Lame LN excuses

[Vincent Baxter]

The differing reactions are quite telling, you and me think being accused is funny because we know it's not true whereas Weidmann goes absolutely ballistic and makes absurd 100,000 dollar challenges and starts the usual diversionary tactics of erroneously linking other members to himself like Iacoletti, but we are way too smart to fall for these blatantly obvious deflections.

JohnM

Now that he's been caught out and can't just log in as Otto Beck to help fight his causes without fear of being ridiculed, he has to suck up to other people on the forum in an attempt to find an actual real person to back him up.

[Vincent Baxter]

Hilarious. I don't want anybody to accuse me of anything, but since you have accused me of being the same person as the one posting as Otto Beck, why don't you just prove it and earn yourself some cash?

Goad, cool word!

 

Ooo, look at the times at which the two above posts were posted.

Now, if I was to post something at a completely random time, lets say 02:36:33 AM, and then log out of my account, type in a different username and password, hit enter to log back in as a different user, select the 'General Discussion & Debate' forum, look for the topic thread that I'd just posted in as the other user, go to the last page, select a post to 'quote', compose a quick 3 or 4 word reply and then hit the 'post' submission button, I reckon it'd take me roughly 2mins 17 seconds. Which means my second post as a different user would appear at approximately 02:38:50 AM. Give or take a few milliseconds.

I'm not making any particular point here obviously. Just thought I'd share that bit of information with you all.

[John Iacoletti]

That's why I only put quotation marks on 1 quote,

Fritz didn’t say that one either.

but the rest are close enough

LOL

You don’t know what Oswald told Fritz.

[John Iacoletti]

And John Iacoletti, I'm assuming by the lack of response to the above question that I asked you, you would indeed have acted in exactly the same way as I did when offered the $100,000 challenge?

Lighten up Francis. I hadn’t seen the post.

I would take the challenge if I was really convinced that I could prove it and not just posturing.

[John Iacoletti]

There's a difference between belief and evidence, I stick to the evidence whereas you stick to your beliefs.

No you don’t. You stick to making a bunch of claims that you cannot substantiate and pretending like that settles the matter.

[John Mytton]

Ooo, look at the times at which the two above posts were posted.

Now, if I was to post something at a completely random time, lets say 02:36:33 AM, and then log out of my account, type in a different username and password, hit enter to log back in as a different user, select the 'General Discussion & Debate' forum, look for the topic thread that I'd just posted in as the other user, go to the last page, select a post to 'quote', compose a quick 3 or 4 word reply and then hit the 'post' submission button, I reckon it'd take me roughly 2mins 17 seconds. Which means my second post as a different user would appear at approximately 02:38:50 AM. Give or take a few milliseconds.

I'm not making any particular point here obviously. Just thought I'd share that bit of information with you all.

I don't know, he would also need to change his VPN from the US to Europe and that adds some time, it would be easier to just have your main computer and a tablet or even a phone. You know like we do! Otto's hit pieces are usually brief which are easily created with a phone.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

So are you now saying he had both the jacket and revolver on him all day?

No, I’m asking you how you know his got “his revolver and jacket” at the boarding house.

Why do evangelists always make up silly “so are you saying” strawman instead of just answering the question?

Exactly! Which is why I was asking you what proof, or even just a justifiable reason, you had to question that Oswald didn't go back to the boarding house to get the revolver?

Duh. Because there’s no evidence he got a revolver at the boarding house.

I didn't say you did make any of those claims. And the point was in the original post. I was highlighting that you don't have be a genius to apply unjustifiable questions or doubt to an occurrence that could actually be fact in the way that you constantly do

Surely you know the difference between a fact and something that could be a fact.