Why waste all of those keystrokes if you aren't going to respond?
1) You, as predicted (every time, lately) feel the need to act on behalf of other's posts....
Uh, in addition to being irrelevant, that's inaccurate. Our last exchange, which I just brought to your attention for the second time, is a direct response to your OP of the silly Black Ops Radio videos. I posted a summary of the introduction and the first five episodes to give you an opportunity to point out what I was missing, but instead you went missing.
> .... possibly, because you don't get my attention to begin with..
Well, I have a theory about why you never seem to have a cogent response to what I post (yet frequently have lame excuses for why you don't), but that's all irrelevant. Since I've come to expect unresponsive responses from you, if anything at all, my primary objective in replying to you is to get the attention of anyone inclined to take you seriously.
> 2) You, as predicted, show pictures, designed in your head to support some kind of "picture" pseudo-evidence of where none exists.
LOL, the pictures I posted demonstrate how absurd your reply to MicaelS was, after saying his post was absurd.
> You can't even touch the evidence that way as to where shots came from, ...
The EVIDENCE of where the shots came from speaks for itself, which is the one and only reason conspiracists declare it fake:
The EVIDENCE says JFK was shot twice from behind, and the evidence says it was with Oswald's rifle from the TSBD 6th floor. After telling us to ignore the actual evidence, after 50 years conspiracists still don't have any evidence of a shot from somewhere else that can withstand scrutiny. But that's not a problem for conspiracy hucksters: Since they aren't really interested in getting at the truth, they just ignore the obvious problems with their evidence and their reasoning.
> ... much less, how impossible they were to come from the window these two guys are at least 12 away from.
Absurd bullshit double-down noted, which brings us to this:
> 3) This funny and silly stuff you insist on presenting (always, on behalf of other's posts) are so unlike the evidence in the video "50 reasons" presentations.
I already called your bluff on that and you folded. You couldn't give me any reason to watch those videos, and then when I watched the first five anyway and found not a shred of this imaginary evidence you're claiming, you decided it was a good time to ignore my posts. But I'll give you another chance: Point me to any one of those videos that contains some credible evidence of a conspiracy.
> Thanks for the abundant laughs. Keep em coming, cause I LOVE having posts like this KICKED!
No problem. Although we don't learn anything useful about 9/11 or the JFK assassination from your posts, I think we learn a lot about how some conspiracists think.
Edit history
= new reply since forum marked as read