Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 09:08:26 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.They refuse to carry their burden.
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:22:03 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.
Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?
You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.
Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?
Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:08:27?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
We have no burden.
We don't give a shit if you accept the conclusions of the WC or not. The
WC provided ample evidence of Oswald's guilt.
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:08:27?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
We have no burden.Believers never do..
We don't give a shit if you accept the conclusions of the WC or not. The >WC provided ample evidence of Oswald's guilt.Why can't you cite the evidence?
It's your cowardice that's the reason most of America doesn't believe
the WCR.
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:02:10 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:08:27?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >> Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Ben is right for once.We have no burden.Believers never do..
This is a conspiracy forum, these guys are supposed to be explaining how Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. Seems they only have innuendo and nothing specific, something along the lines of "some people did stuff".
Why can`t you find it yourself, it is available online.We don't give a shit if you accept the conclusions of the WC or not. The >WC provided ample evidence of Oswald's guilt.Why can't you cite the evidence?
It's your cowardice that's the reason most of America doesn't believeFree country. A lot of people believe in angels.
the WCR.
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:15:49 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:02:10 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:08:27?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote: >> Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Ben is right for once.We have no burden.Believers never do..
This is a conspiracy forum, these guys are supposed to be explaining how Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. Seems they only have innuendo and nothing specific, something along the lines of "some people did stuff".Most of the people who believe in a JFK conspiracy simply aren't well informed about the
Why can`t you find it yourself, it is available online.We don't give a shit if you accept the conclusions of the WC or not. TheWhy can't you cite the evidence?
WC provided ample evidence of Oswald's guilt.
It's your cowardice that's the reason most of America doesn't believe the WCR.Free country. A lot of people believe in angels.
evidence of Oswald's guilt and the lack of evidence of the involvement of others. That makes
it easy for scammers like Oliver Stone to fill their heads with mush.
There is as much evidence for JFK conspirators as there is for angels. Belief in either is a
matter of blind faith.
Most of the people who believe in a JFK conspiracy simply aren't well informed about the
evidence of Oswald's guilt and the lack of evidence of the involvement of others.
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 5:14:24 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:15:49 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 6:02:10 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2023 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 12:08:27?PM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Ben is right for once.We have no burden.Believers never do..
This is a conspiracy forum, these guys are supposed to be explaining how Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy. Seems they only have innuendo and nothing specific, something along the lines of "some people did stuff".Most of the people who believe in a JFK conspiracy simply aren't well informed about the
Why can`t you find it yourself, it is available online.We don't give a shit if you accept the conclusions of the WC or not. TheWhy can't you cite the evidence?
WC provided ample evidence of Oswald's guilt.
It's your cowardice that's the reason most of America doesn't believe the WCR.Free country. A lot of people believe in angels.
evidence of Oswald's guilt and the lack of evidence of the involvement of others. That makes
it easy for scammers like Oliver Stone to fill their heads with mush.
There is as much evidence for JFK conspirators as there is for angels. Belief in either is aIt never ceases to amaze me that Moron Corbett is so fucking stupid.
matter of blind faith.
Has Toilet Seat changed his screen name or are there now two assholes as dumb as him on
this board?
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:26:44 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
Has Toilet Seat changed his screen name or are there now two assholes as dumb as him onNow you can't remember posts from just 3 days ago... ROTFLMAO!!!
this board?
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism of your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X" happened, and so on.
In other words, grow up.
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Claiming that on 11/22/63 some people did something is too vague.
Asking us to endlessly answer your logically fallacious hobby points
is fruitless; you don't accept the answers you've received, and you
never will.
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism of
your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X"
happened, and so on.
And grow a pair.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:55:24 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
And grow a pair.
Anytime, Corbutt. You can find me at the Judo club, molesting kids.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
None of whom agreed with each other.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Been there, done that.
You ran.
As you always do.
Claiming that on 11/22/63 some people did something is too vague.
This is *YOUR* claim. No critic has ever said that.
Asking us to endlessly answer your logically fallacious hobby points
is fruitless; you don't accept the answers you've received, and you
never will.
You're lying again, Chuckles... you're pretending that you GIVE
answers.
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism of
your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X"
happened, and so on.
No. This is about YOU, not the critics...
You lose.
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:14:21?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:55:24 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
And grow a pair.
Anytime, Corbutt. You can find me at the Judo club.
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:13:34?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
None of whom agreed with each other.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Been there, done that.
You've never explained what happened or how
You ran.
Na.
As you always do.
Claiming that on 11/22/63 some people did something is too vague.
This is *YOUR* claim. No critic has ever said that.
Then...
Asking us to endlessly answer your logically fallacious hobby points
is fruitless; you don't accept the answers you've received, and you
never will.
You're lying again, Chuckles... you're pretending that you GIVE
answers.
Answered endlessly.
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism of
your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X"
happened, and so on.
No. This is about YOU, not the critics...
You lose.
Ben...
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 02:14:22 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
Most of the people who believe in a JFK conspiracy simply aren't well informed about theYet even HIGHLY KNOWLEDGEABLE people will still refuse to accept the
evidence of Oswald's guilt and the lack of evidence of the involvement of others.
WCR.
It's simply a lie to claim that a lack of being "well informed" has
anything at all to do with what one accepts about this case.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.None of whom agreed with each other.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.Been there, done that.
You ran.
As you always do.
Claiming that on 11/22/63 some people did something is too vague.This is *YOUR* claim. No critic has ever said that.
Asking us to endlessly answer your logically fallacious hobby pointsYou're lying again, Chuckles... you're pretending that you GIVE
is fruitless; you don't accept the answers you've received, and you
never will.
answers.
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism ofNo. This is about YOU, not the critics...
your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X"
happened, and so on.
You lose.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:13:34?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
Logical fallacy deleted.None of whom agreed with each other.
Chuckles got spanked.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
Logical fallacy deleted.Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Been there, done that.
You've never explained what happened or howMultiple shooters shot at JFK. They used their index finger to pull
the trigger.
You ran.
Na.
Anyone can see that you're a liar...
The Challenge - Part 1 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/x4n7Di-GBd8/_WbEfALeAAAJ The Challenge - Part 2 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/WVBtmUQkx6c/9ZdyxAPeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 1 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/y0hdkKgWvtI/3uukYgXeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 2 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/jSfe1BrGfJc/SOXAOQbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 2a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/kGfZPR4C-Lw/AlnRq1HeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 3 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/IShoUFao5OU/VuYGWFTeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 3a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/JFuasrnWRqA/l1vih03eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 4 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/LRMeWBFE1ug/bfjGTAbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 5 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/S1ddVKc3Jj4/IESJbFPeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 6 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/b5ODl3yA4uk/g77N-UreAAAJ My Scenario - Part 7 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/rwmZjz92YC8/P-9Mn07eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 8 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c6e29olW6XA/Os29-FveAAAJ My Scenario - Part 9 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/ixNqGISHbrU/gd06wVHeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 10 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/3Di6kuseb2Q/aHbAQmLeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/sYEyPH0A_eI/IH-UZgbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/aGduj6uaGUk/3eDp513eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 11b https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8rAmKZBOCiY/yCELq27eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 12 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/OnrH5R6ryHE/stjdfgbeAAAJ My Scenario - Part 12a https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/J0A8N12PPHU/CcxpiU7eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 13 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/8hD-q0gTa_c/Co3ZJE7eAAAJ My Scenario - Part 14 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/lsaXwhPRbEg/hZ7ZmEveAAAJ My Scenario - Part 15 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UA86YdJXEgY/JhG8o0reAAAJ My Scenario - The Conclusion https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/UWfco_sGxYw/yApSPFXeAAAJ
Not a *SINGLE* response to any of them... from you, or any other
believer for that matter.
As you always do.
Claiming that on 11/22/63 some people did something is too vague.
This is *YOUR* claim. No critic has ever said that.
Then...
So you admit it.
You lose!
Asking us to endlessly answer your logically fallacious hobby points
is fruitless; you don't accept the answers you've received, and you
never will.
You're lying again, Chuckles... you're pretending that you GIVE
answers.
Answered endlessly.**NEVER** answered. Take, for example, the questions that Chickenshit
and Huckster are currently running from ... **CITE** where an answer
has EVER been given.
You can't.
You're lying.
So DO SOMETHING positive. PRODUCE A CASE, and INVITE criticism of
your methodology, interpretation of the data you feel shows "X"
happened, and so on.
No. This is about YOU, not the critics...
You lose.
Ben...
Taint about me, we're discusssing the failures of believers to support
the WCR.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 10:30:39 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question.
He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:13:34?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
Logical fallacy deleted.None of whom agreed with each other.
Chuckles got spanked.
By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
Logical fallacy deleted.Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
The burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Been there, done that.
You've never explained what happened or howMultiple shooters shot at JFK. They used their index finger to pull
the trigger.
You ran.
Na.
Anyone can see that you're a liar...
The Challenge - Part 1...
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 12:41:17?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 10:30:39 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question.
He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:59:10?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 08:48:58 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 10:13:34?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:Logical fallacy deleted.
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at 11:08:27?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote: >>>>>
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence.
Done by the DPD, FBI, WC, HSCA and various sub investigations.
None of whom agreed with each other.
Chuckles got spanked.
Logical fallacy deleted.By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
Na.
Yes stupid... this is commonly accepted by people everywhere.
Multiple shooters shot at JFK. They used their index finger to pullThe burden falls upon Team Oswald to produce something we can compare the historically accepted case--Oswald alone, no known help--to.
Been there, done that.
You've never explained what happened or how
the trigger.
You ran.
Na.
Anyone can see that you're a liar...
The Challenge - Part 1...
...hobby points deleted.
Bud: "Jump Ben!"
Ben: "How high?"I own him. I even have the receipt.
On Thursday, September 21, 2023 at 12:41:17 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 10:30:39 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?
Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question.You've never asked an honest question.
He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.
It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)
So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.Lol.
Bud: "Jump Ben!"
Ben: "How high?"
Yes. it's their burden to deal with the evidence. By accpeting the Commission's conclusions, the burden falls on them to explain the missing evidence and contradictions in the case.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 121:34:54 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,489 |