A straight line

[Martin Weidmann]

I'm not going to search the DPD files to check your claim!


Why not? I've researched the conspiracy buffs crap. I use to believe there was a conspiracy Martin, until more and more theories came out that conflicted. I stopped believing there was a conspiracy when I read Lifton's farce. How do you know if I can't support what I claim if you don't research it? Who is being closed minded Martin?

This has nothing to do with being closed minded. You made a claim and when I asked you to back it up, you didn't. Instead you told me to look it up for myself. I know what's in the DPD files. I have done my research, but I'll be damned if I start looking for something that you are supposed to provide but don't!

How do you know if I can't support what I claim if you don't research it?

This is the world upside down. I don't need to find out if you can support a claim or not. You need to support your claim. So, why don't you?

[Wesley Johnson]

This has nothing to do with being closed minded. You made a claim and when I asked you to back it up, you didn't. Instead you told me to look it up for myself. I know what's in the DPD files. I have done my research, but I'll be damned if I start looking for something that you are supposed to provide but don't!

How do you know if I can't support what I claim if you don't research it?

This is the world upside down. I don't need to find out if you can support a claim or not. You need to support your claim. So, why don't you?

I know what's in the DPD files.

Good, then you know what I claimed is true. And you on other posts have made claims without supporting them. Kind of hypocritical Martin. An example Martin is on the thread where I asked "who do you believe" most of your comments if not all were all assumptions and not supported by anything. Oh, you wanted me to support why I thought Oswald lied to Fritz or why I thought Arnold was wrong. And I supported that by citing to you the statements Oswald made to Fritz and by citing that Sander's statement conflicted with Arnold. All you gave me was assumptions. Hypocritical.

[Martin Weidmann]

I know what's in the DPD files.

Good, then you know what I claimed is true. And you on other posts have made claims without supporting them. Kind of hypocritical Martin. An example Martin is on the thread where I asked "who do you believe" most of your comments if not all were all assumptions and not supported by anything. Oh, you wanted me to support why I thought Oswald lied to Fritz or why I thought Arnold was wrong. And I supported that by citing to you the statements Oswald made to Fritz and by citing that Sander's statement conflicted with Arnold. All you gave me was assumptions. Hypocritical.

Stop rambling and start making sense, please.

[Wesley Johnson]

Stop rambling and start making sense, please.

Thanks, I'll take that as confirmation that all you ever do is assume. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Thanks, I'll take that as confirmation that all you ever do is assume. 

Do as you please. It seems you do that anyway, regardless of what anybody tells you.

[Wesley Johnson]

Do as you please. It seems you do that anyway, regardless of what anybody tells you.

At least I say what I believe.

[Martin Weidmann]

At least I say what I believe.

The problem could be that what you believe could well be wrong.

[Bill Brown]

I'm not going to search the DPD files to check your claim!


Why not? I've researched the conspiracy buffs crap. I use to believe there was a conspiracy Martin, until more and more theories came out that conflicted. I stopped believing there was a conspiracy when I read Lifton's farce. How do you know if I can't support what I claim if you don't research it? Who is being closed minded Martin?

This has nothing to do with being closed minded. You made a claim and when I asked you to back it up, you didn't. Instead you told me to look it up for myself. I know what's in the DPD files. I have done my research, but I'll be damned if I start looking for something that you are supposed to provide but don't!

How do you know if I can't support what I claim if you don't research it?

This is the world upside down. I don't need to find out if you can support a claim or not. You need to support your claim. So, why don't you?

You made a claim and when I asked you to back it up, you didn't.

Back up your (mistaken) claim that Tom Robinson worked on Kennedy's head for several hours.