[Ben Holmes]

(08-25-2016, 08:52 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  

(08-24-2016, 03:21 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  Let's hear you acknowledge that fact, Mark. Surely you don't want to label you a coward yet again... so acknowledge in your response that there were MORE THAN 25 WITNESSES DOCUMENTED ON 11/22 & 11/23.

Sign. I've already told you that I don't know. If we were to include unpublished documents, however, then the answer would certainly be yes, but Lane is supposed to have been found his 25 witnesses in the WC volumes.

You're lying again, Mark. I've cited the actual citation from Rush to Judgment, you acknowledged that you forgot the newspaper accounts, then you go right ahead and lie about it again.

Mark Lane gave THREE citations, not only the two found in the WC volumes.

Your abject cowardice doesn't surprise me... I rather suspect that you know very well that the true numbers support Mark Lane's statement as well.
 

(08-25-2016, 08:52 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote:  

(08-24-2016, 03:21 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote:  The truth can never be embarrassing to me - you're the one running from the facts. YOUR OWN NUMBERS PROVE THAT MARK LANE'S POINT WAS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!

A bold-faced lie!

How can the truth be a lie?

You ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to acknowledge that the majority, indeed, the OVERWHELMING majority of the documented witnesses on 11/22 and 11/23 pointed to the Grassy Knoll.

You manage to find 5 witnesses, and you think that this proves Mark Lane wrong.

If you could have found more, you'd have listed them by now.

Now, either admit that Mark Lane was absolutely correct in his statement that most of the witnesses documented on 11/22 & 11/23 pointed to the Grassy Knoll, or run away.

You will not be allowed to label a statement a "lie" again unless you can document it... Those are the rules.