Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
Nutters like Lance are non-conspiracy theorists [NCTs]
Like all true Nutters, he believes that Oswald shooting JFK is a FACT.
IT IS NOT.
It is just another theory.
He cannot accept this even though he pretends that he does.
Lance belongs to the Lunatic Fringe of Nutters. Tinfoil Nutters. Just like John Corbett and "Richard Smith"
Then there are LNers like Charles Collins and John Mytton.
Honest researchers who have worked their way to their own conclusions.
Not like the spoon-fed losers who have recently emerged on this forum.

And then there are zombified-by-KGB-disinfo CTs like you, danny BOY o'meara.
32
Nutters like Lance are non-conspiracy theorists [NCTs]
Like all true Nutters, he believes that Oswald shooting JFK is a FACT.
IT IS NOT.
It is just another theory.
He cannot accept this even though he pretends that he does.
Lance belongs to the Lunatic Fringe of Nutters. Tinfoil Nutters. Just like John Corbett and "Richard Smith"
Then there are LNers like Charles Collins and John Mytton.
Honest researchers who have worked their way to their own conclusions.
Not like the spoon-fed losers who have recently emerged on this forum.
33
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Tom Graves on Yesterday at 11:17:54 PM »
Why aren't they reacting to the first shot you f£cking know-nothing loser?

Good point, danny BOY o'meara!

Some of them had started consciously reacting to THAT one as early as Z-145 or so (as had Rosemary Ellis and most of the passengers in the limo).

34
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 11:16:58 PM »
Just to expand on the incessant nonsense losers like Comrade Pinko Graves endlessly spew.
While they accept that the shots fired were really loud, they somehow convince themselves that none of the SS agents following the limo never heard the first shot.
Even though they report exactly that they did!!

What kind of know-nothing loser can't see the obvious?
Read through this thread and learn something for a change.
Learn something.
35
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 11:10:12 PM »
Dear danny BOY o'meara,

They're reacting to Oswald's second shot, the one that he'd fired about two seconds earlier at approximately Z-222 and which wounded both JFK and JBC.

-- Tom
Why aren't they reacting to the first shot you f£cking know-nothing loser?
36
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 11:08:53 PM »
Ready said he immediately turned to his right in response to the first shot. He started his turn to the right before z206. He had to release his right hand from the hand-hold first. He did that by z199.

This is a lie.
I've always been slightly disgusted by how low you are willing to go.
The last we see of all three agents is z207 and not a single one makes any sign of turning to the right and rear.
You really should be ashamed for peddling this never-ending lie.

Quote
He obviously was focused on what was happening in the President’s car. Hill was responsible for Jackie.  So his reaction was to contemplate what he should do. For the first two seconds after z190 JFK is just beginning to react by moving left. It becomes obvious only from z226.  So less than two seconds to figure that out is not excessive.

Another ridiculous lie.
It never ends.
JFK reacts by throwing his hands up towards his throat/chin.
It is not by "moving left".

Are you not ashamed by the endless lies you have to tell?
Do you have no respect for the truth?
37
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Tom Graves on Yesterday at 11:06:21 PM »
How do you explain Altgens 6 showing a carload of Secret Service agents reacting to the first shot exactly as they initially reported?

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

They're reacting to Oswald's second shot, the one that he'd fired about two seconds earlier at approximately Z-222 and which wounded both JFK and JBC.

-- Tom
38
The JFK Assassination - Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Dan O'meara on Yesterday at 11:01:31 PM »
How do you explain JBC hearing a shot and turning to look over his right shoulder, as we see him do starting at Z164, and then about 3 seconds later get hit by the single bullet if he did not hear an earlier missed shot.
How do you explain Altgens 6 showing a car load of Secret Service agents reacting to the first shot exactly as they initially reported.
I'd like to steer you to the OP of this thread.
As has been endlessly explained to you, JBC's honest recollection of the massively traumatic, life-threatening gun shot wound that sent him immediately into shock, cannot be relied upon. There is copious amounts of literature highlighting how memory is distorted by those who undergo such a massive trauma. That is how Connally's recollections are explained.
But the Secret Service agents never underwent such trauma.
How do you explain how their testimonies match Altgens 6?
Do you even know what's being discussed?
39
You know that your viewpoint has some serious issues when you have to resort to accusing people who disagree with you of being lunatic fringe, having warped minds, having a form of mental illness, having a [fill in the blank]-mindset, having lost the ability to think rationally, etc., etc. This is usually the verbiage used by frustrated people who hold minority viewpoints.

It's interesting that those who posit a conspiracy in the JFK case don't feel the need to question the sanity of lone-gunman theorists, but some lone-gunman theorists--by no means all, but some--routinely accuse conspiracy theorists of various forms of mental illness. In all my years in JFKA forums, I have never seen a conspiracy theorist actually question the sanity of a lone-gunman theorist, nor have I read any pro-conspiracy books or articles that have done so.

What is especially curious about this is that (1) lone-gunman theorists are in a decided minority in the Western world when it comes to the JFK case, and (2) the last official U.S. Government investigation into the assassination concluded that JFK was killed by a conspiracy, that two gunmen were involved, that Jack Ruby had significant Mafia ties, that Ruby lied about how he entered the police basement to kill Oswald, that Ruby lied about why he killed Oswald, that there is credible evidence that anti-Castro Cubans were trying to frame Oswald weeks before the assassination, etc., etc.

It's not like WC believers represent the majority view in the Western world. They do not. Numerous polls have long shown that the substantial majority of Americans and Europeans believe JFK was killed by a conspiracy. Yet, some WC apologists talk like they're speaking for the dominant view, when they are not.

Granted, truth is not automatically determined by public opinion, but you'd think that WC apologists would show a bit more humility given the fact that for decades their view has been the minority view in the Western world.


40

Did a well-known New Orleans businessman, Clay Shaw, a highly valued contact source of the CIA's Domestic Contacts Division from 1948 to 1956, organize the assassination of JFK for the evil, evil Agency, or, as overly ambitious, scandal-plagued, and revengeful Jim Garrison originally thought (until he'd read an article in a Communist-owned Italian newspaper), did he mastermind a Leopold-and-Loeb-like homosexual "thrill-kill" of JFK?
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10