home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.conspiracy.jfk      Discussing the assassination of JFK      99,700 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 99,520 of 99,700   
   Hank Sienzant to Ben Holmes   
   Re: Huckster Sienzant Blatantly Lies...   
   09 Feb 24 08:35:08   
   
   From: hsienzant@aol.com   
      
   On Friday, February 9, 2024 at 9:20:45 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:   
   > On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 16:22:58 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant    
   >  wrote:   
   > >On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 6:08:37?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 09:14:38 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant    
   > >>  wrote:    
   > >>>On Thursday, February 8, 2024 at 9:32:45?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > >>>> On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 03:58:56 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant    
   > >>>>  wrote:    
   > >>>>>On Wednesday, February 7, 2024 at 9:08:30?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > >>>>>> On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 17:05:49 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant    
   > >>>>>>  wrote:    
   > >>>>>>>On Tuesday, February 6, 2024 at 2:29:23?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 10:28:32 -0800 (PST), Bud     
   > >>>>>>>> wrote:    
   > >>>>>>>>> Ben said this...    
   > >>>>>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>>>> "And since the legal system in America *does* accept eyewitness   
   testimony as "credible evidence"...."    
   > >>>>>>>    
   > >>>>>>>No, it doesn’t.    
   > >>>>>>    
   > >>>>>> Lies cannot save you, Huckster.    
   > >>>>>    
   > >>>>>Please, point out the supposed lies...    
   > >>>>    
   > >>>> No need. There are thousands of criminals in jail today based on the    
   > >>>> acceptance of eyewitness testimony.    
   > >>>>    
   > >>>Where judged *credible*.    
   > >>>    
   > >>>Eyewitness testimony isn’t always deemed credible    
   > >>    
   > >> Quote me saying this...    
   > >    
   > >You didn’t.   
   > Then you're a liar to imply that I did    
      
   Your inference is not my implication. That’s entirely on you.   
      
   > - and argue based on something    
   > that not only I never said, but that you can't quote me saying.    
      
   Which is exactly what you are doing here. You draw an inference, pretend   
   it’s what I meant, and argue  against something I never said. So your above   
   complaint is projection on your part.   
      
      
   >    
   > In your email to me, you implied that your mother was a willing    
   > participant... it's still sick!    
   >    
   > You're a sick sick man... get help!   
      
   We both know I never sent you any emails ever, so perhaps you are projecting   
   once more.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca