1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. ALT.CONSPIRACY.JFK

  • Multiple choice exercise

    From John Corbett@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 27 08:10:34 2023
    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From NoTrueFlags Here@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Fri Oct 27 08:19:13 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more
    Answer: Corbett and all of the above.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Fri Oct 27 08:19:26 2023
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:10:34 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more

    Owns Corbutt is the correct answer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BT George@21:1/5 to Ben Holmes on Fri Oct 27 11:42:18 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 10:19:30 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:10:34 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
    <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more
    Owns Corbutt is the correct answer.

    Proof of #7 being true is in the irony above lurkers!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Corbett@21:1/5 to BT George on Fri Oct 27 12:02:08 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 2:42:19 PM UTC-4, BT George wrote:
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 10:19:30 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:10:34 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more
    Owns Corbutt is the correct answer.
    Proof of #7 being true is in the irony above lurkers!

    This is the world's easiest quiz as there are no wrong answers. Some are just more correct than
    others as you have pointed out.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Hank Sienzant@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Fri Oct 27 12:03:06 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more

    All I care about when posting here is discussing the JFK assassination. The fact that Ben would rather attribute false claims to me and avoid discussing the Kennedy assassination doesn’t bother me. It exposes his lack of depth of knowledge about the
    assassination.

    It appears from here he only knows what he has read in conspiracy books, and can only parrot those claims, rather than independently research the claims on both side sides and make up his own mind, as I did.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Fri Oct 27 12:06:20 2023
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:02:08 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 2:42:19?PM UTC-4, BT George wrote:
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 10:19:30?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:10:34 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
    <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more
    Owns Corbutt is the correct answer.
    Proof of #7 being true is in the irony above lurkers!

    This is the world's easiest quiz...

    And proof that I own you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to hsienzant@aol.com on Fri Oct 27 12:05:26 2023
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:03:06 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzant
    <hsienzant@aol.com> wrote:

    All I care about when posting here is discussing the JFK assassination.

    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?

    Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
    and exited the back of his head.

    More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

    Are you proud of yourself?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bud@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Fri Oct 27 12:16:41 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar

    Check.

    2. a coward

    Certainly an intellectual coward.

    Check.

    3. despicable

    Had to look up the definition to see whether it applied. I try to save the more extreme adjectives only when the situation calls for it (For me to call something "awesome", it has to really be awesome.)

    Anyway, the definition is "deserving hatred and contempt". Synonyms include "contemptible", "loathsome", "detestable", and "reprehensible".

    So, check.

    4. repulsive

    Another trip to the dictionary finds "arousing intense distaste or disgust".

    So I`ll skip this one, he doesn`t arouse any intense feelings from me.

    5. a sorry excuse for a human being

    Don`t know about that. Certainly he conducts himself in a shameful manner here, but this isn`t the real world.

    6. all of the above

    Some of the above.

    7. all of the above and a whole lot more

    Oh, there's definitely more. "Delusional" has to be on the list. "Hypocritical". "Short".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Corbett@21:1/5 to Hank Sienzant on Fri Oct 27 13:01:27 2023
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 3:03:07 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
    On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:10:36 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Ben Holmes is:

    1. a liar
    2. a coward
    3. despicable
    4. repulsive
    5. a sorry excuse for a human being
    6. all of the above
    7. all of the above and a whole lot more
    All I care about when posting here is discussing the JFK assassination. The fact that Ben would rather attribute false claims to me and avoid discussing the Kennedy assassination doesn’t bother me. It exposes his lack of depth of knowledge about the
    assassination.

    It appears from here he only knows what he has read in conspiracy books, and can only parrot those claims, rather than independently research the claims on both side sides and make up his own mind, as I did.

    You hit the nail on the head there. If he was able to think for himself, he wouldn't have to resort
    to "logical fallacy deleted" when he has no answer to the point raised or the question asked. If
    he can't find the answer in one of his stack of conspiracy books, deleting the response is his
    only option.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Fri Oct 27 14:18:25 2023
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 13:01:27 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:


    You hit the nail on the head there. If he was able to think for himself, he wouldn't have to resort
    to "logical fallacy deleted" when he has no answer to the point raised or the question asked.


    Logical fallacies don't get answered, they get deleted.

    Legitimate evidential questions get evasions from you and other
    believers.


    If
    he can't find the answer in one of his stack of conspiracy books, deleting the response is his
    only option.


    I've challenged believers many times to ask an evidential question
    that I can't give a credible and reasonable answer to - you've not
    been able to do it.

    Why not?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 27 14:18:56 2023
    On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 12:16:41 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirslick@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.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)