Oswald's Fingerprint Evidence

[Bill Chapman]

>>>You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery<<<
So, you can not back up your claim.... got it! So much for "reasonable people
>>> You just being yourself backs up my claim

Btw when you restort to mockery, instead of providing evidence and answers, all you are doing is exposing the weakness of your case.
>>> Btw the evidence is not mine. It is only made available for assessment. As are the 55 years of kooky conspiracy-monger speculation. Btw Oswald was the only person on the face of the planet seen to be in attendance at both murders.

Nobody asked you.
>>> Yet you responded

[Martin Weidmann]

>>>You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery<<<
So, you can not back up your claim.... got it! So much for "reasonable people
>>> You just being yourself backs up my claim

Btw when you restort to mockery, instead of providing evidence and answers, all you are doing is exposing the weakness of your case.
>>> Btw the evidence is not mine. It is only made available for assessment. As are the 55 years of unreasonable conspiracy-monger speculation.

Nobody asked you.
>>> Yet you responded

You seem agitated?. Did you have a bad week, perhaps?

Everything going well at your end... or are you just being a typical obnoxious LN who thinks he knows it all?

[Bill Chapman]

You seem agitated?. Did you have a bad week, perhaps?

Everything going well at your end... or are you just being a typical obnoxious LN who thinks he knows it all?

Given the oddly adolescent nature of your response, I'd say you're the one with his shorts in a knot. And I can see why you find us lemmings obnoxious. After all, what CTer wants anyone disagreeing with them?

Know-it-all? Well, I know this:

A) Oswald was the only person on the face of the planet who was seen at both crime scenes.
B) No one can show that anyone but the prime suspect knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day

[Martin Weidmann]

Given the oddly adolescent nature of your response, I'd say you're the one with his shorts in a knot. And I can see why you find us
lemmings obnoxious. After all, what CTer wants anyone disagreeing with them?

Know-it-all? Well, I know this:

A) Oswald was the only person on the face of the planet who was seen at both crime scenes.
B) No one can show that anyone but the prime suspect knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day

Given the oddly adolescent nature of your response, I'd say you're the one with his shorts in a knot.

I was just wondering about your state of mind, but I see everything is "normal" with you.   


And I can see why you find us lemmings obnoxious.

Not "us"... just you

After all, what CTer wants anyone disagreeing with them? 

I have no idea what CTers want and I think neither do you.

Know-it-all? Well, I know this:

A) Oswald was the only person on the face of the planet who was seen at both crime scenes.
B) No one can show that anyone but the prime suspect knew there was to be an attempt made on Kennedy that day

Well, that's exactly what I mean... you seem to "know" things that others somehow don't know or are not convinced of.

But I'm glad to see you are just being your usual self....

[John Iacoletti]

One print is enough to associate Oswald with the rifle.

Too bad there isn't one.

[John Iacoletti]

You lot claim anyone but Oswald so why don't you provide names and at least circumstantial evidence that would supplant --- or at least reasonably challenge --- Oswald's status as prime suspect.

Says the guy who has yet to provide any evidence to justify calling Oswald the prime suspect.