There's Hope For John Corbutt!

[Ben Holmes]

Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He
could possibly lose some weight.

[BT George]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 9:58:38 AM UTC-6, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He
> could possibly lose some weight.

Ahhh. This brings back pleasant memories of a similar commentary on the importance of getting help before it's too late:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/dv73v8RJGAQ/m/4yV_BK8lLAAJ

[Gil Jesus]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.

I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.

I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.

Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".
He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.
He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.

Corbett believes in things that can't be proven. Speculations made by David Von Pein.
Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet ?

Here's John Connally saying that as the crowds thinned out, he was re-adjusting his seating position.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-straightening-up.mp4

[David Von Pein]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:47:07 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet?

Is it possible for the anti-SBTers to exhibit MORE denial than the examples displayed at the link below? It will, indeed, be difficult for Gil and Benji to top these hilarious and absurd excuses for ignoring the SBT....but we must never underestimate the "denial" power that exists within every JFK conspiracy fantasist....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-887.html

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:47:04 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.
>
>I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.
>
>I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.
>
>Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".

The point is - believers for a long time spoke of a mythical "lapel
flip" ... and now it's morphed into a "bulge."

So clearly they've changed their minds, and *should* be honest enough
to admit that their previous view on a "lapel flip" was wrong. But,
of course, they aren't honest.

>He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.

Speculation is a powerful tool when you don't have any facts.

>He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.

I suspect that the idea that the wind could flip a lapel, but only a
bullet could cause a "bulge" had a lot to do with their new theory.

And make no mistake, THIS IS A *NEW* THEORY.

But they can't admit it.

>He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
>
>Corbett believes in things that can't be proven. Speculations made by David Von Pein.
>Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet ?
>
>Here's John Connally saying that as the crowds thinned out, he was re-adjusting his seating position.
>https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-straightening-up.mp4

Don't worry, Corbutt doesn't believe Connally.

He doesn't believe **ANY** eyewitness. He counts on the mythical
"forensic evidence" he refuses to cite for.

And because I point these facts out, he refuses to reply.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 09:07:18 -0800 (PST), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:47:07?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet?

Here's what Von Penis snipped without being able to answer it:

> Is it possible for the anti-SBTers to exhibit MORE denial than the
> examples displayed at the link below?

I've told you before, if you can't post it HERE, and defend it HERE,
then it won't be allowed.

Pay attention coward!

[BT George]

Beb can *allow* nothing here folks. ...However, he sure can run for the hills anytime asked difficult questions about his assassination anti-SBT beliefs. Another blast from the past. Still figured out that scenario bebsy?

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.assassination.jfk/c/EBdwYmtoWS0/m/OQUm2-6vR_cJ

[JE Corbett]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:47:07 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

> On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.
> I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.
>

Trust me, Giltardo. You aren't going to win any blue ribbons for your looks.

> I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.
>
> Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".
> He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.

I've proven he could have no direct knowledge that JFK had been hit by the first bullet and if he believes that, he had to
have learned it from another source. Despite being prodded several times, you can't tell us any other way he could have
come to that belief.

> He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.

We see JBC's coat bulge out just two frame before both he and JFK react by suddenly flipping their arms upward. A
thinking person would put those two facts together to conclude that the jacket bulge was caused by the same bullet
that caused the reaction by those two men. Of course, that leaves you out because you have no ability to reason. You
have to have every single element proven with 100% certainty to you without looking at it in context with other known
elements, something that rarely happens in real life.

> He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.

Just a remarkable coincidence that the arm flip happened just two frames after his jacket suddenly bulged outward.
Stay clueless, Giltardo. That way you can go to your grave without ever knowing who killed JFK, just like people like
Rossley, Weisberg, Marrs, Lane, etc. who went before you. Just like all believers in Oswald's innocence are doomed to do.
Nobody but Oswald will ever be identified as the assassin of JFK, and I will go to my grave with that knowledge, whether I
check out today or thirty years from now.

>
> Corbett believes in things that can't be proven. Speculations made by David Von Pein.

Corbett believes in logical conclusions based on known evidence. Absolute proof of anything is virtually impossible. That's
why our criminal courts don't require proof an accused person's guilt beyond all possible doubt. They only require proof
beyond a reasonable doubt. There can be no reasonable doubt that both men reacted at the same instance, given that
JBC's jacket bulged out at Z224, JFK's right hand was still coming down at Z225, and that at Z226 both men suddenly and
dramatically flipped their arms upward in perfect unison. If there was reasonable doubt, there would be a reasonable
alternative explanation for those actions. No such alternative exists. Since they reacted at the same time, and forensic examiners have all concluded that a bullet entered JFK's back and exited from his throat, and that at Z224, JFK and JBC were perfectly aligned with the location where a shooter was seen firing, and a bullet exiting JFK's throat would have been heading
right toward Connally, there is no reasonable doubt that both men were hit by the same bullet. If there was, there would be a
reasonable alternative explanation taking into account all the above facts. No such alternative exists.

> Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet ?

Theoretically. But when you take into account all the other known facts, that theoretical possibility vanishes. There is no
reasonable alternative to the SBT that takes into account ALL the available information. Of course, Gilardo never likes to
look at the evidence as a whole. He always wants to look at the pieces of evidence in isolation. He does that because
putting the pieces together requires one to be able to reason and think logically, something Giltardo has admitted he doesn't
believe in doing.

>
> Here's John Connally saying that as the crowds thinned out, he was re-adjusting his seating position.
> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-straightening-up.mp4

Of course, Giltardo conveniently takes this clip out of context which would have told us WHEN he adjusted his seat
position. Without even seeing the rest of the clip I would bet dollars to donuts that Connally said he did this BEFORE he heard
the first shot which was about 4 seconds before we see his arm flip. But Giltardo is so anxious to dismiss Connally's sudden
arm flip that he'll use anything he can find, even if he has to cut out the part of Connally's statement that would refute what
Giltardo is suggesting.

Giltardo thinks adjusting his seat position would cause his right arm to suddenly flip up and back down within a half a second.
He thinks that is a reasonable alternative explanation. He thinks it's just a coincidence that the arm flip happened just two
seconds after his jacket bulged out. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by saying he thinks at all.

[Bud]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 12:09:42 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:47:04 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
> <gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.
> >
> >I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.
> >
> >I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.
> >
> >Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".
> The point is - believers for a long time spoke of a mythical "lapel
> flip" ... and now it's morphed into a "bulge."

Arguing over semantics. Same observable phenomenon regardless of what words are used to describe it.

> So clearly they've changed their minds, and *should* be honest enough
> to admit that their previous view on a "lapel flip" was wrong. But,
> of course, they aren't honest.
> >He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.
> Speculation is a powerful tool when you don't have any facts.

Reasoning is a powerful tool, for those that know how.

> >He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
> I suspect that the idea that the wind could flip a lapel, but only a
> bullet could cause a "bulge" had a lot to do with their new theory.
>
> And make no mistake, THIS IS A *NEW* THEORY.

Conspiracy idiots that believe a bullet can throw a full grown man bodily backwards don`t believe they are capable of moving a few ounces of fabric.

[Hank Sienzant]

On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 3:45:03 PM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:
> On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:47:07 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.
> > I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.
> >
> Trust me, Giltardo. You aren't going to win any blue ribbons for your looks.
> > I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.
> >
> > Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".
> > He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.
> I've proven he could have no direct knowledge that JFK had been hit by the first bullet and if he believes that, he had to
> have learned it from another source. Despite being prodded several times, you can't tell us any other way he could have
> come to that belief.
> > He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
> We see JBC's coat bulge out just two frame before both he and JFK react by suddenly flipping their arms upward. A
> thinking person would put those two facts together to conclude that the jacket bulge was caused by the same bullet
> that caused the reaction by those two men. Of course, that leaves you out because you have no ability to reason. You
> have to have every single element proven with 100% certainty to you without looking at it in context with other known
> elements, something that rarely happens in real life.
> > He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
> Just a remarkable coincidence that the arm flip happened just two frames after his jacket suddenly bulged outward.

> Stay clueless, Giltardo. That way you can go to your grave without ever knowing who killed JFK, just like people like s

> Rossley, Weisberg, Marrs, Lane, etc. who went before you. Just like all believers in Oswald's innocence are doomed to do.

I think Lane knew Oswald did it, but wrote his multiple books on the subject to make money and laughed all the way to the bank.

The others were true conspiracy theorists in my opinion. There’s just too many places in his books (particularly Rush to Judgment where Lane quotes out of context.

You meant frames, of course.

[JE Corbett]

Are you interested in a job as my proof reader? It will require long hours and the pay isn't very good.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 13:03:01 -0800 (PST), 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.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 12:45:01 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
<jecor...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 11:47:07?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:

>> On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He could possibly lose some weight.
>> I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.
>>

>> I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his nose from Von Pein's ass.
>>
>> Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".
>> He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had been shot, but he can't prove it.
>

>I've proven...


Speculation isn't evidence.

>> He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
>

>We see JBC's coat bulge out ...


Used to be a "lapel flip"... did the video change in the last few
years?

>> He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet, although he can't prove it.
>

>Just a remarkable coincidence...


That your faith is founded on speculation?

>> Corbett believes in things that can't be proven. Speculations made by David Von Pein.
>

>Corbutt believes in logical conclusions based on known evidence.


You're lying again, Corbutt.

>> Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a bullet ?
>
>Theoretically.

Then you lose.

What you think is "proven" you've just admitted... isn't.

>> Here's John Connally saying that as the crowds thinned out, he was re-adjusting his seating position.
>> https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-straightening-up.mp4
>
>Of course,

You acknowledge a fact, then you run from it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:00:17 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 14:04:10 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
<jecor...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Are you interested in a job as my proof reader? It will require long hours and the pay isn't very good.

And the only requirements are an ability to read, and an inability to
tell the truth.