Getting Some Facts Straight About the Single-Bullet Theory

[John Mytton]

Yes, your postings are, primarily, non sequiturs. You seem unable to answer questions, so you post unrelated info, and meaningless graphics.

Now, why would the Connaly suit be laundered?
But , not JFK's?
There was a very good reason to launder the suit. And, it was tied to the single bullet theory.
Do you understand that, or do I need to explain it for you?

OK, I would really like to see your conclusion because figuring out what you perceive to be reality becomes excessively time consuming and frankly I have better things to do.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

McAdams site

Nope.

Google:
No results found for "behind the forehead" site:mcadams.posc.mu.edu.

[Bill Chapman]

Nope.

Google:
No results found for "behind the forehead" site:mcadams.posc.mu.edu.

It's from a book apparently; I saw the quote on McAdam's site in a graphic layout similar in style to a DPD dispatch layout @McAdams. It might be on the McAdams page (in another graphics layout) where he compares witness testimony as to what they said at the time and then later.

[John Tonkovich]

It's from a book apparently; I saw the quote on McAdam's site in a graphic layout similar in style to a DPD dispatch layout @McAdams. It might be on the McAdams page (in another graphics layout) where he compares witness testimony as to what they said at the time and then later.

You're better off at History Matters, or National Archives.
McAdams is a propagandist.

[John Iacoletti]

It's from a book apparently; I saw the quote on McAdam's site in a graphic layout similar in style to a DPD dispatch layout @McAdams. It might be on the McAdams page (in another graphics layout) where he compares witness testimony as to what they said at the time and then later.

More likely it's yet another Chapman recollection failure.

[John Tonkovich]

OK, I would really like to see your conclusion because figuring out what you perceive to be reality becomes excessively time consuming and frankly I have better things to do.

JohnM

Why launder the suit? It was no accident.

[John Mytton]

Why launder the suit? It was no accident.

For someone who wants to seem to be neutral you sure make a lot of negative assertions.
The chair with Lincolns "blood stains" that Lincoln was murdered in, is forever on display and even though there appears to be some doubt as to what caused the "blood stains" it still is a macabre way to remember the dead President and perhaps Mrs Connally didn't want her husband and his suit remembered in the centuries to come in some circus sideshow.

Not my arrows, just some photos I found online of where people are pointing out what they believe to be "blood stains".





And on it goes....

A pillow from Willie Clark’s bed at the Petersen House is now a priceless relic. On it, you can see the blood of President Abraham Lincoln.
https://www.fords.org/lincolns-assassination/lincolns-pillow/



Mark Knight a devout CT who's an Admin from the Ed Forum shares his opinion.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was reported that Robert Kennedy allegedly stole his brothers brain for a similar reason.

Mr Hills comments came as it was reported that JFK’s missing brain was stolen by Robert Kennedy after his assassination to stop it ever going on display, according to secret US government files.
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/jfk-assassination-robert-f-kennedy-took-his-brothers-brain-after-autopsy/news-story/e22123c43934d769aaa439bb0eeea761



JohnM