Why did Oswald go to the movies?

[Howard Gee]

It's just a fact -- Brewer didn't see the guy he was looking at from behind and 50 yards away enter the theater.

There's nothing you won't misrepresent, including what a "troll" is.  Repeatedly kicking the crap out of your lame arguments does not make somebody a troll.

I agree Brewer didn't see Saint Patsy enter the theater.

Let me know when you're going to begin repeatedly kicking the crap out of my lame arguments because all I've seen so far is 'Oswald's rifle, LOL'.

Be gone, Troll.

[John Iacoletti]

I agree Brewer didn't see Saint Patsy enter the theater.

Huzzah.

Let me know when you're going to begin repeatedly kicking the crap out of my lame arguments because all I've seen so far is 'Oswald's rifle, LOL'.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" -- Christopher Hitchens

Let me know when you actually have some evidence that it was Oswald's rifle.

LOL.

Be gone, Troll.

  Heal thyself.

[Howard Gee]

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" -- Christopher Hitchens

Let me know when you actually have some evidence that it was Oswald's rifle.

So you're back to 'there is no evidence that it was Saint Patsy's rifle' ?

Trolletti strikes out again.

[Rob Caprio]

Does the log still exist?  Have you seen it to confirm that it does not contain Postal's call?  If it is simply not available to check, that is not evidence of anything.  Regardless, you would allege it was forged or that there was no "corroborating" witness to information recorded therein etc.  What we have is Postal's sworn testimony and affidavit that she made the call.  And the police responded to that call.  I'm not aware of any other CTer that questions whether Postal made the call to the DPD.  It is absurd and highlights an outlandish struggle against reality.

Of course it still exists as it is in the twenty-six volumes of evidence. Why do I have to do *your* work? Either show that Postal called or stop saying that she did when you have NO evidence showing that she did.

[John Iacoletti]

So you're back to 'there is no evidence that it was Saint Patsy's rifle' ?

Have you found any yet, strikeout king?

[Rob Caprio]

Carpio, I'll probably regret asking this, but why do you think Saint Patsy went to the movies ?

That is actually a good question Geek. Here is my answer.

Quote on

10) Why did LHO go to a movie theater after allegedly shooting the president and a police officer?

Does this make any sense IF we believe what the WC told us?  Is this the normal reaction for most people?  I mean the Mexican border was not that far away and research has shown NONE of the bus, rail or air terminals were alerted or blocked off so LHO could have hopped on any of these things and gotten clean away!

Yet he instead goes to a movie theater!  Why?  We have NO clue as the WC only told us he was walking down the street (another dumb thing to do) when a cop car scared him into the movie theater.  The thing that got him noticed supposedly was the act of NOT paying when he had the money on him!  This is up there with him littering his shell casings at the TSBD and the JDT scenes (at this location it has been said he left his wallet with ID in it for good measure!)!  Yet none of this ?catch me? behavior was shown when he was arrested as he said he was innocent and did NOT confess to anything they claimed he did!

If you don?t believe in a conspiracy how can you explain this very odd behavior?  YOU can?t so you call others who point it out all kinds of names!

Quote off

[Rob Caprio]

Brutal.  Postal knows that a man has entered without a ticket.  She knows Burroughs is the ticket taker working in the lobby.  She knows the man cannot get past Burroughs without a ticket.  The man has also not come out of the theatre.  Therefore he has gained access to the theatre without encountering Burroughs.  Postal reconciles these facts with the conclusion that the man has gone to the balcony to explain how he has avoided Burroughs.   If he has gone to the balcony area, then that is the most likely place for him to be a couple minutes later when she calls the police.  What is so difficult to understand about that obvious point? As confirmed in her testimony.  You don't accept this explanation but you will entertain an outlandish and baseless counternarrative in which all these people are lying for some unknown reason and that there was an Oswald double.  Unreal.

You just keep lying. It has been shown numerous times in this thread that Postal couldn't say that she sold a ticket to the man. And yet, you keep on saying that she did.

[John Iacoletti]

There is no better demonstration of the complete bankruptcy of the "Oswald Did It" position than that its proponents have to lie about the evidence in order to make their arguments.