From: hsienzant@aol.com   
      
   On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 2:11:40 PM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote:   
   > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 1:43:57 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:    
   > > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 1:10:35 PM UTC-5, David Drummond   
   wrote:    
   > > > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 1:02:27 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant   
   wrote:    
   > > > > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 12:50:34 PM UTC-5, David Drummond   
   wrote:    
   > > > > > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 12:46:11 PM UTC-5, Hank   
   Sienzant wrote:    
   > > > > > > On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 12:33:33 AM UTC-5, David   
   Drummond wrote:    
   > > > > > > > >    
   > > > > > > > > I read the 26 volumes and determined there was little to no   
   evidence of a conspiracy.    
   > > > > > > > "I read OJ's book; dude seems legit."    
   > > > > > > I’m going to call that the logical fallacy of an appeal to   
   ridicule.    
   > > > > > >    
   > > > > > You should. I am ridiculing you. And drawing parallels while I do   
   it.    
   > > > > You are ridiculing my arguments, not me. That’s a logical fallacy,   
   and doesn't touch what I said at all.    
   > > > >    
   > > > > And I note that Ben, NoTrueFlags, and now you are staying as far away   
   from discussing the ramifications of Lifton's theory as possible.    
   > > > >    
   > > > > You'd rather employ logical fallacies than actually address a theory   
   many CTs accept.    
   > > > >    
   > > > > Explain that too, while you're explaining how Lifton’s theory makes   
   any sense:    
   > > > Doesn't need to. Only one shooter needs to be in front of the limousine.   
   > > Not according to Lifton, and Lifton’s theory.    
   > >   
   > > If there are shooters behind the President, and a bullet is recovered from   
   a different weapon, how does that implicate a lone nut and not establish a   
   conspiracy?    
   > >    
   > > Lifton’s theory solves that problem by putting all the shooters in front   
   of the President, but it introduced other problems, like the need to alter   
   Connally’s wounds, or retrieve bullets that wind up deflected deep into   
   JFK’s body, or if either    
   man was shot from the front but survived, he never did explain.    
   > >    
   > > And neither will anyone else.    
   > >    
   > > And you pretend these problems go away if we add one shooter in front of   
   the President.    
   > >    
   > > They don't.    
   >    
   > Henry wants CTers to chase every rabbit down every hole and defend every   
   theory in the hopes of flummoxing us into forgetting the one simple and   
   obvious fact.    
   >    
   > There only needed to be one shooter in the front.   
      
   Remember that Ben started this thread and accused me of “Telling   
   Unsupportable Whoppers”.   
      
   But when I support my claims, Ben ignores those, spams the board instead, and   
   you and NTF are too busy changing the subject (or attempting to) to deal with   
   what Ben brought up and asked me to support — Lifton’s theory.   
      
   I simply want to discuss, in this thread, the Lifton body alterations theory   
   Ben brought up in the top post. Apparently nobody here here is willing to step   
   up and do that.   
      
   Clearly, you see a problem with Lifton’s theory of all the shooters being in   
   front of the President, but you appear reticent to admit that. Instead of all   
   the shooters in front of the President, you want to change his theory to your   
   liking and put one    
   shooter in front of the President (and presumably others elsewhere). But that   
   comes with its own set of issues you and other CTs apparently don't want to   
   discuss either.    
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)