They taught me how to kill, and I liked it.

[Richard Smith]

I posed a possible explanation.

You just forgot to tell us it was merely a "possible explanation", right?

Instead of addressing that explanation if you disagree with it,

There was nothing to address. You gave an opinion and, as you always do, presented it a fact. I have no interest whatsoever in discussing your opinions.

Get off your high horse...

Down the contrarian rabbit hole we go again.  How many times can you interject yourself into a discussion without making any substantive points.  I have tried to explain to you that the question posed required an answer based on conjecture.  No one is suggesting that it MUST be the absolute truth because only Oswald would know that for sure.   Why try to derail a conversation based on your contrarian idiocy when it comes to any possible negative connotation regarding Oswald?  If you think there is no merit to discussing his state of mind, why not just avoid this thread?   Is there nothing else to do in "Europe}?

[Martin Weidmann]

Down the contrarian rabbit hole we go again.  How many times can you interject yourself into a discussion without making any substantive points.  I have tried to explain to you that the question posed required an answer based on conjecture.  No one is suggesting that it MUST be the absolute truth because only Oswald would know that for sure.   Why try to derail a conversation based on your contrarian idiocy when it comes to any possible negative connotation regarding Oswald?  If you think there is no merit to discussing his state of mind, why not just avoid this thread?   Is there nothing else to do in "Europe}?

Why try to derail a conversation

I don't do that. I just don't let you get away with spreading your usual BS.

[Richard Smith]

Why try to derail a conversation

I don't do that. I just don't let you get away with spreading your usual BS.

Unreal.  Every thread on this forum is derailed by your nonsense. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Unreal.  Every thread on this forum is derailed by your nonsense.

Calling it nonsense is far easier than actually dealing with it, isn't it?

[Richard Smith]

Calling it nonsense is far easier than actually dealing with it, isn't it?

Dealing with what?  I made a comment in response to a question that called for conjecture.  You have stupidly interjected posts like this numerous times into the discussion without making a single substantive observation on the topic.  The same derailing of the topic that you cause in every single thread.  Not just with me but every single person here who has concluded that Oswald was guilty. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Dealing with what?  I made a comment in response to a question that called for conjecture.  You have stupidly interjected posts like this numerous times into the discussion without making a single substantive observation on the topic.  The same derailing of the topic that you cause in every single thread.  Not just with me but every single person here who has concluded that Oswald was guilty.

Dealing with what?

Calling you out on bogus claims you couldn't support with actual evidence...

Remember this; "the evidence that shows that Oswald came down the stairs unseen within 75 seconds after the last shot is that it happened" - "Richard Smith"

Btw, I paraphrased.

I made a comment in response to a question that called for conjecture.

Except you didn't present it as conjecture. Arrogantly you presented it as fact.

The same derailing of the topic that you cause in every single thread.  Not just with me but every single person here who has concluded that Oswald was guilty.

Calling out bogus claims that you can't support with evidence isn't derailing the thread. Replying with strawman arguments and idiotic rants instead of entering into a discussion (as you do all the time) does derail threads.

[John Iacoletti]

What I think is unreal is how many armchair psychoanalysts there are who base their analyses on the assumption that Oswald actually killed people.