Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 47040 times)

Offline Oscar Navarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #800 on: November 25, 2018, 03:10:54 PM »
I don't know

Indeed!

It seems you main complaint is that other people are less gullible than you and question the evidence more than you would like.


Perhaps, but I doubt that! The gullible part goes both ways. You, and a couple of others I've seen on this forum, question just about every piece of evidence even when you ask for evidence to be produced. Yet, when asked to give an alternative explanation or, better yet, your theory of what happened you punt. Question after question but no answers. According to your ilk it's up to the LNers to provide the answers while you CTers sit back and ignore or reject the answers. I have more respect for the CTers who at least offer an alternative theory no matter how bizarre. At least they put their heads in the guillotine, even if some of them just like to pontificate and ignore request to explain their theories.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #801 on: November 25, 2018, 03:27:48 PM »

Perhaps, but I doubt that! The gullible part goes both ways. You, and a couple of others I've seen on this forum, question just about every piece of evidence even when you ask for evidence to be produced. Yet, when asked to give an alternative explanation or, better yet, your theory of what happened you punt. Question after question but no answers. According to your ilk it's up to the LNers to provide the answers while you CTers sit back and ignore or reject the answers. I have more respect for the CTers who at least offer an alternative theory no matter how bizarre. At least they put their heads in the guillotine, even if some of them just like to pontificate and ignore request to explain their theories.

Perhaps, but I doubt that!

No surprise there...

You, and a couple of others I've seen on this forum, question just about every piece of evidence 

Yes, so what? Is it your position that evidence should be accepted at face value?

Yet, when asked to give an alternative explanation or, better yet, your theory of what happened you punt.

I'm not going to play your game, just because you want me to. You want me to have and present alternative explanations or theories of what happened so you can attack, mock and dismiss them. But that's not why I am here. There is no point to having a theory based on a hunch. I want to find out if the known evidence supports the conclusions about Oswald's guilt, and the only way to do that is by asking questions. That's it! Too bad if you don't like it. 

I don't have alternative explanations of theories of what happened, because that would make me like you (and your ilk) who first draw a conclusion and then look for anything that supports the conclusion.

Question after question but no answers.

See... you're complaining again.

According to your ilk it's up to the LNers to provide the answers

Indeed... the LNs are making the claims. The onus of proof lies with those making the claims.

while you CTers sit back and ignore or reject the answers.

If your answer isn't persuasive why shouldn't it be rejected?

I have more respect for the CTers who at least offer an alternative theory no matter how bizarre.

And I would have more respect for an LNer who just tries to support his claims with evidence and enters into an open and honest discussion about it instead of one who constantly throws around claims like "It has already been proven beyond reasonable doubt, just read the WC and HSCA reports".
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 06:15:16 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #801 on: November 25, 2018, 03:27:48 PM »


Offline Oscar Navarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #802 on: November 25, 2018, 03:53:46 PM »
Perhaps, but I doubt that!

No surprise there...

You, and a couple of others I've seen on this forum, question just about every piece of evidence 

Yes, so what? Is it your position that evidence should be accepted at face value?

Yet, when asked to give an alternative explanation or, better yet, your theory of what happened you punt.

I'm not going to play your game, just because you want me to. You want me to have and present alternative explanations or theories of what happened so you can attack, mock and dismiss them. Besides, that's not why I am here. I want to find out if the known evidence supports the conclusions about Oswald's guilt, and the only way to do that is by asking questions. That's it!

I don't have alternative explanations of theories of what happened, because that would make me like you (and your ilk) who first draw a conclusion and then look for anything that supports the conclusion.

Question after question but no answers.

See... you're complaining again.

According to your ilk it's up to the LNers to provide the answers

Indeed... the LNs are making the claims. The onus of proof lies with those making the claims.

while you CTers sit back and ignore or reject the answers.

If you answer isn't persuasive why shouldn't it be rejected?

I have more respect for the CTers who at least offer an alternative theory no matter how bizarre.

And I would have more respect for an LNer who just tries to support his claims with evidence and enters into an open and honest discussion about it instead of one who constantly throws around claims like "It has already been proven beyond reasonable doubt, just read the WC and HSCA reports".

And I would have more respect for an LNer who just tries to support his claims with evidence and enters into an open and honest discussion about it instead of one who constantly throws around claims like "It has already been proven beyond reasonable doubt, just read the WC and HSCA reports".



First of all, they're not my claims. What I do is to base my opinion on the conclusions reached by investigative bodies such as the WC and the HSCA based on the evidence these august bodies have uncovered and provided. I also rely on additional sources which validate the evidence provided by the WC and the HSCA or that invalidate or update on the evidence and conclusions reached by the WC and the HSCA.

Second, Bill Brown has given you the opportunity to enter "into an open and honest discussion" on just one topic and you have run away from it. But here you're contradicting yourself. You don't want to have any type of discussion because you don't want to play the game.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1282
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #803 on: November 25, 2018, 04:14:43 PM »
And I would have more respect for an LNer who just tries to support his claims with evidence and enters into an open and honest discussion about it instead of one who constantly throws around claims like "It has already been proven beyond reasonable doubt, just read the WC and HSCA reports".


First of all, they're not my claims. What I do is to base my opinion on the conclusions reached by investigative bodies such as the WC and the HSCA based on the evidence these august bodies have uncovered and provided. I also rely on additional sources which validate the evidence provided by the WC and the HSCA or that invalidate or update on the evidence and conclusions reached by the WC and the HSCA.

Second, Bill Brown has given you the opportunity to enter "into an open and honest discussion" on just one topic and you have run away from it. But here you're contradicting yourself. You don't want to have any type of discussion because you don't want to play the game.

First of all, they're not my claims. What I do is to base my opinion on the conclusions reached by investigative bodies such as the WC and the HSCA based on the evidence these august bodies have uncovered and provided. I also rely on additional sources which validate the evidence provided by the WC and the HSCA or that invalidate or update on the evidence and conclusions reached by the WC and the HSCA. 

And thus are they your claims after all!

Second, Bill Brown has given you the opportunity to enter "into an open and honest discussion" on just one topic and you have run away from it. But here you're contradicting yourself. You don't want to have any type of discussion because you don't want to play the game.

Bill Brown can give me as many opportunities as he likes. That doesn't mean I have to accept them. Experience shows that there can not be an "open and honest" discussion with him because that would include respecting the other's opinion and not looking for ways to mock and attack.

I haven't been talking to Bill Brown for a long time and for exactly those reasons and I have seen no reason to change my mind. I do indeed do not want to play his usual game.

Btw, I am still talking to you, so where did you get the notion that I want to have any type of discussion?
« Last Edit: November 25, 2018, 06:39:43 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #803 on: November 25, 2018, 04:14:43 PM »


Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1097
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #804 on: November 25, 2018, 10:20:34 PM »
Regardless of whether CE-162 is Oswald's jacket or not (it is), the fact remains that he left the rooming house zipping up a jacket as he went out the door and then was seen by a multitude of witnesses (near the scene of the Tippit slaying) wearing a jacket.

Why did he have no jacket on when he was seen by Brewer?

How do we know that he was seen by Brewer? Oh, that's right, because Brewer said so.

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1097
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #805 on: November 25, 2018, 10:22:59 PM »
Ha  Nice.

The real question is... why do some try their best to clear the name of a proven cop-killer?

That day, a policeman lost his life while on duty.

A better question is -- why do some accuse LHO of two murders when there isn't any supporting evidence for these claims?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #805 on: November 25, 2018, 10:22:59 PM »


Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #806 on: November 26, 2018, 01:32:25 AM »
Second, Bill Brown has given you the opportunity to enter "into an open and honest discussion" on just one topic and you have run away from it. But here you're contradicting yourself. You don't want to have any type of discussion because you don't want to play the game.

Well said, Oscar.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #807 on: November 26, 2018, 01:44:38 AM »
Second, Bill Brown has given you the opportunity to enter "into an open and honest discussion" on just one topic and you have run away from it. But here you're contradicting yourself. You don't want to have any type of discussion because you don't want to play the game.

Bill Brown can give me as many opportunities as he likes. That doesn't mean I have to accept them. Experience shows that there can not be an "open and honest" discussion with him because that would include respecting the other's opinion and not looking for ways to mock and attack.

I haven't been talking to Bill Brown for a long time and for exactly those reasons and I have seen no reason to change my mind. I do indeed do not want to play his usual game.

In the thread titled "At The End Of The Day, It was Oswald's Rifle", you entered into a discussion with Oscar Navarro.  After a certain number of posts back and forth, you finally got frustrated with Oscar and called him "stupid".

Oscar had not insulted you before that and, to the best of my recollection, he didn't insult you after that, either.

Oscar Navarro can judge for himself if there is any validity to your above whining.  Just like you did with him, you insulted me far before I ever thought about throwing an insult your way; it's clearly what you do when you grow frustrated.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #807 on: November 26, 2018, 01:44:38 AM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #808 on: November 26, 2018, 07:17:38 PM »
How do we know that he was seen by Brewer? Oh, that's right, because Brewer said so.

If you have an explanation as to why Brewer would lie, let's hear it.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1906
Re: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket
« Reply #809 on: November 26, 2018, 07:33:56 PM »
If you can't trust the evidence, you can't trust any conclusions based on it either.

My condolences

And thanks for offering yours regarding my recent loss

 

Mobile View