Originally posted by Pierre
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Was Joe Barnettīs alibi accepted lightly?
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by David Orsam View PostI was asking if you had a source my dear boy.
It transpires that you don't have a source.
What a shame.
But something else transpires when you search the BNA, something you do now want to do to find what you look for.
Or rather, it transpires you do not want to find it, you merely want to criticize me for the sake of it.
What a shame.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pierre View PostYes, it transpires in your opinion, in your brain.
But something else transpires when you search the BNA, something you do now want to do to find what you look for.
Or rather, you do not want to find it, you merely want to criticize me for the sake of it.
What a shame.
I was asking you if you had a source, I wasn't asking me if I had a source.
If you had a source I would expect you to tell me what it is.
You have not done so.
Ergo, you have no source.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pierre View PostHow nice of you to repeat everything you say so many times. I will be be nice too and copy it a lot. I learn it from you.
So do you actually have a source, reliable or otherwise, for the statement you posted in your OP that: "People used false alibis in 1888 and alibis were of course tested."?
If so, what is it?
Comment
-
Originally posted by David Orsam View PostI don't wish to my dear boy. I also don't need to because I'm not searching for a source for you.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pierre View PostOh, but you wanted a "reliable" source.
"My dear boy, do you have any source or reference for that statement?"
I wasn't asking for a "reliable" source. Just a source or a reference. You didn't give me a source or reference.
You still haven't.
Comment
Comment