Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10
62
Not a good analogy.  There is abundant evidence that the Earth is spherical and no evidence that conflicts with that.

There is abundant evidence of JBC being shot in the early Z220s (jacket bulge, arm flip, twisting and doubling over to his right) but you ignore all of that because you prefer to believe in a fantasy.
Quote

In the case of the SBT there is no one who witnessed it and some who witnesses who said it didn’t happen.

Do you think witnesses can see bullets in flight? I guess that's no nuttier than some of the other goofy things you have convinced yourself of.
Quote

There is also abundant other evidence that conflicts with it.  You just say that evidence is all wrong.  I am saying: keep an open mind about it.

I refuse to keep an open mind about nonsense such as a flat earth or your goofy scenario.
Quote

You don’t think this is in reaction to just being shot in the neck?



You said the reaction was at Z224. What reaction do you see in Z224. At Z225, JFK's right arm is still moving downward from where it was at Z225. David Von Pein has pointed out that JFK's facial expression seems to be a reaction to being shot and he might be right but the frame when enlarged is too blurry to say conclusively. In any event, there is no visible reaction at Z224 which is what you claimed.
Quote

I never said I don’t see those things. I am just saying that it is quite consistent with how JBC and others said he reacted to the first shot.

Tell me where JBC said he reacted to the first shot by flipping his arm upward, doubling over and twisting to his right. He said he looked over his right shoulder and when he could not see JFK he started to turn back to the front when he felt the shot strike him in the back. Tell me where you see JBC start turning back to the front post Z230. You have him doing just the opposite. You have him turned around and facing the rear when he was shot in the back, an impossibility for a shot from the rear.

You think JBC's reaction to being shot in the thigh is to calmly turn to his right to see JFK. Then you believe his obvious arm flip and dramatic gyrations at Z226 and immediately after are NOT reactions to being shot through the chest and wrist. These are just examples of the nutty things you have to believe to convince yourself of your nonsensical scenario.
Quote

Tague’s testimony is not evidence? Greer’s is not evidence? That’s why you should keep an open mind.

I refuse to keep an open mind to nonsense.

You continue to treat witness accounts as if they are established facts. There is no conclusive evidence as to when Tague was hit. It could have been a first shot ricochet or a fragment from the headshot. We can say with certainty that it did not come from CE399 which is the bullet from the second shot.
You expect us to believe the second shot struck JBC's wrist, ricocheted up over the front seat, over the windshield, and flew all the way down to where Tague was standing and somehow still had enough velocity to strike the curb in front of Tague and cause his facial wound. Should we label this MMFT (Mason's Magic Fragment Theory)?

You also seem to have an arithmetic problem. If the bullet from the second shot hit Tague and the headshot was the third shot, how did the CE399 and up at Parkland. You have also tried to tell us the first bullet imbedded in the upholstery after exiting JFK's throat and striking JBC's thigh and went undetected aby the SS and FBI. That's four shots. OMG!!! After 62 years you have uncovered empirical evidence of a fourth shot, a second shooter, and a conspiracy. WTG!!

63
JFK Assassination Cops In The Railroad Yard Short Colorized Film Clip


   As we can clearly see on the "Colorized" Darnell Film above, this Bogus DPD Motorcycle Cop is NOT carrying an alleged "motorcycle glove" in his (L) hand. With every stride this impostor takes, the object in his (L) hand steadfastly maintains its shape. The object does Not flop around like a motorcycle glove. There are No "fingers" or extensions of any kind connected to this object. The shape of this object is consistently rock solid.
64
Not always. There are some things that are obvious and JBC being shot early in the Z220s in one of them. To deny that is pure nonsense. Should I be open minded about a flat earth?
Not a good analogy.  There is abundant evidence that the Earth is spherical and no evidence that conflicts with that.  In the case of the SBT there is no one who witnessed it and some witnesses who said it didn’t happen. There is also abundant other evidence that conflicts with it.  You just say that evidence is all wrong.  I am saying: keep an open mind about it.

Quote
No we can't. At Z224, we cannot even see JFK except for his right forearm and left shoulder. When he comes into view at Z225, his right arm was still moving down.
You don’t think this is in reaction to just being shot in the neck?:


Quote
It was at Z226 that both of his arms started upward, in perfect unison with JBC's sudden and rapid upward arm movement which was immediately followed by him doubling over and twisting hard to his right. If you can't see these things, you are being willfully blind, which is the only way to argue the silly things you believe.
I never said I don’t see those things. I am just saying that it is quite consistent with how JBC and others said he reacted to the first shot.
Quote
More silliness. There is not only no evidence that the second shot caused Tague's wound, it's not even possible.
Tague’s testimony is not evidence? Greer’s is not evidence? That’s why you should keep an open mind.
65
So you believe witnesses can accurately say where the limo was when they heard the first shot but can't count to three. Amazing.

The three shot scenario conforms perfectly with the Z-film, the consensus of the witnesses in Dealy Plaza, the 3 spent shells in the sniper's nest, and JBC's recollection that he heard a shot before the one which hit him in the back. If you want to believe JBC just imagined he heard an early shot before the one which struck him, that's your privilege. Just don't expect the rest of us to believe that nonsense.

So you believe witnesses can accurately say where the limo was when they heard the first shot but can't count to three. Amazing.


Your stating the eyewitnesses heard just two shots and they are supposed to state they heard three?  Good point, that would indicate your proposing “medias influence.”

The three shot scenario conforms perfectly with the Z-film, the consensus of the witnesses in Dealy Plaza, the 3 spent shells in the sniper's nest, and JBC's recollection that he heard a shot before the one which hit him in the back. If you want to believe JBC just imagined he heard an early shot before the one which struck him, that's your privilege. Just don't expect the rest of us to believe that nonsense.

Actually, it doesn't. This is not just a three shot scenario. You have been proposing a three shot scenario with an early missed shot at Z160. You have not provided a single witness to this fantasy shot. So much for evidence supporting what only you see in the Zapruder Film. JBC is not twisting and turning and straining to see behind him at that point in time. JBC continues to engage the crowd the same as JFK.

Holland and Meyers understood there was no evidence of a shot. Unless you are thinking a small child running on the side walk and reacting to an imaginary shot that no adult heard is all the evidence you need.

The consensus of the “earwitnesses” was stating there were three shots but that is not what the eyewitnesses stated. The consensus of the eyewitnesses was there was only two shots. The belief that JBC heard an earlier shot is your fantasy. He never stated that. He saw JFK slumped after the first shot. 

There is other three shot narratives, maybe try one of those out and see if it makes more sense. A theory without a single witness to support it is not much of a theory. Ask Andrew maybe he has a spare one he has not used in a while.
66
Presumably "propinquity"? That was Garrison's big buzzword for anything to which he could make a connection, no matter how far-fetched (both suspected participants in the conspiracy owned Stetson hats and named their daughters Lois = propinquity). I've never heard it used in any other connection, but it's an excellent word that I can picture W. C. Fields using ("Ah, yes, sheer propinquity, my dear, sheer propinquity").

I'm going to try to slip it into a conversation when I want to bore my friends with my vocabulary.
67
Presumably "propinquity"? That was Garrison's big buzzword for anything to which he could make a connection, no matter how far-fetched (both suspected participants in the conspiracy owned Stetson hats and named their daughters Lois = propinquity). I've never heard it used in any other connection, but it's an excellent word that I can picture W. C. Fields using ("Ah, yes, sheer propinquity, my dear, sheer propinquity").
68
I just saw this picture of Donald Trump Jr. and his bride-to-be.

https://www.newser.com/story/389618/trump-may-not-make-sons-weekend-wedding.html?utm_source=uol&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=rss_top

She looks like she could dunk on him.

I'm betting Tiger Woods is not on the guest list.
69
   BUMP.  Either provide the Evidence to support YOUR CLAIM ABOVE, or Retract It.  The above is not merely an opinion. You are claiming this car was "Released".

There is zero evidence the car in question was impounded by the DPD. Do you have such evidence? I didn't think so.
70
A "bloodless bullfight" in New Orleans - oh, sure, pal, we know what THAT was code for. You and Shaw discussed a "bloodless bullfight" - I think not, sir. It appears to me that Railroad Yard Guy has a bald spot and thus may be the gunman who Euins saw. Yep, that's it. Bloodless bullfight / Shaw / PO Box / bald spot = case closed.

I actually think these are two different people, but I will concede - wait for it - PROPINQUITY!

Damn it. You made me look up a definition. Cut it out.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 10