For Martin Weidmann, re: Validity of Evidence

[Allan Fritzke]

Lets face it Valenti is just a troll that hijacks all threads but has no other reason to post other than to interject with unbased spume!

[Allan Fritzke]

Don't have to dig deeper, it floats!

[Ray Mitcham]

He did dig deeper: He just dug up a 600 year-old-word 
Seems he's getting all lathered up...

Did you have  to look it up on Merriam Webster, Bill?

[Rob Caprio]

BUMP

===================================

This reminds me of the Ben Holmes/Walt Cakebread show on ACJ. Aah, the memories.

[Bill Chapman]

Did you have  to look it up on Merriam Webster, Bill?

Is that a problem for you
Do you foam at the mouth when posting... don't go getting yourself in a lather, now

[Bill Brown]

BUMP

=================================

I created this thread versus hijacking other threads.  This thread is not intended to mock.  I ask in all sincerity...

Martin Weidmann, John Iacoletti,

Would you mind listing a piece of evidence in the case, which points to Oswald's guilt, that you DO consider authentic?  Or, if you'd rather, I can list various pieces of evidence and you can let me know if you accept it as valid or not.

[Jerry Freeman]

Did you have  to look it up on Merriam Webster, Bill?

Honestly, I had to look it up. I thought it meant some kind of bodily fluid