From: chuckschuyler123@gmail.com   
      
   On Friday, November 17, 2023 at 10:59:51 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:   
   > On Friday, November 17, 2023 at 8:26:29 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:    
   > > Asking for your opinion or take on the matter. Feel free to define it or   
   interpret it as you may.   
   > "Historically guilty" makes no sense. That's why you can't post the link   
   that defines it. There's no such thing. It's a phrase you made up.    
   > A phrase you made up out of ignorance, because history cannot determine a   
   person's guilt or innocence. Neither can the media. In America, only a judge   
   or jury can do that.    
   > And because Oswald was never TRIED, he is therefore entitled to a   
   presumption of innocence under the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to the US   
   Constitution.    
   > While cementheads like yourself would label him an "assassin", the fact is   
   that he was the ACCUSED assassin of the President and Tippit.    
   > The fact that they had evidence against him is meaningless, because that   
   evidence was never challenged in court.    
   > But I challenege it on my site:    
   > www.gil-jesus.com    
   >    
   > Now, if you're asking me if the Warren Commission concluded that Oswald   
   killed Kennedy, then the answer is yes.    
   > That's what they concluded.   
      
   Argumentum ad Dictionarium.   
      
   And you wrote that history will judge Oswald as JFK's killer. True?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)