CT's, in court how would you defend Oswald?

[Rick Plant]

Only in court
This is a discussion forum

Sorry, a person isn't entitled to make stuff up on a discussion forum either. They should be able to provide evidence for what they claim is true or otherwise that person shouldn't be taken seriously as a poster. Sounds like you feel a person can make up whatever they want as long as it fits their false narrative. Is that so?

[Bill Chapman]

Sorry, a person isn't entitled to make stuff up on a discussion forum either. They should be able to provide evidence for what they claim is true or otherwise that person shouldn't be taken seriously as a poster. Sounds like you feel a person can make up whatever they want as long as it fits their false narrative. Is that so?

You're talking about formal debate
This forum is the Wild West by comparison

Point out what I 'made up' other than clever mockery.

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

You're talking about formal debate
This forum is the Wild West by comparison

Point out what I 'made up' other than clever mockery

You already know and that is why you make up rules as you go along. Do you have every angle covered though?

[Bill Chapman]

There you have it. Now you are admitting the WC was anything but a courtroom

Point out where I ever claimed the WC a courtroom.

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Point out where I ever claimed the WC a courtroom.

You are only confusing yourself.
You are playing games.
You are terrified of being pinned down.
So being a chameleon is normal for you.
It is just how you adapt.
You are just making a case for Oswald's innocence.
Just as you did when you started weakening your stance to 100% sure LHO Probably did it.
No big deal,
A reversal of sorts.
It is your current trend
One day it's about literal reasoning.
The next day it's about contextual reasoning. 
I hope that helps because I like helping people

[Thomas Graves]

You are only confusing yourself.
You are playing games.
You are terrified of being pinned down.
So being a chameleon is normal for you.
It is just how you adapt.
You are just making a case for Oswald's innocence.
Just as you did when you started weakening your stance to 100% sure LHO Probably did it.
No big deal,
A reversal of sorts.
It is your current trend
One day it's about literal reasoning.
The next day it's about contextual reasoning. 
I hope that helps because I like helping people

Bill Chapman, et al.,

When dealing with obnoxious people like Kleinschmidt in day-to-day life, just make it a habit to say, "That's a suggestion I refuse to accept".

--  MWT 

[John Iacoletti]

You're talking about formal debate
This forum is the Wild West by comparison

That doesn’t alleviate you of the responsibility to back up your claims with evidence.

Point out what I 'made up' other than clever mockery.

Your claim that Oswald was trying to shoot an officer in the theater is just your most recent example. That and your claim that I called you a lemming merely because I quoted one of your posts in a post where I mentioned lemmings.