On May 17, 5:12 am, timst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> TOP POST
>
> Say, the following from Benny's reply caught my eye:
>
> QUOTE ON:
>
> But should I begin debating with trolls, they'll do what they've
> always done...
> lie and run away. It takes very little intelligence to see that...
>
> QUOTE OFF
>
> LOL! How deluded is this Benny Holmes fella? He's only been running
> for two months solid from any discussion of the specific flaws in his
> *Yellow Pants* equals Z film alteration theory.
he you ever get in touch with Sammy Brown, the freelance writer, I
also know she's just down the street from ya? Don't go holding your
breath waiting for BH, you don't rate troll, never were on the
scoreboard.... your postings are DOA, pukster.... But I do love
kicking you around.... please stay!
> It's quite astoni****ng behaviour for a guy who publicly takes others
> to task in the most vicious manner when he thinks he is right or can
> get away with it.
>
> This guy is a total hypocrite and fraud.
>
> Concerned Regards,
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> On May 16, 5:03 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > In article
<31225c05-8e04-4fb4-a62d-f1410acb0...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > aeffects says...
>
> > >On May 15, 2:33 am, much...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > >> On 15 Maj, 03:24, Ben Holmes <ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > >>> In article
> > >><c5bfd7a4-5934-4982-9de6-e41b62bfd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > >> > aeffects says...
>
> > >> > >On May 14, 6:49 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >>> >>Back by popular demand - the 45 Questions that terrify those who
try to
> > >>defend
> > >> > >> the Warren Commission Re****t. In the past, there have been
only two
> > >>> >>semi-serious attempts to answer them, one by John McAdams, and
one by 'Bud'
> > >>(the
> > >>> >>troll listed below) - Both responses were basically denials of
the facts in
> > >>most
> > >> > >> of the 'answers'.
>
> > >> > >> But first, an im****tant note:
>
> > >> > >>
**********************************************************************
> > >> > >> Im****tant Note for Lurkers - there are many trolls on this
forum who's
> > >> > >> only purpose is to obstruct debate, deny the evidence, and
attempt to
> > >> > >> change message threads from discussing the evidence, to
personal insults
> > >> > >> and attacks.
>
> > >> > >> These trolls include (but are not limited to):
>
> > >> > >> Baldoni
> > >> > >> Bigdog
> > >> > >> Bill
> > >> > >> Brokedad
> > >> > >> Bud
> > >> > >> Burlyguard
> > >> > >> Cdddraftsman
> > >> > >> Chuck Schuyler
> > >> > >> Chu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >> Curious
> > >> > >> David Von Pein
> > >> > >> Ed Dolan *
> > >> > >> Justme1952
> > >> > >> Martybaugh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >> Miss Rita
> > >> > >> much...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >> much...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >> Sam Brown
> > >> > >> Spiffy_one
> > >> > >> Timst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >> Todd W. Vaughan
> > >> > >> YoHarvey
>
> > >>> >> Please beware when seeing their responses, and note that they
will simply
> > >> > >> deny the facts I mention, demand citations that I've provided
before, or
> > >>> >> simply run with insults. These trolls are only good material
for the kill
> > >> > >> files.
>
> > >>> >> * Eddie 'Disgrace' Dolan is an exception - he *should* be
killfiled, but
> > >>he's
> > >> > >> amusing! And being a former Marine, even a disgraced one, is a
plus.
> > >> > >>
**********************************************************************
>
> > >>> >> 30. Somewhat related to the previous question, why does the
Autopsy Re****t
> > >> > >> contradict the BOH photo? (The Autopsy Re****t stated that the
wound
> > >> > >> extended to the occipital, and was *devoid* of bone and
scalp... this
> > >> > >> simply cannot be seen in the BOH photo.) No LNT'er has been
able to
> > >> > >> point to *any* part of the Occipital that cannot be seen in
the BOH
> > >>> >> photo - yet the autopsy re****t, *all* prosectors, and over 40
eyewitnesses
> > >> > >> place a large wound here that was devoid of bone and scalp.
>
> > >> > >scarcely a mouse-peep, Lone Nut suckers are really ducking for
cover
> > >> > >the past few day's
>
> > >> > It's gotta be embarrassing for them... knowing that only lies can
keep 'em
> > >> > afloat.
>
> > >>> I've finally gotten around to the Mark Fuhrman book - and it's
downright funny
> > >>> to see all the spin and lies the guy is putting out. Perhaps if I
get the
> > >>time,
> > >> > I'll put a few of his better whoppers in a post for people to
read about.
>
> > >> I suggest you deal with your own whoppers first, Ben.
>
> > Running from the evidence won't convince anyone... if you can't deal
with the
> > evidence, then the 80-90% in the polls will rise even further...
>
> > >> You have argued that the presence of a *Lady in Yellow Pants* is
proof
> > >> that the Nix and Zapruder films have been altered, haven't you? You
> > >> have also been avoiding discussion of your theory, or admitting
your
> > >> mistake, for a couple of months now.
>
> > Actually, there are those who seem to want to reopen it... but none of
them are
> > LNT'ers... they're all trolls.
>
> > You have *YOUR* op****tunity to defend the authenticity of the extant
Z-film, and
> > you run from it.
>
> > >> Had another poster made a blooper of that magnitude, you would have
> > >> been all over him like a cheap suit, demanding a retraction -within
a
> > >> 'reasonable' amount of time, of course. Then, within a day or so,
you
> > >> would have started multiple threads, attacking the other poster,
with
> > >> words like "liar" and "fool" in the header.
>
> > By all means... do whatever you feel compelled to do.
>
> > >> Fortunately for you, the posters who debunked your *Lady in Yellow
> > >> Pants* theory are decent folks who wouldn't dream of resorting to
such
> > >> dirty tricks,
>
> > ROTFLMAO!!!
>
> > When you have to lie, all you've proven is that you're a liar, eh?
>
> > >> and, although there are limits to their patience,
> > >> they're perfectly willing to give you a year or so to fess up to
the
> > >> fact that you goofed up real bad. But why not bite the bullet
sooner
> > >> rather than later, Ben?
>
> > >> -Mark
>
> > >ya need to focus son, the question #30.... gird those loins (you do
> > >have some, eh?) and all that stuff. Hiding won't do! Simply shows the
> > >coward in you..... Carry on Munchless... you graduate this year or do
> > >we have a few more semesters with you, a simple minded idjit?
>
> > Yeah... the trolls simply have nothing to say. They lied about the
number of
> > people visible in a particular frame - but they think they have me "on
the run"
> > because the only kooks who want to debate are trolls.
>
> > But should I begin debating with trolls, they'll do what they've
always done...
> > lie and run away. It takes very little intelligence to see that...-
Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
|
