The 45 Questions That Frighten LNT'ers - One by One (#4)
aeffects
Back by popular demand - the 45 Questions that terrify those who try
to defend
the Warren Commission Report. In the past, there have been only two
semi-serious
attempts to answer them, one by John McAdams, and one by 'Bud' (the
troll listed
below) - Both responses were basically denials of the facts in most of
the
'answers'.
But first, an important note:
**********************************************************************
Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum who's
only
purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to
change message
threads from discussing the evidence, to personal insults and attacks.
These trolls include (but are not limited to):
Baldoni
Bigdog
Bill
Brokedad
Bud
Burlyguard
Cdddraftsman
Chuck Schuyler
Chu...@amcmn.com
Curious
David Von Pein
Ed Dolan *
Grizzlie Antagonist
Justme1952
Martybaugh...@gmail.com
Miss Rita
much...@hotmail.com
much...@gmail.com
Sam Brown
Spiffy_one
Timst...@Gmail.com
Todd W. Vaughan
YoHarvey
Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they will
simply deny
the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, or
simply run
with insults. These trolls are only good material for the kill files.
* Eddie 'Disgrace' Dolan is an exception - he *should* be killfiled,
but he's
amusing! And being a former Marine, even a disgraced one, is a plus.
**********************************************************************
Another repost in it's entirety of the evidential questions that
LNT'ers and
trolls can't provide answers for:
4. Why did so many credible eyewitnesses point to the front of the
limo as the
source of shots being fired? If eyewitness testimony is unreliable,
and the
claim is made that echoes were what was being heard, why were so many
eyewitnesses specific to the location? IOW’s, why didn’t anyone
specify a shot
from the left?
It won't surprise most people to understand that all the eyewitness
reports put
the shot origins in locations that can be understood as the TSBD and
the Grassy
Knoll. But what the LNT'ers can't do is point to all those people who
*must*
have described shots coming from *other* directions... after all, one
of their
favorite explanations for the second location is "echoes"... where
would real
echoes be coming from? Buildings, of course. So where are they?
And most damaging of all, how can they explain those few eyewitnesses
who
reported shots from both locations? (They can't... all they seem
capable of
doing is pointing out how few of them did so - a sad argument when
it's obvious
that so many people were *NOT* asked where the shots came from.)
Once again the evidence points directly to a conspiracy, and
contradicts the
Warren Commission's Report.
Steve
Dr. Healey,
Sorry it took so long to respond to such an easy question but after I
saw you compile a list of people who resort to insults rather than
address the issues and YOUR name didn't lead the list I fell on the
floor laughing for nearly 45 minutes, knocking over my computer chair
in the process. I read a similar list recently compiled by O.J.
Simpson listing men he doesn't admire because they don't treat women
with the proper respect.
I certainly hope that ALL of your questions are this simple and
logical. When I heard of your magical list of 45 questions I
mistakenly thought they were good points that would be tough to
address.
Here is the answer....drumroll please....eyewitnesses and earwitnesses
are OFTEN fooled by a variety of factors. You see Davy, that is WHY
we have investigations in which bullet wounds, spent cartridges,
fingerprints, trajectories of entrance and exit wounds, recovered
slugs or portions thereof are examined and plugged into the big
picture. ALL of these factors point to the real criminal. Conspiracy
crazies don't understand that ALL evidence must be examined together
to point to the guilty person. When evidence is fragmented and
examined as if it stood alone then there soon develops a bizarre
scenerio in which five, six, or seven different gunmen are all firing
at the President since you think you have found evidence that points
to different gunmen. But that is illogical and ridiculous to begin
with. People thought they heard shots coming from different
directions, however when Kennedy and Connally were examined we learned
that these ear witnesses were mistaken, there were NO gunshots coming
from the right ffont--none. Those that thought there were simply
mistaken. Now, on the other hand, when the TSBD workers locted on the
5th floor directly beneath the 6th floor SE corner window testified
that they heard three shots coming from directly above their heads,
they were 100% correct, because later investigation corroborated their
testimony. The angle of entry lined up perfectly with that spot,
three cartridge cases were found which matched their testimony, a
rifle and rifle bag was found on that floor, and the palm prints of
the suspected gunmen were also found where they said. Therefore some
were correct and others were incorrect.
Welcome to reality.
aeffects
ahh, here we go -- lego man, Steve-o-reno appears and the same old
hogwash. Ya need a different handler troll.... Or a new script!
You see Davy, that is WHY
> we have investigations in which bullet wounds, spent cartridges,
> fingerprints, trajectories of entrance and exit wounds, recovered
> slugs or portions thereof are examined and plugged into the big
> picture. ALL of these factors point to the real criminal. Conspiracy
> crazies don't understand that ALL evidence must be examined together
> to point to the guilty person. When evidence is fragmented and
> examined as if it stood alone then there soon develops a bizarre
> scenerio in which five, six, or seven different gunmen are all firing
> at the President since you think you have found evidence that points
> to different gunmen. But that is illogical and ridiculous to begin
> with. People thought they heard shots coming from different
> directions, however when Kennedy and Connally were examined we learned
> that these ear witnesses were mistaken, there were NO gunshots coming
> from the right ffont--none. Those that thought there were simply
> mistaken. Now, on the other hand, when the TSBD workers locted on the
> 5th floor directly beneath the 6th floor SE corner window testified
> that they heard three shots coming from directly above their heads,
> they were 100% correct, because later investigation corroborated their
> testimony. The angle of entry lined up perfectly with that spot,
> three cartridge cases were found which matched their testimony, a
> rifle and rifle bag was found on that floor, and the palm prints of
> the suspected gunmen were also found where they said. Therefore some
> were correct and others were incorrect.
Holes everywhere troll.....now you've switched to the Dale Myers
school of case closed nonsense..... Steve-o-reno you more than
dependable, of course your also full of shit!
> Welcome to reality.
what we have here son is 45 consecutive years of morons shining up the
WCR, that's your reality. Quite frankly, its a thankless LN task
defending the un-defendable
Steve
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Since you didn't take issue specifically with a single thing I pointed
out I assume I have sufficiently answered that one. Do you have any
more you need clarification on?
I would LOVE another one. These are easy.
YoHarvey
Steve? You are missing the point however. There are no responses
that will EVER satisfy these kooks....none. Like the CT's that
frequent this newsgroup, it's an exercise in futility. They don't
want answers. They want to continue to dwell, as they have most of
their lives in their conspiracy fantasies. This is Healys life!
Imagine that? lol
justm...@gmail.com
Along with what Yoharvey said, don't ever expect Healy to come back
with a rebuttal of any kind except incoherent blabbing. Healy couldn't
even attempt to answer one of his masters questions, let alone debate
one of them. Healy hasn't got a clue what they even mean.
BTW Steve, these are Ben Holme's 45 questions, Healy asked permission
to post them again for the 10th time. Apparently Healy is trying to
impress the lurkers into thinking he actually knows something other
then Kennedys name was John FRANCIS Kennedy. LOL Nuff' said.
aeffects
son I don't feed trolls, wha-zmatta wif you shithead -- utter
contempt, others want to debate you dipshits that's their
business.....
> I would LOVE another one. These are easy.
I should think so, they've been available for nearly 2 years now....,
you been living in a cave shithead, or perhaps sharing cdddraftsman
(aka Tom Lowry) Los Angeles-Rosemead cemetery drop-in crypt?
aeffects
sitdown Fast Eddy..... Vietnam Veteran Impersonators not welcomed
here.....
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>On Apr 9, 12:12=A0pm, YoHarvey <bailey...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 9, 2:40=A0pm, Steve <sahist...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 9, 10:40=A0am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Apr 9, 9:05=A0am, Steve <sahist...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > On Apr 9, 12:27=A0am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > The 45 Questions That Frighten LNT'ers - One by One (#2)
>>
>try
>> > > > > to defend
>> > > > > the Warren Commission Report. In the past, there have been only t=
>wo
>> > > > > semi-serious
>> > > > > attempts to answer them, one by John McAdams, and one by 'Bud' (t=
>he
>> > > > > troll listed
>> > > > > below) - Both responses were basically denials of the facts in mo=
>st of
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > 'answers'.
>>
>> > > > > But first, an important note:
>>
>*****
>> > > > > Important Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this forum =
>who's
>> > > > > only
>> > > > > purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and attempt to
>> > > > > change message
>l
>> > > > > simply deny
>> > > > > the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided before, =
>or
>> > > > > simply run
>> > > > > with insults. These trolls are only good material for the kill fi=
>les.
>>
>> > > > > * Eddie 'Disgrace' Dolan is an exception - he *should* be killfil=
>ed,
>> > > > > but he's
>> > > > > amusing! And being a former Marine, even a disgraced one, is a pl=
>us.
>> > > > > *****************************************************************=
>*****
>>
>> > > > > Another repost in it's entirety of the evidential questions that
>> > > > > LNT'ers and
>> > > > > trolls can't provide answers for:
>>
>e
>> > > > > limo as the
>> > > > > source of shots being fired? If eyewitness testimony is unreliabl=
>e,
>> > > > > and the
>> > > > > claim is made that echoes were what was being heard, why were so =
>many
>> > > > > eyewitnesses specific to the location? IOW=92s, why didn=92t anyo=
>ne
>> > > > > specify a shot
>> > > > > from the left?
>>
>ss
>> > > > > reports put
>> > > > > the shot origins in locations that can be understood as the TSBD =
>and
>> > > > > the Grassy
>> > > > > Knoll. =A0But what the LNT'ers can't do is point to all those peo=
>ple who
>> > > > > *must*
>> > > > > have described shots coming from *other* directions... after all,=
> one
>> > > > > of their
>> > > > > favorite explanations for the second location is "echoes"... wher=
>e
>> > > > > would real
>> > > > > echoes be coming from? =A0Buildings, of course. =A0So where are t=
>hey?
>>
>> > > > > And most damaging of all, how can they explain those few eyewitne=
>sses
>> > > > > who
>> > > > > reported shots from both locations? =A0(They can't... all they se=
>em
>> > > > > capable of
>> > > > > doing is pointing out how few of them did so - a sad argument whe=
>n
>> > > > > it's obvious
>> > > > > that so many people were *NOT* asked where the shots came from.)
>>
>> > > > > Once again the evidence points directly to a conspiracy, and
>> > > > > contradicts the
>> > > > > Warren Commission's Report.
>>
>> > > > Dr. Healey,
>>
> I
>> > > > saw you compile a list of people who resort to insults rather than
>> > > > address the issues and YOUR name didn't lead the list I fell on the
>ir
>> > > > in the process. =A0I read a similar list recently compiled by O.J.
>> > > > Simpson listing men he doesn't admire because they don't treat wome=
>n
>> > > > with the proper respect.
>>
>> > > > I certainly hope that ALL of your questions are this simple and
>> > > > mistakenly thought they were good points that would be tough to
>> > > > address.
>>
>> > > > Here is the answer....drumroll please....eyewitnesses and
>> > > > earwitnesses are OFTEN fooled by a variety of factors.
The question, of course, ALREADY dealt with this objection, and Steve was too
stupid to notice.
Why is it, Steve, that you were too stupid to *READ* the question and understand
it before spitting out the predictable "explanation"?
If eyewitnesses *are* unreliable, then how do you explain that just two
locations can account for all the reports? Why didn't anyone report shots from
the buildings on the left, for example?
Your silly answer doesn't even *begin* to answer the question, and thus, once
again, it's illustrated that the evidence DOES NOT support your theory.
We don't even have to get into the fact that your basic thesis is wrong.
>> > > ahh, here we go -- lego man, Steve-o-reno appears and the same old
>> > > hogwash. Ya need a different handler troll.... Or a new script!
>>
>> > > You see Davy, that is WHY
>>
>> > > > we have investigations in which bullet wounds, spent cartridges,
>> > > > fingerprints, trajectories of entrance and exit wounds, recovered
>> > > > slugs or portions thereof are examined and plugged into the big
>> > > > picture. ALL of these factors point to the real criminal.
No, they don't. Which illustrates yet again that LNT'ers are required to lie to
make their case.
As merely one example, a fingerprint which COULD NOT BE MATCHED to LHO, or any
TSBD worker was found in the 'SN', and never identified.
The "trajectories" you speak of are sheerest nonsense, as I'm sure you know.
>> > > > Conspiracy
>> > > > crazies don't understand that ALL evidence must be examined together
>> > > > to point to the guilty person.
Au contraire! For unlike liars such as yourself, CT'ers recognize that much of
the evidence conflicts with each other, and looks for how the evidence can be
reconciled.
>> > > > When evidence is fragmented and
>> > > > examined as if it stood alone then there soon develops a bizarre
>> > > > scenerio in which five, six, or seven different gunmen are all firing
>> > > > at the President since you think you have found evidence that points
>> > > > to different gunmen. But that is illogical and ridiculous to begin
>> > > > with.
Indeed, that's why you raise such strawmen. What you *CAN'T* do is cite any
CT'er who acts this way.
>> > > > People thought they heard shots coming from different
>> > > > directions,
Two different directions... do try to be honest.
>> > > > however when Kennedy and Connally were examined we learned
>> > > > that these ear witnesses were mistaken, there were NO gunshots coming
>> > > > from the right ffont--none.
This is, of course, and outright lie, and I'm sure you know it. There was *NO*
medical determination BASED ON A PRIMARY EXAMINATION OF THE WOUND that stated
that JFK was not also shot from the front.
>> > > > Those that thought there were simply
>> > > > mistaken.
MR BELIN: "How many shots did you hear, if you remember?"
MR EDWARDS: "Well, I heard one more than was fired, I believe."
The FBI, as early as Saturday - was already *telling* eyewitnesses that they
only heard three shots.
And the FBI intimidation of eyewitnesses is well-known, if denied by people such
as yourself.
>> > > > Now, on the other hand, when the TSBD workers locted on the
>> > > > 5th floor directly beneath the 6th floor SE corner window testified
>> > > > that they heard three shots coming from directly above their heads,
>> > > > they were 100% correct,
The problems with this bit of "evidence" are overwhelming, as you well know.
To begin with, their actions spoke louder than their words, they ran to where
they could get a better look at the GK... as you well know.
You accuse CT'ers of cherry-picking the evidence, and looking at just small
pieces of it, yet it's clear *YOU* that's doing it.
>> > > > because later investigation corroborated their
>> > > > testimony.
No it didn't. The "solution" of three shots was formulated *BEFORE* the
testimony of these three men, as you well know.
>> > > > The angle of entry lined up perfectly with that spot,
Untrue.
>> > > > three cartridge cases were found which matched their testimony,
One which could never have been fired from that weapon...
>> > > > a
>> > > > rifle and rifle bag was found on that floor,
A "rifle bag" now, is it?
>> > > > and the palm prints of
>> > > > the suspected gunmen were also found where they said.
Despite the fact that the FBI couldn't find it.
>> > > > Therefore some
>> > > > were correct and others were incorrect.
Some eyewitnesses corroborated the official story, and others were simply
suppressed.
>> > > Holes everywhere troll.....now you've switched to the Dale Myers
>> > > school of case closed nonsense..... Steve-o-reno you more than
>> > > dependable, of course your also full of shit!
Yep... if these are the best answers that the LNT'er community can come up
with, the next poll of the American people will put a belief in conspiracy above
95%.
>> > > > Welcome to reality.
>>
>> > > what we have here son is 45 consecutive years of morons shining up the
>> > > WCR, that's your reality. Quite frankly, its a thankless LN task
>> > > defending the un-defendable- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > Since you didn't take issue specifically with a single thing I pointed
>> > out I assume I have sufficiently answered that one. Do you have any
>> > more you need clarification on?
>>
>> > I would LOVE another one. These are easy.
>>
>> Steve? You are missing the point however. There are no responses
>> that will EVER satisfy these kooks....none. Like the CT's that
>> frequent this newsgroup, it's an exercise in futility. They don't
>> want answers. They want to continue to dwell, as they have most of
>> their lives in their conspiracy fantasies. This is Healys life!
>> Imagine that? lol
>
>sitdown Fast Eddy..... Vietnam Veteran Impersonators not welcomed
>here.....
Isn't it downright amazing how many liars there are to be found on the LNT'er
side of the camp?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
David Von Pein
>>> "If eyewitnesses *are* unreliable, then how do you explain that just two locations can account for all the reports? Why didn't anyone report shots from the buildings on the left, for example?" <<<
It's just lucky for you kooks that the sound of Oswald's three shots
from the TSBD sounded to many witnesses like they were ALL coming from
the Grassy Knoll area (which, conveniently for you conspiracy-
promoting kooks, is an area where you want to pretend a gunman or
gunmen were hidden on 11/22/63).
Of course, not even most CT clowns think that THREE separate shots
were fired from the Knoll area (although Rossley might be an exception
to this rule)....which means that the most-logical and reasonable
explanation (given the fact that exactly THREE bullet shells were
found in Oswald's Nest in the TSBD) is that the witnesses who claimed
they heard ALL of the shots from the Knoll area were obviously being
misled by the unique acoustical pattern that existed in Dealey Plaza
that day, with those "All Shots Came From The Knoll" witnesses (which
is almost 100% of the "Knoll" witnesses) obviously hearing ONLY
Oswald's three gunshots from the Book Depository Building.
aeffects
oh my goodness, the Reitzes version showed up, with .john mcadams
drivel, what else.... sigh!
Nad-up hon!
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>On Apr 9, 2:04=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> "If eyewitnesses *are* unreliable, then how do you explain that just =
>two locations can account for all the reports? =A0Why didn't anyone report =
>shots from the buildings on the left, for example?" <<<
>>
>> It's just lucky
So an appeal to sheer "luck" is the best you can do?
Sorry to say, this isn't going to be an explanation that the average person will
be able to swallow.
>> for you kooks that the sound of Oswald's three shots
>> from the TSBD sounded to many witnesses like they were ALL coming from
>> the Grassy Knoll area
Ignoring, of course, the FACT that the shots sounded different, and that some
eyewitnesses in Dealey Plaza pointed to both locations.
They must have been lucky too...
>> (which, conveniently for you conspiracy-
>> promoting kooks, is an area where you want to pretend a gunman or
>> gunmen were hidden on 11/22/63).
It's the eyewitnesses who were *THERE* that day that believe a gunman was at the
GK.
This is a problem you simply cannot get around. You have to label anyone who
was there a "kook".
Indeed, you can't name *ANY* eyewitness that you accept *all* of their testimony
& statements made.
>> Of course, not even most CT clowns think that THREE separate shots
>> were fired from the Knoll area
Of course not... that's not what the evidence shows.
>> (although Rossley might be an exception
>> to this rule)....which means that the most-logical and reasonable
>> explanation
You'll have to stop right there ... anytime a kook begins to speak of the
"most-logical and reasonable explanation", we know a lie is coming up.
>> (given the fact that exactly THREE bullet shells were
>> found in Oswald's Nest in the TSBD)
Actually, the evidence supports *two*.
>> is that the witnesses who claimed
>> they heard ALL of the shots from the Knoll area
Hidden presumption: Only three shots were fired.
>> were obviously being
>> misled by the unique acoustical pattern that existed in Dealey Plaza
>> that day,
Yep... unique indeed. Echoes didn't come from buildings, they came from
nothing.
>> with those "All Shots Came From The Knoll" witnesses (which
>> is almost 100% of the "Knoll" witnesses) obviously hearing ONLY
>> Oswald's three gunshots from the Book Depository Building.
Presumption again. Equally speculative: All the shots were fired from the GK,
but *THOSE* shells were picked up. The shells "found" in the TSBD were to frame
a patsy.
Just as speculative, and equally valid based on the SAME evidence you accept.
>oh my goodness, the Reitzes version showed up, with .john mcadams
>drivel, what else.... sigh!
>
>Nad-up hon!
The trolls are hating life... keep the 45 Questions coming...
YoHarvey
> In article <2b7d0cf5-6528-46e0-b16a-b6317ad4c...@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Healy? You have your oders from Holmes. Get to it toots. And before
quitting, clean Holmes toilets and kiss his ass. Remember, Holmes
will NOT allow you to discuss his "lady in yellow pants" bullshit.
Mums the word on that one. Holmes can dodge it all my himself.
David Von Pein
Remember, Mr. Kook (Ben) -- you've got me killfiled.
(Maybe the kook/pussy forgot about that.)
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6e0afa37-1dcc-4a43...@r15g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
David isn't aware that as of midnight the FBI was reporting only TWO (2)
shells were recovered from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
HOW could you have Missed that David?
Do you depend on Mcadams for ALL of your knowledge on the subject?
David Von Pein
>>> "David isn't aware that as of midnight the FBI was reporting only TWO (2) shells were recovered from the 6th floor of the TSBD." <<<
Peek inside Fritz's desk drawer, Tom.
tomnln
>
>
>>>> "David isn't aware that as of midnight the FBI was reporting only TWO
>>>> (2) shells were recovered from the 6th floor of the TSBD." <<<
>
> Peek inside Fritz's desk drawer, Tom.
Are you accusing Fritz of "Witholding Evidence"???
That's a Felony ! ! !
Just How Many Felonies do you CONDONE?
DIDJA hear McAdams choke ON THESE?>>>
http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm
aeffects
> "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:9611303e-c6e5-47e9...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >>>> "David isn't aware that as of midnight the FBI was reporting only TWO
> >>>> (2) shells were recovered from the 6th floor of the TSBD." <<<
>
> > Peek inside Fritz's desk drawer, Tom.
>
> Are you accusing Fritz of "Witholding Evidence"???
>
> That's a Felony ! ! !
>
> Just How Many Felonies do you CONDONE?
David VonPein? He hasn't a clue, Tom....