From: 19efppp@mail.com   
      
   On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 10:45:32 AM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:   
   > On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 1:24:47 AM UTC-5, NoTrueFlags Here   
   wrote:    
   > > On Wednesday, November 22, 2023 at 11:44:59 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant   
   wrote:    
   > > > On Monday, November 20, 2023 at 2:27:33 AM UTC-5, NoTrueFlags Here   
   wrote:    
   > > > > It really doesn't mean anything other than the Official Story is that   
   a person is guilty. Of course, the Nutter Retards are going to believe the   
   Official Story verdict, but that's all it is. The rulers say Oswald did it.   
   Everybody knows that.    
   > > > What’s the “the Official Story verdict” on who was the Texas Tower   
   shooter?    
   > > > Do you believe “the Official Story verdict” there?    
   > > > If so, why? Isn’t that what ‘they’ want you to believe?    
   > > >    
   > > > If not, are you posting to the Texas Tower site that Whitman was framed,   
   and those who believe the the Official Story verdict are ignorant sheeple and   
   just believing their rulers?    
   > > > If not, why not?    
   > > I don't know anything about Your Texas Tower Massacre.   
   > Of course not. Since it happened in Texas only three years after the Kennedy   
   assassination and involved an ex-Marine with similar shooting skills to Oswald   
   shooting with a bolt-action rifle from a much higher building at people who   
   were far more    
   distant than Kennedy was from Oswald, we can’t learn anything about the   
   assassination or whether Oswald and Oswald’s weapon was capable of   
   committing the assassination.    
   >    
   > You want to stick with that answer or phone a friend for help?   
   > > I'm talking about the JFK assassination because that is the topic which   
   interests me, and the topic of this newsgrouppe. Your logical fallacy that   
   Official Stories all need to be false for this one to be false   
   > Straw-man Logical Fallacy. I never said that.   
   > > only reveals your fundamental dishonesty.   
   > The “fundamental dishonesty” is from those who employ logical fallacies   
   like straw-man arguments to make a pretend rebuttal to a point not made.   
   > > Everybody knows what a cowardly liar you are.   
   > And there’s the ad hominem instead of a reasoned response.    
   >    
   > Summary: You argued against a point I didn’t make, called me names, and   
   claimed the similarities and differences between the JFK assassination and the   
   Texas Tower shooting didn’t interest you, dismissing any attempt of mine to   
   draw parallels    
   between the two and extract what we could learn from these parallels.    
   >    
   > How CT of you.   
   Sure, you'd rather talk about something that happened 3 years later because   
   you can't defend your ridiculous Lone Nut theories.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)