Of course that is all you find here. You're on a forum of conspiracy freaks. I doubt you've read Bugliosi's book, or have read the HSCA volumes of evidence, or have read JFK Myths by Larry Sturdivan. But, I am sure you've read lots and lots of crazy conspiracy books.
I would posit that there are more LNers on here than CTers. They are easy to spot as they never cite any evidence for either their claims or those made by the WC.
Why are people who support a conspiracy, which has a lot of supporting evidence, "freaks", but those that support a theory with NO supporting evidence normal? Is it normal to support things that have have NO supporting evidence? I don't think so.
What is Bugliosi's book going to show us that the evidence doesn't? You have yet to cite one piece of evidence. Why?