When Will Gil Jesus Debate?

[Kenneth Gus Posner]

I would like to hear a radio debate between Gil and David Von Pein. This
would be interesting. I betcha that not 5 minutes in Gil would come up
with one of his Gilliganisms" Oswald did not shoot Tippit since no blood
was found on his shoes" , or that old kneeslapper" Connally Shot JFK".

What do you say guys?

[Ben Holmes]

In article <26760-4EB...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth Gus Posner
says...

If David Von Pein can't answer the evidence in this forum, where he has all the
time in the world to research it, and put it in polished form, why do you think
that he could do better face to face?

If DVP want's to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and
non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence.

That's all...


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

[aeffects]

DVP is busy deep frying the WCR. Gil is busy demolishing the WCR...
you keep coming back ya'll hear now?

[timstter]

On Nov 5, 6:53 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <26760-4EB43217-...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth Gus Posner

How would you plan to see anny of the responses, skulking behind your
killfilter the way you do?

Concerned Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

[aeffects]

considering the fact that you're pollution chump, it's not a bad idea
to have to have a kill-filter... hell Fats, the only reason I respond
to you is, simply, I pity you! Suckering all these unsuspecting lone
nut trolls in here, Bill Clarke comes to mind, you should be
ashamed....

[timstter]

Hi Dave,

Say, your only purpose here is to convey messages to your lying
master, Benny Holmes, so people can see him dissemble and lie like the
crank he is. Speaking of cranks, did you see the characteristics of a
crank I lifted from that skeptics forum? I'll detail them below, with
my comments in CAPITALS:

Virtually universal characteristics of cranks include:

Cranks overestimate their own knowledge and ability, and underestimate
that of acknowledged experts.
DOESN'T THIS SOUND LIKE BENNY!

Cranks insist that their alleged discoveries are urgently important.
LOL! DOESN'T *THIS* SOUND LIKE BENNY! GOOD CASE IN POINT HIS PATHETIC
HANDLING OF CHANEY IN THE ALTGEN'S [SIC] PHOTO.

Cranks rarely, if ever, acknowledge any error, no matter how trivial.
DOESN'T *THIS* SOUND LIKE BENNY! WE'RE *STILL* WAITING FOR BENNY TO
ADMIT HE WAS WRONG RE *THE LADY IN YELLOW PANTS* BEING AN INDICATOR OF
Z FILM FORGERY THREE YEARS LATER!

Cranks love to talk about their own beliefs, often in inappropriate
social situations, but they tend to be bad listeners, and often appear
to be uninterested in anyone else's experience or opinions.
DOESN'T THIS SOUND LIKE BENNY! HERE HIS VERBOSITY MANIFESTS ITSELF IN
*SWAMP POSTING* EVEN SINGLE LINE RESPONSES! HIS LATEST RESPONSES TO
BILL CLARKE ARE A DISGRACE!

Don't forget to convey this message to your master, Pavlov. Remember,
at the sound of the bell...

[David Von Pein]

>>> "If DVP want's [sic] to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence." <<<

I already have. Hundreds of times (as anyone with a working mouse can
easily see for themselves at the websites linked below).

You [Ben] just don't like the "non-conspiratorial" answers
(naturally).


http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html

http://DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

----------

"21 QUESTIONS" POST:

Just for Ben (this was when the kook's list of silliness was a mere 21
questions in length in 2007; I've addressed a few of his additional 24
items of fanciful drivel in other posts at acj as well):

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6db9ac1c27e26e32

[Bud]

On Nov 4, 3:53 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <26760-4EB43217-...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth Gus Posner

> says...
>
>
>
> >I would like to hear a radio debate between Gil and David Von Pein. This
> >would be interesting. I betcha that not 5 minutes in Gil would come up
> >with one of his Gilliganisms" Oswald did not shoot Tippit since no blood
> >was found on his shoes" , or that old kneeslapper" Connally Shot JFK".
>
> >What do you say guys?
>
> If David Von Pein can't answer the evidence in this forum, where he has all the
> time in the world to research it, and put it in polished form, why do you think
> that he could do better face to face?
>
> If DVP want's to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and
> non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence.
>
> That's all...

When are you going to offer an explanation for how what is known and
in evidence could exist and Oswald be a patsy?

[Ben Holmes]

In article <309b4c01-e57b-441f...@gy7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...
>
>On Nov 4, 1:16=A0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 6:53=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <26760-4EB43217-...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth G=
>us Posner
>> > says...
>>
>> > >I would like to hear a radio debate between Gil and David Von Pein. Th=

>is
>> > >would be interesting. I betcha that not 5 minutes in Gil would come up

>> > >with one of his Gilliganisms" Oswald did not shoot Tippit since no blo=

>od
>> > >was found on his shoes" , or that old kneeslapper" Connally Shot JFK".
>>
>> > >What do you say guys?
>>

>> > If David Von Pein can't answer the evidence in this forum, where he has=
> all the
>> > time in the world to research it, and put it in polished form, why do y=

>ou think
>> > that he could do better face to face?
>>

>> > If DVP want's to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credibl=

>e and
>> > non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence.
>>
>> > That's all...
>>

>> How would you plan to see anny of the responses, skulking behind your
>> killfilter the way you do?

Why is it important that *I* read it? Is my opinion really that important to
you? :)

>considering the fact that you're pollution chump, it's not a bad idea
>to have to have a kill-filter... hell Fats, the only reason I respond
>to you is, simply, I pity you! Suckering all these unsuspecting lone
>nut trolls in here, Bill Clarke comes to mind, you should be
>ashamed....

The trolls need any and every excuse that they can dream of in order to avoid
the 45 Questions...

>> Concerned Regards,
>>
>> Tim Brennan
>> Sydney, Australia
>> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>

[bigdog]

On Nov 4, 9:29 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <309b4c01-e57b-441f-8e20-52356fb91...@gy7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

You mean like your 45 questions are both irrelevant and immaterial
(not to mention boring). There is nothing original in any of your
questions. They are just a rehash of a multitude of conspiracy
arguments that have been thoroughly debunked over the years. Nobody
cares. Why would any of us waste one minute of our time replying to
your nonsense. You are so unimportant.

[aeffects]

Top Post

you're whining again dipso--I suspect if you have anything, ANYTHING
**cogent** to say folks in the know, other than me, will respond to
your sorry, pitiful,lone nut nonsense. carry on!

[aeffects]

On Nov 4, 2:44 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "If DVP want's [sic] to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence." <<<
>
> I already have. Hundreds of times (as anyone with a working mouse can
> easily see for themselves at the websites linked below).
>
> You [Ben] just don't like the "non-conspiratorial" answers
> (naturally).

moron... you ran from the 45 questions. Facts being what they are, we
understand you reticence, denial and hope for rescue here--ya haven't
got what it takes my man, there isn't a lone nut troll or a .john
wannabe on bended knee around that can answer the questions... ken
rahn and .john had the best shot, now all they do is make you dipso-
wannabes look the fools... carry on

[aeffects]

On Nov 4, 3:40 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 3:53 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <26760-4EB43217-...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth Gus Posner
> > says...
>
> > >I would like to hear a radio debate between Gil and David Von Pein. This
> > >would be interesting. I betcha that not 5 minutes in Gil would come up
> > >with one of his Gilliganisms" Oswald did not shoot Tippit since no blood
> > >was found on his shoes" , or that old kneeslapper" Connally Shot JFK".
>
> > >What do you say guys?
>
> > If David Von Pein can't answer the evidence in this forum, where he has all the
> > time in the world to research it, and put it in polished form, why do you think
> > that he could do better face to face?
>
> > If DVP want's to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and
> > non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence.
>
> > That's all...
>
>   When are you going to offer an explanation for how what is known and
> in evidence could exist and Oswald be a patsy?

after nearly 10,000 posts to this board you still post nonsense like
this? dudster, you're losing it!

[timstter]

On Nov 5, 12:29 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <309b4c01-e57b-441f-8e20-52356fb91...@gy7g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

I was just questioning how YOU planned to see any *credible and non-
conspiratorial explanantions for the known evidence* that DVP might
offer if you were skulking behind your killfilter, as usual. I
couldn't care less if you responded to me or not.

> >considering the fact that you're pollution chump, it's not a bad idea
> >to have to have a kill-filter... hell Fats, the only reason I respond
> >to you is, simply, I pity you! Suckering all these unsuspecting lone
> >nut trolls in here, Bill Clarke comes to mind, you should be
> >ashamed....
>
> The trolls need any and every excuse that they can dream of in order to avoid
> the 45 Questions...
>

LOL! Sure thing, Benny. You're doing so terribly well on that question
re Officer Chaney aren't you? Ulrik has made mincemeat of you!

> >> Concerned Regards,
>
> >> Tim Brennan
> >> Sydney, Australia
> >> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com

Informative Regards,

[Ben Holmes]

In article <108d994a-a071-4bdf...@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
aeffects says...
>
>On Nov 4, 2:44=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> "If DVP want's [sic] to impress the world, all he needs to do is offe=

>r credible and non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence." <<<
>>
>> I already have. Hundreds of times (as anyone with a working mouse can
>> easily see for themselves at the websites linked below).

Then let's start with just one.

And it's one that you should set you to salivating...

Explain why Bugliosi stated:

"Although Carrico was unable to determine whether the throat wound was an
entrance or exit wound, he did observe that the wound was "ragged," virtually a
sure sign of an exit wound as opposed to an entrance wound, which is usually
round and devoid of ragged edges." (Bugliosi, p.413)

Simply cite the testimony where Carrico described the throat wound as "ragged",
which would allow a determination of bullet direction.

Now, the *credible* answer is that no such testimony exists, and Bugliosi simply
lied.

But my guess is that you can't possibly be honest enough to agree to the facts.

>> You [Ben] just don't like the "non-conspiratorial" answers
>> (naturally).
>
>moron...

Yeah... I think he didn't catch the qualification that *HE* has to provide
non-conspiratorial and credible explanations.

It's relatively *EASY* to give credible explanations for the evidence, the
problem is that they are not *non* conspiratorial.

For example, how to explain *credibly* that so many people believed that the
shots were coming from the GK?

You can imagine a mass hysteria... not credible.

You can imagine "echoes" - again, not credible.

You can imagine that there *were* shots fired from that location - oops,
perfectly credible, but *NOT* non-conspiratorial.

It's easy to get "credible"... it's easy to get "non-conspiratorial" - it's
quite difficult indeed to get both.

>you ran from the 45 questions. Facts being what they are, we
>understand you reticence, denial and hope for rescue here--ya haven't
>got what it takes my man, there isn't a lone nut troll or a .john
>wannabe on bended knee around that can answer the questions... ken
>rahn and .john had the best shot, now all they do is make you dipso-
>wannabes look the fools... carry on
>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html
>>
>> http://DavidVonPein.blogspot.com
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> "21 QUESTIONS" POST:
>>
>> Just for Ben (this was when the kook's list of silliness was a mere 21
>> questions in length in 2007; I've addressed a few of his additional 24
>> items of fanciful drivel in other posts at acj as well):
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6db9ac1c27e26e32

Hmmm... wasted 2 good minutes skimming through all the denials there...

[aeffects]

Urlick? that flea bitten wannabe, he's gotta be what 85 by now,
probably forgot his middle name. Worthless nutter-losers your
recruiting, padre.

And, are you suppose to be important, Fats. Worthy of even MY time,
tell us all about it, son.

[Bud]

On Nov 5, 1:49 pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 3:40 pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 4, 3:53 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>
> > > In article <26760-4EB43217-...@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net>, Kenneth Gus Posner
> > > says...
>
> > > >I would like to hear a radio debate between Gil and David Von Pein. This
> > > >would be interesting. I betcha that not 5 minutes in Gil would come up
> > > >with one of his Gilliganisms" Oswald did not shoot Tippit since no blood
> > > >was found on his shoes" , or that old kneeslapper" Connally Shot JFK".
>
> > > >What do you say guys?
>
> > > If David Von Pein can't answer the evidence in this forum, where he has all the
> > > time in the world to research it, and put it in polished form, why do you think
> > > that he could do better face to face?
>
> > > If DVP want's to impress the world, all he needs to do is offer credible and
> > > non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence.
>
> > > That's all...
>
> >   When are you going to offer an explanation for how what is known and
> > in evidence could exist and Oswald be a patsy?
>
> after nearly 10,000 posts to this board you still post nonsense like
> this? dudster, you're losing it!

I don`t interject sanity for the benefit of the insane.

[Bud]

On Nov 5, 5:13 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <108d994a-a071-4bdf-8e6b-20f131052...@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,

> aeffects says...
>
>
>
> >On Nov 4, 2:44=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >>> "If DVP want's [sic] to impress the world, all he needs to do is offe=
> >r credible and non-conspiratorial explanations for the known evidence." <<<
>
> >> I already have. Hundreds of times (as anyone with a working mouse can
> >> easily see for themselves at the websites linked below).
>
> Then let's start with just one.
>
> And it's one that you should set you to salivating...
>
> Explain why Bugliosi stated:
>
> "Although Carrico was unable to determine whether the throat wound was an
> entrance or exit wound, he did observe that the wound was "ragged," virtually a
> sure sign of an exit wound as opposed to an entrance wound, which is usually
> round and devoid of ragged edges." (Bugliosi, p.413)
>
> Simply cite the testimony where Carrico described the throat wound as "ragged",
> which would allow a determination of bullet direction.

I figured out what must have occurred. Poor Ben read Bug`s his book
and the unassailable logic within shook poor Benny`s faith so bad he
had to find something to cling to. When he found this Carrico thing it
was like a starving man finding a sandwich. He was rejuvenated and his
faith was restored. Hallelujah!