Did Captain Fritz show Mr Oswald a Mauser?

[Bill Chapman]

Totally beside the point. I did not say it would take a conspiracy to kill for political reasons. I merely asked if it wouldn't point to a conspiracy. Those capable of understanding what is written would know the difference.

'I merely asked'
LOL. Stop JAQing off, coward.

'Those capable of understanding what is written would know the difference..
See above.

That, as you have shown, is a qualification only used by a novice who easily gets impressed.
I'm easily impressed by top quality in any walk of life. I place the fellow who wrote and presented the video in that category.

Ironically, Oswald is not mentioned in that wikipedia list, so we can stick with using the word murder.
Oswald is listed as the killer of Kennedy and Tippit

Still trying to weasel your way out of that one, I see.
No, just catching a snake

It had nothing in it I didn't already know
Same here, sport.

[Martin Weidmann]

'I merely asked'
LOL. Stop JAQing off, coward.

'Those capable of understanding what is written would know the difference. You apparently don't.
See above.

Ironically, Oswald is not mentioned in that wikipedia list, so we can stick with using the word murder.
Oswald is listed as the killer of Kennedy and Tippit

Still trying to weasel your way out of that one, I see.
No, just catching a snake

It had nothing in it I didn't already know
Same here: I've been interviewed by the police and knew enough to correct them when they would keep repeating the questions but using different terminology.

HAHAHA

'I merely asked'
LOL. Stop JAQing off, coward.

Nasty, nasty...    Overcompensating for your total lack of understanding of what is written?

Still trying to weasel your way out of that one, I see.
No, just catching a snake

And again, more delusions of grandeur 

It had nothing in it I didn't already know
Same here: I've been interviewed by the police and knew enough to correct them when they would keep repeating the questions but using different terminology.

Contradictio in terminis 

You corrected them? And that somehow isn't talking to the police? It seems you still haven't learned much from the video you like so much....  Hilarious!

Btw, you (mistakenly) think you can teach people something on this board, you claim to have corrected the police..... Who the f*ck do you think you are?

[Bill Chapman]

HAHAHA

Nasty, nasty...    Overcompensating for your total lack of understanding of what is written?

And again, more delusions of grandeur 

Contradictio in terminis 

You corrected them? And that somehow isn't talking to the police? It seems you still haven't learned much from the video you like so much....  Hilarious!

Btw, you (mistakenly) think you can teach people something on this board, you claim to have corrected the police..... Who the f*ck do you think you are?

Nasty, nasty...    Overcompensating for your total lack of understanding of what is written?
Touchy, touchy... deflecting when caught out for JAQing around like the classic internet troll you are, I see..

You corrected them? And that somehow isn't talking to the police? It seems you still haven't learned much from the video you like so much....  Hilarious!
You're being way too superficial. And rigid... as if everything happens on a page in a book. Open up a page and up pops a paper cut-out, lifeless and inflexible. The Book of Oswald (See below) right there, permeating the entire lifeless 60 years of conspiracy-monger abject hopelessness.

Btw, my police interview happened 4-5 years ago, sport. Be advised that I posted the video about a year ago, in off-topics, immediately as I discovered it.

Yes, I corrected the interviewing officer. You do know why the cops will keep asking the same questions over and over again don't you, big fella?

---------------------
CT WONDERLAND
BOOK OF OSWALD
---------------------

BOOK I: LUNATIC FRINGE
Nothing is Knowable
Nothing is Provable
Nothing is Believable

BOOK II: CULT OF OSWALD
Everything is Sinister
Everything is a Lie
Everything is Planted
Everything is Faked
Everything is Altered
Everything is a Hoax
Everything is a Sham

BOOK III: MINUTIAE
Trivia writ Large:
The Lifeblood of the
Oswald-Lover crowd

BOOK IV: OZZIE RABBIT
AKA LEE HARVEY OSWALD
Here
we
go,
down
the
rabbit
hole

[Martin Weidmann]

Nasty, nasty...    Overcompensating for your total lack of understanding of what is written?
Touchy, touchy... deflecting when caught out for JAQing around like the classic internet troll you are, I see..
[/quoting]

LOL

You corrected them? And that somehow isn't talking to the police? It seems you still haven't learned much from the video you like so much....  Hilarious!
You're being way too superficial. And rigid... as if everything happens on a page in a book. Open up a page and up pops a paper cut-out, lifeless and inflexible. The Book of Oswald (See below) right there, permeating the entire lifeless 60 years of conspiracy-monger hopelessness.

Btw, my police interview happened 4-5 years ago, sport. Be advised that I posted the video about a year ago, in off-topics, immediately as I discovered it.

Yes, I corrected the interviewing officer. You do know why the cops will keep asking the same questions over and over again don't you, big fella?

Way to eager to explain away your obvious contradiction. You talked to the police, period!   

[Bill Chapman]

Way to eager to explain away your obvious contradiction. You talked to the police, period!   

Quite the paradox there, Sluggo: Tell us how one can contradict oneself before the event actually happens.

2017: My police interview
2020: My finding of the video

Go ahead, you do the math... you go back to the future, Michael.

[Martin Weidmann]

Quite the paradox there, Sluggo: Tell us how one can contradict oneself before the event actually happens.

2017: My police interview
2020: My finding of the video

Go ahead, you do the math... you go back to the future, Michael.

Just how stupid can you be?

You claimed to know that you should not talk to the police prior to seeing the video,

It had nothing in it I didn't already know
Same here: I've been interviewed by the police and knew enough to correct them when they would keep repeating the questions but using different terminology.

yet in 2017, despite that knowledge you talked to the police.

(* although you have edited your original post since, a copy still existed as quote in one of my posts, exposing your dishonesty)

Now, you want to explain the fact that you talked to the police in 2017 with not finding and watching the video in 2020, which of course means that, prior to finding the video, you didn't know that you should not talk to the police.

Which, in turn, of course perfectly explains this comment;

.... it was one of the most important and interesting videos I've ever watched and would be of great benefit to everybody.

Don't Talk to the Police

Care to try again?

[Bill Chapman]

Just how stupid can you be?

You claimed to know that you should not talk to the police prior to seeing the video,

yet in 2017, despite that knowledge you talked to the police.

(* although you have edited your original post since, a copy still existed as quote in one of my posts, exposing your dishonesty)

Now, you want to explain the fact that you talked to the police in 2017 with not finding and watching the video in 2020, which of course means that, prior to finding the video, you didn't know that you should not talk to the police.

Which, in turn, of course perfectly explains this comment;

Care to try again?

I reserve the right to edit my posts as long as it hasn't been answered yet and I don't see the the person it's directed to logged into the thread. Now point out the post you say I've edited dishonestly.

Now since I don't see your name as/of this moment, I'll add that I often inform the party that I'm posting to that I have done some editing, but in your case you just bleat that you don't give a spombleprofglidnoctobuns, so fck you.

[Martin Weidmann]

I reserve the right to edit my posts as long as it hasn't been answered yet and I don't see the the person it's directed to logged into the thread. Now point out the post you say I've edited dishonestly.

Now since I don't see your name as/of this moment, I'll add that I often inform the party that I'm posting to that I have done some editing, but in your case you just bleat that you don't give a spombleprofglidnoctobuns, so fck you.

So much gibberish to "explain away" your dishonesty.

I reserve the right to edit my posts as long as it hasn't been answered yet and I don't see the the person it's directed to logged into the thread. Now point out the post you say I've edited dishonestly.

BS. You edited your post (# 376) after I had replied to it (# 377), otherwise I couldn't have quoted it, and you even replied to my reply (#378) without making a comment about the edit of # 376. That's dishonesty!

Now since I don't see your name as/of this moment,

What the hell does that even mean?

I'll add that I often inform the party that I'm posting to that I have done some editing, but in your case you just bleat that you don't give a spombleprofglidnoctobuns, so fck you.

Excuses, excuses and aggressive as well.... very telling.

Btw, none of this changes in any way the fact that you claimed to know that you should not talk to the police, prior to seeing the video, yet you still talked to them in 2017, proving your earlier statement to be false.

Care to try again?