The Warren Commission Sham

[Lance Payette]

  You stole that peanut butter out of a jar with a spoon from Joe Black. Google it.

Stole? Goodness, you are in the grip of the conspiracy-prone mindset! I have been eating peanut butter with a spoon at least every other morning for 40 years.

As far as humoring CTers, I have utterly no problem engaging with CTers who say something at least halfway new and substantive and worth discussing. This is, alas, hardly the norm on internet forums.

What I do not understand engaging with or humoring is CTers who (1) say obviously ridiculous things from the far edge of the lunatic fringe, and/or (2) insist on rehashing the same old arguments that have been discussed 9,000 times previously as though new ground were going to be broken or minds were going to be changed on the 9,001st attempt. This, alas, is the norm on internet forums - including this one, in spades.

Yes, the world needs yet another thread on "how deceitful and untrustworthy the Warren Commission was."  Was not, was too, you're crazy, no it's you, shut the eff up.

I cannot, of course, speak for others. Perhaps even some LNers enjoy this endless mental masturbation with folks like you and Dan and numerous others I could mention. I simply say ...

B-O-R-I-N-G

[Tom Graves]

Stole? Goodness, you are in the grip of the conspiracy-prone mindset! I have been eating peanut butter with a spoon at least every other morning for 40 years.

As far as humoring CTers, I have utterly no problem engaging with CTers who say something at least halfway new and substantive and worth discussing. This is, alas, hardly the norm on internet forums.

What I do not understand engaging with or humoring is CTers who (1) say obviously ridiculous things from the far edge of the lunatic fringe, and/or (2) insist on rehashing the same old arguments that have been discussed 9,000 times previously as though new ground were going to be broken or minds were going to be changed on the 9,001st attempt. This, alas, is the norm on internet forums - including this one, in spades.

Yes, the world needs yet another thread on "how deceitful and untrustworthy the Warren Commission was." Was not, was too, you're crazy, no it's you, shut the eff up.

I cannot, of course, speak for others. Perhaps even some LNers enjoy this endless mental xxxxxxxxxxxx with folks like you and Dan and numerous others I could mention. I simply say ...

Poor Fancy Pants.

Maybe you should get back into UFOs.

[Dan O'meara]

Danny Boy,

How do you know Tomlinson didn't find it?

Is that what Mark Lane, Oliver Stone, and/or Vladimir Putin told you?

Do you think the evil, evil bad guys planted it on a gurney in Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63 for someone like Tomlinson to find, or maybe planted it in the limo for someone like hard-drinking, future-book-writer, Secret Service agent Landis to find?

Or . . . gasp . . . do you think the evil, evil FBI somehow created it after-the-fact?

Do you have no clue?

-- Tom

How do you know Tomlinson didn't find it?

Because he handed the bullet he found to O P Wright who stated, unequivocally, that it was not CE399.
This is the reason why both Tomlinson and Wright refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
That's how I know Tomlinson didn't find CE399.

Now, back to you Thomas - Where do you get the idea from that CE399 was found at Parkland?

[Lance Payette]

How do you know Tomlinson didn't find it?

Because he handed the bullet he found to O P Wright who stated, unequivocally, that it was not CE399.
This is the reason why both Tomlinson and Wright refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
That's how I know Tomlinson didn't find CE399.

Now, back to you Thomas - Where do you get the idea from that CE399 was found at Parkland?

This has never been discussed before! Never, I tell you! I don't recall ever hearing about Tomlinson, Wright and CE 399 before - certainly not more than 14,000 times, which is simply not enough. It is soooooo interesting! Because the world really cares - really cares, I tell you! - what Tom and Dan think about this subject! I don't know about anyone else, but threads like this make me happy to be alive! Before this thread reaches its 512th page, I strongly suspect the JFKA will have been solved and history books will have to be rewritten (or maybe not, as the case may be). Where are the Sock Puppets - don't they have something to contribute here?

[Dan O'meara]

This has never been discussed before! Never, I tell you! I don't recall ever hearing about Tomlinson, Wright and CE 399 before - certainly not more than 14,000 times, which is simply not enough. It is soooooo interesting! Because the world really cares - really cares, I tell you! - what Tom and Dan think about this subject! I don't know about anyone else, but threads like this make me happy to be alive! Before this thread reaches its 512th page, I strongly suspect the JFKA will have been solved and history books will have to be rewritten (or maybe not, as the case may be). Where are the Sock Puppets - don't they have something to contribute here?

Like anyone cares what a silly old bully like you thinks.

[Tom Graves]

How do you know Tomlinson didn't find it?

Because he handed the bullet he found to O P Wright who stated, unequivocally, that it was not CE399.
This is the reason why both Tomlinson and Wright refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
That's how I know Tomlinson didn't find CE399.

Now, back to you Thomas - Where do you get the idea from that CE399 was found at Parkland?

Danny Boy,

Why was there an FBI report stating Wright was shown CE-399 and that he said it resembled the bullet he'd seen at Parkland on 11/22/63?

Regardless, since CE-399 has Oswald's Carcano's ballistics marks on it, we know that somebody fired CE-399 from Oswald's Carcano.

If Oswald didn't fire CE-399 from his Carcano on 11/22/63, then the bad guys must have fired it before then.

How did the bad guys:

1) Take possession of Oswald's Carcano (and ammunition) without his knowing about it?

2) Return it to Ruth Paine's garage before the assassination?

3) Deform CE-399 the way it ended up: 1) with no damage to its nose, but with 2) 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, 3) a longitudinal twist, and 4) lead core extruded from its base?

4) Why did the bad guys (somehow magically) deform CE-399 the way it ended up -- with no damage to the nose, with 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, with a longitudinal twist, and with lead core extruded from its base?

Did they want people to think that it had started tumbling when it exited something soft, and that it then sideswiped something hard while it was twirling / tumbling? Because after all, that's the only way it could have been deformed the way that it was -- with no damage to the nose, but with 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, with a longitudinal twist, and with lead core extruded from its base.

-- Tom

PS If CE-399 isn't the same bullet that was allegedly "planted" on Connally's stretcher, why would the bad guys plant a pointy-nosed bullet (of the sort that O. P. Wright kept in his drawer and perhaps liked to fondle) there, instead?

[Dan O'meara]

Danny Boy,

Why was there an FBI report stating Wright was shown CE-399 and that he said it resembled the bullet he'd seen at Parkland on 11/22/63?

Regardless, since CE-399 has Oswald's Carcano's ballistics marks on it, we know that somebody fired CE-399 from Oswald's Carcano.

If Oswald didn't fire CE-399 from his Carcano on 11/22/63, then the bad guys must have fired it before then.

How did the bad guys:

1) Take possession of Oswald's Carcano (and ammunition) without his knowing about it?

2) Return it to Ruth Paine's garage before the assassination?

3) Deform CE-399 the way it ended up: 1) with no damage to its nose, but with 2) 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, 3) a longitudinal twist, and 4) lead core extruded from its base?

4) Why did the bad guys (somehow magically) deform CE-399 the way it ended up -- with no damage to the nose, with 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, with a longitudinal twist, and with lead core extruded from its base?

Did they want people to think that it had started tumbling when it exited something soft, and that it then sideswiped something hard while it was twirling / tumbling? Because after all, that's the only way it could have been deformed the way that it was -- with no damage to the nose, but with 1/3 to 1/2 of its length flattened towards the rear, with a longitudinal twist, and with lead core extruded from its base.

-- Tom

PS If CE-399 isn't the same bullet that was allegedly "planted" on Connally's stretcher, why would the bad guys plant a pointy-nosed bullet (of the sort that O. P. Wright kept in his drawer and perhaps liked to fondle) there, instead?

You've been asked a very simple question, Thomas...twice.
So, for the third time - Where do you get the idea from that CE399 was found at Parkland?

As far as I know, there isn't a single scrap of evidence of any kind placing CE399 anywhere near Parkland.
Now, you seem so confident it was CE399 that Tomlinson found at Parkland it's as though you have some kind of definitive evidence supporting this confidence. But it's my guess you don't even know why you believe CE399 was found at Parkland (other than the WC Sham told you to believe that).
Wright, an ex-Chief of Police at the DPD, categorically denied the bullet he handled that day was CE399.
Tomlinson, Wright and SSA Johnsen (the only men to handle the bullet at Parkland) ALL refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
The Sham entered CE399 into evidence as the bullet found at Parkland without any proof it was such.

[Lance Payette]

Like anyone cares what a silly old bully like you thinks.

Well, let's see, he who calls me a "silly old fool" and a "silly old bully" would appear to be the silly old kettle calling the silly old pot black, no? I would prefer "snarky pompous old twit," if you don't mind.

I must confess to growing increasingly intolerant of endless, repetitive discussions of the same old, same old JFKA stuff, as though anything new were going to be said, any minds were going to be changed, or anyone really cares what anyone else thinks. This scenario plays out across all internet forums, whether it's Cowboy fans screaming at Packer fans, atheists screaming at fundies, or gerbil owners screaming at ferret owners. The same debates over and over and over.

I used to say that I found the psychology and dynamics of internet forums way more interesting than the actual subject matter. Increasingly, I don't find any of it very interesting. But carry on, if you enjoy and find meaning in it. Unless someone can steer me to a juicy factoid in need of busting, I don't think I have anything further to add.