Doug Horne Has Solved The Case!
Ben Holmes
is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal clear to
me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
reasonable and understandable explanations for all of the medical evidence
(which I think is the key to solving this).
Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old stuff on
Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume set more highly!
One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this news forum
(and will be hated by at least two people here):
"Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia and the
media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe we
landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believe that
the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off by the
government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the buildings.
...
Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on the moon
are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause. But
just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL Germans
were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were. Most JFK
researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality, who are
simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must understand our
true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future
transgressions (such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
avoided. (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
don't know where you are going.) Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
on the moon from 1969-1972, and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings. Future
attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers by
linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and which
denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered. If there
is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' by the
responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease. The obvious
irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the government claims
to be true (which underlies the skepticism of those who don't believe we landed
on the moon, and of those who disbelieve the official explanations of 9/11) is a
sad and undeniable legacy of the massive coverup surrounding President Kennedy's
assassination in 1963, and of the coverups of the assassinations of Martin
Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The official lies that surround those
three events have had a very corrosive effect upon our trust in government."
Doug Horne, pgs 1801-1802.
Doug Horne also described a rather interesting 'disinfo' campaign that was waged
against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the historical
facts.
He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions made me want
to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist bent of the
5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
aeffects
hear - hear!
David Von Pein
>>> "Anyone who can't find $85 for the set..." <<<
Nope. It's up to $125 now for Horne's 5-volume set of pure fantasy (as
of 2/22/10 anyway):
I'll interject a little bit of common sense and "reality" into the
proceedings here, by replaying these articles:
THE RIDICULOUS THEORIES OF DOUGLAS P. HORNE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0e2e36113ce98e6b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/155a3a578f5005f5
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>On Feb 22, 6:23=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> Well, I've finally slogged my way though the last volume (and trust me, V=
>ol. 5
>> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal cl=
>ear to
>> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
>e
>> (which I think is the key to solving this).
>>
>f on
>> Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume set more highl=
>y!
>>
>> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this new=
>s forum
>> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>>
>d the
>> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe=
> we
>> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believ=
>e that
>> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off b=
>y the
>> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the bui=
>ldings.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on th=
>e moon
>> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause. =
>But
>> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL =
>Germans
>> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were. Most JFK
>ho are
>> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must understan=
>d our
>> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future
>e to be
>> avoided. (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come fro=
>m, you
>> don't know where you are going.) Most JFK researchers believe we really d=
>id land
>> on the moon from 1969-1972, and that the damage suffered by our society o=
>n 9/11
>> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings. F=
>uture
>> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers=
> by
>> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and=
> which
>> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered. If =
>there
>> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' =
>by the
>> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease. The obv=
>ious
>> irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the government =
>claims
>> to be true (which underlies the skepticism of those who don't believe we =
>landed
>> on the moon, and of those who disbelieve the official explanations of 9/1=
>1) is a
>> sad and undeniable legacy of the massive coverup surrounding President Ke=
>nnedy's
>> assassination in 1963, and of the coverups of the assassinations of Marti=
>n
>> Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The official lies that surroun=
>d those
>> three events have had a very corrosive effect upon our trust in governmen=
>t."
>> Doug Horne, pgs 1801-1802.
>>
>s waged
>> against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the histori=
>cal
>> facts.
>>
>> He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions made =
>me want
>> to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist bent=
> of the
>> 5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
>
Of course, not everyone is as far to the right as I am... and may enjoy Doug
Horne from their own perspective... I'm just pointing out that even if Rush
Limbaugh is on your left, you'll still manage to enjoy reading the 5 volumes of
Doug Horne's. In fact, you'll probably appreciate Doug Horne even more if you
aren't as far to the right as I am. :)
aeffects
Chuck Schuyler
> hear - hear!
Horne drives a stake (it sounds like) into the heart of Healy's hero,
9/11 "Truther" and lunar landings denier Jim Fetzer, and the trained
seal Healy immediately slaps his fins and barks a "hear hear!"
Here is a link to Fetzer's sh*tty website with a prominent place
reserved for links to information about the so-called faked lunar
landings and "Truther" baloney.
http://www.assassinationscience.com/
How 'bout it Red-Nose...do you agree with Fetzer that the moon
landings were faked and 9/11 was an inside job?
Why are you giving Ben a shout-out "hear, hear!" for his comments if
it doesn't jibe with what you and your hero Fetzer believe? If you
paused in your hero worship and actually read what he wrote before
responding, you might not come off as such an ass.
You people are first class kooktards.
Richard
"Ben Holmes" <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote in message
news:hlve6...@drn.newsguy.com...
I have to find out where Doug Horne hangs out and ask him what he thinks of
the fact that Bush didn't want an investigation of 9/11, didn't want to
testify to the 9/11 commission and only agreed to do so on condition that he
would not be under oath and Cheney would be with him, and no notes would be
taken. I'd also ask him what he thinks of the fact that Bush arranged for
all of the high ranking Saudi nationals in the country (the hijackers were
Saudis, remember) to be airlifted out when no Americans were permitted to
fly. I'd also ask him what he thinks of the fact that not one person was
reprimanded, demoted, transferred, court-martialled, fired, scolded, sent to
their rooms without any dinner, or otherwise disciplined in the face of the
worst Defense failure since Pearl Harbor. Well, except maybe the Tet
Offensive.
Future
> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers
> by
> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and
> which
> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered. If
> there
> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association'
> by the
> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease. The
> obvious
> irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the government
> claims
> to be true
George Carlin said that he doesn't believe anything the government says,
about anything whatsoever, ever. I think that's wise. You might be wrong
some of the time, but you'd be right enough. As far as I know, George never
expressed doubt about the moon landings.
lazu...@webtv.net
says in the volumes paraphrasing, he had to tell the story his own way,
he could have got a big, mainstream publisher, but his book would have
been cut to 500 pages, or so, certainly, would have made a lot more
money, and sold a lot more copies, and instead of having poor B &W
reproductions on ZFilm frames, could have had superior quality, which
would have really augmented the alteration issues.
However, the text ,and his insights, are keen, and taken directly from
much witness.testimony and documentation..a must read, especially for
the 4th estate..Laz
mucher1
Extreme buffs like you and Ben are clearly over the moon about Horne's
book, but how has it been received outside the world of kookdom?
David Von Pein
http://www.amazon.com/review/R23U3HRSNOQ2X3/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&cdMsgNo=5&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2RVKNXI6HGY2D#Mx2RVKNXI6HGY2D
ON DECEMBER 19, 2009, DOUGLAS P. HORNE SAID:
>>> "Dr. Humes performed the post-mortem surgery on JFK's head wounds before the autopsy." <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The above single sentence penned by Douglas P. Horne should be enough
of a reason all by itself, with nothing more added, for all sensible
and reasonable people to disregard Mr. Horne's theories as pure
hogwash and nonsense (not to mention impossible).
DOUG HORNE SAID:
>>> "Mr. Von Pein, this is in response to your claim that there is nothing wrong with the autopsy x-rays and photos. Many autopsy photos, and two skull x-rays, are missing." <<<
DVP SAID:
Yes, there are indeed apparently some autopsy photos "missing". But I
will once again have to agree with the man who wrote the best book
ever written on the JFK assassination, Vincent Bugliosi, when he said
this in "Reclaiming History":
"For years conspiracy theorists have charged that the "missing"
autopsy photographs are, in their minds, one more indication of a
conspiracy in the assassination. .... But...with literally hundreds of
people from various official investigative agencies...examining and
working with the photos throughout the years, I not only don't find it
suspicious, I find it completely predictable that one or more
photographs ended up missing, misplaced, or expropriated by people
through whose hands they passed." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 275 of
"Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F.
Kennedy" (Endnotes on CD-ROM)(©2007)
http://www.ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com
DOUG HORNE SAID:
>>> "Dr. David Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., in 9 visits to the [National] Archives (most of them during the 1990s), has conclusively proven that the three surviving skull x-rays in the National Archives are altered copy films, not original x-rays. The science he used was optical densitometry, a technique not employed by the HSCA's "experts" because they didn't think outside the box." <<<
DVP SAID:
And yet at the end of this day (like all other days since the HSCA
final report was published in early 1979), we're still left with the
conclusions of the TWENTY or so experts who were a part of the HSCA's
Photographic Panel, with those conclusions being:
"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays
were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that
they had not been altered in any manner." -- 7 HSCA 41 [linked below]
DOUG HORNE SAID:
>>> "Quoting old findings which did not employ optical densitometry as an analytical technique does NOT discredit his [Dr. Mantik's] work, it is simply an intellectually dishonest way of attempting to ignore it." <<<
DVP SAID:
I'm certainly not alone in my disagreements with Dr. Mantik. Many
other people also strongly disagree with Dr. Mantik's conclusions
regarding the photographs and X-rays, and also disagree with his
notion that some conspirator(s) had a desire to "plant" a "6.5-
millimeter object" onto one of JFK's X-rays after the autopsy, which
is a notion that defies logic from all sensible points-of-view (mainly
because it was so utterly UNNECESSARY AND SUPERFLUOUS).
But Dr. David Mantik doesn't care about Occam and his handy (and
usually accurate) razor. Instead of applying some measure of logic and
common sense (and Occam) to the controversial matters surrounding
JFK's murder, Dr. Mantik (and you) would rather peddle impossible-to-
prove theories for years on end.
And, of course, there will always be somebody out there in fantasy-
land who will be ready to listen to the impossible-to-prove theories
of conspiracy theorists like Doug Horne and David Mantik. Such is the
way with the world.
DOUG HORNE SAID:
>>> "Hopefully, your attempts to dissuade people from reading my book will backfire, and badly. All of your concerns are addressed and countered, more than adequately, in my book, for those who are curious and have an open mind." <<<
DVP SAID:
I'm not attempting to "dissuade" anyone from reading your 5 volumes of
nonsense, Doug. Not at all. Hopefully many people will buy your books.
And among those people who buy them there will certainly be a decent-
sized percentage of logical and reasonable folks (like me) who know
beyond any and all doubt that none of the over-the-top theories that
you purport as being true and valid in your book series entitled
"Inside The Assassination Records Review Board" can possibly be
accurate...because the stuff you think happened in November 1963 is
just (to put it bluntly) too ridiculous to consider believing for more
than three seconds.
DOUG HORNE SAID:
>>> "Have a nice day. And thank you for attracting more attention to my book. Surely, anyone reading this debate in the [Amazon.com] comments section will now want to buy it, to see what this is all about---so they can make their own assessments." <<<
DVP SAID:
Yeah, if only for the many belly-laughs that your impossible-to-prove
conspiracy theories will undoubtedly elicit from the people reading
your books.
But good luck selling them anyway.
Have a nice day.
ADDENDUM:
Let's just take a quick (but by no means comprehensive) inventory of a
few of the insane and crazy things that Mr. Douglas P. Horne believes
happened with respect to the death of the 35th U.S. Chief Executive.
And keep in mind that Mr. Horne thinks that ALL of these things
definitely occurred in connection with JFK's assassination, and this
short list is probably only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to
the crazy conspiracy-oriented things that Mr. Horne puts his faith in.
Back in the world of sanity and REALITY, however, in order to believe
that even ONE of the following things is actually true, a person has
no choice but to place his faith in something that is really, really
silly:
1.) Doug Horne believes that President Kennedy's bullet wounds were
"altered" by Dr. James Joseph Humes at Bethesda Naval Hospital on the
night of November 22, 1963, with the President's wounds being altered
by Humes before the start of the official autopsy on JFK's body.
2.) Doug Horne believes that there were TWO separate brain
examinations performed by the autopsists in late November 1963, with
one of these supplementary brain exams being performed on a brain that
was NOT John F. Kennedy's brain. And the second brain exam was
apparently done on a brain that was WAY TOO BIG to even be JFK's own
brain. (The plotters/cover-up agents involved in this silliness
evidently had no brains at all in any of their own heads, because this
craziness is BEYOND silly and stupid. It's utterly insane, as is #1
above, of course.)
3.) Doug Horne believes that the Zapruder Film has been altered. And
Horne believes the film was faked/altered/manipulated despite the fact
that we know that the original film, both BEFORE and immediately AFTER
it was developed and copied in Dallas on 11/22/63, was never out of
the sight of Abraham Zapruder and/or Zapruder's business partner,
Erwin Schwartz. But maybe Mr. Horne would like to pretend that
ordinary Dallas citizens like Zapruder and Schwartz were also part of
the plot to conceal all of the best evidence from the eyes of the
American public immediately after JFK was shot.
4.) Doug Horne believes that multiple X-rays of JFK's head have been
faked/altered.
The above short list, as I mentioned, is probably only a
representative sampling of the ridiculous and impossible things that
Mr. Horne believes regarding the John F. Kennedy murder case, with the
above four items being things that I jotted down after listening to
Horne's appearance on "Black Op Radio" on December 10, 2009 [linked
below].
http://www.BlackOpRadio.com/black452a.ram
http://www.BlackOpRadio.com/black452b.ram
I'll close this post with some additional excellent quotes from the
master of CS&L [Common Sense & Logic], Vince Bugliosi:
"Before Doug Horne, the main beef that most conspiracy theorists
had with the autopsy surgeons was their alleged incompetence. But
thirty-five years after the assassination, Horne showed all these
naive, whippersnapper conspiracy theorists a thing or two. Humes and
Boswell weren't incompetent. They were criminals and co-conspirators.
"One would think that Horne would be ashamed of himself for
writing the memorandum he did. But to the contrary, he is very
proud. ....
"A great number of nuts have kept pumping out conspiracy
theories for years. But these are private nuts, on the outside as it
were. But when someone like Horne, working for an official review
board of the federal government, someone we expect to be responsible,
can author a document that couldn't possibly be any sillier or
transparently irresponsible, then unfortunately we know that the
notion of a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination will be alive and
well until the crack of doom.
"I suppose it is a given that there will be other Doug Hornes
who will breast-feed the conspiracy loonies for generations to come
with their special lactations of bilge, blather, and bunk.
"One wants to take earnest, well-intentioned, and intelligent
people like Drs. David Mantik and Gary Aguilar seriously, even though
neither of them are pathologists. But when they take someone like Doug
Horne seriously, and accept his outrageous and patently false theory
as completely valid, it becomes much more difficult to take them
seriously." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 435-444 of "Reclaiming History"
To read more of Mr. Bugliosi's common-sense debunking of Doug Horne's
silliness, go to the top link below:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1d034f32416ff7b6
http://www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com
http://www.Blogger.com/profile/12501570830179992520
David Von Pein
December 19, 2009
David Von Pein
Sure enough, by glancing at just a few of the pages of Horne's five
volumes provided for free by Amazon.com, I found several more things
to add to the list of "Ridiculous Things That Doug Horne Believes With
Respect To JFK's Assassination". Let's take an another inventory (this
is in addition to the four insane items that I already outlined in the
article linked above):
1.) Doug Horne believes that JFK's body arrived at Bethesda Naval
Hospital in a cheap "shipping casket".
2.) Doug Horne believes that JFK arrived at Bethesda inside a body
bag.
3.) Doug Horne believes that the expensive ornamental casket that was
taken off of Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base was "empty".
4.) Doug Horne believes that "corrupt individuals within the U.S.
Secret Service were responsible not only for the security stripping of
President Kennedy's Dallas motorcade...but that the Secret Service was
integrally involved in the physical coverup of bullet damage to the
Presidential limousine which, if left in its damaged condition
immediately following the assassination, would have provided
incontrovertible proof that the limousine's occupants were subjected
to ambush by crossfire in Dealey Plaza, and that President Kennedy was
therefore assassinated by a conspiracy" [Horne; page 1379].
5.) Doug Horne, also on page 1379 of his book (Volume 5) suggests that
Governor John Connally was intimately involved in planning the
motorcade route through Dallas so that JFK "would have to pass through
the dangerous kill zone on Elm Street in Dealey Plaza" [Horne; page
1379].
And the only possible inference I can see from that statement made by
Horne on page 1379 is that Horne believes that Governor Connally was
an integral part of a plot to murder John F. Kennedy in Dallas -- even
though Connally HIMSELF rode in the very same car as JFK and was in a
direct line of fire when the bullets started flying in Dealey Plaza
(with Connally, of course, being shot and nearly killed himself during
the shooting).
And I saved the best one for last here (this one's a real dilly):
6.) Doug Horne said this on page 1654 of "Inside The ARRB":
"One reality that is undeniable is that Lee Harvey Oswald DID
NOT KILL PRESIDENT KENNEDY, as proven by George O'Toole in
1975." [Emphasis is Horne's.]
For those who might not recall who George O'Toole is -- O'Toole is the
kook who utilized a machine known as a "Psychological Stress
Evaluator" to determine that Lee Oswald was positively telling the
truth when he told the press (and the world) that he was merely "a
patsy" and that he had not shot President Kennedy.
And O'Toole's "PSE" evaluation of Oswald's oral statements made while
LHO was in custody in Dallas is apparently the BEST evidence that Mr.
Horne can come up with to back up his belief that "Lee Harvey Oswald
did not kill President Kennedy".*
* = Along with O'Toole's "PSE" tests, Horne also states on page 1654
of his book (in Volume 5) that the other of the "two lines of
evidence" that have "convinced me, more than any others, that Lee
Harvey Oswald did not assassinate President Kennedy" [Horne; page
1654], is the negative result of the paraffin test that was conducted
on Oswald's cheek.
Horne, of course, undoubtedly is aware of the fact that the FBI did a
test with Oswald's rifle after the assassination which proved that a
negative paraffin result on a gunman's cheek does not prove that the
person being tested did NOT fire a rifle, with the FBI agent who fired
Oswald's rifle testing NEGATIVE for nitrates on both his hands AND his
cheek.
I'm guessing that Horne, however, probably thinks that that FBI test
was merely a sham and a total lie. After all, nobody in officialdom
can be trusted to ever tell the truth. Right, Doug?
When does Doug Horne's laundry list of insane beliefs cease, you might
be asking?
Beats me.
I only read a few pages (for free) at Amazon.com. And just look at the
list of craziness I was able to gather from just that very short
reading.
Just imagine how long my list would be if I had plopped down the
outrageous sum of $84.35 [it's now up to $125, as of Feb. 23, 2010] to
purchase all 2,000+ pages of Horne's fanciful flight into delirium.
David Von Pein
December 21, 2009
j leyden
Well, thank the Good Lord. It's over. Now we can close this silly NG
down. And, Ben, you might also want rto post this on AAJ so they can
pull the shutters there,too. Oh, that's right, you're afraid to post
on AAJ. Too bad.
JGL
curtjester1
worshippers here, Richard. They'll start in with the kook dance.
Limbaugh is so far right that he probably rooted for JFK's demise. I
think Holmes is even more cockeyed right than that....lol.
CJ
> > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
aeffects
> On Feb 22, 9:37 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > hear - hear!
>
> Horne drives a stake (it sounds like) into the heart of Healy's hero,
> 9/11 "Truther" and lunar landings denier Jim Fetzer, and the trained
> seal Healy immediately slaps his fins and barks a "hear hear!"
shithead you need to shave those legs again.... LMFAO! Your worthy of
nothing else around here, now go find a few seniors you can ripoff
selling reverse mortgages too...
<snip the remaining lone nut kooktard whining>
aeffects
sure enough, save it David lone nutter-kooktard Von Pein, we'll wait
till HBO contract writers parse Horne's 5 volumes..... your
heroworships 20 years of work is in the toilet...
aeffects
> On Feb 22, 9:23 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>
> Well, thank the Good Lord. It's over. Now we can close this silly NG
> down.
WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
<snip>
Ben Holmes
Well... it's clear that there's a few more kooks than the two I was thinking of.
Chuck Schuyler
Running again, I see.
Ben Holmes
lazu...@webtv.net says...
And, since he relies on the evidence, and has a keen analytical mind - he fits
the evidence together in a way that's never been done before... of course, he
also had access to a great deal of evidence that no-one else did before.
And unlike LNT'ers and trolls - he wanted to EXPLAIN the evidence, not
pigeonhole it.
j leyden
> WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
"Stand By Your Man."
JGL
Bud
> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal clear to
> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
> reasonable
As judged by a retard who finds the idea of an impossibly massive
conspiracy as being reasonable.
>and understandable explanations for all of the medical evidence
> (which I think is the key to solving this).
The medical evidence is a Rorschach test. The results are in, and
you and Horne are retarded.
> Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old stuff on
> Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume set more highly!
Ben is pleased with his purchase of magic beans.
> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this news forum
> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>
> "Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia and the
> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe we
> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believe that
> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off by the
> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the buildings.
This is not a false association, a false association would be if JFK
researchers were associated with sane people.
> ...
>
> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on the moon
> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause. But
> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL Germans
> were Nazis -
Just Nazi supporters.
>actually, only a small proportion of them were. Most JFK
> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality,
Where do they post?
>who are
> simply very intolerant of lies -
Is that why they tell so many, to build up a tolerance?
>who are persuaded that we must understand our
> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future
> transgressions (such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
> avoided. (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
> don't know where you are going.) Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
> on the moon from 1969-1972,
But all people who believe we didn`t land on the moon probably
believe that Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. You should ask
yourself why it is that your position attracts the lunatics.
>and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings.
You JFK conspiracy kooks paved the way for the 9-11 Truthers. They
use the same "this must mean this" approach perfected by the KFK
conspiracy retards.
> Future
> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers by
> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and which
> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
Man the clocktowers!
> If there
> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' by the
> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
No it won`t. People have a natural tendency to group like things
together.
Steve
>
> - Show quoted text -
To DVP: I find it interesting that none of the nuts on this site
responded to Horne's beliefs you pointed out. They simply refer to
peripheral issues that don't deal directly with Horne's nutty claims.
This is to be expected. It is clear that since "Reclaiming History"
was released the nuts have been frantic for a messiah to deliver an
opposing message. For them to hitch their wagons to Horne's
ridiculous work is evidence of the desperate state the conspiracy
assylum is in following the total destruction their theories received
in "Reclaiming History". I'll bet David Lifton is boiling mad that
Horne has hijacked much of his ridiculous 1980 theory of pre-autopsy
body alteration and is the "Conspiracy Flavor of the Month." By the
way, how many respected medical experts agree with Horne's pre-autopsy
body alteration theory?
aeffects
> On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> "Stand By Your Man."
focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
solved. Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
robcap...@netscape.com
> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal clear to
> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
> reasonable and understandable explanations for all of the medical evidence
> (which I think is the key to solving this).
> Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old stuff on
> Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume set more highly!
Of course Ben "I hog all the information for myself" Holmes won't list
the main points for us! He is supposedly here for the truth of JFK's
death and "educating the lurkers" yet he will just say Horne has
pieced it all together, but see you later!
LOL!!
> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this news forum
> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>
> "Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia and the
> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe we
> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believe that
> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off by the
> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the buildings.
So Horne's belief system is important to type out, but NOT the
solutions to the JFK murder he has discovered, huh?
Ben is NOT about sharing the truth in this case, he is here to lie and
attack real CTers!
I for one have NEVER denied we have gone to the moon (in fact I
believe we have gone to Mars and other planets too), I have just said
I have questions about the televised landing on July 20, 1969!
As for 9/11, Horne needs to get up to speed as nearly 800 of the
world's top engineers and scientists have said the official story is
bunk!
> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on the moon
> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause.
What does one have to to do with the other? I wholeheartedly support
Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his about Vietnam
I do NOT support! As long as someone is NOT outright lying (as you
do) who cares what they think about other issues?? Do you believe
JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
> But
> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL Germans
> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were.
Very true, most research has shown it was only about 10% of the
people, but guess what?? THEY WERE THE 10% THAT COUNTED! Just like
ONLY 10% endorse the ridiculous lie about LHO!
When you have the power structure on board YOU don't need the large
numbers to be effective.
> Most JFK
> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality, who are
> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must understand our
> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future transgressions
(such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
> avoided.
LOL! He knows Walt!! LOL!! Ben and Walt are two of the BIGGEST LIARS
on here in regards to the evidence of this case!
LOL!!
BTW, it is TOO LATE I fear as IDIOTS LIKE YOU BELIEVE EVERYTHING THE
GOVERNMENT TELLS THEM in regards to every event beyond the Kennedy
assassinations!
> (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
> don't know where you are going.)
He who controls and shapes the past, controls and shapes the present.
> Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
> on the moon from 1969-1972,
What does that have to do with the JFK case? Why must JFK researchers
be tied to another event?
> and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings.
19 equals a conspiracy. I guess Ben really thinks Christopher
Columbus discovered America too! LOL!!
> Future
> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers by
> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and which
> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
Sure, that is why YOU call CTers "kooks" when they speak the truth.
YOU are the epitome of what the government, media and academia do!
> If there
> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' by the
> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
Why can't JFK researchers simply say, "I have not fully investigated
the moon landings or 9/11?" What do the three events have in common??
One thing they have in common is called "Operations Northwoods"
lurkers. Go read about it as this insane plan was submitted to JFK
and he rejected it. See if any part of it sounds like 9/11. Make up
your own minds.
> The obvious
> irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the government claims
> to be true (which underlies the skepticism of those who don't believe we landed
> on the moon, and of those who disbelieve the official explanations of 9/11) is a
> sad and undeniable legacy of the massive coverup surrounding President Kennedy's
> assassination in 1963, and of the coverups of the assassinations of Martin
> Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The official lies that surround those
> three events have had a very corrosive effect upon our trust in government."
> Doug Horne, pgs 1801-1802.
Doug Horne should read the "THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A CITIZEN IN A
DEMOCRACY" again as it is the RIGHT of all citizens, nay a DUTY, to
question the information you are given. ONLY idiots accept everything
they are told without doubt.
When one looks at all the lies that have been told in our world's
history, why would anyone believe what they are told without
researching it for themselves?
If we really did land on the moon on 7/20/69 and 19 Muslim terrorists
really did cause 9/11 all by themselves, why is everyone worried about
us questioning some of the information? The truth has no fear from
questions from what I have been taught.
I guess Horne had to say this to get his book published.
> Doug Horne also described a rather interesting 'disinfo' campaign that was waged
> against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the historical
> facts.
They do this to everyone who tells the truth, but one has to be
careful, as many disinfo agents spread some truth in with thier lies.
I.E. YOU!
> He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions made me want
> to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist bent of the
> 5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
Of course he spends time on nonsense and does NOT outline a single
point of Horne's research for us!
j leyden
> focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> solved. Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
>
Hey, you got me all wrong, healy/aeffects. I think it's "sweet" that
you Stand By Your Man.
JGL
> On Feb 23, 11:02�am, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > <snip>- Hide quoted text -
Bud
>
> > On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> > When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> > aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> > "Stand By Your Man."
>
> focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> solved.
So who was the murderer? Professor Plum?
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Feb 22, 9:23=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> Well, I've finally slogged my way though the last volume (and trust me, V=
>ol. 5
>> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal cl=
>ear to
>> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
>e
>> (which I think is the key to solving this).
>
>> Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old
>> stuff on Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume
>> set more highly!
>
>Of course Ben "I hog all the information for myself" Holmes won't list
>the main points for us!
I can't begin to list the people who've posted reviews on currently available
books... Laz comes to mind as one who frequently does - yet I've *NEVER* seen
you demand of him what you're demanding now.
Doug Horne spent 5 long volumes explaining what he's explained... even the
simpliest point - the one for which Doug is rightfully congratulated for - his
discovery that there were *TWO* brain exams... took chapters of words to
explain...
Why would I take the time to do so here?
So tell us, why am I required to do what you've demanded of no-one else?
>He is supposedly here for the truth of JFK's
>death and "educating the lurkers" yet he will just say Horne has
>pieced it all together, but see you later!
Yep... pretty much what anyone does with a book review... explain why they think
it's worth it to buy it - it gives other people a yardstick to judge whether
they want to spend the money or not.
>> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this new=
>s forum
>> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>>
>> "Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia an=
>d the
>> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe=
> we
>> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believ=
>e that
>> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off b=
>y the
>> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the bui=
>ldings.
>
>So Horne's belief system is important to type out, but NOT the
>solutions to the JFK murder he has discovered, huh?
Yep... I knew you'd hate it.
<moderated>
>I for one have NEVER denied we have gone to the moon (in fact I
>believe we have gone to Mars and other planets too), I have just said
>I have questions about the televised landing on July 20, 1969!
>
>As for 9/11, Horne needs to get up to speed as nearly 800 of the
>world's top engineers and scientists have said the official story is
>bunk!
>
>> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on th=
>e moon
>> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause.
>
>What does one have to to do with the other?
Only a kook can't figure it out.
>I wholeheartedly support
>Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his about Vietnam
>I do NOT support!
Not an accurate analogy by a long shot.
Which, of course, merely illustrates that you didn't understand Doug's point.
>As long as someone is NOT outright lying <moderated> who cares what
>they think about other issues??
The fact that you can't see this illustrates what a kook you are.
>Do you believe
>JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
Why would I think that???
>> But
>> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL =
>Germans
>> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were.
>
>Very true, most research has shown it was only about 10% of the
>people, but guess what?? THEY WERE THE 10% THAT COUNTED! Just like
>ONLY 10% endorse the ridiculous lie about LHO!
>
>When you have the power structure on board YOU don't need the large
>numbers to be effective.
>
>> Most JFK
>> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality, w=
>ho are
>> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must understan=
>d our
>> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future=
> transgressions
>(such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
>> avoided.
<moderated>
>> (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
>> don't know where you are going.)
>
>He who controls and shapes the past, controls and shapes the present.
>
>> Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
>> on the moon from 1969-1972,
>
>What does that have to do with the JFK case? Why must JFK researchers
>be tied to another event?
We realize you don't understand.
>> and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
>> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings.
<moderated>
>> Future
>> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers=
> by
>> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and=
> which
>> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
<moderated>
>> If there
>> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' =
>by the
>> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
>
>Why can't JFK researchers simply say, "I have not fully investigated
>the moon landings or 9/11?" What do the three events have in common??
Nothing. (Other than the government, of course)
>One thing they have in common is called "Operations Northwoods"
>lurkers. Go read about it as this insane plan was submitted to JFK
>and he rejected it. See if any part of it sounds like 9/11. Make up
>your own minds.
>
>> The obvious
>> irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the government =
>claims
>> to be true (which underlies the skepticism of those who don't believe we =
>landed
>> on the moon, and of those who disbelieve the official explanations of 9/1=
>1) is a
>> sad and undeniable legacy of the massive coverup surrounding President Ke=
>nnedy's
>> assassination in 1963, and of the coverups of the assassinations of Marti=
>n
>> Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The official lies that surroun=
>d those
>> three events have had a very corrosive effect upon our trust in governmen=
>t."
>> Doug Horne, pgs 1801-1802.
>
>Doug Horne should read the "THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A CITIZEN IN A
>DEMOCRACY" again as it is the RIGHT of all citizens, nay a DUTY, to
>question the information you are given. ONLY idiots accept everything
>they are told without doubt.
Do you presume that he's doing this?
>When one looks at all the lies that have been told in our world's
>history, why would anyone believe what they are told without
>researching it for themselves?
Do you presume that people have not?
>If we really did land on the moon on 7/20/69 and 19 Muslim terrorists
>really did cause 9/11 all by themselves, why is everyone worried about
>us questioning some of the information?
Do you presume that someone is?
>The truth has no fear from
>questions from what I have been taught.
>
>I guess Horne had to say this to get his book published.
LOL!!
>> Doug Horne also described a rather interesting 'disinfo' campaign that wa=
>s waged
>> against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the histori=
>cal
>> facts.
>
>They do this to everyone who tells the truth, but one has to be
>careful, as many disinfo agents spread some truth in with thier lies.
<moderated>
>> He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions made =
>me want
>> to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist bent=
> of the
>> 5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
<moderated>
I'm guessing that you aren't going to spend the $85...
aeffects
> On Feb 23, 3:43 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 23, 11:02 am, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> > > When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> > > aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> > > "Stand By Your Man."
>
> > focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> > solved.
>
> So who was the murderer? Professor Plum?
>
> >Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
ahh.... my lone nut lovelies, I speak you jump! LIFE is good!
Bud
> On Feb 23, 4:57 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 3:43 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 23, 11:02 am, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> > > > When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> > > > aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> > > > "Stand By Your Man."
>
> > > focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> > > solved.
>
> > So who was the murderer? Professor Plum?
>
> > >Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
>
> ahh.... my lone nut lovelies, I speak you jump! LIFE is good!
Aren`t you even interested, stoner? Ben said that Horne solved the
case, how can you solve a whodunnit without naming who done it?
bigdog
> >>> "Anyone who can't find $85 for the set..." <<<
>
> Nope. It's up to $125 now for Horne's 5-volume set of pure fantasy (as
> of 2/22/10 anyway):
>
$125 for Doug Horne's repackaging of David Lifton's fair tale? WOW!!!
WHAT A DEAL!!! I wonder if he has to share the royalties with Lifton.
Lifton, Horne, and the horde of conspiracy authors have proven one
thing over the last 4 decades:
"A fool and his money are soon parted".
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <3acec5cc-accc-407d-b366-49615166c...@t42g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 22, 9:23=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >> Well, I've finally slogged my way though the last volume (and trust me, V=
> >ol. 5
> >> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal cl=
> >ear to
> >> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provides
> >> reasonable and understandable explanations for all of the medical evidenc=
> >e
> >> (which I think is the key to solving this).
>
> >> Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old
> >> stuff on Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume
> >> set more highly!
>
> >Of course Ben "I hog all the information for myself" Holmes won't list
> >the main points for us!
>
> I can't begin to list the people who've posted reviews on currently available
> books... Laz comes to mind as one who frequently does - yet I've *NEVER* seen
> you demand of him what you're demanding now.
YOU are NOT "reviewing a book" Ben! YOU said he "pieced it all
together" (medical evidence) so is it upsurd to ask you to list this
CONCLUSION?
Laz does NOT usualy say the book he is mentioning "SOLVED THE CASE" or
solved a part of the case, but YOU did!
> Doug Horne spent 5 long volumes explaining what he's explained... even the
> simpliest point - the one for which Doug is rightfully congratulated for - his
> discovery that there were *TWO* brain exams... took chapters of words to
> explain...
We know about that Ben, why can't YOU highlight (in bullet point form)
the points he made throughout the book?? Or did YOU forget them
already?
> Why would I take the time to do so here?
So you blow a horn and then run from educating lurkers with
information. What else should we expect from a man who censors posts?
> So tell us, why am I required to do what you've demanded of no-one else?
NO one else has proclaimed a book "put all the pieces together". Why
not list it for us then?
Why are you afraid to LIST OR CITE ANYTHING?
> >He is supposedly here for the truth of JFK's
> >death and "educating the lurkers" yet he will just say Horne has
> >pieced it all together, but see you later!
>
> Yep... pretty much what anyone does with a book review... explain why they think
> it's worth it to buy it
YOU didn't explain why it is good, that is the point! YOU simply said
it was! What book review provides NO samples from the book???
> - it gives other people a yardstick to judge whether
> they want to spend the money or not.
Based on what you wrote it does NOT as we are talking about $125.00
U.S. here! YOU gave us nothing to determine whether it is worth while
or not. I would assume much of this has been released before to
through the AARB.
> >> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this new=
> >s forum
> >> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>
> >> "Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia an=
> >d the
> >> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't believe=
> > we
> >> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who believ=
> >e that
> >> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set off b=
> >y the
> >> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the bui=
> >ldings.
>
> >So Horne's belief system is important to type out, but NOT the
> >solutions to the JFK murder he has discovered, huh?
>
> Yep... I knew you'd hate it.
So much for educating the lurkers, huh? Just ANOTHER LIE by Ben!
> <moderated>
Ben calls others kooks while he CENSORS THEIR WORDS!
> >I for one have NEVER denied we have gone to the moon (in fact I
> >believe we have gone to Mars and other planets too), I have just said
> >I have questions about the televised landing on July 20, 1969!
>
> >As for 9/11, Horne needs to get up to speed as nearly 800 of the
> >world's top engineers and scientists have said the official story is
> >bunk!
>
> >> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on th=
> >e moon
> >> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our cause.
>
> >What does one have to to do with the other?
>
> Only a kook can't figure it out.
That is why I asked YOU!
> >I wholeheartedly support
> >Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his about Vietnam
> >I do NOT support!
>
> Not an accurate analogy by a long shot.
So you now can speak for other people's opinons?
> Which, of course, merely illustrates that you didn't understand Doug's point.
I get his point, it is the same INSANE point you make! YOU want to
believe JFK, Lincoln and RFK died as a result of a conspiracy but that
NO OTHER CONSPIRACY EVER HAPPENED!
He has to lie to get his book published and to sell them, what is YOUR
excuse?
> >As long as someone is NOT outright lying <moderated> who cares what
> >they think about other issues??
>
> The fact that you can't see this illustrates what a kook you are.
NO, the fact you claim a conspiracy exists in this case due to faulty
evidence, but then claim everything is kosher in others cases where
the evidence is equally faulty only proves to me you were hired ONLY
TO BE A DISINFO AGENT FOR THIS TOPIC!
> >Do you believe
> >JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
>
> Why would I think that???
YOU don't seem to believe in any other that folks have mentioned since
I was here beyond JFK, RFK and Lincoln. How come?
> >> But
> >> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that ALL =
> >Germans
> >> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were.
>
> >Very true, most research has shown it was only about 10% of the
> >people, but guess what?? THEY WERE THE 10% THAT COUNTED! Just like
> >ONLY 10% endorse the ridiculous lie about LHO!
>
> >When you have the power structure on board YOU don't need the large
> >numbers to be effective.
>
> >> Most JFK
> >> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality, w=
> >ho are
> >> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must understan=
> >d our
> >> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if future=
> > transgressions
> >(such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
> >> avoided.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
> >> don't know where you are going.)
>
> >He who controls and shapes the past, controls and shapes the present.
>
> >> Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
> >> on the moon from 1969-1972,
>
> >What does that have to do with the JFK case? Why must JFK researchers
> >be tied to another event?
>
> We realize you don't understand.
YOU are the one that is lying to make your point...there is no rule
that JFK researchers have to believe anything about the other events
to be credible.
> >> and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
> >> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> Future
> >> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK researchers=
> > by
> >> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, and=
> > which
> >> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> If there
> >> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by association' =
> >by the
> >> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
>
> >Why can't JFK researchers simply say, "I have not fully investigated
> >the moon landings or 9/11?" What do the three events have in common??
>
> Nothing. (Other than the government, of course)
So you believe everything you are told beyond JFK's, RFK's and
Lincoln's murders?
YOU admitted you had NOT even studied the 9/11 event yet YOU said
anyone who did not buy the official theory was a "kook!"
Who knows, but the better question is, what took him so long to write
this book? I mean the AARB ended in 1998!
Could a green light now be activated since we are moving towards a
time when the JFK case was soooo long ago they figure the truth can't
hurt them?
Who knows, but his book did NOT need these silly comments as it was
about the JFK case. It was done to get approval for his book
obviously!
Shills like you eat it up to!
> >When one looks at all the lies that have been told in our world's
> >history, why would anyone believe what they are told without
> >researching it for themselves?
>
> Do you presume that people have not?
YOU admitted to NOT studying 9/11 yet you called me and CJ kooks for
having questions about the official explanation! LOL!!
> >If we really did land on the moon on 7/20/69 and 19 Muslim terrorists
> >really did cause 9/11 all by themselves, why is everyone worried about
> >us questioning some of the information?
>
> Do you presume that someone is?
YOU are liar, as you called us liars and kooks!
> >The truth has no fear from
> >questions from what I have been taught.
>
> >I guess Horne had to say this to get his book published.
>
> LOL!!
The truth is usually unbelievable and funny to many liars!
> >> Doug Horne also described a rather interesting 'disinfo' campaign that wa=
> >s waged
> >> against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the histori=
> >cal
> >> facts.
>
> >They do this to everyone who tells the truth, but one has to be
> >careful, as many disinfo agents spread some truth in with thier lies.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions made =
> >me want
> >> to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist bent=
> > of the
> >> 5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> I'm guessing that you aren't going to spend the $85...
Ben had to run from my words and remove them instead of just
highlighting why this book "put all the pieces together" for us! This
says a lot about his character!
Coondog
wrote:
> On Feb 22, 9:23 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>
>
> What does one have to to do with the other? I wholeheartedly support
> Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his aboutVietnam
> I do NOT support! As long as someone is NOT outright lying (as you
> do) who cares what they think about other issues?? Do you believe
> JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
>
Cappie, it warms my heart that you are able to see through Mark Lane’s
bullshit on Vietnam. Well done son!
But doesn’t it worry you that a person that disregards the truth on
one subject (Lane on Vietnam) wouldn’t be predisposed to being
dishonest about other subjects. It causes me to worry.
But anyway, I’m so proud of you showing some common sense!
Bill Clarke
aeffects
> On Feb 24, 5:44 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 4:57 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 23, 3:43 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 23, 11:02 am, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> > > > > When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> > > > > aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> > > > > "Stand By Your Man."
>
> > > > focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> > > > solved.
>
> > > So who was the murderer? Professor Plum?
>
> > > >Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
>
> > ahh.... my lone nut lovelies, I speak you jump! LIFE is good!
>
> Aren`t you even interested, stoner?
shithead its simple.... simply wind up that tinfoil beanie of yours,
get back under the Skully Street glass pyramid, do a few simple UMM's,
wait 30 seconds for that DVP likeness to materialize in front of you,
don those well worn kneepads of yours -- the GET busy....
Ben said that Horne solved the
> case, how can you solve a whodunnit without naming who done it?
solved 45 years ago ya fucking dipshit... gotta put that crack pipe
down for at least 24 hours, the answer is written in the ethers.....
The case IS solved, the details are emerging at just the right pace, a
pace that's driving the lone nut trolls BONKERS (withOUT their
collective bong of course)
Now you continue to keep us entertained... ya gotta do something for
that monthly stipend...
Where are the Red Sox going this year, Dudster? We want the inside
scoop, ya gotta be worth something around here...
Ben Holmes
Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply post a
book review!
In article <20aeb248-117f-4b3b...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Feb 23, 8:07=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <3acec5cc-accc-407d-b366-49615166c...@t42g2000vbt.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Feb 22, 9:23=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> Well, I've finally slogged my way though the last volume (and trust me=
>, V=3D
>> >ol. 5
>> >> is the slowest of the volumes to get through!), and what seems crystal=
> cl=3D
>> >ear to
>> >> me is that Doug Horne has been able to piece it all together. He provi=
>des
>> >> reasonable and understandable explanations for all of the medical evid=
>enc=3D
>> >e
>> >> (which I think is the key to solving this).
>>
>> >> Anyone who can't find $85 for the set, should sell some of their old
>> >> stuff on Ebay until they have it... I can't recommend this 5 volume
>> >> set more highly!
>>
>> >Of course Ben "I hog all the information for myself" Holmes won't list
>> >the main points for us!
>>
>> I can't begin to list the people who've posted reviews on currently
>> available books... Laz comes to mind as one who frequently does - yet
>> I've *NEVER* seen you demand of him what you're demanding now.
>
>YOU are NOT "reviewing a book" Ben!
Sorry moron, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing.
Why do you refuse to demand that Laz provide details from books?
>YOU said he "pieced it all
>together" (medical evidence) so is it upsurd to ask you to list this
>CONCLUSION?
Yep.
>Laz does NOT usualy say the book he is mentioning "SOLVED THE CASE" or
>solved a part of the case, but YOU did!
Nor does Laz ever mention Santa Claus wearing red.
>> Doug Horne spent 5 long volumes explaining what he's explained... even the
>> simpliest point - the one for which Doug is rightfully congratulated
>> for - his discovery that there were *TWO* brain exams... took chapters
>> of words to explain...
>
>We know about that Ben, why can't YOU highlight (in bullet point form)
>the points he made throughout the book?? Or did YOU forget them
>already?
Nope. Buy the 5 volumes, and read for yourself.
>> Why would I take the time to do so here?
>
>So you blow a horn and then run from educating lurkers with
>information. What else should we expect from a man who censors posts?
Why does no-one else get the stalker treatment, kook?
>> So tell us, why am I required to do what you've demanded of no-one else?
>
>NO one else has proclaimed a book "put all the pieces together". Why
>not list it for us then?
That's what reviews do, stupid. They give you the reviewer's opinion of the
book.
<moderated>
>> >He is supposedly here for the truth of JFK's
>> >death and "educating the lurkers" yet he will just say Horne has
>> >pieced it all together, but see you later!
>>
>> Yep... pretty much what anyone does with a book review... explain why
>> they think it's worth it to buy it
>
>YOU didn't explain why it is good,
LOL!!!
>that is the point! YOU simply said
>it was! What book review provides NO samples from the book???
Actually, I did. That's probably what started your stalking on this topic.
>> - it gives other people a yardstick to judge whether
>> they want to spend the money or not.
>
>Based on what you wrote it does NOT as we are talking about $125.00
>U.S. here!
Who cares whether you trust my judgment or not?
Ask someone else. Don't go complaining because I refuse to quote anything more
out of the 5 volumes than I've already done.
>YOU gave us nothing to determine whether it is worth while
>or not.
That's your opinion... why do you blame *me* for your opinion?
>I would assume much of this has been released before to
>through the AARB.
>
>> >> One interested bit I found near the end, seems quite relevant to this =
>new=3D
>> >s forum
>> >> (and will be hated by at least two people here):
>>
>> >> "Another pet peeve I have is the false association by many in academia=
> an=3D
>> >d the
>> >> media of all JFK assassination researchers with persons who don't beli=
>eve=3D
>> > we
>> >> landed on the moon six times (from 1969-1972); or with persons who bel=
>iev=3D
>> >e that
>> >> the 9/11 terrorist attacks were really 'controlled demolitions' set of=
>f b=3D
>> >y the
>> >> government, and were not caused by fanatics flying airplanes into the =
>bui=3D
>> >ldings.
>>
>> >So Horne's belief system is important to type out, but NOT the
>> >solutions to the JFK murder he has discovered, huh?
>>
>> Yep... I knew you'd hate it.
>
>So much for educating the lurkers, huh?
And clearly, I did.
<moderated>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> >I for one have NEVER denied we have gone to the moon (in fact I
>> >believe we have gone to Mars and other planets too), I have just said
>> >I have questions about the televised landing on July 20, 1969!
>>
>> >As for 9/11, Horne needs to get up to speed as nearly 800 of the
>> >world's top engineers and scientists have said the official story is
>> >bunk!
>>
>> >> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on=
> th=3D
>> >e moon
>> >> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our caus=
>e.
>>
>> >What does one have to to do with the other?
>>
>> Only a kook can't figure it out.
<moderated>
>> >I wholeheartedly support
>> >Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his about Vietnam
>> >I do NOT support!
>>
>> Not an accurate analogy by a long shot.
<moderated>
>> Which, of course, merely illustrates that you didn't understand Doug's
>> point.
>
>I get his point, it is the same INSANE point you make! YOU want to
>believe JFK, Lincoln and RFK died as a result of a conspiracy but that
>NO OTHER CONSPIRACY EVER HAPPENED!
Kook, aren't you?
That isn't the point at all.
>He has to lie to get his book published and to sell them,
Yep... now Doug Horne is a "liar". There's no end of 'em, it seems. Anyone who
says a single word that the stalker doesn't like, is labeled a liar.
<moderated>
>> >As long as someone is NOT outright lying <moderated> who cares what
>> >they think about other issues??
>>
>> The fact that you can't see this illustrates what a kook you are.
<moderated>
>> >Do you believe
>> >JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
>>
>> Why would I think that???
>
>YOU don't seem to believe in any other that folks have mentioned since
>I was here beyond JFK, RFK and Lincoln. How come?
Perhaps because this is "Alt.Conspiracy.JFK", and not "Alt.Conspiracies.Kooks"?
>> >> But
>> >> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that A=
>LL =3D
>> >Germans
>> >> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were.
>>
>> >Very true, most research has shown it was only about 10% of the
>> >people, but guess what?? THEY WERE THE 10% THAT COUNTED! =A0Just like
>> >ONLY 10% endorse the ridiculous lie about LHO!
>>
>> >When you have the power structure on board YOU don't need the large
>> >numbers to be effective.
>>
>> >> Most JFK
>> >> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality=
>, w=3D
>> >ho are
>> >> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must unders=
>tan=3D
>> >d our
>> >> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if fut=
>ure=3D
>> > transgressions
>> >(such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
>> >> avoided.
>>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> >> (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
>> >> don't know where you are going.)
>>
>> >He who controls and shapes the past, controls and shapes the present.
>>
>> >> Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
>> >> on the moon from 1969-1972,
>>
>> >What does that have to do with the JFK case? Why must JFK researchers
>> >be tied to another event?
>>
>> We realize you don't understand.
<moderated>
>> >> and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
>> >> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings=
>.
>>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> >> Future
>> >> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK research=
>ers=3D
>> > by
>> >> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, =
>and=3D
>> > which
>> >> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
>>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> >> If there
>> >> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by associatio=
>n' =3D
>> >by the
>> >> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
>>
>> >Why can't JFK researchers simply say, "I have not fully investigated
>> >the moon landings or 9/11?" What do the three events have in common??
>>
>> Nothing. (Other than the government, of course)
>
>So you believe everything you are told beyond JFK's, RFK's and
>Lincoln's murders?
Go to another forum to discuss these OT items.
>YOU admitted you had NOT even studied the 9/11 event yet YOU said
>anyone who did not buy the official theory was a "kook!"
I've never felt the need to study the Flat Earth Society in order to realize
that the world is round.
>> >One thing they have in common is called "Operations Northwoods"
>> >lurkers. =A0Go read about it as this insane plan was submitted to JFK
>> >and he rejected it. =A0See if any part of it sounds like 9/11. =A0Make u=
>p
>> >your own minds.
>>
>> >> The obvious
>> >> irony here is that the overwhelming suspicion of anything the governme=
>nt =3D
>> >claims
>> >> to be true (which underlies the skepticism of those who don't believe =
>we =3D
>> >landed
>> >> on the moon, and of those who disbelieve the official explanations of =
>9/1=3D
>> >1) is a
>> >> sad and undeniable legacy of the massive coverup surrounding President=
> Ke=3D
>> >nnedy's
>> >> assassination in 1963, and of the coverups of the assassinations of Ma=
>rti=3D
>> >n
>> >> Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. The official lies that surr=
>oun=3D
>> >d those
>> >> three events have had a very corrosive effect upon our trust in govern=
>men=3D
>> >t."
>> >> Doug Horne, pgs 1801-1802.
>>
>> >Doug Horne should read the "THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A CITIZEN IN A
>> >DEMOCRACY" again as it is the RIGHT of all citizens, nay a DUTY, to
>> >question the information you are given. ONLY idiots accept everything
>> >they are told without doubt.
>>
>> Do you presume that he's doing this?
>
>Who knows, but the better question is, what took him so long to write
>this book? I mean the AARB ended in 1998!
As I recall, he discusses that.
>Could a green light now be activated since we are moving towards a
>time when the JFK case was soooo long ago they figure the truth can't
>hurt them?
>
>Who knows, but his book did NOT need these silly comments as it was
>about the JFK case. It was done to get approval for his book
>obviously!
Or, of course, it could simply be the truth.
<moderated>
>> >When one looks at all the lies that have been told in our world's
>> >history, why would anyone believe what they are told without
>> >researching it for themselves?
>>
>> Do you presume that people have not?
>
>YOU admitted to NOT studying 9/11 yet you called me and CJ kooks for
>having questions about the official explanation! LOL!!
See above.
>> >If we really did land on the moon on 7/20/69 and 19 Muslim terrorists
>> >really did cause 9/11 all by themselves, why is everyone worried about
>> >us questioning some of the information?
>>
>> Do you presume that someone is?
<moderated>
>> >The truth has no fear from
>> >questions from what I have been taught.
>>
>> >I guess Horne had to say this to get his book published.
>>
>> LOL!!
<moderated>
>> >> Doug Horne also described a rather interesting 'disinfo' campaign that=
> wa=3D
>> >s waged
>> >> against him, and that he was able to avoid by simply checking the hist=
>ori=3D
>> >cal
>> >> facts.
>>
>> >They do this to everyone who tells the truth, but one has to be
>> >careful, as many disinfo agents spread some truth in with thier lies.
>>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> >> He's overwhelmingly a lefty... and sometimes his leftist assertions ma=
>de =3D
>> >me want
>> >> to gag... but as long as you can overcome the rather radical leftist b=
>ent=3D
>> > of the
>> >> 5 volumes (particularly volume 5), it's worth it.
>>
>> <moderated>
<moderated>
>> I'm guessing that you aren't going to spend the $85...
<moderated>
Bud
> On Feb 24, 2:59 am,Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 24, 5:44 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > On Feb 23, 3:43 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 23, 11:02 am, j leyden <JLeyden...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 23, 10:54 am, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > WHAT no troll stipend? Sigh, another lone nut wetdream...
>
> > > > > > When you post on Ben's behalf (five on this thread alone), healy/
> > > > > > aeffects, I can almost hear Tammy Wynette in the background singing
> > > > > > "Stand By Your Man."
>
> > > > > focus there JGL (sic), Doug Horne and the 5 volume set, aka case
> > > > > solved.
>
> > > > So who was the murderer? Professor Plum?
>
> > > > >Now THAT pisses ya off, eh?
>
> > > ahh.... my lone nut lovelies, I speak you jump! LIFE is good!
>
> > Aren`t you even interested, stoner?
>
> shithead its simple.... simply wind up that tinfoil beanie of yours,
> get back under the Skully Street glass pyramid, do a few simple UMM's,
> wait 30 seconds for that DVP likeness to materialize in front of you,
> don those well worn kneepads of yours -- the GET busy....
I`d respond to this, but I have no idea what you just said.
> Ben said that Horne solved the
>
> > case, how can you solve a whodunnit without naming who done it?
>
> solved 45 years ago ya fucking dipshit... gotta put that crack pipe
> down for at least 24 hours, the answer is written in the ethers.....
I was hoping it could be found in Horne`s book. According to Ben,
Horne has solved the case. Who did Horne name as the person who pulled
the trigger?
> The case IS solved,
Great. Who shot Kennedy, we need to get this guy in a court of law
before he dies of old age.
> the details are emerging at just the right pace,
The only thing that is happening is that retards are arranging the
facts of the case in patterns they find pleasing.
> a
> pace that's driving the lone nut trolls BONKERS (withOUT their
> collective bong of course)
The total effect of this is that Ben is out 85 bucks, but his ever-
expanding collection of crackpot conspiracy books has increased by
one. Other than that, nothing.
> Now you continue to keep us entertained... ya gotta do something for
> that monthly stipend...
You can`t even afford Horne`s book, you blow all your money on drugs
and trannies. Contact Horne, maybe he will send you a special edition.
> Where are the Red Sox going this year, Dudster?
I think the Eagles will kill them.
> We want the inside
> scoop, ya gotta be worth something around here...
I have to do something to bring in the crowds, lurkers aren`t coming
here to see Ben and robcap bicker.
robcap...@netscape.com
NO Bill because I know the case too! I do NOT see any lies by Mark
Lane in the JFK case. His mistakes with Vietnam are he seems to have
bought into the "right" and "left" crap many fall for. The truth is
the power controls all sides! JFK did NOT want us in that mess, and
he died for it (along with some other key reasons).
Don't forget, his master piece "Rush To Judgement" was done years
before the Vietnam War really got under way. I did NOT say I though
Lane lied either, I just said I did not agree with him on his take all
the time. YOU shouldn't put words into folks' mouths Bill!
Do you have a keyword HIGHLIGHT PROMPT OR WHAT? I don't see you for
months but if someone types in "Vietnam", there you are!
Who else do you post as?
> But anyway, I’m so proud of you showing some common sense!
YOU are taking it the wrong way as usual Bill. I did NOT say Mark
Lane lied, I said I do not always agree with his opinion!
robcap...@netscape.com
> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply post a
> book review!
How's it feel liar! YOU did this to CTers for years on here, every
post you would follow them around and attack them! YOU would change
the header to read "Liar" or "Coward", so it is time to watch you now
since you lie for the WC's benefit all the time!
> In article <20aeb248-117f-4b3b-bf97-31c303ce9...@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
YOU claimed it did something, and then ran from telling us what! YOU
did NOT include anything but a section YOU knew would cause trouble,
then he is "shocked" I responded! What a con artist he is!
> Why do you refuse to demand that Laz provide details from books?
I don't always read his stuff to be honest, but the few I have read he
did NOT state they SOLVED the case like YOU did!
> >YOU said he "pieced it all
> >together" (medical evidence) so is it upsurd to ask you to list this
> >CONCLUSION?
>
> Yep.
Figures. All hot air and no substance as usual!
> >Laz does NOT usualy say the book he is mentioning "SOLVED THE CASE" or
> >solved a part of the case, but YOU did!
>
> Nor does Laz ever mention Santa Claus wearing red.
YOU must find Santa Claus attractive, huh?
> >> Doug Horne spent 5 long volumes explaining what he's explained... even the
> >> simpliest point - the one for which Doug is rightfully congratulated
> >> for - his discovery that there were *TWO* brain exams... took chapters
> >> of words to explain...
>
> >We know about that Ben, why can't YOU highlight (in bullet point form)
> >the points he made throughout the book?? Or did YOU forget them
> >already?
>
> Nope. Buy the 5 volumes, and read for yourself.
So you are NOT here to "educate the lurkers" like you have claimed in
the past when YOU HAVE ATTACKED CTERS, HUH?
Just another lie by Ben!
> >> Why would I take the time to do so here?
>
> >So you blow a horn and then run from educating lurkers with
> >information. What else should we expect from a man who censors posts?
>
> Why does no-one else get the stalker treatment, kook?
YOU stalked me for a long time, and who knows how many other REAL
CTERS over the years you lying LNer. I will leave you alone IF you
admit you are really a LNer. Deal?
> >> So tell us, why am I required to do what you've demanded of no-one else?
>
> >NO one else has proclaimed a book "put all the pieces together". Why
> >not list it for us then?
>
> That's what reviews do, stupid. They give you the reviewer's opinion of the
> book.
LOL!! They also INCLUDE relevant portions to show how they CAME TO
THOSE OPINIONS MORON!
Start listing them for us. But he won't. He will censor instead in
all liklihood.
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >He is supposedly here for the truth of JFK's
> >> >death and "educating the lurkers" yet he will just say Horne has
> >> >pieced it all together, but see you later!
>
> >> Yep... pretty much what anyone does with a book review... explain why
> >> they think it's worth it to buy it
>
> >YOU didn't explain why it is good,
>
> LOL!!!
Still no quotes...
> >that is the point! YOU simply said
> >it was! What book review provides NO samples from the book???
>
> Actually, I did. That's probably what started your stalking on this topic.
Sure, YOU picked one part at the very end to start trouble with!
LOL!! Then he says I'm stalking him when I am just defending myself as
I know I was one of the two he was slandering again!
> >> - it gives other people a yardstick to judge whether
> >> they want to spend the money or not.
>
> >Based on what you wrote it does NOT as we are talking about $125.00
> >U.S. here!
>
> Who cares whether you trust my judgment or not?
OF course I don't, but I thought one of YOUR goals on this board was
to "educate the lurkers?"
> Ask someone else. Don't go complaining because I refuse to quote anything more
> out of the 5 volumes than I've already done.
What kind of researcher claims to have found the "Holy Grail" and then
DOES NOT FEEL THE NEED TO SHARE IT WITH ANYONE ELSE???
> >YOU gave us nothing to determine whether it is worth while
> >or not.
>
> That's your opinion... why do you blame *me* for your opinion?
YOU did NOT list anything but a section to cause trouble Ben. Very
typical of YOU!
About what?? YOUR LNer traits?
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> <moderated>
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >I for one have NEVER denied we have gone to the moon (in fact I
> >> >believe we have gone to Mars and other planets too), I have just said
> >> >I have questions about the televised landing on July 20, 1969!
>
> >> >As for 9/11, Horne needs to get up to speed as nearly 800 of the
> >> >world's top engineers and scientists have said the official story is
> >> >bunk!
>
> >> >> Sadly, some of these people who are in denial that Americans landed on=
> > th=3D
> >> >e moon
> >> >> are also JFK assassination researchers, which is injurious to our caus=
> >e.
>
> >> >What does one have to to do with the other?
>
> >> Only a kook can't figure it out.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >I wholeheartedly support
> >> >Mark Lane in this case, but I have read comments of his about Vietnam
> >> >I do NOT support!
>
> >> Not an accurate analogy by a long shot.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> Which, of course, merely illustrates that you didn't understand Doug's
> >> point.
>
> >I get his point, it is the same INSANE point you make! YOU want to
> >believe JFK, Lincoln and RFK died as a result of a conspiracy but that
> >NO OTHER CONSPIRACY EVER HAPPENED!
>
> Kook, aren't you?
Drone, aren't you?
> That isn't the point at all.
That is the point YOU posted though, isn't it?
YOU posted the ONE part that slammed the CT community! Just like you
always do you lousy LNer in hiding!
> >He has to lie to get his book published and to sell them,
>
> Yep... now Doug Horne is a "liar". There's no end of 'em, it seems. Anyone who
> says a single word that the stalker doesn't like, is labeled a liar.
He lied about his points that YOU posted! Since I don't have the 5
volumes I can't judge the rest, can I?
YOU highlighted that section so BLAME yourself!
> <moderated>
Ben has called the founding fathers of this case liars like Garrison,
White, Lane, Weisberg and Salandria liars, but I'm the one that calls
everyone else liars. (He has called many of the top next wave liars
too!)
> >> >As long as someone is NOT outright lying <moderated> who cares what
> >> >they think about other issues??
>
> >> The fact that you can't see this illustrates what a kook you are.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >Do you believe
> >> >JFK's murder was the ONLY conspiracy in all of history?
>
> >> Why would I think that???
>
> >YOU don't seem to believe in any other that folks have mentioned since
> >I was here beyond JFK, RFK and Lincoln. How come?
>
> Perhaps because this is "Alt.Conspiracy.JFK", and not "Alt.Conspiracies.Kooks"?
YOU attacked CJ though about 9/11 EVEN AFTER YOU ADMITTED YOU HAVE NOT
EVEN STUDIED THE EVIDENCE, how come liar?
YOU jumped on me for having questions about the televised landing on
the moon too. Ditto Pearl Harbor. Ditto the camps for Japanese-
Americans. So it seems you have partaken in other topics, but now he
lies and runs.
> >> >> But
> >> >> just as some Germans during WWII were Nazis, it does not follow that A=
> >LL =3D
> >> >Germans
> >> >> were Nazis - actually, only a small proportion of them were.
>
> >> >Very true, most research has shown it was only about 10% of the
> >> >people, but guess what?? THEY WERE THE 10% THAT COUNTED! =A0Just like
> >> >ONLY 10% endorse the ridiculous lie about LHO!
>
> >> >When you have the power structure on board YOU don't need the large
> >> >numbers to be effective.
>
> >> >> Most JFK
> >> >> researchers I know are serious, sober individuals, grounded in reality=
> >, w=3D
> >> >ho are
> >> >> simply very intolerant of lies - who are persuaded that we must unders=
> >tan=3D
> >> >d our
> >> >> true history, if our democracy is to fulfill its potential, and if fut=
> >ure=3D
> >> > transgressions
> >> >(such as the assassinations and cover-ups of the 1960s) are to be
> >> >> avoided.
>
> >> <moderated>
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >> (Past is prologue, and if you don't know where you have come from, you
> >> >> don't know where you are going.)
>
> >> >He who controls and shapes the past, controls and shapes the present.
>
> >> >> Most JFK researchers believe we really did land
> >> >> on the moon from 1969-1972,
>
> >> >What does that have to do with the JFK case? Why must JFK researchers
> >> >be tied to another event?
>
> >> We realize you don't understand.
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >> and that the damage suffered by our society on 9/11
> >> >> really was caused by hijacked airplanes that were flown into buildings=
> >.
>
> >> <moderated>
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >> Future
> >> >> attempts by the media or academics to tar and feather all JFK research=
> >ers=3D
> >> > by
> >> >> linking us with the radical fringe that denies we landed on the moon, =
> >and=3D
> >> > which
> >> >> denies the obvious realities of 9/11, must be aggressively countered.
>
> >> <moderated>
>
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >> If there
> >> >> is enough push-back to these attempts at 'discreditation by associatio=
> >n' =3D
> >> >by the
> >> >> responsible members of the JFK research community, it will cease.
>
> >> >Why can't JFK researchers simply say, "I have not fully investigated
> >> >the moon landings or 9/11?" What do the three events have in common??
>
> >> Nothing. (Other than the government, of course)
>
> >So you believe everything you are told beyond JFK's, RFK's and
> >Lincoln's murders?
>
> Go to another forum to discuss these OT items.
How are the off topic moron? They are assassinations like JFK's?? We
have been lied to like JFK's!
YOU should have kilfiled me when I asked you to coward.
> >YOU admitted you had NOT even studied the 9/11 event yet YOU said
> >anyone who did not buy the official theory was a "kook!"
>
> I've never felt the need to study the Flat Earth Society in order to realize
> that the world is round.
LOL!! What a moron! He thinks building 7 fell because the building
next to it did! I wonder why buildings next to other buildings with
fires don't collapse all the time based on this logic!
To bad you won't share it with us, huh?
Most of us don't have the free time you do, so be a pal and share it
with us!
> >Could a green light now be activated since we are moving towards a
> >time when the JFK case was soooo long ago they figure the truth can't
> >hurt them?
>
> >Who knows, but his book did NOT need these silly comments as it was
> >about the JFK case. It was done to get approval for his book
> >obviously!
>
> Or, of course, it could simply be the truth.
YOU believe it is the truth because YOU ARE A WC SHILL! Real CTers
don't believe what he wrote.
> <moderated>
Ben can only snip and censor as his lies & WC shill status are fully
exposed now!
> >> >When one looks at all the lies that have been told in our world's
> >> >history, why would anyone believe what they are told without
> >> >researching it for themselves?
>
> >> Do you presume that people have not?
>
> >YOU admitted to NOT studying 9/11 yet you called me and CJ kooks for
> >having questions about the official explanation! LOL!!
>
> See above.
What a "kook" you are! Or, a brainwashed drone!
(snip all of Ben's censoring!)
lazu...@webtv.net
nutters!, but if you have an inkling of concern to why our country has
degenerated into the ugly mess it is, & you have been bamboozled by the
Establishmentarian Oswald did it nonsense, then it is imperative to get
with the program and get Horne's books now...Laz
bigdog
Toilet paper is much cheaper at Kroger's.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Feb 24, 8:56=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply
>> post a book review!
<moderated>
(Psst... Laz said something nice about Doug Horne's 5 Volume set. Why not go
label him a LNT'er because he didn't lay out all the points in the set for you?)
<the Stalker's whining snipped>
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <fa99399a-ae2c-41a8-8c16-d010a8ae7...@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
> >On Feb 24, 8:56=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply
> >> post a book review!
>
> <moderated>
>
> (Psst... Laz said something nice about Doug Horne's 5 Volume set. Why not go
> label him a LNT'er because he didn't lay out all the points in the set for you?)
Has Laz said the following?
Why are you NOT focusing on how the WC lied about LHO owning CE-139,
or that CE-139 was high velocity, or that he ordered a 40" Carcano
when their OWN evidence shows us he would have ordered a 36" Carbine,
or that he NEVER received any rifle at his P.O. Box, or that he never
posed for any photos as the many issues the BY photos have show us
they are fake, or that he did NOT go to Mexico as the CIA and WC said
due to NO evidence showing this, or how suspicious the two limo
fragments were since they were NOT found until 12-15 hours after the
shooting, or how the WC lied when they said the two limo fragments
came from ONE bullet when their own tests did NOT show this, or how
they lied about the clip being in the rifle at time of discovery when
it does NOT appear in any photo, any report, or any inventory list,
and how the SS and FBI had NO jurisdiction on 11/22/63 even though
they took
the evidence and interviewed witnesses and released them!
I would wonder why, BUT THEN ALL I HAVE TO DO IS REMEMBER YOU
SUPPORTED THE WC IN ALL OF THESE TOPICS!
Laz has NOT! Thus,
YOU are a WC shill!
> <the Stalker's whining snipped>
Ben can only whine and run from his own words now!
“Snipped everything again, I see. Rather cowardly of you, isn't it
Rob?
This *is* a typical LNT'er tactic.
Understandable, of course, since you don't want others to see that you
did indeed completely misunderstand a comment that others could easily
place in context. You don't want to look like a fool. But if you'd
slow down, and re-read before you reply, perhaps that would solve half
of your problems.” (Ben Holmes—10/25/08)
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Feb 25, 9:22=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <fa99399a-ae2c-41a8-8c16-d010a8ae7...@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Feb 24, 8:56=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply
>> >> post a book review!
>>
>> <moderated>
>>
> go
>> label him a LNT'er because he didn't lay out all the points in the set fo=
>r you?)
>
>Has Laz said the following?
<Walt paranoia snipped>
<the Stalker's whining snipped>
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <326320d5-bf80-408b-878b-84425e508...@b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Feb 25, 9:22=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >> In article <fa99399a-ae2c-41a8-8c16-d010a8ae7...@33g2000yqj.googlegroups.=
> >com>,
> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
> >> >On Feb 24, 8:56=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >> >> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simply
> >> >> post a book review!
>
> >> <moderated>
>
> >> (Psst... Laz said something nice about Doug Horne's 5 Volume set. Why not=
> > go
> >> label him a LNT'er because he didn't lay out all the points in the set fo=
> >r you?)
>
> >Has Laz said the following?
>
> <Walt paranoia snipped>
>
> <the Stalker's whining snipped>
Ben is pathetic, and a SERIAL LIAR who works for the government! He
is running from his claims, foremost right now is that LHO OWNED the
alleged murder weapon for sure!
He is paid to FRAME LHO!
Bud
wrote:
Thats like being paid to make water "wet".
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Feb 26, 11:06=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <326320d5-bf80-408b-878b-84425e508...@b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Feb 25, 9:22=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <fa99399a-ae2c-41a8-8c16-d010a8ae7...@33g2000yqj.googlegrou=
>ps.=3D
>> >com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On Feb 24, 8:56=3D3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Ah! My favorite stalker is back, showing why it's dangerous to simp=
>ly
>> >> >> post a book review!
>>
>> >> <moderated>
>>
>not=3D
>> > go
>> >> label him a LNT'er because he didn't lay out all the points in the set=
> fo=3D
>> >r you?)
>>
>> >Has Laz said the following?
>>
>> <Walt paranoia snipped>
<the Stalker's whining snipped>
aeffects
wrote:
my goodness, you are whining.....