Touring the Tippit Scene

[Charles Collins]

No, just pointing out two things;

First of all, your hypocrisy in dismissing out of hand a narrative based on factual witness testimonty while on the other hand insisting that your speculative assumptions can not be dismissed out of hand, because your "reasons" need to be discussed.

And secondly, that wannabe "know alls" like yourself don't have the guts, nor the arguments, to tell me what is wrong about the timeline.

You provide the most idiotic "reasons" why it's so-called "likely" that Oswald knew the Texas Theater and argue ad-nauseam about that, but when you have an opportunity to actually discuss a significant part of the case you chicken out and run....

I wouldn't be surprised if you don't even understand that your inability to provide any reason why the timeline is wrong is, by itself, an admission that it isn't wrong at all.

In another thread I told you several items that I believe are wrong with your “timeline.” You responded with a “that’s total bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns” dismissal. I gave up. Period. Not interested in engaging with you any further. Period.

[Charles Collins]

Brewer indicated that he thought Oswald had been in his store before.  At the very least, that places him in the immediate vicinity of the TT on a prior occasion.  Do I have a time machine to prove Oswald ever went to the TT on a prior occasion?  No.  Does it matter a whole lot?  No.  Even if Oswald had never been there before, he could still have taken those stairs to the balcony upon entering.  They appear to be fairly conspicuous.  Whether he actually did so or not is also not very important as to his guilt.  It just explains the early report of the man being in the balcony.  Burroughs didn't see him and he and Postal assumed from past experience that someone who hadn't bought a ticket would ascend into the balcony via those stairs.  So that is what they thought Oswald had done.

Yes, if I remember correctly, a pair of shoes LHO owned were the same brand that Brewer’s shoe store sold. So there is speculation that LHO could have bought them from Brewer.

[Martin Weidmann]

In another thread I told you several items that I believe are wrong with your “timeline.” You responded with a “that’s total bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns” dismissal. I gave up. Period. Not interested in engaging with you any further. Period.

That's cheap, even for your level. It's just a pathetic attempt to explain why you ran away from the discussion. If you ended every conversation where somebody told you what you were saying is BS, you wouldn't have anybody left to talk to. You really need to get of that high horse, because you're more wrong than you are right about something.

And you did not give me any items that were wrong with the timeline. All you did was argue ad-nauseam (as you usually do) about Bowles and the open mike business, as if that had some bearing on the Tippit murder, which it didn't, due to a lack of a fixed time event. And you made a silly claim about a time, for his radio call, Scoggins had heard from a supervisor who in turn had heard it from a dispatcher. The claim was stupid, because if you had read Scoggins' testimony better you would have learned that he made his call to the radio dispatcher just after the killer left 10th street, and before Callaway arrived on the scene. In other words less than a minute after the shots.

If you made any other suggestion, why don't you show us the post, because I don't remember it. But as far as I'm concerned you ran away from the discussion after you failed miserably to make a valid point. Hell, apart from trying to make a pathetic attempt to discredit one minor part of the timeline, you couldn't even formulate a coherent argument beyond "I am right, because I said so".

[John Iacoletti]

 

According to you, nobody knows anything at all about anything at all.

Funny, I don’t recall saying that. Or anything remotely similar to that. Perhaps you can provide a citation.

There are reference books for the proper usage of words. One can consult these.

And “one” did. I cited the definition of arbitrary that I was using and you proceeded to argue with it anyway.

This shows that you understand the concept.

Are you disputing that “likely” means greater than 50%?

More than I can say about the nonsense coming out of Martin. You state that I have no evidence either way for the second question. What evidence do you believe would be needed?

Something beyond pure speculation.

I asked for argument against the reasons I cited. These reasons are not hypothetical. There is evidence to support them.

What “evidence” supports any of your speculated “reasons”?

[John Iacoletti]

Now we are getting somewhere.

You’re completely missing the point. If you can make a “reasoned” hypothetical argument for both a proposition AND its negation, then neither proposition is more “likely” than the other.

1. Yes, he was very frugal, no doubt. However, this could also be used as another reason to believe that he had already figured out the easy way to sneak in to the Texas Theater, before 11/22/63. And perhaps he had even sneaked in before.

You can talk yourself into believing anything. That doesn’t make it “likely”.

2. The Texas Theater was within easy walking distance of where he lived. He also had the bus as an option if the weather was too nasty. The summer heat is ferocious in Dallas, I can say that from personal experience. But it wouldn’t have taken much time to walk the distances involved and tolerating the heat for short periods isn’t out of the question for a healthy man in his early twenties.

Neither is tolerating the heat for longer periods.

3. Do you have any evidence that LHO had a television or air conditioning (not as common in residences in 1962-1963 as it is today) in the places that he lived in Oak Cliff? I know there was a community television in the rooming house. But what about the Neely Street address, etc?

Do you have any evidence that the Texas Theater had air conditioning?

4. We need to include the other times and places LHO lived in Oak Cliff. Also, we do not know his whereabouts for certain during the weekend before the assassination.

Oak Cliff is a big place, and there were a lot of movie theaters there. Even if you could somehow argue with more than speculation that Oswald “likely” went to the movies in Oak Cliff in the “summer heat”, that doesn’t make it “likely” that it was at the Texas Theater.

Perhaps, if the reasons were hypothetical. But they are not in this argument.

They are completely hypothetical! Are we going to have a dictionary argument now on what “hypothetical” means? For all you know, Oswald adored hot weather. He was from New Orleans.

[John Iacoletti]

Still begging for someone to “argue” with you about your “timeline” I see.

Did you have any specific reasons for declaring that it has no chance at all of being correct, or are you making up arbitrary probabilities again?

[John Iacoletti]

See how it goes? Every act (proven act and not speculated) by Oswald is isolated and then given, with speculation that is only permissible by his defenders,

Speculate away. Just don’t pretend that it proves anything.

There's a long detailed series of actions - proven actions - by Oswald that cannot be explained away.

Such as?

Unless one is acting like a defense attorney - a modern day Mark Lane - and trying to deconstruct each piece of evidence.

Unless one is acting like a prosecuting attorney - a modern day Vince Bugliosi - and calling things “evidence” or “proven actions” that are just speculation and rhetoric.

Why would one do that? Why would one come here day-after-day week-after-week for years with this same argument?

Why would one come here day-after-day week-after-week for years and rehash the same tired WC conclusions?

Who really knows? Is the idea to try and muddle through and come to a conclusion as to what happened that November day?

Oddly enough, it’s the WC apologists who avoid any detailed examination of the evidence.

Or is the idea to, for again some odd reason, exonerate Oswald? I assume the former since I am not aware of any other historical event that people discuss where a group of people act like this.

No, the idea is to examine the existing evidence and any new evidence that arises and determine if it justifies any specific claimed conclusion. It’s not about insulting people for daring to disagree with your reasoning.

[Charles Collins]

You’re completely missing the point. If you can make a “reasoned” hypothetical argument for both a proposition AND its negation, then neither proposition is more “likely” than the other.

You can talk yourself into believing anything. That doesn’t make it “likely”.

Neither is tolerating the heat for longer periods.

Do you have any evidence that the Texas Theater had air conditioning?

Oak Cliff is a big place, and there were a lot of movie theaters there. Even if you could somehow argue with more than speculation that Oswald “likely” went to the movies in Oak Cliff in the “summer heat”, that doesn’t make it “likely” that it was at the Texas Theater.

They are completely hypothetical! Are we going to have a dictionary argument now on what “hypothetical” means? For all you know, Oswald adored hot weather. He was from New Orleans.

Do you have any evidence that the Texas Theater had air conditioning?

In my opinion, no amount of evidence will ever convince you of anything whatsoever.

With that said, here is  your chance to say that that isn’t evidence of anything at all:

From Wikipedia:

When first opened, fittingly on the anniversary day of Texas independence in 1931, the Texas Theatre was the largest suburban movie theater in Dallas and was part of a chain of theaters financed by Howard Hughes. It was the first theater in Dallas with air conditioning and featured many state-of-the-art luxuries.[/b]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Theatre

Also here is a photo of the theater that shows an air-conditioning cooling tower on the high roof of the theater. I spent over 35-years in the commercial air-conditioning world and understand it thoroughly. I can easily recognize the various air-conditioning components.

 It is very similar to the cooling tower that existed on the roof of one of the theaters in my home town which was built in the same era as the Texas Theater. I am familiar with it because I once proposed replacing the air-conditioning system for that theater and was on the roof inspecting it up close.