So show me some evidence then. I just quoted this guy's testimony from 1963 and it refuted what you said he said. I'm willing to believe any evidence you show to me. But you haven't yet. All I get are innuendo, loose and vague connections, some coincidences, distortions, feelings, and speculation. "Nixon was in Dallas the night before -- Aha! therefore there were two gunmen." "Hoover hated JFK -- therefore there were two gunmen." "LBJ talked with Hoover about the assassination on November 24th -- therefore they must have been discussing the coverup." You all claim that because the Zapruder film shows Kennedy moving "back and to the left" there were two gunmen -- but it doesn't. It shows an immediate thrust forward. Whenever I check out your "evidence" it vanishes. I could go on.
Just like those invisible and nonexistant curtain rods.
He said what he said on the History Channel. You refuse to watch it.
But you haven't yet. All I get are innuendo, loose and vague connections, some coincidences, distortions, feelings, and speculation.
Doctors at Parkland said the exit hole was in back of the head. You refuse to believe them. They said the throat wound was an entrance wound, you refuse to believe them. The hole in Kennedy's back is lower than his throat wound yet you still say it was caused by a downward-travelling bullet from 60 feet in the vertical. CIA agents say the CIA was bragging about the assassination, you refuse to believe them. We have a match on the fingerprints, you refuse to believe them. Witnesses describe a man dressed different than Oswald shoot Tippit, you refuse to believe them. Dallas police lined up Mexicans in Oswald's line-up, that doesn't bother you. LBJ's association with convicted killer Mac Wallace doesn't bother you. The pristine bullet seems OK to you. Witnesses say that there was a puff of smoke on the knoll, that doesn't bother you.
"Nixon was in Dallas the night before -- Aha! therefore there were two gunmen."
I never mentioned Nixon regarding the party.
"Hoover hated JFK -- therefore there were two gunmen." "LBJ talked with Hoover about the assassination on November 24th -- therefore they must have been discussing the coverup."
I never mentioned anything about November 24.
You all claim that because the Zapruder film shows Kennedy moving "back and to the left" there were two gunmen -- but it doesn't.
I've said nothing of Kennedy's movements.
It shows an immediate thrust forward. Whenever I check out your "evidence" it vanishes. I could go on.
Does LBJ's involvement with Mac Wallace bother you? What's your opinion of the Marshall death? The government said it was a suicide, do you believe the government regarding Marshall?