From: 19efppp@mail.com   
      
   On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 11:23:45 AM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:   
   > On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 11:15:29 AM UTC-5, NoTrueFlags Here   
   wrote:    
   > > On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 11:11:46 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler   
   wrote:    
   > > > On Thursday, November 23, 2023 at 10:02:11 AM UTC-6, NoTrueFlags Here   
   wrote:    
   > > > > 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.    
   > > > What about your theory? I'm not asking you to defend it, but what should   
   the punishment have been for Oswald shooting at the motorcade from the grassy   
   knoll?    
   > > >    
   > > > Are you thinking a life sentence or the death penalty or something else?    
   > > >    
   > > > Maybe some combination of prison and being forced to befriend Gil or at   
   least clean his trailer once a week?    
   > > >    
   > > > Is Oswald "historically guilty" of some sort of involvement in JFK's   
   death on 11/22/63?    
   > > If Oswald did what I think he did, then the death penalty would have been   
   appropriate.   
   > So while not approving of what Jack Ruby did, you are saying Oswald’s   
   death would have been the appropriate punishment by the State of Texas, only   
   Ruby beat them to it.    
   >    
   > What about Clay Shaw? Any views there on his guilt or innocence?   
   I am saying what I said. If Oswald did what I think he did, then the death   
   penalty would have been appropriate. And if Ruby murdered Oswald, then the   
   death penalty would be appropriate for him, too. And Clay Shaw was found not   
   guilty just as he should    
   have been, since he was not proven guilty.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)