info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
David Von Pein - Coward Extraordinaire
62 views
Skip to first unread message
Ben Holmes
Jul 24, 2019, 8:14:38 PM7/24/19
to
Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
(and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
David pretends that the answers have been given...
But refuses to cite them.
David's a coward and a liar.
the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
(and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
David pretends that the answers have been given...
But refuses to cite them.
David's a coward and a liar.
Ben Holmes
Jul 25, 2019, 11:01:23 AM7/25/19
to
Nor can he cite any website page of his where this is addressed.
If *I* were getting spanked as badly as David is, I'd have to
seriously think about moving to another forum.
Which is, of course, what David did. He only pops in here every few
months to see if the forum is worth sticking around...
But when he *DOES* pop in, he shows his inherent dishonesty and vast
cowardice...
And that does believers no good.
Message has been deleted
David Von Pein
Jul 25, 2019, 7:29:22 PM7/25/19
to
Ben just doesn't like the answers I've given him in the last dozen years, so he keeps insisting that I give him some *different* answers.
Sorry, Super Stump. I've got nothing "different" than what I've been saying for the last 13 years. Take it or leave it....
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/boh.html
----------------
And there's lots more "Head Wound" talk at the link below (for Ben The Stump to pretend he's never seen, even though I know he's seen most of it, with Ben no doubt ready to fall back on his usual cop-out/dodge of: "You Must Post All Of That BOH Material--Verbatim--Here At This ACJ Forum Or I [Benjamin "Super Stump" Holmes] Get To Pretend That Such DVP Material Doesn't Even Exist And Therefore I Get To Ignore It And Also Pretend That DVP Really Has Taken *NO* Position At All On Why So Many Trained Medical Professionals Said They Saw A Large Wound On The Back Side Of President Kennedy's Cranium On November The Twenty-Second, Nineteen Hundred And Sixty-Three AD")....
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#JFK-Head-Wounds
Ben Holmes
Jul 25, 2019, 8:03:20 PM7/25/19
to
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:55:32 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
here is still cowardice of the worse sort.
Why can't you POST your answer here, coward?
Ben Holmes
Jul 25, 2019, 8:14:44 PM7/25/19
to
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>
>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>
>> But refuses to cite them.
>
> Ben knows full well what my answer is to his perpetual "BOH"
> inquiry. I've talked about it dozens of times in acj posts dating back
> more than 12 years. And I've linked to my "Back Of Head" pages at my
> website dozens of times over those years as well.
Then simply QUOTE your previous answer.
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>
>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>
>> But refuses to cite them.
>
> Ben knows full well what my answer is to his perpetual "BOH"
> inquiry. I've talked about it dozens of times in acj posts dating back
> more than 12 years. And I've linked to my "Back Of Head" pages at my
> website dozens of times over those years as well.
You *do* know how to use 'cut & paste' right?
> Ben just doesn't like the answers I've given him in the last dozen
> years, so he keeps insisting that I give him some *different* answers.
Why the cowardice, David?
If you had the truth on your side, shouldn't you be slamming me with
it day in and day out?
> Sorry, Super Stump. I've got nothing "different" than what I've been
> saying for the last 13 years. Take it or leave it....
Why is that, coward?
Why are you so TERRIFIED of posting any answers in this forum?
David Von Pein
Jul 25, 2019, 8:53:33 PM7/25/19
to
David Von Pein
Jul 25, 2019, 8:59:52 PM7/25/19
to
As if anyone could possibly buy that one. 😏
Ben's truly a One Trick Super Stump.
David Healy
Jul 25, 2019, 9:02:20 PM7/25/19
to
Ben Holmes
Jul 26, 2019, 9:04:14 AM7/26/19
to
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 17:53:32 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
Your ad hominem attack and CONTINUED refusal to address the issue of
the dozens of medically trained eyewitnesses who refute your theory
that there was not a large exit wound on the back of JFK's head can
only be attributed to your cowardice.
There's no other explanation...
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 8:03:20 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:55:32 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>>>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>>>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>>>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>>>
>>>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>>>
>>>> But refuses to cite them.
>>>>
>>>> David's a coward and a liar.
>>
>> Citing your website, but refusing to defend it against critical review
>> here is still cowardice of the worse sort.
>>
>> Why can't you POST your answer here, coward?
>
>Mr. Stump is right on cue. What a surprise.
Wouldn't it be smarter to not answer, and highlight your cowardice?
>On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 8:03:20 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:55:32 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>>>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>>>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>>>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>>>
>>>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>>>
>>>> But refuses to cite them.
>>>>
>>>> David's a coward and a liar.
>>
>> Citing your website, but refusing to defend it against critical review
>> here is still cowardice of the worse sort.
>>
>> Why can't you POST your answer here, coward?
>
>Mr. Stump is right on cue. What a surprise.
Your ad hominem attack and CONTINUED refusal to address the issue of
the dozens of medically trained eyewitnesses who refute your theory
that there was not a large exit wound on the back of JFK's head can
only be attributed to your cowardice.
There's no other explanation...
Ben Holmes
Jul 26, 2019, 9:16:49 AM7/26/19
to
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 17:59:51 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
He either doesn't know how to cut & paste, or more likely, doesn't
have anything *TO* cut & paste.
This demonstrates David's inherent cowardice.
>>> Ben just doesn't like the answers I've given him in the last dozen
>>> years, so he keeps insisting that I give him some *different* answers.
>>
>>
>> I never like lies and unsupported claims.
>>
>>
>> Why the cowardice, David?
>>
>>
>> If you had the truth on your side, shouldn't you be slamming me with
>> it day in and day out?
Anyone note the dead silence?
>>> Sorry, Super Stump. I've got nothing "different" than what I've been
>>> saying for the last 13 years. Take it or leave it....
>>
>>
>> IOW's, you've got nothing you dare to defend.
>>
>> Why is that, coward?
>>
>> Why are you so TERRIFIED of posting any answers in this forum?
>
> This is another one of Ben's really silly fallback positions ---- to
> pretend I've never "posted *any* answers at all on this forum".
And there you go again, molesting the neighborhood little boys.
David "Chester" Pein is busy molesting again... he can't address WHAT
I ACTUALLY SAY, so he's forced to put words in my mouth.
Well, I can talk about your email to me where you told me disgusting
perversions ...
You see, two people can play that game.
And clearly, you enjoy it, because you *KNOW* that pretending I've
said something I didn't gets the same response back.
One can only imagine that you *ENJOY* being outed as a child molester.
>As if anyone could possibly buy that one. ?
Why would anyone buy your lie?
>Ben's truly a One Trick Super Stump.
Yep... my one trick is a simple one... the evidence.
And once again, you demonstrate your cowardice. You can't offer any
explanation for the dozens of medically trained witnesses who put the
large exit wound in the right side occipital parietal.
Every time you respond without actually addressing the issues simply
drives another nail into your coffin of dishonesty and cowardice.
<davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 8:14:44 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>>>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>>>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>>>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>>>
>>>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>>>
>>>> But refuses to cite them.
>>>
>>> Ben knows full well what my answer is to his perpetual "BOH"
>>> inquiry. I've talked about it dozens of times in acj posts dating back
>>> more than 12 years. And I've linked to my "Back Of Head" pages at my
>>> website dozens of times over those years as well.
>>
>>
>> Then simply QUOTE your previous answer.
>>
>> You *do* know how to use 'cut & paste' right?
David's answer is clearly "no."
>On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 8:14:44 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 8:14:38 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> Willing to assert that the prosectors were "mistaken" about locating
>>>> the wound in the back of the head - yet completely unable to explain
>>>> why dozens of other medically trained witnesses **ALSO** put the large
>>>> (and, as David asserts: EXIT) wound in the back of the head.
>>>>
>>>> David pretends that the answers have been given...
>>>>
>>>> But refuses to cite them.
>>>
>>> Ben knows full well what my answer is to his perpetual "BOH"
>>> inquiry. I've talked about it dozens of times in acj posts dating back
>>> more than 12 years. And I've linked to my "Back Of Head" pages at my
>>> website dozens of times over those years as well.
>>
>>
>> Then simply QUOTE your previous answer.
>>
>> You *do* know how to use 'cut & paste' right?
He either doesn't know how to cut & paste, or more likely, doesn't
have anything *TO* cut & paste.
This demonstrates David's inherent cowardice.
>>> Ben just doesn't like the answers I've given him in the last dozen
>>> years, so he keeps insisting that I give him some *different* answers.
>>
>>
>> I never like lies and unsupported claims.
>>
>>
>> Why the cowardice, David?
>>
>>
>> If you had the truth on your side, shouldn't you be slamming me with
>> it day in and day out?
>>> Sorry, Super Stump. I've got nothing "different" than what I've been
>>> saying for the last 13 years. Take it or leave it....
>>
>>
>> IOW's, you've got nothing you dare to defend.
>>
>> Why is that, coward?
>>
>> Why are you so TERRIFIED of posting any answers in this forum?
>
> This is another one of Ben's really silly fallback positions ---- to
> pretend I've never "posted *any* answers at all on this forum".
David "Chester" Pein is busy molesting again... he can't address WHAT
I ACTUALLY SAY, so he's forced to put words in my mouth.
Well, I can talk about your email to me where you told me disgusting
perversions ...
You see, two people can play that game.
And clearly, you enjoy it, because you *KNOW* that pretending I've
said something I didn't gets the same response back.
One can only imagine that you *ENJOY* being outed as a child molester.
>As if anyone could possibly buy that one. ?
Why would anyone buy your lie?
>Ben's truly a One Trick Super Stump.
And once again, you demonstrate your cowardice. You can't offer any
explanation for the dozens of medically trained witnesses who put the
large exit wound in the right side occipital parietal.
Every time you respond without actually addressing the issues simply
drives another nail into your coffin of dishonesty and cowardice.
BT George
Jul 26, 2019, 4:38:07 PM7/26/19
to
> David "Chester" Pein is busy molesting again... he can't address WHAT
> I ACTUALLY SAY, so he's forced to put words in my mouth.
>
> Well, I can talk about your email to me where you told me disgusting
> perversions ...
>
> You see, two people can play that game.
>
> And clearly, you enjoy it, because you *KNOW* that pretending I've
> said something I didn't gets the same response back.
>
> One can only imagine that you *ENJOY* being outed as a child molester.
>
David Healy
Jul 26, 2019, 5:19:34 PM7/26/19
to
Understood by all on this side, you've failed supporting the 1964 WCR conclusions. Your sole stinking job, I'd be pulling my hair too if I was you. Gird those tender loins and get busy. At least make an effort.
BT George
Jul 29, 2019, 5:58:57 PM7/29/19
to
0 new messages