On Jan 26, 10:59 am, Robert Harris <reharr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article
> <a8e968a7-b1df-46de-ac60-b333a078d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Chuck Schuyler <chu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 24, 9:20 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > I recently posted a message entitled, "The Altgens Photo", which
listed a
> > > number of witnesses who stated that they heard two shots after
events,
> > > which we can see, had not yet occured, in the photo taken by James
Altgens
> > > at the equivalent of Z255.
>
> > > If these witnesses are correct, then the Posner scenario of audible
shots
> > > at 160, 224, 312 is false, and the final shots were indeed, fired
well
> > > after 255.
>
> > > For some reason, every time I post about this, the LN theorists go
> > > completely silent. Is it possible that they have no answer to these
very
> > > powerful visual corroborations of these Secret Service agents and
law
> > > enforcement professionals?
>
> > > But since none of them will tackle this issue, let me try another
> > > challenge:
>
> > > Can you find even one witness who sup****ts the Posner shot timing,
who can
> > > be visually corroborated?
>
> > > IOW, can you find even a single witness who said something like, "I
heard
> > > two shots, seperated by 2-3 seconds, and then turned to look to the
> > > rear.".
>
> > > Of course, the corroboration would be that the witness could be
seen,
> > > turned to the rear in the Altgens, or other photo, or film.
>
> > > Just to show what a good s****t I am, I'll even give you a tip. There
are a
> > > number of other visible witnesses who described turning around,
relative
> > > to gunshots. They include Kellerman, Jackie, Greer, and Nellie
Connally.
>
> > > Any takers?
>
> > > Robert Harris
>
> > What is your infatuation with witnesses, Bob?
>
> I look at witness statements because those people were there during the
> assassination and can tell us what happened, Chuck.
>
> I then compare what they said, with their actions in the films and
> photos, to confirm or deny their accuracy.
>
> > You tend to ignore
> > witnesses that conflict with your theories, and prop up witnesses that
> > corroborate your theories.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> The entire purpose of my posting is, to ask people to post verifiable
> witness testimony that DISAGREES with me.
>
> Did you even bother to read the post you are attacking Chuck:-)
>
Chuckie daCheeze shares a cubicle with Tom daTune Lowry (aka
cdddraftsman)in a mortgage com[pany office somewhere in the upper
midwest.... He hasn't quite got a handle on reading and comprehension yet
but we're working on that -- because of the real estate debacle Chuckie
has been working off prior student loans (of course he flunked out of
school) for the .john Marquette crowd.
Chuck won't admit he went to school Marquette... We can safely assume
differently though, every time .john shows up here Chuckie is right on top
of it.... .john stopped fast, chuckie daShoe's head would be buried about
a foot up .john's ass.
Carry on, son!
>
> > You can easily solve this case based on the rifle found on the 6th
floor,
> > the spent shells, the bullet/bullet fragments, and the wounds to the
> > victims.
>
> Wrong again, Chuck. You are talking about evidence against one of the
> shooters.
>
>
>
> > Everything else is speculation or a sideshow.
>
> Chuck, you seem to thrive on sweeping, unsup****ted generalizations. What
> exactly is wrong, with examining witness statements and then trying to
> corroborate/deny their accuracy??
>
> Isn't your REAL mission, to convince everyone to stop looking so closely
> at the case?
>
> Does it bother you, that the evidence is almost 100% AGAINST your single
> assassin theory??
>
> Does it bother you, that there is NOT EVEN ONE verifiable witness who
> sup****ts your/Posner/Bugliosi/WC's shooting scenario??
>
> Chuck, did you know that among the law enforcement professionals, there
> was not a single contem****aneous statement sup****ting the shooting
> scenario that is required for the SA theory??
>
> Why doesn't that bother you Chuck?
>
> Robert Harris
|
