Did Marina have a reason to claim the MC rifle belonged to Lee?

[John Iacoletti]

Really? He's holding a rifle, that's for sure, but what is your evidence that it is the one Kleins' is supposed to have sent to him?

Still waiting for “Richard” to name the experts who “have indicated that rifle is the same rifle found on the 6th floor”. But then “Richard” doesn’t answer questions or defend his dishonest claims. He just regurgitates them ad nauseam.

[Martin Weidmann]

I simply asked you to tell me who or what department you asked about the Hidell ID so I could expediate a response but your failure to respond is clear proof of what transpired.

JohnM

You can't "expedite" anything. But I will give you the information when you provide your true identity.

[John Mytton]

You can't "expedite" anything.

Why not?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Why not?

JohnM

Because you are a fake.

Provide your true identity and then we'll talk.

[John Mytton]

Because you are a fake.

Provide your true identity and then we'll talk.

Disclosing my identity on this Forum has no bearing on my ability to extract the information that we require from the archives.

But your newest diversion is Duly noted and clearly demonstrates your grasping of straws and is powerful evidence of your lack of credibility.

Btw since we know your real name is "Martin Weidmann" you should have no problem proving it, right?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Disclosing my identity on this Forum has no bearing on my ability to extract the information that we require from the archives.

But your newest diversion is Duly noted and clearly demonstrates your grasping of straws and is powerful evidence of your lack of credibility.

Btw since we know your real name is "Martin Weidmann" you should have no problem proving it, right?

JohnM

Disclosing my identity on this Forum has no bearing on my ability to extract the information that we require from the archives.

Of course it does, unless you use your fake ID to contact the National Archives as well. But you never really planned on contacting them in the first place, right?

But your newest diversion is Duly noted and clearly demonstrates your grasping of straws and is powerful evidence of your lack of credibility.

You're not making sense. I'm calling you a fake and you have already admitted that you are. There is no diversion....

Btw since we know your real name is "Martin Weidmann" you should have no problem proving it, right?

Why would I need to prove it when you already know it?

[John Mytton]

Disclosing my identity on this Forum has no bearing on my ability to extract the information that we require from the archives.

Of course it does, unless you use your fake ID to contact the National Archives as well. But you never really planned on contacting them in the first place, right?

But your newest diversion is Duly noted and clearly demonstrates your grasping of straws and is powerful evidence of your lack of credibility.

You're not making sense. I'm calling you a fake and you have already admitted that you are. There is no diversion....

Btw since we know your real name is "Martin Weidmann" you should have no problem proving it, right?

Why would I need to prove it when you already know it?

unless you use your fake ID to contact the National Archives as well.

Well you contacted them didn't you "Martin Weidmann", right?

But you never really planned on contacting them in the first place, right?

If you simply supplied the information I innocently requested then of course I would!

You're not making sense. I'm calling you a fake and you have already admitted that you are. There is no diversion....

No, you demanded I provide my "true identity", do you even know your own arguments?

Why would I need to prove it when you already know it?

Then proving your real name shouldn't be a problem, right?

JohnM