JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
How did Oswald get the job at the TSBD
Richard Smith:
--- Quote from: Martin Weidmann on March 12, 2018, 04:04:56 PM ---Never mind that she did not confirm Oswald owned a rifle in her DPD affidavit and did not recognize the rifle when it was shown to her, right?
Shall we just overlook that as well, Richard?
--- End quote ---
Keep dancing like a circus monkey and changing the topic. You have argued that Marina confirmed Oswald's ownership of the rifle only after being convinced of such by Rankin and the press. That is preposterous but the question presented in the context of your explanation is why she would direct the DPD to the blanket on Nov. 22 - before she comes into contact with Rankin or the press - when asked about Oswald's rifle? The only explanation for doing so is that she had seen a rifle in that blanket. That is consistent with her WC testimony. Absent a time machine, we know your silly explanation is a complete failure because Marina confirms the presence of the rifle in the blanket BEFORE she encounters Rankin or any press to convince her of this fact. Thus, your explanation is not only implausible but chronologically impossible.
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Richard Smith on March 13, 2018, 04:08:38 PM ---Keep dancing like a circus monkey and changing the topic. You have argued that Marina confirmed Oswald's ownership of the rifle only after being convinced of such by Rankin and the press. That is preposterous but the question presented in the context of your explanation is why she would direct the DPD to the blanket on Nov. 22 - before she comes into contact with Rankin or the press - when asked about Oswald's rifle? The only explanation for doing so is that she had seen a rifle in that blanket. That is consistent with her WC testimony. Absent a time machine, we know your silly explanation is a complete failure because Marina confirms the presence of the rifle in the blanket BEFORE she encounters Rankin or any press to convince her of this fact. Thus, your explanation is not only implausible but chronologically impossible.
--- End quote ---
The only explanation for doing so is that she had seen a rifle in that blanket. That is consistent with her WC testimony.
Even if that is true and she saw indeed a rifle, how do we know it was owned by Oswald?
That is preposterous but the question presented in the context of your explanation is why she would direct the DPD to the blanket on Nov. 22 - before she comes into contact with Rankin or the press - when asked about Oswald's rifle?
I don't believe for a second Marina did that. It was Ruth Paine who was "translating" or do you think the officers spoke Russian?
Thus, your explanation is not only implausible but chronologically impossible.
And still Marina did not confirm that Oswald owned a rifle in her day 1 affidavit. Go figure... in the afternoon she allegedly shows officers where Oswald's rifle is hidden and a few hours later she fails to confirm that he owned a rifle.... Yeah, that makes sense!
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Wesley Johnson on March 13, 2018, 02:04:02 PM ---
Read the quote again Martin. Since I have a feel for how you and others operate here I intentionally worded it "as for the photo it shows Oswald had a rifle and revolver" to see if you would say rifle"Do you think that means I owned that rifle ?"You didn't fail me Martin. Although I believe the rifle was linked to Ozzie quite well.
--- End quote ---
Of course you believe the rifle was linked to Oswald, you are just not certain enough to claim he owned it, right?
I'm just curious which rifle you are talking about. The one he allegedly bought from Klein's under an alias or the one seen in the photo?
Also, let me ask you again; what exactly do you think it means that Oswald was photographed with a rifle and a revolver in late March 1963?
Bill Chapman:
--- Quote from: Tom Sorensen on March 13, 2018, 05:57:53 PM ---Martin, you should have learned by now that when you look at the totality of this mountain of little pieces of evidence that can be picked apart you've got your man, Oswald!
--- End quote ---
Earth to Captain Tom:
📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡
Thanks for confirming Bug's statement that you lot 'split hairs, and then split the split hairs'
Martin Weidmann:
--- Quote from: Bill Chapman on March 13, 2018, 09:58:32 PM ---Earth to Captain Tom:
📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡📡
Thanks for confirming Bug's statement that you lot 'split hairs, and then split the split hairs'
--- End quote ---
Pretty obvious why Bugs would say that.
Just image what would happen when serious people take a closer look at the "evidence", or (even worse) they start asking questions for which credible explanations are required, right?
Can't have that, now can we?...... Whatever happened to the good old days when gullible people accepted that Oswald killed Kennedy because he left his wedding ring in a cup?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version