GIL JESUS SAID:
>>> "Too bad Lattimer can't tell us himself which one asked him, Canal or Davison. They both seem to take credit for asking him." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You're nuts. They do no such thing.
Where in this short thread does Jean Davison take any "credit" for having asked John Lattimer herself about the issue regarding the serial number?
Answer: Nowhere.
When Jean said: "It was I who asked, John...", she was responding to John Canal's comment in his first post, when John said: "I can't recall who asked me to check with Dr. Lattimer...". She wasn't implying that it was she, herself, who had asked John Lattimer any questions. This is quite obvious when reading the two Canal/Davison posts back-to-back.
Gil can't even interpret a short three-post thread correctly. Incredible.
Anyway, this is just another "So what?" issue raised by Gil "Chaff Always Trumps Wheat" Jesus.
As if the person who initially did the asking regarding the serial number on Lattimer's rifle would have changed Dr. Lattimer's response of: "The book was printed before we noticed the error and it was too late to correct it."
Gil is simply....well....amazing.
>>> "I wonder, did either of them get his response in writing?" <<<
Like I said....he's amazing.
And what did I tell you, folks....just one hour ago:
"This should shut the kooks up about this for good (but it probably won't; they'll just say that Lattimer lied to Canal in 2004)." -- DVP; 09/09/2008; 8:03 PM EDT
In other words -- Somebody said something that a conspiracy kook doesn't want to hear, therefore somebody must be telling tales out of school....whether it be Lattimer himself, or maybe Canal just made the whole thing up about asking Dr. Lattimer the question about the serial number and then getting a response directly from the doctor.
A new fitting slogan:
"A conspiracy kook's mind is a terrible thing to waste (if it could only be located in the first place, that is)."
David Von Pein
September 9, 2008
