"Hobby Killer" Hucker Sienzant

[Ben Holmes]

> Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.

Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:

Do you want proof that lies and cowardice are what is being used to
defend the WCR's lies?

Here it is:


Wants his name in the subject line before answering, but it will make
no difference, Huckster's a coward, and will refuse to honestly deal
with this post.

Indeed, he's repeatedly REFUSED to answer.

We can judge quite accurately the honesty of believers... for when one
of them tells an outright lie - none of them are willing to step up to
the plate and tell the historical truth.

The prosectors did **NOT** dissect the track of the bullet, or the
frontal throat wound of JFK - this was TESTIFIED TO IN SWORN
TESTIMONY, and there's no evidence whatsoever that contradicts this
sworn testimony.

Yet not a single believer will step up to the plate, and publicly
acknowledge this fact.

Because they know it would be a slap in the face of a fellow liar.

Keep an eye out on how often you see this post being reposted...
Huckster is proving BEYOND ALL DOUBT his cowardice and dishonesty by
his refusal to address the truth.

And despite the fact that he is PROVABLY running away from my point,
he believes he's entitled to a response from me on his points.

He's sadly mistaken.

And so is Chuckles, because Huckster can't "kill" this "hobby."

[John Corbett]

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:17:16 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> > that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> > crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
>
> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
>

Maybe you should take up a different hobby. You suck at that one.

> Do you want proof that lies and cowardice are what is being used to
> defend the WCR's lies?
>

That would be like wanting proof of the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot. That doesn't exist either.

> Here it is:
>
>
> Wants his name in the subject line before answering, but it will make
> no difference, Huckster's a coward, and will refuse to honestly deal
> with this post.
>
> Indeed, he's repeatedly REFUSED to answer.
>

Hank is under no obligation to humor you in your trivial pursuit.

> We can judge quite accurately the honesty of believers... for when one
> of them tells an outright lie - none of them are willing to step up to
> the plate and tell the historical truth.

None of us are under any obligation to humor you in your trivial pursuit.

>
> The prosectors did **NOT** dissect the track of the bullet, or the
> frontal throat wound of JFK - this was TESTIFIED TO IN SWORN
> TESTIMONY, and there's no evidence whatsoever that contradicts this
> sworn testimony.
>
> Yet not a single believer will step up to the plate, and publicly
> acknowledge this fact.
>
> Because they know it would be a slap in the face of a fellow liar.
>

See above.

> Keep an eye out on how often you see this post being reposted...

Oh, goody.

> Huckster is proving BEYOND ALL DOUBT his cowardice and dishonesty by
> his refusal to address the truth.
>

See above.

> And despite the fact that he is PROVABLY running away from my point,
> he believes he's entitled to a response from me on his points.
>

You are the one who has the burden of proving your case. You have failed miserably. It isn't necessary to refute what you are incapable of establishing. I repeat my suggestion that you find a new hobby. You aren't cut out for this one.

> He's sadly mistaken.
>
> And so is Chuckles, because Huckster can't "kill" this "hobby."

It's still a silly hobby in which silly people participate.

[Chuck Schuyler]

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> > that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> > crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.

I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.

>
> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:

I thought your hobby was molesting kids at the Encino Judo Club.
>
> Do you want proof

...in your opinion,

>that lies and cowardice are what is being used to
> defend the WCR's lies?
>
> Here it is:
>
>
> Wants his name in the subject line before answering, but it will make
> no difference, Huckster's a coward, and will refuse to honestly deal
> with this post.
>
> Indeed, he's repeatedly REFUSED to answer.
>
> We can judge quite accurately the honesty of believers... for when one
> of them tells an outright lie - none of them are willing to step up to
> the plate and tell the historical truth.
>
> The prosectors did **NOT** dissect the track of the bullet, or the
> frontal throat wound of JFK - this was TESTIFIED TO IN SWORN
> TESTIMONY, and there's no evidence whatsoever that contradicts this
> sworn testimony.
>
> Yet not a single believer will step up to the plate, and publicly
> acknowledge this fact.
>
> Because they know it would be a slap in the face of a fellow liar.
>
> Keep an eye out on how often you see this post being reposted...
> Huckster is proving BEYOND ALL DOUBT his cowardice and dishonesty by
> his refusal to address the truth.
>
> And despite the fact that he is PROVABLY running away from my point,
> he believes he's entitled to a response from me on his points.

He did answer you. You didn't like the answer.

>
> He's sadly mistaken.
>
> And so is Chuckles, because Huckster can't "kill" this "hobby."

No Ben, in your case, you're right. The hobby dies when you do. Enjoy your snipe hunt.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> > Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
>> > that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
>> > crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
>
>I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.

So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.

>> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
>>

>> Do you want proof
>
>...in your opinion,

No "opinion" needed. Merely the ability to read.

>>that lies and cowardice are what is being used to
>> defend the WCR's lies?
>>
>> Here it is:
>>
>>
>> Wants his name in the subject line before answering, but it will make
>> no difference, Huckster's a coward, and will refuse to honestly deal
>> with this post.
>>
>> Indeed, he's repeatedly REFUSED to answer.
>>
>> We can judge quite accurately the honesty of believers... for when one
>> of them tells an outright lie - none of them are willing to step up to
>> the plate and tell the historical truth.
>>
>> The prosectors did **NOT** dissect the track of the bullet, or the
>> frontal throat wound of JFK - this was TESTIFIED TO IN SWORN
>> TESTIMONY, and there's no evidence whatsoever that contradicts this
>> sworn testimony.
>>
>> Yet not a single believer will step up to the plate, and publicly
>> acknowledge this fact.
>>
>> Because they know it would be a slap in the face of a fellow liar.
>>
>> Keep an eye out on how often you see this post being reposted...
>> Huckster is proving BEYOND ALL DOUBT his cowardice and dishonesty by
>> his refusal to address the truth.
>>
>> And despite the fact that he is PROVABLY running away from my point,
>> he believes he's entitled to a response from me on his points.
>
>He did answer you. You didn't like the answer.

His "answer" was to run from the questions.

>> He's sadly mistaken.
>>
>> And so is Chuckles, because Huckster can't "kill" this "hobby."
>
>No Ben, in your case, you're right.

Indeed! Huckster Sienzant will NEVER be man enough to answer this
topic.

[Bud]

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:59:17 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> > Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> >> > that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> >> > crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
> >
> >I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.
> So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.
> >> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
> >>
> >> Do you want proof
> >
> >...in your opinion,
> No "opinion" needed.

It is all you have.

> Merely the ability to read.

Everyone here can read and everyone here can form their own opinions. You want to dictate that your opinions are fact. Nobody signed off on that but you.

You`re projecting, you haven`t supported anything you`ve said on this issue but make demands of others.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:06:02 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

wrote:

>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:59:17 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>>> Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
>>>>> that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
>>>>> crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
>>>
>>>I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.
>> So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.
>>>> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
>>>>
>>>> Do you want proof
>>>
>>>...in your opinion,
>> No "opinion" needed.
>
> It is all you have.

And here we see Chickenshit committing a virtually identical lie that
Huckster was guilty of.

But you can't convince folks with lies.

>> Merely the ability to read.
>

> Everyone here can read...


Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
out to be.

> You`re projecting...

And yet... still no answer.

Even *CHICKENSHIT* can't explain why Huckster is terrified of this
topic.

[Bud]

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 11:11:02 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:06:02 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:59:17 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
> >> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >>>>> Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> >>>>> that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> >>>>> crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
> >>>
> >>>I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.
> >> So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.
> >>>> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you want proof
> >>>
> >>>...in your opinion,
> >> No "opinion" needed.
> >
> > It is all you have.
> And here we see Chickenshit committing a virtually identical lie that
> Huckster was guilty of.

More opinion.

> But you can't convince folks with lies.

More opinion. You have to have more than hot air.

> >> Merely the ability to read.
> >
> > Everyone here can read...
>
>
> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
> out to be.

He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.

You should answer for your own cowardice.

> Even *CHICKENSHIT* can't explain why Huckster is terrified of this
> topic.

You`re projecting, you`ve been petrified to support your claims for months now.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:36:45 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

wrote:

>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 11:11:02 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:06:02 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:59:17 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
>>>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>> Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
>>>>>>> that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
>>>>>>> crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
>>>>>
>>>>>I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.
>>>> So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.
>>>>>> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you want proof
>>>>>
>>>>>...in your opinion,
>>>> No "opinion" needed.
>>>
>>> It is all you have.
>>
>> And here we see Chickenshit committing a virtually identical lie that
>> Huckster was guilty of.
>
> More opinion.

Nope. Not an "opinion." You made a claim you refuse to support, and
indeed, CANNOT support.

>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
>
> More opinion.

Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.

>>>> Merely the ability to read.
>>>
>>> Everyone here can read...
>>
>>
>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
>> out to be.
>
> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.

Can't do that by running away...

>> Even *CHICKENSHIT* can't explain why Huckster is terrified of this
>> topic.
>

> You`re projecting...

And Chickenshit proves me right yet again...

[Bud]

On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 11:41:59 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:36:45 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 11:11:02 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 08:06:02 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 10:59:17 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:31:04 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
> >>>> <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 9:17:16 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hank is your hobby killer. Wait until he disabuses you of the notion
> >>>>>>> that there's a Santa Claus or an Easter Bunny. Then you'll really be
> >>>>>>> crying to your mommy about the bad man Hank.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I was referring to Toilet Seat, but it applies to you as well.
> >>>> So "Hank" is "Toilet Seat"... okay.
> >>>>>> Here's my "hobby"... proving Huckster a coward:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do you want proof
> >>>>>
> >>>>>...in your opinion,
> >>>> No "opinion" needed.
> >>>
> >>> It is all you have.
> >>
> >> And here we see Chickenshit committing a virtually identical lie that
> >> Huckster was guilty of.
> >
> > More opinion.
> Nope. Not an "opinion."

More opinion.

> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
> indeed, CANNOT support.

Since when is your opinion the default?

> >> But you can't convince folks with lies.
> >
> > More opinion.
> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.

That it is your opinion.

> >>>> Merely the ability to read.
> >>>
> >>> Everyone here can read...
> >>
> >>
> >> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
> >> out to be.
> >
> > He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
> Can't do that by running away...

He cites the evidence. You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?

You are projecting your faults onto other people.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:34:58 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Prove it.

>> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
>> indeed, CANNOT support.

LFD.

>>>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
>>>
>>> More opinion.
>>
>> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.
>>

>>>>>> Merely the ability to read.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone here can read...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
>>>> out to be.
>>>
>>> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
>>
>> Can't do that by running away...
>
> He cites the evidence.

YOU'RE A LIAR, CHICKENSHIT.

He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.

Neither have you, for that matter.

> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?

You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
that he's been running from.

[Bud]

Still you. Hank cites evidence all the time. He probably cites more evidence than everyone else in this forum combined.

> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.

It wasn`t Hank who claimed to have support for his ideas and refused to produce it, that was you.

> Neither have you, for that matter.

You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.

> > You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
> that he's been running from.

Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.

You don`t get to talk over whatever someone else says and move the goalposts to where ever you like. I`m speaking to the concept of "Hobby Killer" that Chuck expressed. To me, Chuck meant that Hank ruins the fun of the idiots who made a hobby of the deaths of these men. I expressed this as "Hank throws cold water on conspiracy silliness". This is true whether Hank has given in to your demands that he speak on this particular talking point of yours or not.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:03:17 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

And as I figured, Chickenshit ran.

>>>> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
>>>> indeed, CANNOT support.
>> LFD.
>>>>>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
>>>>>
>>>>> More opinion.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Merely the ability to read.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Everyone here can read...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
>>>>>> out to be.
>>>>>
>>>>> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
>>>>
>>>> Can't do that by running away...
>>>
>>> He cites the evidence.
>>
>> YOU'RE A LIAR, CHICKENSHIT.
>
> Still you.

Surprising no-one, Chickenshit can't support his claim.

>> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
>> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.

LFD.

Notice, that Chickenshit was completely unable to refute this fact.

>> Neither have you, for that matter.
>
> You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.

Ad Argumentum Tony Marshium.

Humes *NO-WHERE* states that he dissected the track of the bullet, or
the the frontal neck wound.

You will *NEVER* quote such a statement.

>>> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
>>
>> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
>> that he's been running from.
>
> Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.

Sorry stupid, you're responding to *MY* thread. **YOU** respond to
what **I** said.

Notice folks, that Chickenshit has been completely unable to refute
what I first stated in this thread.

[Bud]

Merely your opinion.

> >> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
> >> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.
> LFD.

Merely your opinion that I employed a fallacy.

> Notice, that Chickenshit was completely unable to refute this fact.

Merely your opinion that this is a fact.

> >> Neither have you, for that matter.
> >
> > You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.
> Ad Argumentum Tony Marshium.
>
> Humes *NO-WHERE* states that he dissected the track of the bullet, or
> the the frontal neck wound.

He opened the body and noted damage. How does this differ from these vague concepts you can`t seem to spell out?

> You will *NEVER* quote such a statement.

Your beef seems to be he didn`t use the exact words you demand.

> >>> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
> >>
> >> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
> >> that he's been running from.
> >
> > Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.
> Sorry stupid, you're responding to *MY* thread. **YOU** respond to
> what **I** said.

You were responding to what Chuck said. I spoke to what Chuck said, you did not.

I just looked at things correctly. You hate that people other than yourself can do that.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:35:28 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

Such a coward!!!

>>>>>> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
>>>>>> indeed, CANNOT support.
>>>> LFD.
>>>>>>>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> More opinion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Merely the ability to read.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Everyone here can read...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
>>>>>>>> out to be.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can't do that by running away...
>>>>>
>>>>> He cites the evidence.
>>>>
>>>> YOU'RE A LIAR, CHICKENSHIT.
>>>
>>> Still you.
>>
>> Surprising no-one, Chickenshit can't support his claim.
>
> Merely your opinion.

As PROVEN by your cowardice...

>>>> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
>>>> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.
>>
>> LFD.
>>

>> Notice, that Chickenshit was completely unable to refute this fact.
>>

>>>> Neither have you, for that matter.
>>>
>>> You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.
>> Ad Argumentum Tony Marshium.
>>
>> Humes *NO-WHERE* states that he dissected the track of the bullet, or
>> the the frontal neck wound.
>

> He opened the body ...


Not a refutation, nor a quote of Dr. Humes doing what you claimed he
did.

You lose!

>> You will *NEVER* quote such a statement.
>

> Your beef...


And, as predicted, Chickenshit couldn't do it.

>>>>> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
>>>>
>>>> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
>>>> that he's been running from.
>>>
>>> Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.
>>
>> Sorry stupid, you're responding to *MY* thread. **YOU** respond to
>> what **I** said.
>

> You ...


Started this thread, yes.

> I ...

Have been completely unable to refute what I first stated in this
thread... yes.

[healyd...@gmail.com]

You Chuckles are guilty by participation AND association... have a nice day, Pudge!

[Bud]

You`re removing what I write, Yellowpanties.

> >>>>>> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
> >>>>>> indeed, CANNOT support.
> >>>> LFD.
> >>>>>>>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> More opinion.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Merely the ability to read.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Everyone here can read...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
> >>>>>>>> out to be.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Can't do that by running away...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> He cites the evidence.
> >>>>
> >>>> YOU'RE A LIAR, CHICKENSHIT.
> >>>
> >>> Still you.
> >>
> >> Surprising no-one, Chickenshit can't support his claim.
> >
> > Merely your opinion.
> As PROVEN by your cowardice...

More opinion.

> >>>> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
> >>>> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.
> >>
> >> LFD.
> >>
> >> Notice, that Chickenshit was completely unable to refute this fact.
> >>
> >>>> Neither have you, for that matter.
> >>>
> >>> You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.
> >> Ad Argumentum Tony Marshium.
> >>
> >> Humes *NO-WHERE* states that he dissected the track of the bullet, or
> >> the the frontal neck wound.
> >
> > He opened the body ...
>
>
> Not a refutation, nor a quote of Dr. Humes doing what you claimed he
> did.

You claimed dissection was needed. I showed it occurred.

You haven`t been able to show how the autopsy that was performed differs from this vague concept your refuse to spell out. You can`t declare that something isn`t elephant unless you can say what is an elephant.

> You lose!
> >> You will *NEVER* quote such a statement.
> >
> > Your beef...
>
>
> And, as predicted, Chickenshit couldn't do it.

Merely your opinion.

> >>>>> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
> >>>>
> >>>> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
> >>>> that he's been running from.
> >>>
> >>> Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.
> >>
> >> Sorry stupid, you're responding to *MY* thread. **YOU** respond to
> >> what **I** said.
> >
> > You ...
>
>
> Started this thread, yes.

About the term Chuck used. I addressed the term Chuck used, you did not.

Merely your opinion.

>yes.

[Ben Holmes]

Notice folks, the many times that Chickenshit responded - yet couldn't
address what I stated here.

And all it would take is a citation or a quote of Huckster "killing"
my "hobby."

As stated above.

[Bud]

And how many times Yellowpanties removed and ran from what I wrote.

Ben hates the truth.

>yet couldn't
> address what I stated here.
>
> And all it would take is a citation or a quote of Huckster "killing"
> my "hobby."

Perhaps you are being too literal.

> As stated above.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:40:44 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

LFD.

>>yet couldn't
>> address what I stated here.
>>
>> And all it would take is a citation or a quote of Huckster "killing"
>> my "hobby."

LFD.

>> As stated above.

[healyd...@gmail.com]

grow up you fraud!

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

>>>>>>>> You made a claim you refuse to support, and
>>>>>>>> indeed, CANNOT support.
>>>>>> LFD.
>>>>>>>>>> But you can't convince folks with lies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> More opinion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, I suspect most people feel the same way.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Merely the ability to read.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone here can read...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then everyone can see that Huckster isn't the "Hobby Killer" he's made
>>>>>>>>>> out to be.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He throws cold water on conspiracy silliness.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can't do that by running away...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He cites the evidence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YOU'RE A LIAR, CHICKENSHIT.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still you.
>>>>
>>>> Surprising no-one, Chickenshit can't support his claim.
>>>
>>> Merely your opinion.
>>
>> As PROVEN by your cowardice...
>>

>>>>>> He's **NEVER** cited the evidence for the prosectors dissecting the
>>>>>> track of the bullet, or the frontal neck wound.
>>>>
>>>> LFD.
>>>>
>>>> Notice, that Chickenshit was completely unable to refute this fact.
>>>>
>>>>>> Neither have you, for that matter.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are simply lying, I quoted Humes on the matter.
>>>> Ad Argumentum Tony Marshium.
>>>>
>>>> Humes *NO-WHERE* states that he dissected the track of the bullet, or
>>>> the the frontal neck wound.
>>>
>>> He opened the body ...
>>
>>
>> Not a refutation, nor a quote of Dr. Humes doing what you claimed he
>> did.
>
> You claimed dissection was needed.

There you go molesting your own brother now...

You'll **NEVER** quote any such thing.

>> You lose!
>>>> You will *NEVER* quote such a statement.
>>>
>>> Your beef...
>>
>> And, as predicted, Chickenshit couldn't do it.
>>

>>>>>>> You remove the cites he produces. Who do think you are fooling?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You'll never produce anyplace where Huckster has cited for the topic
>>>>>> that he's been running from.
>>>>>
>>>>> Non sequitur. Speak to what I said.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry stupid, you're responding to *MY* thread. **YOU** respond to
>>>> what **I** said.
>>>
>>> You ...
>>
>> Started this thread, yes.
>>

>>yes.

[Bud]

Save your perversions for the schoolyard.

> You'll **NEVER** quote any such thing.

When are you going to learn that google saves what you say?

Me: "What would such a procedure entail?"

You: "A dissection."

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 14:25:46 -0800 (PST), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

Notice folks, that Chickenshit never can seem to cite for his lies.

>> You'll **NEVER** quote any such thing.
>
> When are you going to learn that google saves what you say?

When are you going to learn that I know what I said?

> Me: "What would such a procedure entail?"
>
> You: "A dissection."

Where does that say a dissection was needed???

Your brain is letting you down...