Sounds like a bailout to me. Btw, you lot are the ones bent on removing Oswald from the timeline.
Wrong again.... The actual timeline (and not the made up one by the WC) determines if Oswald stays in or out.
Investigation, conducted correctly, is a process of elimination. This is such a simple concept that even you should understand it, but it seems you don't.
Once again you have leapfrogged over my ask re 'no guarantee' implications in a wider, general sense.
Furthermore, you complain about not having real 'discussions' here, yet when you have the chance you promptly go on the attack. You respond to every LNer in this manner.
Once again you have leapfrogged over my ask re 'no guarantee' implications in a wider, general sense.I did not leapfrog over anything. I already told you that the words "no guarantee" were used by me and not Bowles! There is no need to discuss "implications in a wider, general sense", whatever that means. All you need to do is read the statement Bowles made to the HSCA and you will know exactly just how unreliable the times given by DPD dispatchers are. But, you probably do not want to know any of that and thus try to deflect to a pointless discussion about two words I used.
Furthermore, you complain about not having real 'discussions' here, yet when you have the chance you promptly go on the attack. More duplicity. You don't want to discuss the actual evidence (either because you can't or for fear that you won't prevail) but instead want to waste my time by discussing two words I used.
You respond to every LNer in this manner.Ah stop whining. I don't suffer fools gladly. Every LNer who acts like you deserves all he or she gets. Man up for once and try to have a normal rational discussion about the evidence and see what happens.
