Since this topic has come up recently I thought I would post something I did years ago for ACJ. I used to have long discussions with a person who claimed to be a CTer, but then said and did everything a LNer would do! He used the name Ben Holmes, but it didn't take long to see that this was just a psued so I began addressing him as Allegedly "Ben Holmes".
Despite his obvious LNer leanings I did get a lot of out the debates with him (and others did too hopefully) as he perfectly laid-out the LNer playbook for all to see and we were able to go in-depth on a number of topics in ways you can't with a normal LNer so I assumed he was a "head honcho" of sorts if you will.
Allegedly "Ben Holmes" told so many lies that I was able to start a number of series on him, but my favorite one was the "Provable Lies of Ben Homes" one where I used his OWN words against him. Allegedly "Ben Holmes" used to always demand you quoted him on things he said and this could take time, so one day I decided to keep a library of his words for easy access. This of course lead to him accusing me of lying about his words, when in fact, I could easily put a link to each one! This allowed me to show in this series his claims and how he lied, thus, they could be "proven lies"!
I have done over a hundred of them (I believe I have paused at 105 or 106)! Here is one of them!
----------------------------------------
Awhile ago I had a long, drawn out conversation with Allegedly "Ben Holmes" about Lee Harvey Oswald's (LHO) alleged trip to Mexico City in late Sept./early Oct. of 1963. For those NOT that familiar with the case the CIA claimed, thus the WC claimed as they got the vast majority of their "intel" from the CIA and FBI WITHOUT DOING A LICK OF INVESTIGATION ON THEIR OWN, that LHO went to Mexico City, Mexico in the last week of September 1963 to secure a visa to Cuba. The CIA was building a program of low level agents that appeared to want to go to Cuba via Mexico City (as they have done for most other "hostile" countries -- i.e. the defection program to Russia) as part of their solidarity for
Fidel Castro and his Communist Revolution. In fact, these were mere pawns being used by the CIA for a myriad of tasks and some would be selected to be "Patsies" for some events. I'm NOT talking just
assassinations here, but if the CIA ever became endangered of being caught at something they always needed a group of "Patsies" to throw to the wolves so to speak.
The CIA gave us scant evidence for this alleged trip by LHO and the WC certainly did NOT add much to it. Despite the two embassies – The Russian and Cuban -- being under 24 hour surveillance by the CIA they could NOT produce one call by the real LHO (they had the phones in the Cuban embassy wiretapped) nor produce a picture of LHO entering or leaving the Russian embassy where they had cameras installed to watch the comings and goings of visitors! The man in charge of this surveillance for the Mexico City CIA branch office -- David Atlee Phillips -- said it was due to a camera going out of working order
when LHO came and went. During the HSCA investigation the two assigned to this area (Lopez and Hardaway) found this to be incorrect as the CIA had MULTIPLE CAMERAS to provide coverage in case one went out! Phillips flat-out lied to the WC and the HSCA on this and many other questions.
It would have been bad enough NOT to produce a photo of LHO entering and leaving the Russian Embassy has claimed, but they made it worse by giving us photos of man CLEARLY NOT LHO in the least! And they claimed it was him! They would also tell the WC they had voice recordings of LHO making calls to the Russian Embassy from the Cuban Embassy, but when asked to produce these they said they were destroyed "routinely" shortly after the alleged visit. The problem with this is two FBI agents sent a report about this as they listened to the tapes AFTER the assassination of JFK and said the man on the tape WAS NOT LHO!
With all these lies who would believe the CIA's claim that LHO went there when they said? It appears some on this board do, and Allegedly "Ben Holmes" is one of them! I was talking with CJ and Bud about this when Allegedly "Ben Holmes" pushed his way into the conversation. He listed two items of evidence and said it made sense to him LHO went when the CIA said he did. One of the two pieces was an alleged notation made by LHO in his personal diary/notebook of the name "Silvia Duran." She is the woman
who worked at the Cuban consulate and the woman the alleged LHO would have a run in with while allegedly there.
Allegedly "Ben Holmes" played this up big as IF this notation showed and proved LHO went to Mexico City when the CIA/WC claimed he did. Like this:
“There is NO proof beyond some very shaky testimony by Duran who admitted to having an affair with the man in question.” (Robert)
“And strangely enough, Silvia Duran's name appears in Oswald's notebook.
Something I've mentioned before, and you've run away from...For someone making the claim that Oswald was never in Mexico - that's going to be a tough one to explain.” (Allegedly "Ben Holmes" –
1/27/09)
Does this claim make any sense to anyone honest out there? How does an alleged notation in a diary/notebook PROVE he went to Mexico City? I was asking for proof, NOT claims. See the notation found in LHO's diary/notebook was NEVER proven to have been written by him for starters, and furthermore, even if he did right it, so what???? I asked Allegedly "Ben Holmes" -- have you never called around for quotes or for some other reason to various stores and written names down and then NEVER WENT there? I have done things like this many times in business from checking flights to checking in on
quotes,etc...but I never visited every place I have ever called.
How can Allegedly "Ben Holmes" claim an alleged notation in a diary/notebook shows he went is beyond me! Furthermore, Ms. Duran ONLY got the job at the Cuban Embassy a MONTH before the alleged visit by LHO as the woman who had the position for many years died in a car crash and the Mexican police classified it as "very strange." Add in the fact Phillips got is first promotion in 9 years and was moved to the Mexico City branch just on MONTH before the alleged visit too and you have some strange
coincidences going on.
Ms. Duran FAILED TO ID, and refused to do so UNTIL SHE WAS ARRESTED AND TORTURED into signing a document claiming it was LHO she talked with. Upon release she began telling folks about what happened to her and that the man she spoke with (and had an affair with) was NOT LHO and she was arrested and tortured again! Ms. Druan said she did NOT know LHO and she never mentioned speaking with so how did LHO get her name for his alleged entry into his diary/notebook?
Allegedly "Ben Holmes" didn't care and he takes everything the WC told us as the gospel as he claimed her name was indeed in his diary/notebook and there was NO doubt about that!
“If Oswald never went to Mexico, THERE'S NO CONCEIVABLE WAY HE WOULD HAVE EVEN
KNOWN SILVIA DURAN'S NAME - yet there it is in his notebook...something that your theory can't explain.” (Allegedly “Ben Holmes” –1/28/09)
Oh, I guess Allegedly "Ben Holmes" never thought that it was ADDED LATER TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE LHO SPOKE WITH HER AND WENT TO MEXICO CITY, HUH?
As usual Allegedly "Ben Holmes" took the side of the prosecution and therefore had the BURDEN OF PROOF on his side, but also as usual he dumped it onto me!
”You're *STILL* going to have to explain the Silvia Duran entry in Oswald's notebook.” (Allegedly "Ben Holmes" – 1/28/09)
Why do I have to explain something that I NEVER claimed in the first place? Did the WC or Allegedly "Ben Holmes" prove LHO wrote that name in the diary/notebook? NOT that I'm aware of. Did the WC or
Sick Sadist (tm!) "Ben Holmes" prove if said notation was real, and they did not prove this, that that proved he went to Mexico City when the CIA claimed he did? NO! So I tried to explain this and got EDITED
for my efforts!
I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN ANYTHING…” (Robert, EDITED by Allegedly "Ben Holmes")
“Of course you do, Rob. You claim that there's no proof that Oswald went to Mexico, and indeed, there *IS* evidence. Evidence that you will continue to duck ... much like LNT'ers always duck the evidence.
Your theory *NEEDS* to explain this evidence... otherwise, you don't have a theory, you have a faith. “ (Allegedly "Ben Holmes" – 1/28/09)
I was NOT ducking it, I was asking Allegedly "Ben Holmes" to PROVE it showed what HE AND THE WC WERE CLAIMING it showed or proved, and ALL I got was the runaround instead.
A notation in a notebook, even IF it was real, does NOT prove someone made a long trip!
Here is the rest he EDITED!
“…since I am NOT the one claiming something …” (Robert, EDITED by Allegedly "Ben Holmes")
“Of course you are. Recently, you tried to assert that no-one had ever seen Oswald's camera. Looked rather foolish there, didn't you?
“Now you're asserting that simply because the WC stated that Oswald went to Mexico, that it must be a lie, and anyone who agrees that Oswald went to Mexico must be a shill.” (Allegedly "Ben
Holmes")
Who was "ducking" the evidence now? I did NOT assert the WC lied simply because they said it, I said they lied because they could NOT prove it to be so, JUST LIKE Allegedly "Ben Holmes"! When one
supports an obvious lie made by the WC in this case and insists it is the truth when they don't add any new evidence/proof of course I will call them a shill!
I asked for proof and got things like this numerous times!
“I already told you, Rob... I have no intention of *EVER* providing "proof"... for obvious reasons.” (Allegedly "Ben Holmes")
Why is Allegedly "Ben Holmes" here then? IF he is NOT seeking the truth, and this can ONLY be obtained by providing proof of one's claims, then what is he doing here. I admit, it is hard to prove your claims since NO real investigation was ever done, that is why it is soooo important to show the claims of the WC were all wrong and lies in many cases! That we can do with NO investigation on our side.
Of course it would be MY FAULT as to why he couldn't provide proof of his claims!
“No Rob ... I'll provide *evidence*. There is no proof that you would accept, so therefore your challenge isn't falsifiable.” (Allegedly Sick Sadist (tm!) "Ben Holmes" – 1/28/09)
This is another LIE by itself and may call for a "Provable Lies of Allegedly "Ben Holmes" post all by itself as I have NEVER been shown proof in this case since Allegedly "Ben Holmes" is ALWAYS DEFENDING THE CLAIMS OF THE WC with me and they NEVER PROVED ANYTHING THEY CLAIMED! So, since Allegedly "Ben Holmes" has NEVER offered me real firm proof, how can he know "there is proof I will not accept?"
This is just his lying way of getting out of SUPPORTING HIS CLAIMS that benefit the WC!
Allegedly "Ben Holmes" told so many lies in this area I can do multiple posts in this series as I found quotes that show he either lied many years ago, changed his mind dramatically from many years ago on this topic (but he refused to admit this) or he is lying now by what he is claiming!
Allegedly "Ben Holmes" is the one lying through his teeth about the evidence and what it shows or proves, NOT me! He has not once shown the evidence to be factual and supporting of the claim that LHO went to Mexico City, yet I am the one ignoring it or lying about it according to him! He even said this to me:
“The Silvia Duran notation, the Oswald letter to the Russian embassy, *both* support "the claim being made".
I'm left with the evidence, Robsie. I'm left with citations... You have neither.” (Allegedly "Ben Holmes")
How does a notation you can't even prove was written by LHO show he went to Mexico City? Even IF it was written by LHO, how does a notation prove he went by itself? How does a letter they couldn't say
was written by LHO and contains a cryptic "I could have stayed longer and applied for a new visa but **I WOULD HAVE HAD TO USE MY REAL NAME**" when the man presenting himself said he was "Lee Oswald" support the claim he went to Mexico City?
Neither of these two claimed pieces of "evidence" support the claim he went to Mexico City when the CIA said he did when looked at more closely. They would have been DESTROYED on cross-examination assuming they were even admitted into the court record as evidence in the first place.
We'll finish with one of Allegedly "Ben Holmes'" favorite tactics -- circular reasoning. ALL LNers use this as they CAN'T explain the stuff the WC gave us so they try and dump it onto you! I quoted this earlier but it is worth repeating to show Allegedly "Ben Holmes'" WC shill tactics in ALL THEIR GLORY!
“Of course you do, Rob. You claim that there's no proof that Oswald went to Mexico, and indeed, there *IS* evidence. Evidence that you will continue to duck ... much like LNT'ers always duck the evidence.
Your theory *NEEDS* to explain this evidence... otherwise, you don't have a theory, you have a faith. “ (Allegedly Sick Sadist (tm!) "Ben Holmes" –1/28/09)
First of all, he acknowledges I asked for PROOF, and he then mentions there is "evidence" he went. These are two different things. He then claims I "duck it" when I simply ask him to show us how this "evidence" he gave us (the same junk the WC gave us in 1964) shows or proves his claim LHO went to Mexico City! He then RUNS AND DUCKS THAT PART!
He then asserts my "theory" (he did NOT go when the CIA said he did) needs to "explain this evidence" when I did NOT claim he went! Allegedly "Ben Holmes" said in another quote this "evidence” supports LHO going" so why do I need to explain something I did NOT assert? Allegedly "Ben Holmes" is either clueless of our legal system (as all LNers are), a
(as most LNers are), or both (as most LNers are) as it is NOT the defense's job to EXPLAIN the evidence of the prosecutor! The defense's job it show it does NOT prove the point it is tied to, that is all.
I never claimed to have a "theory" in the first place as I was saying the claim or assertion made by the CIA/WC and Allegedly "Ben Holmes" was NOT proven by the evidence they gave us! Allegedly
"Ben Holmes" did NOTHING to prove his claims, the same ones the CIA/WC gave us by the way, but instead he tried to dump it on to me to do, and when I didn't do it he then claimed this proved he went!
So many lies, so little time to report on them for you! Will Allegedly "Ben Holmes" retract his many lies?
P.S. OF COURSE NOT! I must have been dreaming! LOL!
How pathetic and sad can you get. Some people need to get a real life.
