[Mark Ulrik]

(08-10-2016, 02:00 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  

(08-10-2016, 08:39 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  

(08-09-2016, 03:12 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  It all boils down to one irrefutable fact.

The overwhelming majority of witnesses who made statements on 11/22 or 11/23 stated that the shots came from the direction of the Grassy Knoll.

You absolute MUST AGREE with Mark Lane on that fact.

If you dispute him, then its up to you to produce your list of eyewitnesses, and cite what they said.

Since you refuse to do so - it's clear that you understand that Mark Lane told the truth.

Thank you for admitting that Lane's numbers are wrong. As his unofficial fan club president, that must have been a bitter pill to swallow.

And, no, I won't simply take your word for an "overwhelming majority." It's your (highly dubious) claim, so the onus is on you to support it. Lane was too much of a coward to list his 25 witnesses, and you refuse to post the tabulation you claim to have done. The lurkers are free to draw their own conclusions, but I frankly doubt it even exists.

It all boils down to one irrefutable fact.

The overwhelming majority of witnesses who made statements on 11/22 or 11/23 stated that the shots came from the direction of the Grassy Knoll.

You absolute MUST AGREE with Mark Lane on that fact.

Do you think I'm an idiot? His numbers are demonstrably wrong.

If you dispute him, then its up to you to produce your list of eyewitnesses, and cite what they said.

I have already produced 5 who pointed to the TSBD. Lane claimed there were only 3 non-GK witnesses. How many witnesses have you produced? In another thread, you claimed there were more than 22 GK witnesses. List them!

Since you refuse to do so - it's clear that you understand that Mark Lane told the truth. I'm not required to cite and support YOUR claim. That's up to you to do.

Lane's "22 of 25" claim has already been refuted. The "overwhelming majority" is your claim. Which you refuse to support (we all know why).

Denying the accuracy of Mark Lane's point, even as you REFUSE to cite the evidence, shows that you know what that evidence actually shows.

There's nothing accurate about Lane's claim. [5 TSDB witnesses] > [3 non-GK witnesses]. Had the WC made a mistake like that, you're be over them like a cheap suit.

Like your hero Mark Lane, you're too much of a coward to post the tabulation you (ha-ha) claim to have done.

My comments in green above.