Tomlinson and Wright are at odds on the color of the magic bullet

[J. Raymond Carroll]

What I am saying is this: if you did have such a tape, and since it has become an issue for your credibility, why would you not find it and ask some one to make a wave file of it?

I have answered your question on other threads

in direct response to your questions

but either you cannot read

or cannot understand.

P.S. As far as I recall

you are the only person here

who consistently impugns my motives

or calls me a xxxx.

Edited July 3, 2011 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Michael Hogan]

Many of us do not think you have any such tape.

So in addition to his longtime habit of impugning my motives, Jim D. is now explicitly calling me a xxxx.

Carroll has a longtime habit of making claims that are either false or that he is unable to substantiate with evidence.

On another thread he made numerous false and unsubstantiated claims against Mark Lane. That is where this banter

about a tape allegedly in Carroll's possession began.

Actually you are wrong ONCE AGAIN. I made these charges to Mark Lane's FACE at the Duquesne conference in 2003,

and Lane ran away with tail between legs. I've got it on audiotape, would give a million bucks to have it on video

I doubt that any audio tape that Carroll may or may not possess will show Lane "running away with tail between legs."

Carroll claims that he confronted Lane and charged him with betraying his client, among other things.

If there ever was such a confrontation, it makes sense that Lane would get away as soon as possible.

Surely Lane had encountered more than his share of nut cases in his long career and he may have

thought that this was just one more.

THe reason you do not recall the event is because you were not present during my encounter with Mark Lane I do have an audio of the event, which is stored among a pile of clutter in my garage.

I will post it here in due course, when I straighten out the clutter and figure out how to post an audiotape.

It is Carroll that brought up the "audio of the event" as a means of authenticating his version of events.

It is Carroll that wrote that he would post said audio in here in due course after straightening out "the pile of clutter in his garage."

Jim DiEugenio has reminded Carroll several times of his promise and has been met with evasions each time.

Jim is well within his rights in doubting such a tape exists.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Jim is well within his rights in doubting such a tape exists.

Does anyone here think

that I give a FIDDLER"S DAMN

about what Hogan or Di Eugenio think?

Thinking is a SKILL

and these boyos just don't got it.

As I have stated here UMPTEEN times,

I will publish my Mark Lane interview

at a time and place

OF MY OWN CHOOSING.

And I don't think Mr. Hogan should be calling

another member

a xxxx.

[David Von Pein]

Thinking is a SKILL...

Says the man who thinks Oswald did not shoot JFK.

What a farce.

[Michael Hogan]

Thinking is a SKILL...

Says the man who thinks Oswald did not shoot JFK.

What a farce.

David Von Pein could have picked many better examples than the one he used. Carroll has provided many of them.

Instead David took what was, for him, the lazy way out.

David's example might be one of the few things Carroll has gotten right.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray Baby:

You just said you would publish it.

Why did you use that word?

BABY JAMES,

I hope someone gives you a rattler soon,

to stop your crying and moaning.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray Baby:

You just said you would publish it.

Will someone please give this silly crybaby a rattler or other toy to keep him from crying and moaning?

Edited July 6, 2011 by J. Raymond Carroll

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Thinking is a SKILL...

Says the man who thinks Oswald did not shoot JFK.

What a farce.

Greetings, David.

I think you have collected and posted some valuable videos,

and I especially appreciated your recent posting of the interview

with Josiah Thompson,

but I have to say that your thinking skills

are on about the same level as Di Eugenio & Hogan

[David Von Pein]

...your thinking skills are on about the same level as Di Eugenio & Hogan.

Oh dear. I guess I am in trouble then.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Oh dear. I guess I am in trouble then.

Yes David, you are in trouble.

You are quite correct in claiming that Oz acted alone,

your only mistake is in thinking that he shot anyone,

or committed any crime,

on 11/22/63.

Your analysis should begin with

the time-honored logic of

THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.

[Michael Hogan]

Greetings, David.

......but I have to say that your thinking skills are on about the same level as Di Eugenio & Hogan

Ray Carroll to David Von Pein: "Hello David. You may feel like an outlaw here, but IMO you are closer to the truth than most of the members.

You are correct in thinking that Lee Oswald acted alone."

Edited July 7, 2011 by Michael Hogan

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray Carroll to David Von Pein: "Hello David. You may feel like an outlaw here, but IMO you are closer to the truth than most of the members.

You are correct in thinking that Lee Oswald acted alone."

Beats me why Mr. Hogan keeps posting this

over and over,

since it is obviously

WAY ABOVE HIS HEAD!

Maybe he thinks that if he re-posts it often enough,

he will EVENTUALLY understand it.

Edited July 8, 2011 by J. Raymond Carroll

[David Von Pein]

Hogan is right to keep posting that very silly remark that J. Raymond made on my profile in 2010. Because, to a reasonable person, that comment most certainly would indicate that Carroll thinks Oswald was guilty of KILLING PEOPLE IN DALLAS ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963.

But, evidently J. Ray enjoys playing word games on his computer, so what he really meant by his comment is that Oswald--ACTING ALONE--killed NOBODY on 11/22/63.

That's typical of a conspiracist, though. Up is down, sour is sweet, guilty is innocent, and all the evidence is worthless and untrustworthy (regardless of how much of it there is to indicate a guilty LHO).

But remember, too, J. Raymond, "thinking is a SKILL".

Translation: Creative thinking and inventing new ways to pretend Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent is a skill. Sensible "thinking" has got nothing to do with it.

Edited July 8, 2011 by David Von Pein