Ben Holmes, Conspiracy Theorist Without A Theory

[Tom Keske]

Strangely, when I Google-investigated Ben Holmes, who tries
to dominate alt.conspiracy.jfk, to find out his bottom-line
theory, he did not appear to have any particular theory
in spite of all his prolific pontification and ramblings.

What is wrong with that picture?

Too bad to have a conspiracy theorist without
a theory, since we are certainly not lacking in
a conspiracy.

I saw one person speculating that he must be a
"lone nutter" rather than a conspiracy theorist, but
it is difficult to tell when he is more secretive about
his JFK assassination theories than the CIA is secretive
about the JFK assassination cover-up.

For an apparent right-winger like Holmes to be
investigating a right-wing conspiracy like the
Kennedy assassination is nearly as much as
an exercise in futility as the CIA trying to
investigate itself to see if it might be guilty of
mass-murder.

No? We are so relieved.

That is about all the Warren Commission really represented,
with a CIA honcho like Allen Dulles as a prominent member.
Obscenely absurd, right out of the starting gate.

Holmes ridicules the idea that he could be working
for the CIA, himself. Many a truth told in jest.

It is typical of the CIA and the Right to try to frame an
argument by pretending that certain positions would
be somehow obviously "beyond the pale". Trying to
use bully-style intimidation to prevent someone
from even taking up that line of reasoning.

Nothing of the sort is beyond the pale. If the
JFK assassination cover-up was worth some 50-100
additional murders, it certainly would be worth
keeping some professional trolls on the Kennedy
discussion groups, even at this late date, to prevent
a further tarnishing of CIA reputation.

In fact, one could safely *presume* that there would
be some game-playing propagandists, here.

If you asked me, concerning any JFK discussion group,
how might you spot such people, I would reply with
a question:

"Who are the most prolific and persistent posters?"

Whatever names were given in response, I would say,
"That is most likely your boy."

Tom Keske