On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 6:57:39?AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
< his usual worthless comments and questions >
It's all here your ass-holiness:
www.gil-jesus.com
Don't ask me to prove things that are already on line.
It's not my fault you're too chickenshit to look at it.
On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 5:08:58?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
To a believer, everything is perfect. Not a single thing wrong with
any of the evidence, or with anything the WC, Clark Panel, HSCA, or
ARRB ever said. (With the sole exception being the audio evidence,
allegedly refuted.)
Oh, they'll moan about some small item (Huckster actually listed four
minor items one time - nothing that impugns the official story) - but
never the important stuff we critics point out. Not *once* has any
believer publicly acknowledged any problems with this case.
But in order to believe everything is perfect, believers are forced to
stick their heads in a hole, and simply refuse to address so much of
the evidence that shows problems in this case.
Check the archives, you`ll find your issues have been addressed over and over.
Such as the OVERWHELMING evidence that witnesses were intimidated into
shutting up about what they heard and saw. Not a *SINGLE* instance of
intimidation has EVER been admitted by ANY believer. Not once!
The multiple examples of eyewitnesses swearing under oath that they
didn't say what the FBI reported them saying.
The INCREDIBLE problems with the chain of custody.
The impossible selection of witnesses to call to testify, and the
number of irrelevant questions asked.
The *PROVEN* lies told by the WC & HSCA.
The list can go on and on... (Indeed, Gil Jesus could expand this list
immensely.)
Believers simply shut their eyes to the evidence.
Can't admit the truthfulness of the above, or explain it in
non-conspiratorial terms.
They simply run away.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 10:22:18?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 03:39:40 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 5:08:58?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:You're lying. Take, for example, the following... eyewitness
To a believer, everything is perfect. Not a single thing wrong with
any of the evidence, or with anything the WC, Clark Panel, HSCA, or
ARRB ever said. (With the sole exception being the audio evidence,
allegedly refuted.)
Oh, they'll moan about some small item (Huckster actually listed four
minor items one time - nothing that impugns the official story) - but
never the important stuff we critics point out. Not *once* has any
believer publicly acknowledged any problems with this case.
But in order to believe everything is perfect, believers are forced to >>>> stick their heads in a hole, and simply refuse to address so much of
the evidence that shows problems in this case.
Check the archives, you`ll find your issues have been addressed over and over.
intimidation. You cannot cite a *SINGLE* place where this has been
addressed by a believer.
So you can ignore it again?
And Chickenshit proves my point.Such as the OVERWHELMING evidence that witnesses were intimidated into >>>> shutting up about what they heard and saw. Not a *SINGLE* instance of
intimidation has EVER been admitted by ANY believer. Not once!
The multiple examples of eyewitnesses swearing under oath that they
didn't say what the FBI reported them saying.
The INCREDIBLE problems with the chain of custody.
The impossible selection of witnesses to call to testify, and the
number of irrelevant questions asked.
The *PROVEN* lies told by the WC & HSCA.
The list can go on and on... (Indeed, Gil Jesus could expand this list >>>> immensely.)
Believers simply shut their eyes to the evidence.
Can't admit the truthfulness of the above, or explain it in
non-conspiratorial terms.
They simply run away.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
I'm delusional.
His absolute cowardice is proven here:
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 Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 10:22:18?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 03:57:36 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 6:10:22?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:Chickenshit proves that he agrees with me.
On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 5:08:58?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
And what you've just listed is the "smoking gun" of Oswald's innocence. >>>> In a normal criminal investigation, you don't:
Such as the OVERWHELMING evidence that witnesses were intimidated into shutting up about what they heard and saw.
The multiple examples of eyewitnesses swearing under oath that they didn't say what the FBI reported them saying.
The INCREDIBLE problems with the chain of custody.
The impossible selection of witnesses to call to testify, and the number of irrelevant questions asked.
The *PROVEN* lies told by the WC & HSCA.
The list can go on and on... (Indeed, Gil Jesus could expand this list immensely.)
Believers simply shut their eyes to the evidence.
Can't admit the truthfulness of the above, or explain it in non-conspiratorial terms.
They simply run away.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Continue to question a suspect once he has "lawyered up".
As long as he is answering questions they will keep asking them.
Keep a suspect from making a phone call until the next day.
So?
Refuse his family's request to speak with him.
They spoke with him.
Put him in lineups with police employees dressed differently than the witnesses' descriptions.
So? You don`t understand lineups, they aren`t an attempt to fool people. >>>
Stage those lineups without a defense attorney present.
So?
Tell witnesses before they view the lineup that the suspect is in the lineup.
Support that.
Dissuade criminal attorneys from talking to the suspect.
How so?
Arraign a suspect on murder charges without defense counsel present or appointing counsel if he has none.
So if a suspect refuses legal representation you can never charge them?
Fail to establish a chain of custody for the evidence AT THE POINT OF DISCOVERY by the use of evidence logs.
You refuse to show that the DPD handled the evidence in this case any different than any other case (cases which resulted in a high conviction rate).
Fail to photograph evidence as found.
You fail to show this is necessary (or even possible in some cases).
Fail to secure evidence once it is collected.
Whatever that means.
Fail to secure the Dealey Plaza and Tenth Ave. crime scenes.
Show they handled these crime scenes any different than others.
Fail to correctly identify evidence that is clearly marked.
Show this.
Fail to protect the suspect after receiving death threats against him.
Did Ruby send death threats?
Coerce, threaten and harass witnesses into changing their stories or remaining silent.
Show this.
Altering witness statements on reports.
Show this.
Altering statements and forging signatures on sworn affidavits.
Show this.
And that doesn't even count the inconsistencies in the descriptions of the wounds or the autopsy debacle.
Like?
Or the fact that the shells allegedly found at the Tippit murder scene do not match the bullets removed from his body.
Did they find all the shells? All the bullets?
No, you're right, all of these things would not have occurred in a normal criminal investigation.
Wasn`t a normal criminal investigation. Police probably don`t interview more than a dozen people in a normal criminal investigation.
But they would have occurred in a case where the authorities were trying to frame someone for a crime he did not commit.
You refuse to walk us through how such a framing is even possible.
And since ALL of these were done in this case, it becomes obvious that the authorities arrested the wrong man for the crime.
You have to be a contortionist to get there.
Then covered up that fact.
"Believers", as you call them, have spent the last 60 years making up excuses for these shortcomings. They think their comments,
speculations and opinions are the equivalent of evidence. They try to fill in the holes with "common sense" and "reason", neither of which
is recognized as evidence in a court of law. Neither should they be accepted in the court of public opinion.
Information is useless unless you can apply reason to it. That is why you get to the places you do, you can`t reason.
They just can't wrap their minds around the fact that they were lied to about this case.
By everybody, according to you folks.
Corroboration means nothing to these people. It doesn't matter if 30, 40, or 50 witnesses all saw or heard the same thing.
You have to look at all information correctly, for what it actually is, and what it isn`t. You frame things incorrectly and remove important context, which leaves you with nothing but hot air empty claims.
They either lied or were all mistaken.
Ironic.
In their world, the Dallas doctors, who saw on an average 3 gunshot wounds a day, couldn't tell an entrance wound from an exit wound.
Not their job.
Welcome to the Twilight Zone.
If you don`t like the WC`s explanation for this event, put up your own.
You`re delusional.
In his world, everything
is perfect in this case. He doesn't have enough honesty to admit the
slightest problem in this case...
On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 10:22:18?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 03:57:36 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 24, 2024 at 6:10:22?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:Chickenshit proves that he agrees with me.
On Tuesday, January 23, 2024 at 5:08:58?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
And what you've just listed is the "smoking gun" of Oswald's innocence. >>>> In a normal criminal investigation, you don't:
Such as the OVERWHELMING evidence that witnesses were intimidated into shutting up about what they heard and saw.
The multiple examples of eyewitnesses swearing under oath that they didn't say what the FBI reported them saying.
The INCREDIBLE problems with the chain of custody.
The impossible selection of witnesses to call to testify, and the number of irrelevant questions asked.
The *PROVEN* lies told by the WC & HSCA.
The list can go on and on... (Indeed, Gil Jesus could expand this list immensely.)
Believers simply shut their eyes to the evidence.
Can't admit the truthfulness of the above, or explain it in non-conspiratorial terms.
They simply run away.
EVERY
SINGLE
TIME!
Continue to question a suspect once he has "lawyered up".
As long as he is answering questions they will keep asking them.
Keep a suspect from making a phone call until the next day.
So?
Refuse his family's request to speak with him.
They spoke with him.
Put him in lineups with police employees dressed differently than the witnesses' descriptions.
So? You don`t understand lineups, they aren`t an attempt to fool people. >>>
Stage those lineups without a defense attorney present.
So?
Tell witnesses before they view the lineup that the suspect is in the lineup.
Support that.
Dissuade criminal attorneys from talking to the suspect.
How so?
Arraign a suspect on murder charges without defense counsel present or appointing counsel if he has none.
So if a suspect refuses legal representation you can never charge them?
Fail to establish a chain of custody for the evidence AT THE POINT OF DISCOVERY by the use of evidence logs.
You refuse to show that the DPD handled the evidence in this case any different than any other case (cases which resulted in a high conviction rate).
Fail to photograph evidence as found.
You fail to show this is necessary (or even possible in some cases).
Fail to secure evidence once it is collected.
Whatever that means.
Fail to secure the Dealey Plaza and Tenth Ave. crime scenes.
Show they handled these crime scenes any different than others.
Fail to correctly identify evidence that is clearly marked.
Show this.
Fail to protect the suspect after receiving death threats against him.
Did Ruby send death threats?
Coerce, threaten and harass witnesses into changing their stories or remaining silent.
Show this.
Altering witness statements on reports.
Show this.
Altering statements and forging signatures on sworn affidavits.
Show this.
And that doesn't even count the inconsistencies in the descriptions of the wounds or the autopsy debacle.
Like?
Or the fact that the shells allegedly found at the Tippit murder scene do not match the bullets removed from his body.
Did they find all the shells? All the bullets?
No, you're right, all of these things would not have occurred in a normal criminal investigation.
Wasn`t a normal criminal investigation. Police probably don`t interview more than a dozen people in a normal criminal investigation.
But they would have occurred in a case where the authorities were trying to frame someone for a crime he did not commit.
You refuse to walk us through how such a framing is even possible.
And since ALL of these were done in this case, it becomes obvious that the authorities arrested the wrong man for the crime.
You have to be a contortionist to get there.
Then covered up that fact.
"Believers", as you call them, have spent the last 60 years making up excuses for these shortcomings. They think their comments,
speculations and opinions are the equivalent of evidence. They try to fill in the holes with "common sense" and "reason", neither of which
is recognized as evidence in a court of law. Neither should they be accepted in the court of public opinion.
Information is useless unless you can apply reason to it. That is why you get to the places you do, you can`t reason.
They just can't wrap their minds around the fact that they were lied to about this case.
By everybody, according to you folks.
Corroboration means nothing to these people. It doesn't matter if 30, 40, or 50 witnesses all saw or heard the same thing.
You have to look at all information correctly, for what it actually is, and what it isn`t. You frame things incorrectly and remove important context, which leaves you with nothing but hot air empty claims.
They either lied or were all mistaken.
Ironic.
In their world, the Dallas doctors, who saw on an average 3 gunshot wounds a day, couldn't tell an entrance wound from an exit wound.
Not their job.
Welcome to the Twilight Zone.
If you don`t like the WC`s explanation for this event, put up your own.
You`re delusional.
In his world, everything
is perfect in this case. He doesn't have enough honesty to admit the
slightest problem in this case...
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:01:19?PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 11:48:39?AM UTC-5, BT George wrote:
Keep 'em honest while you still can Bud!This is your standard for honesty ? Bud ? Are you on drugs ?
The "Bud" who posts no evidence ?
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
I`ve done all that and more.
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:52:02?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 10:29:55 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 1:01:19?PM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:Here's your opportunity to prove it:
On Thursday, January 25, 2024 at 11:48:39?AM UTC-5, BT George wrote:
Keep 'em honest while you still can Bud!This is your standard for honesty ? Bud ? Are you on drugs ?
The "Bud" who posts no evidence ?
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
I`ve done all that and more.
To who?
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.
Gil now has ...
Gil now has ...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 104:30:27 |
| Calls: | 6,660 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,176 |