Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[Vincent Baxter]

um,
yea, you did.

Yeah, I put words in your mouth. So shoot me! Is it really that much of a big deal for you? I'd hate to see what you'd be like if someone did anything seriously bad to you.

How about just answering the question? Are you telling me you don't believe there was no JFK assassination cover up?

(Did you see I did it again? Round up a few more of your mates and get them to moan at me too)

[Martin Weidmann]

I'm the only one pre-occupied with winning argument, yet you have to reply to everything I post to try to put your point across and attempt to have the last word?
Well, you can dress it up however you like and say you're just calling it as you see it but from where I'm standing it looks like you're trying to win an argument to me.

yet you have to reply to everything I post to try to put your point across and attempt to have the last word?

You write something stupid on this forum, and I reply.... that's how it works on forums. As for trying to have the last word, why do you keep replying?

from where I'm standing it looks like you're trying to win an argument to me.

That's only because you are wired that way...

I was asking him a simple question, I really don't see the big problem here. Whether I asked him "Are you saying you don't believe in a cover up?", "Are you saying you do believe in a cover up?" or "Do you believe there was a cover up" it all pretty much equates to the same question that a simple "yes" or "no" answer will solve. I'm not exactly convicting him of anything by phrasing a question in a certain way as any of the above questions are totally irrelevant and invalid until he actually replies. It's at that point when his opinion comes out. I really don't see why anyone would get so upset and make such a point about it. Its a question that is asking for an answer, its not a statement or accusation!

I was asking him a simple question

Sure you were...

OK, fair point but within this huge long thread many posts have strayed away from the original point of Oswald's lies. Maybe I should have started a new thread rather than post within this thread? But clearly you did butt into an exchange between me and Goth and accused me of putting words in his mouth.
It's pretty small minded and egotistical to be so hostile to someone just because they're "a newbie". Just because someone only just joined a JFK forum it doesn't mean they know less than you. I'm sure some of most prolific JFK researchers aren't members of this forum so if they were to join tomorrow would you automatically accuse them of being newbies who think they know it all, just because you've been a member of this forum for longer?.

It's pretty small minded and egotistical to be so hostile to someone just because they're "a newbie".

I wasn't hostile to you because you are a newbie. If I was hostile to you it was because you behaved obnoxiously. The first thing you did was pick a fight with Tom Scully.

Just because someone only just joined a JFK forum it doesn't mean they know less than you.

Strawman! Nobody said that.

I'm sure some of most prolific JFK researchers aren't members of this forum so if they were to join tomorrow would you automatically accuse them of being newbies who think they know it all, just because you've been a member of this forum for longer?.

Another strawman! You are making up your own reality here... I was not hostile to you because you were a newbie but because you deserved it.

As it stands, and this probably won't surprise you one little bit, I'm by no means an expert on this case. I'm from the UK and the JFK assassination is not even something we're taught in school. I randomly got interested in the case a few years ago and have read numerous books both for, against and neutral to any conspiracy theories. I joined this forum as I don't know anyone else who is interested in this subject and there are several things that I'm curious about that, so far, I have never seen addressed in the books I've read. Hence, I thought that joining something like this would offer some fun discussion and useful insight in to what other people think about certain topics. Sadly, all I've seem to have gotten so far is aggressive replies, demands of "proof" or being told I live in a fairy land and that I just believe anything the government tells me, rather than any actual discussion and the majority of my discussions so far have been completely irrelevant to the JFK assassination and mainly about how I phrase questions to Peter Goth.

So, you decided to join this forum to enhance your knowledge and figured a good way to start was to piss off some of the members?

Btw, I already firgured you were either from the U.K. or down under. Your spelling and choice of words gave that away fairly quickly.

As such, I hope you can see why I resorted to such comments as "Super Weidmann". I read your comment and just thought to myself "oh here we go, another nobber who is just going to rant about spombleprofglidnoctobuns without actually addressing the issue.

No, I can't see why you resorted to such a comment.

Again, I refer back to my error of not starting a new thread. I have to admit I was not really following the interactions between you, Goth & Mytton until I was likened to him

Then perhaps you should have done a bit more research before you replied.

Yeah, you didn't say we were Siamese twins. Do you really have to take everything so literally? It was an OTT exaggeration on how you seemed to be assuming me and Mytton were best buddies or something. I thought anyone with an ounce of common sense would get that. I was just watching an old episode of a 1970s British sit-com called George & Mildred when one of the characters said the line "Blimey! Look at him. Once dance lesson and already he thinks he's John Travolta". This was obviously meant as a joke, but no doubt you would have got angry and written to the show's writers stating "At no point did that guy who took the dance lesson ever say he was John Travolta. You just made that up!"

I like British humor. The only problem is that sit-com doesn't really go down in writing on a forum and neither does your feeble attempt at ridicule.

Well clearly not as far as you're concerned. I'm clearly just "a newbie" who's not worthy of your expertise or time so I won't be offended if you don't bother replying to this with another one of your long winded accusations of how I'm putting words in people's mouths or not backing any of my notions up with hard evidence.

I'm clearly just "a newbie" who's not worthy of your expertise or time

Oh poor boy...

I won't be offended if you don't bother replying to this

What? And let you get away with this kind of BS? Not a chance.....

[Martin Weidmann]

Yeah, I put words in your mouth. So shoot me! Is it really that much of a big deal for you? I'd hate to see what you'd be like if someone did anything seriously bad to you.

How about just answering the question? Are you telling me you don't believe there was no JFK assassination cover up?

(Did you see I did it again? Round up a few more of your mates and get them to moan at me too)

From "I was only asking him a question" to Yeah, I put words in your mouth. in just three subsequent posts.

Amazing... just how much of a hypocrite can this guy be?

[Vincent Baxter]

yet you have to reply to everything I post to try to put your point across and attempt to have the last word?

You write something stupid on this forum, and I reply.... that's how it works on forums. As for trying to have the last word, why do you keep replying?

from where I'm standing it looks like you're trying to win an argument to me.

That's only because you are wired that way...

I was asking him a simple question

Sure you were...

It's pretty small minded and egotistical to be so hostile to someone just because they're "a newbie".

I wasn't hostile to you because you are a newbie. If I was hostile to you it was because you behaved obnoxiously. The first thing you did was pick a fight with Tom Scully.

Just because someone only just joined a JFK forum it doesn't mean they know less than you.

Strawman! Nobody said that.

I'm sure some of most prolific JFK researchers aren't members of this forum so if they were to join tomorrow would you automatically accuse them of being newbies who think they know it all, just because you've been a member of this forum for longer?.

Another strawman! You are making up your own reality here... I was not hostile to you because you were a newbie but because you deserved it.

So, you decided to join this forum to enhance your knowledge and figured a good way to start was to piss off some of the members?

Btw, I already firgured you were either from the U.K. or down under. Your spelling and choice of words gave that away fairly quickly.

No, I can't see why you resorted to such a comment.

Then perhaps you should have done a bit more research before you replied.

I like British humor. The only problem is that sit-com doesn't really go down in writing on a forum and neither does your feeble attempt at ridicule.

I'm clearly just "a newbie" who's not worthy of your expertise or time

Oh poor boy...

I won't be offended if you don't bother replying to this

What? And let you get away with this kind of BS? Not a chance.....

OK, busted! Maybe an incy, teeny weeny bit of me did come on here just to pick immature fights but I swear that wasn't my intention when I signed up. I did honestly hope to enhance my knowledge but it seems that's not really how JFK forums work. Am I right to assume that American people can get pretty defensive and indiscriminately dislike someone entirely depending on what their views on the assassination are? Is it a bit like how British people are divided over Brexit?

I do apologise to Tom Scully if I picked a fight with him for no reason, but being civil doesn't seem to be the theme of this forum. And admit it, you enjoy it as much as me.

p.s. Are we Brits really that easy to detect?

[Vincent Baxter]

Yeah, I put words in your mouth.

Amazing... just how much of a hypocrite can this guy be?

Personally, I still don't think phrasing the question the way I did was exactly putting words into his mouth. Certainly it was something I wouldn't even have bothered mentioning or getting offended about if someone had done the same to me, but clearly there's no point me in trying to argue that case anymore as you've both already determined that I did so it's down to interpretation.
Thought I'd just concede in the hope that he might actually reply to the question now rather than go all round the houses about how I'm putting words in his mouth. Out of curiosity I really want to know now considering the whole bloody palaver its caused.

[Martin Weidmann]

OK, busted! Maybe an incy, teeny weeny bit of me did come on here just to pick immature fights but I swear that wasn't my intention when I signed up. I did honestly hope to enhance my knowledge but it seems that's not really how JFK forums work. Am I right to assume that American people can get pretty defensive and indiscriminately dislike someone entirely depending on what their views on the assassination are? Is it a bit like how British people are divided over Brexit?

I do apologise to Tom Scully if I picked a fight with him for no reason, but being civil doesn't seem to be the theme of this forum. And admit it, you enjoy it as much as me.

p.s. Are we Brits really that easy to detect?

being civil doesn't seem to be the theme of this forum. And admit it, you enjoy it as much as me.

Actually, no I don't enjoy that at all. I'd much rather discuss the case and the evidence.

p.s. Are we Brits really that easy to detect?

When you use words like "geezer" and write "defence" instead of "defense" it's pretty obvious.

[Vincent Baxter]

So far you haven't proven anything yourself so why would anyone waste their time proving you wrong?

I didn't say I'd proven anything myself, I merely stated one of my own personal opinions.
And anyway, since when did you have to prove something in the first place in order to be proven wrong? Do criminals prove that they were somewhere else at the time of an alleged crime before they can be proven they weren't?

[John Mytton]

OK, busted! Maybe an incy, teeny weeny bit of me did come on here just to pick immature fights but I swear that wasn't my intention when I signed up. I did honestly hope to enhance my knowledge but it seems that's not really how JFK forums work. Am I right to assume that American people can get pretty defensive and indiscriminately dislike someone entirely depending on what their views on the assassination are? Is it a bit like how British people are divided over Brexit?

I do apologise to Tom Scully if I picked a fight with him for no reason, but being civil doesn't seem to be the theme of this forum. And admit it, you enjoy it as much as me.

p.s. Are we Brits really that easy to detect?

Vincent, these clowns like Goth, Otto and Roger Collins are all created by the same cookie cutter and can't debate their way out of a wet paper bag, they all know there is a MOUNTAIN of evidence so they start attacking the messenger and try to make it personal, my advice is just present the facts and watch them all scurry away like frightened mice.

JohnM