I find it very interesting that there is a bread title saying that JFK Jr. died:
"#4128: JFK Jr. (R.I.P.) Died And Some Guy From PA Is Not Him Edition"
and that same night, Jr. reappears at a rally for the first time in a year and half.
Q can say anything he wants. Why not just clearly deny R and say, "no sorry to say JFK Jr. is did indeed die in 1999. R is not Jr."?
"There is only Q" is not a denial of R. Not to mention the fact that, logically, the statement is meaningless.
I thought you 'autist' faggots were like some sort of geniuses or something …. More like retards if you ask me.
No you have not backed up you claim with any evidence whatsoever. Anger and ridicule are not evidence.
Who is "Vincent Fusca?"
Why is he two different people, apparently one in disguise?
Why did he show up in Ohio last year - with Carolyn?
Why did he show up in WV last night?
Why does Fusca's face match Jr.'s perfectly?
Terrible argument. If you turned this in to me in history class, you would get a very low F for a grade.
No. You and a small minority don't care. You are very alone.
The rest of us are excited and uplifted by the imminent return of Camelot and the reappearance of JFK Jr.
What attempt to discredit. How exactly would that work?
Q had a chance to clearly deny JFK Jr. alive and R.
So, you've got a lot of work to do to force through your point.
That's more like you creaming like a wild animal when I present evidence and pertinent facts to support my claims and suggestions. I am glad you posted, that way I didn't have to.