[Mark Ulrik]

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:The criteria is quite specific. If someone lies about citable evidence, then that can be publicly labeled a lie.

This is the first time you have, even by implication, admitted that there was no roll call.

You can have an opinion that there was, and I'd have no problem with that. Indeed, there's testimony to support this (even though it's simply not credible) But to assert that Oswald was the only missing employee from any roll call is a lie.

Then all you need to do is deny publicly, that Oswald was the only "missing" employee. But you didn't do this... you attempted to support the lie that Oswald was the only missing employee.

You keep making a completely meaningless point about whether someone was inside or outside the building at the time of the assassination. NO-ONE conducting a roll call would have known when someone left.

Anyone who asserts that Oswald was the only missing employee at the time of this mythical "roll call" is a liar. It's really just that simple.

You seem to be confusing me with someone else. I don't know who told you that Oswald was the only employee not present at that time, but it certainly wasn't me. I was the one who made the distinction between leaving the building before and after the shooting.

The distinction is not trivial: being inside the building at the time of the assassination makes you a potential assassin! Oswald's boss observed him inside the building immediately after the shooting and was later unable to find him. Only a complete moron would assign equal weight to the non-presence of someone like pregnant secretary Carolyn Arnold, who in Truly's mind wasn't unaccounted for, as they were both standing outside watching the motorcade when the shots rang out.

Was there a 'roll call' in which it was discovered that Oswald was the only employee missing?

Who told you there was?