+- Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com)
+-- Forum: Main JFK Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-Main-JFK-Forums)
+--- Forum: JFK Conspiracy Main Forum (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-JFK-Conspiracy-Main-Forum)
+--- Thread: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane (/Thread-Nolan-Potter-s-View-vs-Mark-Lane)
Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Ben Holmes - 06-30-2016
Henry Sienzant Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:It's a PROVABLE FACT that Potter immediately noticed the smoke on the Grassy Knoll - As Mark Lane stated.Direct from the FBI statement: "POTTER said he recalls seeing smoke in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building rising above the trees."
(above is the view from the approximate position of Sam Holland). Nolan Potter was also on the overpass, not far from this location. The red circle denotes the approximate location where Potter placed the smoke he saw. Note the circle contains the sniper's nest window).
Ignore it some more, Ben. Or attempt to move it to where you want it to be. We both know you are dying to do that.
![[Image: NPotter.jpg]](http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/images/NPotter.jpg)
It's always good to see a believer help prove the critic's case. Because, of course, the critic's case is built on the actual evidence.
Henry was kind enough to provide the photo that PROVES BEYOND ANY DOUBT that Mark Lane (And the HSCA) said about where Nolan Potter saw the smoke.
Henry has absolutely refused to show where the circle in the photo above would be different if the smoke were coming from the TSBD. And for years now, Henry has refused to answer that simple question.
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Patrick C - 06-30-2016
Would you get smoke from the murder weapon...Oswald's MC ....I wonder.....?
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Ben Holmes - 07-01-2016
Patrick C Wrote:Would you get smoke from the murder weapon...Oswald's MC ....I wonder.....?
That's not the right question.
The right question is "Was smoke seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination?"
And the answer is - indisputably.
But I note for the record that Patrick is unable to point to any area on the photo where smoke would appear from the TSBD ... yet be differentiated from above the Grassy Knoll.
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Patrick C - 07-01-2016
Ben Holmes Wrote:The right question is "Was smoke seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination?
And the answer is - indisputably.
Speculation....you have NO idea about that.
I can tell you NON of the 20+ people I met who were there said they saw smoke.....not that that proves anything of course.......
Would the MC release smoke Holmes...?
As it was the ONLY weapon fired in the plaza that day it surely would have to in order for you to be correct hey....?
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Ben Holmes - 07-01-2016
Patrick C Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:The right question is "Was smoke seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination?
And the answer is - indisputably.
Speculation....you have NO idea about that.
You're lying again, Patrick. There's no speculation WHATSOEVER to state that smoke was seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination.
Sam Holland Wrote:When they got just about to the Arcade I heard what I thought for the moment was a fire cracker and he slumped over and I looked over toward the arcade and trees and saw a puff of smoke come from the trees and I heard three more shots after the first shot but that was the only puff of smoke I saw. … But the puff of smoke I saw definitely came from behind the arcade through the trees. - WC XIX, pg 480
Ed Johnson Wrote:Some of us saw little puffs of white smoke that seemed to hit the grassy area in the esplanade that divides Dallas’ main downtown streets. - Fort Worth Star–Telegram, 23 November 1963, pg 2
Austin Miller Wrote:I saw something which I thought was smoke or steam coming from a group of trees north of Elm off the Railroad tracks. - WC XIX, pg 485
You may or may not be familiar with all these witnesses, but it's simply not conceivable that you were unaware of eyewitness testimony for smoke in the Grassy Knoll area.
Once again Patrick, you've been caught dead in a lie. Tell us Patrick, will you retract your lie - or simply leave the forum for someplace where there aren't knowledgeable critics who can catch you?
Patrick C Wrote:I can tell you NON of the 20+ people I met who were there said they saw smoke.....not that that proves anything of course.......
I can almost instantly list 100 witnesses who saw no smoke... it would be just as meaningless.
Patrick C Wrote:Would the MC release smoke Holmes...?
Hoover wrote to Rankin in a Sep 23, 1964 letter... Hoover stated that in test firing a Mannlicher Carcano rifle, "a small amount of white smoke was visible. - WC XXVI, pg 811."
Patrick C Wrote:As it was the ONLY weapon fired in the plaza that day it surely would have to in order for you to be correct hey....?
Speculation on your part, Patrick... and NOT supported by the evidence.
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Patrick C - 07-01-2016
I would accept that those witnesses thought they saw smoke and perhaps they did.. But that does not prove it was there....you stated it was there "indisputably"......
I cannot see how you can say it is not disputable....
Some people said they thought they saw steam.....
Perhaps it was flash and smoke from the magic wand of Gandalf down there on the Knoll.....that would be about the only explanation in my book.....
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Ben Holmes - 07-01-2016
Patrick C Wrote:I would accept that those witnesses thought they saw smoke and perhaps they did.. But that does not prove it was there....you stated it was there "indisputably"......
YOU'RE LYING AGAIN PATRICK
Either produce my statement saying that smoke was indisputably there, or retract your blatant lie!
Patrick C Wrote:I cannot see how you can say it is not disputable....
That's because you've lied about what I stated... it's a strawman you've erected. You cannot deny that witnesses REPORTED seeing smoke.
Patrick C Wrote:Some people said they thought they saw steam.....
Indeed true. And doesn't affect my point at all.
Patrick C Wrote:Perhaps it was flash and smoke from the magic wand of Gandalf down there on the Knoll.....that would be about the only explanation in my book.....
Or, it could be that the historical truth is so devastating to your faith that you have to frequently lie about it.
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Patrick C - 07-01-2016
Ben Holmes Wrote:Either produce my statement saying that smoke was indisputably there, or retract your blatant lie!
Here is your statement
Ben Holmes Wrote:The right question is "Was smoke seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination?
And the answer is - indisputably.
Now, either you are having another major English comprehension problem......or there is something seriously wrong.
So calling me a liar on that point - well sorry you really don't deserve a response on that.....
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Patrick C - 07-01-2016
I do not lie about the evidence or my beliefs in the JFK case Holmes.
If you insist on calling me liar I will just leave. Simple. And you can stew in your own self indulgence and delusion and you can all agree that there were 7 shots and 5 shooters and they all got away backed by LBJ and the CIA.....
Re: Nolan Potter's View vs Mark Lane - Ben Holmes - 07-01-2016
Patrick C Wrote:Sorry Patrick, you have NOT QUOTED ME SAYING THAT "SMOKE" WAS INDISPUTABLY THERE.Ben Holmes Wrote:Either produce my statement saying that smoke was indisputably there, or retract your blatant lie!Here is your statement
Ben Holmes Wrote:The right question is "Was smoke seen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63 immediately following the assassination?Now, either you are having another major English comprehension problem......or there is something seriously wrong.
And the answer is - indisputably.
So calling me a liar on that point - well sorry you really don't deserve a response on that.....
I stated that that smoke was SEEN by eyewitnesses...
There's quite a bit of difference between the assertion that smoke was seen - AND THIS IS ADMITTED EVEN BY YOU, and the claim that it was "indisputably" smoke which was seen.
Here was your lie again:
Patrick C Wrote:I would accept that those witnesses thought they saw smoke and perhaps they did.. But that does not prove it was there....you stated it was there "indisputably"......Now until you retract your lie, or QUOTE ME SAYING THAT SMOKE WAS INDISPUTABLY SEEN, I'm going to keep charging you with telling lies.