From: sirslick@fast.net   
      
   On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 12:09:42 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:   
   > On Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:47:04 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus    
   >  wrote:   
   > >On Thursday, December 14, 2023 at 10:58:38?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > >> Yes, I know. He's fat, ugly, bald, and stupid, but all is not lost. He   
   could possibly lose some weight.    
   > >    
   > >I may be fat, but he's ugly and I can lose weight.    
   > >    
   > >I don't believe there's any hope for him, even after they extricate his   
   nose from Von Pein's ass.    
   > >    
   > >Don't get him started on the "lapel flip".   
   > The point is - believers for a long time spoke of a mythical "lapel    
   > flip" ... and now it's morphed into a "bulge."    
      
     Arguing over semantics. Same observable phenomenon regardless of what words   
   are used to describe it.   
       
   > So clearly they've changed their minds, and *should* be honest enough    
   > to admit that their previous view on a "lapel flip" was wrong. But,    
   > of course, they aren't honest.   
   > >He's convinced that Connally was told by "someone else" that Kennedy had   
   been shot, but he can't prove it.   
   > Speculation is a powerful tool when you don't have any facts.   
      
     Reasoning is a powerful tool, for those that know how.   
      
   > >He's convinced there was a "bulge" in Connally's coat caused by a bullet,   
   although he can't prove it.   
   > I suspect that the idea that the wind could flip a lapel, but only a    
   > bullet could cause a "bulge" had a lot to do with their new theory.    
   >    
   > And make no mistake, THIS IS A *NEW* THEORY.    
      
     Conspiracy idiots that believe a bullet can throw a full grown man bodily   
   backwards don`t believe they are capable of moving a few ounces of fabric.   
      
   > But they can't admit it.   
   > >He's convinced Connally's arm moving upward was caused by a bullet,   
   although he can't prove it.    
   > >    
   > >Corbett believes in things that can't be proven. Speculations made by David   
   Von Pein.    
   > >Could Connally's movements have been caused by something other than a   
   bullet ?    
   > >    
   > >Here's John Connally saying that as the crowds thinned out, he was   
   re-adjusting his seating position.    
   > >https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-str   
   ightening-up.mp4   
   > Don't worry, Corbutt doesn't believe Connally.    
   >    
   > He doesn't believe **ANY** eyewitness. He counts on the mythical    
   > "forensic evidence" he refuses to cite for.    
   >    
   > And because I point these facts out, he refuses to reply.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)