Subject: Re: Disney: **BAD news!**
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 13:00:24 GMT
From: TarzAuntBea@AHHHHeeeYAHooooodlooodlyAAAAAHhh.GoodnessGracious! (RevLurch)
Reply-To: White Punks On White Bread
Organization: Or Lack of Same
Newsgroups: alt.disney, alt.disney.beauty+beast, alt.disney.criticism, alt.disney.secrets, alt.disney.vacation-club,
References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6
>firstname.lastname@example.org (Jon Nadelberg) wrote:
>> (jonn replied):
>>>>Geeze is this a bunch of idiotic crap. It was just a bunch of cartoons
>>>>designed to be popular so they could make some money for the producers.
it was idiotic crap, but...
>>>That's =GOOD=, Nadelberg. You've learned your lesson =VERY= well.
>>>You're a =GOOD= little Mouseketeer. Now, repeat after me: Lee Harvey
>>>Oswald, acting alone...
>>Actually, yes. Lee Harvey Oswald did act alone. Oh, and there
>>are no alien abductions and Elvis is dead. Have a nice day.
....so's this. Well. Two out of three ain't all THAT bad. but...
...okay. I'll bite. Seems a good time and place to rehash an idiotic
35 year-old argument. What's your basis for saying this? How much
experience do you have with cheap Italian bolt-action rifles, sport?
And how do you explain the so-called "fact" that a 6.5 millimeter
copper-skinned lead slug, traveling nearly 3000 ft per second, could
hit two people, (we won't even worry about the turn it
supposedly made in mid-air) break a few bones, then end up on a
stretcher with virtually no deformation, when firing the exact same
round (at the same range) into gelatin produces a mushroom-shaped mess
of a bullet? You have to believe abject garbage like that to believe
Lee Harvery popped the prez all by his lonesome. I don't give a damn
how many phony experts the government had come forth, show slides,
wave a pointer around and claim it was possible. Anyone that has had
much experience with weapons knows it's bullshit. The laws of physics
may indeed be abstracts, but I don't see any reason to throw them all
out the window (as well as what I've learned first hand in 20 some-odd
years of owning and firing scores of military and sporting rifles, and
digging splattered and shattered slugs out of everything from possums
to phone books) the minute the government tells a goony story replete
with magic bullets that hesitate for a full half second between double
impacts, heads snapping back in the same direction a shot came from,
melon sized entry wounds and finger sized exit wounds and so on. But
the fact this official "version" still has mainstream credibility is
the craziest story of all.
And don't bother trying to compare me to idiots like Oliver stone in
an effort to divert attention. He's as full of crap as the Warren boys
Subject: Re: Disney: **BAD news!**
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 21:10:47 GMT
From: TarzAuntBea@AHHHHeeeYAHooooodlooodlyAAAAAHhh.GoodnessGracious! (RevLurch)
Reply-To: White Punks On White Bread
Organization: Or Lack of Same
Newsgroups: alt.disney, alt.disney.beauty+beast, alt.disney.criticism, alt.disney.secrets, alt.conspiracy, alt.slack
References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7
>>>>Well, gee. You have strange notions about what constitutes evidence.
>>I guess I do. I don't consider rumor and innuendo and lies as
Me neither. Do you even know what innuendo means?
In any case, I know what you're saying. It has to be typed up and
made to look official and repeated a bunch of times and appear real
proper and be read by a suit, preferably one employed by guys that
promised to end poverty and win the WAR on drugs and balance the
budget and what not, before YOU'LL bite.
>>>>>>>experience do you have with cheap Italian bolt-action rifles, sport?
>>>>>>Tons. In fact, I've spent hundreds of hours using cheap Italian
>>>>>>bolt-action rifles of all sorts. My father and I used to go out
>>>>>>hunting using nothing but. "If it's good enough for the President's
>>>>>>head and trachea, it's good enough for a deer," he'd often say.
>>Thanks. I thought it was a reasonable answer for a completely stupid
you would, being a completely stupid guy.
>>>>>>And how do you explain the so-called "fact" that a 6.5 millimeter
>>>>>>copper-skinned lead slug, traveling nearly 3000 ft per second, could
>>>>>>hit two people, (we won't even worry about the turn it
>>>>>>supposedly made in mid-air) break a few bones, then end up on a
>>>>>>stretcher with virtually no deformation, when firing the exact same
>>>>>>round (at the same range) into gelatin produces a mushroom-shaped mess
>>>>>>of a bullet?
>>>>>Your statement of facts is incorrect.
>>>Oh yeah? What is incorrect, exactly?
>>That anyone is claiming the bullet made a turn in mid-air, that the
The hell they don't. Have you read the Warren Report?
>>bullet had virtually no defomation.
have you ever seen a photo of it? They aren't hard to find.
And no Defoamation was necessary. We didn't fire it into the
BurmaShave tank. Was being used at the time.
Sorry for the length of what follows, but if you want more, I got
more. Most of this was compiled by Mike Griffith, a loon and addled
conspiracy buff who, tragically, can't help but let facts get in the
way of his feelgood solipsheepism:
According to the Warren Commission (WC), one bullet hit Kennedy in the
back of the neck, emerged from his throat, entered Governor Connally's
back, caused all of his wounds, and yet emerged from the governor in
nearly "pristine" condition (according to the WC itself), and was
found later on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital. This bullet, known
to many as the "magic bullet," is listed as Commission Exhibit (CE)
Even one of the Kennedy autopsy doctors called the "Single Bullet
Theory (SBT)," "most unlikely." And Dr. Charles
Gregory, one of the physicians who treated Governor Connally,
said the bullet that hit the Governor "behaved as though it had
never struck anything except him."
More bullet fragments were removed from Connally's wrist than are
missing from CE 399, and at least one fragment remained in his body
when he left the hospital. Nurse Audrey Bell, the Parkland nurse who
assisted with the surgery to the Governor's wrist, insists that
far more bullet fragment material was removed from the wrist than
is missing from CE 399, and her account is supported by the
11/22/63 Parkland operative record on the wrist surgery.
WC supporters hail the neutron activation analysis (NAA)
conducted by Dr. Vincent Guinn for the House Select Committee on
Assassinations (HSCA). Guinn analyzed CE 399 and some alleged
fragments from Connally's wrist and from the limousine. He
concluded it was "very likely" and "highly probable" they were
from the same ammunition. However, given the fragments Guinn
tested, as well as those he did NOT test, not to mention the
serious questions concerning CE 399's origin, it is impossible
for his NAA to support the magic-bullet theory or the lone-gunman
When Guinn began his analysis, he found that a can which had
contained fragments that had apparently struck the limousine's
windshield was empty, so he could not test them. The fragments
from Connally's wrist that were tested in 1964 were (and still
are) missing and thus were not analyzed either. Of the fragment
specimens that were available to Guinn, one of them, CE 569,
could not be tested because it was only the copper bullet jacket
with no lead inside. In addition, Guinn later conceded that none of
the wrist fragments for his test weighed the same as those listed as
evidence by the WC, and that he did not test the same samples that
were tested by the FBI in 1964.
Kennedy and Connally were not in the proper alignment for the
magic bullet to have caused all of the governor's wounds.
According to WC supporters, however, some experts claim that a line
drawn "through Connally and Kennedy's wounds leads
right back, straight as an arrow" to the sixth-floor window."
This alleged straight line is based on downright fanciful
speculation, and it is contrary to eyewitness testimony and to
the photographic evidence. The author of the WC trajectory
study admitted he could not get the "straight line" to match up
when JFK's back wound was considered. He also admitted that the
margin of error in his analysis of the head shot was so great it
could allow for a shot from the Dal-Tex Building and even from
the County Records Building.
Dr. David Mantik's recent research at the National Archives
definitely appears to refute the single-bullet theory once and
for all. Dr. Mantik, a physicist and radiologist, was permitted
to examine the original x-rays at the National Archives, along
with the autopsy photographs:
Mantik measured the width of the spine directly
on the X-ray. He estimated the front-to-back
distance of the body as 14 cm (typical for males of
this size) and the distance of the back wound from
the midline (4.5 cm to 5.0 cm) was given by the
HSCA. He measured distances on the photographs as
well. The wound seen in the front of the throat at
Parkland was placed at the midline. [Quoting Dr.
Mantik] "When I placed these measurements onto a
cross section of the body at the seventh cervical
vertebra and then connected the bullet entry and
exit sites by a straight line, I Immediately saw that the
"magic bullet" had to go right through the spine. This path
would have caused major damage to the spine and would have
been very obvious on the chest X-ray. In fact, there is
no major trauma like this anywhere in the spine.
[Still quoting Dr. Mantik] "Because of the
impenetrable vertical barrier produced by the
transverse process up and down the entire cervical
spine and because of the total width of the cervical
spine, there is no place for the bullet to pass
through anywhere in the neck and still
exit the midline of the throat. If, instead, the upper chest
is considered as a possible bullet trajectory site, then
another problem arises. The bullet would have had to go
right through the lung. But no lung damage of this type
was seen by the pathologists and none is seen on the
X-rays either. This 'magic' bullet simply cannot enter
through the back wound and then exit through the
throat wound without hitting the spine--or else
causing major lung trauma.
"It is odd that this rather simple construction
with exact measurements has never been done before.
The throat wound, which looked like an entrance
wound to the Parkland physicians when they first
described it [original emphasis], may indeed have
been an entrance wound." (emphasis added)
Dr. Mantik's discovery confirms the conclusions of the late Dr.
John Nichols, who was a professor of pathology at the University
of Kansas Medical Center. Although Dr. Nichols was not permitted
to study the autopsy x-rays and photos, he deduced from the
trajectories involved and from his knowledge of human anatomy
that no bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat
wound without smashing into one of the transverse processes of
the spine. Said Dr. Nichols,
Figure 6 is the view through Oswald's
telescopic sight at Frame 222, showing the depressed
angle of 20.23 degrees prevailing at the first shot
as measured in the FBI reenactment. I have both
measured and calculated the lateral angle at this
frame to be 9.21 degrees. Elementary anatomy
indicated that the minimum lateral angle for the
bullet to miss the transverse processes and emerge
in the midline [of the throat] is 28 degrees; this
is obviously impossible from Oswald's alleged firing
Yet another problem with the SBT is the location of the wound in
President Kennedy's back. Lone-gunman theorists claim there was
an entrance wound in the back of President Kennedy's neck, on the
lower right-hand side. They do so in order to account for his
throat wound. They say the bullet that allegedly hit the back
of Kennedy's neck emerged from his throat.
However, the back wound was actually located about five and a
half inches down in the back, near the third thoracic vertebra.
This is confirmed by Kennedy's death certificate, by an original
autopsy face sheet (marked "verified" by JFK's personal physician), by
the transcript of the 1/27/64 WC executive session, by an FBI
report on the autopsy, by the holes in the President's shirt and
coat, by former Parkland nurse Diana Bowron, and by four medical
professionals who attended the autopsy. Moreover, recently
released HSCA documents have provided further corroboration for
the back wound's low location. Three federal agents who saw the
back wound drew diagrams of it for HSCA investigators. Those
diagrams have now been released, and they show that each agent
placed the back wound well below the neck (and visibly below the
It's worth remembering that for years the back wound was claimed
to be ABOVE the throat wound. Then, the HSCA reinvestigated the
case and turned up evidence that the wound was in fact BELOW the
throat wound, and, moreover, that the bullet must have had a
slightly UPWARD trajectory in order to have emerged from the throat.
WC supporters accept the HSCA's location for the wound but claim
that Kennedy was leaning so far forward that the bullet was able
to cause the throat wound and then strike Governor Connally, yet
no photo or footage of the assassination shows Kennedy leaning
that far forward. If the wound's location at the third thoracic
vertebra is acknowledged, then the SBT is invalid no matter how
far forward one wants to assume Kennedy was leaning. Even the
WC's location for the back wound poses severe problems for the
>>These are common arguments
>>used by the consipracy industry. They are not true. And I
>>believe this is just about the only worthwhile section of
>>debate in your entire posting. The rest appears to be either
>>flame bait or generalized insanity.
Maybe they are common becuse they are true, as opposed to yours (which
I hesitate to even call arguments), consisting as they do of
absolutely nothing but mindless contradiction, motivated by a the sort
of "generalized" (whatever the hell that means) insanity that
would cause an armless man to dive into a pool with rocks in his
>>>>You ain't fooling anybody here. Gonna have to do more than park your
>>>>ass and squawk NOT TRUE NOT TRUE to keep me from making an arse out of
>>>>you here. Gonna anyway, but it'll take longer if you fight back a
>You're going to make an "arse" out of me? And you're planning on
>>do this because I dare challenged your anti-American conspiratorial
>>mindset? Strike number one.
fire the umpire. He's a moron.
>>>>> But that's ok. You're only
>>>>>parroting what the conspiracy industry would have you beleive.
>>>>>since they are not saying this, then it's really not germain.
>>>What them no-good germains got to do with it? Looks dumb to use fancy
>>>words and misspell them.
>>I see. So you have no real facts to argue from, so you start picking
>>pointlessly at grammatical issues in an effort to foster further
>>argument. Strike number two.
And you pick back and say nothing! Kick his ass while he's in the
>>>Still waiting for you to tell me where the
>>>factual errors are.
>>Considering you asked for these factual errors in the same post, it's
>>likely that until I read this post, that I would not have been able
>>to respond, so you would be "waiting" quite a while for me to
>>respond during your composition.
hoohah. Having a ball with yer little temporal displacement gag, eh?
>You could have typed "still waiting"
>>a hundred times more, and you still wouldn't have received any
>>more info. But you knew that, and you're just making some pathetic
>>little attempt to give the appearance that I am not supplying any
>>responses. Strike number three. You're a troll.
Kill the S.O.B.!
>>Next batter please.
Batter up yerself. Roll around in it. Seem dead set on deep-frying
your own ass, and it'll make you tastier.
>>Anyway, run off and do the reading you wish you
>>had done before you shot off yer bazoo, and come back when you are
>>ready to argue.
>Oh, you have more? Ok. I'll follow these up since I already started,
>but this is the last response you're getting.
WHAT A SURPRISE!
>>To answer your hysterical rantings directly, I've already done
>>enough reading, thank you. And since this is not argument,
>>but merely a series of name calling exercises on your part,
>>I don't see what any sort of reading would be worthwhile,
>>except to get tactics out of alt.flame.
You could use some
>>>>>>The only people saying the above "line" are those in the
>>>>>>conspiracy industry who use it as a straw man.
>>>>I said all there is to say, I think.
>>You haven't said anything substantive. You've just become more strident.
You haven't said a goddam thing, substantive or otherwise, except I"M
RIGHT, and if you don't believe me, well, I DON"T CARE. I'm Taking
my TV guide an going home!. WAH
>>>You have nothing to support your
>>>position (which is, in fact, insupportable), so you say NAH NAH yer
>>>wrong "cause I SEZ SO," and try to tar me with the extremist brush
>>>just like I indicated you would in my first set of remarks.
He's a tape, I think. This is where I came in.
>>Have you ever tried to boil water at high altitudes?
yeah. It's real easy. And making a pork chop sweat at sea level ain't
much harder, at least figuratively.
>>>>>Again, no one is claiming these things except conspiracy theorists
>>>>>such that they use these distortions of the truth only to say that they are
>>>>>obviously false and therefore a conspiracy exists.
>>>horseshit. I've had enough of this. Let's hear the facts from you,
>>>>since you said everything I said was wrong, you MUST know what they
>>You've had enough? Then I suggest you stop posting these sorts
>>of pointless tirades. Since you have supplied absolutely nothing
>>in the way of facts, I don't see any reason to bother doing so.
"reason to" or "way of?"
>>What little in the way of facts that you have posted have been
>>wrong. Most of your postings consist of personal attack.
only when I'm dealing with dumb jerks
>>>>>And I'm not sure I agree with you that taking a gun and shooting
>>>>>at phone books and whatever vermin you happen to find in your
>>>>>basement qualifies you in the various areas of study that have
>>>>>>been undertaken to examine the issue.
>>>yeah. Name some of them. Tell me who did them, who paid for them, and
>>>what they found.
>>Name them? It doesn't matter who they are or even what conclusions they
>>came to. Shooting at phone books does not make you a munitions expert,
>>and does not qualify you to comment on anything other than shooting
>>at phone books.
guess we'll never know what you are qualified to do, besides
displaying debating skills on a par with those of a yearling Mynah
bird left next to a radio blaring Senator Bob Dornick filling in for
>>split and partially fragmented at the nose. And it it went through
>>>lots less tissue and bone than ce-399 supposedly did.
>>So you and your "gunsmith friend" went out and fired some bullets
>>into a tank and now you know all there is to know, eh? Do you
>>know what solipsism is?
Yeah. I know what pretentiousness means, too. Know what
Floccinaucinihilipilification means? Beat that, doughboy!
>>So who here is parroting nonsense they have no evidence to support,
>>And you call this ridiculous experiment of yours evidence of some
No, I said it was evidence that the government line (and the Warren
report) was bunk. And I'll stick to that until I'm faced with
arguments to the contrary aren't composed entirely of unsupported,
self-satisfied sneering from people who are determined their stubborn
efforts to avoid objective analysis of laughably far-fetched "official
positions" make them APPEAR superior to those that, given several
thousand years of history and a SHITLOAD of hard "evidence" to
indicate its existence, accept the possibility that, from time to
time, govenments just might lie about stuff like this.
>>>Fact is, ce-399 never hit anything harder than water, unless you
>>>count the back of a tank.
>>Believe whatever you want. You're not going to convince me with just
>>barnyard experiments and wild accusations.
For once, I believe YOU.
>>>>But I know the hacks that have been engaged in clumsy damage
>>>>control ever since the assassination are grateful as all hell that
>>>>most Americans are as gullible as you are.
>>Actually, you know, I'm not gullible at all. I'm part of the conspiracy.
yer jokes suck. Pick up some copies of Zit the next time you go to
Tattersalls to get the latest of Stephen King's Spooky Adventures in
Word Processing. Might help ya.
>>>>>>>the fact this official "version" still has mainstream credibility is
>>>>>>>the craziest story of all.
>>>>>>It has credibility because 1) it is the most likely, 2) it has
>>>>>>the most evidence to support it, and 3) is not depended upon
>>>>>>by an industry of book sellers and convetioneers to make them
>>>>>>tons of money in just about the most reprehensible manner
>>>>>>Ok. I won't divert you.
>>Attempted diversion is all you are capable of, it seems (at least
>>>>regarding this issue).
>>You're too funny. Good bye.
Well, funny or no funny, troll and flamebaiter or not, I can at
least finish what I started. In fairness, it looks like you can too,
but in a much less satisfying way. I don't blame you for this attempt
at damage control, but there's not much I can do when my opponent
decides to finish HIMSELF off, which you STARTED doing on your first
followup in this thread. As I said before (and am now, gloriously
vindicated and gleefully repeating myself), you ain't fooling anybody,
waggin' yer finger and slinking off with your tail between your legs.
Go on, eat yer hat out, ya lame-brained load of loofa juice. You been
done and you knows it!