No translation needed. I've provided facts and documentation that counters your uninformed intransigence many times, as have many other posters who just got fed up with your act and walked away. Informed experts and an overwhelming majority of public opinion, which has stayed firmly in doubt of the official tale over the years, all reject the government cover up which you cling to like a child clinging to mommy and daddy.
No you have not provided facts or any documentation. The other posters you refer to merely lost and looked stupid and realized it. You simply refuse to admit it. The people you refer to as informed experts are nothing of the sort they are merely con artists who you naively believe. Public opinion is irrelevant as it proves........nothing. There is no evidence of a government coverup period. The evidence proves Oswald shot Kennedy that evidence which I HAVE cited and demonstrated is in fact documented and irrefutable. You cannot provide evidence against it and have never done so. Repeating an assertion is not evidence andall you have done is stomp and scream the same thing over and over in the face of evidence and facts which prove you wrong
Ironic blather coming from someone who does nothing but issue endless unsubstantiated denials. I've seen your act before and it's very tiresome and reprehensible. Save your e-breath and just realize there are many posters here that reject your zany denials.
Wrong. It is you making unsubstantiated claims. I support my statements. Once again it is all about evidence and you have none to support your claim. There is in fact massive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy which you willfully and dishonestly ignore. There is no evidence of another shooter. Those other posters have merely been defeated.
I have always been curious about the Kennedy assassination, since I was a kid. I've probably heard every conspiracy theory put out there. The one that rings most true, in my mind, is Oswald was alone, but he did not fire the fatal shot. He fired 3 times, missed twice. Then a Secret Service agent in a follow-up car stood up with a carbine to return fire at the book depository. But, just as he did so, the driver of his car accelerated - throwing him backwards and off-balance, causing a negligent misfire, which was the fatal headshot. Oswald was using ball ammunition, which is why his one on-target shot went through Kennedy's back, and through Gov. Connelly. The fatal shot was a military round which was designed to explode on impact - for maximum damage - and that came from the Secret Service rifle. It was an embarrassing accident, which the Secret Service did not want anybody to know. And, hence, all the conspiracy theories emerged.
That theory has long since been debunked. There is simply no evidence for it and massive evidence disproving it. First of all one agent did raise a rifle but he did not fire it. He was in LBJs lomo along with several others and no one heard or saw him fire. The rifle was loaded with standard militaeu issue ball rounds and not some imaginary exploding bullet. Of course every bullet or bullet fragment found at the scene was chemically proven to have come from Oswald's rifle. It is simply another fictional conspiracy theory.
No, he was in a Secret Service car, not LBJ's car. Exploding bullets are not imaginary, my friend. I am guessing you have never been in the military (that's how you spell that word, by the way). I told you; I have heard just about every conspiracy theory out there. I know about the photo of George Bush, outside the book depository. I know about Zapata Oil, and the Cuban connection. I'm not a rube.
I was mistaken about the car. LBJs car was directly behind the secret service car and still was full of witnesses who would have seen and heard such a shot. None did. Bullets can be rigged to explode but the secret service was not equipped with such ammo and the military uses no such rounds. That is why it is imaginary. They we're using standard hardball full metal jacket ammo. You sound like a rube. There is no such picture of bush. Like all conspiracy theories there is no evidence to support yours. Yes in fact I have been in the military which is how I know they do not have or use exploding bullets. Ordnance explodes i.e. mortar rounds or artillery shells. Military issue bullets do not.
I'm still seriously doubting your credibility, son. I was on a tank, and we had two kinds of rounds: sabot and HEAT round. Not to mention, there were a couple other types of tank rounds which were outlawed by the time I enlisted (Beehive, and Willy Pete). Beehive rounds were basically shotgun shells fired from a tank barrel. And Willy Pete is white phosphorus rounds. They are not 'rigged' to explode, genius. They are designed to fracture and fragment into pieces upon impact. Kinda like a hollow point round, but much more severe.
Those are not bullets they are ordnance which I clearly explained. Hollow points rounds do not explode and are not designed to explode or to fracture and fragment. They are designed to expand. The military does not use exploding bullets as I clearly specified. You are wrong and no evidence exists to support your theory. I have more credibility than some one who tries to dodge and obsfucate by deliberately confusing rounds of ordnance with small arms bullets.
Wrong. I am correct and you know this. Childish replies such as yours are an admission of this. I stated facts which are irrefutable.
Am not! Am too! Grow up, dude. We disagree. That does not mean I am immature, genius. Were you in the military? I didn't think so.
My bad, you said you were in the military. What was your MOS? Supply? Medical? I was combat arms. Your MOS started with a 9-something, right? Mine started with a 1
What makes you immature is your denial of simple facts which I stated. You know little to nothing about he militay as we have proven here so your self aggrandizing claim is doubtful
You did not state any 'facts', junior. Just stop pretending you are the authority, because you're not. I know little or nothing about 'he militay'? Ok, son. I have a DD214 that says different.
