Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Proven Lies Of The Warren Commission (#3)
28 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Holmes
Apr 21, 2021, 10:18:21 AM4/21/21
to
"Givens thought this was about 11:55 a.m. None of the Depository
employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
shooting." (WCR 143)
This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
"Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. PIPER. Well, I said to him---"It's about lunch time. I believe
I'll go have lunch." So, he says, "Yeah"---he mumbled something---I
don't know whether he said he was going up or going out, so I got my
sandwich off of the radiator and went on back to the first window of
the first floor. (6H 383)
Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came
down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.
Mr. BALL - Where had you been working?
Mr. SHELLEY - I had been on the sixth floor with the boys laying that
floor that morning.
Mr. BALL - What time did you go down and eat lunch?
Mr. SHELLEY - It was around 10 'til. (6H 328)
And, of course, we have Carolyn Arnold, who reports seeing LHO around
12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (CD 5 pg 41)
The WC lied when it stated that "None of the Depository employees is
known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting." Their own
evidence shows that he was seen *before* the time that Givens
asserted, down on the 1st floor, and was seen repeatedly on either the
1st or 2nd floor *after* Given's alleged sighting.
Why does the "truth" need a lie to support it?
Another question lurkers may wish to consider: why do believers run
from these questions? I rarely get responses from any but the trolls -
and no response has yet refuted the clear lies of the WCR.
employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
shooting." (WCR 143)
This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
"Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. PIPER. Well, I said to him---"It's about lunch time. I believe
I'll go have lunch." So, he says, "Yeah"---he mumbled something---I
don't know whether he said he was going up or going out, so I got my
sandwich off of the radiator and went on back to the first window of
the first floor. (6H 383)
Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came
down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.
Mr. BALL - Where had you been working?
Mr. SHELLEY - I had been on the sixth floor with the boys laying that
floor that morning.
Mr. BALL - What time did you go down and eat lunch?
Mr. SHELLEY - It was around 10 'til. (6H 328)
And, of course, we have Carolyn Arnold, who reports seeing LHO around
12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (CD 5 pg 41)
The WC lied when it stated that "None of the Depository employees is
known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting." Their own
evidence shows that he was seen *before* the time that Givens
asserted, down on the 1st floor, and was seen repeatedly on either the
1st or 2nd floor *after* Given's alleged sighting.
Why does the "truth" need a lie to support it?
Another question lurkers may wish to consider: why do believers run
from these questions? I rarely get responses from any but the trolls -
and no response has yet refuted the clear lies of the WCR.
John Corbett
Apr 22, 2021, 8:05:35 PM4/22/21
to
the FBI's summary of her initial statement:
"Mrs. R. E. ARNOLD, Secretary, Texas School Book Depository, advised she was in her office on the second floor of the building on November 22, 1963, and left that office between 12:00 and 12:15 PM, to go downstairs and stand in front of the building to view the Presidential Motorcade. As she was standing in front of the building, she stated she thought she caught a fleeting glimpse of LEE HARVEY OSWALD standing in the hallway between the front door and the double doors leading to the warehouse, located on the first floor. She could not be sure that this was OSWALD, but said she felt it was and believed the time to be a few minutes before 12:15 PM.
She stated thereafter she viewed the Presidential Motorcade and heard the shots that were fired at the President; however, she could furnish no information of value as to the individual firing the shots or any other information concerning OSWALD, whom she stated she did not know and had merely seen him working in the building."
She was not sure it was Oswald she saw and she believed whomever she saw was before
12:15. Even if she did see Oswald shortly before 12:15, it would not preclude him from being
in the sniper's nest at 12:30 when he shot JFK.
Bud
Apr 22, 2021, 8:36:08 PM4/22/21
to
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 10:18:21 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> "Givens thought this was about 11:55 a.m. None of the Depository
> employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
> shooting." (WCR 143)
>
> This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
> the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
>
> "Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
> up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
Is this *known* to have occurred before Givens encountered Oswald on the 6th floor?
> employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
> shooting." (WCR 143)
>
> This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
> the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
>
> "Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
> up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
> Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
> Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
> Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
> Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
> Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
> Mr. PIPER. Well, I said to him---"It's about lunch time. I believe
> I'll go have lunch." So, he says, "Yeah"---he mumbled something---I
> don't know whether he said he was going up or going out, so I got my
> sandwich off of the radiator and went on back to the first window of
> the first floor. (6H 383)
>
> Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
> Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came
> down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.
> Mr. BALL - Where had you been working?
> Mr. SHELLEY - I had been on the sixth floor with the boys laying that
> floor that morning.
> Mr. BALL - What time did you go down and eat lunch?
> Mr. SHELLEY - It was around 10 'til. (6H 328)
I don`t see you establishing any chronology for these things.
> And, of course, we have Carolyn Arnold, who reports seeing LHO around
> 12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (CD 5 pg 41)
>
> The WC lied when it stated that "None of the Depository employees is
> known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting." Their own
> evidence shows that he was seen *before* the time that Givens
> asserted, down on the 1st floor, and was seen repeatedly on either the
> 1st or 2nd floor *after* Given's alleged sighting.
>
> Why does the "truth" need a lie to support it?
Like Jack Dougherty in his affidavit...
"There was another employee that is named Lee Oswald that I saw on the sixth floor. He works all over the building, but I saw him on the sixth floor shortly before noon."
> Another question lurkers may wish to consider: why do believers run
> from these questions?
Ben Holmes
Apr 22, 2021, 9:24:52 PM4/22/21
to
testify before the WC.
Therefore everyone can totally ignore your nonsense.
The abject failure of the Warren Commission in calling legitimate and
necessary witnesses is YOUR burden, not mine.
And a failure you'll never even acknowledge, let alone explain...
Notice folks, that Monkey Corbett only attempted to impugn a single
witness, leaving the others to STILL PROVE THAT THE WC LIED.
Our lil Monkey failed to refute the lie the WC told, YET FAILED TO
PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE IT EITHER... thus proving his dishonesty and
cowardice.
Bud
Apr 23, 2021, 6:01:50 AM4/23/21
to
> The abject failure of the Warren Commission in calling legitimate and
> necessary witnesses is YOUR burden, not mine.
> And a failure you'll never even acknowledge, let alone explain...
> Notice folks, that Monkey Corbett only attempted to impugn a single
> witness, leaving the others to STILL PROVE THAT THE WC LIED.
Ben Holmes
May 19, 2021, 7:43:10 PM5/19/21
to
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 17:36:07 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
>On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 10:18:21 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> "Givens thought this was about 11:55 a.m. None of the Depository
>> employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
>> shooting." (WCR 143)
>>
>> This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
>> the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
>>
>> "Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
>> up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
Logical fallacy deleted.
>> Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
>> Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
>> Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
>> Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
>> Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
>> Mr. PIPER. Well, I said to him---"It's about lunch time. I believe
>> I'll go have lunch." So, he says, "Yeah"---he mumbled something---I
>> don't know whether he said he was going up or going out, so I got my
>> sandwich off of the radiator and went on back to the first window of
>> the first floor. (6H 383)
>>
>> Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came
>> down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.
>> Mr. BALL - Where had you been working?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - I had been on the sixth floor with the boys laying that
>> floor that morning.
>> Mr. BALL - What time did you go down and eat lunch?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - It was around 10 'til. (6H 328)
Logical fallacy deleted.
>> And, of course, we have Carolyn Arnold, who reports seeing LHO around
>> 12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (CD 5 pg 41)
>>
>> The WC lied when it stated that "None of the Depository employees is
>> known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting." Their own
>> evidence shows that he was seen *before* the time that Givens
>> asserted, down on the 1st floor, and was seen repeatedly on either the
>> 1st or 2nd floor *after* Given's alleged sighting.
>>
>> Why does the "truth" need a lie to support it?
>
> Why are acting as if you have established times for these things?
Why are you pretending that the Warren Commission did not?
> And why are you omitting other people who said they saw Oswald?
Do they conflict with what the WC stated?
Logical fallacy deleted.
>> Another question lurkers may wish to consider: why do believers run
>> from these questions?
>
> Why do you run when the flaws of the questions are pointed out?
What flaw?
Have you even *addressed* the lie told by the WC?
Do you even know what it is?
wrote:
>On Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 10:18:21 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> "Givens thought this was about 11:55 a.m. None of the Depository
>> employees is known to have seen Oswald again until after the
>> shooting." (WCR 143)
>>
>> This is, yet again, another lie of the Warren Commission. Looking at
>> the underlying evidence that *they* had, we have the following:
>>
>> "Yesterday at about 12:00 Noon, this fellow Lee says to me, "I'm going
>> up to eat" and I went on to my lunch." - Affidavit of Eddie Piper
>> Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
>> Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o'clock.
>> Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o'clock?
>> Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
>> Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
>> Mr. PIPER. Well, I said to him---"It's about lunch time. I believe
>> I'll go have lunch." So, he says, "Yeah"---he mumbled something---I
>> don't know whether he said he was going up or going out, so I got my
>> sandwich off of the radiator and went on back to the first window of
>> the first floor. (6H 383)
>>
>> Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came
>> down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.
>> Mr. BALL - Where had you been working?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - I had been on the sixth floor with the boys laying that
>> floor that morning.
>> Mr. BALL - What time did you go down and eat lunch?
>> Mr. SHELLEY - It was around 10 'til. (6H 328)
>> And, of course, we have Carolyn Arnold, who reports seeing LHO around
>> 12:15 in the 2nd floor lunchroom. (CD 5 pg 41)
>>
>> The WC lied when it stated that "None of the Depository employees is
>> known to have seen Oswald again until after the shooting." Their own
>> evidence shows that he was seen *before* the time that Givens
>> asserted, down on the 1st floor, and was seen repeatedly on either the
>> 1st or 2nd floor *after* Given's alleged sighting.
>>
>> Why does the "truth" need a lie to support it?
>
> Why are acting as if you have established times for these things?
> And why are you omitting other people who said they saw Oswald?
Logical fallacy deleted.
>> Another question lurkers may wish to consider: why do believers run
>> from these questions?
>
> Why do you run when the flaws of the questions are pointed out?
Have you even *addressed* the lie told by the WC?
Do you even know what it is?
Ben Holmes
May 19, 2021, 7:44:58 PM5/19/21
to
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 03:01:49 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So the Monkey man is allowed to utlize *STUPID* logic, but can't be
bound by the same logic?
Not surprising, since I do this to you all the time, and you HATE IT.
>> The abject failure of the Warren Commission in calling legitimate and
>> necessary witnesses is YOUR burden, not mine.
>
> It is only your opinion that calling Arnold was "necessary".
The moment you have a witness who CONTRADICTS your theory, they become
essential.
Any honest person would recognize that fact.
>> And a failure you'll never even acknowledge, let alone explain...
>
> They did what they did.
The words that will never escape your lips are: "The Warren Commission
lied."
This is a proven fact, but you never let facts get in the way of your
faith.
>> Notice folks, that Monkey Corbett only attempted to impugn a single
>> witness, leaving the others to STILL PROVE THAT THE WC LIED.
>
> Have you established a chronology for these sightings?
Don't need to do anything, this is *YOUR* burden.
The Warren Commission has been caught in a proven lie, *regardless* of
your acceptance of that fact.
wrote:
bound by the same logic?
Not surprising, since I do this to you all the time, and you HATE IT.
>> The abject failure of the Warren Commission in calling legitimate and
>> necessary witnesses is YOUR burden, not mine.
>
> It is only your opinion that calling Arnold was "necessary".
essential.
Any honest person would recognize that fact.
>> And a failure you'll never even acknowledge, let alone explain...
>
> They did what they did.
lied."
This is a proven fact, but you never let facts get in the way of your
faith.
>> Notice folks, that Monkey Corbett only attempted to impugn a single
>> witness, leaving the others to STILL PROVE THAT THE WC LIED.
>
> Have you established a chronology for these sightings?
The Warren Commission has been caught in a proven lie, *regardless* of
your acceptance of that fact.
0 new messages