Post by Gil JesusPost by BudRather than waste your time with meaningless posts like this you should be working on putting an explanation of the assassination on the table for consideration.
Start small, tell us what happened at 10th and Patton.
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-murder/
I`m familiar with what it looks like when you apply your "reasoning" skills to information. It isn`t pretty.
Post by Gil JesusPost by BudNever happen. You spend thousands of hour studying event and the more you study, the more clueless you become.
Talking about clueless, at least I know how long the paper bag was.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/33a9MbNPYEg/m/rT_ERTztAgAJ
Yet you refuse to say what the length is with the flap extended.
Post by Gil JesusPost by BudAnd you delude yourself that it is a mark of bravery to run from every counter idea expressed here.
I don't deal in "counter ideas", conjecture, opinion, or speculation.
That is how truth is determined, stupid, that is how ideas are vetted. Through a robust application of reasoning to information. You hash it out, all you do is make "this must mean this" empty declarations.
Post by Gil JesusI deal in evidence.
And this is the perfect example of you being an idiot.
Quote from the evidence where it says there is a problem with the chain of possession.
This is your idea, but you are too stupid to even understand that it *is* your idea.
Now, what happens is, we apply reasoning and critical thinking to your idea, we look to see if the idea is valid. We then offer counter ideas, or we show flaws in the thinking which led to this idea, or we offer evidence in conflict with the idea, ect.
This all gets ignored by you, it doesn`t show on your radar. Then you just repeat the claim as if nothing was said.
How it is supposed to work is we look at you ideas, and maybe we say your idea is flawed because of "A", "B" and "C". Then you come back and show that reasoning we used to arrive at "A", "B" and "C" is flawed because of "X", "Y" and "Z". This is ideas are hashed out, this is how ideas are vetted. You skip this whole process, you merely repeat the claim, hide behind the notion that it isn`t you talking, it is the evidence. Evidence doesn`t post itself here.
Post by Gil JesusAnd while we're on the subject of evidence, in what year can we expect you to post some ?
I do all the time. But as you can see you are unaware of facts that are inconvenient to you. Just a week ago I posted evidence that showed you were wrong about Dougherty being the only person to see Oswald enter the TSBD. I showed it was Frazier, and that Dougherty never saw Oswald enter the building. You ignored it, and you repeated the claim later as if I said nothing about it.
Hank quotes evidence all the time, and all it shows is that you are simply lying about following the evidence. Invariably what he produces is ignored or removed.
What you do is pour through the evidence, find something you see as a problem and put that on a pedestal ("A-HA this is useful!", but for what? You don`t use it to make a case for what happened), ignore other evidence that pertains to the issue, apply no reasoning to the information, ect. In other words, you look at the wrong things, and you look at those wrong things incorrectly.
You write things that you are proud of that you should be embarrassed to be associated with.
Post by Gil JesusOr will the clock run out and leave your reputation as a know-nothing troll intact ?
All you`ve done here is cement your reputation as an idiot.
Post by Gil JesusWhen it comes to running, you've got the world record. You've done so much running here that you should be in the Paris Olympics this summer.
This is how you and Ben delude yourselves. Nobody here has ever been afraid of your stupid thinking. This is just something you and Ben are comfortable believing, because you find the truth uncomfortable. The truth is you are both deluding yourselves.
Post by Gil JesusYou've probably run a couple of hundred times alone from that one question Ben keeps asking you.
Go back to the beginning of the issue and you`ll find I addressed it.
Ben creates crooked games, and then he appoints himself the referee for the crooked games he creates.
He asks loaded questions, but then declares it is not allowed to "unload" them. He asks questions with begged premises. He quotes out of context, with the assumption that all that is needed to be know to resolve an issue is the passage he has isolated.
He plays crooked games, you or he have no interest in an honest exchange of ideas because your ideas suck.
Post by Gil JesusYour favorite track to run on is the "you're looking at the wrong things incorrectly" track.
Yes, the truth is my favorite "go-to".
What happens is, you insist on heading into the weeds. We fight you for the steering wheel, try to get you back on the road. After a while it become clear you prefer the weeds. Have fun, it`s a free country, spin your wheels in the weeds for as long as you like. But any ideas that this is some sort of "better way" to make progress is the product of your own delusions.
Post by Gil JesusJust another response designed to let you people run from the topic.
Which is?
Post by Gil JesusAnd here's a bulletin for you: the items you call "wrong things" are evidence.
And in that vast body of evidence there are things that give an understanding of this event, and things that do not. You ignore the things that give clarity and focus on the things that produce muddle.
Post by Gil JesusThe testimony, the documents, the exhibits....they're all evidence....whether they made it into the 26 volumes or not.
They're all part of the public record on the case.
And then you take all that and play silly, childish games with the information.
You can`t hide behind the evidence, it doesn`t bring itself here in support of your ideas, you bring it here (or post links to it because you don`t want it picked apart here).
Post by Gil JesusA case so weak that questions remain and it is still being debated 60 plus years after it was supposedly closed.
More poor thinking. Has there ever been a case where every issue was answered, or people couldn`t think of questions to raise?
The WC could only produce findings, they couldn`t make anyone accept those findings. But as you say, the evidence is available. Put it together and produce findings that are superior to the WC`s. Critic criticize, but they produce nothing. Anything can be criticized (which is why CTers will never put a case up, it could never stand to scrutiny).
Do you really think the WC should have take the tact you folks have, and spend 60 years playing silly games with the evidence?
Post by Gil JesusA case so weak that the cops had to make sure Oswald would never make it to trial.
Make your strong case that the cops made sure Oswald didn`t make it to trial. If it is so strong, why aren`t cops behind bars?
Post by Gil JesusA case so weak that you have to run from those questions that still remain.
The ability to generate questions is meaningless, it is the ability to answer them in a reasonable manner that counts.
Post by Gil JesusYou'd rather run than shine a light into those dark corners out of fear of what you might find.
Of all the things I might fear, your stupid ideas don`t make the list.
I am confident in my assessment of the situation. The chances that you folks will ever take your ideas anywhere is so slim it isn`t even worth considering. Even if there was a conspiracy, why would I think the stupidest stumps walking upright could find what accomplished men could not? And you`ve given the conspiracy magical abilities, they can remove or place into evidence anything they want at any time, make anyone say anything they want them to say and stick to it for life, ect. Now that you`ve set this as the reality of the situation, you have no chance to expose anything. You`ve made the rules for this reality to preclude uncovering the conspiracy in any real way. Which becomes a built in excuse for your failure, they are just much, much better than you. If you were good, you would be able to say exactly what cops allowed Oswald to be killed, who was involved in the plot, what their roles were, ect. But you really have nothing like this, you have your face pushed up to the glass from the outside and you are saying "it looks that way to me". But how it looks to you isn`t worth anything.
Post by Gil JesusThat's why you don't click links.
It doesn`t matter how many things I explain things to you, it will bounce off and you will go with what you are comfortable believing.
Post by Gil JesusWhile you see yourself as "sir slick", the internet record ( which is permanent ) will reveal to the world that you're just another lying coward.
I`m fine with what I`ve done here. Actually proud of some of it.
Post by Gil JesusJust another keyboard warrior who's a real-life coward on so many levels. You're a paranoid/schizo who runs from everything out of fear.
Yes idiot, I`ve been so terrified by you ideas I`ve been coming here for decades.
Even when reality goes against your delusions, your delusions win.
Post by Gil JesusYou've displayed that you're terrified of real-life confrontation and terrified of the COVID virus, so I'm not surprised to find you terrified of the truth as well.
I`m not surprised you are desperately trying to spin my participation here into a form you are comfortable with.
Post by Gil JesusIn fact, you seem to be terrified to start a conversation, always preferring to respond to a conversation started by someone else.
It`s a conspiracy board, stupid. I`m not a conspiracy theorist, stupid.
Post by Gil JesusOn the rare occasion you DO start a conversation, it's always something off-topic or an insult aimed at another poster.
I`ve started dozens of on topic posts. It doesn`t have the effect you might think. I can`t *make* you engage on ideas, and you and Ben are totally incapable.
Post by Gil JesusThat tells us that your knowledge of the subject matter is weak.
I know more about this case than 99% of the people.
Post by Gil JesusAfter Feb. 22nd, the Google record will show that you and the other assholes here have done a poor job of defending the Warren Commission's case.
Who am I to argue with a delusional person about what he has decided to believe?
Post by Gil JesusYou're a bunch of losers who don't bring anything to the table but comments, insults and questions.
We bring reasoning. Has the same effect a cross has on a vampire.
Post by Gil JesusI wouldn't choose you to prosecute a parking violation. You people are the ones who are clueless.
I hope if I ever have to kill someone, you are on the jury.
Post by Gil JesusBut look at it this way, after February 22nd, you'll be able to spend more time in mommy's basement with one hand on your video game controller and the other one in your pants.
I will miss the diversion of slapping you around like this.
Post by Gil JesusBecause after years of posting in this newsgroup, the only one who you've successfully made a fool out of is yourself.
Your assessment of what I did here is irrelevant, you`re delusional.
I did what I did, no need to slap me on the back.
Thank you for playing the straight man, I couldn`t have done what I did without you.
