From: sirslick@fast.net   
      
   On Monday, January 15, 2024 at 12:23:20 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:   
   > Taken from the censored forum:    
   >    
   > > I evaluate witnesses on their merits.    
   > >    
   > > If you applied the same standard to JFK witnesses you apply to    
   > > scripture, you would reject *all* of them.    
   > >    
   > > So who's being dogmatic?    
   > >    
   > > .John    
   >    
   >    
   > It's truly amusing that Johnny can say this with a straight face...    
   > since he refuses to name a *SINGLE* eyewitness whom he believes    
   > completely in all their 1963-64 statements concerning the murder of    
   > JFK.    
      
     He looked at what they said correctly, for what it was, and what it wasn`t.   
   If everyone could do this there would be no assassination conspiracy theorists.   
       
   > So the *FACT* is... Johnny *DOES* reject all eyewitnesses.   
      
     You figure. What is that worth?   
      
   > He    
   > cherry-picks their testimony to find things that support his faith,    
   > and pretends otherwise.    
      
     Ironic.   
       
   > Now... Johnny refuses to post in an open forum where he cannot control    
   > other people when they refute what he says...   
      
     Who decides when something is refuted? Let me guess, you appoint yourself   
   that role.   
      
   > so he won't respond    
   > here.    
      
     No discussion of ideas occurs here.   
       
   > But he *DOES* read these posts... as proven by his occasional 'theft'    
   > of a post to be posted and answered in his censored arena... but    
   > *this* post won't be one of them... anyone care to bet?    
      
     Nothing of substance to be found in what you wrote. You did what you always   
   do, you blew hot air.   
        
   > [No-one wanted to bet - and if they had, I won.]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)