What?s the MINIMUM number of people required for your CT to work?

[John Mytton]

Says the guy who thinks calling Oswald a “proven double murderer” is evidence.

Well at least Griffith doesn't try to hide behind his endless accusations and he has the balls to give some numbers supporting his absolutely massive conspiracy.

JohnM

[John Tonkovich]

Well at least Griffith doesn't try to hide behind his endless accusations and he has the balls to give some numbers supporting his absolutely massive conspiracy.

JohnM

Ok.
Mr Mytton:
This is a discussion board. Not a competition involving, uh, testicles. Plenty of " balls " being compared and discussed on other sites. Perhaps Grinder would be a better spot for you - and I mean that in the nicest way. I don't get into anyone's private life here.
And I make no judgements.

[John Tonkovich]

Back to the topic at hand:

Mr Mytton doesn't understand that being skeptical about the WC report does not require one to create an equally bizarre and unfounded "conspiracy " theory.

[John Mytton]

Back to the topic at hand:

Mr Mytton doesn't understand that being skeptical about the WC report does not require one to create an equally bizarre and unfounded "conspiracy " theory.

Nobody cares what you think, I was clearly responding to Mr Griffith who stated "The JFK assassination conspiracy involved perhaps 20 high-level conspirators, a few dozen second-tier conspirators under them, and perhaps 10 high-level accessories who were aware of the plot, who wanted JFK dead, who did nothing to prevent it, and who did what they could to help cover up the crime".

Bye!

JohnM

[John Tonkovich]

Nobody cares what you think, I was clearly responding to Mr Griffith who stated "The JFK assassination conspiracy involved perhaps 20 high-level conspirators, a few dozen second-tier conspirators under them, and perhaps 10 high-level accessories who were aware of the plot, who wanted JFK dead, who did nothing to prevent it, and who did what they could to help cover up the crime".

Bye!

JohnM

Actually, you were responding to Mr Iacoletti, and calling him out about, yes, testicles, or lack thereof.

You seem confused.

[John Mytton]

Actually, you were responding to Mr Iacoletti, and calling him out about, yes, testicles, or lack thereof.

Show me where in my response to Iacoletti where I specifically call out Iacoletti's lack of balls? Oops!

Well at least Griffith doesn't try to hide behind his endless accusations and he has the balls to give some numbers supporting his absolutely massive conspiracy.

JohnM

My original response to Griffith.

OMG, what an incredibly specific claim, that's over 60 people being involved in the crime of the century and still not a shred of evidence from a billion possibly sources has emerged that supports your endless conspiracy theories and that's why nobody can ever take you seriously.

JohnM

Btw next time read my posts carefully before you yet again make a fool of yourself.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

I don't have a "conspiracy theory".

But who impersonated Oswald on the Mexico City phone calls?
That person might have no idea why this was necessary., and was never told the purpose.
Conspirator? No.

I don't have a "conspiracy theory".

Why do you feel the need to tell the Forum that, and especially in this thread?

But who impersonated Oswald on the Mexico City phone calls?

How do you know Oswald was impersonated?

That person might have no idea why this was necessary., and was never told the purpose.

So you're saying someone impersonated Oswald under orders? Who and why?

Conspirator? No.

Why would anybody have the need to impersonate Oswald, where does that go?

JohnM