[Ben Holmes]

miker Wrote:First of all, stop embedding all the quotes. Reading your posts is already hard enough. Make one quote at the beginning and thats it. You have a tendency , I am learning, to overdue EVERYTHING.

I have a 'tendency' for accuracy. I predicted that you'd end up being a traditional WCR Supporter... thus far, it looks like I'm correct.

Someone who objects to someone quoting what they said just before responding to it... that fairly reeks of embarrassment. If you don't want your statements quoted, then you have that power... simply don't make the statements.

Ben Holmes Wrote:...you are not a critic of the HSCA in any traditionally accepted sense. My prediction is that you're really simply a supporter of the WCR, and wish to only "criticize" the "probable conspiracy" portion of the HSCA.

You want to fly under false colors...

You don't want your basic assumptions of the correctness of the Warren Commission to be known.

Time will tell if my prediction is correct.

Miker Wrote:Also, please remember that Larry Hancock gave you a seal of approval. You have an obligation to be somewhat sensible, otherwise, you are going to reflect poorly on Larry Hancock. Already I am thinking , is the kind of stuff that Larry Hancock wants to promote?

You mean that you seriously think that Larry Hancock would *NOT* label this statement as a lie?

HSCA Wrote:In disagreement with the observations of the Parkland doctors are the 26 people present at the autopsy. All of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated the general location of the wounds as depicted in the photographs; none had differing accounts.

I would be dumbfounded if Mr. Hancock reviewed this statement, reviewed the evidence, and didn't come to the same conclusion I did - and that you refuse to weigh in on.

Miker Wrote:You could not be more wrong about my being a HSCA critic. I am probably the biggest HSCA critic that you will ever find.

Yet when one of the biggest lies ever told by the HSCA is quoted, you remain silent.

Miker Wrote:I am not going to respond to any of your questions, until I begin to see sensibility and not "bullying".

I have things and subjects that I want to bring up and maybe, if you stop being such a bully, I will get the chance to bring them up. You have your subjects you want to talk about. I have subjects I want to talk about. That is the way the world works.

I have absolutely no doubt that I could debate the pant off of you if I so desired, but I do not want to do that. The subjects you are interested in are not the subjects I am interested in. But you kind of made that clear yesterday when you refused to make a sub forum for Photographic Analysis.

Stop being a bully, and stop posting so much. I have not given up on you yet, but I am very close.

I ignored Patrick's threats to leave the forum too.

Naturally, if there aren't any believers who can defend the Warren Commission Report in an arena that allows no ad hominem attacks, yet provides for photos, graphics, videos, etc... that simply shows the weakness of the WCR.

My personal objective is achieved whether you have the courage to stick around or not.

(My personal objective is, of course, the truth about what happened on 11/22/63)

So stick around and make your case - or go find a forum that doesn't have any knowledgeable critics capable of pointing out your errors. Who cares?

[Administrator's Note: Corrected for correct name on quotes.]