Reclaiming Misery aka Reclaiming History

[John Iacoletti]

Remember that John will not even acknowledge that he is a CTer.  He is simply taking issue with any evidence against Oswald by suggesting it is all faked or the product of lies.  LOL.

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.  "Richard" can't even tell the truth about what other people on the forum say.  I've never said that any evidence against Oswald is all faked or the product of lies.  The conclusions that you make are not actually supported by the existing evidence.  Not without a lot of assumptions, speculation, and handwaving.

A classic example is suggesting there is somehow doubt about Oswald's ownership of the MC rifle.  Imagine all the forge documents, photos, lies, and fakery that would have to have gone on to explain away the evidence that links Oswald to that rifle.

What evidence, "Richard"?  Biased handwriting "analysis" of 2 block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon from microfilm that is now "missing"?  There is no forgery required to explain why this is not evidence of ownership.

[John Iacoletti]

Conspiracy theorists are masters at abusing this psyhcological phenomenon for their advantage. They basically insinuate that "if you believe the official story then you are gullible because you are being lied to". They want to make it feel that doubting the original story is a sign of intelligence and logical thinking. However, believing a conspiracy theory usually shows, quite ironically, a great lack of logical thinking.

The ODIA-ites are masters at false appeals to authority.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/21/Appeal-to-Authority

They think that you should believe the official story, merely because it's the official story.

[Bill Brown]

A cop said it, you believe it, and that settles it.

And you believe that somehow equates my position on the assassination to a religion?  The cop is a deity?  You're going to have to explain that one.

[John Iacoletti]

And you believe that somehow equates my position on the assassination to a religion?  The cop is a deity?  You're going to have to explain that one.

Strong belief in a doctrine based on faith in authority rather than evidence of its veracity.

[Bill Brown]

Strong belief in a doctrine based on faith in authority rather than evidence of its veracity.

But, that's just it.  My belief is not based on faith.  It is based on every single piece of evidence that has been presented.  The evidence which has been presented points to Oswald and no one but Oswald.  I know that you agree with that.

I've asked you this before.  Is there any evidence which points to someone other than Oswald?  You answered with a "no".

So, once again, you're doing nothing more than wasting the forum's time by playing devil's advocate.

[John Iacoletti]

But, that's just it.  My belief is not based on faith.  It is based on every single piece of evidence that has been presented.

Yep, plus a whole lots of faith-based assumptions, handwaving, conjecture, and cherry-picking.

  The evidence which has been presented points to Oswald and no one but Oswald.  I know that you agree with that.

What little evidence there is, is weak, circumstantial, and tainted.

I've asked you this before.  Is there any evidence which points to someone other than Oswald?  You answered with a "no".

Is that supposed to prove that Oswald committed the crime?

So, once again, you're doing nothing more than wasting the forum's time by playing devil's advocate.

No, once again, you think your answer automatically wins by default unless somebody proves a different answer.  For someone who keeps invoking what he thinks would happen at a hypothetical trial, you sure don't seem to understand how burden of proof at trials work.  Has anybody ever acquitted of a crime been required to prove that somebody else did it?

[Bill Brown]

I've asked you this before.  Is there any evidence which points to someone other than Oswald?  You answered with a "no".

Is that supposed to prove that Oswald committed the crime?

No.  I never said that.

You said that my strong belief in a doctrine is based on faith in authority.  I am simply showing that your statement is wrong, that my "strong belief" is based on the evidence and the witness testimony in the case... nothing to do with faith in authority.

[Steve Logan]

And you believe that somehow equates my position on the assassination to a religion?  The cop is a deity?  You're going to have to explain that one.

The cop is a deity?

Not all of them.