Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Mark Lane #231
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Holmes
Apr 4, 2013, 9:29:46 AM4/4/13
to
In the previous paragraphs, Mark Lane continued pointing out chain of custody
issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'ers run from.
"The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called upon to
testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol felt that
the
shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positive in this
instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with the words
'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regarding the
bullet
an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my opinion
that
those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the revolver'.
Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet in regard
to
the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more didactic and
less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at the scene of
the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald at the
time
of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
Mark Lane is showing the difference between what the experts stated, and what
the
Warren Commission stated.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'ers run from.
"The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called upon to
testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol felt that
the
shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positive in this
instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with the words
'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regarding the
bullet
an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my opinion
that
those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the revolver'.
Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet in regard
to
the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more didactic and
less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at the scene of
the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald at the
time
of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
Mark Lane is showing the difference between what the experts stated, and what
the
Warren Commission stated.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
timstter
May 17, 2013, 9:56:12 PM5/17/13
to
On Apr 4, 11:29 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of custody
He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
Picayune newspaper.
YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
Lane is, Holmes.
It's as simple as that, really.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
> In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of custody
> issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'ers run from.
>
> "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called upon to
> testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol felt that
> the
> shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positive in this
> instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with the words
> 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regarding the
> bullet
> an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my opinion
> that
> those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the revolver'.
> Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet in regard
> to
> the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>
> The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more didactic and
> less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at the scene of
> the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald at the
> time
> of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>
> MarkLaneis showing the difference between what the experts stated, and what
>
> "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called upon to
> testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol felt that
> the
> shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positive in this
> instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with the words
> 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regarding the
> bullet
> an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my opinion
> that
> those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the revolver'.
> Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet in regard
> to
> the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>
> The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more didactic and
> less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at the scene of
> the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald at the
> time
> of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>
> the
> Warren Commission stated.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
No, Mark Lane is simply LYING again.
> Warren Commission stated.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
Picayune newspaper.
YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
Lane is, Holmes.
It's as simple as that, really.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
timstter
May 20, 2013, 4:36:50 PM5/20/13
to
>
> X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
> X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
TB
aeffects
May 21, 2013, 12:14:07 AM5/21/13
to
to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
Tim 'Mark Lane lied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
Carry on, load!
> TB
Ben Holmes
May 21, 2013, 9:13:07 AM5/21/13
to
In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...
>
>On May 20, 1:36=A0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 18, 11:56=A0am, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Apr 4, 11:29=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of cu=
>stody
>> > > issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'ers=
> run from.
>>
>> > > "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called=
> upon to
>> > > testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol =
>felt that
>> > > the
>> > > shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positiv=
>e in this
>> > > instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with=
> the words
>> > > 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regardin=
>g the
>> > > bullet
>> > > an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my =
>opinion
>> > > that
>> > > those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the=
> revolver'.
>> > > Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet=
>dactic and
>> > > less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at th=
>e scene of
>> > > the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald=
topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>> TB
aeffects says...
>
>On May 20, 1:36=A0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 18, 11:56=A0am, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Apr 4, 11:29=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of cu=
>stody
>> > > issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'ers=
> run from.
>>
>> > > "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were called=
> upon to
>> > > testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nicol =
>felt that
>> > > the
>> > > shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less positiv=
>e in this
>> > > instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion with=
> the words
>> > > 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regardin=
>g the
>> > > bullet
>> > > an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is my =
>opinion
>> > > that
>> > > those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the=
> revolver'.
>> > > Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; yet=
> in regard
>> > > to
>> > > the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>>
>> > > The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more di=
>> > > to
>> > > the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>>
>dactic and
>> > > less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at th=
>e scene of
>> > > the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Oswald=
> at the
>> > > time
>> > > of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>>
>> > > MarkLaneis showing the difference between what the experts stated, an=
>> > > time
>> > > of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>>
>d what
>> > > the
>> > > Warren Commission stated.
>>
>> > > --
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------=
>> > > the
>> > > Warren Commission stated.
>>
>> > > --
>---
>> > > Ben Holmes
>> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>>
>> > No, Mark Lane is simply LYING again.
>>
>> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
>> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
>> > Picayune newspaper.
>>
>> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>>
>> > You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
>> > Lane is, Holmes.
>>
>> > It's as simple as that, really.
>>
>> > Informative Regards,
>>
>> > Tim Brennan
>> > Sydney, Australia
>> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>>
>> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
>> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>> > Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
>>
>> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://www.=
>> > > Ben Holmes
>> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>>
>> > No, Mark Lane is simply LYING again.
>>
>> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
>> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
>> > Picayune newspaper.
>>
>> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>>
>> > You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
>> > Lane is, Holmes.
>>
>> > It's as simple as that, really.
>>
>> > Informative Regards,
>>
>> > Tim Brennan
>> > Sydney, Australia
>> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>>
>> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
>> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>> > Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
>>
>history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>>
>> > X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
>>
>> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
>you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
>to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
>Tim 'Mark Lane lied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
>about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
>Carry on, load!
My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
>>
>> > X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
>>
>> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
>you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
>to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
>Tim 'Mark Lane lied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
>about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
>Carry on, load!
topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>> TB
aeffects
May 21, 2013, 3:47:57 PM5/21/13
to
On May 21, 6:13 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
indeed!
when it comes to Mark Lane's Rush to Judgement the .johnites have only
one solution, while running away they change the subject...
that's it!
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
when it comes to Mark Lane's Rush to Judgement the .johnites have only
one solution, while running away they change the subject...
that's it!
timstter
May 21, 2013, 4:01:20 PM5/21/13
to
On May 21, 11:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
My guess is you'll avoid any discussion of Lane's lie re what Nicol
said, Holmes.
Your hero is a liar and people knew it back in the sixties.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
said, Holmes.
Your hero is a liar and people knew it back in the sixties.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
Ben Holmes
May 22, 2013, 9:24:59 AM5/22/13
to
In article <52a6baba-29fc-48ab...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...
>
>On May 21, 6:13=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> aeffects says...
>>
>> >On May 20, 1:36=3DA0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On May 18, 11:56=3DA0am, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Apr 4, 11:29=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of=
> cu=3D
>> >stody
>> >> > > issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'=
>ers=3D
>> > run from.
>>
>> >> > > "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were cal=
>led=3D
>> > upon to
>> >> > > testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nic=
>ol =3D
>> >felt that
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less posi=
>tiv=3D
>> >e in this
>> >> > > instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion w=
>ith=3D
>> > the words
>> >> > > 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regar=
>din=3D
>> >g the
>> >> > > bullet
>> >> > > an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is =
>my =3D
>> >opinion
>> >> > > that
>> >> > > those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in =
>the=3D
>> > revolver'.
>> >> > > Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; =
>yet=3D
> di=3D
>> >dactic and
>> >> > > less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at=
> th=3D
>> >e scene of
>> >> > > the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Osw=
>ald=3D
> an=3D
>---=3D
>ww.=3D
someone "playing" with the subject line.
Quite the coward, our little Billy...
aeffects says...
>
>On May 21, 6:13=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> aeffects says...
>>
>> >On May 20, 1:36=3DA0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On May 18, 11:56=3DA0am, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Apr 4, 11:29=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > > In the previous paragraphs,MarkLanecontinued pointing out chain of=
> cu=3D
>> >stody
>> >> > > issues with the evidence... this is the sort of material that LNT'=
>ers=3D
>> > run from.
>>
>> >> > > "The same two police experts who had examined the bullets were cal=
>led=3D
>> > upon to
>> >> > > testify about the shells. As he had in the case of one bullet, Nic=
>ol =3D
>> >felt that
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > shells came from the revolver in question, but he seemed less posi=
>tiv=3D
>> >e in this
>> >> > > instance than he was about the bullet, qualifying his conclusion w=
>ith=3D
>> > the words
>> >> > > 'it is my opinion'. Cunningham, who found Nicol's conclusion regar=
>din=3D
>> >g the
>> >> > > bullet
>> >> > > an impossibility, asserted that in the case of the shells, 'it is =
>my =3D
>> >opinion
>> >> > > that
>> >> > > those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in =
>the=3D
>> > revolver'.
>> >> > > Thus Cunningham found Nicol inaccurate when Nicol seemed certain; =
>yet=3D
>> > in regard
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>>
>> >> > > The opinion of the two police experts found expression in the more=
>> >> > > to
>> >> > > the shells Nicol appeared less than certain.
>>
> di=3D
>> >dactic and
>> >> > > less complex language of the Report: 'The cartridge cases found at=
> th=3D
>> >e scene of
>> >> > > the shooting were fired from the revolver in the possession of Osw=
>ald=3D
>> > at the
>> >> > > time
>> >> > > of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>>
>> >> > > MarkLaneis showing the difference between what the experts stated,=
>> >> > > time
>> >> > > of his arrest to the exclusion of all other weapons.'"
>>
> an=3D
>> >d what
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > Warren Commission stated.
>>
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------=
>> >> > > the
>> >> > > Warren Commission stated.
>>
>> >> > > --
>---=3D
>> >---
>> >> > > Ben Holmes
>> >> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>>
>> >> > No, Mark Lane is simply LYING again.
>>
>> >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
>> >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
>> >> > Picayune newspaper.
>>
>> >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>>
>> >> > You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
>> >> > Lane is, Holmes.
>>
>> >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>>
>> >> > Informative Regards,
>>
>> >> > Tim Brennan
>> >> > Sydney, Australia
>> >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>>
>> >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
>> >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>> >> > Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
>>
>> >> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://w=
>> >> > > Ben Holmes
>> >> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>>
>> >> > No, Mark Lane is simply LYING again.
>>
>> >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
>> >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
>> >> > Picayune newspaper.
>>
>> >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>>
>> >> > You simply chose to repeat Lane's lie because you are LIAR just like
>> >> > Lane is, Holmes.
>>
>> >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>>
>> >> > Informative Regards,
>>
>> >> > Tim Brennan
>> >> > Sydney, Australia
>> >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>>
>> >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
>> >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>> >> > Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
>>
>ww.=3D
>> >history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>>
>> >> > X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
>>
>> >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>>
>> >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
>> >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>>
>> >Tim 'Mark Lane lied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
>> >about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
>> >Carry on, load!
>>
>> My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
>> topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
>indeed!
>when it comes to Mark Lane's Rush to Judgement the .johnites have only
>one solution, while running away they change the subject...
>that's it!
>
>> >> TB
I was right... Billy Clarke is absolutely silent on this *REAL* example of
>>
>> >> > X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!
>>
>> >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>>
>> >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
>> >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>>
>> >Tim 'Mark Lane lied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
>> >about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
>> >Carry on, load!
>>
>> My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
>> topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
>indeed!
>when it comes to Mark Lane's Rush to Judgement the .johnites have only
>one solution, while running away they change the subject...
>that's it!
>
>> >> TB
someone "playing" with the subject line.
Quite the coward, our little Billy...
aeffects
May 22, 2013, 3:52:19 PM5/22/13
to
On May 22, 6:24 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <52a6baba-29fc-48ab-81f9-1c8d51cb2...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
let's not forget 'Chubbs' Tim Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup
comic)...
> In article <52a6baba-29fc-48ab-81f9-1c8d51cb2...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
comic)...
timstter
May 24, 2013, 5:10:09 PM5/24/13
to
On May 21, 11:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
My guess is that YOU will be absolutely SILENT on the lie Mark Lane
told re Nicol.
When Lane's lies are demonstrated, you simply run.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
> In article <c3c58008-1ef6-477e-99fd-b6f57bef9...@li6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
told re Nicol.
When Lane's lies are demonstrated, you simply run.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
timstter
May 24, 2013, 6:52:51 PM5/24/13
to
if I were you, Dave/Ringo.
I mean, have you SEEN the Encino Judo Club video with some guy
CAVORTING like a beer-gutted CLOWN in the background, Dave/Ringo?
Right here, Dave/Ringo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc0vSIad7mk
You might OFFEND somebody if you're not careful, Dave/Ringo.
And we all know just how SENSITIVE poor lil' Benny can be...
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
timstter
May 25, 2013, 4:19:45 AM5/25/13
to
OK, Dave/Ringo, here goes:
Times Picayune, New Orleans, Sunday, June 25, 1967. The authors are
Bernard Gazver and Sid Moody.
QUOTE ON:
On page 199 of the hardcover edition of *Rush To Judgment* Lane
mentions an Illinois ballistics expert, Joseph D. Nicol. Nicol
testified before the commission on Oswald's pistol, the shells found
at the scene of the slaying of officer J. D. Tippit and bullets
recovered from Tippit's body.
Lane says Nicol *appeared less than certain* the shells came from
Oswald's gun. There is a footnote in the passage referring to Volume
III of the hearings, Page 511. Few readers have the volumes much less
the time to check Lane's thousands of citations. A pity.
On Page 511, Volume III Nicol is asked by commission counsel Melvin
Eisenberg if he was *certain in your own mind of the identification*
of the shells. Nicol replied: *Yes; the marks on the firing pin
particularly were very definitive. Apparently this firing pin had been
subjected to some rather severe abuse, and there were numerous small
and large striations which could be matched up very easily.*
Yet Lane says Joseph D. Nicol appeared *less than certain.*
QUOTE OFF
Already provided BEFORE, Dave/Ringo.
Holmes RAN from it then, as well.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
Bud
May 25, 2013, 8:45:39 AM5/25/13
to
that Tim pointed out that Lane told, idiot. What a coward he is and a
retard you are. He keeps putting these articles up and when lies are
pointed out he runs, and you are just too stupid to realize this. Just
keep rah-rahing like a cheerleader with a labotomy, you drooling
junkie dunce. Oh, and thank you for your service.
timstter
May 25, 2013, 5:13:34 PM5/25/13
to
On May 22, 11:24 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <52a6baba-29fc-48ab-81f9-1c8d51cb2...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Don't see you wanting to engage in any substantive debate re the lie
Lane told about Nicol, Holmes.
As usual, you simply RUN and change the subject.
Lane is a liar, simple as that.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm
> In article <52a6baba-29fc-48ab-81f9-1c8d51cb2...@zo5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
Lane told about Nicol, Holmes.
As usual, you simply RUN and change the subject.
Lane is a liar, simple as that.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
timstter
May 26, 2013, 3:40:04 PM5/26/13
to
>
> > > >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
> > > >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
> > > >> > Picayune newspaper.
>
> > > >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>
> > > >> > You simply chose to repeatLane'slie because you are LIAR just like
> > > >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
> > > >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
> > > >> > Picayune newspaper.
>
> > > >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>
> > > >> >Laneis, Holmes.
>
> > > >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>
> > > >> > Informative Regards,
>
> > > >> > Tim Brennan
> > > >> > Sydney, Australia
> > > >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> > > >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> > > >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
> > > >> >MarkLane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
> > > >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>
> > > >> > Informative Regards,
>
> > > >> > Tim Brennan
> > > >> > Sydney, Australia
> > > >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> > > >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> > > >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>
> > > >> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://www.=
> > > >history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>
> > > >> > X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
>
> > > >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
> > > >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
> > > >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
> > > >Tim 'MarkLanelied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
> > > >> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://www.=
> > > >history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>
> > > >> > X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
>
> > > >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
> > > >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
> > > >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
> > > >about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
> > > >Carry on, load!
>
> > > My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
> > > topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
> > indeed!
> > when it comes toMarkLane'sRush to Judgement the .johnites have only
> > > >Carry on, load!
>
> > > My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
> > > topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
> > indeed!
> > one solution, while running away they change the subject...
> > that's it!
>
> Ben just misdirected to the topic line to avoid addressing the lie
> that Tim pointed out thatLanetold, idiot. What a coward he is and a
> > that's it!
>
> Ben just misdirected to the topic line to avoid addressing the lie
> retard you are. He keeps putting these articles up and when lies are
> pointed out he runs, and you are just too stupid to realize this. Just
> keep rah-rahing like a cheerleader with a labotomy, you drooling
> junkie dunce. Oh, and thank you for your service.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >> TB
>
> > > --
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Ben Holmes
> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
LOL! Your description of Healy has completely NAILED his lame antics!
> pointed out he runs, and you are just too stupid to realize this. Just
> keep rah-rahing like a cheerleader with a labotomy, you drooling
> junkie dunce. Oh, and thank you for your service.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >> TB
>
> > > --
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Ben Holmes
> > > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
timstter
May 27, 2013, 8:38:40 AM5/27/13
to
>
> > >> >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
> > >> >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
> > >> >> > Picayune newspaper.
>
> > >> >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>
> > >> >> > You simply chose to repeatLane'slie because you are LIAR just like
> > >> >> > He has misrepresented and LIED about what Mr Nicol said, as was
> > >> >> > pointed out by Sid Moody and Co. back in the sixties in the Times
> > >> >> > Picayune newspaper.
>
> > >> >> > YOU have been informed of this BEFORE, Holmes.
>
> > >> >> >Laneis, Holmes.
>
> > >> >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>
> > >> >> > Informative Regards,
>
> > >> >> > Tim Brennan
> > >> >> > Sydney, Australia
> > >> >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> > >> >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> > >> >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
> > >> >> >MarkLane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
> > >> >> > It's as simple as that, really.
>
> > >> >> > Informative Regards,
>
> > >> >> > Tim Brennan
> > >> >> > Sydney, Australia
> > >> >> > *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> > >> >> > *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> > >> >> > neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
>
> > >> >> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://w=
> > >ww.=3D
> > >> >history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>
> > >> >> > X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
>
> > >> >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
> > >> >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
> > >> >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
> > >> >Tim 'MarkLanelied' Brennan (aka Tim Shell failed standup comic) that
> > >> >> > And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://w=
> > >ww.=3D
> > >> >history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>
> > >> >> > X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
>
> > >> >> BUMP! YOO HOO! BENNY!
>
> > >> >you must be beside yourself Chubbs, when will you ever learn you have
> > >> >to post 'cites', you overblown bloviator you!
>
> > >> >about sums up your entire knowledge of the case.... ROTFLMFAO! ! ! !
> > >> >Carry on, load!
>
> > >> My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
> > >> topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
> > >indeed!
> > >when it comes toMarkLane'sRush to Judgement the .johnites have only
> > >> >Carry on, load!
>
> > >> My guess is that Billy Clarke will be absolutely silent on Timmy changing the
> > >> topic line - even as he disparages my right to *write* one.
>
> > >indeed!
> > >one solution, while running away they change the subject...
> > >that's it!
>
> > >> >> TB
>
> > I was right... Billy Clarke is absolutely silent on this *REAL* example of
> > someone "playing" with the subject line.
>
> > Quite the coward, our little Billy...
>
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Ben Holmes
> > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>
> Don't see you wanting to engage in any substantive debate re the lieLanetold about Nicol, Holmes.
> > >that's it!
>
> > >> >> TB
>
> > I was right... Billy Clarke is absolutely silent on this *REAL* example of
> > someone "playing" with the subject line.
>
> > Quite the coward, our little Billy...
>
> > --
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Ben Holmes
> > Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
>
>
> As usual, you simply RUN and change the subject.
>
> Laneis a liar, simple as that.
> As usual, you simply RUN and change the subject.
>
>
> Informative Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
> neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).MarkLane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.
> Informative Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> *...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
>
> And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol...
>
> X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
BUMP! YOO HOO! HOLMES!
> X marks the spot whereMarkLanelied!
TB
0 new messages