info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Watch Chickenshit Prove His Cowardice!!!
63 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 2:45:31 PM8/10/23
to
3. Another fact that, all by itself, is virtually conclusive evidence
proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
“significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
“through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
My firearms expert at the London trial, Monty Lutz, told me that “no
bullet traveling at 2,000 feet per second is going to start to tumble
or yaw on its own until around 200 yards. When Connally was struck he
was around 60 yards from the window, so the bullet had to have hit
something before it hit him, and other than Kennedy’s body, there was
nothing between the sixth-floor window and him. Not the oak tree, or
its leaves. Nothing.”
It has to be emphasized that at the time Connally was struck by a
bullet (somewhere between Z frames 210 and 222),* the oak tree to the
north of Elm close to the Depository Building was no longer in the
line of fire from the sniper’s nest to Connally’s body.
So Kennedy’s body was the only intervening object that the Connally
bullet could have first hit. HSCA physical scientist Larry M.
Sturdivan told the committee that the Carcano bullet was a “very
stable bullet, perhaps one of the most stable bullets that we have
ever done experimentation with.” He said that it would only start
yawing—and then very little, “perhaps less than a degree”—at “about
100 meters” (about 110 yards) and “if it had struck [Connally] without
having previously encountered another object, it [Connally’s back
wound] would never have been elongated. This bullet is too stable. It
would have had to be a nice round hole.”
Here's the quesition that Chickenshit will refuse to answer: What is
the "virtually conclusive evidence" that Bugs was talking about?
proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
“significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
“through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
My firearms expert at the London trial, Monty Lutz, told me that “no
bullet traveling at 2,000 feet per second is going to start to tumble
or yaw on its own until around 200 yards. When Connally was struck he
was around 60 yards from the window, so the bullet had to have hit
something before it hit him, and other than Kennedy’s body, there was
nothing between the sixth-floor window and him. Not the oak tree, or
its leaves. Nothing.”
It has to be emphasized that at the time Connally was struck by a
bullet (somewhere between Z frames 210 and 222),* the oak tree to the
north of Elm close to the Depository Building was no longer in the
line of fire from the sniper’s nest to Connally’s body.
So Kennedy’s body was the only intervening object that the Connally
bullet could have first hit. HSCA physical scientist Larry M.
Sturdivan told the committee that the Carcano bullet was a “very
stable bullet, perhaps one of the most stable bullets that we have
ever done experimentation with.” He said that it would only start
yawing—and then very little, “perhaps less than a degree”—at “about
100 meters” (about 110 yards) and “if it had struck [Connally] without
having previously encountered another object, it [Connally’s back
wound] would never have been elongated. This bullet is too stable. It
would have had to be a nice round hole.”
Here's the quesition that Chickenshit will refuse to answer: What is
the "virtually conclusive evidence" that Bugs was talking about?
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 3:49:28 PM8/10/23
to
On Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 2:45:31 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> 3. Another fact that, all by itself, is virtually conclusive evidence
> proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
> Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
So he did go on to explain and flesh out the concept and you were selectively quoting.
> 3. Another fact that, all by itself, is virtually conclusive evidence
> proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
> Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
> My firearms expert at the London trial, Monty Lutz, told me that “no
> bullet traveling at 2,000 feet per second is going to start to tumble
> or yaw on its own until around 200 yards. When Connally was struck he
> was around 60 yards from the window, so the bullet had to have hit
> something before it hit him, and other than Kennedy’s body, there was
> nothing between the sixth-floor window and him. Not the oak tree, or
> its leaves. Nothing.”
>
> It has to be emphasized that at the time Connally was struck by a
> bullet (somewhere between Z frames 210 and 222),* the oak tree to the
> north of Elm close to the Depository Building was no longer in the
> line of fire from the sniper’s nest to Connally’s body.
>
> So Kennedy’s body was the only intervening object that the Connally
> bullet could have first hit. HSCA physical scientist Larry M.
> Sturdivan told the committee that the Carcano bullet was a “very
> stable bullet, perhaps one of the most stable bullets that we have
> ever done experimentation with.” He said that it would only start
> yawing—and then very little, “perhaps less than a degree”—at “about
> 100 meters” (about 110 yards) and “if it had struck [Connally] without
> having previously encountered another object, it [Connally’s back
> wound] would never have been elongated. This bullet is too stable. It
> would have had to be a nice round hole.”
>
> Here's the quesition that Chickenshit will refuse to answer: What is
> the "virtually conclusive evidence" that Bugs was talking about?
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 4:01:46 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 12:49:26 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
>On Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 2:45:31?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> 3. Another fact that, all by itself, is virtually conclusive evidence
>> proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
>> Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>
wrote:
>On Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 2:45:31?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> 3. Another fact that, all by itself, is virtually conclusive evidence
>> proving the single-bullet theory is that the entrance wound in
>> Governor Connally’s back was not circular, but oval. Drs. Charles
>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>
>> My firearms expert at the London trial, Monty Lutz, told me that “no
>> bullet traveling at 2,000 feet per second is going to start to tumble
>> or yaw on its own until around 200 yards. When Connally was struck he
>> was around 60 yards from the window, so the bullet had to have hit
>> something before it hit him, and other than Kennedy’s body, there was
>> nothing between the sixth-floor window and him. Not the oak tree, or
>> its leaves. Nothing.”
>>
>> It has to be emphasized that at the time Connally was struck by a
>> bullet (somewhere between Z frames 210 and 222),* the oak tree to the
>> north of Elm close to the Depository Building was no longer in the
>> line of fire from the sniper’s nest to Connally’s body.
>>
>> So Kennedy’s body was the only intervening object that the Connally
>> bullet could have first hit. HSCA physical scientist Larry M.
>> Sturdivan told the committee that the Carcano bullet was a “very
>> stable bullet, perhaps one of the most stable bullets that we have
>> ever done experimentation with.” He said that it would only start
>> yawing—and then very little, “perhaps less than a degree”—at “about
>> 100 meters” (about 110 yards) and “if it had struck [Connally] without
>> having previously encountered another object, it [Connally’s back
>> wound] would never have been elongated. This bullet is too stable. It
>> would have had to be a nice round hole.”
>>
>> Here's the quesition that Chickenshit will refuse to answer: What is
>> the "virtually conclusive evidence" that Bugs was talking about?
>
> The shape of the wound.
What was the shape of the wound?
>> bullet traveling at 2,000 feet per second is going to start to tumble
>> or yaw on its own until around 200 yards. When Connally was struck he
>> was around 60 yards from the window, so the bullet had to have hit
>> something before it hit him, and other than Kennedy’s body, there was
>> nothing between the sixth-floor window and him. Not the oak tree, or
>> its leaves. Nothing.”
>>
>> It has to be emphasized that at the time Connally was struck by a
>> bullet (somewhere between Z frames 210 and 222),* the oak tree to the
>> north of Elm close to the Depository Building was no longer in the
>> line of fire from the sniper’s nest to Connally’s body.
>>
>> So Kennedy’s body was the only intervening object that the Connally
>> bullet could have first hit. HSCA physical scientist Larry M.
>> Sturdivan told the committee that the Carcano bullet was a “very
>> stable bullet, perhaps one of the most stable bullets that we have
>> ever done experimentation with.” He said that it would only start
>> yawing—and then very little, “perhaps less than a degree”—at “about
>> 100 meters” (about 110 yards) and “if it had struck [Connally] without
>> having previously encountered another object, it [Connally’s back
>> wound] would never have been elongated. This bullet is too stable. It
>> would have had to be a nice round hole.”
>>
>> Here's the quesition that Chickenshit will refuse to answer: What is
>> the "virtually conclusive evidence" that Bugs was talking about?
>
> The shape of the wound.
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 4:37:33 PM8/10/23
to
Chuck Schuyler
Aug 10, 2023, 4:40:14 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 4:43:57 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 13:37:30 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
> Oval...
Getting closer...
So according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was "virtually
conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
You may give as long an answer as you want, as long as it's preceded
by a definitive "yes," or "no."
Quote Bugliosi's answer to support your response...
wrote:
Getting closer...
So according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was "virtually
conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
You may give as long an answer as you want, as long as it's preceded
by a definitive "yes," or "no."
Quote Bugliosi's answer to support your response...
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 4:48:53 PM8/10/23
to
> So according to Bugliosi,
The shape of the wound spoke to the creation of the wound.
> it was this "oval" shape that was "virtually
> conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
If that was the entirety of the argument he could have just stopped there.
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:01:59 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 13:48:50 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
>> So according to Bugliosi,
wrote:
>> it was this "oval" shape that was "virtually
>> conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
>>
>> conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
>>
>> You may give as long an answer as you want, as long as it's preceded
>> by a definitive "yes," or "no."
>>
>> Quote Bugliosi's answer to support your response...
Non-answers deleted. So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval"
>> by a definitive "yes," or "no."
>>
>> Quote Bugliosi's answer to support your response...
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:04:05 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 13:40:11 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Descriptions of the wound are in the first paragraph...
You'll have to argue with Chickenshit over that. His claim is that I
was "selective(ly) quoting."
So Chuckles... what was the shape of the wound?
If you don't know, don't be embarrassed, just admit you can't answer.
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
You'll have to argue with Chickenshit over that. His claim is that I
was "selective(ly) quoting."
So Chuckles... what was the shape of the wound?
If you don't know, don't be embarrassed, just admit you can't answer.
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 5:17:19 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 5:18:25 PM8/10/23
to
"Oval, linear, elliptical, ovoid according to the passage you supplied. Can`t you read?"
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:19:30 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 5:25:13 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:25:36 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 14:18:22 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
> Fringe reset...
If Chuckles wants to play the game, **HE'LL** have to answer.
wrote:
If Chuckles wants to play the game, **HE'LL** have to answer.
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 5:28:04 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:35:03 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 14:24:18 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
Non answer deleted. So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval"
wrote:
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 5:36:14 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 14:28:02 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
Still no answer from Chuckles...
wrote:
Chuck Schuyler
Aug 10, 2023, 6:32:31 PM8/10/23
to
More arguing to argue from Ben. Eristic argumentation. Ben argues for conflict, never for clarity.
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 6:33:39 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 6:40:35 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 6:45:34 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 6:58:18 PM8/10/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 15:32:30 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> If you don't know, don't be embarrassed, just admit you can't answer.
Still no answer from Chuckles. What was the shape of the wound?
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 7:00:57 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 7:02:05 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 7:11:20 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 7:33:36 PM8/10/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 10, 2023, 7:42:13 PM8/10/23
to
Bud
Aug 10, 2023, 9:06:10 PM8/10/23
to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 11:10:48 AM8/11/23
to
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 18:06:08 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Buglisoi (sic), it was this "oval" shape that
Has nothing to do with this topic.
So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
wrote:
was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>
> All true. The HSCA...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>
Has nothing to do with this topic.
So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Bud
Aug 11, 2023, 1:32:38 PM8/11/23
to
No, because that was not the idea he was advancing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
> >
> > All true. The HSCA...
>
>
> Has nothing to do with this topic.
> So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA),
>it was this "oval" shape
> that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 2:20:27 PM8/11/23
to
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 10:32:36 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
> Did Bugliosi...
Nothing Bugliosi did or said could prevent your cowardice.
The question still remains unanswered: So, according to Buglisoi
wrote:
Nothing Bugliosi did or said could prevent your cowardice.
The question still remains unanswered: So, according to Buglisoi
(sic), it was this "oval" shape that was "virtually conclusive
evidence" of an SBT?
evidence" of an SBT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>>
>>> All true. The HSCA...
>>
>> Has nothing to do with this topic.
>>
>> So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>>
>>> All true. The HSCA...
>>
>> Has nothing to do with this topic.
>>
>> that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Still no answer from the proven coward.
Bud
Aug 11, 2023, 3:10:18 PM8/11/23
to
Can stop you from being a coward.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
> >>>
> >>> All true. The HSCA...
> >>
> >> Has nothing to do with this topic.
> >>
> >> So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
> >> that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Addressing of the points I made by this coward.
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 3:21:23 PM8/11/23
to
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:10:16 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>>>>
>>>>> All true. The HSCA...
>>>>
>>>> Has nothing to do with this topic.
>>>>
>>>> So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
>>>> that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Drs. Charles
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gregory and Robert Shaw, who attended Connally at Parkland Hospital,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> described the wound as “linear” and “elliptical” in shape, indicating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the bullet was out of alignment with its trajectory just before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> striking Connally’s body. The HSCA said that a factor which
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “significantly” influenced its conclusion that the bullet that struck
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Connally had first struck and passed through Kennedy “was the ovoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shape of the wound in the Governor’s back, indicating that the bullet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had begun to tumble or yaw before entering. An ovoid wound is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> characteristic of one caused by a bullet that has passed through or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> glanced off an intervening object…The forensic pathology panel’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusions were consistent with the so-called single bullet theory
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced by the Warren Commission,” to wit, that one bullet had passed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “through both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.”
>>>>>
>>>>> All true. The HSCA...
>>>>
>>>> Has nothing to do with this topic.
>>>>
>>>> So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
>>>> that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
So, according to Bugliosi (Not the HSCA), it was this "oval" shape
that was "virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Bud
Aug 11, 2023, 3:23:24 PM8/11/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 3:27:59 PM8/11/23
to
Bud
Aug 11, 2023, 3:31:10 PM8/11/23
to
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 3:35:17 PM8/11/23
to
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:31:08 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
Bud
Aug 11, 2023, 3:37:23 PM8/11/23
to
On Friday, August 11, 2023 at 3:35:17 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:31:08 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
I wish Ben would be a man and ask me a question.
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:31:08 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
Ben Holmes
Aug 11, 2023, 4:45:37 PM8/11/23
to
0 new messages