[Ben Holmes]

(08-10-2016, 10:49 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  

Ben Holmes Wrote:Patrick undoubtedly knew that I could prove McAdams was a liar, but it's amusing that Patrick thought he could get away with claiming it was "unassailable" when he knew otherwise.

You have proved nothing of the sort. 

And no, I did not "know" or believe otherwise.

Okay... let's start again - since you've forgotten.

If you're standing at the entry way to the TSBD, and you hear a shot from the "Railroad yard" - how did you determine that it was not the Grassy Knoll?

If you cannot explain this - then you've demonstrated that you know McAdams' tabulation isn't correct.

Patrick C Wrote: 

Ben Holmes Wrote:McAdams pulled virtually every possible trick he could to get the numbers of the Grassy Knoll witnesses as low as possible.

Bull shit - he is simply reporting accurately on what people said. Of course there will be some instances of vagueness on the part of witnesses. No doubt about it.

Anyway, it matters not. I don't care if 75% of all the witnesses thought ALL the shots came from the Knoll - the fact is they were WRONG. We know TWO shots at leats were fired from behind. Period.

The facts don't matter?

No wonder you're a believer!

This is an excellent example of 'Begging the Question' - you presume what you need to support, and argue that no matter what the evidence shows, your faith is paramount.

Patrick C Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:But, as Mark Lane pointed out many years ago - the witnesses who were on the record in the first two days, 11/22 and 11/23 - quite overwhelmingly pointed to the Grassy Knoll.

Bull shit - no they did not.

You're lying again, Patrick. You'll NEVER support such a claim with evidence. Just as Mark refused to do.

So tell us Patrick - why are you a liar?
 

Patrick C Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:No believer has been able to refute that simple fact.

Oh, if I could be bothered I could easily do that. Mike Majerus certainly has. It's just a question of homework and application.

Nope...you're lying again. If Mike Majerus has addressed this question - simply cite the page number.

But you won't... you're lying again.

Quite pathetic, actually.

Patrick C Wrote:But, as I said a week or two ago, this is just the same old crap from a conspiracy junky who can't see the wood for the trees and I don't give much of a monkeys about what you think about the Kennedy assassination. Your views are off the wall and off the planet.

Have fun talking to yourself Ben.

When all you can do is repeatedly lie to defend your beliefs, don't you think it would be better to stick with the truth?

Since the overwhelming majority of Americans accept the position I hold, I have no stake in this... but you do.