OSWALD'S P.O. BOXES
David Von Pein
David Von Pein
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f5cca9b6a67f70b9
>>> "When Oswald is supposed to have picked up the rifle and pistol from the Post Office on March 25, even though they were mailed to A.J. Hidel [sic], Oswald was working at J/C/S." <<<
Once again, Bill Kelly is pretending to know exactly what day Oswald
picked up the rifle at the post office. I wonder why Bill is
pretending to know it was precisely March 25th?
That info is totally unknowable, of course. But Mr. Kelly wants to
make people believe that he's nailed it down to just March 25th and no
other possible date. And Bill is also trying to make it sound as if
it's the LNers who have somehow nailed it down to that precise date,
which isn't true at all.
Bill is also pretending to know that BOTH the rifle and pistol were
picked up the SAME DAY. That, too, is not known. Maybe Oswald picked
up the rifle on one day, and the revolver on another.
I wonder how Bill knows such unknowable things?
David Von Pein
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2853.msg54308.html#msg54308
MILES SCULL SAID [BY WAY OF COPYING-AND-PASTING ANOTHER PERSON'S WORDS
INTO HIS POST, WITHOUT CREDITING THE REAL AUTHOR OF THESE WORDS]:
Fortunately, Postal Inspector Holmes is not the final authority on
Postal Regulations. The Postal Manual, Section 846.53b, states quite
unequivocally that "Part 3 of the box rental application, identifying
persons other than the applicant authorized to receive mail must be
retained for 2 years after the box is closed."
DVP SAID:
That's nothing but a flat-out lie, Miles.
You should really start doing at least a little bit of research on
your own before slapping together a copy-and-paste post like your last
one about the postal regulations.
First off, you're incorrect on the number of the postal regulation
that you think is going to save the conspiracy theorists from further
embarrassment concerning this issue. It's not 846.53b. The one you're
referring to is the regulation concerning post office boxes, and
that's 846.53h (pictured at the link below).
I also find it interesting to note that this particular error about
the number of the regulation is the exact same mistake made by
conspiracy theorist Rob Caprio in an earlier post in this thread. He,
too, seems to think it's 846.53b. (This probably means that Caprio and
Scull are relying on the same conspiracy-flavored kookbook or website
for their "facts" and information.)
Secondly, the copy-and-pasted quote you provided earlier -- "Part 3 of
the box rental application, identifying persons other than the
applicant authorized to receive mail must be retained for 2 years
after the box is closed" -- is nowhere to be found in Postal
Regulation 846.53h (and it's not in 846.53b either). So whoever put
those exact words inside quotation marks is nothing but a liar. Simple
as that.
What probably happened is this: The conspiracy theorist whom Rob
Caprio and Miles Scull trust so dearly with their information
concerning the 1963 United States Postal Regulations likely just
copied the main thrust of Ralph R. Rea's words that appear in Rea's
May 3, 1966, letter to Stewart Galanor.
As we can easily see when doing a comparison, the words are almost
identical in the two quotes. In fact, beginning with the word
"identifying", the quote used by Miles Scull is verbatim to the words
that we find in Ralph Rea's 1966 letter [which can be seen at the link
below].
And Rea's information is obviously not correct, because, as I
mentioned earlier, there's nothing at all in Postal Regulation 846.53h
that says that "Part 3" of a P.O. Box rental application must be
retained for two years after the box is closed.
So many conspiracy myths. And so many people willing to believe in
almost all of them--hook, line, sinker, and P.O. Box application.
aeffects
you remind me of diarrhea, shit everywhere...
don't forget: no advertising shithead!
Bud
> On Jul 17, 12:20 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> you remind me of diarrhea, shit everywhere...
This is what the trolls are countering the evidence of this case
with these days. It`s seems we can declare victory, the retards have
surrendered (Gil Jesus) or went into hiding (Ben) or are just too
stoned to make coherent arguments (Healy).
Gil Jesus
> This is what the trolls are countering the evidence of this case
> with these days. It`s seems we can declare victory, the retards have
> surrendered (Gil Jesus) or went into hiding (Ben) or are just too
> stoned to make coherent arguments (Healy).
I surrendered ?
David Von Pein
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/4dadb858c6858e46
>>> "Thanks for that David, and for supplying the supporting documents and records that indicate that what I say in #1 of my list, that there is no witness, document, records or evidence that Oswald obtained the rifle from the PO box 2915." <<<
OSWALD ordered the rifle from Klein's, paid for the rifle via a $21.45
money order that he (OSWALD) purchased and sent to Klein's, was
shipped a rifle to the same PO Box in Dallas that was rented by
OSWALD, and the rifle was not returned to Klein's.
To Bill Kelly, all of the above (in unison) somehow indicates that
OSWALD didn't pick up that rifle.
I guess nothing short of a photo of Oswald walking out of the P.O.
with the rifle in his mitts will satisfy William Kelly. (Of course,
that photo might have been faked by the Govt. too, you know. The Govt.
will never stop trying to pin some murders on hapless sap Oswald, of
course. No matter how much evidence they have to fake to do it. Right,
William K.?)
IOW--Conspiracy theorists like Bill will choose to believe ANY hunk of
silliness, instead of accepting the obvious truth about a double-
murderer they so desperately seek to exonerate.
What a goofy hobby CTers have.
http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/post-office-applications.html
Bud
Yah, you haven`t been posting so I figured you came to your senses.
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Jul 17, 6:39=A0am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> =A0 This is what the trolls are countering the evidence of this case
>> with these days. It`s seems we can declare victory, the retards have
>> surrendered (Gil Jesus) or went into hiding (Ben) or are just too
>> stoned to make coherent arguments (Healy).
>
>I surrendered ?
Did you? I hadn't noticed. Anymore than someone spotted a troll actually
*answering* the 45 Questions (or indeed, yours!)
Trolls are best simply killfiled - they thrive on attention...
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
aeffects
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/th...
...
> What a goofy hobby CTers have.
>
> http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/post-office-applications.html
and yours: swimming in KFC deep fryer, FAT.... You're disgusting David
Von Pein, ya need a new church to attend, the church of WCR has way to
many holes, what with winter approaching, you're gonna freeze that
tender ass of yours OFF... Get busy TROLL!
Sam McClung
news:36dc3edd-7ff1-4876...@s17g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
is davey still in the kfc navy? or has he moved on to greener pastures?
timstter
> In article <2e29795a-7d53-4db7-a58d-010db15d8...@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
Bit hard to notice ANYTHING when you're hiding behind your killfilter,
Yellow Pants, as YOU are.
Informative Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
robcap...@netscape.com
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f5cca9b6a67f...
Dave is up to his old tricks again. He can't explain for us how they
would deliver mail to a person who didn't exist in the eyes of the
Postal service for us.
He plays dodgeball instead.
David Von Pein
So, Rob, you think Oswald would have intentionally ordered a rifle
under the name of Hidell, all the while knowing full well he would
never be able to pick up the gun at the post office box where he
intentionally had it mailed. Is that about the size of it, Robby?
robcap...@netscape.com
You just made my point for me Dave! This whole claim of the WC is a
ridiculous! He would have sent it to himself (if he actually ordered
it) since he was NOT worried about any link obviously. IF he was
worried about it tracing back to him he would have gone to a store and
left no trace. Even LNers like you claim this is why there is NO
receipt for the ammo because stores keep NO records!
David Von Pein
That whole business about leaving no trace if he'd bought it in a
store is probably not right either. I'd like for somebody to prove
that a gun bought in a gun shop required absolutely no paperwork at
all. Can you do that, Robby?
David Von Pein
>>> "You just made my point for me Dave! This whole claim of the WC is a ridiculous!" <<<
It's not the WC's claim, you idiot stick. We have the verified
paperwork WITH LHO'S WRITING ON IT -- the order form and the money
order to Klein's.
That's called PROOF BEYOND ALL DOUBT that Oswald/"Hidell" ordered a
rifle by mail order. It doesn't matter whether it was stupid to order
it via mail order--we know he did it nonetheless.
You must actually think that all of the paperwork with Oswald's
handwriting on it is fake (somehow). Right, Rob?
If you DO believe that, you're nuts. (Which is no surprise, since we
all know you are nuts anyway.)
robcap...@netscape.com
LOL! If you keep the "Robby" stuff up Reitzes we will all know you
are "Ben Holmes" too!
YOUR side is the one that claims NO records were kept when the ammo is
discussed since there is NO record of LHO ever purchasing any, now you
want to claim they do keep records when it helps you with the rifle!
YOU are all over the place Reitzes!
Can you make up your mind or not? Show us how LHO would receive mail
for "A. Hidell" when NO such person was listed on his Part 3.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "You just made my point for me Dave! This whole claim of the WC is a ridiculous!" <<<
>
> It's not the WC's claim, you idiot stick. We have the verified
> paperwork WITH LHO'S WRITING ON IT -- the order form and the money
> order to Klein's.
The order form is for a 36" Carbine!
The money order MATCHES THE PRICE for a 36" Carbine w/scope, NOT a 40"
Carcano!
Just how dumb are you Reitzes?
> That's called PROOF BEYOND ALL DOUBT that Oswald/"Hidell" ordered a
> rifle by mail order.
LOL!! YOU have NO idea what "proof" is! The ONLY "proof" is that LHO
would have ordered a 36" Carbine, yet the WC claimed he owned and used
a 40" Carcano!!
YOU are sunk Reitzes!
> It doesn't matter whether it was stupid to order
> it via mail order--we know he did it nonetheless.
YOU can't show he ordered and received a 40" Carcano and that is my
point!
> You must actually think that all of the paperwork with Oswald's
> handwriting on it is fake (somehow). Right, Rob?
Don't need to claim that Dave as it POINTS TO A DIFFERENT RIFLE than
the one you and the WC claim was ordered!
> If you DO believe that, you're nuts. (Which is no surprise, since we
> all know you are nuts anyway.)
Now, now Reitzes, don't blame me because you switched to a side with
NO supporting evidence. It was YOUR choice to leave the side of
conspiracy for money.
David Von Pein
>>> "YOUR side is the one that claims NO records were kept when the ammo is discussed since there is NO record of LHO ever purchasing any, now you want to claim they do keep records when it helps you with the rifle! YOU are all over the place Reitzes!" <<<
In my previous post, I was talking about a person in Texas (circa
1963) buying a RIFLE over the counter at a gun shop--not just buying
BULLETS.
Big difference.
BTW, I'm not Dave Reitzes. Have you been taking Healy Pills, Caprio?
David Von Pein
>>> "YOU are sunk Reitzes!" <<<
You are retarded, Caprio.
robcap...@netscape.com
NO it isn't Dave. Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the
SAME system of records! YOU can't claim there would be records for
one item and NONE for another. NOW that is crazy!
So you say, but I wonder. I really don't care if you are ten people
on here and other boards, YOU still make NO sense!
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "YOU are sunk Reitzes!" <<<
>
> You are retarded, Caprio.
How does it feel to lose everytime to someone you call retarded?
David Von Pein
>>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of records! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for another." <<<
In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
the above post clinches the deal.
Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
rifle would "require the same system of records".
Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
Bud
I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuck
and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
that they don`t even bother any more, but I wonder if the kooks don`t
realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer, a parody of
a thinking, reasoning person. Perhaps they feel a little shame that
they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was a
legitimate position. But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
books fed him. This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
back up. John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
mouth our work here is done.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of records! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for another." <<<
>
> In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
> the above post clinches the deal.
Dave claims there would be RECORDS for the rifle, but NO records for
the ammo and somehow I'm the retarded one!
> Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
> rifle would "require the same system of records".
Nice try Davy, but that is NOT what I said or meant and you should be
smart enough to know this (or perhaps you are intellectually
challenged). Since ONLY two stores carried Carcanos and ammo for them
in ALL of Dallas we are talking about the same store in all
liklihood. Who goes to one store for a rifle and then leaves to go to
another for the ammo (unless they first one is out of ammo, but this
is very unlikely since the Carcano could not have been a big seller)?
Dave is trying to compare TWO DIFFERENT items to make his falsehood
seem more logical, but we all see how he is lying, don't we?
> Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
Sure, and I mention BREAD a lot in regards to JFK's death, don't I? I
usually claim LHO killed him with a STALE LOAF OF BREAD! Good one
Davy! When you have to lie to make your point....
robcap...@netscape.com
> On Jul 20, 3:34 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of records! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for another." <<<
>
> > In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
> > the above post clinches the deal.
>
> > Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
> > rifle would "require the same system of records".
>
> > Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
>
> I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuck
> and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
> that they don`t even bother any more,
Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
falsehoods that they are! I whooped DVP so bad he has stayed away
from me for years! LOL!
> but I wonder if the kooks don`t
> realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
done this!
> a parody of
> a thinking, reasoning person.
That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
basis.
> Perhaps they feel a little shame that
> they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
> perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
> knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was a
> legitimate position.
Wow, more support for Ben. I am just shocked! LOL!! NO real CTer, or
any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
and come away with the following conclusions:
1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
2) LHO received said rifle.
3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
dialog. The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
really on in many cases.
> But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> books fed him.
NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
is on many issues in this case.
> This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> back up.
So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
this case. Tis that simple. The mere fact Ben hides behind his
kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
for setting the record straight! IF you are not wiling to debate
spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
years, didn't he?
> John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
> it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
> failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
> zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
> mouth our work here is done.
Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
any way! Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
Thanks!
Bud
wrote:
> On Jul 20, 8:54 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 20, 3:34 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of records! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for another." <<<
>
> > > In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
> > > the above post clinches the deal.
>
> > > Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
> > > rifle would "require the same system of records".
>
> > > Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
>
> > I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuck
> > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
> > that they don`t even bother any more,
>
> Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
> falsehoods that they are! I whooped DVP so bad he has stayed away
> from me for years! LOL!
Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he realized he
was dealing with a retard?
> > but I wonder if the kooks don`t
> > realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>
> i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
> without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
> done this!
Visiting retard conspiracy sites isn`t research, retard. Lets see
you actually research whether there would be some kind of paperwork or
whether any license or registration would need to be shown in order to
purchase a rifle in Texas in 1963. You seem to think just squawking
something over and over is just as good as actually supporting what
you say.
> > a parody of
> > a thinking, reasoning person.
>
> That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
> basis.
I know you are but what am I?
> > Perhaps they feel a little shame that
> > they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
> > perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
> > knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was a
> > legitimate position.
>
> Wow, more support for Ben. I am just shocked! LOL!! NO real CTer, or
> any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
> and come away with the following conclusions:
>
> 1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
>
> 2) LHO received said rifle.
>
> 3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
>
> 4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
>
> This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
> dialog. The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
> really on in many cases.
Ben at least understands how foolish it is to deny EVERYTHING. You
give away the game and your own credibility when you turn everything
into a simple game of denial.
> > But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> > cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> > books fed him.
>
> NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
> is on many issues in this case.
He was killfiling regulars here before you showed up, retard. He
wasn`t hiding from you, he was hiding from LNers. He continued having
a dialog with you long after there was any point to.
> > This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> > flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> > will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> > to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> > those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> > back up.
>
> So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
> LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
I wonder how you can be so retarded as to think I am expressing
worry over Ben. If anything I am expressing gratitude to you, you`ve
done more harm to the CT position than I could ever do.
> I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
> this case.
No, you took words of his out of context and portrayed them to mean
opinions Ben was not expressing. You don`t think anyone can follow
this?
> Tis that simple. The mere fact Ben hides behind his
> kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
> for setting the record straight! IF you are not wiling to debate
> spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
Don`t know. I know he likes to ambush LN newbies when the stumble in
here. Sometimes they rough him up.
> To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
> years, didn't he?
I think it was Mark who started it. He asked Ben why, if he was
actually on the side of truth, he let you tell so many falsehoods
unopposed. I think this struck a nerve, and Ben did start publicly
disagreeing with some of your nonsense.
> > John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
> > it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
> > failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
> > zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
> > mouth our work here is done.
>
> Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
> any way! Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
> in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
> Thanks!
Certainly you aren`t credible enough to support your point of view.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jul 20, 8:54=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> On Jul 20, 3:34=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of re=
>cords! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for ano=
>ther." <<<
>>
>> > In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
>> > the above post clinches the deal.
>>
>> > Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
>> > rifle would "require the same system of records".
>>
>> > Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
>>
The FACT that you cannot quote me saying *ANY* of those statements demonstrates
that you're not only a moron, but a dishonest one.
>This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
>dialog. The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
>really on in many cases.
>
>> But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
>> cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
>> books fed him.
>
>NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
>is on many issues in this case.
:)
Since I continue to post - your lie is rather transparent, isn't it?
>> This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
>> flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
>> will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
>> to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
>> those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
>> back up.
>
>So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
>LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>
>I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
>this case. Tis that simple.
If this were true, then you could simply quote or cite the Death Certificate
that said what you claimed.
But you STILL can't...
>The mere fact Ben hides behind his
>kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
>for setting the record straight!
I just set the record straight.
You've lied repeatedly about what I've said, and you lied about the Death
Certificate.
You cannot refute...
>IF you are not wiling to debate
>spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
>
>To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
>years, didn't he?
>
>> John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
>> it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
>> failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
>> zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
>> mouth our work here is done.
>
>Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
>any way! Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
>in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
>Thanks!
robcap...@netscape.com
> On Jul 21, 10:16 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> wrote:
> > > I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuck
> > > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
> > > that they don`t even bother any more,
>
> > Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
> > falsehoods that they are! I whooped DVP so bad he has stayed away
> > from me for years! LOL!
>
> Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he realized he
> was dealing with a retard?
I'm sure. I know because I asked him to kilfile me many times for
years and he wouldn't do it! He followed me everywhere butting in and
defending the WC, but ONCE I BEGAN SAVING HIS WORDS and started to
quote them then he ran eventually when it became obvious how he was
lying to us.
> > > but I wonder if the kooks don`t
> > > realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>
> > i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
> > without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
> > done this!
>
> Visiting retard conspiracy sites isn`t research, retard.
Name calling is NOT going to save you Bud, nor increase belief in your
beliefs.
> Lets see
> you actually research whether there would be some kind of paperwork or
> whether any license or registration would need to be shown in order to
> purchase a rifle in Texas in 1963. You seem to think just squawking
> something over and over is just as good as actually supporting what
> you say.
ALL the paperwork the WC gave us POINTS TO A 36" Carbine! Here is a
link a guy by the name of Miles did on this recently. It has lots of
pictures so you should understand it Bud.
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2906.0.html
Perhaps one day you will become familiar with the evidence you
support.
> > > a parody of
> > > a thinking, reasoning person.
>
> > That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
> > basis.
>
> I know you are but what am I?
YOU are either a paid liar, or a man who is soooo gullible that he
believes every fairy-tale he is told.
> > > Perhaps they feel a little shame that
> > > they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
> > > perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
> > > knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was a
> > > legitimate position.
>
> > Wow, more support for Ben. I am just shocked! LOL!! NO real CTer, or
> > any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
> > and come away with the following conclusions:
>
> > 1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
>
> > 2) LHO received said rifle.
>
> > 3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
>
> > 4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
>
> > This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
> > dialog. The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
> > really on in many cases.
>
> Ben at least understands how foolish it is to deny EVERYTHING.
I am NOT denying it, I am showing the evidence DOES NOT support your
claims! Blame the WC for the lousy work they did with evidence if you
need someone to blame.
> You
> give away the game and your own credibility when you turn everything
> into a simple game of denial.
LOL!! This is NOT a game Bud, a real person was killed and this
country headed into a different direction! YOU and your ilk play the
game of denial, I simply show the evidence the WC gave us DOES NOT
SUPPORT THE CLAIM IT IS TIED TO IN ALMOST EVERY ISSUE.
> > > But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> > > cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> > > books fed him.
>
> > NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
> > is on many issues in this case.
>
> He was killfiling regulars here before you showed up, retard. He
> wasn`t hiding from you, he was hiding from LNers. He continued having
> a dialog with you long after there was any point to.
More defense of Ben, wow! I thought he was retarded and a kook too?
YOU are showing us he is really one of you in all liklihood. ALL I
did was asked Ben to cite evidence supporting his claims, but he can't
do it because his claims matched the WC's and we know they couldn't do
it so he ran!
Somehow it is my fault! LOL!
> > > This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> > > flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> > > will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> > > to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> > > those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> > > back up.
>
> > So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
> > LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>
> I wonder how you can be so retarded as to think I am expressing
> worry over Ben. If anything I am expressing gratitude to you, you`ve
> done more harm to the CT position than I could ever do.
YOU are lying again Bud as MOST CTers see things the way I do, NOT the
way Ben does! I know of very few CTers who think like he does on the
major issues in this case.
> > I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
> > this case.
>
> No, you took words of his out of context and portrayed them to mean
> opinions Ben was not expressing. You don`t think anyone can follow
> this?
Wow! Bud is using the same old argument Ben did! LOL! He has to be a
LNer!
They were never out of context (how would Bud know anyway as all LNers
claimed not to read our posts?) as I categorized them in order of
TOPIC and only used them in the topic that applied.
YOU are lying again "Bud".
> > Tis that simple. The mere fact Ben hides behind his
> > kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
> > for setting the record straight! IF you are not wiling to debate
> > spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
>
> Don`t know. I know he likes to ambush LN newbies when the stumble in
> here. Sometimes they rough him up.
Sure they do. YOUR side has NO support Bud, that is why you have to
resort to denial, lying, and personal character attacks.
> > To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
> > years, didn't he?
>
> I think it was Mark who started it. He asked Ben why, if he was
> actually on the side of truth, he let you tell so many falsehoods
> unopposed. I think this struck a nerve, and Ben did start publicly
> disagreeing with some of your nonsense.
NO, that is NOT it "Bud" as NO one lied more than Walt and he NEVER
once called him on it.
> > > John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
> > > it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
> > > failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
> > > zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
> > > mouth our work here is done.
>
> > Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
> > any way! Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
> > in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
> > Thanks!
>
> Certainly you aren`t credible enough to support your point of view.
I'm here to support it every day for the most part, you are NOT
credible enough to even ask me the right questions.
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <d29cd41d-07af-4f93-bd78-0e5f8fea1...@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Ben, we have been through this and YOUR words do say this (then "Bud"
claims I use denial? LOL!). YOU believe LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
received it, owned it and posed with it for one BY photo (CE-133A).
Why lie about YOUR own words?
Why insult me for what you said? IF you know this is wrong then admit
you were wrong and we can move on. I'm not petty like you, I will
accept the mistake and move on instead of harrass you for years like
you did to Tony and others.
> >This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
> >dialog. The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
> >really on in many cases.
>
> >> But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> >> cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> >> books fed him.
>
> >NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
> >is on many issues in this case.
>
> :)
>
> Since I continue to post - your lie is rather transparent, isn't it?
YOU post on nothing Ben. YOU say a sentence as you are terrified I
will save your words for later.
This is the first time you have even responded to me in a month or
so. IF I was a wrong and a moron as you claim, why are you terrified
to say anything to me?
> >> This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> >> flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> >> will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> >> to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> >> those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> >> back up.
>
> >So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
> >LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>
> >I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
> >this case. Tis that simple.
>
> If this were true, then you could simply quote or cite the Death Certificate
> that said what you claimed.
I have Ben, and I have quoted YOU agreeing with me! My comment does
NOT go against the evidence either as the OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH WAS
WHAT I SAID! YOU OTOH distort what the actual evidence shows for your
own benefit (and the WC's too).
> But you STILL can't...
List the claim, let's see if I can or not. YOUR game of denial is
old. YOU should be a man and admit you said what you said and it if
you are embarrassed by it admit you made a mistake and move on.
> >The mere fact Ben hides behind his
> >kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
> >for setting the record straight!
>
> I just set the record straight.
The record Ben sets "straight" is his own personal agenda, not the
TRUTH.
> You've lied repeatedly about what I've said, and you lied about the Death
> Certificate.
Ben, I quote your words, if that is lying then you have been the one
lying. YOU couldn't quote me saying what you claimed, remember?
As for the basic point YOU agreed with me and I have quoted that too!
Anyway we look at this you lied, and were NOT man enough to admit
it.
> You cannot refute...
YOU are in the fairy-tale you support Ben because I have shown you
lied and were not man enough to admit it.
YOUR pals "J. Leyden" and Bud can't save you if you don't admit you
were wrong!
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jul 21, 1:33=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> On Jul 21, 10:16=A0am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
>> wrote:
>
>> > > =A0 I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuc=
>k
>> > > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game her=
>e
>> > > that they don`t even bother any more,
>>
>> > Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
>> > from me for years! =A0LOL!
>>
>> =A0 Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he realized he
>> was dealing with a retard?
>
>I'm sure. I know because I asked him to kilfile me many times for
>years and he wouldn't do it! He followed me everywhere butting in and
>defending the WC, but ONCE I BEGAN SAVING HIS WORDS and started to
>quote them then he ran eventually when it became obvious how he was
>lying to us.
Actually, it's because you REFUSE to quote my words.
You see, each and every time you accurately quote me, I have absolutely no
problem with it.
It's just that you continue to lie about what I've said, AND CANNOT QUOTE ME
SAYING SO...
>> > > but I wonder if the kooks don`t
>> > > realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>>
>> > i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
>> > without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
>> > done this!
>>
>> =A0 Visiting retard conspiracy sites isn`t research, retard.
>
>Name calling is NOT going to save you Bud, nor increase belief in your
>beliefs.
>
>> Lets see
>> you actually research whether there would be some kind of paperwork or
>> whether any license or registration would need to be shown in order to
>> purchase a rifle in Texas in 1963. You seem to think just squawking
>> something over and over is just as good as actually supporting what
>> you say.
>
>ALL the paperwork the WC gave us POINTS TO A 36" Carbine! Here is a
>link a guy by the name of Miles did on this recently. It has lots of
>pictures so you should understand it Bud.
>
>http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2906.0.html
>
>Perhaps one day you will become familiar with the evidence you
>support.
>
>
>> > > a parody of
>> > > a thinking, reasoning person.
>>
>> > That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
>> > basis.
>>
>> =A0 I know you are but what am I?
>
>YOU are either a paid liar, or a man who is soooo gullible that he
>believes every fairy-tale he is told.
>
>
>> > > Perhaps they feel a little shame that
>> > > they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
>> > > perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
>> > > knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was =
>a
>> > > legitimate position.
>>
>> > Wow, more support for Ben. I am just shocked! =A0LOL!! NO real CTer, or
>> > any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
>> > and come away with the following conclusions:
>>
>> > 1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
>>
>> > 2) LHO received said rifle.
>>
>> > 3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
>>
>> > 4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
>>
>> > This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
>> > dialog. =A0The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he i=
>s
>> > really on in many cases.
>>
>> =A0 Ben at least understands how foolish it is to deny EVERYTHING.
>
>I am NOT denying it, I am showing the evidence DOES NOT support your
>claims! Blame the WC for the lousy work they did with evidence if you
>need someone to blame.
>
>> You
>> give away the game and your own credibility when you turn everything
>> into a simple game of denial.
>
>LOL!! This is NOT a game Bud, a real person was killed and this
>country headed into a different direction! YOU and your ilk play the
>game of denial, I simply show the evidence the WC gave us DOES NOT
>SUPPORT THE CLAIM IT IS TIED TO IN ALMOST EVERY ISSUE.
>
>
>> > > But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
>> > > cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
>> > > books fed him.
>>
>> > NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
>> > is on many issues in this case.
>>
>> =A0 He was killfiling regulars here before you showed up, retard. He
>> wasn`t hiding from you, he was hiding from LNers. He continued having
>> a dialog with you long after there was any point to.
>
>More defense of Ben, wow! I thought he was retarded and a kook too?
>YOU are showing us he is really one of you in all liklihood. ALL I
>did was asked Ben to cite evidence supporting his claims, but he can't
>do it because his claims matched the WC's and we know they couldn't do
>it so he ran!
>
>Somehow it is my fault! LOL!
>
>> > > This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
>> > > flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
>> > > will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
>> > > to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
>> > > those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
>> > > back up.
>>
>> > So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. =A0I wonder why a
>> > LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>>
>> =A0 I wonder how you can be so retarded as to think I am expressing
>> worry over Ben. If anything I am expressing gratitude to you, you`ve
>> done more harm to the CT position than I could ever do.
>
>YOU are lying again Bud as MOST CTers see things the way I do, NOT the
>way Ben does! I know of very few CTers who think like he does on the
>major issues in this case.
Of course, as I demonstrated, that is simply not the case.
One easy example was "Oswald in Mexico City" issue - which I demonstrated that a
large majority of CT authors agree with me on.
>> > I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
>> > this case.
>>
>> =A0 No, you took words of his out of context and portrayed them to mean
>> opinions Ben was not expressing. You don`t think anyone can follow
>> this?
>
>Wow! Bud is using the same old argument Ben did! LOL! He has to be a
>LNer!
>
>They were never out of context (how would Bud know anyway as all LNers
>claimed not to read our posts?) as I categorized them in order of
>TOPIC and only used them in the topic that applied.
>
>YOU are lying again "Bud".
>
>
>> >=A0Tis that simple. =A0The mere fact Ben hides behind his
>> > kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
>> > for setting the record straight! =A0IF you are not wiling to debate
>> > spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
>>
>> =A0 Don`t know. I know he likes to ambush LN newbies when the stumble in
>> here. Sometimes they rough him up.
>
>Sure they do. YOUR side has NO support Bud, that is why you have to
>resort to denial, lying, and personal character attacks.
>
>
>> > To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
>> > years, didn't he?
>>
>> =A0 I think it was Mark who started it. He asked Ben why, if he was
>> actually on the side of truth, he let you tell so many falsehoods
>> unopposed. I think this struck a nerve, and Ben did start publicly
>> disagreeing with some of your nonsense.
>
>NO, that is NOT it "Bud" as NO one lied more than Walt and he NEVER
>once called him on it.
>
>
>> > > John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
>> > > it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
>> > > failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
>> > > zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
>> > > mouth our work here is done.
>>
>> > Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
>> > any way! =A0Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
>> > in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
>> > Thanks!
>>
>> =A0 Certainly you aren`t credible enough to support your point of view.
>
>I'm here to support it every day for the most part, you are NOT
>credible enough to even ask me the right questions.
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jul 21, 3:09=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <d29cd41d-07af-4f93-bd78-0e5f8fea1...@r27g2000yqb.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Jul 20, 8:54=3DA0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> >> On Jul 20, 3:34=3DA0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system of=
> re=3D
>> >cords! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE for =
>ano=3D
>> >ther." <<<
>>
>> >> > In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded status,
>> >> > the above post clinches the deal.
>>
>> >> > Per Robby's above hunk of brilliance, buying a loaf of bread and a
>> >> > rifle would "require the same system of records".
>>
>> >> > Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
>>
>ck
>> >> and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
>> >> that they don`t even bother any more,
>>
>> >Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
>> >from me for years! =A0LOL!
>>
>> >> but I wonder if the kooks don`t
>> >> realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>>
>> >i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
>> >without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
>> >done this!
>>
>> >> a parody of
>> >> a thinking, reasoning person.
>>
>> >That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
>> >basis.
>>
>> >> Perhaps they feel a little shame that
>> >> they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
>> >> perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
>> >> knew having idiots like rob on his side discredited what he felt was a
>> >> legitimate position.
>>
>> >any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
>> >and come away with the following conclusions:
>>
>> >1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
>>
>> >2) LHO received said rifle.
>>
>> >3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
>>
>> >4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
>>
>trates
>> that you're not only a moron, but a dishonest one.
>
>Ben, we have been through this and YOUR words do say this (then "Bud"
>claims I use denial? LOL!). YOU believe LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
>received it, owned it and posed with it for one BY photo (CE-133A).
>Why lie about YOUR own words?
>
>Why insult me for what you said? IF you know this is wrong then admit
>you were wrong and we can move on. I'm not petty like you, I will
>accept the mistake and move on instead of harrass you for years like
>you did to Tony and others.
Yep... still can't quote me saying these things...
Lied, didn't you?
>> >This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
>> >dialog. =A0The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
>> >really on in many cases.
>>
>> >> But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
>> >> cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
>> >> books fed him.
>>
>> >NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
>> >is on many issues in this case.
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Since I continue to post - your lie is rather transparent, isn't it?
>
>YOU post on nothing Ben. YOU say a sentence as you are terrified I
>will save your words for later.
Quote me, stupid!
But, as above, where I challenged you to do so, you run.
>This is the first time you have even responded to me in a month or
>so. IF I was a wrong and a moron as you claim, why are you terrified
>to say anything to me?
LOL!
Why are you so afraid to quote me, stupid?
>> >> This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
>> >> flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
>> >> will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
>> >> to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
>> >> those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
>> >> back up.
>>
>> >So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. =A0I wonder why a
>> >LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>>
>> >I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
>> >this case. =A0Tis that simple.
>>
>> If this were true, then you could simply quote or cite the Death
>> Certificate that said what you claimed.
>
>I have Ben, and I have quoted YOU agreeing with me!
Yep...
Why not QUOTE what I agreed with, stupid?
What you CANNOT quote is any instance where I "agreed" with you on your outright
lie that the Death Certificate listed the cause of death as a "high velocity
bullet to the head".
And you can't admit that you lied.
>My comment does
>NOT go against the evidence
Yes it does, stupid.
The Death Certificate DID NOT STATE what you asserted it stated.
You lied.
>either as the OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH WAS
>WHAT I SAID! YOU OTOH distort what the actual evidence shows for your
>own benefit (and the WC's too).
So I can assert that it's found in the Bible too?
>> But you STILL can't...
>
>List the claim,
That the Death Certificate states the cause of death as a "high velocity bullet
to the head".
>let's see if I can or not.
Just did, stupid.
>YOUR game of denial is
>old. YOU should be a man and admit you said what you said and it if
>you are embarrassed by it admit you made a mistake and move on.
Still no quotes...
>> >The mere fact Ben hides behind his
>> >kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
>> >for setting the record straight!
>>
>> I just set the record straight.
>
>The record Ben sets "straight" is his own personal agenda, not the
>TRUTH.
What does the Death Certificate state as the cause of death?
>> You've lied repeatedly about what I've said, and you lied about the Death
>> Certificate.
>
>Ben, I quote your words,
And when you accurately do so, surprising absolutely no-one, I always agree with
the quoted words.
>if that is lying then you have been the one
>lying. YOU couldn't quote me saying what you claimed, remember?
Untrue, stupid. Why lie about it?
>As for the basic point YOU agreed with me and I have quoted that too!
Nope, untrue. I agreed WITH WHAT YOU SAID... which was, at that point, not what
you'd been claiming.
>Anyway we look at this you lied, and were NOT man enough to admit
>it.
What does the Death Certificate give as the cause of death?
>> You cannot refute...
>
>YOU are in the fairy-tale you support Ben because I have shown you
>lied and were not man enough to admit it.
And yet, you ran from quoting me... why can't you quote me, stupid?
>YOUR pals "J. Leyden" and Bud can't save you if you don't admit you
>were wrong!
What does the Death Certificate say about "high velocity bullets" again?
QUOTE IT!
(But you won't)
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <4fba10b3-0478-46c7-bdc5-6ef1ea180...@c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 21, 1:33=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> On Jul 21, 10:16=A0am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > > =A0 I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuc=
> >k
> >> > > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game her=
> >e
> >> > > that they don`t even bother any more,
>
> >> > Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
> >> > falsehoods that they are! =A0I whooped DVP so bad he has stayed away
> >> > from me for years! =A0LOL!
>
> >> =A0 Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he realized he
> >> was dealing with a retard?
>
> >I'm sure. I know because I asked him to kilfile me many times for
> >years and he wouldn't do it! He followed me everywhere butting in and
> >defending the WC, but ONCE I BEGAN SAVING HIS WORDS and started to
> >quote them then he ran eventually when it became obvious how he was
> >lying to us.
>
> Actually, it's because you REFUSE to quote my words.
Ben, if you are going to continue with this silly game then go back
into hiding. YOUR words say what I say they say!
Why do you support the WC's point of view so much? Be honest for
once.
> You see, each and every time you accurately quote me, I have absolutely no
> problem with it.
I ALWAYS accurately quote you! The problem for you is those quotes
show you support the WC's version of events!
> It's just that you continue to lie about what I've said, AND CANNOT QUOTE ME
> SAYING SO...
Ben, I am NOT going to play this denial game anymore. I can quote,
and have quoted you, many times. IF others think I am wrong they can
say so, but they have to show why I'm wrong in my quotes of you!
By the way, I mean respected people like Gil, Laz, CJ and Rossely too,
NOT Walt and your merry band of LNer cohorts.
It is the case as anyone who can actually look and comprehend the
evidence can ONLY leave with the same understanding as I have. How
can you claim LHO ordered a 40" Carcano when ALL the evidence the WC
gave us points to a 36" Carbine Ben?
Ditto the receiving part (they gave us none for this area), the owning
part and the posing with it part.
> One easy example was "Oswald in Mexico City" issue - which I demonstrated that a
> large majority of CT authors agree with me on.
NO you did not as NOT one of them said he went for sure due to
overwhelming evidence! NO one can place the real LHO there with
evidence that holds up and that is the truth.
IF evidence could do this I would agree, but there is NONE that does
this.
He was at Odio's in all likelihood.
Ben Holmes
And *that* statement is quite revealing.
My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
They only mean what *YOU* say they mean! How amusing!!!
But, the simple fact is that you're once again proven to be a liar.
>Why do you support the WC's point of view so much? Be honest for
>once.
When are you going to stop molesting the neighborhood children? Be honest for
once.
>> You see, each and every time you accurately quote me, I have absolutely no
>> problem with it.
>
>I ALWAYS accurately quote you!
Untrue. As I've previously demonstrated.
Indeed, you're lying right now in this thread about what I've stated.
>The problem for you is those quotes
WHAT quotes? The ones you refuse to quote???
>show you support the WC's version of events!
>
>> It's just that you continue to lie about what I've said, AND CANNOT QUOTE ME
>> SAYING SO...
>
>Ben, I am NOT going to play this denial game anymore. I can quote,
No you can't. As demonstrated right here.
>and have quoted you, many times.
Then it would be a simple matter to simply provide the URL to this previous
example.
But you can't. You're lying.
************************************************************
* WHY CAN'T YOU QUOTE ME SAYING WHAT YOU ASSERT, STUPID??? *
************************************************************
>IF others think I am wrong they can
>say so, but they have to show why I'm wrong in my quotes of you!
You *aren't* wrong when YOU ACCURATELY QUOTE ME.
It's just that you're an atrocious liar when it comes to what you assert I've
said.
And yet, I just gave a perfect example demonstrating otherwise.
Stupid, aren't you?
>as anyone who can actually look and comprehend the
>evidence can ONLY leave with the same understanding as I have.
Then why can't you support your assertion?
>How can you claim LHO ordered a 40" Carcano
How can you claim to have molested all the neighborhood children?
>when ALL the evidence the WC
>gave us points to a 36" Carbine Ben?
>
>Ditto the receiving part (they gave us none for this area), the owning
>part and the posing with it part.
>
>> One easy example was "Oswald in Mexico City" issue - which I demonstrated
>> that a large majority of CT authors agree with me on.
>
>NO you did not
Lying won't save you moron.
>as NOT one of them said he went for sure due to
>overwhelming evidence!
None of them said that Santa wears red, either. But it's a generally accepted
truth that he does.
>NO one can place the real LHO there with
>evidence that holds up and that is the truth.
>
>IF evidence could do this I would agree, but there is NONE that does
>this.
>
>He was at Odio's in all likelihood.
As I demonstrated with quote after quote, CT'ers *DO* accept that there's
legitimate evidence that Oswald traveled to Mexico City.
You're not only a liar, stupid... but a moronic one.
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <6b93a109-bd74-48c5-9022-9d3075f27...@j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
LOL! He is back (of course he did not leave at all he just posted as
other people) and in the same form as when he "left" too! Denial,
denial and more denial is all he has.
> Lied, didn't you?
I know you wish I did, but we have seen from your OWN words you LIED!
> >> >This is but one example of Ben's dishonesty, so save your silly
> >> >dialog. =A0The mere fact you are supporting Ben shows us what side he is
> >> >really on in many cases.
>
> >> >> But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> >> >> cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> >> >> books fed him.
>
> >> >NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
> >> >is on many issues in this case.
>
> >> :)
>
> >> Since I continue to post - your lie is rather transparent, isn't it?
>
> >YOU post on nothing Ben. YOU say a sentence as you are terrified I
> >will save your words for later.
>
> Quote me, stupid!
For what? Personal insults won't save you Ben, in fact, they show YOU
are a LNer for real as NO real CTer needs to sink to this level since
the evidence is on OUR side.
> But, as above, where I challenged you to do so, you run.
LOL!! Challenged me where whomever you are? I have quoted them a
million times Ben, so quit acting like I can't.
Your library is safe and sound by the way in case you hoped I deleted
it.
> >This is the first time you have even responded to me in a month or
> >so. IF I was a wrong and a moron as you claim, why are you terrified
> >to say anything to me?
>
> LOL!
It is funny, isn't it scardy-cat?
> Why are you so afraid to quote me, stupid?
Name the topic and I will quote away! This is one of the most silly
comments this person has ever made as I spent over a YEAR DOING
NOTHING BUT QUOTING HIM!
> >> >> This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> >> >> flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> >> >> will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> >> >> to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> >> >> those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> >> >> back up.
>
> >> >So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. =A0I wonder why a
> >> >LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>
> >> >I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
> >> >this case. =A0Tis that simple.
>
> >> If this were true, then you could simply quote or cite the Death
> >> Certificate that said what you claimed.
>
> >I have Ben, and I have quoted YOU agreeing with me!
>
> Yep...
>
> Why not QUOTE what I agreed with, stupid?
Oh, you mean the statement you claimed contained a "double negative"
one only one negative existed?? LOL!!
> What you CANNOT quote is any instance where I "agreed" with you on your outright
> lie that the Death Certificate listed the cause of death as a "high velocity
> bullet to the head".
You did agree with me Ben, and we all know it. That is why you are
really so mad, you got beat at your own game.
YOU more than met your match, go ahead and admit it. I played YOUR
silly game better than you did! I must admit saving your words like I
did was the key turning point as it made you LIE ABOUT AND DENY YOUR
OWN WORDS for everyone to see!
IF you really believed LHO ordered a 40" Carcano you would cite valid
evidence showing this, but you don't. YOU instead invent another
silly game called the "dictionary game!"
> And you can't admit that you lied.
I didn't lie, and the sad part for you is NONE of the quotes of mine
you posted ever mentioned what you claimed! IN fact you ADMITTED I
never used Burkley and Naval together!
> >My comment does
> >NOT go against the evidence
>
> Yes it does, stupid.
Sorry, JFK did die as a result of high velocity bullet to the head.
The Burkley D.C. YOU claim was NOT part of the WC's evidence by the
way so once again you have tied yourself up in your web of lies.
> The Death Certificate DID NOT STATE what you asserted it stated.
Which one? YOU never could show this Ben. YOU were left flailing at
air. By the way, you never could show mentioning or listing the
velocity speed was needed or required in 1963 either.
YOU flat-out lied about the FBI having jursidiction for the murder of
JFK and that is IN the WC's evidence and thanks to Tom we have read
it!
Lied as usual, didn't you?
> You lied.
Look who's talking! LOL!!
> >either as the OFFICIAL CAUSE OF DEATH WAS
> >WHAT I SAID! YOU OTOH distort what the actual evidence shows for your
> >own benefit (and the WC's too).
>
> So I can assert that it's found in the Bible too?
Why did you agree with me? Why did you admit I never said Burkley and
Naval together? Why do you claim this is evidence when you said ONLY
official stuff counts and the WC did NOT include the Naval D.C. in
their volumes per YOU?
YOU are dead on so many levels whomever you are.
> >> But you STILL can't...
>
> >List the claim,
>
> That the Death Certificate states the cause of death as a "high velocity bullet
> to the head".
YOU mean this one?
Quote on
“Does the death certificate NOT say death is "due to a high-velocity"
bullet to the head?” (Robert)
“Yep.” (Ben Holmes – 5/25/09)
Quote off
By the by, where is the DOUBLE NEGATIVE again?
> >let's see if I can or not.
>
> Just did, stupid.
Me too whomever you are.
> >YOUR game of denial is
> >old. YOU should be a man and admit you said what you said and it if
> >you are embarrassed by it admit you made a mistake and move on.
>
> Still no quotes...
See above whomever you are. YOU need to request something first.
> >> >The mere fact Ben hides behind his
> >> >kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
> >> >for setting the record straight!
>
> >> I just set the record straight.
>
> >The record Ben sets "straight" is his own personal agenda, not the
> >TRUTH.
>
> What does the Death Certificate state as the cause of death?
It seems it states what you AGREED TO! LOL!
> >> You've lied repeatedly about what I've said, and you lied about the Death
> >> Certificate.
>
> >Ben, I quote your words,
>
> And when you accurately do so, surprising absolutely no-one, I always agree with
> the quoted words.
I always accruately quote you and that is another game you play, you
blame me for your lying words. I have many quotes of you saying I
quote you 100% accruately, but when it suits you then you claim I
edited them. The ONLY one who edits is YOU whomever you are.
> >if that is lying then you have been the one
> >lying. YOU couldn't quote me saying what you claimed, remember?
>
> Untrue, stupid. Why lie about it?
Very true, in fact, it is 100% correct! LOL!
> >As for the basic point YOU agreed with me and I have quoted that too!
>
> Nope, untrue. I agreed WITH WHAT YOU SAID... which was, at that point, not what
> you'd been claiming.
Really? Let's look again, okay?
Quote on
“Does the death certificate NOT say death is "due to a high-velocity"
bullet to the head?” (Robert)
“Yep.” (Ben Holmes – 5/25/09)
Quote off
Hmm. It seems to say "high velocity bullet" to the head there whomever
you are. Also note how the quotes are not around "to the head" as you
claimed above in this post.
YOU got caught lying again about my words, yet you claim I do this to
you! YOU are the one that misrepresents other peoples' words, NOT me.
> >Anyway we look at this you lied, and were NOT man enough to admit
> >it.
>
> What does the Death Certificate give as the cause of death?
We saw YOU agreed with me! YOU lied and claimed the FBI had
jurisdiction when EVEN THE WC AND THE FBI SAID THEY DIDN'T! NOW that
is a whopper whomever you are!
> >> You cannot refute...
>
> >YOU are in the fairy-tale you support Ben because I have shown you
> >lied and were not man enough to admit it.
>
> And yet, you ran from quoting me... why can't you quote me, stupid?
YOU mean this?
“Does the death certificate NOT say death is "due to a high-velocity"
bullet to the head?” (Robert)
“Yep.” (Ben Holmes – 5/25/09)
> >YOUR pals "J. Leyden" and Bud can't save you if you don't admit you
> >were wrong!
>
> What does the Death Certificate say about "high velocity bullets" again?
“Does the death certificate NOT say death is "due to a high-velocity"
bullet to the head?” (Robert)
“Yep.” (Ben Holmes – 5/25/09)
NOW, explain for us why you lied and claimed the FBI had jurisdiction
for the murder when they did NOT.
> QUOTE IT!
“Does the death certificate NOT say death is "due to a high-velocity"
bullet to the head?” (Robert)
“Yep.” (Ben Holmes – 5/25/09)
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <e9783f32-0e6f-48d0-923e-0a85bac32...@c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
> My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
LOL!! Folks if you want a good chuckle just search the archives for
the "Ben Holmes In His Own Words" as I have 58 posts in that series so
far (more will be coming soon). That series shows his words in the
form of two quotes a post!
I have done nothing but quote his words for a year and a half and all
he does is deny them, lie about them, or claim I altered them.
YOU can't win with whomever this is.
> They only mean what *YOU* say they mean! How amusing!!!
NO, they say what any normal person with a 5th grade reading ability
thinks they say. YOUR words are NOT that complicated whomever you
are.
> But, the simple fact is that you're once again proven to be a liar.
YOU wish, but we know you are! Why did you lie about the FBI having
jurisdiction when the WC itself said they did NOT? Ditto the FBI!
> >Why do you support the WC's point of view so much? Be honest for
> >once.
>
> When are you going to stop molesting the neighborhood children? Be honest for
> once.
Same old whomever you are. I guess this is "Ben's character flaw" so
Dave has to add it back in for him! LOL!
> >> You see, each and every time you accurately quote me, I have absolutely no
> >> problem with it.
>
> >I ALWAYS accurately quote you!
>
> Untrue. As I've previously demonstrated.
YOU have not. Put a link to it.
> Indeed, you're lying right now in this thread about what I've stated.
Hardly, you are lying about what you said is more accurate.
Embarrassing, isn't it.
> >The problem for you is those quotes
>
> WHAT quotes? The ones you refuse to quote???
LOL!! Sure, I have never quoted you. Good one.
> >show you support the WC's version of events!
>
> >> It's just that you continue to lie about what I've said, AND CANNOT QUOTE ME
> >> SAYING SO...
>
> >Ben, I am NOT going to play this denial game anymore. I can quote,
>
> No you can't. As demonstrated right here.
YOU won't tell me what you want quoted so I can't be held responsible.
> >and have quoted you, many times.
>
> Then it would be a simple matter to simply provide the URL to this previous
> example.
>
> But you can't. You're lying.
Look who is talking. He claims to show I am lying about his words and
says he has shown this but we see no link to this fabricated event.
LOL!
> ************************************************************
> * WHY CAN'T YOU QUOTE ME SAYING WHAT YOU ASSERT, STUPID??? *
Why can't you say what you want me to quote from you?
> ************************************************************
>
> >IF others think I am wrong they can
> >say so, but they have to show why I'm wrong in my quotes of you!
>
> You *aren't* wrong when YOU ACCURATELY QUOTE ME.
Thanks, and I'll keep this for the library since I ACCRUATELY QUOTE
YOU 100% OF THE TIME!
> It's just that you're an atrocious liar when it comes to what you assert I've
> said.
LOL!! Good job at trying to make it about me INSTEAD OF YOUR OWN LYING
WORDS! LOL! The way you lie there is NO need for me to alter them as
you hang yourself so perfectly!
> >By the way, I mean respected people like Gil, Laz, CJ and Rossely too,
> >NOT Walt and your merry band of LNer cohorts.
Dead silence.
Personal insults won't save you whomever you are.
> >as anyone who can actually look and comprehend the
> >evidence can ONLY leave with the same understanding as I have.
>
> Then why can't you support your assertion?
What assertion? YOU are the one that got caught making a bunch of
assertions that just happen to match the WC's!
> >How can you claim LHO ordered a 40" Carcano
>
> How can you claim to have molested all the neighborhood children?
See? YOU ask him a realistic question and this is what you get in
return. It is a waste of time talking with this person, whomever they
are (my guess would be Dave Reitzes).
> >when ALL the evidence the WC
> >gave us points to a 36" Carbine Ben?
>
> >Ditto the receiving part (they gave us none for this area), the owning
> >part and the posing with it part.
>
> >> One easy example was "Oswald in Mexico City" issue - which I demonstrated
> >> that a large majority of CT authors agree with me on.
>
> >NO you did not
>
> Lying won't save you moron.
Of course, that is why I am NOT lying.
> >as NOT one of them said he went for sure due to
> >overwhelming evidence!
>
> None of them said that Santa wears red, either. But it's a generally accepted
> truth that he does.
But your words said they also said he went for sure due to
overwhelming evidence, remember?
> >NO one can place the real LHO there with
> >evidence that holds up and that is the truth.
>
> >IF evidence could do this I would agree, but there is NONE that does
> >this.
>
> >He was at Odio's in all likelihood.
>
> As I demonstrated with quote after quote, CT'ers *DO* accept that there's
> legitimate evidence that Oswald traveled to Mexico City.
NO they don't. Most just brush over it as they have NO interest in
it. It is like what Armstrong does with the cab and bus rides as he
would rather make his points instead of honestly dealing with the
evidence.
The ones that spent the vast majority of their time on this one aspect
(i.e. Fonzi, Scott, Lane later on, etc...) have all said there is NO
evidence that can show this happened.
> You're not only a liar, stupid... but a moronic one.
The same old rants by a man who can't support a single thing he says.
LOL!
Bud
wrote:
> On Jul 21, 1:33 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 21, 10:16 am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@netscape.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Tim and Chuck
> > > > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game here
> > > > that they don`t even bother any more,
>
> > > Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
> > > falsehoods that they are! I whooped DVP so bad he has stayed away
> > > from me for years! LOL!
>
> > Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he realized he
> > was dealing with a retard?
>
> I'm sure. I know because I asked him to kilfile me many times for
> years and he wouldn't do it! He followed me everywhere butting in and
> defending the WC, but ONCE I BEGAN SAVING HIS WORDS and started to
> quote them then he ran eventually when it became obvious how he was
> lying to us.
You create and live in your own little world, don`t you retard?
> > > > but I wonder if the kooks don`t
> > > > realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>
> > > i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
> > > without researching it for themselvew, hey wait, the CTers have always
> > > done this!
>
> > Visiting retard conspiracy sites isn`t research, retard.
>
> Name calling is NOT going to save you Bud, nor increase belief in your
> beliefs.
How could I increase the belief I hold in my own beliefs, retard?
> > Lets see
> > you actually research whether there would be some kind of paperwork or
> > whether any license or registration would need to be shown in order to
> > purchase a rifle in Texas in 1963. You seem to think just squawking
> > something over and over is just as good as actually supporting what
> > you say.
>
> ALL the paperwork the WC gave us POINTS TO A 36" Carbine!
Actually, most of the paperwork doesn`t mention length.
> Here is a
> link a guy by the name of Miles did on this recently. It has lots of
> pictures so you should understand it Bud.
I told, reading retard sites isn`t research.
The evidence is not to blame. The WC is not to blame. The retards
are to blame.
> > You
> > give away the game and your own credibility when you turn everything
> > into a simple game of denial.
>
> LOL!! This is NOT a game Bud, a real person was killed and this
> country headed into a different direction!
Are you referring to the massive amount of progressive and liberal
legislation Johnson got passed?
> YOU and your ilk play the
> game of denial, I simply show the evidence the WC gave us DOES NOT
> SUPPORT THE CLAIM IT IS TIED TO IN ALMOST EVERY ISSUE.
No, that isn`t what you do. What you do is play denial games.
> > > > But Ben went into hiding when LN reason caused
> > > > cracks in his faith, and raised doubts in the myths the conspiracy
> > > > books fed him.
>
> > > NO, Ben went into hiding AFTER I showed everyone what a LNer he really
> > > is on many issues in this case.
>
> > He was killfiling regulars here before you showed up, retard. He
> > wasn`t hiding from you, he was hiding from LNers. He continued having
> > a dialog with you long after there was any point to.
>
> More defense of Ben, wow! I thought he was retarded and a kook too?
> YOU are showing us he is really one of you in all liklihood.
Unfortunately Ben can`t muster the integrity to be an LNer.
> ALL I
> did was asked Ben to cite evidence supporting his claims, but he can't
> do it because his claims matched the WC's and we know they couldn't do
> it so he ran!
What he did was point out that you constantly make claims you can`t
support. You try to achieve by volume what you can`t produce by
demonstration.
> Somehow it is my fault! LOL!
>
> > > > This left robcap the keys to the kingdom, the new
> > > > flagship for the CTer contingent on this board, one of the few who
> > > > will engage on the issues (even if he never says anything). Ben tried
> > > > to battle rob, but after a few months he realized that rob was one of
> > > > those blow up clowns you punch and knock over and they bounce right
> > > > back up.
>
> > > So much typing to save Ben, a supposed "CTer", hmmm. I wonder why a
> > > LNer like Bud is so worried about poor old Ben?
>
> > I wonder how you can be so retarded as to think I am expressing
> > worry over Ben. If anything I am expressing gratitude to you, you`ve
> > done more harm to the CT position than I could ever do.
>
> YOU are lying again Bud as MOST CTers see things the way I do, NOT the
> way Ben does! I know of very few CTers who think like he does on the
> major issues in this case.
You are offering a distinction without a difference, all CTers are
retards.
> > > I beat Ben with his OWN words and showed he lies on many issues of
> > > this case.
>
> > No, you took words of his out of context and portrayed them to mean
> > opinions Ben was not expressing. You don`t think anyone can follow
> > this?
>
> Wow! Bud is using the same old argument Ben did! LOL! He has to be a
> LNer!
It isn`t an argument, it`s an observation of fact.
> They were never out of context (how would Bud know anyway as all LNers
> claimed not to read our posts?) as I categorized them in order of
> TOPIC and only used them in the topic that applied.
>
> YOU are lying again "Bud".
No, what I said was true, you misrepresented his words constantly.
Your portayed his meanings to be that which he did not intend. It`s a
sleazy, underhanded and distinctly CTer trick. No LNer would ever
stoop so low.
> > > Tis that simple. The mere fact Ben hides behind his
> > > kilfilter to let you LNers say whatever you want shows he is NOT here
> > > for setting the record straight! IF you are not wiling to debate
> > > spreaders of falsehoods like YOU, then why is he here at all?
>
> > Don`t know. I know he likes to ambush LN newbies when the stumble in
> > here. Sometimes they rough him up.
>
> Sure they do. YOUR side has NO support Bud, that is why you have to
> resort to denial, lying, and personal character attacks.
You have no character, retard.
> > > To each his own I guess, but he sure relished attacking real CTers for
> > > years, didn't he?
>
> > I think it was Mark who started it. He asked Ben why, if he was
> > actually on the side of truth, he let you tell so many falsehoods
> > unopposed. I think this struck a nerve, and Ben did start publicly
> > disagreeing with some of your nonsense.
>
> NO, that is NOT it "Bud" as NO one lied more than Walt and he NEVER
> once called him on it.
Right, Ben saw Walt`s retarded musings as advancing the CT cause
while he saw your childish denial as detrimental.
> > > > John McAdams said he was going to destroy this newsgroup and
> > > > it looks like a retard is going to succeed where a college professor
> > > > failed. So all hail Prince Rob, when the spokesman for the kooks has
> > > > zero credibility and nobody believes anything that comes out of his
> > > > mouth our work here is done.
>
> > > Who would expect spreaders of falsehoods to accept an honest person
> > > any way! Bud, you have done MORE to show my point of view is correct
> > > in this one post than any number of ones I could have typed up!
> > > Thanks!
>
> > Certainly you aren`t credible enough to support your point of view.
>
> I'm here to support it every day for the most part, you are NOT
> credible enough to even ask me the right questions.
Ok, let me ask you the right question. Klein`s had the 40" rifle in
their inventory and were shipping them to customers. Can you show it
appearing in a Klein`s ad?
Ben Holmes
Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>> My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
>
>LOL!! Folks if you want a good chuckle just search the archives for
>the "Ben Holmes In His Own Words" as I have 58 posts in that series so
>far (more will be coming soon). That series shows his words in the
>form of two quotes a post!
>
>I have done nothing but quote his words for a year and a half and all
>he does is deny them, lie about them, or claim I altered them.
And yet, you can't quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted my words,
and I "deny them".
Why is that, stupid?
Ben Holmes
>com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jul 21, 3:09=3DA0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <d29cd41d-07af-4f93-bd78-0e5f8fea1...@r27g2000yqb.googlegro=
>ups=3D
>> >.com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On Jul 20, 8:54=3D3DA0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On Jul 20, 3:34=3D3DA0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrot=
>e:
>>
>> >> >> > >>> "Purchasing ANY item in a store would require the SAME system=
> of=3D
>> > re=3D3D
>> >> >cords! YOU can't claim there would be records for one item and NONE f=
>or =3D
>> >ano=3D3D
>> >> >ther." <<<
>>
>> >> >> > In case anyone had any doubts at all about Caprio's retarded stat=
>us,
>> >> >> > the above post clinches the deal.
>>
>a
>> >> >> > rifle would "require the same system of records".
>>
>> >> >> > Pure retardation. That's Robby Boy.
>>
>d Chu=3D
>> >ck
>> >> >> and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s game h=
>ere
>> >> >> that they don`t even bother any more,
>>
>> >> >Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
>y
>> >> >from me for years! =3DA0LOL!
>>
>> >> >> but I wonder if the kooks don`t
>> >> >> realize that robcap represents the new generation of CTer,
>>
>> >> >i.e. people that think and don't believe everything they are told
>s
>> >> >done this!
>>
>> >> >> a parody of
>> >> >> a thinking, reasoning person.
>>
>> >> >That would be YOU Bud as you neither "reason or think" on a daily
>> >> >basis.
>>
>> >> >> Perhaps they feel a little shame that
>> >> >> they helped spawn such a crop of intellectually bankrupt dweebs. Or
>> >> >> perhaps they are too shameless to care. It bothered Ben, because he
>s a
>> >> >> legitimate position.
>>
>> >> >Wow, more support for Ben. I am just shocked! =3DA0LOL!! NO real CTer=
>, or
>> >> >any honest person, can look at the evidence the WC gave us for rifle
>> >> >and come away with the following conclusions:
>>
>> >> >1) LHO ordered a 40" Carcano.
>>
>> >> >2) LHO received said rifle.
>>
>> >> >3) LHO posed with said rifle for BY photos.
>>
>> >> >4) That LHO OWNED said rifle.
>>
>ons=3D
>> >trates
>> >> that you're not only a moron, but a dishonest one.
>>
>> >Ben, we have been through this and YOUR words do say this (then "Bud"
>> >claims I use denial? LOL!). YOU believe LHO ordered a 40" Carcano,
>> >received it, owned it and posed with it for one BY photo (CE-133A).
>> >Why lie about YOUR own words?
>>
>> >Why insult me for what you said? IF you know this is wrong then admit
>> >you were wrong and we can move on. I'm not petty like you, I will
>> >accept the mistake and move on instead of harrass you for years like
>> >you did to Tony and others.
>>
>> Yep... still can't quote me saying these things...
Still refusing to quote me...
Of course, the fact that you can't, merely illustrates your lies.
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <0e9e9cda-0f92-4557-8b28-5ad88d4d4...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
I am NOT shocked that the Marines BOOTED you out.
> >> My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
>
> >LOL!! Folks if you want a good chuckle just search the archives for
> >the "Ben Holmes In His Own Words" as I have 58 posts in that series so
> >far (more will be coming soon). That series shows his words in the
> >form of two quotes a post!
>
> >I have done nothing but quote his words for a year and a half and all
> >he does is deny them, lie about them, or claim I altered them.
>
> And yet, you can't quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted my words,
> and I "deny them".
YOU have said I quoted them accuarately!
“YOU wouldn't know the truth IF it ran you over! YOU are the one
lying about YOUR OWN CLAIMS yet again, NOT me or CJ!” (Robert)
“Which "claim" of mine am I "lying" about? ***All you do is quote
statements of mine that are 100% accurate and true.***” (Ben Holmes –
10/3/09)
How can they be "110% accurate and true" IF I'm editing them all the
time as you NOW claim?
Here we see Ben caught lying again as he said this to me:
“Ben edits, which IS DISHONEST as it changes the context of your
words, but this is okay because Ben can do that, but IF you do it you
will be called all kinds of sick stuff.” (Robert)
“I've *NEVER* complained about what *YOU* refer to as "editing"... Nor
do I have any reason to.” (Ben Holmes – 8/1/09)
LOL!!! Isn't this what he is doing NOW??? It sure is, so once again
we see he is a brazen liar based on his OWN WORDS!
> Why is that, stupid?
Ah, because you are paid to lie??
Ben Holmes
>.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Jul 22, 4:37 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>ps.com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >On Jul 22, 12:46 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> >>>>In article
>> >><4fba10b3-0478-46c7-bdc5-6ef1ea180...@c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >>>> >> On Jul 21, 10:16=3DA0am, "robcap...@netscape.com" <robcap...@nets=
>cape.com>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >>>> >> > > =3DA0 I`d like to think that it was you, David, along with Ti=
>m and Chuc=3D
>> >> >> >k
>> >>>> >> > > and Mark and others who took so much fun out of the retard`s =
>game her=3D
>> >> >> >e
>> >> >> >> > > that they don`t even bother any more,
>>
>> >> >> >> > Of course they don't as they are shown to be the spreaders of
>yed away
>> >> >> >> > from me for years! =3DA0LOL!
>>
>> >>>> >> =3DA0 Ah, are you sure he didn`t stay away from you because he re=
>alized he
>> >> >> >> was dealing with a retard?
>>
>> >> >> >I'm sure. I know because I asked him to kilfile me many times for
> and
>> >> >> >defending the WC, but ONCE I BEGAN SAVING HIS WORDS and started to
>s
>> >> >> >lying to us.
>>
>> >> >> Actually, it's because you REFUSE to quote my words.
>>
>> >> >Ben, if you are going to continue with this silly game then go back
>> >> >into hiding. YOUR words say what I say they say!
>>
>> >> And *that* statement is quite revealing.
>>
>> >It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
>>
>> Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>
>Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
Why does it upset you to have your own statements quoted back to you? If you're
going to talk about the children you molest, why isn't it appropriate for others
to disagree with your despicable actions?
>> >> My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
>>
>> >LOL!! Folks if you want a good chuckle just search the archives for
>> >the "Ben Holmes In His Own Words" as I have 58 posts in that series so
>> >far (more will be coming soon). That series shows his words in the
>> >form of two quotes a post!
>>
>> >I have done nothing but quote his words for a year and a half and all
>> >he does is deny them, lie about them, or claim I altered them.
>>
>> And yet, you can't quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted
>> my words, and I "deny them".
>
>YOU have said I quoted them accuarately!
Ah! Let's not change the topic, stupid... here it is again: And yet, you can't
quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted my words, and I "deny them".
>=93YOU wouldn't know the truth IF it ran you over! YOU are the one
>lying about YOUR OWN CLAIMS yet again, NOT me or CJ!=94 (Robert)
>
>=93Which "claim" of mine am I "lying" about? ***All you do is quote
>statements of mine that are 100% accurate and true.***=94 (Ben Holmes =96
>10/3/09)
>
>How can they be "110% accurate and true" IF I'm editing them all the
>time as you NOW claim?
You just can't stay away from molesting children, can you? You *do* know that
you can spend hard time in prison for such activities, don't you?
You should get help before you're caught.
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <ab275924-beec-4981-b65b-9d8952341...@u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
> >> >> And *that* statement is quite revealing.
>
> >> >It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
>
> >> Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>
> >Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
>
> Why does it upset you to have your own statements quoted back to you?
When did I ever say I was a child molester you sick nutjob? YOU are a
disgrace to humanity Reitzes.
(Note for lurkers: It has been shown that Reitzes, a.k.a. Holmes has a
proclivity for devil worship).
> If you're
> going to talk about the children you molest, why isn't it appropriate for others
> to disagree with your despicable actions?
I have never said this you satanic sicko, but it shows us all what
levels you will go to Reitzes to keep your job.
> >> >> My words aren't adequate on their own... that's why you can't quote 'em.
>
> >> >LOL!! Folks if you want a good chuckle just search the archives for
> >> >the "Ben Holmes In His Own Words" as I have 58 posts in that series so
> >> >far (more will be coming soon). That series shows his words in the
> >> >form of two quotes a post!
>
> >> >I have done nothing but quote his words for a year and a half and all
> >> >he does is deny them, lie about them, or claim I altered them.
>
> >> And yet, you can't quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted
> >> my words, and I "deny them".
>
> >YOU have said I quoted them accuarately!
>
> Ah! Let's not change the topic, stupid... here it is again: And yet, you can't
> quote a SINGLE INSTANCE where you accurately quoted my words, and I "deny them".
Ah, let's not change the topic Reitzes. YOU said I quoted you
accurately on many occassions.
> >=93YOU wouldn't know the truth IF it ran you over! YOU are the one
> >lying about YOUR OWN CLAIMS yet again, NOT me or CJ!=94 (Robert)
>
> >=93Which "claim" of mine am I "lying" about? ***All you do is quote
> >statements of mine that are 100% accurate and true.***=94 (Ben Holmes =96
> >10/3/09)
>
> >How can they be "110% accurate and true" IF I'm editing them all the
> >time as you NOW claim?
>
> You just can't stay away from molesting children, can you? You *do* know that
> you can spend hard time in prison for such activities, don't you?
See, YOU nail this sick satanic guy with the truth and he goes into
his weekend hobby with you!
> You should get help before you're caught.
It is too late for you REITZES AS YOU HAVE BEEN CAUGHT!
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jul 23, 3:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>In article <ab275924-beec-4981-b65b-9d8952341...@u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>> >> >> And *that* statement is quite revealing.
>>
>> >> >It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
>>
>> >> Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>>
>> >Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
>>
>> Why does it upset you to have your own statements quoted back to you?
>
>When did I ever say I was a child molester you sick nutjob?
Why, the same time that I said the statements that I keep demanding you produce
the quotes of.
Why does this seem objectionable to you?
If you put lies in the mouth of others, why do you object if it's done to you?
robcap...@netscape.com
> In article <a0cd4a69-e767-4c6b-9722-5dbd242d7...@t2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 23, 3:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> >>In article <ab275924-beec-4981-b65b-9d8952341...@u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
> >> >> >> And *that* statement is quite revealing.
>
> >> >> >It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
>
> >> >> Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>
> >> >Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
>
> >> Why does it upset you to have your own statements quoted back to you?
>
> >When did I ever say I was a child molester you sick nutjob?
>
> Why, the same time that I said the statements that I keep demanding you produce
> the quotes of.
YOU are lying and claiming evidence exists when it does NOT Reitzes/
May. Why?
Also, if it exists as you claim -- why can't you ever cite it?
> Why does this seem objectionable to you?
ONLY sickos resort to topics as child molestation, but the Reitzes/May
team have done this before! See here:
> If you put lies in the mouth of others, why do you object if it's done to you?
First of all, YOU are the one lying as you are claiming evidence
exists that does NOT! YOU won't cite it so you are confirming you are
a liar everytime you fail to cite!
Secondly, you don't need to go to a topic like child molestation you
nutjob to make your point! YOU could stick to your favorite past-time
instead -- SATANIC WORSHIP Reitzes/May!
Ben Holmes
robcap...@netscape.com says...
>
>On Jul 23, 6:36 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>In article <a0cd4a69-e767-4c6b-9722-5dbd242d7...@t2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
>> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >On Jul 23, 3:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>>>In article
>><ab275924-beec-4981-b65b-9d8952341...@u26g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> robcap...@netscape.com says...
>>
>> >> >> >> And *that* statement is quite revealing.
>>
>> >> >> >It is as I can actually read and comprehend the English language.
>>
>> >> >> Why can't you stop molesting little children, Rob Caprio?
>>
>> >> >Ben, whomever you are (probably Reitzes), you are a sick individual.
>>
>> >> Why does it upset you to have your own statements quoted back to you?
>>
>> >When did I ever say I was a child molester you sick nutjob?
>>
>> Why, the same time that I said the statements that I keep demanding you
>> produce the quotes of.
>
>YOU are lying
And yet, it's merely a fact.
You asserted that I'd made statements that you can't produce.
So why are you upset when someone does the same thing to you???
>and claiming evidence exists when it does NOT Reitzes/
>May. Why?
Sorry, you can't even go there.
You refuse to quote me accurately, so readers don't know that I'm merely stating
the truth - evidence *DOES* exist for the points made.
You've lied and said that I made statements I've never made.
You're a liar, stupid...
>Also, if it exists as you claim -- why can't you ever cite it?
The question, moron, is why can't you quote me saying what you asserted I said.
Why do you keep trying to change the topic?
>> Why does this seem objectionable to you?
>
>ONLY sickos resort to topics as child molestation,
Oh, the topic means nothing ... it's the fact that you're lying about what I
said.
*THAT* is the topic here.
So tell us, why do you find what you do to others objectionable when it's done
to you?
And why do you keep evading that simple question?
>> If you put lies in the mouth of others, why do you object if it's
>> done to you?
>
>First of all, YOU are the one lying
And yet, if I'd actually said what you claimed, you'd be able to produce quotes
of me saying it.
Why can't you do this, stupid?
>as you are claiming evidence
>exists that does NOT!
Cannot even *begin* to discuss that issue... you lied and never told anyone that
I *was* stating that evidence exists.
Let's go back to the original statements that you claimed I said - and until we
can come to a conclusion on that, there's no possibility of moving ahead to
other topics.
So why can't you quote me saying what you claimed I said???
>YOU won't cite it so you are confirming you are
>a liar everytime you fail to cite!
YOU won't cite the statements you claimed I made - so you are confirming you are
a liar every time you fail to cite!
>Secondly, you don't need to go to a topic like child molestation you
>nutjob to make your point!
You don't have the right to complain, stupid.
timstter
> On Jul 17, 6:39 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > This is what the trolls are countering the evidence of this case
> > with these days. It`s seems we can declare victory, the retards have
> > surrendered (Gil Jesus) or went into hiding (Ben) or are just too
> > stoned to make coherent arguments (Healy).
>
> I surrendered ?
Yeah, you surrendered. Let's check out your recent posting stats:
Verm monthly posts in May 2009: 313
Verm monthly posts in May 2010: 75
Verm monthly posts in June 2009: 219
Verm monthly posts in June 2010: 7
Verm monthly posts in July 2009: 299
Verm monthly posts in July 2010, so far: 14
Sure looks like you've tossed in the towel to me, Verm, ol' fella. And
tomnln's posting stats for the same period are even worse!
Concerned Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*