On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 1:16:36 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 10:02:39 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 11:04:26 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 7:03:30 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > > On Friday, March 3, 2017 at 10:29:01 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > > David Von Pein:
> > > > > >>> What caused the bullet hole in JFK's throat [if it wasn't caused by a bullet exiting his throat]? And where did that bullet go? And why wasn't it in JFK's body at autopsy?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ben Holmes:
> > > > > >> The wound in JFK's throat was exactly what the doctors who saw it originally thought...an entry wound. That bullet ranged downward toward JFK's chest.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> It wasn't in JFK's body at the autopsy because it was pulled out in the pre-autopsy autopsy that took place between 6:40 and 8:00pm.
> > > > >
> > > > > David Von Pein:
> > > > > > Please note the multiple lies uttered by Ben Holmes above:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ben thinks that this statement....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "That bullet ranged downward toward JFK's chest."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...is "SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE" in this case. Of course Ben is lying, because such a desperate theory put forth by Ben is most certainly NOT supported by the "evidence" in this case at all. There is NO evidence that any bullet "ranged downward toward JFK's chest". None. Ben is engaging in nothing but blatant speculation and wishful thinking, and nothing more. (As per usual.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Here's my first response that DAVID KNEW ABOUT WHEN HE POSTED ON HIS WEBSITE!
> > > > > ************************************************
> > > > > So you're calling Kemp Clark, one of the doctors in attendance, a liar?
> > > >
> > > > I`m calling you stupid for not understanding what Kemp Clark meant by what he said.
> > >
> > > What a kook!
> > >
> > > Another OBVIOUS lie pointed out, and you're quite desperate to defend it.
> >
> > All you need to do is tell us what Kemp meant when he used the word "might" in the sentence you quoted.
>
> No, I don't.
>
> This isn't about provable factual history.
If you want to use what the witness said in support of an idea you have to use what the witness actually said.
> This is whether or not EVIDENCE EXISTS for a particular event. David labeled me a liar, and stated that there was "NO" evidence.
You`ve provided no evidence of a downranging bullet. You provided evidence that the doctors at one time thought such a thing was *possible*.
If you go to a doctor they might order certain test to determine your problem. This is not evidence that he *believes* you have any of the ailments being tested for, only that he sees them as possibilities.
Conspiracy retards always have problems with qualifiers. They are important, because they often change the entire meaning.
> I've provided that evidence...
>
> That makes you and David liars.
>
> "There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers." Proverbs 6:16-19
Are you saying God hates you?