Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[John Mytton]

Friends, it looks like Mr Iacoletti has really gotten under poor Mr Mytton's skin. Imagine needing consolation from Mr Chapman... Oh vey!

Just because I'm blowing you away in another thread is no reason to chase me around like a little puppy dog. Woof woof!

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Says the guy who lives by his bible, called the WC report, and who worships his highpriest Bugliosi....It's comedy gold!

Awesome, another religious Kook.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Awesome, another religious Kook.

JohnM

Did your mommy not tell you that calling names is a sign of weakness, even it it is the last resort because you have nothing of interest or credibility to say?

It's a telling sign when a die hard LN finds himself confronted with information he can not counter with credible arguments. They will try every trick in the book, ranging from outright dismissal to ridicule, from trying to change the subject to muddy the waters and pretending not to understand and so on.

There's just one thing they will never ever do; enter into an open and honest discussion about the information that has been presented.

[Alan Ford]

Just because I'm blowing you away running away from your straightforward question in another thread is no reason to chase me around like a little puppy dog. Woof woof!

JohnM

 

[John Mytton]

Did your mommy not tell you that calling names is a sign of weakness, even it it is the last resort because you have nothing of interest or credibility to say?

Sorry Martin but my Mommy also says you are a "Religious Kook".
I find this entire subject an interesting diversion where I can learn about another time and another place whereas you and your aggressive hostile buddies treat this like a war where anybody who doesn't say Conspiracy is instantly dismissed and thrown to the lions.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Sorry Martin but my Mommy also says you are a "Religious Kook".
I find this entire subject an interesting diversion where I can learn about another time and another place whereas you and your aggressive hostile buddies treat this like a war where anybody who doesn't say Conspiracy is instantly dismissed and thrown to the lions.

JohnM

Sorry Martin but my Mommy also says you are a "Religious Kook".

Which probably explains how you became so obnoxious... No decent upbringing will do that to you!

I find this entire subject an interesting diversion

Your fanatical nature tells a different story.

where I can learn about another time and another place

Usually, people who want to learn don't have predetermined ideas.... I have never seen you being interested in anything! Just show me the last post in which you actually were interested in anybody's opinions or arguments.....

whereas you and your aggressive hostile buddies treat this like a war

You are cracking me up....

where anybody who doesn't say Conspiracy is instantly dismissed and thrown to the lions.

As opposed to instantly being branded a kook and lots of other words by guys like you who will not tolerate even the slightest comment that goes against the WC religion?

You're a pathetic piece of work, Mytton

[John Iacoletti]

Now you'll have to provide a never-ending list of witnesses with film of the warehouse guy actually signing the order... on film, of course. Then do entire background stories of each individual, including Genealogy Man doing a complete, never ending search connecting everybody on the planet to some sort of conspiracy.. except Oswald of course.

Therefore you should just believe what Chapman thinks probably happened. Because reasons.

@Lurkers:

Five Stupid Things About JFK Conspiracy Theories

This old chestnut again.

Lurkers:

Great job pasting that Youtube link Bill!  That's some impressive research.

As for the actual video.  That's 6 minutes of life that nobody will ever get back.  Here we see a guy named Steve Shives use the usual LN tactic of argument by appeal to ridicule, without ever actually addressing any reasons for believing the narrative.

His "5 Stupid things":

1. The endless list of potential suspects

This is the usual strawman that says that every CT believes every conjecture that has ever been brought forth.  As an amusing aside he talks here about preferring the "explanation that requires the fewest assumptions" as if the WC explanation isn't absolutely loaded with assumptions.

2.  The equally endless list of possible motives

As opposed to the WC's lack of any motive.

3. The lack of a coherent counter-narrative

As opposed to the WC's lack of a coherent narrative to begin with.

4. They attract people who aren't normally conspiracy theorists

I'm not sure why he considers this "stupid".  But this may have something to do with this case being nothing like conspiracy theories like the moon landing hoax or Bigfoot, despite some LNers' best attempts to paint them with the same brush to avoid actually talking about the evidence.

5. They combine to form the perfect storm of conspiracy theories

Also not about anything stupid.  I think Steve lost his train of thought halfway though the video.  Here he shows a cute graphic with JFK's picture and the quote "Ask not what the evidence says happened.  Ask what sounds good to you".  Which in fact describes perfectly how the WC came to their conclusion.

Nice try, but a giant fail on multiple levels.