Touring the Tippit Scene

[John Iacoletti]

No trickery involved. I gave several reasons why I believe that it is likely. Do you have any legitimate reason whatsoever to believe that it is not likely?

No, you gave reasons for why it was possible, and then arbitrarily decreed it to be “likely”.

[Charles Collins]

No, you gave reasons for why it was possible, and then arbitrarily decreed it to be “likely”.

There are three good reasons why I believe it to be likely in my previous posts today.

I didn’t think you had any legitimate reasons for it to be unlikely. You are ust being your usual contrarian self.

[Martin Weidmann]

There are three good reasons why I believe it to be likely in my previous posts today.

I didn’t think you had any legitimate reasons for it to be unlikely. You are ust being your usual contrarian self.

This is so funny. First you arbitrarily decide that the reasons you gave are "good".
And then you declare yourself to be correct simply because John isn't playing your silly game.

How old are you, for heaven's sake?

[Charles Collins]

This is so funny. First you arbitrarily decide that the reasons you gave are "good".
And then you declare yourself to be correct simply because John isn't playing your silly game.

How old are you, for heaven's sake?

Neither of you two are using the word arbitrary correctly; even thought we have been through its definition.

If you believe that my reasons for believing the likelihood of LHO being familiar with the Texas Theater are wrong, then argue them.

[Martin Weidmann]

Neither of you two are using the word arbitrary correctly; even thought we have been through its definition.

If you believe that my reasons for believing the likelihood of LHO being familiar with the Texas Theater are wrong, then argue them.

So, now you arbitrarily decide that John and I are using the word incorrectly and by doing so you prove beyond doubt that we are not. Great entertainment... keep it going.

Your "reasons for believing" is not based in fact and thus 100% assumption. You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.

There... it's argued!

[Charles Collins]

So, now you arbitrarily decide that John and I are using the word incorrectly and by doing so you prove beyond doubt that we are not. Great entertainment... keep it going.

Your "reasons for believing" is not based in fact and thus 100% assumption. You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.

There... it's argued!

And there we have it. Inexplicably, you believe  you have addressed the reasons. Pure nonsense is your M.O..

[Martin Weidmann]

Reason 1

Interesting layout. So someone who was familiar with the theater layout would know that sneaking past Postal made it possible to bypass the concession stand by going up the stairs to the balcony first. (No wonder there was a bunch of high school boys playing hooky in the balcony; have one of the group buy a ticket and distract Postal while the others sneak in.) And then by using the northern set of stairs, someone could enter the main floor seating area. LHO had lived in the neighborhood before, and was most likely familiar with the Texas Theater.

Reason 2 and 3

LHO liked watching movies. Also, back in 1962-1963, movie theaters were a good place to get out of the summer heat and into an air conditioned building for a while.

I didn’t say that I knew for a fact that he was familiar with the Texas Theater. Just that it was likely. Why do you have a freaking problem with that?

So, you assumed that Oswald knew the Texas Theater because (1) he had lived in the neighborhood before, (2) he liked watching movies and (3) a movie theater gets him out of the summer heat and into an air conditioned building.

My reply;

So, now you arbitrarily decide that John and I are using the word incorrectly and by doing so you prove beyond doubt that we are not. Great entertainment... keep it going.

Your "reasons for believing" is not based in fact and thus 100% assumption. You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.

There... it's argued!

Your come back;

And there we have it. Inexplicably, you believe  you have addressed the reasons. Pure nonsense is your M.O..

None of the "reasons" you have provided make it even remotely likely (possible, yes) that Oswald knew the Texas Theater. You can only assume he had been to the Texas Theater before but you have not a shred of evidence for it. So, I was correct when I said;

You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.

That you don't understand what I was telling you, is not my problem.

And btw, did you forget you agreed with me on page 2

I didn’t say that I knew for a fact that he was familiar with the Texas Theater. Just that it was likely. Why do you have a freaking problem with that?

If you don't know something for a fact, you can not make a determination that something is likely. Even a 5 year old understands that, so why don't you?

[Charles Collins]

Reason 1

Reason 2 and 3

So, you assumed that Oswald knew the Texas Theater because (1) he had lived in the neighborhood before, (2) he liked watching movies and (3) a movie theater gets him out of the summer heat and into an air conditioned building.

My reply;

Your come back;

None of the "reasons" you have provided make it even remotely likely (possible, yes) that Oswald knew the Texas Theater. You can only assume he had been to the Texas Theater before but you have not a shred of evidence for it. So, I was correct when I said;

You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.

That you don't understand what I was telling you, is not my problem.

And btw, did you forget you agreed with me on page 2

If you don't know something for a fact, you can not make a determination that something is likely. Even a 5 year old understands that, so why don't you?

So, you assumed that Oswald knew the Texas Theater because


Not no, but hell no. I did not assume that LHO knew the TT. I said that it was likely.


None of the "reasons" you have provided make it even remotely likely (possible, yes) that Oswald knew the Texas Theater.

It is freaking possible that I knew the TT in 1963. But it is much less likely because I didn't live in the neighborhood. Even though I didn't live there, but it is possible that I could have been there.


So, I was correct when I said;

You can't even prove he had ever been at the Texas Theater before.



No where did I say that I could prove he had been there before. I said that it was likely.


That you don't understand what I was telling you, is not my problem.

I believe that is you who is confused. There is a difference in something being likely and it being fact. If I beleived it for a fact, that could be proven, I would have said so.


If you don't know something for a fact, you can not make a determination that something is likely.


Good grief dude, what kind of crap is that?