Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: What?s the MINIMUM number of people required for your CT to work?  (Read 39719 times)

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #192 on: August 21, 2018, 05:04:59 AM »
Advertisement
Why didn't Bugliosi strip down his own list instead of padding it with nonsense?  The answer is obvious:  there'd be very little left.

Bug used what he himself calls 'overkill' for a reason:

Many other readers, he [Bugliosi] writes, will say to themselves, Why does he keep piling one argument upon another to prove his point? He's already made it 12 ways from Sunday, so why go on?. To those readers I say that the Warren Commission also made its point, and well, over 40 years ago, yet today the overwhelming majority of Americans do not accept its conclusion. ... Hence, the overkill in this book is historically necessary. -- Bryan Burrough

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/books/review/Burrough-t.html
« Last Edit: July 23, 2020, 03:37:32 PM by Bill Chapman »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #192 on: August 21, 2018, 05:04:59 AM »


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7402
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #193 on: August 21, 2018, 03:40:12 PM »
Bug used what he himself calls 'overkill' for a reason:

?Many other readers,? he [Bugliosi] writes, ?will say to themselves, ?Why does he keep piling one argument upon another to prove his point? He?s already made it 12 ways from Sunday, so why go on?? To those readers I say that the Warren Commission also made its point, and well, over 40 years ago, yet today the overwhelming majority of Americans do not accept its conclusion. ... Hence, the overkill in this book is historically necessary.?-- Bryan Burrough

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/books/review/Burrough-t.html

So, what is the reasoning here?

The WC failed to convince the majority of the people so Bugs piles on more weak, selfserving, speculative BS arguments and he hopes that will convince people after all...... really?

What a load of crap! All Bugs overkill really proves is that the basic case is so weak that he feels he needs to throw everything and the kitchen sink on top of it in a desperate attempt to somehow make it covincing....

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #194 on: August 21, 2018, 08:47:57 PM »
Bug used what he himself calls 'overkill' for a reason:

?Many other readers,? he [Bugliosi] writes, ?will say to themselves, ?Why does he keep piling one argument upon another to prove his point? He?s already made it 12 ways from Sunday, so why go on?? To those readers I say that the Warren Commission also made its point, and well, over 40 years ago, yet today the overwhelming majority of Americans do not accept its conclusion. ... Hence, the overkill in this book is historically necessary.?-- Bryan Burrough

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/books/review/Burrough-t.html

And by "overkill" he means piling on a bunch of rhetorical crap that has nothing to do with the assassination and calling it "evidence".

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #194 on: August 21, 2018, 08:47:57 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #195 on: August 22, 2018, 07:35:51 AM »
So, what is the reasoning here?

The WC failed to convince the majority of the people so Bugs piles on more weak, selfserving, speculative BS arguments and he hopes that will convince people after all...... really?

What a load of crap! All Bugs overkill really proves is that the basic case is so weak that he feels he needs to throw everything and the kitchen sink on top of it in a desperate attempt to somehow make it covincing....

Show us one poll that asked if Oswald was the killer. The polls ask if Oswald had help or not.

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7402
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #196 on: August 22, 2018, 03:28:33 PM »
Show us one poll that asked if Oswald was the killer. The polls ask if Oswald had help or not.

Pay attention!

Nobody said anything about a poll or what was asked, so there is no need for me to show anything.

You, on the other hand, just made the wild claim about what the polls ask.... please provide proof for that claim?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #196 on: August 22, 2018, 03:28:33 PM »



Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3724
Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #198 on: July 23, 2020, 04:08:28 AM »
LOL.  It took me 5 seconds on Google to find one.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/uk-world/533778/poll-jfk-files-think-assassinated-president-john-f-kennedy-articleisfree/
As of today July 22, 2020.... The US elite  63.38%  (90 votes)-----Lee Harvey Oswald acting alone  14.79%  (21 votes)   

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: What?s the minimum number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #198 on: July 23, 2020, 04:08:28 AM »


Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 926
Re: What?s the MINIMUM number of people required for your CT to work?
« Reply #199 on: July 25, 2020, 01:23:18 AM »
Well, look at the Iran-Contra conspiracy, since that's a conspiracy that virtually all historians acknowledge. Most of the participants had no idea that they were aiding a conspiracy, and most of them did not grasp how their actions fit into the larger picture. Some of them had some idea, some understanding that their actions might be illegal, but they felt that they were just following orders, that it wasn't their place to question things, and that their superiors must have had good reasons for giving the orders. Others had no idea they were doing anything wrong, much less that they were aiding a conspiracy, until the Iran-Contra affair was exposed.

The reason that all the medical personnel who were involved with the autopsy were forced to sign strict and severe secrecy agreements was that only a few of them were knowingly aiding the cover-up of the facts about JFK's wounds. The vast majority of them were just doing what they were told, and many of them said they were very surprised that they were forced to sign secrecy agreements and were threatened with such dire consequences if they violated them.

The standard line that was used on many innocent participants in the cover-up was that the truth about JFK's assassination had to be concealed in order to avoid a catastrophic nuclear war that would kill tens of millions of people.

The JFK assassination conspiracy involved perhaps 20 high-level conspirators, a few dozen second-tier conspirators under them, and perhaps 10 high-level accessories who were aware of the plot, who wanted JFK dead, who did nothing to prevent it, and who did what they could to help cover up the crime. I think J. Edgar Hoover was an accessory. I think David Atlee Phillips was at least a second-tier conspirator. I think James Angleton was a high-level conspirator. I think J. Walton Moore was at least a second-tier conspirator. I think David Sanchez Morales was a second-tier conspirator. I think one or two of the Joint Chiefs of Staff were either accessories or high-level conspirators.