JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
How did Oswald get the job at the TSBD
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Wesley Johnson on March 12, 2018, 04:56:20 PM ---
Weak response Martin. The question for you is, "do you dispute how Oswald got the job at the TSBD?" Do you understand the importance of that? That was a powerful response by Richard and now I know who he is. And I know why you guys say the things you do about him. You are weak and the CTers have no evidence at all. I don't know what you do for a living but it better not involve having some common sense, logic or critical thinking. Most of the CTers have zero deductive reasoning skills. The shear magnitude of what it would take to set-up a conspiracy, as you and the CTers claim, is unsustainable. It all falls apart after a minutes scrutiny. I would love to have Oswald in the hot seat at court. At the end of it, I would pin the bag, the rifle, the revolver, the bullet, the fragments, the shell casings, the documents, proving Oswald's ownership of the weapons, and the eye witness testimonies, right to little old Oswaldovich's head. And after the defense, blew all the smoke and put up all the mirrors, the jury would see that they had zero, physical, or ballistic evidence to support their defense. It is hilarious.
--- End quote ---
Oh great... another misguided "king of assumption and speculation" who thinks he knows what would have happened at a trial that will never take place and now he starts to do John "powerful evidence" Mytton imitations as well. Great stuff....
Weak response Martin.
You know what's really weak?.... Not having a response to a comment you call weak.
The shear magnitude of what it would take to set-up a conspiracy, as you and the CTers claim, is unsustainable.
What conspiracy do I claim? Pray tell....
Gary Craig:
"JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE
Why He Died And Why It Matters"
By James W. Douglas
p.177
-snip-
"On October 9, 1963, one week before Lee Harvey Oswald began his job at a site overlooking the president's future parade route,an FBI official in Washington, D.C., disconnected Oswald from a federal alarm system that was about to identify him as a threat to national security. The FBI man's name was Marvin Gheesling. He was a supervisor in the Soviet espionage section at FBI headquarters. His timing was remarkable. As author John Newman remarked in an analysis of this phenomenon, Gheesling "turned off the alarm switch on Oswald literally an instant before it would have gone off."
-snip-
Wesley Johnson:
--- Quote from: Martin Weidmann on March 12, 2018, 05:28:36 PM ---Oh great... another misguided "king of assumption and speculation" who thinks he knows what would have happened at a trial that will never take place and now he starts to do John "powerful evidence" Mytton imitations as well. Great stuff....
Weak response Martin.
You know what's really weak?.... Not having a response to a comment you call weak.
The shear magnitude of what it would take to set-up a conspiracy, as you and the CTers claim, is unsustainable.
What conspiracy do I claim? Pray tell....
--- End quote ---
Martin, you just keep telling yourself you don't believe in a conspiracy. Do you ever question the information (can't call it evidence) from any of the dozens of conspiracy theories? I'm just curious. And by the way you ducked the question again. How did Oswald get the job at the TSBD? If you disagree with how I said he did get the job, then say so. And then tell me how you say he got the job. If you agree with how I say he got the job, then you have a long way to go to explain how this conspiracy plan that you mentioned in an earlier post take place?
Wesley Johnson:
--- Quote from: Martin Weidmann on March 11, 2018, 08:50:27 PM ---Martin, you seem to be a little bit agitated. You can get through it.
Funny... The truth is I just don't like guys much who think they know it all.
Actually I play a real good game of chess.
So far, there hasn't been much evidence of it on this board. You seem to plan ahead no more than one reply (which you likely have already prepared) when you ask a (mostly loaded) question. Considering options doesn't seem to be your forte.
But, then again, overestimation isn't uncommon amongst LNs...
You really need to stop being in denial and except that you are a CT buff.
Do you need this kind of crap to boost your ego?
--- End quote ---
My mistake Martin. You are correct. You didn't say "open ended questions" you said loaded questions. How are my questions loaded? They are very logical questions to ask. Explain to me how asking how he got the job at the TSBD is loaded? Now when you said it could have been a "master plan" in place that had failed in Chicago and Miami, could you explain that. Did you mean a few days before he went to Texas?
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Wesley Johnson on March 12, 2018, 06:18:12 PM ---
Martin, you just keep telling yourself you don't believe in a conspiracy. Do you ever question the information (can't call it evidence) from any of the dozens of conspiracy theories? I'm just curious. And by the way you ducked the question again. How did Oswald get the job at the TSBD? If you disagree with how I said he did get the job, then say so. And then tell me how you say he got the job. If you agree with how I say he got the job, then you have a long way to go to explain how this conspiracy plan that you mentioned in an earlier post take place?
--- End quote ---
Martin, you just keep telling yourself you don't believe in a conspiracy.
I don't need to, for one simple reason; I do in fact believe a conspiracy could have occurred, but I also consider it possible that Oswald did indeed do it alone. My problem is with the weak, predominantly circumstantial, case against him. The weaker that case is, the more likely becomes a cover up (to wrap the case around Oswald regardless of his guilt or innocence) or the possibility of a conspiracy.
Do you ever question the information (can't call it evidence) from any of the dozens of conspiracy theories?
I have in fact dismissed the majority of conspiracy theories as being too wacky or not credible. And for your information; everything that's used in support of a claim is in fact evidence, regardless if you want to call it that or not. Just not all of it is actually proof.
And by the way you ducked the question again. How did Oswald get the job at the TSBD? If you disagree with how I said he did get the job, then say so. And then tell me how you say he got the job.
Unlike you, I find it completely insignificant how Oswald got his job, but if it makes you happy, I think it's unlikely it was arranged by any third party.
If you agree with how I say he got the job, then you have a long way to go to explain how this conspiracy plan that you mentioned in an earlier post take place?
I have nothing of the kind to explain to you. My basic premise is that if there was indeed a conspiracy, it would have been executed in a way that stayed as close to the truth as possible and was adapted to the actual situation.
Btw what conspiracy plan did I mention in an earlier post?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version