Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Non problematic evidence?  (Read 23049 times)

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3573
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #128 on: April 01, 2019, 05:26:53 PM »
Advertisement
Untrue?

It seems to me you don't even know what the word means. You keep talking in riddles, making claims that you can/will not back up with anything solid. It's pathetic.

There isn't anything I said that wasn't true. And you can't provide a single example of something that isn't true.

As long as you keep playing these immature games I will indeed continue to keep on calling you out about things you claim you are not saying whilst actually saying it.

You have posted 63 times since March 28 and none of your post have been either part of a discussion or otherwise informative, which - again - justifies the question what it is exactly that you are doing here, except bore us all to death of course?

I give up. You are completely hopeless. Good luck.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #128 on: April 01, 2019, 05:26:53 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #129 on: April 01, 2019, 05:29:07 PM »
I give up. You are completely hopeless. Good luck.

How big is your mirror?


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #130 on: April 01, 2019, 06:33:24 PM »
How big is your mirror?

I doubt his mirror is big enough to see the reflection a giant fool....

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #130 on: April 01, 2019, 06:33:24 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #131 on: April 01, 2019, 07:33:18 PM »
I doubt his mirror is big enough to see the reflection a giant fool....

Regardless, it turned out that Charles Collins is just one more LN who believes evidence which he can or will not explain, defend or discuss.

Nothing new, really... there have been a bunch of those in the past and there probably will be more in the future.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #132 on: April 01, 2019, 10:28:09 PM »
Regardless, it turned out that Charles Collins is just one more LN who believes evidence which he can or will not explain, defend or discuss.

Particularly annoying after he demanded (in the other thread) that I explain myself after I said that what little evidence there is that points to LHO is weak and circumstantial and all of it is questionable, arguable, impeachable, or tainted in some way. I responded with a lengthy and detailed explanation. Then all of a sudden he?s not interested in discussing the evidence.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #132 on: April 01, 2019, 10:28:09 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #133 on: April 01, 2019, 10:34:49 PM »
Particularly annoying after he demanded (in the other thread) that I explain myself after I said that what little evidence there is that points to LHO is weak and circumstantial and all of it is questionable, arguable, impeachable, or tainted in some way. I responded with a lengthy and detailed explanation. Then all of a sudden he?s not interested in discussing the evidence.

He'll have my vote for the biggest waste of time award in 2019.

The only good thing to come out of it is that he can never credibly challenge or question other posters