A Lot Of Racket About One Ditched Jacket

[Martin Weidmann]

Kook strategy #26... When you're up against it with no way out, change the argument to the color of the jacket versus the fact that it was a jacket, regardless of the color.

BS. If it wasn't a grey jacket, your entire argument falls apart.

Your fairytale story only works if Oswald left the rooming house, not with any old jacket, but a grey one. Why? Because that grey one was allegedly found under a car in a car park, which in your fantasy world somehow explain why Oswald was (allegedly) seen without a jacket on Jefferson.

You just don't want to talk about the color because it destroys your narrative as Roberts failed to identify the grey jacket belonging to Oswald and said the jacket she had seen (for what that is worth) was darker.

This is just another example of a LN not being willing to look at all the evidence and only concentrating on one part of the evidence (a very weak part) in a pathetic attempt to score a point.

[Bill Brown]

BS. If it wasn't a grey jacket, your entire argument falls apart.

Your fairytale story only works if Oswald left the rooming house, not with any old jacket, but a grey one. Why? Because that grey one was allegedly found under a car in a car park, which in your fantasy world somehow explains why Oswald was (allegedly) seen without a jacket on Jefferson.

You just don't want to talk about the color because it destroys your narrative as Roberts failed to identify the grey jacket belonging to Oswald and said the jacket she had seen (for what that is worth) was darker.

This is just another example of a LN not being willing to look at all the evidence and only concentrating on one part of the evidence (a very weak part) in a pathetic attempt to score a point.

And.... Another post goes by with no logical explanation for why Oswald ditched the jacket he was zipping up when he left the rooming house.

[Martin Weidmann]

And.... Another post goes by with no logical explanation for why Oswald ditched the jacket he was zipping up when he left the rooming house.

And... Another post goes by with a questionable claim based on a buch of assumptions.
You can throw a hissy fit and repeat the same thing over and over again but you are only wasting people's time with your BS

[Bill Brown]

And... Another post goes by with a questionable claim based on a buch of assumptions.
You can throw a hissy fit and repeat the same thing over and over again but you are only wasting people's time with your BS

I think most here know who is the time-wasting troll and who isn't.

[Martin Weidmann]

I think most here know who is the time-wasting troll and who isn't.

Of course you think that. You think a great many things. The problem is that most of them are only true in your own mind.

[Bill Brown]

Did I miss the part where you explained why Oswald ditched the two jackets he was wearing in Whaley's cab?

I've already showed you the FBI interview written long before he ever testified to the Warren Commission where Whaley describes Oswald's shirt, making no mention of a jacket.

[John Iacoletti]

Two weeks and a couple thousand posts later, and still no evidence that Oswald ditched a jacket.

[Bill Chapman]

I've already showed you the FBI interview written long before he ever testified to the Warren Commission where Whaley describes Oswald's shirt, making no mention of a jacket.

I see what's going on here, Bill. Its the word 'ditched' that has Oswald-lovers all shook up.
Seems they are still smarting from the fact that Marina had dumped the little psycho (and who wouldn't) just that morning.

After all, its only been six decades and such delicate little blossoms need time to heal.

I suggest that in future, one might simply say that 'Oswald abruptly ended his personal relationship with his jacket'