CT's, how did Oswald's rifle end up on the 6th floor?

[Charles Collins]

Of course it doesn't… but that doesn't diminish the validity of the opinion. It just shows how closed your mind really is.

Most of your opinions are only attacks on the people who disagree with you. Or you trying to spin statements around to attempt to make it appear someone said something that they didn’t say. Or you trying to generalize a statement about something that is specific. Or you trying to take something out of context and make it into something that fits your fantasy. I have shown you these things to no avail. Why do you think I should be interested in nonsense?

[Martin Weidmann]

Most of your opinions are only attacks on the people who disagree with you. Or you trying to spin statements around to attempt to make it appear someone said something that they didn’t say. Or you trying to generalize a statement about something that is specific. Or you trying to take something out of context and make it into something that fits your fantasy. I have shown you these things to no avail. Why do you think I should be interested in nonsense?

Most of your opinions are only attacks on the people who disagree with you.

No. You have that the wrong way around. I ask hard questions you can't answer, so you hide behind "the bad man attacked me" nonsense.

Try having an honest debate for once, instead of just being defensive all the time. You may find it refreshing.

Or you trying to spin statements around to attempt to make it appear someone said something that they didn’t say.

Nope again. That's what you are doing  You are trying to put words in Henry Wade's mouth, which the real evidence conclusively shows he could never have said at the time when you claimed he said it, and all you have to back up your opinion is a vague newspaper article and some quotes from a book.

Or you trying to generalize a statement about something that is specific.

I don't even know what you are rambling on about here....

Or you trying to take something out of context and make it into something that fits your fantasy

Nothing is being taken out of context. At least not by me. A newspaper article and quotes from memory long after the fact don't offer the so-called context you keep going on about

I have shown you these things to no avail. 

All you have shown me is that you are more than happy to take a newspaper article and some quotes from memory (that fit with your theory) as gospel while at the same time ignoring under oath testimony from Latona and Day which combined demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that what you claim simply could not have happened. And then you say I'm living in a fantasy world..... really?
 
Btw, in this one post alone you falsely claim that I (1) attack people who disagree with me (2) try to spin statements around (3) try to generalize statements and (4)  try to take something out of context..... and I'm the one attacking you? Are you for real?

Why do you think I should be interested in nonsense?

Indeed, so why are you desperately clinging to your absurd claim and ignoring actual evidence?

[Charles Collins]

Most of your opinions are only attacks on the people who disagree with you.

No. You have that the wrong way around. I ask hard questions you can't answer, so you hide behind "the bad man attacked me" nonsense.

Try having an honest debate for once, instead of just being defense all the time. You may find it refreshing.

Or you trying to spin statements around to attempt to make it appear someone said something that they didn’t say.

Nope again. That's what you are doing  You are trying to put words in Henry Wade's mouth, which the real evidence conclusively shows he could never have said at the time when you claimed he said it, and all you have to back up your opinion is a vague newspaper article and some quotes from a book.

Or you trying to generalize a statement about something that is specific.

I don't even know what you are rambling on about here....

Or you trying to take something out of context and make it into something that fits your fantasy

Nothing is being taken out of context. At least not by me. A newspaper article and quotes from memory long after the fact don't offer the so-called context you keep going on about

I have shown you these things to no avail. 

All you have shown me is that you are more than happy to take a newspaper article and some quotes from memory (that fit with your theory) as gospel while at the same time ignoring under oath testimony from Latona and Day which combined demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that what you claim simply could not have happened. And then you say I'm living in a fantasy world..... really?
 
Btw, in this one post alone you falsely claim that I (1) attack people who disagree with me (2) trying to spin statements around (3) trying to generalize statements and (4)  trying to take something out of context..... and I'm the one attacking you? Are you for real?

Why do you think I should be interested in nonsense?

Indeed, so why are you desperately clinging to your absurd claim and ignoring actual evidence?

If someone here has something to say that pertains to the JFK assassination and is reasonable and I agree with them, no matter which side of the fence they are on, I have no problem saying so. I don't recall ever seeing anything like that from you.

[Martin Weidmann]

If someone here has something to say that pertains to the JFK assassination and is reasonable and I agree with them, no matter which side of the fence they are on, I have no problem saying so. I don't recall ever seeing anything like that from you.

That only means you not only have a bad recollection but also feel the need to attack me again, as you have nothing to dispute my comments.

[John Iacoletti]

Martin is absolutely right, Charles, you're being hypocritical.  You seem to think that Wade's 6-months-later "recollection" of Fritz telling him about a palmprint is somehow an unassailable truth even though Wade himself admits in the same testimony that it varies from the facts and that no palmprint was actually identified by the Dallas PD that night or at any other time.

Can you point to any contemporary mention or report of such a print before Oswald's death?

[Charles Collins]

Martin is absolutely right, Charles, you're being hypocritical.  You seem to think that Wade's 6-months-later "recollection" of Fritz telling him about a palmprint is somehow an unassailable truth even though Wade himself admits in the same testimony that it varies from the facts and that no palmprint was actually identified by the Dallas PD that night or at any other time.

Can you point to any contemporary mention or report of such a print before Oswald's death?

Martin was trying to compare two different books written by two different authors about different persons in two different situations.  As for your question, the newspaper article was published before Oswald's death. You can believe whatever you want to believe as to whether or not it is referring to the palm print. I really don't care.

[John Iacoletti]

Martin was trying to compare two different books written by two different authors about different persons in two different situations.

And your reason for trusting one and rejecting the other seems completely arbitrary and based solely on your preconceptions.

  As for your question, the newspaper article was published before Oswald's death. You can believe whatever you want to believe as to whether or not it is referring to the palm print. I really don't care.

The newspaper article says nothing about a palmprint, partial or otherwise.  The fact remains that the magic palmprint wasn't positively IDed until Latona examined the index card it was taped to on November 29th.  All the article shows is that an unnamed "investigator" was feeding misinformation to the press before Oswald's death.

[Charles Collins]

And your reason for trusting one and rejecting the other seems completely arbitrary and based solely on your preconceptions.

The newspaper article says nothing about a palmprint, partial or otherwise.  The fact remains that the magic palmprint wasn't positively IDed until Latona examined the index card it was taped to on November 29th.  All the article shows is that an unnamed "investigator" was feeding misinformation to the press before Oswald's death.

And your reason for trusting one and rejecting the other seems completely arbitrary and based solely on your preconceptions.

And what stated reason of mine are you referring to?

The newspaper article says nothing about a palmprint, partial or otherwise.  The fact remains that the magic palmprint wasn't positively IDed until Latona examined the index card it was taped to on November 29th.  All the article shows is that an unnamed "investigator" was feeding misinformation to the press before Oswald's death.

I have presented the words of several people who were there. Your opinion of them makes no difference to me.