Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Bill Chapman]

Thanks for your time - - I didn't bother correcting it.
 
Now?
 
And could the self proclaimed genius please tell us the name of No. 2 from the left?

Whaley ID'd Oswald as the one he hauled to Beckley.

Representative FORD. Did the man you identified have any reaction when they brought the group out, did he have any reaction that you noticed at the time you identified him?
Mr. WHALEY. Only that he was the only one that had the bruise on his head, sir. The only one who acted surly. In other words, I told this Commission this morning you wouldn't have had to have known who it was to have picked him out by the way he acted. But he was the man that I carried in my taxicab. I told them when I identified him.

---------------

As for 'genius' it's meant as tongue-in-cheek here. But since you seem so interested, I'll reveal that multiple art directors, clients, bosses and colleagues have called me 'genius' throughout my entire career in advertising design & art, and the graphic arts in general.

[Bill Chapman]

This line up would have been just as "fair" as the one they actually had

To you lot it would: That's the point I'm making with the design.
Thanks for confirming it.

[Martin Weidmann]

To you lot it would: That's the point I'm making with the design.
Thanks for confirming it.

So, you're posting stuff you don't agree with? Got it!

[Bill Chapman]

So, you're posting stuff you don't agree with? Got it!

The intent of the design is clear. Again, thanks for confirming it.

[Martin Weidmann]

The intent of the design is clear. Again, thanks for confirming it.

The intent of the design is clear.

Indeed. It's to post things you don't agree with. It has been my pleasure to point that out and thus confirm it.

From now on, we can all assume that you mean the opposite of what you post. Good to know! 

[Bill Chapman]

The intent of the design is clear.

Indeed. It's to post things you don't agree with. It has been my pleasure to point that out and thus confirm it.

From now on, we can all assume that you mean the opposite of what you post. Good to know! 

Keep assuming.

The intent of the design is abundantly clear: Mockery.
There. Consider yourself schooled. Again.

[Martin Weidmann]

Keep assuming.

The intent of the design is abundantly clear: Mockery.
There. Consider yourself schooled. Again.

There. Consider yourself schooled. Again.

As we now know that you post things you don't agree with, there's nothing really there for me to consider....

[Martin Weidmann]

After running away from the discussion in this thread, once he completed the ad hom attack below;

Oh dear.
It's only just dawned on me how far gone you are.
This is one of the most Tinfoil things I've ever come across.

So somebody immediately contacted Roberts' friend from Parkland Hospital to tell her that JFK was dead??
 
Long before any of the networks were aware of it Roberts' neighbour had the scoop??
 
And the first thing this woman thought to do was ring Earlene Roberts with the news??
 

Once I'd pointed out you were destroying your own tinfoil, ill-conceived, tatty theory with your insistence that Roberts' friend had used the word "killed" instead of "shot" anyone with a grain of common sense would've held their hands up to the mistake. But not the truly Tinfoil who forge ahead into ever deeper and darker folly.

It's clear you don't have the wit to be embarrassed by your own buffoonery and I feel embarrassed I've wasted so much time on you.
It won't be happening in future.

"Unlike you, I just try to follow the evidence and am not trying to create an alternate reality."

 

it seems Danny has now opened up the "discussion" again in another thread;

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2925.20.html

with an out of context quote and another ad hom attack....

Does he perhaps think his bogus arguments will go down better in this thread or did he quitely hope that I would not notice. Or perhaps both? Who knows, but it's kinda funny.....