and JBC was hit by one. According to the SBT, three shots were
fired, JFK was hit by two of those bullets, and JBC was hit by one. Perfectly compatible.
I made it a point not to say anything about the entire report. That report did not endorse the SBT
which is not surprising given that the SBT was developed after the FBI summary report was
written. There was no reason for the FBI to address or even consider the SBT because nobody
had thought of it at the time the report was written. It was only after months of viewing the
Z-film that the WC investigators began to see the problems with the three shots, three hits
scenario. The SBT was a resolution to those problems. Now, after we have had five decades
to view the Z-film and have modern viewing techniques available to us, we have picked up on
clues that were missed by the initial investigators and can be more precise in determining just
when the single bullet struck and the two victims reacted to the shot. Clinging to the
conclusions of the initial FBI summary report is sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the
things we have learned in the 60 years since the assassination.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 10:35:33 AM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 07:18:37 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 5:29:40?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Notice folks, that Corbutt DARES NOT quote the very first statement
and his very first response.
Corbutt's simply lying again...
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 5:29:40?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
>> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>
>> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
>>
>> Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
>
>Gil, this isn't about the FBI Summary Report.
This is PRECISELY what it's about.
>> < more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>
>> The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>> In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>> His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
>>
>> Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
>
>Gil, this isn't about the FBI Summary Report.
Notice folks, that Corbutt DARES NOT quote the very first statement
and his very first response.
Corbutt's simply lying again...
Chuck Schuyler
Oct 9, 2023, 1:46:09 PM10/9/23
to
John Corbett
Oct 9, 2023, 3:35:50 PM10/9/23
to
everybody else writes and then twist the rest, people would be more willing to converse with him.
But if he did that, he wouldn't be Yellowpanties.
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 5:57:52 PM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 12:35:49 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 1:46:09?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 1:46:09?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
>> On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 9:16:37?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 02:29:37 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
>>> <gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
>>>>< more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>>>
>>>>The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>>>>In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>>>>His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>>>
>>>>https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
>>>>
>>>>Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
>>
>>> Let's not forget Huckster, who's reading all this, and remaining
>>> silent like the coward he is...
Logical fallacies from cowards deleted.
>>> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 02:29:37 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
>>> <gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:31:30?PM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
>>>>< more bullshit comments that were deleted >
>>>>
>>>>The final word on what the FBI Summary Report said comes from J.Edgar Hoover himself.
>>>>In this phone call to LBJ, Hoover describes specifically what shot did what.
>>>>His description confirms what I said they reported in their Summary Report and is in direct conflict with the Single Bullet Theory.
>>>>
>>>>https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
>>>>
>>>>Corbett, Bud and Chuckles can suck it.
>>
>>> Let's not forget Huckster, who's reading all this, and remaining
>>> silent like the coward he is...
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 5:57:53 PM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 10:46:07 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Or maybe ...
Sorry stupid, no speculation allowed.
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sorry stupid, no speculation allowed.
Chuck Schuyler
Oct 9, 2023, 6:55:51 PM10/9/23
to
Ben Holmes
Oct 9, 2023, 6:59:20 PM10/9/23
to
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:55:50 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
Logical fallacy deleted.
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
0 new messages