DVP Vs. Various Individual Conspiracy Theorists

[David Von Pein]

New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#DVP-Vs-Various-Individual-Conspiracy-Theorists

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:26:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):

Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?

You're simply TERRIFIED of answering the evidence in an open forum...

[David Von Pein]

Yeah, I've *never* done anything like that before, have I, "Chester"?

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:37:56 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 4:31:13 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:26:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):
>>
>> Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?
>>
>> You're simply TERRIFIED of answering the evidence in an open forum...
>
>Yeah, I've *never* done anything like that before, have I, "Chester"?

You've clearly learned your lesson, and refuse to do so anymore.

Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?

Willing to whine about DiEuginio, but completely unwilling to CITE THE
EVIDENCE in an open forum.

You know you'll only look like a fool... and perhaps looking like a
coward is, in your mind, better than looking like a fool.

Your choice, of course...

But don't try to deny that you're *NOW* running away like the coward
that you are...

[Bud]

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 4:55:11 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:37:56 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 4:31:13 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:26:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> >> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):
> >>
> >> Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?
> >>
> >> You're simply TERRIFIED of answering the evidence in an open forum...
> >
> >Yeah, I've *never* done anything like that before, have I, "Chester"?
>
> You've clearly learned your lesson, and refuse to do so anymore.
>
> Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?
>
> Willing to whine about DiEuginio, but completely unwilling to CITE THE
> EVIDENCE in an open forum.
>
> You know you'll only look like a fool... and perhaps looking like a
> coward is, in your mind, better than looking like a fool.

How can someone who thinks Mark Lane is honest be qualified to judge whether someone else is a fool, lurkers?

> Your choice, of course...
>
> But don't try to deny that you're *NOW* running away like the coward
> that you are...

Poor Benny, nobody will play his crooked games with him any more, lurkers.

[David Von Pein]

Hey Bud (or anybody else reading this)....

As a tie-in to my thread-starting post above, would you happen to have any further recommendations as to the names of any other CTers I could add to my list linked above?

I know you probably don't know which CTers I've argued with on forums in past years and which ones I haven't done battle with, but just in general, can you think of any other prominent (or even not so prominent, but *vocal*) CTers that have graced the various JFK forums with their presence that aren't already on my list above? Perhaps a few additional CTers that YOU yourself have confronted?

Thanks.

[BT George]

He's definitely not prominent, or "vocal" outside of AAJFK, but Chris (everything was faked) Mainframe Tech is always worth a laugh or two. Also, haven't you taken on the lunacy of Ralph (seeing things) Cinque? I'm sure it is found elsewhere on your site, but you might link to the exchanges.

[chucksch...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 5:00:20 PM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:

Did Tom Rossley make your list? David Healy?

[Bud]

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 6:00:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> Hey Bud (or anybody else reading this)....
>
> As a tie-in to my thread-starting post above, would you happen to have any further recommendations as to the names of any other CTers I could add to my list linked above?

You seem to have them pretty well covered. I only question whether one name deserves to be on the list. Rob Caprio?

> I know you probably don't know which CTers I've argued with on forums in past years and which ones I haven't done battle with,

I`ve lurked in on some of your arguments in the Education Forum. I`m not very impressed with the conspiracy retards that post there. Or anywhere, for that matter.

> but just in general, can you think of any other prominent (or even not so prominent, but *vocal*) CTers that have graced the various JFK forums with their presence that aren't already on my list above? Perhaps a few additional CTers that YOU yourself have confronted?

I don`t know that what I do is what you do. It isn`t a battle of the evidence for me, since the cause of the problems in the case are the product of poor thinking on the part of the retards, so that is where I focus. They are constantly trying to package poor thinking and approaches as the right way to go. With a retard like Ben he is (like Mark Lane taught him) constantly trying to arrange information in such a way as to make up look like down. So the information doesn`t matter, his dishonest framing of it is the real problem that gets the attention. And it is the same whether it is Boris or dw or any of them. They purposely head for the rocks so you point out that is what they are doing. Certainly evidence based arguments aren`t going to change their minds since they are usually aware of the evidence you are going to use and have already contrived reasons to disregard it. That is the game Ben tries tries to strongarm everyone into playing with him.


In any case, there are a few of my favorite arguments I could look up, but since google changed the format here a few years back I find it nearly impossible to surf old posts, something I always did years back. I used to be able to go to any year and month and look at the posts during that time, but these days I can only do that for the last couple years.

I did enjoy when the knee jerk liberals were represented here and approached the assassination from a purely political perspective. Ann Archy, Tim Howell, Jerry Organ, others I forget. Very entertaining pinko blather.



> Thanks.

[David Von Pein]

Thanks Brock and Chuck.

I have had several archived exchanges with all four of the outer-fringe CTers you guys just mentioned (Chris/"Frame", Cinque, Rossley, and Healy), and I even considered adding separate links for Cinque, Rossley, and Healy.....but, to be blunt, those three loons are so far into the "outer fringe" of JFK discussion, I don't think I want to highlight their names any more than is necessary. Not to mention the fact that Healy and Rossley are both disgusting, foul-mouthed jerks. And they exhibit that kind of foul behavior nearly every time I've talked with them online. So that's not the kind of material I want to particular prop up or highlight. Although many of those exchanges *can* be found by just typing their names into the Search boxes on my site/blog.

Chris/Frame is a good suggestion though. Thanks.

Any more ideas?

[David Von Pein]

On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 7:20:37 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
> On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 6:00:20 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > Hey Bud (or anybody else reading this)....
> >
> > As a tie-in to my thread-starting post above, would you happen to have any further recommendations as to the names of any other CTers I could add to my list linked above?
>
> You seem to have them pretty well covered. I only question whether one name deserves to be on the list. Rob Caprio?
>

It's funny you mentioned that, because I too was sort of "on the fence" as to whether to include Caprio (and Cakebread too) in my Index of CTers. But the main reason I included Caprio is because he happened to be the guy I seemed to argue with the most in the very first pages of my "JFK Arguments" series. And it went on for several months (or years), so I thought those early exchanges were worthy of highlighting via a separate link. And the same with some of my discussions with Walt Cakebread too. Walt, if you'll recall, is the guy who had the brilliant idea that Howard Brennan really said that the sniper was located on the WEST end of the 6th floor, instead of the EAST end [archived discussion below]....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-575.html

And since I've never considered either Caprio or Cakebread to be nearly as vile and disgusting as Healy or Rossley, I elected to add their names to my JFK Index. (But note that Caprio's name *is* dead last on my list. So that placement should tell you something.) :-)

> > I know you probably don't know which CTers I've argued with on forums in past years and which ones I haven't done battle with,
>
> I`ve lurked in on some of your arguments in the Education Forum. I`m not very impressed with the conspiracy retards that post there. Or anywhere, for that matter.
>
> > but just in general, can you think of any other prominent (or even not so prominent, but *vocal*) CTers that have graced the various JFK forums with their presence that aren't already on my list above? Perhaps a few additional CTers that YOU yourself have confronted?
>
> I don`t know that what I do is what you do. It isn`t a battle of the evidence for me, since the cause of the problems in the case are the product of poor thinking on the part of the retards, so that is where I focus. They are constantly trying to package poor thinking and approaches as the right way to go. With a retard like Ben he is (like Mark Lane taught him) constantly trying to arrange information in such a way as to make up look like down. So the information doesn`t matter, his dishonest framing of it is the real problem that gets the attention. And it is the same whether it is Boris or dw or any of them.

Ahhh! You inadvertently just gave me another to consider---Donald "Arce Shot JFK" Willis. I'll check out my archives featuring Mr. Willis right now. (Thanks.)

> They purposely head for the rocks so you point out that is what they are doing. Certainly evidence based arguments aren`t going to change their minds since they are usually aware of the evidence you are going to use and have already contrived reasons to disregard it. That is the game Ben tries tries to strongarm everyone into playing with him.
>
>
> In any case, there are a few of my favorite arguments I could look up, but since google changed the format here a few years back I find it nearly impossible to surf old posts, something I always did years back. I used to be able to go to any year and month and look at the posts during that time, but these days I can only do that for the last couple years.
>

Are you sure? Because when I bring up my "Show Activity" page (from the pull-down Menu on the right-hand side of all my posts), it allows me to go back 11 years---to 2007....

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ye39XhqUXvg/W2zUjlElePI/AAAAAAABPV8/0Efhek4svVU0aKeAxUHQuMlZz9-b57vrQCLcBGAs/s1600/DVP-Usenet-Profile-Page.png

But when I access somebody ELSE'S "Activity" page (such as yours, Bud), I can only see the last 12 months of activity. And I can only see the last 7 months for Ben Holmes. But for other people, I can see up to 12 months, but no more. Strange. ~shrug~ (I guess if I'm "logged in", it will allow me to see more of my *own* posts, but only a few months worth of somebody else's. But if that's true, then why can't you see 11 years of your own posts too?)

> I did enjoy when the knee jerk liberals were represented here and approached the assassination from a purely political perspective. Ann Archy, Tim Howell, Jerry Organ, others I forget. Very entertaining pinko blather.
>

Familiar names indeed. Although I can't recall talking to any of those people on any forums, so they won't show up at all on my archived webpages on my site.

Thanks, though, for your reply.






>
>
> > Thanks.

[Jason Burke]

Golly, gee, Bennie. You mean "a forum populated by retards".

There, I fixed it for you.

[Jason Burke]

Too bad your mama got the brain but missed the rest, eh, Bennie-boy?

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:26:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):

Of course, what you can't see at David's carefully compiled site is
the number of times he's simply run away.

Indeed, it would be virtually impossible for David to **CITE** a
debate where he failed to run away...

And the fact that you won't see him even *try* will tell you
something...

[Ben Holmes]

On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 14:32:04 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

wrote:

>On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 4:55:11 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:37:56 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thursday, August 9, 2018 at 4:31:13 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 13:26:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> >> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >New section added to my website (more CTers' names will likely be added in the future):
>> >>
>> >> Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?
>> >>
>> >> You're simply TERRIFIED of answering the evidence in an open forum...
>> >
>> >Yeah, I've *never* done anything like that before, have I, "Chester"?
>>
>> You've clearly learned your lesson, and refuse to do so anymore.
>>
>> Quite the coward, aren't you Chester?
>>
>> Willing to whine about DiEuginio, but completely unwilling to CITE THE
>> EVIDENCE in an open forum.
>>
>> You know you'll only look like a fool... and perhaps looking like a
>> coward is, in your mind, better than looking like a fool.
>
> How can someone who thinks Mark Lane is honest be qualified to
> judge whether someone else is a fool, lurkers?

How can someone who thinks Mark Lane lied, yet can't produce and
defend a *SINGLE* example be anything other than a fool?

>> Your choice, of course...
>>
>> But don't try to deny that you're *NOW* running away like the coward
>> that you are...
>
> Poor Benny, nobody will play his crooked games with him any more, lurkers.

Chester likes censorship, as do most believers.