[Ben Holmes]

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:Selective quoting? How deceptive of you. There is a difference between looking back (opposite of ahead) and away, then back (in the direction you were looking before you looked away). Here is, in context, what Chaney said:

So where's the "deceptive quoting?"

I stated that Chaney said he was looking at the President, then I quoted his words saying this.

You also quote his words saying this.

WHO DID JAMES CHANEY STATE THAT HE WAS LOOKING AT?

He said he was looking back over to his left. That would be in the general direction of Hargis and Martin (which is consistent with what we see in the Altgens photo).

Dragging the truth out of a believer has much in common with nailing jello to a wall.

The question was WHO DID JAMES CHANEY STATE THAT HE WAS LOOKING AT?

Your answer fails to address the question.

Would you like to try again?

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Mark Ulrik Wrote:Notice that he first looked away from and then back at the President. As we all know, the Altgens photo corresponds to Z frame 255 and the head shot to Z-313 (about 3 seconds later). Since Chaney is out of the frame in Z-255, he must be behind the limo, which is also what we see in Altgens. He's not looking ahead (in the direction of JFK) in the photo, but to his left (in the direction of Hargis and Martin).

Nope... speculation will not change James Chaney's position... nor who he stated he was looking at.

I wasn't speculating. You're just wrong. Chaney isn't looking at JFK in the Altgens photo. He's looking to his left, in the direction of his fellow officers.

Who did Chaney STATE that he was looking at?

Why does the question frighten you so much?

Mark Ulrik Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0gcAQNunbM[/youtube]

Now, the question becomes, why did the Warren Commission completely ignore a police officer, less than a dozen feet away from the murder victim, WHO WAS FILMED STATING THAT HE WAS WATCHING THE MURDER VICTIM AS HE WAS BEING MURDERED...

I can well understand why you refuse to answer... there isn't one from the believer's side.

The critics can easily and credibly explain why the Warren Commission was afraid of James Chaney's testimony... James Chaney would have undercut their SBT - without which would have proven a second shooter.

Dead silence...

Mark couldn't answer this question...

Oh, I thought you hated speculation. I don't know why Chaney wasn't allowed to testify (and neither do you).

Ah! But I DO KNOW WHY CHANEY WASN'T CALLED TO TESTIFY.

And you know very well why he wasn't called as well...

But that reason reveals the biases held by the Warren Commission. Biases you should be familiar with... The Warren Commission never even tried to discover who shot the President... they merely tried to prove that Oswald did.

Now, would you like to try to answer the question?