Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Joe Elliott on Today at 03:02:56 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on Today at 12:09:24 AM
False generalization.

There were 400-500 measles deaths in the US per year between 1953-1963.  Between 1912 and 1922, it was 6000 per year.

https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/history.html

This is correct. Royell is unfamiliar with deaths of children because we era leaving the era where a high enough percentage of the population was vaccinated to make death by measles almost unheard of. But this is no longer true and deaths are starting up again. Wikipedia lists that about one in four people who come down with the measles will need to go to the hospital. And one or two per thousand will die from the measles. Without the measles vaccine, like one, two or three of the people who attended my high school would have died. Maybe someone I knew. Maybe me.

The 6,000 deaths per year between 1912 and 1922 that John noted sounds about right. Six million a year might come down with measles, about the rate one would expect if everyone came down with the measles sometime in their youth and one in a thousand would die. If the measles vaccine totally goes away, with today's population, we could have 10,000 deaths a year, which a significant percentage of the number we lose from automobile accidents, 37,000 per year. It is a pretty big deal.
42
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Warren Commission Sham
« Last post by Royell Storing on Today at 03:01:56 AM »
Quote from: John Mytton on Today at 01:46:06 AM
Well said! Thumb1:

Geez, what are the chances that someone could produce a bullet that would match the injuries with such precision, missing a small amount of lead and flattened on only one side?



JohnM

   And that same exact Ammo somehow EXPLODED JFK's Head on contact? Only in the Funny Papers.
43
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Tippit Debate
« Last post by John Mytton on Today at 03:01:37 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on April 03, 2025, 09:41:08 PM
The Hertz clock was of unknown accuracy, as were the dispatcher's clocks.

Gee Whiz John, this really takes the cake, two independent time pieces where each were relied upon to be extremely accurate, and both were synchronized within a minute of each other but for some desperate CT reasoning they were both exactly wrong by the exact same amount.

JohnM
44
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Joe Elliott on Today at 02:55:42 AM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on April 03, 2025, 04:11:28 PM
If by "obsessed with immigrants" you mean that they oppose opening the borders to millions of unknown people from all over the world and instead want the federal immigration laws enforced, then you are right.  There is nothing racist about that, however.   That is just the tired leftist trope to explain any policy that they oppose.  It is common sense supported by the overwhelming number of Americans including most Democrats.  That is one of the main reasons that Old Joe and Kamala were rolled out of office.  I do agree that the deportation efforts have been weak so far.  Hopefully that changes.

Fair enough. If the bulk immigrants do get deported I won't be happy but you will be happy because you think it is a good thing. And the arguments I have been making honestly proved false because I misestimated Trump's and the billionaires intentions.

My question is, what if three years from now, in the spring of 2028, the bulk of the immigrants are still here, still working, still helping the American economy, still helping the profits of the wealthy? But the Republicans, with Trump or some other candidate are running on the promise that if they are elected, they will deport the immigrants.

Will you be supporting that candidate? Or will you conclude that they are just promising things that will get them elected and likely have no intention of deporting the bulk of the immigrants.
45
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Can we be honest about Oswald's "patsy" statement?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 02:50:01 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on Today at 01:42:12 AM
Your problem is that your “evidence,” even if genuine, does not prove who killed Kennedy.

If three people had photographed Oswald as he was shooting at JFK from his Sniper's Nest, you would probably claim that their photos, lacking a digital time stamp (or a clock in the background) and a notarized statement in triplicate, were fake.
46
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Those mysterious frontal gunmen
« Last post by John Mytton on Today at 02:49:21 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on April 03, 2025, 09:08:23 PM
The problem with all of "Mytton"'s silly lists like this is that they begin with a false premise.  None of these things (authentic or not) tell us a single thing about who killed Kennedy.  The fact that they cannot be authenticated is just gravy.  And also as is the case with "Mytton"'s lists, many of the claims implicit in it aren't even accurate or provable.

Hilarious, so owning the murder weapon, tells us nothing! You can't make this up!

JohnM
47
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Tippit Debate
« Last post by John Mytton on Today at 02:47:01 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on April 03, 2025, 09:34:48 PM
Are you suggesting that a ragged T-shirt would not be visible underneath a brown long-sleeved shirt, particularly a brown long-sleeved shirt with missing buttons?



Yeah John, that fraction of a T-shirt looks exceptionally "ragged"? LOL

BTW, this digging a deeper and deeper hole is just emphasizing your desperation, just give it up and stop embarrassing yourself.

JohnM

JohnM
48
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Explain the logic of Prayer Man please
« Last post by John Mytton on Today at 02:24:43 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on Today at 01:07:44 AM
This is your go-to when you cannot respond to the points raised.

Basically what you are doing is whining that we are not arguing within the context of your narrowly defined assumptions, therefore you are going to take your ball and go home.

But not without flouncing with an insult for good measure.  Which is part of the standard LN script.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist.  Why should I be compelled to come up with one?  Just so you can shift the burden away from your own failing narrative?

Like your propaganda is some gift that should be sought out and cherished?

Quote
I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

Hahahaha! Who do you think you're kidding?

You're just copying Weidmann. Of course you're a conspiracy theorist, you continually theorize in over eleven thousand posts that it wasn't Oswald and keep elaborating on this theory by rejecting each piece of the Mountain of evidence that incriminates Oswald and in doing so, you constantly say/imply that the evidence is manipulated, the very definition of a conspiracy.
Just because you're not smart enough to figure out where all your denials lead doesn't stop you from being a grade "A" conspiracy theorist! LOL!

JohnM
49
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: If I had planned the conspiracy ...
« Last post by Mitch Todd on Today at 02:06:38 AM »
Quote from: Martin Weidmann on April 03, 2025, 10:05:07 PM
MW: So, I'll just assume that his claim is bogus.

MT: You've been doing that since the beginning. Why stop now?

So, you can't show at all that Carroll stayed with Hill and the revolver all the time, as you previously claimed?

Thanks for clearing that up!  Thumb1:
I didn't say that. Either you're misreading or misrepresenting what I said. I said you've refused to believe me from the get go before anything was presented. It's just matter of habit rather than evidence or reason.

BTW, you noticed that I answered your question in the post just before the one you replied to, didn't you?

50
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Oliver Stone - Did he get it correct with his Movie?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 02:04:00 AM »
Quote from: John Iacoletti on Today at 01:10:16 AM
You need much more than squinting at a blurry film and interpreting reactions in a self-serving way.

Oh wait, I forgot who I was talking to.

Iacoletti,

Do you still think the three people walking across the pergola's "patio" a few minutes after the assassination in the Mr. Towner clip were three Bermuda-shorts-wearing dudes, and that one of them was either wearing a blue headscarf or holding a blue balloon near his head?
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10