(08-16-2016, 09:51 AM)Mark Ulrik Wrote: (08-11-2016, 02:17 PM)Ben Holmes Wrote: Mark Ulrik Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:Such amusing cowardice!!!
You admit that the Presidential limo was traveling roughly 40mph at the last of the extant Z-film, you agree that the Presidential limo never completely passed the lead vehicle - yet you presume a stop before they got to the Hospital - BASED ON NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER.
Stop putting words in my mouth.
Which fact that I listed do you dispute?
You said I agreed with you about something. I never agree with you about anything.
Well, that's simply untrue. my statement above says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about you "agreeing" with me. (And, of couse, we
DO agree with many things... and unless you're willing to publicly state that JFK didn't die on 11/22/63 - I've just proven that.)
But tell us Mark ... BE SPECIFIC... which statement do you disagree with?
1. The Presidential limo was traveling roughly 40mph at the end of the extant Z-film.
2. The Presidential limo never completely passed the lead vehicle.
3. You assert a stop for Curry to speak with Chaney before they reached Parkland.
4. There's ZERO evidence for a stop outside of Dealey Plaza
Now... I predict you won't answer this question... because it's a FACT that you
AGREE WITH ME on each one of those statements. So despite the fact that I never spoke of "agreement" before, I'm doing so now.
Go ahead and refute me, if you dare.
Mark Ulrik Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:Why are you so afraid to debate this topic?
Speak up, Mark! Tell everyone your scenario that explains the known facts... If you cannot - then you might as well admit it.
Chaney was never alongside the limo in DP. The films and photos taken in DP were not faked.
This is the logical fallacy known as 'Begging the question'... it's too bad that Henry Sienzant won't post here, or he'd tell you this (were he honest enough to correct a fellow believer) The testimony quite firmly places the meeting IN Dealey Plaza... Eyewitness testimony clearly places a limo stop IN Dealey Plaza. Yet this isn't seen in the films... so you cannot accept the eyewitness testimony. Yet you pretend to do so. You simply refuse to admit that the testimony & the films are in contradiction to each other.
But they are. And your refusal to answer the above questions prove it.