HEY DRUMMER BOY TIME TO EAT THAT DOUBLE DECKER!!
Phil Ossofee
of shot from knoll & the Zapruder film shows to most people a shot which
could only have originated from the right front, and not only did a
majority of witnessess hear shots from that direction. JFK Aides Kenny
O'Donnell & Dave Powers place not one,but 2 shots as coming over the
picket fence!( Ultimate Sacrifice) In the Moorman photograph, a figure
is shown that could well be firing through the top slats of the picket
fence and is seen directly to the right of the tree from the perspective
of the viewer. The HSCA put a shot there with 95% certainty and two
teams of scientists confirmed this. Also,several of the railroad workers
heard a report and saw a big puff of smoke immediately coming from this
exact location.
A little too much turkey and ham in that double decker with whine.
David VP
And (naturally) it makes no difference to CTers that this "95%
certainty" conclusion was determined utilizing what is now-debunked (or
at the very least....highly-questionable) acoustic results. Right?
And it doesn't seem to matter to most CTers that the HSCA's "4-Shot"
determination is still not correct per most anti-SBTers (who need AT
LEAST FIVE SHOTS total in a non-SBT shooting scenario...can't be less
than five). I guess the acoustal experts just missed that 5th shot
(somehow) in 1979. It's on the dictabelt, but it wasn't noticed at all
in '78-'79. Right?
In a word -- Nutty.
Ben Holmes
says...
Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of people
that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their actions,
where *they* heard shots coming from.
For that matter, it's interesting to note the *actions* of some supposed TSBD
eyewitnesses *WHO WERE IN THE BUILDING*.
--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
Ben Holmes
Cowards always snip and run... it's predictable.
In article <1145347722.8...@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, David VP
says...
>
>> The HSCA put a shot there with 95% certainty and two teams of scientists
>> confirmed this."
>
>And (naturally) it makes no difference to CTers that this "95%
>certainty" conclusion was determined utilizing what is now-debunked (or
>at the very least....highly-questionable) acoustic results. Right?
Untrue. What you have, is a contradictory "expert" opinion. Something that
happens everyday in courts across the land.
The experts hired by the government said that there *was* a shot... and this is
*confirmed* by eyewitness testimony and actions... as well as by the Z-film.
>And it doesn't seem to matter to most CTers that the HSCA's "4-Shot"
>determination is still not correct per most anti-SBTers (who need AT
>LEAST FIVE SHOTS total in a non-SBT shooting scenario...can't be less
>than five).
Why bother to lie, Davey-boy? The *ONLY* problem the WC had was the Tague
wounding. Four shots would cover *ALL* the known evidence, and comply with all
the known testimony and statements.
I happen to believe that it was closer to 5 or 6 shots, but 4 shots *would* fit
all the known evidence.
So why lie about it?
>I guess the acoustal experts just missed that 5th shot
>(somehow) in 1979.
Actually, they came up with, I believe, 6 or 8 "impulses", but only labeled four
of them as shots. It was due to the limited time that they had to work on the
dictabelt.
But don't let the facts get in the way of your lying about the evidence... carry
on.
>It's on the dictabelt, but it wasn't noticed at all
>in '78-'79. Right?
>
>In a word -- Nutty.
In a word -- Liar. And, gutless coward that you are, you won't respond to this
entire post...
Bud
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <22844-444...@storefull-3232.bay.webtv.net>, Phil Ossofee
> says...
> >
> >Don Thomas's brillant in depth acoustical research puts a 96.3% chance
> >of shot from knoll & the Zapruder film shows to most people a shot which
> >could only have originated from the right front, and not only did a
> >majority of witnessess hear shots from that direction. JFK Aides Kenny
> >O'Donnell & Dave Powers place not one,but 2 shots as coming over the
> >picket fence!( Ultimate Sacrifice)
I don`t suppose that book quotes either man directly, does it?
> In the Moorman photograph, a figure
> >is shown that could well be firing through the top slats of the picket
> >fence and is seen directly to the right of the tree from the perspective
> >of the viewer. The HSCA put a shot there with 95% certainty and two
> >teams of scientists confirmed this. Also,several of the railroad workers
> >heard a report and saw a big puff of smoke immediately coming from this
> >exact location.
> >
> >A little too much turkey and ham in that double decker with whine.
>
> Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of people
> that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their actions,
> where *they* heard shots coming from.
It proves no such thing. It indicates that at least one person
thought that shots came from that location.
> For that matter, it's interesting to note the *actions* of some supposed TSBD
> eyewitnesses *WHO WERE IN THE BUILDING*.
Oh, suspicious actions, no doubt.
David VP
that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their
actions,
where *they* heard shots coming from."
That's another CT-created myth I've never bought for a single solitary
minute. There's no proof whatsoever that all of those dozens of
individuals stormed the knoll because they were "courageously" charging
after the killer(s).
IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
direction.
It's much more likely that the majority of the Knoll-Stormers hadn't
the slightest idea what exactly was happening and were merely playing
"follow the leader".
>>"Actually, they came up with, I believe, 6 or 8 "impulses", but only labeled four
of them as shots. It was due to the limited time that they had to work
on the
dictabelt."
Gee....how convenient.
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>> Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of
>> people that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their
>> actions, where *they* heard shots coming from."
>
>
>That's another CT-created myth I've never bought for a single solitary
>minute.
Then, by all means, simply *quote* the testimony of any eyewitness giving his
reasons for charging up the Grassy Knoll.
>There's no proof whatsoever that all of those dozens of
>individuals stormed the knoll because they were "courageously" charging
>after the killer(s).
Yep... they were clearly trying to get to the parking lot, and pull out before
the traffic got too bad.
>IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
>were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
>WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
>its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
>direction.
We *know* you're a coward already.
>It's much more likely that the majority of the Knoll-Stormers hadn't
>the slightest idea what exactly was happening and were merely playing
>"follow the leader".
Tis true, *some* of them may very well have been playing "follow the leader".
>> Actually, they came up with, I believe, 6 or 8 "impulses", but only
>> labeled four of them as shots. It was due to the limited time that they
>> had to work on the dictabelt.
>
>Gee....how convenient.
Convenient that you snipped the silly statement that this factual bit of history
refuted, isn't it?
But don't worry... the longer you stay here, the less ignorant you will be.
Steve
<SNIP>
DVP wrote:
>IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
>were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
>WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
>its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
>direction.
Ben, writes:
We *know* you're a coward already.
Steve writes:
Ah, yes, once again, Ben and his infamous name calling. Just can't
make it through a post without name calling, can you, Ben? Whining
away here, yet again, Ben.
I suppose that you would stick around where there is an assassin with
weapon in hand, after the president of the united states just had his
head shot off, Ben? Give me a break!
Bud
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <1145415890....@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, David VP
> says...
> >
> >> Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of
> >> people that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their
> >> actions, where *they* heard shots coming from."
> >
> >
> >That's another CT-created myth I've never bought for a single solitary
> >minute.
>
> Then, by all means, simply *quote* the testimony of any eyewitness giving his
> reasons for charging up the Grassy Knoll.
Why would anyone do that, we have Ben`s claims, what else is needed?
> >There's no proof whatsoever that all of those dozens of
> >individuals stormed the knoll because they were "courageously" charging
> >after the killer(s).
>
>
> Yep... they were clearly trying to get to the parking lot, and pull out before
> the traffic got too bad.
Or they thought the shots came from behind them, and were running
up the hill for cover.
> >IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
> >were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
> >WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
> >its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
> >direction.
>
> We *know* you're a coward already.
>
>
> >It's much more likely that the majority of the Knoll-Stormers hadn't
> >the slightest idea what exactly was happening and were merely playing
> >"follow the leader".
>
> Tis true, *some* of them may very well have been playing "follow the leader".
Then "the numbers of people" become less significant.
Ben Holmes
says...
>
>
>
> <SNIP>
>
> DVP wrote:
>
>>IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
>>were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
>>WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
>>its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
>>direction.
>
>
>
> Ben, writes:
>
>We *know* you're a coward already.
>
> Steve writes:
>
> Ah, yes, once again, Ben and his infamous name calling.
It's not me that is 'snipping and running away', Steve. You'll just have to
live with your character.
>Just can't
>make it through a post without name calling, can you, Ben? Whining
>away here, yet again, Ben.
>
> I suppose that you would stick around where there is an assassin with
>weapon in hand, after the president of the united states just had his
>head shot off, Ben? Give me a break!
Twice a coward, aren't you?
Steve
> DVP wrote:
>>IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
>>were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
>>WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
>>its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
>>direction.
> Ben, writes:
>We *know* you're a coward already.
> Steve writes:
> Ah, yes, once again, Ben and his infamous name calling.
It's not me that is 'snipping and running away', Steve. You'll just
have to
live with your character.
>Just can't
>make it through a post without name calling, can you, Ben? Whining
>away here, yet again, Ben.
> I suppose that you would stick around where there is an assassin with
>weapon in hand, after the president of the united states just had his
>head shot off, Ben? Give me a break!
Twice a coward, aren't you?
Steve writes:
Just more whining from Ben.
Anthony Marsh
> In article <1145415890....@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, David VP
> says...
>>> Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of
>>> people that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their
>>> actions, where *they* heard shots coming from."
>>
>> That's another CT-created myth I've never bought for a single solitary
>> minute.
>
> Then, by all means, simply *quote* the testimony of any eyewitness giving his
> reasons for charging up the Grassy Knoll.
>
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I glanced around and was watching the crowd to make
sure they stayed back out of the way of the motorcade, and also to make
sure none of the cars started up or anything. Then I heard the shots,
and I immediately proceeded from this point.
Mr. LIEBELER. Point 4 on Commission Exhibit No. 354?
Mr. SMITH. I started up toward this Book Depository after I heard the
shots, and I didn't know where the shots came from. I had no idea,
because it was such a ricochet.
Mr. LIEBELER. An echo effect?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in
hysterics. She told me, "They are shooting the President from the
bushes." So I immediately proceeded up here.
Anthony Marsh
>>> "Let's not forget in the moments *after* the assassination the numbers of people
> that courageously charged up that grassy knoll... proving, by their
> actions,
> where *they* heard shots coming from."
>
>
> That's another CT-created myth I've never bought for a single solitary
> minute. There's no proof whatsoever that all of those dozens of
> individuals stormed the knoll because they were "courageously" charging
> after the killer(s).
>
Except for the fact that they said so. But your only way out is to call
witnesses liars.
> IMO, that's nuts. I don't believe for a second that THAT many people
> were playing hero and running directly into the KNOWN LINE OF FIRE
> WHERE THEY MIGHT GET THEMSELVES KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN! That's kooky on
> its face. If I knew an assassin was up there, I'd have run in the other
> direction.
>
It's nuts to YOU, because someone like you would never do such a thing.
> It's much more likely that the majority of the Knoll-Stormers hadn't
> the slightest idea what exactly was happening and were merely playing
> "follow the leader".
>
>
>>> "Actually, they came up with, I believe, 6 or 8 "impulses", but only labeled four
> of them as shots. It was due to the limited time that they had to work
> on the
> dictabelt."
>
> Gee....how convenient.
>
Misreading of the evidence.
David VP
said that the one and only reason they rushed up there was due to
hearing gunshots. That's balderdash and everybody knows it.
Not even close to all of those people were identified to tell their
Knoll-storming tale....and if they had been, I'd bet a considerable sum
of greenbacks that a large majority ran up the Knoll simply because
OTHER people were doing the same.
Anthony Marsh
> Yeah, right Tony. As if EVERY last one of the gobs of "Knoll-Stormers"
> said that the one and only reason they rushed up there was due to
> hearing gunshots. That's balderdash and everybody knows it.
>
I didn't say all. Testimony was not taken from all. You said none. There
were a few.
> Not even close to all of those people were identified to tell their
> Knoll-storming tale....and if they had been, I'd bet a considerable sum
> of greenbacks that a large majority ran up the Knoll simply because
> OTHER people were doing the same.
>
Not all. Not all knoll stormers have been identified.
Sure, many people were just following the crowd. But not all. How can
all follow itself?
Many were following the police.
David VP
"Knoll-Stormers" said that the one and only reason they rushed up there
was due to hearing gunshots. That's balderdash and everybody knows it."
TONY M.: "I didn't say all. Testimony was not taken from all. You said
none."
~~~~~~~~
Tony, when did I ever say that "none" of the Knoll-stormers thought
they heard shots from the Knoll area?
Please provide my quote in that "none" regard. (You won't find that
quote, of course, because I never said it.)
Steve
Hi David,
This is one of Tony's many games that he likes to play with people .
Pay him no mind.
It's the megalomaniac in him.
