I'm getting misty-eyed

[Donald Willis]

No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!

[Bud]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!

Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore. Nobody to apply reasoning to your ideas. It`ll be like heaven for you guys.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
>

> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...

Such as:

So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?

Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.

It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)

So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.

Chickenshit's been running for months, and he'll **NEVER** answer
this. He loses...

[Bud]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> >> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
> >
> > Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
>
> Such as:

Fringe reset.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:40:57 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
>>>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
>>>
>>> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
>>
>> Such as:
>
> Fringe reset.

Prove it. Cite where you've previously answered this.

Or be known as the lying coward that you are...

[Bud]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:09:12 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:40:57 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
> >On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> >>>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
> >>>
> >>> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
> >>
> >> Such as:
> >
> > Fringe reset.
> Prove it. Cite where you've previously answered this.

Just as soon as you stipulate that I get to decide when something has been proven, and when something has been answered.

[Donald Willis]

Sorry I left you out... No more Bud? Celebration time! And I can't forget John "The Wide-Open-Window Weasel" Corbett, gone. Celebration time!

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 14:14:03 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
>>>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
>>>
>>> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
>>
>> Such as:
>
> Fringe reset.


Prove it. Cite where you've previously answered this.

[Bud]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 6:08:56 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 14:14:03 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> >>>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
> >>>
> >>> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
> >>
> >> Such as:
> >
> > Fringe reset.
>
>
> Prove it.

Done.

[Ben Holmes]

On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 15:17:40 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 3:30:47?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 11:46:34 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
>> wrote:
>>>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
>>>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
>>>
>>> Yes. Nobody to point out that pesky information you`d rather ignore...
>>
>> Such as:
>
> Fringe reset.

Prove it. Cite where you've previously answered this.

[NoTrueFlags Here]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:

> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!

Snarky von Penis will be there for you in your time of need at
The Education Forum.

[Donald Willis]

So I have noticed, but he hasn't responded to any of my very cogent arguments for a conspiracy in Dealey and Oak Cliff.

[Gil Jesus]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:14:05 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
> Just as soon as you stipulate that I get to decide when something has been proven, and when something has been answered.

You don't get to decide anything.
You only get to prove what you say is true.
And you're not very good at that.
In fact, you've failed miserably at posting citations proving questions have been answered.
Congratulations.

[Gil Jesus]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:18:51 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> Sorry I left you out... No more Bud? Celebration time! And I can't forget John "The Wide-Open-Window Weasel" Corbett, gone. Celebration time!

ROFLMAO, what is this ?
"Gentleman" Don Willis getting in some parting shots ?
Has hell frozen over ?
ROFLMAO.

No, he just sees you Lone Nutters like the rest of us see you: as assholes.
He's just too nice to have called it.
Me, I call them the way I see them and I'll be celebrating the end of your foolishness and insults.

You Nutters were never interested in this case. You only came in here to "entertain" yourselves by insulting other people.
That's because you're better than everybody else.

You don't need to look at the documents. You don't need to read the testimony. Because you believe what you've been told.
How do you know who your daddy was ? Because your momma told you so.
But momma's not always right, as the "Maury Show" has proven.

You're smarter than everybody else. You're more knowledgeable than everybody else.
But you can't answer 40 questions, many of them requiring a simple "yes" or "no" answer.
Other questions you run from, claiming they've been answered but unable to cite where that is the case.

You're liars, you're deceivers and you're cowards, afraid of the evidence.
No matter how much evidence is presented to you, you deny everything.
You refuse to click on the links and look at the evidence.
You are among the most closed-minded people I've ever encountered on the internet.

You have YOUR truth: "The Warren Commission said it, I believe it and that settles it."
That's your opinion and I respect that.
What I don't respect is your constant insults, lies and denials.
But your time for coming in just to insult those whom you don't agree with is growing short.

You COULD end your time here by discussing the evidence, but you won't.
Because as the Google archives will show, you don't have any class.
No, I won't be misty-eyed to see these lice go away.
February 22nd can't come soon enough for me.

[Bud]

On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 4:24:06 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:14:05 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
> > Just as soon as you stipulate that I get to decide when something has been proven, and when something has been answered.
> You don't get to decide anything.
> You only get to prove what you say is true.

Reread what I wrote for comprehension.

> And you're not very good at that.
> In fact, you've failed miserably at posting citations proving questions have been answered.

According to who?

> Congratulations.

[Bud]

You guys will have your own little worlds going on whether we are here or not.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 01:24:05 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

I wonder who they think they're fooling? I'll bet even their own
mother would reject such nonsense.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 04:15:19 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 01:53:30 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well stated.

[Ben Holmes]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 04:16:42 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

[Donald Willis]

On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 1:53:32 AM UTC-8, Gil Jesus wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:18:51 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> > Sorry I left you out... No more Bud? Celebration time! And I can't forget John "The Wide-Open-Window Weasel" Corbett, gone. Celebration time!
> ROFLMAO, what is this ?
> "Gentleman" Don Willis getting in some parting shots ?
> Has hell frozen over ?
> ROFLMAO.
>
> No, he just sees you Lone Nutters like the rest of us see you: as assholes.
> He's just too nice to have called it.
> Me, I call them the way I see them and I'll be celebrating the end of your foolishness and insults.

I should note that, by contrast, there have been some LNs who actually evidenced open minds: John R. King, Russ Burr, and Claviger. But, of course, by-the-book [i.e., The Warren Report] LNs had to dismiss the latter as a CT, although he never espoused a conspiracy, just a ghastly accident. And until someone does an exhaustive, objective analysis of bullet trajectories in Dealey, I'm not sure if Claviger & co. are right or wrong. [Dale Myers need not apply for such an analysis. Like I said, "objective"!]

[BT George]

On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 4:24:34 PM UTC-6, Donald Willis wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 1:53:32 AM UTC-8, Gil Jesus wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:18:51 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> > > Sorry I left you out... No more Bud? Celebration time! And I can't forget John "The Wide-Open-Window Weasel" Corbett, gone. Celebration time!
> > ROFLMAO, what is this ?
> > "Gentleman" Don Willis getting in some parting shots ?
> > Has hell frozen over ?
> > ROFLMAO.
> >
> > No, he just sees you Lone Nutters like the rest of us see you: as assholes.
> > He's just too nice to have called it.
> > Me, I call them the way I see them and I'll be celebrating the end of your foolishness and insults.
> I should note that, by contrast, there have been some LNs who actually evidenced open minds: John R. King, Russ Burr, and Claviger. But, of course, by-the-book [i.e., The Warren Report] LNs had to dismiss the latter as a CT, although he never espoused a conspiracy, just a ghastly accident. And until someone does an exhaustive, objective analysis of bullet trajectories in Dealey, I'm not sure if Claviger & co. are right or wrong. [Dale Myers need not apply for such an analysis. Like I said, "objective"!]
> >

I believe I am open minded, at least within the bounds of what I have already determined to be true, or *highly* likely to be so. That is the mark of intellectual honesty. However, it is not to be confused with those who keep a "chronic" open mind, for I do not consider "Ever learning, but unable to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2 Tim. 3:7) a feature in its own right. But I do respect someone who can admit *any* part of the LN case I believe in, including a guilty Oswald, so I have always considered you more intellectually honest than most CTs that post in these groups. Not to mention, just generally a more cordial dude.

[Donald Willis]

On Thursday, February 15, 2024 at 8:37:12 AM UTC-8, BT George wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 4:24:34 PM UTC-6, Donald Willis wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 1:53:32 AM UTC-8, Gil Jesus wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 5:18:51 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> > > > Sorry I left you out... No more Bud? Celebration time! And I can't forget John "The Wide-Open-Window Weasel" Corbett, gone. Celebration time!
> > > ROFLMAO, what is this ?
> > > "Gentleman" Don Willis getting in some parting shots ?
> > > Has hell frozen over ?
> > > ROFLMAO.
> > >
> > > No, he just sees you Lone Nutters like the rest of us see you: as assholes.
> > > He's just too nice to have called it.
> > > Me, I call them the way I see them and I'll be celebrating the end of your foolishness and insults.
> > I should note that, by contrast, there have been some LNs who actually evidenced open minds: John R. King, Russ Burr, and Claviger. But, of course, by-the-book [i.e., The Warren Report] LNs had to dismiss the latter as a CT, although he never espoused a conspiracy, just a ghastly accident. And until someone does an exhaustive, objective analysis of bullet trajectories in Dealey, I'm not sure if Claviger & co. are right or wrong. [Dale Myers need not apply for such an analysis. Like I said, "objective"!]
> > >
> I believe I am open minded, at least within the bounds of what I have already determined to be true, or *highly* likely to be so. That is the mark of intellectual honesty. However, it is not to be confused with those who keep a "chronic" open mind, for I do not consider "Ever learning, but unable to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2 Tim. 3:7) a feature in its own right. But I do respect someone who can admit *any* part of the LN case I believe in, including a guilty Oswald, so I have always considered you more intellectually honest than most CTs that post in these groups. Not to mention, just generally a more cordial dude.

As I wrote when I first switched to Oswald Probably Guilty in Dealey (though not in Oak Cliff), I couldn't see how the conspirators could keep their prospective patsy out of the public eye unless he was a shooter or otherwise corralled, or hogtied (figuratively). At the same time, I came to realize that most of my arguments here (and on alt.assassination.jfk) tended to show that, though there was a conspiracy, Oswald was not necessarily innocent of complicity in same. And, yes, you and I have always had positive exchanges!

dcw

[Hank Sienzant]

On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!

Hi Don! Don’t start the party without me. ;)

[Donald Willis]

I've invited Joey Zircon. Want to see you two together....

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 20:22:06 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, February 13, 2024 at 1:58:00?PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:
>> No more Hank S? Wait a minute--celebration time!
>
>Hi Don! Don’t start the party without me. ;)

Such a coward!