Youtube Interview I Did, Tippit Case

[Bill Chapman]

Good for you that you are completely sure. So now you can drop the "I'm pretty sure" crap.

Just consider this; I'm beyond sure that, even if I did not witness the actual crime, if I were placed in front of a 4 man line up like that I would pick Oswald as the most likely one as well.

Too bad that none of the line up witnesses were ever questioned by a defense lawyer because it is beyond a shadow of a doubt (IMO) that their identifications would have been destroyed on the stand.

'So now you can drop the "I'm pretty sure" crap.'
Who are you to tell me to drop anything? And just who testified that Oswald was the 'most likely one' btw?


BILL CHAPMAN

[Martin Weidmann]

'So now you can drop the "I'm pretty sure" crap.'
WhoTF are you to tell me to drop anything? And just who testified that Oswald was the 'most likely one' btw?


BILL CHAPMAN

WhoTF are you to tell me to drop anything?

Did you say something, hypocrite?

Now feel free to bugger off if you must.

[Bill Chapman]

WhoTF are you to tell me to drop anything?

Did you say something, hypocrite?

More of an invitation, actually:

To wit: I'm pretty sure that you're one who initially asked, condescendingly, if I really thought you were going to get into what you call my 'silly games'. So that's why I attached 'feel free to bugger off if you have to' (or words to that effect).

And I'm dead certain that my invitation for you to bugger off remains permanently open-ended.

[Martin Weidmann]

More of an invitation, actually:

To wit: I'm pretty sure that you're one who initially asked, condescendingly, if I really thought you were going to get into what you call my 'silly games'. So that's why I attached 'feel free to bugger off if you have to' (or words to that effect).

And I'm dead certain that my invitation for you to bugger off remains permanently open-ended.

Your desperate need to "explain" everything is duly noted.

[Bill Chapman]

Your desperate need to "explain" everything is duly noted.

No desperation required to put you in your place over your attempt to 'deep-six' the fact that you initially —  and somewhat haughtily, I might add — tried to give the impression that you would never deign to get into an exchange with me over what you refer to as 'silly games'. And yet you dove right in pronto.

Unfortunately for you, all you've done is belly-flop and become yet another contrarian overboard.

[Martin Weidmann]

No desperation required to put you in your place over your attempt to 'deep-six' the fact that you initially —  and somewhat haughtily, I might add — tried to give the impression that you would never deign to get into an exchange with me over what you refer to as 'silly games'. And yet you dove right in pronto.

Unfortunately for you, all you've done is belly-flop and become yet another contrarian overboard.

Even misrepresenting just about everything you can about what actually was being said (in another thread) you are still not making any sense.

'I wasn't trying. If you feel the fool, it has nothing to do with me.'
Where did I say I felt like a fool? I said you tried to make me seem the fool.

It is on you.

Let's see. Now you really hope that I am going to debate you on this pathetic topic, right?

No way... but nice try 

What part of "this pathetic topic" did you not understand?

You seem to be very good at creating your own little alternate reality here, but hey, as a LN, so that's par for the course for you, right?

[Bill Chapman]

Even misrepresenting just about everything you can about what actually was being said (in another thread) you are still not making any sense.

What part of "this pathetic topic" did you not understand?

You seem to be very good at creating your own little alternate reality here, but hey, as a LN, so that's par for the course for you, right?

What part of your 'no way' response to debating this 'silly game/pathetic topic' — then doing just that (debating) anyway — do you not understand?