Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

DVP Whimpers...

183 views
Skip to first unread message

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 21, 2013, 10:00:48 AM10/21/13
to
Found on censored forum:

DVP:
> I truly think Scott Kaiser might benefit from my websites on the JFK case.
> I'm not saying that EVERY last thing is included on my sites, but a lot of
> info and facts are included. And I didn't just MAKE UP the source material
> I often cite. Just like the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just MAKE UP any of
> the evidence against Oswald.

Anyone care to guess if DVP gives a list of people who left the TSBD and weren't
present at any mythical 'roll call' on his website?

And since DVP is now on record stating that "the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just
MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald." ... perhaps *HE* can tell us where
Chief Justice Warren got the "rich oil man" from...

Or not...


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

tom...@cox.net

unread,
Oct 21, 2013, 8:13:54 PM10/21/13
to
Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> Found on censored forum:
>
> DVP:
> > I truly think Scott Kaiser might benefit from my websites on the JFK
> > case. I'm not saying that EVERY last thing is included on my sites, but
> > a lot of info and facts are included. And I didn't just MAKE UP the
> > source material I often cite. Just like the WARREN COMMISSION didn't
> > just MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald.
>
> Anyone care to guess if DVP gives a list of people who left the TSBD and
> weren't present at any mythical 'roll call' on his website?
>
> And since DVP is now on record stating that "the WARREN COMMISSION didn't
> just MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald." ... perhaps *HE* can
> tell us where Chief Justice Warren got the "rich oil man" from...
>
> Or not...
===========================================================================
== what do you wanna bet he won't explain how oswald mailed the rifle order
in a ppost office several miles away from the tsbd at the same time oswald
was at work? ? ?
===========================================================================
my website might david a lotta good since it's from the 26 volumes he
hasn't read ! ! ! see>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/
===========================================================================
=

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

Bud

unread,
Oct 21, 2013, 8:35:05 PM10/21/13
to
On Monday, October 21, 2013 10:00:48 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Found on censored forum:
>
>
>
> DVP:
>
> > I truly think Scott Kaiser might benefit from my websites on the JFK case.
>
> > I'm not saying that EVERY last thing is included on my sites, but a lot of
>
> > info and facts are included. And I didn't just MAKE UP the source material
>
> > I often cite. Just like the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just MAKE UP any of
>
> > the evidence against Oswald.
>
>
>
> Anyone care to guess if DVP gives a list of people who left the TSBD and weren't
>
> present at any mythical 'roll call' on his website?

You are too stupid to realize that some of the people who had left (like Givens) may have been vouched for by people who were there during the head count.

> And since DVP is now on record stating that "the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just
>
> MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald." ... perhaps *HE* can tell us where
>
> Chief Justice Warren got the "rich oil man" from...

Explain how this is evidence against Oswald.
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Oct 21, 2013, 8:58:14 PM10/21/13
to
"The point is that *everyone* who'd been inside the TSBD had an opportunity to leave right after the shooting, but Oswald is the only worker who did so, according to the affidavits in CE 1381 and other testimony." -- Jean Davison; April 13, 2003

http://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Z7ZALKXgFsA/A-RoLGWDDNYJ

Maybe Ben Holmes and the other conspiracy clowns should have a look at Commission Exhibit No. 1381 that Jean spoke of in her above forum post from ten years ago.

CE1381 contains signed statements from 73 employees known to have been in the Book Depository on 11/22/63. Lee Harvey Oswald stands out like a sore thumb here.

But I'm sure that the great investigator named Benjamin Holmes has a convenient conspiratorial excuse to dismiss these 73 statements. I imagine he'll use the good ol' fallback of: "Well, since they were obtained by Hoover's FBI, we know it's all a big fat lie."

Right, Ben?

CE1381:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0331b.htm

Sam McClung

unread,
Oct 21, 2013, 10:54:29 PM10/21/13
to
>> DVP:
<snippage>
>> Just like the WARREN COMMISSION didn't
>> > just MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald.

the warren commission admitted it made up evidence against oswald

the warren commission acknowledged its personnel were rewriting witness
testimony taken under oath

ritzcracker's comment quoted above is just one more example of why his
incoherent utterances are filtered out on my reader

aeffects

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 12:09:08 AM10/22/13
to
On Monday, October 21, 2013 5:58:14 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
> "The point is that *everyone* who'd been inside the TSBD had an opportunity to leave right after the shooting, but Oswald is the only worker who did so, according to the affidavits in CE 1381 and other testimony." -- Jean Davison; April 13, 2003
>
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Z7ZALKXgFsA/A-RoLGWDDNYJ
>
>
>
> Maybe Ben Holmes and the other conspiracy clowns should have a look at Commission Exhibit No. 1381 that Jean spoke of in her above forum post from ten years ago.
>

we've been on to your lone nut bullshit for years, son. By the sounds of your blatherings the last few weeks, lone nuts are having a difficult time defending the WCR during 50th anniversary proceedings.
What you have to offer is stale dude, so make mine "crispy"... send in the "clowns, LMFAO!

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 10:01:54 AM10/22/13
to
In article <68c58410-ca1c-40d3...@googlegroups.com>, aeffects
says...
>
>On Monday, October 21, 2013 5:58:14 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
>> "The point is that *everyone* who'd been inside the TSBD had an opportunity
>> to leave right after the shooting, but Oswald is the only worker who did
>> so, according to the affidavits in CE 1381 and other testimony." -- Jean
>> Davison; April 13, 2003
>> http://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Z7ZALKXgFsA/A-RoLGWDDNYJ
>> Maybe Ben Holmes and the other conspiracy clowns should have a look at
>> Commission Exhibit No. 1381 that Jean spoke of in her above forum post
>> from ten years ago.

It's truly amusing to see this post - since it illustrated that the original
post couldn't be answered at all.

Here's the original post again:

***********************************************
DVP:
> I truly think Scott Kaiser might benefit from my websites on the JFK case.
> I'm not saying that EVERY last thing is included on my sites, but a lot of
> info and facts are included. And I didn't just MAKE UP the source material
> I often cite. Just like the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just MAKE UP any of
> the evidence against Oswald.

Anyone care to guess if DVP gives a list of people who left the TSBD and weren't
present at any mythical 'roll call' on his website?

And since DVP is now on record stating that "the WARREN COMMISSION didn't just
MAKE UP any of the evidence against Oswald." ... perhaps *HE* can tell us where
Chief Justice Warren got the "rich oil man" from...

Or not...
***********************************************

Looks like I was right... "DVP" is too much of a coward to admit that his
website doesn't have the list of people who left and weren't at any mythical
'roll-call'.

Nor was he able to refute my proof that he's a liar when he claims that the
Warren Commission didn't "make up" any evidence... they clearly did.

Tell us "DVP" - can you explain why you refuse to list the people who were *NOT*
at the TSBD after the murder?

Could it be that you'd embarrass quite a few Warren Commission believers?

Bud

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 1:56:28 PM10/22/13
to
Are you saying that there wasn`t an informal head count made? A number of witnesses said there was, are they all lying. Conspiracy retards have to call the witnesses liars, what they supplied doesn`t support their faith.

> Nor was he able to refute my proof that he's a liar when he claims that the
>
> Warren Commission didn't "make up" any evidence... they clearly did.
>
>
>
> Tell us "DVP" - can you explain why you refuse to list the people who were *NOT*
>
> at the TSBD after the murder?

Why don`t you name all the people who were in the TSBD when the shooting occurred that fled the area soon after. That would be a very short list indeed.

> Could it be that you'd embarrass quite a few Warren Commission believers?

You idiots will never figure this very simple crime out, you are too busy focusing on all the wrong things, like Mark Lane taught you to. Apparently he gave you quite a few pointers in dishonesty, also.

aeffects

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 3:41:30 PM10/22/13
to
you silly guy, you.... we understand your lone nut anxiety. After all, ANOTHER possible suspect? Hell, the script is already written, Oswald is the guy, eh Dud?

If Mark Lane would of had the opportunity to defend Oswald, he'd of swept the floor with you nutter fools like yourself... Carry on son!

tom...@cox.net

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 4:21:32 PM10/22/13
to
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> "The point is that *everyone* who'd been inside the TSBD had an
> oppor= tunity to leave right after the shooting, but Oswald is the only
> worker who=
> did so, according to the affidavits in CE 1381 and other testimony." --
> Je= an Davison; April 13, 2003
>
> http://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/Z7ZALKXgFsA/A-RoLGWDDNY
> J
>
> Maybe Ben Holmes and the other conspiracy clowns should have a look at
> Comm= ission Exhibit No. 1381 that Jean spoke of in her above forum post
> from ten=
> years ago.
>
> CE1381 contains signed statements from 72 employees known to have been in
> t= he Book Depository on 11/22/63. Lee Harvey Oswald stands out like a
> sore th= umb here.
>
> But I'm sure that the great investigator named Benjamin Holmes has a
> conven= ient conspiratorial excuse to dismiss these 72 statements. I
> imagine he'll = use the good ol' fallback of: "Well, since they were
> obtained by Hoover's F= BI, we know it's all a big fat lie."
> .h= tm
david; are you gonna answer who else was housed along with oswald at 3126
hrlendale avenue in dallas? ? ?

tom...@cox.net

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 4:28:25 PM10/22/13
to
===========================================================================
==== see>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/missing_employees.htm
===========================================================================
===

tom...@cox.net

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 4:29:16 PM10/22/13
to
see>>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/missing_employees.htm

> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> >
> > Ben Holmes
> >
> > Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 5:13:02 PM10/22/13
to
In article <2e0668a8-e41c-4ba3...@googlegroups.com>, aeffects
says...
>
>On Tuesday, October 22, 2013 10:56:28 AM UTC-7, Bud wrote:
>> On Tuesday, October 22, 2013 10:01:54 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>> In article <68c58410-ca1c-40d3...@googlegroups.com>, aeffects
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>>On Monday, October 21, 2013 5:58:14 PM UTC-7, David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>> "The point is that *everyone* who'd been inside the TSBD had an
>>>>> opportunity to leave right after the shooting, but Oswald is the only
>>>>> worker who did so, according to the affidavits in CE 1381 and other
>>>>> testimony." -- Jean Davison; April 13, 2003


Jean's lying... if that's what she said. It's easy to spot other workers who
left both before and after the actual shooting by reading CE 1381.
Are you stupid?

Let me repeat what I just said: Looks like I was right... "DVP" is too much of a
coward to admit that his website doesn't have the list of people who left and
weren't at any mythical 'roll-call'.

Now, if you're *NOT* stupid, why not simply cite where DVP has that on his
website... help him out.

If you need the list, I'll be happy to provide it.

But every time some Warren Commission believer sputters that LHO was the only
one missing from the TSBD - they're flat lying.


>>> Nor was he able to refute my proof that he's a liar when he claims that the
>>> Warren Commission didn't "make up" any evidence... they clearly did.
>>> Tell us "DVP" - can you explain why you refuse to list the people who
>>> were *NOT* at the TSBD after the murder?
>>
>> Why don`t you name all the people who were in the TSBD when the
>> shooting occurred that fled the area soon after. That would be a very'
>> short list indeed.


Even *ONE* person other than Oswald would turn Warren Commission believers into
liars...

Have you bothered to *READ* the very citation given in this thread?


>>> Could it be that you'd embarrass quite a few Warren Commission believers?
>>
>> You idiots will never figure this very simple crime out, you are too busy
>> focusing on all the wrong things, like Mark Lane taught you to.

Mark Lane focused on lies and liars...

I agree with him... lies aren't needed to support the truth, nor are liars.

>> Apparently he gave you quite a few pointers in dishonesty, also.

There are currently 371 possibilities for you to illustrate as "dishonest" - get
busy...


> you silly guy, you.... we understand your lone nut anxiety. After all,
> ANOTHER possible suspect? Hell, the script is already written, Oswald is
> the guy, eh Dud?
>
> If Mark Lane would of had the opportunity to defend Oswald, he'd of swept
> the floor with you nutter fools like yourself... Carry on son!


And in close to 50 years, his book 'Rush To Judgment' still hasn't been refuted.

Embarrassing... isn't it?

Bud

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 8:50:36 PM10/22/13
to
Preparing to run from what I wrote, aren`t you?

> Let me repeat what I just said: Looks like I was right... "DVP" is too much of a
>
> coward to admit that his website doesn't have the list of people who left and
>
> weren't at any mythical 'roll-call'.

Why are you replying to what I wrote if you are only going to run from it? Witnesses said there was an informal head count. Are you saying they lied? What is your alternative to workers in the TSBD getting together to determine that Oswald was missing and unaccounted for?

> Now, if you're *NOT* stupid, why not simply cite where DVP has that on his
>
> website... help him out.

Thats not the argument, stupid, it`s an irrelevancy. Whats relevant is that shots came from the TSBD, and Oswald is the only person known to have been inside the building during the shooting that was accounted for shortly afterwards.

> If you need the list, I'll be happy to provide it.

Provide the list of people who were in the building during the shooting that left the area shortly afterwards.

> But every time some Warren Commission believer sputters that LHO was the only
>
> one missing from the TSBD - they're flat lying.

Thats the strawman you want to address.

>
>
>
>
> >>> Nor was he able to refute my proof that he's a liar when he claims that the
>
> >>> Warren Commission didn't "make up" any evidence... they clearly did.
>
> >>> Tell us "DVP" - can you explain why you refuse to list the people who
>
> >>> were *NOT* at the TSBD after the murder?
>
> >>
>
> >> Why don`t you name all the people who were in the TSBD when the
>
> >> shooting occurred that fled the area soon after. That would be a very'
>
> >> short list indeed.
>
>
>
>
>
> Even *ONE* person other than Oswald would turn Warren Commission believers into
>
> liars...

You are running when you should be naming one.

> Have you bothered to *READ* the very citation given in this thread?

More running. Why aren`t you producing the name of a person other than Oswald who was in the building during the shooting that was unaccounted for shortly after?

> >>> Could it be that you'd embarrass quite a few Warren Commission believers?
>
> >>
>
> >> You idiots will never figure this very simple crime out, you are too busy
>
> >> focusing on all the wrong things, like Mark Lane taught you to.
>
>
>
> Mark Lane focused on lies and liars...

He told lies to idiots like yourself who were too stupid to realize they were being lied to.

> I agree with him... lies aren't needed to support the truth, nor are liars.

Then why did Lane use this approach?

> >> Apparently he gave you quite a few pointers in dishonesty, also.
>
>
>
> There are currently 371 possibilities for you to illustrate as "dishonest" - get
>
> busy...

That was accomplished very early on in that series.

>
>
>
>
> > you silly guy, you.... we understand your lone nut anxiety. After all,
>
> > ANOTHER possible suspect? Hell, the script is already written, Oswald is
>
> > the guy, eh Dud?
>
> >
>
> > If Mark Lane would of had the opportunity to defend Oswald, he'd of swept
>
> > the floor with you nutter fools like yourself... Carry on son!
>
>
>
>
>
> And in close to 50 years, his book 'Rush To Judgment' still hasn't been refuted.

Nothing is any different if that book had never been written. Anybody can critique an investigation.

tom...@cox.net

unread,
Oct 22, 2013, 10:08:03 PM10/22/13
to
out of curiosity;

ben; do you have the 26 volumes? ? ?
0 new messages