Lame LN excuses

[John Iacoletti]

There's a difference between belief and evidence, I stick to the evidence whereas you stick to your beliefs.

No you don’t. You stick to making a bunch of claims that you cannot substantiate and pretending like that settles the matter.

[John Mytton]

Ooo, look at the times at which the two above posts were posted.

Now, if I was to post something at a completely random time, lets say 02:36:33 AM, and then log out of my account, type in a different username and password, hit enter to log back in as a different user, select the 'General Discussion & Debate' forum, look for the topic thread that I'd just posted in as the other user, go to the last page, select a post to 'quote', compose a quick 3 or 4 word reply and then hit the 'post' submission button, I reckon it'd take me roughly 2mins 17 seconds. Which means my second post as a different user would appear at approximately 02:38:50 AM. Give or take a few milliseconds.

I'm not making any particular point here obviously. Just thought I'd share that bit of information with you all.

I don't know, he would also need to change his VPN from the US to Europe and that adds some time, it would be easier to just have your main computer and a tablet or even a phone. You know like we do! Otto's hit pieces are usually brief which are easily created with a phone.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

So are you now saying he had both the jacket and revolver on him all day?

No, I’m asking you how you know his got “his revolver and jacket” at the boarding house.

Why do evangelists always make up silly “so are you saying” strawman instead of just answering the question?

Exactly! Which is why I was asking you what proof, or even just a justifiable reason, you had to question that Oswald didn't go back to the boarding house to get the revolver?

Duh. Because there’s no evidence he got a revolver at the boarding house.

I didn't say you did make any of those claims. And the point was in the original post. I was highlighting that you don't have be a genius to apply unjustifiable questions or doubt to an occurrence that could actually be fact in the way that you constantly do

Surely you know the difference between a fact and something that could be a fact.

[John Mytton]

Fritz didn’t say that one either.

Really, I copied and pasted the quote from his testimony?

Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he shot Tippit?
Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes.
Mr. BALL. What did he say.
Mr. FRITZ. He denied it---that he did not. The only thing he said he had done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, "That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I have done wrong."

JohnM

[John Mytton]

No you don’t. You stick to making a bunch of claims that you cannot substantiate and pretending like that settles the matter.

Ok, your opinion is noted and I agree to disagree!

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Really, I copied and pasted the quote from his testimony?

So you did. My mistake. Awesome memory he had.

[John Mytton]

So you did. My mistake. Awesome memory he had.

So you did. My mistake.

No worries, I knew what you meant.

Awesome memory he had.

Yeah, he was an experienced interrogator, that was his job. He was good at interrogating because after extensive grilling, criminals whose stories aren't grounded in reality, start to slip up and picking the anomalies in the criminals answers takes total recall. And having one of the biggest Murder event of all time right in his lap, will tend to stick in the memory.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Techno Johnny to the rescue!

This is actually posted from my main computer, as you call it.

No VPN, BTW.

Techno Johnny to the rescue!

 

This is actually posted from my main computer, as you call it.

I really don't care but I do appreciate that you feel the need to tell me.

No VPN, BTW.

No worries, I believe you.

JohnM