Another Nonsensical Post From The Censored Forum...

[Ben Holmes]

> The alleged conspirator snuck into Mrs. Paine's garage and removed
Oswald's rifle without Lee, Marina, Mrs. Paine, or Rachel and June even
seeing anyone enter.


This is speculation based on the theory that there existed a rifle in the Paine's garage.


> The alleged conspirator wrapped Oswald's rifle in a bag and never left any
palmprints nor fingerprints on the bag.


Again, more speculation - the alleged 'bag' was never photographed on site, and a number of witnesses said that they didn't see it there. Legitimate questions remain around the bag.

Particularly interesting is the undelivered brown paper bag that was mailed to Oswald before the assassination. (The timing is circumstantial, but convincing.) A topic that believers don't care to address... the Warren Commission certainly ran from it.


> The alleged conspirator walked into the TSBD with Oswald's rifle without
getting any palmprints or fingerprints on Oswald's rifle.


Since the rifle had *NO* identifiable prints, this is merely historical fact. And in a battle of the FBI vs Lt. Day, I'll take the FBI - particularly when Lt. Day showed a consciousness of guilt over this matter.


> The alleged conspirator was walking around on the 6th floor while Oswald
was there but Oswald never saw him.


Again, more speculation. This presumes that Oswald was still on the 6th floor long **AFTER** he'd been seen downstairs. It would have been difficult indeed for Oswald, in the lunchroom, to have seen the two individuals that several eyewitnesses spotted on the sixth floor.


> The alleged conspirator set up a sniper's nest on the 6th floor without
leaving fingerprints nor palmprints on the boxes.


Simply not true.

THIS IS A LIE!!!

There *WERE* unidentified prints found on the boxes. It's truly amusing that more than 50 years later, believers don't know this basic fact.

Perhaps they just don't *want* to know it.

They *certainly* don't want to publicly acknowledge it... just as the Warren Commission was unwilling to let the public know about these unidentified prints.


> The alleged conspirator fired Oswald's rifle from the 6th floor, hid
Oswald's rifle and walked down the stairs without anyone seeing him.


Actually, there's testimony of *TWO* unidentified men walking down the stairs. Anyone care to guess what the chances are that the believers in this forum will ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to publicly acknowledge this fact?

[David Von Pein]

BEN HOLMES SAID:

There's testimony of *TWO* unidentified men walking down the stairs.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Point me to that testimony.

[Ben Holmes]

Amusingly, you snipped the ENTIRE post... so let's put it back in:

****************************************************

Now, David has acknowledged WITHOUT COMMENT all of the above, except for my final statement, which David pretends he doesn't know about.

So here it is, David... PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE that you have no idea whatsoever about two unknown men coming down the stairs, and found in testimony, and I'll cite it for you.

An honest man would have no problem with that... I suspect that you'll refuse to publicly admit that you don't know this... because you probably already do.

Which begs the question of why you're asking...

And why you snipped virtually the entire post...

[David Von Pein]

Boy, what E.G. Marshall dramatics we have here! (LOL break.) You sure do love to play games, don't you Ben? You're hilarious. Do I need to take an oath or sign any official Dallas Sheriff's Department affifavits before I "PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE" my ignorance on this topic? (I want this to be "official", after all.)

Anyway....

For the record, Your Honor and ladies and gentleman of the jury and defense counsel Ben Holmes (aka Mr. Prick)....

I do hereby "PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE" that I, David Robert Von Pein of the USA (North America, Milky Way) have no memory of reading any testimony regarding the two (alleged) men who were (allegedly) seen by someone coming down the back stairs in the northwest corner of the Texas School Book Depository Building located at 411 Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, USA, North America, Earth, Milky Way, at approximately 12:30 to 12:31 PM Central Standard Time on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD.

Signed (under oath),
David R. Von Pein
Sworn on this date of April 20th, the year of our Lord 2017 AD.

(Member FDIC.)
(Warning: May contain peanuts and milk products.)

[Ben Holmes]

It remains to be seen whether David will acknowledge this or not... he's proclaimed ignorance on this issue, despite the fact that this is far from the first time I've brought the topic up.

> > ****************************************************
> >
> > Now, David has acknowledged WITHOUT COMMENT all of the above, except for my final statement, which David pretends he doesn't know about.
> >
> > So here it is, David... PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE that you have no idea whatsoever about two unknown men coming down the stairs, and found in testimony, and I'll cite it for you.
> >
>
> Boy, what E.G. Marshall dramatics we have here! (LOL break.) You sure do love to play games, don't you Ben? You're hilarious. Do I need to take an oath or sign any official Dallas Sheriff's Department affifavits before I "PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE" my ignorance on this topic? (I want this to be "official", after all.)

Yep... I want your ignorance publicly asserted. Now I'll be happy to provide the citation.

Usually, believers pretend not to know something to avoid debate... and refuse to admit that they don't know it... but as you've asserted that you didn't know this, then I'm happy to cite for it.

> Anyway....
>
> For the record, Your Honor and ladies and gentleman of the jury and defense counsel Ben Holmes (aka Mr. Prick)....
>
> I do hereby "PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE" that I, David Robert Von Pein of the USA (North America, Milky Way) have no memory of reading any testimony regarding the two (alleged) men who were (allegedly) seen by someone coming down the back stairs in the northwest corner of the Texas School Book Depository Building located at 411 Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, USA, North America, Earth, Milky Way, at approximately 12:30 to 12:31 PM Central Standard Time on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD.
>
> Signed (under oath),
> David R. Von Pein
> Sworn on this date of April 20th, the year of our Lord 2017 AD.
>
> (Member FDIC.)
> (Warning: May contain peanuts and milk products.)
>
> > An honest man would have no problem with that... I suspect that you'll refuse to publicly admit that you don't know this... because you probably already do.
> >
> > Which begs the question of why you're asking...
> >
> > And why you snipped virtually the entire post...

It's amusing that David tries to turn his ignorance into a joke... but here's the cite that's been waiting for him.

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0145a.htm

Simply read til you find his description of two unidentified men coming down the stairs. Page 284 should be your first stop... (I know how much you hate to read the testimony.)

And when you come back - you can PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE that this statement of mine was just as accurate as all the other statements that you refused to respond to.

Or show your cowardice again... who cares?

[David Von Pein]

LOL. Holmes cited a police officer's testimony (Luke Mooney), who, several minutes after the shooting, saw "some other officers coming down, plainclothes, and I believe they were deputy sheriffs". Keep in mind that Mooney by that time had already engaged in a search outside the building down by the railroad yards before he ever entered the Depository. So there was ample time for several policemen to have entered the TSBD before Mooney.

I thought Holmes was going to enlighten us with a "bombshell" witness who saw people on the stairs within a minute or two of the assassination who could conceivably have been "assassins".

I should have known Holmes' claims would turn out to be as bogus as he is.

[Ben Holmes]

Yep... two UNIDENTIFIED men - you can't put names to them, and neither can anyone else. Mooney thought that they were police officers, but other than haircut & demeanor, HE HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO GO ON. He didn't know them, he didn't recognize them - he HAD NO CLUE AT ALL other than haircut & demeanor.

It was merely his opinion... and as such, with no corroborative evidence, is nothing more than his opinion. Given more information than he had, it's easy to see that these can very well be the two men seen on the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses.

> Keep in mind that Mooney by that time had already engaged in a search outside the building down by the railroad yards before he ever entered the Depository. So there was ample time for several policemen to have entered the TSBD before Mooney.

He was *IN* the building before the snipers nest was discovered. That puts him in the building fairly early on.

Waiting until the police were in the building is a gutsy, but fairly safe way for two men with a police background (or perhaps even active duty) to escape the building.

> I thought Holmes was going to enlighten us with a "bombshell" witness who saw people on the stairs within a minute or two of the assassination who could conceivably have been "assassins".

The timing could be as soon as 5 or 6 minutes after the assassination.

The question *YOU* need to answer is why were "police" *LEAVING THE BUILDING* before the snipers nest was found?

So yes, it's likely indeed that these two unidentified men were the assassins. There's **NOTHING** you can point to that contradicts that possibility... NOTHING AT ALL. (If there were, surely you'd have spoken up, right David?)

> I should have known Holmes' claims would turn out to be as bogus as he is.

I should have known that you'd refuse to publicly acknowledge THAT MY STATEMENT WAS ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT AND NOT MISLEADING IN **ANY** WAY.

And indeed, YOU'RE A LIAR - because there's nothing "bogus" about my statement **AT ALL**. Nor were you able to point out anything "bogus" about it. YOU'RE SIMPLY LYING, DAVID VON PEIN... IF MY STATEMENT WERE "BOGUS" - YOU'D BE ABLE TO QUOTE WHAT WAS "BOGUS" - AND CITE THE EVIDENCE.

But you can't.


But it's interesting to note for the record what David refuses to refute.

David refuses to show that the rifle was in the Paines' garage.

David refuses to show the legitimacy of the paper bag, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSED to address the paper bag that was mailed to Oswald.

David refused to address the issue of identifiable prints on the rifle.

David refused to correct the OUTRIGHT LIE that someone (other than Oswald) set up the sniper's nest without leaving fingerprints.

David refused to correct the BLATANT LIE that no-one was seen coming down the stairs after the assassination.

Tell us David - did you ask for any help from John McAdams? You seem to be slipping...

If a failure to refute is your way of accepting all of these issues, you're well on your way to becoming a critic.

Keep up the good work!

[David Von Pein]

> The question *YOU* need to answer is why were "police" *LEAVING THE BUILDING* before the sniper's nest was found?
>

What makes you think they were "LEAVING THE BUILDING"? Mooney saw them coming down the northwest staircase at some point between the second floor (which is where Mooney got on the stairs in the first place after taking the elevator to the 2nd floor) and the sixth floor.

But there's nothing in Mooney's testimony to indicate on EXACTLY WHAT FLOOR he saw those men. He might have seen them between floors five and six for all we know, with those men (whom Mooney thought were deputy sheriffs) then stopping to search the fifth floor.

So when Ben Holmes says that the men Luke Mooney saw on the stairs shortly after the shooting were "LEAVING THE BUILDING", Holmes is doing what all conspiracy theorists always do 24/7 --- he's SPECULATING heavily.

The men Mooney saw were almost certainly just exactly what he thought they were, they were police officers who went into the building for the same purpose Mooney did. And those officers very likely were not "leaving the building" at the time Mooney saw them. They were merely walking from one of the Depository floors to another in order to search for the assassin or to search for evidence (just like Luke Mooney was doing that day).

Is my last paragraph "speculation" too? You bet it is, because we don't know for sure who the men were that were seen on the stairs by Mooney that day. But it's very *reasonable* speculation, IMO, given the sum total of the evidence in this case which indicates that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only person who was shooting at President Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.

> So yes, it's likely indeed that these two unidentified men were the assassins. There's **NOTHING** you can point to that contradicts that possibility... NOTHING AT ALL. (If there were, surely you'd have spoken up, right David?)
>

I think you're silly, Ben.

[David Von Pein]

BEN HOLMES SAID:

There's testimony of *TWO* unidentified men walking down the stairs.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

BTW, Luke Mooney never once specificed the exact number of people that he saw coming down the back staircase in the TSBD. Mooney merely said that he "met some other officers coming down". He never said he specifically saw "TWO" men on the stairs. It could have been only two men he encountered, yes. But it could have been three or four too. We just don't know, because Mooney never provided that detailed information in his Warren Commission testimony.

So when Ben Holmes attempts to place a definitive number ("TWO") on this incident, Ben is not telling the truth. Because Mooney did not say "two" at all. This is a relatively small and insignificant point, yes. But it helps to illustrate the sloppiness and recklessness of a conspiracy theorist named Ben Holmes.

[David Von Pein]

I do lots of "refuting" here ----> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html

[David Von Pein]

BEN HOLMES SAID:

Waiting until the police were in the building is a gutsy, but fairly safe way for two men with a police background (or perhaps even active duty) to escape the building.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Not a bad point for a conspiracy theorist to make, I must admit. But to assume that the multiple people (not necessarily just "two", as Ben incorrectly asserts) seen by Luke Mooney on the stairs shortly after the assassination "likely indeed...were the assassins" is, in my opinion, simply a case of very wishful thinking being engaged in by CTer Ben Holmes, especially since we know that the Book Depository was definitely crawling with POLICEMEN within a very few minutes of the shots being fired in Dealey Plaza. And we also know that some of those police officers were, indeed, moving UP and then DOWN those back stairs shortly after the shooting in their attempt to locate an assassin or the physical evidence of an assassin having been in that building.

Therefore, it's much more likely that the multiple individuals seen on the staircase by Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney on 11/22/63 were just what Mooney thought they were -- police officers.
- hide quoted text -

Another possibility is that the men Mooney saw on the stairs could have been reporter Kent Biffle and WFAA-TV cameraman Tom Alyea, who entered the TSBD building within a very few minutes of the assassination (and before the police had a chance to seal off the building at approximately 12:37 PM).

[Bud]

On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 3:00:52 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> BEN HOLMES SAID:
>
> Waiting until the police were in the building is a gutsy, but fairly safe way for two men with a police background (or perhaps even active duty) to escape the building.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Not a bad point for a conspiracy theorist to make, I must admit.

Its retarded, especially in the context of the vast conspiracy that the conspiracy retards imagine. All that planning and the plan is to wait for a while and walk out. Really?

> But to assume that the multiple people (not necessarily just "two", as Ben incorrectly asserts) seen by Luke Mooney on the stairs shortly after the assassination "likely indeed...were the assassins" is, in my opinion, simply a case of very wishful thinking being engaged in by CTer Ben Holmes,

Conspiracy retard approach that if we don`t know something they can plug anything they like into the unknown slot.

What it really is is just one more of the thousands of things they can go nowhere with. Usually they make pretend they arrived somewhere when they haven`t.

[Ben Holmes]

What makes you think that Oswald was leaving the building?

(Yes, I know you won't answer, but perhaps you'll squirm a little...)

> But there's nothing in Mooney's testimony to indicate on EXACTLY WHAT FLOOR he saw those men. He might have seen them between floors five and six for all we know, with those men (whom Mooney thought were deputy sheriffs) then stopping to search the fifth floor.

Feel free to offer all the speculation you want.

It's MORE than reasonable to speculate that they were leaving the building - they were certainly HEADING IN THAT DIRECTION.

At a time when others were going *UP* the stairs...

> So when Ben Holmes says that the men Luke Mooney saw on the stairs shortly after the shooting were "LEAVING THE BUILDING", Holmes is doing what all conspiracy theorists always do 24/7 --- he's SPECULATING heavily.

Untrue, David.

A believer such as yourself HAS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER describing Oswald as leaving the building when he was heading downstairs.

Why would you object to unknown men in the building being described THE SAME WAY **YOU'D** DESCRIBE OSWALD?

Men who were traveling in the OPPOSITE direction from what everyone else was doing at that time?

> The men Mooney saw were almost certainly just exactly what he thought they were, they were police officers who went into the building for the same purpose Mooney did. And those officers very likely were not "leaving the building" at the time Mooney saw them. They were merely walking from one of the Depository floors to another in order to search for the assassin or to search for evidence (just like Luke Mooney was doing that day).

It's certainly *possible*.

It's also certainly possible that they were the two assassins seen on the sixth floor.

The fact that you CANNOT ELIMINATE THAT POSSIBILITY means that I was telling the EXACT TRUTH in my original post. And you've *STILL* refused to publicly acknowledge that fact.

(Although your inability to refute it certainly proves my point!)

> Is my last paragraph "speculation" too? You bet it is, because we don't know for sure who the men were that were seen on the stairs by Mooney that day. But it's very *reasonable* speculation, IMO, given the sum total of the evidence in this case which indicates that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only person who was shooting at President Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.

It's also reasonable to presume that these were the two assassins, making their way out of the building.

Just as I originally stated. Two unknowns who were leaving as the police were arriving.

> > So yes, it's likely indeed that these two unidentified men were the assassins. There's **NOTHING** you can point to that contradicts that possibility... NOTHING AT ALL. (If there were, surely you'd have spoken up, right David?)
> >
>
> I think you're silly, Ben.

Good of you to admit that you have no evidence, and no logical argument.

I think you're a moron, but what does *that* matter to this case?

Your dishonesty & cowardice don't advance *MY* case at all... it merely goes to show that you can't refute the evidence for conspiracy.

> > > I should have known Holmes' claims would turn out to be as bogus as he is.
> >
> >
> > I should have known that you'd refuse to publicly acknowledge THAT MY STATEMENT WAS ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT AND NOT MISLEADING IN **ANY** WAY.
> >
> > And indeed, YOU'RE A LIAR - because there's nothing "bogus" about my statement **AT ALL**. Nor were you able to point out anything "bogus" about it. YOU'RE SIMPLY LYING, DAVID VON PEIN... IF MY STATEMENT WERE "BOGUS" - YOU'D BE ABLE TO QUOTE WHAT WAS "BOGUS" - AND CITE THE EVIDENCE.
> >
> > But you can't.

And again, didn't.

When caught blatantly lying, just shut up, right David?

> > But it's interesting to note for the record what David refuses to refute.
> >
> > David refuses to show that the rifle was in the Paines' garage.
> >
> > David refuses to show the legitimacy of the paper bag, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSED to address the paper bag that was mailed to Oswald.
> >
> > David refused to address the issue of identifiable prints on the rifle.
> >
> > David refused to correct the OUTRIGHT LIE that someone (other than Oswald) set up the sniper's nest without leaving fingerprints.
> >
> > David refused to correct the BLATANT LIE that no-one was seen coming down the stairs after the assassination.
> >
> > Tell us David - did you ask for any help from John McAdams? You seem to be slipping...
> >
> > If a failure to refute is your way of accepting all of these issues, you're well on your way to becoming a critic.
> >
> > Keep up the good work!

David once again ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to address anything else in this post... so the next time he brings up the paper bag, I'm going to laugh at him.

And rightfully so...

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, April 21, 2017 at 10:30:29 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> BEN HOLMES SAID:
>
> There's testimony of *TWO* unidentified men walking down the stairs.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> BTW, Luke Mooney never once specificed the exact number of people that he saw coming down the back staircase in the TSBD. Mooney merely said that he "met some other officers coming down". He never said he specifically saw "TWO" men on the stairs. It could have been only two men he encountered, yes. But it could have been three or four too. We just don't know, because Mooney never provided that detailed information in his Warren Commission testimony.

That means, of course, that you have *NOTHING* to refute the fact that they were the two men seen in the sixth floor before the assassination by multiple eyewitnesses.

Good of you to admit this.

> So when Ben Holmes attempts to place a definitive number ("TWO") on this incident, Ben is not telling the truth. Because Mooney did not say "two" at all. This is a relatively small and insignificant point, yes. But it helps to illustrate the sloppiness and recklessness of a conspiracy theorist named Ben Holmes.

The number "two" is corroborated by the eyewitnesses who saw two men on the sixth floor... a fact you keep running from.

Run David... RUN!!!

[Ben Holmes]

Yep... in your mind you certainly do.

*HERE* however, where there's someone to point out your nonsense, you don't do so well, do you David?

You keep running...

[Ben Holmes]

On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 12:00:52 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> BEN HOLMES SAID:
>
> Waiting until the police were in the building is a gutsy, but fairly safe way for two men with a police background (or perhaps even active duty) to escape the building.
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Not a bad point for a conspiracy theorist to make, I must admit.

And one you CANNOT REFUTE.

> But to assume that the multiple people (not necessarily just "two", as Ben incorrectly asserts) seen by Luke Mooney on the stairs shortly after the assassination "likely indeed...were the assassins" is, in my opinion, simply a case of very wishful thinking being engaged in by CTer Ben Holmes, especially since we know that the Book Depository was definitely crawling with POLICEMEN within a very few minutes of the shots being fired in Dealey Plaza. And we also know that some of those police officers were, indeed, moving UP and then DOWN those back stairs shortly after the shooting in their attempt to locate an assassin or the physical evidence of an assassin having been in that building.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Mooney asserts that he was alone when he hit the sixth floor, that places him on the scene very early indeed... and *YOU* think officers have searched above, and are already coming downstairs...

ROTFLMAO!!!

How did they miss the rifle, the shells, the evidence of someone having lunch there near an open window?

> Therefore, it's much more likely that the multiple individuals seen on the staircase by Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney on 11/22/63 were just what Mooney thought they were -- police officers.

Therefore???

BASED ON **WHAT**, DAVID???

WHAT DID YOU JUST USE TO COME UP WITH THAT "CONCLUSION?"

> Another possibility is that the men Mooney saw on the stairs could have been reporter Kent Biffle and WFAA-TV cameraman Tom Alyea, who entered the TSBD building within a very few minutes of the assassination (and before the police had a chance to seal off the building at approximately 12:37 PM).

No, that's complete nonsense.

You're an utter moron to think that Mooney was so stupid that he'd confuse a reporter AND A CAMERAMAN WITH HIS CAMERA as undercover cops.

You see, you can get away with this sort of nonsense on your website, but when you post it publicly, you're going to be publicly humiliated.

[Ben Holmes]

On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 2:26:36 AM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
> On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 3:00:52 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > BEN HOLMES SAID:
> >
> > Waiting until the police were in the building is a gutsy, but fairly safe way for two men with a police background (or perhaps even active duty) to escape the building.
> >
> >
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> >
> > Not a bad point for a conspiracy theorist to make, I must admit.
>

> Its retarded...

"Bud" agrees with David that they cannot refute what I stated.

[Bud]

I agree with my assessment that you are retarded. Only a true retard would entertain the idea you are advancing.

[Ben Holmes]

Ad hominem is merely an admission on your part that you cannot refute what I stated... even David admits that it's possible.

You lose again!

[Bud]

I have no idea what he was thinking. I can see the planning meeting...

"We are going to kill the President, and if we are caught we face certain death. Now here is the plan, after we shoot and kill JFK we sit tight and wait for the building to fill up with cops and then we walk out."

> You lose again!

[David Von Pein]

BEN HOLMES SAID:

What makes you think that Oswald was leaving the building? .... A believer such as yourself HAS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER describing Oswald as leaving the building when he was heading downstairs. Why would you object to unknown men in the building being described THE SAME WAY **YOU'D** DESCRIBE OSWALD?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Are you REALLY crazy enough to ask that question, Ben? (I guess you are since you just asked it.)

How do you think Lee Oswald got to his roominghouse in Oak Cliff by approximately 1:00 PM if he did not, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after he was last seen inside the TSBD Building by Mrs. Robert Reid at about 12:32 PM?

So there's the (obvious) difference, Ben. In Oswald's case, we KNOW via other evidence and other information (e.g., the bus ride, the cab ride, and Earlene Roberts having seen Oswald rush into his roominghouse) that Lee Harvey Oswald positively DID "leave the building" right after he was seen by Mrs. Reid.

But in the instance of the "unidentified men" seen by Luke Mooney somewhere within the Book Depository Building shortly after the assassination, we have no clue as to the specific identities of those men, so therefore we can't possibly KNOW for certain where they went after being seen by Mooney that day.*

* Was it REALLY necessary to explain something so incredibly obvious? Gimini Christmas.

[Ben Holmes]

It's a brilliant plan for shooters who had experience as police... or who were police.

Fooled you.

David showed a smidge of honesty in acknowledging the point... you, on the other hand, are still a coward.


> > You lose again!

[Bud]

Stupid idea.

[Ben Holmes]

Snipping EVERYTHING he can't answer... David responds:

On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 9:44:07 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> BEN HOLMES SAID:
>
> What makes you think that Oswald was leaving the building? .... A believer such as yourself HAS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER describing Oswald as leaving the building when he was heading downstairs. Why would you object to unknown men in the building being described THE SAME WAY **YOU'D** DESCRIBE OSWALD?
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
> Are you REALLY crazy enough to ask that question, Ben? (I guess you are since you just asked it.)

What is "crazy" about asking a believer if he thought Oswald was leaving the building when he walked down the stairs?

What's "crazy" about acknowledging the SAME SCENARIO to the two shooters seen on the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses?

(Note that David continues to refuse to acknowledge that point... or refute it.)

> How do you think Lee Oswald got to his roominghouse in Oak Cliff by approximately 1:00 PM if he did not, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after he was last seen inside the TSBD Building by Mrs. Robert Reid at about 12:32 PM?

How do you think the two shooters got to the safe house at 1328 Bleker Street for debriefing if they didn't, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after they were last seen by Luke Mooney?

> So there's the (obvious) difference, Ben. In Oswald's case, we KNOW via other evidence and other information (e.g., the bus ride, the cab ride, and Earlene Roberts having seen Oswald rush into his roominghouse) that Lee Harvey Oswald positively DID "leave the building" right after he was seen by Mrs. Reid.

There's no difference *AT ALL*.

You can point to NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that those two unknown men were still in the building when it was locked down.

Nor will you even try.

> But in the instance of the "unidentified men" seen by Luke Mooney somewhere within the Book Depository Building shortly after the assassination, we have no clue as to the specific identities of those men, so therefore we can't possibly KNOW for certain where they went after being seen by Mooney that day.*

They went OUT OF THE BUILDING. That's a fact. You wish to pretend, with no evidence whatsoever, that they were merely bypassing the 6th floor to begin searching the 2nd... or whatever floor you imagine.

After Luke Mooney saw them, THEY DISAPPEARED FROM ALL EVIDENCE & TESTIMONY.

You cannot show otherwise.

And since we don't know who they are, THEY CANNOT POSSIBLY BE UNKNOWN ASSASSINS... the two who were seen at the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses... right David?

SINCE WE DON'T KNOW WHO THEY WERE, ONE OF THEM MUST HAVE BEEN YOUR FATHER.

See how easy this speculation game is?

> * Was it REALLY necessary to explain something so incredibly obvious? Gimini Christmas.

Was it REALLY necessary to school you on such simple logic, David?

[Ben Holmes]

Still lost...

[David Von Pein]

On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 5:02:55 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Snipping EVERYTHING he can't answer... David responds:
>
>
> On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 9:44:07 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> > BEN HOLMES SAID:
> >
> > What makes you think that Oswald was leaving the building? .... A believer such as yourself HAS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER describing Oswald as leaving the building when he was heading downstairs. Why would you object to unknown men in the building being described THE SAME WAY **YOU'D** DESCRIBE OSWALD?
> >
> >
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> >
> > Are you REALLY crazy enough to ask that question, Ben? (I guess you are since you just asked it.)
>
>
> What is "crazy" about asking a believer if he thought Oswald was leaving the building when he walked down the stairs?
>
> What's "crazy" about acknowledging the SAME SCENARIO to the two shooters seen on the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses?
>
> (Note that David continues to refuse to acknowledge that point... or refute it.)
>
>
> > How do you think Lee Oswald got to his roominghouse in Oak Cliff by approximately 1:00 PM if he did not, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after he was last seen inside the TSBD Building by Mrs. Robert Reid at about 12:32 PM?
>
> How do you think the two shooters got to the safe house at 1328 Bleker Street for debriefing if they didn't, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after they were last seen by Luke Mooney?
>
>
> > So there's the (obvious) difference, Ben. In Oswald's case, we KNOW via other evidence and other information (e.g., the bus ride, the cab ride, and Earlene Roberts having seen Oswald rush into his roominghouse) that Lee Harvey Oswald positively DID "leave the building" right after he was seen by Mrs. Reid.
>
> There's no difference *AT ALL*.
>
> You can point to NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that those two unknown men were still in the building when it was locked down.
>
> Nor will you even try.
>
>
> > But in the instance of the "unidentified men" seen by Luke Mooney somewhere within the Book Depository Building shortly after the assassination, we have no clue as to the specific identities of those men, so therefore we can't possibly KNOW for certain where they went after being seen by Mooney that day.*
>
> They went OUT OF THE BUILDING. That's a fact.

It's not a "fact" at all. You're just making up a theory that the men had to be "LEAVING THE BUILDING". There's no evidence for that at all---except your silly theories about those men being "the assassins".

> You wish to pretend, with no evidence whatsoever, that they were merely bypassing the 6th floor to begin searching the 2nd... or whatever floor you imagine.
>
> After Luke Mooney saw them, THEY DISAPPEARED FROM ALL EVIDENCE & TESTIMONY.
>
> You cannot show otherwise.
>

We don't even know who they were. You don't. I don't. Mooney didn't. So what you just said about them "disappearing" is nothing but more speculation on the part of a rabid CTer. Nothing more.

> And since we don't know who they are, THEY CANNOT POSSIBLY BE UNKNOWN ASSASSINS... the two who were seen at the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses... right David?
>
> SINCE WE DON'T KNOW WHO THEY WERE, ONE OF THEM MUST HAVE BEEN YOUR FATHER.
>
> See how easy this speculation game is?
>

You expect Mooney to be familiar with every cop & detective in Dallas, do you?

Ben = Loopy.

>
> > * Was it REALLY necessary to explain something so incredibly obvious? Gimini Christmas.
>
>
> Was it REALLY necessary to school you on such simple logic, David?

You fail the "simple logic" test every time, Ben. This discussion was no different.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 2:53:42 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 5:02:55 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > Snipping EVERYTHING he can't answer... David responds:
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 9:44:07 AM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > BEN HOLMES SAID:
> > >
> > > What makes you think that Oswald was leaving the building? .... A believer such as yourself HAS NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER describing Oswald as leaving the building when he was heading downstairs. Why would you object to unknown men in the building being described THE SAME WAY **YOU'D** DESCRIBE OSWALD?
> > >
> > >
> > > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> > >
> > > Are you REALLY crazy enough to ask that question, Ben? (I guess you are since you just asked it.)
> >
> >
> > What is "crazy" about asking a believer if he thought Oswald was leaving the building when he walked down the stairs?

Dead silence!!

Happens often when believers get schooled.

> > What's "crazy" about acknowledging the SAME SCENARIO to the two shooters seen on the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses?
> >
> > (Note that David continues to refuse to acknowledge that point... or refute it.)

Crickets... David has no snappy comeback... he's checking with John McAdams to try to figure out how to answer this.

John's avoiding David...

> > > How do you think Lee Oswald got to his roominghouse in Oak Cliff by approximately 1:00 PM if he did not, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after he was last seen inside the TSBD Building by Mrs. Robert Reid at about 12:32 PM?
> >
> > How do you think the two shooters got to the safe house at 1328 Bleker Street for debriefing if they didn't, in fact, leave the Depository building very shortly after they were last seen by Luke Mooney?

David's been schooled again, and has nothing to say...

> > > So there's the (obvious) difference, Ben. In Oswald's case, we KNOW via other evidence and other information (e.g., the bus ride, the cab ride, and Earlene Roberts having seen Oswald rush into his roominghouse) that Lee Harvey Oswald positively DID "leave the building" right after he was seen by Mrs. Reid.
> >
> > There's no difference *AT ALL*.
> >
> > You can point to NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that those two unknown men were still in the building when it was locked down.
> >
> > Nor will you even try.

I was wrong... David not only "tried" - he claims that they never left the building!!!

> > > But in the instance of the "unidentified men" seen by Luke Mooney somewhere within the Book Depository Building shortly after the assassination, we have no clue as to the specific identities of those men, so therefore we can't possibly KNOW for certain where they went after being seen by Mooney that day.*
> >
> > They went OUT OF THE BUILDING. That's a fact.
>
> It's not a "fact" at all. You're just making up a theory that the men had to be "LEAVING THE BUILDING". There's no evidence for that at all---except your silly theories about those men being "the assassins".

Ah! So we can now identify these two men ... you believe that they're still in the building!

ROTFLMAO!!!

You have NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that they didn't leave the building... the presumption is quite clear that they did. Yet you presume they didn't leave. Their handlers at 1328 Bleker street would surely be surprised to hear you claim that.

> > You wish to pretend, with no evidence whatsoever, that they were merely bypassing the 6th floor to begin searching the 2nd... or whatever floor you imagine.
> >
> > After Luke Mooney saw them, THEY DISAPPEARED FROM ALL EVIDENCE & TESTIMONY.
> >
> > You cannot show otherwise.
> >
>
> We don't even know who they were. You don't. I don't. Mooney didn't. So what you just said about them "disappearing" is nothing but more speculation on the part of a rabid CTer. Nothing more.

Actually, it's simply a fact.

One that you can't publicly acknowledge.

I challenged you to show otherwise, and you acknowledged that you can't.

I'm right again... as usual.

> > And since we don't know who they are, THEY CANNOT POSSIBLY BE UNKNOWN ASSASSINS... the two who were seen at the 6th floor by multiple eyewitnesses... right David?
> >
> > SINCE WE DON'T KNOW WHO THEY WERE, ONE OF THEM MUST HAVE BEEN YOUR FATHER.
> >
> > See how easy this speculation game is?
> >
>
> You expect Mooney to be familiar with every cop & detective in Dallas, do you?
>
> Ben = Loopy.

Logical fallacies... Henry Sienzant would be ashamed of you.

**YOU** on the other hand, expect Mooney to be familiar with every assassin in Dallas.

ROTFLMAO!!!

David = Dishonest.

> > > * Was it REALLY necessary to explain something so incredibly obvious? Gimini Christmas.
> >
> >
> > Was it REALLY necessary to school you on such simple logic, David?
>
> You fail the "simple logic" test every time, Ben. This discussion was no different.

You lost again! :)