RedIbis explains Arlen Specter's "magic bullet chart"

I was once into the Kennedy conspiracy, i used to listen to a lot of Bill Hicks and it seemed so clear cut when Hicks used to do all the 'back and to the left' stuff. Hicks used to joke that if you 'dabble in a bit of physics' you can see that the bullet had to come from the grassy knoll direction. When i found out that physics actually says that the head would jerk back from where the bullet came from i was pretty shocked. Penn and Teller explain it really well.
 
RedIbis said:
It wasn't a comment and it wasn't tongue in cheek. It was two posts of your so called analysis.
Click to expand...


In only one of those posts did I "accuse" you of being an anti-semite, and that, for the third time, was tongue-in-cheek. Your claim that it was two posts is either confabulation or deception, and to imply that either one, let alone both, were an analysis of your "anti-semitism" is pure nonsense.

If you need a review, my posts are here and here.

I would so love to see you point out where in that second post I "accuse" you of anti-semitism.
 
Last edited:
Cl1mh4224rd said:
In only one of those posts did I "accuse" you of being an anti-semite, and that, for the third time, was tongue-in-cheek. Your claim that it was two posts is either confabulation or deception, and to imply that either one, let alone both, were an analysis of your "anti-semitism" is pure nonsense.

If you need a review, my posts are here and here.

I would so love to see you point out where in that second post I "accuse" you of anti-semitism.
Click to expand...

Post 21 is a continuation of 20. You appear to have some reading comprehension difficulties. Which is strange since they're your posts.
 
RedIbis said:
Post 21 is a continuation of 20. You appear to have some reading comprehension difficulties. Which is strange since they're your posts.
Click to expand...


The continuation is to support my statement that you will forever be vague and non-committal, not a continuation of my "accusation". I'm not sure how that escaped you. I do find it amusing, though, that you think you understand what I wrote better than I do. That takes a special kind of deluded arrogance, wouldn't you agree?

Anyway, as I said later in that thread, you're proving my hypothesis quite nicely. This thread is another testament to your inability to support yet another one of your claims.
 
Last edited:
I don't like these threads that call out other members specifically to jump to attention and respond. I will give them some leeway if a relevant dioscussion is started, however this can be difficult if the OP gives no information or links at all to what you want to discuss. If you absolutely must call out someone to respond to a question, please make the OP clear and relevant. Why not just start a thread with your questions and any links, without naming people specifically, anyway?

As to this thread, if it does not develop into discussion in the next few posts, it's going to AAH due to the lack of relevant, on-topic CT material, and the bickering.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom