How to destroy Ben Holmes

[lisa...@gmail.com]

Don't respond to him.

It's time to put this forum out to pasture. For good. Make Ben engage on the subject at another forum.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 7:00:10 AM UTC-7, lisa...@gmail.com wrote:
> Don't respond to him.
>
> It's time to put this forum out to pasture. For good. Make Ben engage on the subject at another forum.

Ah! Another anonymous troll has appeared! And, of course, quite likely simply another identity of one of the regulars.

It's not possible for believers not to engage... so I have no worries on that account.

But let's take the opportunity to school believers some more:

************************************************************
"James Fetzer, PhD, is the editor of the only exclusively scientific books (three) on the assassination. David Mantik, MD, PhD, is among the leading conspiracy researchers and writers in the current conspiracy community. They are both good and sincere men. Dr. Fetzer wrote me on January, 23, 2001;

'What would it take, David Mantik has asked me to inquire of you. What would it take to convince you of the existence of a conspiracy and cover-up in the death of JFK? What would it take to persuade you of Oswald's innocence, which is not necessarily the same thing? Are none of our major discoveries - our '16 smoking guns,' for example - convincing? And if not, why? And, if not, then what would it take?'

Only evidence, Drs. Fetzer and Mantik. Only evidence." - Reclaiming History, page 974.
*************************************************************

Sadly, although the above quote from Bugliosi's book makes it quite clear that Bugliosi was well acquainted with the 16 smoking guns... Bugliosi didn't have the guts to actually address these issues.

For in what has become EXPECTED BEHAVIOR for Warren Commission defenders, Bugliosi too refuses to answer the evidence.

David Mantik made the mistake of thinking that he was addressing the question to an honest man. A mistake that I rarely make - having had much experience with the sort of Warren Commission defenders who inhabit forums.

Although the details of each "Smoking Gun" must be appreciated by reading the book - here's a synopsis of what Bugliosi simply ran away from:

*************************************************************
For the official government account of the death of JFK to be true, therefore, at least the following three conjectures - "hypotheses," let us call them, to avoid begging the question by taking for granted what needs to be established on independent grounds - have to be true:

(H1) JFK was hit at the base of the back of his neck by a bullet that transversed his neck without hitting any bony structures and exited his throat at the level of his tie;

(H2) JFK was hit in the back of his head by a bullet fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, as its diagrams display, causing his death; and,

(H3) these bullets were fired by a sole assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, using a high powered rifle, which was identified as a 6.5 mm Italian Mannlicher-Carcano.

Smoking Gun #1: (H1) is an anatomical impossibility, because the bullet would have had to impact bony structures.

Smoking Gun #2: The head shot trajectory is inconsistent with the position of his head at the time of the shot, falsifying (H2).

Smoking Gun #3: The weapon, which was not even a rifle, could not have fired the bullets that killed the President, falsifying (H3).

Smoking Gun #4: The bullets, which were standard copper-jacketed World War II vintage military ammunition, could not have caused the explosive damage.

Smoking Gun #5: The axis of metallic debris is inconsistent with a shot from behind but consistent with a shot that entered the area of the right temple.

Smoking Gun #6: The official autopsy report was contradicted by more than 40 eyewitness reports and was inconsistent with HSCA diagrams and photographs.

Smoking Gun #7: These eyewitness reports were rejected on the basis of the X-rays, which have been fabricated in at least two different ways.

Smoking Gun #8: Diagrams and photos of a brain in the National Archives are of the brain of someone other than JFK.

Smoking Gun #9: Those who took and processed the autopsy photographs claim that parts of the photographic record have been altered, created, or destroyed.

Smoking Gun #10: The Zapruder film, among others, has been extensively edited using highly sophisticated techniques.

Smoking Gun #11: The official conclusion contradicts widely-broadcast reports on radio and television about two shots fired from the front.

Smoking Gun #12: The (fabricated) X-rays, (altered) autopsy photographs, and even the (edited) Zapruder film were improperly used to discredit eyewitness reports.

Smoking Gun #13: The motorcade route was changed at the last minute and yet the assassination occurred on the part that had been changed.

Smoking Gun #14: Secret Service policies for the protection of the President were massively violated during the motorcade in Dallas.

Smoking Gun #15: Neither the Mafia nor pro- or anti-Castro Cubans nor the KGB could have done any of these things - [fabricated autopsy X-rays; substituted the brain of someone else for the brain of JFK; created, altered, or destroyed autopsy photographs; or subjected motion pictures, such as the Zapruder film, to extensive editing using highly sophisticated techniques] - much less Lee Oswald, who was either incarcerated or already dead.

Smoking Gun #16: Many individuals knew details about the assassination before and after the fact, all of whom viewed Lee Oswald as no more than a patsy.
*************************************************************

Now, if you'd like to claim that these were addressed by Bugliosi (rather than just referred to), you'll have to cite the page number, or QUOTE the response.

But you won't...

[David Von Pein]

I will though (and I have---9 years ago)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/16-smoking-guns-or-16-misfires.html

[Ben Holmes]

Sadly, you won't post it here, *OR* defend it here.

And you CERTAINLY won't cite page numbers...

[David Von Pein]

Already did, you idiot. And you know it. I cited "RH" page numbers all over the place in my "16 Smoking Guns" article.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/16-smoking-guns-or-16-misfires.html

[Ben Holmes]

Sadly, you won't post it here, *OR* defend it here... and you CERTAINLY won't post page numbers...

Yet another prediction fulfilled.