Speculation Piled On Top Of More Speculation...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 11:08:03 AM3/10/19

to

Speculation... the believer's best friend.

Found in the censored forum:

>OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND MISSED SHOT 1.
>
>OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND HIT JFK NEAR THE BASE OF THE
>NECK DURING SHOT#2.
>
>SHOT #3 WAS FROM THE FARTHEST DISTANCE (88YARDS) AND HIT JFK IN THE HEAD.
>
>SHOT #3 WAS THE LONGEST SHOT AND WAS THE KILL SHOT.

Each and every statement is speculation.

And that fact tells the tale.

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 11:19:45 AM3/10/19

to

Really? You think there were still bullets flying after the head shot?

healyd...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 12:03:43 PM3/10/19

to

perhaps you'll assist us in pointing out where in the 1964 WCR and volumes does this bit of *non* evidence show up....?

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 12:35:14 PM3/10/19

to

Not certain I can decipher your latest word salad, but if you want to rephrase is in a way I can answer it, I'll give it a try.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 1:27:04 PM3/10/19

to

On Sunday, March 10, 2019 at 8:19:45 AM UTC-7, chucksch...@gmail.com wrote:

Let's go through them one by one... and see if you're man enough to refute me.

> OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND MISSED SHOT 1

Sheer speculation. Indeed, Marines are taught to aim for the body, not the head. But **OBVIOUSLY** where an assassin was aiming is sheer speculation unless they *told* you.

> OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND HIT JFK NEAR THE BASE OF
> THE NECK DURING SHOT#2.

A repeat of the last speculation, with an added lie about where the shot hit. JFK was hit in the back, not the "base of the neck," or near the "base of the neck." This is unsupportable speculation combined with an outright lie.

> SHOT #3 WAS FROM THE FARTHEST DISTANCE (88YARDS) AND HIT JFK IN THE HEAD.

Actually, there's quite good evidence that this was *NOT* the last shot, and you can see this evidence in the extant Z-film. So ... once again, we have speculation...

> SHOT #3 WAS THE LONGEST SHOT AND WAS THE KILL SHOT.

This is a repeat of the last speculation.

Now, to answer your question Chuckles - yes, the extant Z-film provides quite credible evidence of further shots. And no, you COMPLETELY failed to refute a single thing I stated.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 10, 2019, 1:34:16 PM3/10/19

to

That's not possible.

You *CAN'T* answer it, no matter how it's explained to you.

BT George

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 2:28:32 PM3/11/19

to

On Sunday, March 10, 2019 at 10:08:03 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

And for this clueless post, beb is hereby awarded the coveted:

**GOLDEN DUFUS** award!!!

Given out periodically, in recognition of to the person making the most stupid or self-unaware post.

Since beb believes in more speculative theories than any human I have ever known, he qualifies on that last category alone. (See "Chuck's Benny Tracker Updated: Exposing a Kook Named Ben (sic) Holmes for undeniable proof.)

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 5:01:35 PM3/11/19

to

I only addressed your statement that there were shots after Z 313.

What do you have? Let's hear it.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 5:27:52 PM3/11/19

to

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 14:01:35 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

Amusingly, you still can't refute what I stated.

>What do you have? Let's hear it.

No, let's examine what you DON'T have... a refutation of what I stated
above.

So clearly, you agree.

Good!

healyd...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 5:52:59 PM3/11/19

to

you are upset... listen Einstein, you'll believe anyone who delivers a bit of hope.

Get smart the WCR is full of shit, what earthly reason do you suspect LHO did its all by his lonesome? Where is the proof? Not best guess "theory." PROOF!

How'd ya get Oswald in that 6th floor window at 1230hrs 11/22/1963, talk about "speculative theories, a better term is *wetdream*

Bud

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 7:43:16 PM3/11/19

to

Oswald killed Kennedy. And you can`t refute that.

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 8:38:23 PM3/11/19

to

More games.

Where's your proof for shots after Zapruder film frame 313?

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 11, 2019, 8:39:28 PM3/11/19

to

You're challenging, not me. Put up your case, let's compare it to the WCR conclusions.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 10:03:02 AM3/12/19

to

And you run again!

I don't need to provide anything... you refuse to refute what I stated, so clearly you agree with me. The original poster provided nothing but speculation, and you can't deny that fact.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 10:04:37 AM3/12/19

to

Been there, done that, you snipped it, claimed you'd never snipped it, and ran away.

You're a provable coward & liar... you can't "prove" anything to a liar such as yourself.

You lose!

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 11:05:26 AM3/12/19

to

Er, you're conflating. I challenged you on your specific assertion that each and every assertion the poster made was speculation. Clearly, you're wrong. Again.

The WC said three shots, the last shot being at Z313. The HSCA said 4 shots, the last shot being at Z 313.

If there was an investigation which concluded a shot was fired after JFK had his brains splattered, let me know. Otherwise, feel free to retreat and assume a fetal position.

Bye-bye, you've been soundly defeated.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 11:14:22 AM3/12/19

to

On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 08:05:25 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

Cry your heart out...

> I challenged you on your specific assertion that each and every
> assertion the poster made was speculation. Clearly, you're wrong.
> Again.

You`re a dumbass. Claims that can`t be supported are empty claims.
Empty claims are worthless (especially in support of fantastic
premises), so why did you bother posting them?

> The WC said three shots, the last shot being at Z313. The HSCA said
> 4 shots, the last shot being at Z 313.

Who cares what they thought? If **YOU** can't provide the evidence,
then you lose.

If YOU don't believe what they say, why should I?

(Of course, this is a question you'll refuse to answer... you'll run
like the coward you are yet again...)

> If there was an investigation which concluded a shot was fired after
> JFK had his brains splattered, let me know. Otherwise, feel free to
> retreat and assume a fetal position.

No moron, I rely on the EVIDENCE, not what someone else said about it.

>Bye-bye, you've been soundly defeated.

And yet, my statements stand... unrefuted by you or anyone else.

The entire post I quoted was filled with unsupported speculation, and
**YOU** haven't been able to touch that fact.

You lose.

healyd...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 12:24:58 PM3/12/19

to

I posit Chuckles has no formal position, nor opinion regarding 3-4 gunshots and the Z-film. He does not know the WCR evidence. He barfs up whatever .Johnite types want him too. With no forethought or knowledge.

The Zapruder film is the linchpin holding together the alleged evidence incriminating Oswald. If 4 shots rung out in Dealey Plaza that noontime lunch hour. The WCR. isn't worth campfire kindling... Chuckles knows that.

> You lose.

Been evident for months, hell, years even.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 3:10:09 PM3/12/19

to

On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 09:24:57 -0700 (PDT), healyd...@gmail.com

I've noted time and time again that Chuckles doesn't seem to know the
evidence...

Sadly, that's quite common among believers... David Von Pein, for
example, didn't know the description of the throat wound.

He had *NO IDEA* that "ragged" was not the description.

> The Zapruder film is the linchpin holding together the alleged
> evidence incriminating Oswald. If 4 shots rung out in Dealey Plaza
> that noontime lunch hour. The WCR. isn't worth campfire kindling...
> Chuckles knows that.

Chuckles probably isn't smart enough to know that if there were four
shots, then conspiracy is a proven fact.

>> You lose.
>
>Been evident for months, hell, years even.

Yep... I just have to keep reminding them...

BT George

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 3:34:26 PM3/12/19

to

Well actually it was. You just had to ask the right doctor:

See "A Ragged Addendum" here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/07/reclaiming-history-errors.html

Given what the good Doctor said, that Bugliosi footnoted to it, and that the explanation of a memory confusion as to which doctor said exactly what, it's no wonder beb has ignored this every time it has been pointed out to him. Gee. I "wonder" why? :-)

donald willis

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 4:14:58 PM3/12/19

to

He took two shots, I believe, missed one completely, then missed the kill shot again, more narrowly, though some say the back shot would have killed Kennedy. If so, then, yes, there are one in three chances that Oswald killed Kennedy. Alternate take: Arce took two shots, & Oswald was just the show-off up there.... So, yes, if Oswald was the shooter (one chance) and the back shot would have killed Kennedy (two), then I agree with you. Otherwise....

dcw

chucksch...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 4:35:10 PM3/12/19

to

If there were four shots, your conspiracy theory is a disproven fact.

healyd...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 4:57:58 PM3/12/19

to

now you're worthy that old nutter incompetent cdddraftsman, the perfect numbskull...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 12, 2019, 5:32:54 PM3/12/19

to

On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 13:35:09 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 13, 2019, 12:16:55 PM3/13/19

to

On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 16:43:15 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

Who owes you answers to anything that pops into your head? Why are you
even asking questions rather than putting a case out there for
consideration? If you have nothing to offer the audience just say so.

Bud

unread,

Mar 13, 2019, 3:04:46 PM3/13/19

to

Who asked you to answer anything? I challenged you to refute that Oswald killed Kennedy.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 15, 2019, 10:30:11 AM3/15/19

to

On Sun, 10 Mar 2019 08:08:03 -0700, Ben Holmes
<Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:

>Speculation... the believer's best friend.
>
>Found in the censored forum:
>
>>OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND MISSED SHOT 1.
>>
>>OSWALD WAS OBVIOUSLY AIMING FOR THE HEAD AND HIT JFK NEAR THE BASE OF THE
>>NECK DURING SHOT#2.
>>
>>SHOT #3 WAS FROM THE FARTHEST DISTANCE (88YARDS) AND HIT JFK IN THE HEAD.
>>
>>SHOT #3 WAS THE LONGEST SHOT AND WAS THE KILL SHOT.
>
>Each and every statement is speculation.
>
>And that fact tells the tale.

Has anyone noticed that not a single believer has been able to cite
the evidence showing *ANY* of these things?

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 19, 2019, 10:45:57 AM3/19/19

to

On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 12:04:45 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Bud

unread,

Mar 19, 2019, 6:43:06 PM3/19/19

to

Non sequitur.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Mar 27, 2019, 11:37:25 AM3/27/19

to

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 15:43:05 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Your words... own 'em!