http://nfowars.com Telling the Truth - While We Still Can! Tue, 22 May 2012 18:34:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34091 Bagelbutcher Tue, 22 May 2012 18:34:31 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34091 Thumbs up to the gracious uploader TTRISTANN Thumbs down to the jury system of "Blahmerica." Thumbs up to the gracious uploader TTRISTANN
Thumbs down to the jury system of “Blahmerica.”

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34090 Reggie1971 Tue, 22 May 2012 18:27:42 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34090 Oswald has been proven guilty. The evidence is overwhelming. Watch the ABC News special with Peter Jennings. It provides one of the best cases for LHO acting alone. Using computer technology they can now draw a straight trajectory from Connally and Kennedy's wounds straight up to the sixth floor window. Oswald has been proven guilty. The evidence is overwhelming. Watch the ABC News special with Peter Jennings. It provides one of the best cases for LHO acting alone. Using computer technology they can now draw a straight trajectory from Connally and Kennedy’s wounds straight up to the sixth floor window.

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34089 Reggie1971 Tue, 22 May 2012 18:27:00 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34089 You and many other conspiracy theorists have no credible evidence of anyone else being involved but Oswald. Therefore you have resort to invective and name-calling. People like you should not be taken seriously until you can present a credible and scientific argument for your thesis. You and many other conspiracy theorists have no credible evidence of anyone else being involved but Oswald. Therefore you have resort to invective and name-calling. People like you should not be taken seriously until you can present a credible and scientific argument for your thesis.

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34088 mickymacky02 Tue, 22 May 2012 17:57:29 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34088 lol omg. credible? u mean like the government admitting it? cuz thats the only way anything is credible to blind sheep like u. if the government doesnt say its true, than to u, its not true. what other evidence do u need, other than the zapruder film? it doesnt get any more credible than the zapruder film. any moron can see that there was more than one shooter, IMPOSSIBLE not to be. lol omg. credible? u mean like the government admitting it? cuz thats the only way anything is credible to blind sheep like u. if the government doesnt say its true, than to u, its not true. what other evidence do u need, other than the zapruder film? it doesnt get any more credible than the zapruder film. any moron can see that there was more than one shooter, IMPOSSIBLE not to be.

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34087 mickymacky02 Tue, 22 May 2012 17:32:16 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34087 lol!!!!!!!!!!! ive seen that news special. my favorite line in it is, "back and to the left, in no way indicates where a bullet came from." lol classic! lol!!!!!!!!!!! ive seen that news special. my favorite line in it is, “back and to the left, in no way indicates where a bullet came from.” lol classic!

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34086 Blastaar7 Tue, 22 May 2012 17:24:21 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34086 HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAH

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34085 nogoodbastid Tue, 22 May 2012 16:53:43 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34085 this scene starts with one false premise and extrapolates from there. connally wasn't seated directly in front of kennedy. he was seated on a removable jumper seat that considerably lower and to the front left of kennedy's seat. the conspiracy theorists are well aware of this fact due to it being visible in countless photos and videos of the motorcade in dallas and the limo itself yet they willfully ignore it. the lies just continue from there in this movie. this scene starts with one false premise and extrapolates from there. connally wasn’t seated directly in front of kennedy. he was seated on a removable jumper seat that considerably lower and to the front left of kennedy’s seat. the conspiracy theorists are well aware of this fact due to it being visible in countless photos and videos of the motorcade in dallas and the limo itself yet they willfully ignore it. the lies just continue from there in this movie.

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34084 TheTrueDiablix Tue, 22 May 2012 16:25:35 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34084 Agreed. It is not the task of the innocent to prove themselves innocent. the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. In this case, there is more than enough reasonable doubt for any reasonable person to give Oswald a not guilty verdict, so to speak. Agreed. It is not the task of the innocent to prove themselves innocent. the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. In this case, there is more than enough reasonable doubt for any reasonable person to give Oswald a not guilty verdict, so to speak.

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34083 TheTrueDiablix Tue, 22 May 2012 15:53:14 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34083 The only way that the bullet had a straight trajectory into Connely is itself based on a false premise. There was a computer animation done in recent years using film that had been taken of the shooting to try to prove the bullet had a straight trajectory from where it is claimed Oswald was, down into the president and into Connely. Though that entire finding to prove it had a straight trajectory is based on the idea that connely was lying about when the bullet hit him and that he was hit sooner The only way that the bullet had a straight trajectory into Connely is itself based on a false premise. There was a computer animation done in recent years using film that had been taken of the shooting to try to prove the bullet had a straight trajectory from where it is claimed Oswald was, down into the president and into Connely. Though that entire finding to prove it had a straight trajectory is based on the idea that connely was lying about when the bullet hit him and that he was hit sooner

]]> http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1/comment-page-1#comment-34082 nogoodbastid Tue, 22 May 2012 15:30:18 +0000 http://nfowars.com/conspiracy-theories/jfk-trial-of-clay-bertrand-part-1#comment-34082 it's not that he was lying it's that the evidence shows that he was mistaken, which is understandable, considering the circumstances. imagine the adrenaline rush of someone shooting you. the dispute is literally over just a couple of seconds. it’s not that he was lying it’s that the evidence shows that he was mistaken, which is understandable, considering the circumstances. imagine the adrenaline rush of someone shooting you. the dispute is literally over just a couple of seconds.

]]>