Nellie Connally: A Good Anti-SBT Witness? Or Not?

27 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 5, 2007, 6:32:32 PM10/5/07
to
A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:

>>> "Nellie Connally's shot numbering and description totally blows apart the WC findings -- but you knew that, right? She unmistakably says all three {shots} hit, and both she and JBC flatly deny the SBT." <<<

DVP SAID:

Oh, indeed, I'm quite aware of Nellie's testimony and the way CTers
prop her up as proof that the SBT could never have happened. (Plus the
ultra-silly claim by those same CTers when they suggest that JOHN
Connally's eyewitness testimony is useful in the slightest way to aid
their SBT bashfests.)

Of course, in reality, John Connally's EYEwitness testimony is totally
worthless (for the purpose of determining WHEN John Kennedy was hit
with a bullet).

Why?

Because of these words spoken by John Connally himself:

"This almost sounds incredible, I am sure, since we were in the car
with them. .... I turned to my right, which was away from both of
them, of course, and looked out and could see neither, and then as I
was turning to look into the back seat where I would have seen both of
them, I was hit, so I never completed the turn at all, and I never saw
either one of them after the firing started. .... I could not see into
the back seat, so I didn't see either one of them." -- John B.
Connally; WC Testimony

Given the above comments by Mr. Connally himself, how in the world the
CTers can prop up JBC as a good "Anti-SBT" witness is beyond me.

And Nellie is actually a pretty fair "LN" witness too. And JBC is an
excellent pro-SBT witness, even though he never favored the theory.
But JBC's timeline for the shooting is letter-perfect in a "SBT"
manner. John Connally always said these things (which all "line up"
with the SBT and the general "Lone Assassin Firing From Behind"
scenario):

"I was definitely not hit by the first shot. I had time to think; I
had time to react {to the sound of the first shot}."

"Then I WAS hit."

"The third shot definitely did not hit me."

"All the shots came from over my right shoulder."

By the way, John Connally is on film saying that the SBT is, indeed,
"possible". That statement was made during the 1967 CBS-TV four-part
documentary "The Warren Report". More on that below....

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe

Regarding Nellie Connally's adamant anti-SBT stance -- That's
explainable in a lone-assassin light too, in my opinion. And in a very
believable "human nature" type of fashion.

In short -- Nellie just flat-out didn't see the INITIAL INVOLUNTARY
REACTIONS made by her husband just after Bullet CE399 tore through
JBC's body at frame #224 of the Zapruder Film.

In fact, if you watch this stabilized version of the Z-Film....

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov

....it's quite obvious that Nellie wasn't even looking at either JFK
or JBC until about Z235 or so, when her head turns sharply and
abruptly to the right. This, of course, is well after both men have
been struck by a bullet.

Just watch Nellie closely and then try to determine whether or not she
could possibly have noticed anything going on with either JFK's or
JBC's initial reactions to external (bullet) stimulus until about
Z235?

Nellie first notices her husband's distress as a result of JBC
screaming "Oh, no, no, no!"; but there's no way she saw JBC's "dropped
shoulder" at Z224; the open mouth and pained look on JBC's face at
Z225; or the quick up-and-down arm/hat flip beginning at Z226.

All of that stuff occurs in the blink of an eye, plus it's occurring
when Nellie isn't even looking in her husband's direction.

So it's not surprising to me that Nellie thought the men were struck
by separate bullets. I'm just disappointed that nobody thought to take
Nellie into a room someplace, sit her down, and have her watch (frame-
by-frame) a good, clear digital copy of the stabilized Zapruder Film
(like the linked copy above), in order for her to see for herself the
"JBC Initial Reactions" to a bullet striking him at Z-Frames 224 to
approximately 235.*

* = As far as I know, Nellie never engaged in such a Z-Film-watching
session prior to her death on August 31, 2006. But I could be wrong
about that assumption I suppose.

mnhay27

unread,
Oct 6, 2007, 5:09:31 AM10/6/07
to

This is all very interesting Mr Von Pein but there is a problem with
your theory. That problem is Mr Connally's earliest account given from
his hospital bed.

"We had just turned the corner, we heard a shot. I turned and looked
in the back and the PRESIDENT HAD SLUMPED, he had said nothing. Almost
simultaneously, as I turned I was hit and I knew I'd been hit badly."

So it seems that Connally's earliest account was not only different
from that which he gave later but was also devestating for the SBT.

Gil Jesus

unread,
Oct 6, 2007, 10:11:55 AM10/6/07
to
Good point mnhay and thank you for that quote from Connally.

Some time back, I posted a link to a video clip on my Youtube channel
where in Connally's press conference, the Governor implied that
Kennedy had slumped AT THE SOUND OF THE FIRST SHOT by saying that he
had turned to see of he could see Kennedy out of the corner of his eye
and could not see him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM-q2YOsbrc

In addition, witness S.M.Holland, who stood on the overpass, confirmed
Connally's account:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P21fB0T2kVI

Now, the LN idiots, who would LOVE to put JBC INWARD of JFK to make
their Single Bullshit Theory legitimate, are lost to explain HOW
Kennedy could be out of Connally's sight if Connally was inward of
JFK, turned and JFK did not slump ?

If Connally turned THAT much to his right to receive the entrance
wound near his right armpit from a bullet exiting the front of the
President's throat, how could he NOT see Kennedy if the President had
not yet already been well into his slump ?

Of course it's foolishness and anyone who quotes from the WC quotes
lies. Period.

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 6, 2007, 4:34:24 PM10/6/07
to
JBC got the "slumped" remark from his wife. I'm as certain of that as
I am that the SBT is a rock-solid fact.

For years on end, John Connally never ONCE ever said anything about
SEEING the President "slump" after his initial bedside chat with
Martin Agronsky. Never.

In fact, he always claimed he never saw JFK at all after the shooting
started.......

"This almost sounds incredible, I am sure, since we were in the

car with them. But...I never saw either one of them {JFK/Jackie} after
the firing started, and, of course, as I have testified, then Mrs.
Connally pulled me over into her lap and I was facing forward with my
head slightly turned up to where I could see the driver and Roy
Kellerman on his right, but I could not see into the back seat, so I
didn't see either one of them." -- John B. Connally; To the WC

Also -- If you'll listen closely to the Connally/Agronsky bedside
interview again, you'll note that John Connally never said that *HE*,
himself, physically SAW Kennedy "slump". Instead, JBC's exact words
are: "The President had slumped".

He got the "slumped" information from his wife, Nellie. He HAD to have
gotten it from her, because JBC was always adamant about never seeing
JFK AT ALL after the shooting started.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:06:11 AM10/7/07
to
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/bb2a705c4b32ed36

>>> "Wow, maybe she {Nellie C.} could not have seen the lapel flip from her point of view! But you overlook the fact that both Connallys studied the Zapruder frame slides very carefully." <<<

Obviously not carefully enough.

Nellie's head doesn't turn toward JFK until about Z250, well after
BOTH Kennedy and Connally have undeniably been hit by the same bullet.

Just one good hard look at this stabilized version of the Zapruder
Film (linked below) demonstrates that Mrs. Connally could not possibly
have known with 100% certainty that JFK and JBC were definitely hit by
separate bullets, as she always maintained. There's no way possible
she could have known that.

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov

And, based on the SUM TOTAL of all of the evidence, we KNOW that Mrs.
Connally was merely mistaken when she firmly maintained that her
husband and President Kennedy were struck by two different bullets.

How can we be sure of this?

Because --- The Single-Bullet Theory is a rock-solid FACT (based on
that aforementioned "SUM TOTAL" of evidence in the Kennedy murder
case).

And conspiracy theorists, as usual, will continually overlook this
powerful statement uttered by Governor Connally himself (in front of
millions of CBS-TV viewers):

GOVERNOR CONNALLY -- "The only way that I could ever reconcile my
memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-
Bullet Theory is....it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit
us both."

EDDIE BARKER -- "Do you believe, Governor Connally, that the first
bullet could have missed, the second one hit both of you, and the
third one hit President Kennedy?"

GOVERNOR CONNALLY -- "That's possible. That's possible."

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe

I guess we should just ignore the above "THAT'S POSSIBLE" statement
made by John B. Connally, Jr., in mid-1967, huh? Should we just
pretend he never said "That's possible" during that interview with
Eddie Barker?

Or was Mr. Connally, as many CTers probably believe, just going with
the flow of the "Official Government-sponsored LN line" when those two
words ("That's possible") came out of his mouth in 1967?

>>> "You are always wrong." <<<

Coming from Mr. Kettle (aka: Tony "Nothing Is Ever What It Seems To Be
With Respect To The Murder Of John F. Kennedy" Marsh), I'll take that
as a compliment. Thanks.

=====================================

"With respect to the second shot fired in Dealey Plaza, the "single-
bullet THEORY" is an obvious misnomer. Though in its incipient stages
it was but a theory, the indisputable evidence is that it is now a
proven FACT, a wholly supported conclusion. .... And no sensible mind
that is also informed can plausibly make the case that the bullet that
struck President Kennedy in the upper right part of his back did not
go on to hit Governor Connally." -- Vince Bugliosi; Pages 489-490 of
"Reclaiming History" (c.2007)

~~~~~

"You call it the theory; I call it the conclusion; it was a theory
until we found the facts; that's why I refer to it as the Single-
Bullet Conclusion." -- Arlen Specter; 1965

~~~~~

"It's a straight line....it {the SBT} is the only way it COULD have
happened." -- Dale K. Myers; 2004

=====================================

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

tomnln

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:03:31 AM10/7/07
to
Your own official records prove you WRONG.

JBC said he was hit between frames 131-134
(Volume IV page 145)

JBC's Dr's said he was hit at frame 136.
(Volume IV page 114)


"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191733132....@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...


>
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/bb2a705c4b32ed36
>
>
>>>> "Wow, maybe she {Nellie C.} could not have seen the lapel flip from her
>>>> point of view! But you overlook the fact that both Connallys studied
>>>> the Zapruder frame slides very carefully." <<<
>
>
> Obviously not carefully enough.
>
> Nellie's head doesn't turn toward JFK until about Z250, well after
> BOTH Kennedy and Connally have undeniably been hit by the same bullet.
>
> Just one good hard look at this stabilized version of the Zapruder
> Film (linked below) demonstrates that Mrs. Connally could not possibly
> have known with 100% certainty that JFK and JBC were definitely hit by
> separate bullets, as she always maintained. There's no way possible
> she could have known that.
>
> http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/film/Zapruderstable.mov
>
> And, based on the SUM TOTAL of all of the evidence, we KNOW that Mrs.
> Connally was merely mistaken when she firmly maintained that her
> husband and President Kennedy were struck by two different bullets.
>
> How can we be sure of this?
>
> Because --- The Single-Bullet Theory is a rock-solid FACT (based on
> that aforementioned "SUM TOTAL" of evidence in the Kennedy murder

> case.


>
> And conspiracy theorists, as usual, will continually overlook this
> powerful statement uttered by Governor Connally himself (in front of
> millions of CBS-TV viewers):
>
> GOVERNOR CONNALLY -- "The only way that I could ever reconcile my
> memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-
> Bullet Theory is....it HAD to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit
> us both."
>
> EDDIE BARKER -- "Do you believe, Governor Connally, that the first
> bullet could have missed, the second one hit both of you, and the
> third one hit President Kennedy?"
>
> GOVERNOR CONNALLY -- "That's possible. That's possible."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
>
> I guess we should just ignore the above "THAT'S POSSIBLE" statement
> made by John B. Connally, Jr., in mid-1967, huh? Should we just
> pretend he never said "That's possible" during that interview with

> Eddie Barker? (Or was Mr. Connally, as many CTers probably believe,
> just "towing the official Government-sponsored LN line" when those two
> words came out of his mouth in 1967?)

tomnln

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:04:30 AM10/7/07
to
JBC said he was hit between frames 131-134
(Volume IV page 145)

JBC's Dr's said he was hit at frame 136.
(Volume IV page 114)

Your own official records prove you WRONG David.

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1191733571.3...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:18:09 AM10/7/07
to
Gee, now the kook's gone even madder....he's got Connally hit at Z131,
before the limo even appears on Elm in the Z-Film.


tomnln

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:24:57 AM10/7/07
to
Obvious typo David.

Even with the typo, I gave Volume AND, page.
(something you're NOT familiar with)

Your own official records prove you WRONG.

JBC said he was hit between frames 231-234
(Volume IV page 145)

JBC's Dr's said he was hit at frame 236.
(Volume IV page 114)

Those are OFFICIAL

Aren't you familiar with the evidence/testimony David?

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1191734289.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

tomnln

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 1:29:08 AM10/7/07
to
Obvious typo David.

Even with the typo, I gave Volume AND, page.
(something you're NOT familiar with)

Your own official records prove you WRONG.

JBC said he was hit between frames 231-234
(Volume IV page 145)

JBC's Dr's said he was hit at frame 236.
(Volume IV page 114)

Those are OFFICIAL

Aren't you familiar with the evidence/testimony David?

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191734289.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...


> Gee, now the kook's gone even madder....he's got Connally hit at Z131,
> before the limo even appears on Elm in the Z-Film.
>
>

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1191734289.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

mnhay27

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 11:58:52 AM10/7/07
to

With respect, Mr Von Pein, whatever Connally later came to say does
not change the fact that he originally reported that the President
slumped with the first shot. Your little theory, that he got this
information from his wife, remains just that; a theory.
Unsubstantiated by ANY statements or testimonies. Whereas the fact
that Connally SAID JFK slumped with the first shot is just that; a
fact.

And I can't believe anybody would quote Dale Myers: The Walt Disney of
JFK Research! LOL

Cartoons solve crimes! LMAO

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 7, 2007, 4:03:03 PM10/7/07
to
John Connally never once said that he himself saw JFK "slump".....not
even from his hospital bed did he say that.

Keep trying though. Maybe some day you CTers will come up with some
way to logically explain how three different (disappearing) bullets
can replace the perfectly-reasonable SBT.

tomnln

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 12:36:31 AM10/8/07
to
http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm

Point # 8 Proves you WRONG David.


"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1191787383.8...@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

mnhay27

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 5:17:57 AM10/8/07
to

Semantics, Mr Von Pein. "I turned to my left to LOOK IN THE BACK SEAT--
the President had slumped."

You keep trying Mr Von Pein, maybe one day you'll give in to common
sense.
Do a little research and you'll likely discover that it's not at all
unusual for bullets to penetrate a body and not be found.

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 5:59:15 AM10/8/07
to
>>> "I turned to my left to LOOK IN THE BACK SEAT--the President had slumped." [JBC Quote] <<<


JBC, in his bedside interview w/Agronsky, was confused about some
things, wasn't he? (Considering the fact that Connally DIDN'T TURN TO
HIS "LEFT" at all "to look in the back seat" -- he turned to his RIGHT
to do that. And was always adamant about that RIGHT TURN to look into
the back seat, and was equally as adamant about never actually SEEING
John Kennedy at all. That "RIGHT turn" proof is in the Z-Film.)


>>> "You keep trying Mr Von Pein, maybe one day you'll give in to common sense. Do a little research and you'll likely discover that it's not at all unusual for bullets to penetrate a body and not be found." <<<


Including the TWO whole bullets that went into JFK's neck & back (via
the CT substitute for the SBT) and FAILED TO EXIT THE OTHER SIDE OF
HIS BODY???

Plus: NEITHER of these CTer "Wishful Thinking" bullets created ANY
SIGNIFICANT WOUNDS AT ALL.

Do a little research and come up with TWO bullets that stop on a dime
without hitting any solid objects in a human body.....and then both
missiles vanish without a trace. THAT I'm dying to see proven via a
previous case history.

Now, what were you just saying about "common sense"?

You anti-SBT CTers have got gonads, I must concede that fact...if
nothing else.

mnhay27

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 8:18:40 AM10/8/07
to

A possible scenario:

The first shot hit JFK in the back and according to inspection of the
wound at the autopsy did not penetrate any futher than a fingers
length. Where did this shot go? The autopsy surgeons postulated that
it worked its way out at Parkland Hospital during efforts to
resuscitate the President. In the absence of a better explaination, I
will accept this one. It is possible that this was the bullet found at
Parkland and later substituted for CE399.

The second shot hit Connally and broke in two when it hit the wrist. A
fragment from this bullet caused a superficial wound to Connally's
thigh (as testified to by Dr Shaw). The nose and tail were found in
the limo.

The third shot hit Kennedy in the head. A frangible bullet, it
exploded on impact leaving no significant part of itself intact and
distributing dozens of dust like particles throughout the skull. A
fragment from this round caused the wound to the throat - a wound that
was too small to be an exit for an intact 6.5 mm missile.

The fourth shot, fired simultaneously with the third, hit the curb on
the south side of Main Street and a fragment caused the wound to
James Tague. This bullet is unaccounted for even in the official
scenario.

cdddraftsman

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 9:34:17 AM10/8/07
to
On Oct 8, 5:18 am, mnhay27 <mnha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Do a little research and (Snipped)

We heard all those lines before from :
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2cncvvs&s=2
You don't sound any more convincing .

Sorry

tl

cdddraftsman

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 9:49:57 AM10/8/07
to
On Oct 7, 8:58 am, mnhay27 <mnha...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Whereas the fact that Connally SAID JFK slumped
> with the first shot is just that; a fact.
>
> > It may be a fact that he said it , doesn't mean that he saw JFK though
> > and the Zapruder film shows that he indeed didn't turn far enough around to
> > his right to see the first missed shot that was deflected by a tree branch .
> > About 3 seconds later their both hit and it isn't until the head shot as he lays
> > in his wifes arms that he's turned sufficiently around towards JFK to actually
> > see him .
> >
> > You need a course in the SBT , Logic and Memory :
> > Start here : http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/memory.htm
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/zaid.htm

>
> And I can't believe anybody would quote Dale Myers: The Walt Disney of
> JFK Research! LOL
>
> Cartoons solve crimes! LMAO
>
> > Sounds like your taking courses from Tom Rossley , Bone Head
> > Extrodinaire ? How about pulling your head out of your butt and repeat by
> > saying " A forensic recreation used all the time in the courts of law and
> > admissible as such " and you'd begin to be slightly more acurate in your
> > lopsided assessment of his work . If you want send me a picture of yourself
> > and I'll put it with the rest of the marroons here :
> > http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2cncvvs&s=2

cdddraftsman

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 9:56:25 AM10/8/07
to
On Oct 6, 10:29 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
> (Snipped)

Just because someone said something doesn't make it true asshole !
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2cncvvs&s=2

Wanna Exchange Insults ?
I'll bury your sorry ass just like I always have !

On Oct 7, 9:07 pm, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:
VIDEO'S ! VIDEO'S !VIDEO'S !VIDEO'S !VIDEO'S !VIDEO'S ! :

Mag30th :
" The Pristine bullet " This Video is for "
GJJdude "
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J45xnVcgTMY


Video's On The Assassination :
With No Bogus Hot Aired liars ......! :


Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 1 6.5 Carcano, Oswald rifle :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACT0aKWEAow&mode=related&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK Part 2 Carcano 6 shots, 11 seconds :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPrI7JnsKeo&mode=related&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 3 , Carcano 7 shots in 6.8 seconds :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-qQBl5ZuPc&mode=related&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 4 Gov Connelly's position :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lCNLa8a4sk&mode=related&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 5 "The Magic Bullet" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=om05TQYyuUI&mode=related&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 7, "The Badge Man" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adfkLKXmL6A
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 6 "The Magic Bullet" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOU3pvKkBU8
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 8 "Gordon Arnold" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NprUqYrLWVE&mode=user&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 9 "Case against LHO" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c8DDEhg6WQ&mode=user&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 10, The Tippit murder. :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpLkUp2j_mw&mode=user&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 11, Brenanns testimony :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTW72kYE6Zc&mode=user&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 12, Mac Wallace's fingerprint :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khA2XdGPQqk&mode=user&search=
Oswald assassinated JFK, Part 13, Head movement :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnYd2qgQnJk&mode=user&search=
Oswald shoot :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBeMaEwwvwU
The Kennedy Assassination - Beyond Conspiracy :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikIRB3lvFvw&mode=related&search=
Lining up the "magic" bullet :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kEh3Kgwhk0&mode=related&search=
Vincent Bugliosi - No Evidence for JFK / Oswald Conspiracies :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JktLkQbtVbE&mode=related&search=

Whadda Ya Mean Idiot ? McAdam's Made Me Cut Out All The Good Parts
and Here They Are Below :

Many decent folks here at acj have already told us about this live
Chatterroo Stumper-Room of Rossleys that requires you computer be
checked for the AIDS Virus after leaving his forum .


The story goes like this :


Your asked right off the bone by Rossley , in a belligerent , port
wine induced fit of anger and drunken tone of voice , if you support
the WC findings that says Rossley loves sheep more than he does
fouling up the JFK Assassination , In which case , If you say yes ,
your immediately called a felon and snipper zipper supporter , you
are
banished from his forum , which is about the best thing that can
happen , because if you listen to that mind numbing voice for more
than 2 minutes , you'll probably go brain dead as in ' Lights Out ' !
He apparently takes great enjoyment from hearing only his own feeble
minded opinion based accounts taken from the croch down , that he's
somehow spindled , mutilated , mashed and mangled into a un-
recognisable version of the events that happened that day in Dallas ,
that he's conjured from one too many session at his weegee board .


He allows no discussion of evidence and testimony that is not
strictly 1/3rd conspiratorial in nature , based upon 1/2 extreme
speculation , has at
least 2/3rd's innuendo and 4/5th's of it must be strictly
contradictory , for not only will he not accept it as a file
transfer , he won't be able to understand it ! .
:-( Picture a sad sak'0'nuts face )-:


This is because :


He feigns ignorance that the WCR is full of the truth and overwhelming
evidence of Lee Harvey Oswalds guilt . Evidence retained for the
historical record . This was to preserve a contemporanious account of
the confusion that is reflected in not only contradictions between
witnesses ,but witnesses sometimes contradicted even themselves !
Rossley has the gaul to twist this confusion into a conspiracy based ,
voodoo enhanced , religiospiratual account , that is at best , quasi-
history !


If you seek :


A better definition of winners and losers it's not worth the effort
and wasted time to talk to a person who uses the Death of a President
to discuss only his mumbo jumbo , hap hazard list of unfounded
speculation in this case , that reads like : ' Godzilla meets Anne
Frank ' .


The real value here :


Is in the fact that it is hilarious entertainment that relies upon
leaving no gutter un-scraped in the pursuit of finding out ' Who
Didn't Kill JFK " ?
.........tl

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 10:17:08 AM10/8/07
to
In article <1191835077.9...@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, mnhay27
says...

Actually, CT'ers believe in the FACT that not all bullets were found. The
LNT'ers and Trolls have a hard time admitting that simple fact.

They'd prefer to hammer CT'ers for "disappearing" bullets when they know quite
well that they can't account for one of *their* "three" bullets.

Amusing, really...

tomnln

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 11:19:45 AM10/8/07
to
FIRST Interview David.
FIRST Interview David.
FIRST Interview David.


"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1191837555.1...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...

tomnln

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 11:23:27 AM10/8/07
to

"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1191851397....@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...

We never see Anyone quoting You PERVERT.


mnhay27

unread,
Oct 8, 2007, 12:10:25 PM10/8/07
to

There are some strange people round here...

Just wanted to let it be known that I won't even bother debating with
idiots who have to resort to name-calling.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages