JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[7forever]

Two conspiraciy theorists die and go to Heaven. As they stand before God, one of them asks, "Lord, please tell us, who killed JFK?"

God looks at them sternly and says, "I want you to listen carefully. Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot John F. Kennedy from the sixth floor of the Book Depository building. Got it?"

One of the conspiracists turns to the other and says, "This is even bigger than we thought."

Two randi denialists die and go to Hell. As they stood before Lucifer, one of them asks, "Lu, please tell us, who killed JFK?"

Satan looks at them sternly and says, "I want you to listen carefully. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy, and the driver shot jfk. Got it?"

One of the denialist's turns to the other and says, "This hurts worse than I thought it would."

 

[7forever]

You still cant comprehend basic english?
The shot was fired from behid.
It exited FROM behind, ie the same direction.

I assume from your confusion you think it is saying it exited from HIS behind. But it does not. If you are not mistakenly adding an extra word, I have no idea how you can think anything needs resolving.

You can comprehend basic english.
The shot was fired by Greer.
It exited FROM behind, ie the opposite direction.

I assume from your confusion you think it is saying it exited from front. But it does not. If you are not mistakenly adding an extra word, I have an idea how you can think anything needs resolving.

 

[7forever]

lol.

I would ask you for evidence to support those claims, but we both know you don't have anything other than suppositions and quotes out of context.

Hank

lol.

I would ask you for evidence to support those delusions, but we both know you don't have anything other than myths and fantasies.

the truth

 

[7forever]

Either way. It's a drawing, a subjective interpretation of memory, and directly contradicted by material and clinical evidence. Obviously Robert has not retreated far enough to come into contact with reality yet.

It's not corroborated by any credible evidence whatsoever. The hole was on the right rear which is consistent with the film, autopsy report and 40 witnesses.

 

[7forever]

We only have evidence for Oswald. Any more, or different shooters are possible, but are not plausible with out evidence to support them. There is evidence that suggests the possibility, but little more in real terms.

Oswald is innocent simply based on Zapruder showing jfk get shot from the front. Any more, or different shooters is factual.

 

[7forever]

You are playing games here and I don't play games with conspiritoids. Your challenge is bogus. There is never one piece of evidence that convicts a defendant in a criminal case. There is abundant evidence the Oswald killed Kennedy.

I have other things to do today. I'll check back tonight to see if you can come of with ONE piece of evidence for a conspiracy.

You are playing games here and I play games with craptoids. You are bogus, total and complete. There is never one piece of evidence that convicts a defendant in a criminal case. There is Zero evidence that Oswald killed Kennedy because the driver shot him from the front.

 

[7forever]

?

Ok, let's see if the same rules work in reverse: Supply one single piece of evidence beyond doubt that LHO was NOT acting alone. Just one.

Zapruder, nix, and muchmore all show him being shot from the front.

 

[7forever]

A suggestion which the Warren Commission ignored. Have you even read the WC Report? I'll bet you if 95% of the report was read to you without attribution you'd agree with it. Can you state the conclusion of the WC re a conspiracy to kill JKF. Google and get back to me if you can't.

The hsca gave the theorists a bone by confirming there was at least 4 shots in 1979, thereby debunking that pile of **** you still support.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Still cowering away from the video, 7forever?

 

[7forever]

Still cowering away from the video, 7forever?

The video you use as proof has the exit wound on the right forehead, but that's not where it officially was. In fact, Humes even shocked the aarb by drawing the exit wound in the right rear, consistent with the autopsy report and all the evidence.

 

[RoboTimbo]

The video you use as proof has the exit wound on the right forehead, but that's not where it officially was. In fact, Humes even shocked the aarb by drawing the exit wound in the right rear, consistent with the autopsy report and all the evidence.

The one I've been asking you to circle the gun in Greer's hand and you've so far failed to do.

 

[HSienzant]

lol.

I would ask you for evidence to support those delusions, but we both know you don't have anything other than myths and fantasies.

the truth

Let's start here: Numerous witnesses saw a man with a rifle in the Texas School Book Depository during the assassination. True or false?

 

[HSienzant]

Two randi denialists die and go to Hell. As they stood before Lucifer, one of them asks, "Lu, please tell us, who killed JFK?"

Satan looks at them sternly and says, "I want you to listen carefully. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy, and the driver shot jfk. Got it?"

One of the denialist's turns to the other and says, "This hurts worse than I thought it would."

lol. Your joke falls flat because you ignore the obvious solution here: Would Satan / Lucifer ever lie to accomplish his ends? Os is Satan / Lucifer somebody reknown world-wide for being a truth teller?

Having Satan state the driver shot JFK removes all the meaning from your point entirely. You do understand that, I trust.

 

[HSienzant]

You are playing games here and I play games with craptoids. You are bogus, total and complete. There is never one piece of evidence that convicts a defendant in a criminal case. There is Zero evidence that Oswald killed Kennedy because the driver shot him from the front.

You do realize that merely taking someone else's post and turning it around isn't the most convincing argument in the world, I trust.

Reading your posts makes me feel like I'm deeply imbedded in a Monty Python skit (and I'm obviously paraphrasing):

"I came here for an argument."
"No you didn't."
"Yes I did!"
"No you didn't."
"An argument isn't simply a negation of another's points!"
"Yes it is."
"An argument is a logical and factual assault on the other's points as well as an elaboration of the evidence in your favor, in an attempt to prove you are correct and the other person is wrong in their conclusions!"
"No it's not."

Do you intend to actually discuss the facts of the case, or not?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Zapruder said no such thing. You have been corrected on this already, but you refuse to acknowledge it.

Here is Abraham Zapruder's placement of the head wound on television on the afternoon of the assassination:

http://simfootball.net/JFK/Zapruder.jpg

Right side of the head. Not the back of the head. Was Zapruder lying or simply mistaken?

Hank

PS: That agrees with Dr.Jenkins placement of the wound, does it not?
Didn't Doctor Jenkins say "There was a great laceration on the right side of the head..." ?

 

[HSienzant]

The video you use as proof has the exit wound on the right forehead, but that's not where it officially was. In fact, Humes even shocked the aarb by drawing the exit wound in the right rear, consistent with the autopsy report and all the evidence.

No, that's a straw argument by you. The 8mm film (not a video) has the exit wound on the right side of the head. The forehead is not damaged.

You state a right-rear wound is consistent with *all the evidence*.

That is incorrect. Here's a few examples of evidence that contradicts your statement.

The man who filmed the assassination (Abraham Zapruder) was on local television within about an hour of the assassination, and this is where he placed the large wound in the head:

http://simfootball.net/JFK/Zapruder.jpg

His placement of the large wound location is consistent with the wound as seen in the Zapruder film, as can be plainly seen in this loop:

http://i366.photobucket.com/albums/oo103/bmjfk63/spatteronJackiesface-1.gif

And it's consistent with the autopsy photos, for example, this one:

http://simfootball.net/JFK/JFK-Autopsy.jpg

Note there is no visible damage to the back of the head in the loop.
And Zapruder isn't pointing to the right-rear of the head, either.
And the autopsy photo cited doesn't show a right-rear exit wound, either.

So your statement that a right-rear exit wound is "consistent with ... all the evidence" is thereby established as false.

And you are citing Humes testimony to the AARB, which was about 35 YEARS after the assassination.
Why not cite his testimony to the Warren Commission, which was less than a year after the assassination, when his memory of the events was much fresher?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

Why do you continue to repeat falsehoods that you have been corrected on time and again. Here is what Jenkins said:

"There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital)...even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." "I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound...."

The words Occipital and Cerebellum refer to the back of the head. Get it????

Hi Robert,

I have it on good authority the wound was to the temporal bone and it was on the right side of the head, not the back of the head (emphasis in the ORIGINAL below). The guy below fancies himself an authority on the subject. I'm not certain whether you would agree or not:

Marion Jenkins, (Professor And Chairman Of Anaesthesiology):

"There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital)...even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." "I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound...."

 

[dc1971]

Oswald is innocent simply based on Zapruder showing jfk get shot from the front. Any more, or different shooters is factual.

So let's raise him from the dead and set him free.

 

[dc1971]

Two randi denialists die and go to Hell. As they stood before Lucifer, one of them asks, "Lu, please tell us, who killed JFK?"

Satan looks at them sternly and says, "I want you to listen carefully. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy, and the driver shot jfk. Got it?"

One of the denialist's turns to the other and says, "This hurts worse than I thought it would."

YEAH!

I'll tell that at my next birthday party!

 

[dc1971]

lol.

I would ask you for evidence to support those delusions, but we both know you don't have anything other than myths and fantasies.

the truth

Alright! A game called "Repeat Every Word the Last Person Said" - can I play?