Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jango said:
Lol. You people never cease to amaze me. So unless she specifically said: "I went onto the trunk to retrieve parts of my husband's head" it never happened, eh?
Click to expand...

So jackie is in on the conspiracy?

Without her scooping up the brain matter the 'buffs' would have the smoking gun sitting there on the trunk of the limo....but she took the time to scoop it up so it would not be visible...except.. you saw it...and she mentioned... no wait...she is scooping it up because it shouldn't be there, but you know it's there.... no, she just scooped it up because that's what a wife would do.... but how did "they" know she would... oh, the brain matter was unexpected, and her scooping it up was happy coincidence... but what if she hadn't?

It's bloody confusing. Can you elaborate?
 
Jango said:
As is going for the brain and bone blown out the back of her husband's head which she saw.
Click to expand...
I was responding to your question to JayUtah as to why he did not "call Hans out" on his thought regarding Mrs. Kennedy's attempt to exit the car. You seemed to be dismissive of that (as per your :rolleyes:). I merely chimed in to offer that Hans' thought is entirely reasonable, not to discuss your "ejecta" hypothesesis one way or the other.
 
Jango said:
What the **** is there to elaborate on?
Click to expand...

There's a conspiracy. Rather than a single shooter from the SBD, there's another shooter in front of the limo.

The result of the second shooter is that brain matter will end up on the rear of the limo. Who is to take care of this so that the conspiracy is not revealed?

Jackie kennedy will clean up any evidence of a shooter from the front.

Correct?
 
Jango said:
Lol. You people never cease to amaze me. So unless she specifically said: "I went onto the trunk to retrieve parts of my husband's head" it never happened, eh?
Click to expand...

And the waffling continues. Which part of the material you linked and/or Hank quoted do you think supports your contention that that's what she did? Specifically now; after all, you're the one who pompously said "address the evidence." It's your evidence- you gotta show what evidence you have before anyone can address it, not just sling a bunch of crap at the wall and hope some of it sticks.
 
uk_dave said:
There's a conspiracy. Rather than a single shooter from the SBD, there's another shooter in front of the limo.

The result of the second shooter is that brain matter will end up on the rear of the limo. Who is to take care of this so that the conspiracy is not revealed?

Jackie kennedy will clean up any evidence of a shooter from the front.

Correct?
Click to expand...

No. Not even close.
 
Jango said:
Lol. You people never cease to amaze me. So unless she specifically said: "I went onto the trunk to retrieve parts of my husband's head" it never happened, eh?
Click to expand...

Yep you are assigning that deliberate action to her but the question still remains why do you think it was deliberate action and was that her purpose.

So again what do you base this opinion on? If she never said that was the reason why should this invented reason be believed?
 
Last edited:
Jango said:
Just like the 9/11 debunkers. Unless the entire Bush administration (and anyone else involved for that matter) don't hold a joint press conference and all recite the same message at the very same time in unison admitting their fault and involvement, it never happened. Such brain dead *****************.
Click to expand...

Trying to change the subject to get you out of the quick sand? lol
 
Jango said:
She didn't need an ulterior motive to retrieve her husband's blown out bits.
Click to expand...

The problem continues to be that since you cannot find anywhere that she said that was the reason then that means others made up that scenario to support a CT.

Can you show anything on which you can base your statements?

Or are you going to concede this too?
 
Hans said:
The problem continues to be that since you cannot find anywhere that she said that was the reason then that means others made up that scenario to support a CT.

Can you show anything on which you can base your statements?

Or are you going to concede this too?
Click to expand...

Again, watch the Zapruder film and read what I've already provided.

[SNIP]
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rules 12 & 0

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jango said:
Again, watch the Zapruder film and read what I've already provided.

[SNIP]
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rules 12 & 0
Click to expand...

I have and you have NOTHING

You still cannot provide any evidence that is why she did what she did - now can you?

Can we consider this conceded or do you want to splash around a bit more?

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jango said:
Again, watch the Zapruder film and read what I've already provided.

[SNIP]
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed to comply with Rules 12 & 0
Click to expand...

Already demolished by Hank, prompting you to run away from responding to his points. Seems to be a theme you have going.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hans said:
My eyes are quite fine thank you. They can see your complete desperation as you try over and over again to get away from the key point.

I'll remind you again.

You have no evidence that was the reason she did what she did . Now try to man up to your amusing failure and move on or we can just sit here while you continue to do nothing useful.

LOL
Click to expand...

And what is your evidence that she reacted out of fear and was trying to flee danger?
 
Jango said:
And what is your evidence that she reacted out of fear and was trying to flee danger?
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have she didn't? What did she say was her reason for doing so?

Have you conceded that you have no evidence that she did so to grab some skull fragment?


Really Jango STILL trying to reverse the proof thingy - hasn't Jay "brain grinder" Utah spoken to you about this before?

lol
 
Hans said:
What evidence do you have she didn't? What did she say was her reason for doing so?

Have you conceded that you have no evidence that she did so to grab some skull fragment?


Really Jango STILL trying to reverse the proof thingy - hasn't Jay "brain grinder" Utah spoken to you about this before?

lol
Click to expand...

Except I've added evidence to this. You've added a 'gut feeling'. Again, what proof do you have? Sorry to break it to you, you're not above questioning, there is no reversing of the burden of proof. You said she fled out of fear. Back it up already.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom