Who supports/promotes the shills?

[David Von Pein]

There were NEVER any fingerprints of LHO found anywhere, none. Only his palmprint which was planted on the rifle while he was in the morgue.

And yet, per Ken, it is **I** who puts "lies" on my website.

Pot....meet Kettle (aka: Kenny Drew).

The above quote by Ken D. is nothing but falsehoods.

Mind-boggling.

Edited June 20, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Glenn Nall]

oh, sorry. i can see how that question might be misunderstood. you're right, it sounds a lot like i asked, "where did they say they saw him at precisely 12.30?" when in actuality I should have written:

Carolyn Arnold, Bill Shelley, Wesley Frazier, Billy Lovelady, etc

where do they say they saw him?

[David Von Pein]

You just wrote the exact same thing again, Glenn.

(Is Glenn being "cute" with Davey V.P.?)

Edited June 20, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Glenn Nall]

was simply trying to understand how you might have misunderstood the question, since you must have.

is it a tricky question? is Robert's question tricky...?

there must be some reason you don't want to answer some of these questions that are, quite fairly, asked.

[David Von Pein]

Glenn,

Each of those witnesses saw LHO inside the building (in different places within the building) throughout the day on 11/22. But the important point I was making is: NONE of those TSBD employees said they saw LHO at precisely 12:30.

Do you disagree with that? Do you think Arnold or Shelley or Frazier or Lovelady (or some other TSBD worker of your choosing) provides Oswald with a "12:30" alibi?

[Glenn Nall]

Glenn,

A - Each of those witnesses saw LHO inside the building (in different places within the building) throughout the day on 11/22. But the important point I was making is: NONE of those TSBD employees said they saw LHO at precisely 12:30.

B - Do you disagree with that? Do you think Arnold or Shelley or Frazier or Lovelady (or some other TSBD worker of your choosing) provides Oswald with a "12:30" alibi?

A - We know this, Dave.

B - this is what people mean when they discuss "shill" behavior. You're egging for an argument (does that work, "egging for"?), you're trying to put insinuation into my very simple question. I did not intend for there to be an implication in it - if i had, it would have been a bit more obvious. I don't disagree with that. I don't care where he was at 12.30. It's YOU who have to place him somewhere at 12.30.

Your question, "Do you think..." is so entirely loaded with provocation it's (should be) embarrassing. Your MO is embarrassing. Your assumption that others know so much less than you is insulting. If you wonder why your "defense" isn't given more consideration, you can look at this little string of yours and mine for a really good explanation.

and LHO doesn't need an alibi for 12.30. Reasonable doubt is all that's necessary. And there's plenty of that.

[David Von Pein]

Glenn,

You asked some questions. Then I asked you some questions in return. And this somehow equals "shill"-like behavior?

My question about the TSBD witnesses is neither insulting nor embarrassing -- to anyone. And why you think it is is a mystery.

What's truly embarrassing (for you), Glenn, is your complete dismissal of virtually all of the evidence because you can't classify it as "Direct Evidence". Your repeated claims that my points regarding LHO's odd behavior on 11/21 and 11/22 are ALL "irrelevant" is something you should have been embarrassed to write.

In fact, given the OTHER evidence which all points in one way or another to Oswald (whether it be "direct" or "circumstantial" in nature), the ten items on my "Out Of The Ordinary Behavior" list are entirely relevant. Crucial, in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall as if it's totally unimportant when talking about the events of 11/22/63....

DVP SAID:

9.) Murdering a policeman on Tenth Street.

GLENN NALL SAID:

NOT proven, AND irrelevant

[unquote.]

Now THAT'S not only embarrassing for you, Glenn. It's just plain ridiculous.

Edited June 20, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Kenneth Drew]

I wish I had your total freedom, Ken. You can just make up stuff from pure nothingness all day long and try to pass off such tommyrot as an "open mind". No need to stick with the physical evidence. Just pretend it was all faked to frame Oswald. Done deal. Ahhhh, what a life!

And why don't you have 'total freedom'? Who or what constrains you from having the freedom to see the truth?

DVP are you deliberately avoiding this question?

[Kenneth Drew]

That's the whole point, Glenn --- none of those TSBD workers said they saw LHO at exactly 12:30.

the preponderance of witnesses place LHO on the 2nd floor at 12:30

and tell us where LHO's fingerprints were found (that existed prior to the manipulation of the evidence in DC.) and don't make it up. Or I guess you don't have the 'freedom' to make up things, do you?

[Kenneth Drew]

Glenn,

You asked some questions. Then I asked you some questions in return. And this somehow equals "shill"-like behavior?

My question about the TSBD witnesses is neither insulting nor embarrassing -- to anyone. And why you think it is is a mystery.

What's truly embarrassing (for you), Glenn, is your complete dismissal of virtually all of the evidence because you can't classify it as "Direct Evidence". Your repeated claims that my points regarding LHO's odd behavior on 11/21 and 11/22 are ALL "irrelevant" is something you should have been embarrassed to write.

In fact, given the OTHER evidence which all points in one way or another to Oswald (whether it be "direct" or "circumstantial" in nature), the ten items on my "Out Of The Ordinary Behavior" list are entirely relevant. Crucial, in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall as if it's totally unimportant when talking about the events of 11/22/63....

DVP SAID:

9.) Murdering a policeman on Tenth Street.

GLENN NALL SAID:

NOT proven, AND irrelevant

[unquote.]

Now THAT'S not only embarrassing for you, Glenn. It's just plain ridiculous.

in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall Why shouldn't it be brushed aside. No witnesses place LHO there, the time of deaths place LHO at the Texas theatre at the time of JDT's death. the bullets removed from Tippets body did not come from LHO's revolver. In short, Davey, you got nothing.....

[Kenneth Drew]

I suspect DVP is about to bail on this thread, he's now not answering questions. " And why don't you have 'total freedom'? Who or what constrains you from having the freedom to see the truth?" He made the statement but won't tell us why he's not free to tell the truth.....

[Glenn Nall]

Glenn,

You asked some questions. Then I asked you some questions in return. And this somehow equals "shill"-like behavior?

My question about the TSBD witnesses is neither insulting nor embarrassing -- to anyone. And why you think it is is a mystery.

What's truly embarrassing (for you), Glenn, is your complete dismissal of virtually all of the evidence because you can't classify it as "Direct Evidence". Your repeated claims that my points regarding LHO's odd behavior on 11/21 and 11/22 are ALL "irrelevant" is something you should have been embarrassed to write.

In fact, given the OTHER evidence which all points in one way or another to Oswald (whether it be "direct" or "circumstantial" in nature), the ten items on my "Out Of The Ordinary Behavior" list are entirely relevant. Crucial, in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall as if it's totally unimportant when talking about the events of 11/22/63....

DVP SAID:

9.) Murdering a policeman on Tenth Street.

GLENN NALL SAID:

NOT proven, AND irrelevant

[unquote.]

Now THAT'S not only embarrassing for you, Glenn. It's just plain ridiculous.

I'm imagining a conversation something like this on your side of the universe:

"Hey, let's see how many times we can get Glenn to bite on an increasingly unreasonable string of unconnected provocation! That'd be a hoot!"

"Good idea - I bet he canNOT resist. Let's!"

I give. You win.

[Glenn Nall]

Glenn,

You asked some questions. Then I asked you some questions in return. And this somehow equals "shill"-like behavior?

My question about the TSBD witnesses is neither insulting nor embarrassing -- to anyone. And why you think it is is a mystery.

What's truly embarrassing (for you), Glenn, is your complete dismissal of virtually all of the evidence because you can't classify it as "Direct Evidence". Your repeated claims that my points regarding LHO's odd behavior on 11/21 and 11/22 are ALL "irrelevant" is something you should have been embarrassed to write.

In fact, given the OTHER evidence which all points in one way or another to Oswald (whether it be "direct" or "circumstantial" in nature), the ten items on my "Out Of The Ordinary Behavior" list are entirely relevant. Crucial, in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall as if it's totally unimportant when talking about the events of 11/22/63....

DVP SAID:

9.) Murdering a policeman on Tenth Street.

GLENN NALL SAID:

NOT proven, AND irrelevant

[unquote.]

Now THAT'S not only embarrassing for you, Glenn. It's just plain ridiculous.

in fact. You even dismiss the Tippit murder on my 10-point list! A murder committed by Oswald is just brushed aside by Glenn Nall Why shouldn't it be brushed aside. No witnesses place LHO there, the time of deaths place LHO at the Texas theatre at the time of JDT's death. the bullets removed from Tippets body did not come from LHO's revolver. In short, Davey, you got nothing.....

heck, i didn't know all that. i was simply speaking to the lack of evidence. trying to keep it simple.

this is why i've come to the conclusion that his agenda is not in the LG arena. I think it's elsewhere. in this thread (and how many others?), reason was left behind a long way back.

[Glenn Nall]

I suspect DVP is about to bail on this thread, he's now not answering questions. " And why don't you have 'total freedom'? Who or what constrains you from having the freedom to see the truth?" He made the statement but won't tell us why he's not free to tell the truth.....

AH. i've reread your statement. Terrific question he walked himself into...

[Brian Schmidt]

Time for a word or two in defense of the people who usually and predictably get slagged in threads like these: They are not stupid, they do not have a lesser knowledge of the evidence and they are not shills, agents or paid agents. They are sincere people who, whether you like it or not, interpret things differently than you, and they deserve the same courtesies as you, like not being constantly called names and put down.

Stephen, as always, I tend to agree with most things you say. But, my criticism of most LNers in general is that they tend to be living decades in the past in terms of research and ignore entire fields of research that is inconvenient for them to delve into. Of course, CT's often ignore evidence too...