Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Reasonable doubts about Lee Harvey Oswald
#46
Tracy I agree a high standard must be met. Perhaps we agree that since it appeared in a published book for decades, plenty of opportunity existed for those who may not believe this claim to make a legal declaration against it, or sue Roberts previously, it likely is true. We can never have absolute verification that will please everyone, but it appears to reasonably be true based on the existing evidence.

As for Mr. H

JH: As for claims of "Somethings cannot be disclosed in this manner.Nor at this time."

CAS: I disagree with this vagary, especially after previous claims with proof were criticized.

JH: "After the revolution, maybe.... that sunlight disinfectant could have thousands of cockroaches skittering for cover or the Caymans or where ever."

The Revolution? I'm sorry to break to those who harbor some imagined belief of a magical day when all tyranny will be cast aside and all facts will be known to them, that somehow with claims of truth, the truth is proven. Guess again! The truth is not just surfing the net for the parts that support your theories! The truth is not beliefs, its proven by evidence, the complete record not just portions that support this revolutionary fantasy some harbor. The truth must be pursued, in libraries, interviews, videos, and in official documents, tens of thousands of pages, the truth definitely will not revealed by ham handed declarations without support from the entire record, both official documents and independent research. If you ignore evidence because you disagree with it, that is not investigation, that is self deception. It s easy to make sweeping and grand statements, its harder to actually prove what you say, and do the work. We had a Revolution, it was a few centuries ago, now we actually have laws and try to peaceably change things. Perhaps instead of a revolution we can just agree on basic facts, and recognize, despite the claims of you and others, you believe, but you cannot offer evidence to prove it. By evidence I mean repeated items that can be viewed and critically assessed by others without a leap of faith. You don't speak to my claims, you complain because I will not believe you without overwhelming evidence. I provided facts from both independent credible researchers and the official record, truth is not just one or the other, it is a mixture of all proven facts. Facts support your ideas, insults and speculation degrade them.

Ah Hee, Hee, Hee.

C.S.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Reasonable doubts about Lee Harvey Oswald - by C. Savastano - 28-09-2013, 06:40 AM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  If the case against Oswald was legitimate Gil Jesus 0 235 04-07-2024, 12:11 PM
Last Post: Gil Jesus
  Harvey In Hungary Brian Doyle 7 1,086 21-03-2024, 07:03 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Why the Government's Case Against Oswald is BS --- Part III Gil Jesus 0 514 10-12-2023, 12:08 PM
Last Post: Gil Jesus
  Why the Govenment's Case Against Oswald is BS --- Part II Gil Jesus 1 571 28-11-2023, 03:36 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Why the Government's case against Oswald is BS --- Part I Gil Jesus 1 594 15-11-2023, 04:55 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Thomas Kelley reports Oswald said he did not view parade Richard Gilbride 1 653 26-09-2023, 04:31 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  Evidence of Witness Tampering in the case against Oswald Gil Jesus 0 645 28-07-2023, 11:31 AM
Last Post: Gil Jesus
  The REAL reason Oswald went to Irving on 11.21.63 Gil Jesus 1 771 15-06-2023, 03:46 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  The Conspiracy to Kill Lee Harvey Oswald --- Conclusion Gil Jesus 1 928 01-04-2023, 04:23 PM
Last Post: Brian Doyle
  The Conspiracy to Kill Lee Harvey Oswald --- Part IV Gil Jesus 0 691 26-03-2023, 02:10 PM
Last Post: Gil Jesus

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)