Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Iacoletti v Bug53  (Read 10219 times)

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #32 on: December 31, 2022, 04:42:12 AM »
Advertisement
“Possible”. LOL.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #32 on: December 31, 2022, 04:42:12 AM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #33 on: December 31, 2022, 10:16:20 AM »
Oswald got what he deserved

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #34 on: December 31, 2022, 10:31:54 AM »
Oswald did his job on those stairs: Nobody saw him.

Duh.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #34 on: December 31, 2022, 10:31:54 AM »


Offline Larry Baldwin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2023, 12:31:43 PM »
This thread confirms why I stopped frequenting this forum.  The same old thin arguments and pontification from the same old group of clearly dillusional lone nutters, and the same old CTs believing that they can convice them otherwise.  Both are excersizing futility. Remember how Einstein defined insanity?  Y'all need to be fit for straight jackets.

Special mention goes to Organ for posting a pic of a baseball stadium and stating that 1 person could slip past thousands of people as evidence that Oswald could have slipped past TWELVE.  Please tell me you were joking.  Either way, thank you for the laugh.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1825
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2023, 03:48:26 PM »
This thread confirms why I stopped frequenting this forum.  The same old thin arguments and pontification from the same old group of clearly dillusional lone nutters, and the same old CTs believing that they can convice them otherwise.  Both are excersizing futility. Remember how Einstein defined insanity?  Y'all need to be fit for straight jackets.

Special mention goes to Organ for posting a pic of a baseball stadium and stating that 1 person could slip past thousands of people as evidence that Oswald could have slipped past TWELVE.  Please tell me you were joking.  Either way, thank you for the laugh.

You don't believe that Oswald fired a single shot on Nov 22, 1963. It seems to me that you're one who is delusional here. Maybe stay away until you can come up with something that exonerates your guy. Something that makes all of the evidence against him go away. Good luck with that.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2023, 03:48:26 PM »


Online Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1496
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2023, 05:32:51 PM »
The assassination and the shooting of Tippit only happened one way, there's only one explanation, a single story line or narrative. How many explanations should be given? Five? Ten? The same old delusional lone nutters can't make things up, use the assassination as a grievance event against "the government" or "the CIA" or whatever monsters in their heads they have. We have one and only one explanation. Oswald took his rifle - you really think it was his lunch? - and shot JFK. Then, leaving the scene shortly after - he wasn't interested at all in what happened? - he then shot Tippit. If that's boring then never mind.

Anyway, if someone doesn't believe the 8-10 witnesses who saw Oswald shoot Tippit or leave the scene (and the other physical and circumstantial evidence) I doubt you'd accept witnesses who saw Oswald go down the stairs. And if powerful evil groups did pull this off you can be damned sure they would make Norman and Jarman and others say they saw that very same thing, Oswald going down the steps. If you believe all of this other evidence was manufactured why wouldn't they do something this simple? There I go, boring stuff again.

This is the guy they had to silence, the guy who could expose their plot. This is what they let him do. Meet with his family, a lawyer, make phone calls. And this. If you believe this is what they would allow happen, this is what they would allow him to do, the word delusional does come to mind.


« Last Edit: January 11, 2023, 05:41:26 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2023, 07:13:30 PM »
This thread confirms why I stopped frequenting this forum.  The same old thin arguments and pontification from the same old group of clearly dillusional lone nutters, and the same old CTs believing that they can convice them otherwise.  Both are excersizing futility. Remember how Einstein defined insanity?  Y'all need to be fit for straight jackets.

Special mention goes to Organ for posting a pic of a baseball stadium and stating that 1 person could slip past thousands of people as evidence that Oswald could have slipped past TWELVE.  Please tell me you were joking.  Either way, thank you for the laugh.

Y'all need to be fit for straight jackets.
Try 'straitjackets' next time, Einstein.

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5309
Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2023, 08:54:25 PM »
The assassination and the shooting of Tippit only happened one way, there's only one explanation, a single story line or narrative. How many explanations should be given? Five? Ten? The same old delusional lone nutters can't make things up, use the assassination as a grievance event against "the government" or "the CIA" or whatever monsters in their heads they have. We have one and only one explanation. Oswald took his rifle - you really think it was his lunch? - and shot JFK. Then, leaving the scene shortly after - he wasn't interested at all in what happened? - he then shot Tippit. If that's boring then never mind.

Anyway, if someone doesn't believe the 8-10 witnesses who saw Oswald shoot Tippit or leave the scene (and the other physical and circumstantial evidence) I doubt you'd accept witnesses who saw Oswald go down the stairs. And if powerful evil groups did pull this off you can be damned sure they would make Norman and Jarman and others say they saw that very same thing, Oswald going down the steps. If you believe all of this other evidence was manufactured why wouldn't they do something this simple? There I go, boring stuff again.

This is the guy they had to silence, the guy who could expose their plot. This is what they let him do. Meet with his family, a lawyer, make phone calls. And this. If you believe this is what they would allow happen, this is what they would allow him to do, the word delusional does come to mind.



Great picture.  Imagine how many times a loser like Oswald had fantasized about being the center of attention and standing in front of those cameras and microphones.  The center of attention at last.  Jack Ruby didn't play into that narrative, though.  Tough luck.  Did he have time to regret his actions?  I doubt it.  His arrest and/or death was always part of the equation.  He would no doubt love forums like this one.  Immortality for a guy who would otherwise have spent his life in menial jobs and be long forgotten.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2023, 08:55:05 PM by Richard Smith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Iacoletti v Bug53
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2023, 08:54:25 PM »