(PART 247)


>>> "Dave, the SBT is impossible by every law of physics and gravity, therefore, it is only common sense that JBC [John B. Connally] was hit by more than one bullet." <<<


Whether the Single-Bullet Theory is true or untrue has nothing whatever to do with whether JBC was hit by 1 or 2 (or 52) bullets. Why are you linking the two things? They don't go together.

>>> "He [JBC] did not say this publicly, but he did say he was NOT hit by the same bullet as JFK." <<<

Which, as we all know, is pretty much worthless and meaningless testimony coming from a man (John Connally) who wasn't even looking at JFK when JFK was hit by bullet CE399. You're really reaching now.

>>> "...You have to have two bullets that caused [Connally's] chest and lung wounds, and one that broke his wrist." <<<

Goodie! The kook is making shit up again. Will he EVER stop doing this? Knowing how these nutcases like Rob operate, the answer to that is very likely "No".

Anyway, two bullets are certainly not required to account for all of Connally's wounds. Rob, of course, probably realizes this fact too. He just won't admit it.

Dr. Robert Shaw, on 11/22/63, said on live TV (after describing all of Governor Connally's injuries) that it was his opinion that all of Connally's wounds were caused by "one" single bullet.

The Warren Commission determined that Connally was hit by just one bullet (CE399). The HSCA (re)-determined that Connally was hit by just one bullet (CE399).

But Rob knows better. He's got BETTER evidence than what the liar-filled and/or ignorant WC and HSCA relied on.

Right, Robert?

As I've said before, you are an LNer's dream come true. You are so full of make-believe evidence and never-could-have-happened garbage relating to the murders of JFK and J.D. Tippit, you epitomize the "Anybody But Oswald" Kook Brigade. You are a caricature. A joke.

And furthermore, you ought to be ashamed and embarrassed to put into electronic print the unsupportable nonsense you ejaculate here regularly.

But Rob's not embarrassed in the slightest. He's probably proud of the "ABO" stance he supports. He's doing the righteous thing by mangling and/or tossing out every last piece of evidence in BOTH the Kennedy and Tippit murder cases.

What he's left with is the sound of his own voice reverberating in an arena where NO EVIDENCE AT ALL remains with which to "solve" the case.

Or, to quote my favorite author once again (which never gets tiring, due to the large amounts of common sense that come from the man's yellow pad and pencil):

"The dreadful illogic and superficiality of the conspiracy theorists' modus operandi has inevitably resulted in the following situation: Though they have dedicated their existence to trying to poke holes in the Warren Commission's findings, they have failed abysmally to tell us (if the Warren Commission was wrong) what actually did happen. In other words, other than blithely tossing out names, they have failed to offer any credible evidence of who, if not Oswald, killed Kennedy. Nor have they offered any credible evidence at all of who the conspirators behind the assassination were. So after more than forty years, if we were to rely on these silly people, we'd have an assassination without an assassin (since, they assure us, Oswald didn't kill Kennedy), and a conspiracy without conspirators. Not a simple achievement." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 982 of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)

David Von Pein
June 3, 2008