Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[Martin Weidmann]

Vincent, these clowns like Goth, Otto and Roger Collins are all created by the same cookie cutter and can't debate their way out of a wet paper bag, they all know there is a MOUNTAIN of evidence so they start attacking the messenger and try to make it personal, my advice is just present the facts and watch them all scurry away like frightened mice.

JohnM

my advice is just present the facts

Let's see if this is merely "do as I say, not as I do" crap.....

How do you know when Klein's took delivery of those rifles ordered from Cresent?

[Vincent Baxter]

Vincent, these clowns like Goth, Otto and Roger Collins are all created by the same cookie cutter and can't debate their way out of a wet paper bag, they all know there is a MOUNTAIN of evidence so they start attacking the messenger and try to make it personal, my advice is just present the facts and watch them all scurry away like frightened mice.

JohnM

Thank you! I wasn't even trying to produce a fact, I merely posted an opinion and asked people's thoughts about it. Clearly my opinion did not fall into their way of thinking and since then I've spent the last 3 days listening to them rabbit on in long messages about how I put words into people's mouths, used bad English, said hypocritical things and pretty much everything else other than address anything remotely connected to my question about the case.
The funny thing is they don't see this and just continue to give it all the holier than thou attitude.

Good luck

[Martin Weidmann]

Well then why don't you bugger off and discuss the case and the evidence instead of constantly replying to tedious posts that are getting more and more ridiculous the longer you fuel them.
I've already stated that I do it because I find it fun, but seeing as you don't why do you bother engaging in it all the time?

Well, let's just say, it's because I dislike wankers with a bad additute

The fact that you had ample opportunity to discuss the case when I initially posted something which actually related to it but instead chose to be a dick and discuss pretty much everything BUT the case, suggests to me you're talking as much shit as me.

Nobody is talking as much shit as you....

[Martin Weidmann]

Thank you! I wasn't even trying to produce a fact, I merely posted an opinion and asked people's thoughts about it. Clearly my opinion did not fall into their way of thinking and since then I've spent the last 3 days listening to them rabbit on in long messages about how I put words into people's mouths, used bad English, said hypocritical things and pretty much everything else other than address anything remotely connected to my question about the case.
The funny thing is they don't see this and just continue to give it all the holier than thou attitude.

Good luck

How nice to see that you and that geezer are becoming best buddies so fast....

[John Mytton]

Because you confirmed having understood the question, which you obviously didn't, then posted a random quote.

You're still making no sense, if I didn't answer your question to your biased satisfaction then explain yourself? As I said it's not my job to decipher your incoherent ramblings?

JohnM

[Vincent Baxter]

OK, so let me rephrase: Have you so far posted anything that would require anyone to spend their time proving you wrong?

I don't know, thats up for interpretation isn't it? Depends whether that specific aspect of the case that I mentioned interests you or not.
Just to recap, in reference to people claiming there was a cover up I enquired as to what the likelihood was that nobody involved in an alleged cover up ever came clean or left a full confession? And stated that personally I thought at least one person would have done by now.

Now, to me, that seems a fairly rational question and I don't see anything wrong with the actual question. If that topic was of no relevance or interest to you then you're all welcome to scroll past or just ignore the post.

Granted, it might have been something that has been asked a lot of times before, so I can understand if people didn't want to waste their time replying. But clearly people (especially you) have plenty of time to reply with numerous posts about the way I phrased a question or saying that I claimed something happened which I didn't have evidence for, but that didn't address the actual issue.

Obviously there was that one chap who did reply with a sensible answer, so lets exclude him.

[John Mytton]

Thank you! I wasn't even trying to produce a fact, I merely posted an opinion and asked people's thoughts about it. Clearly my opinion did not fall into their way of thinking and since then I've spent the last 3 days listening to them rabbit on in long messages about how I put words into people's mouths, used bad English, said hypocritical things and pretty much everything else other than address anything remotely connected to my question about the case.
The funny thing is they don't see this and just continue to give it all the holier than thou attitude.

Good luck

and pretty much everything else other than address anything remotely connected to my question about the case.

That's it, you nailed it!

JohnM