[Lee Abbott]

I see you're at it again, Patrick. --->> "It is not Gallup that is wrong, it is the majority of voters. If those same voters would read "Oswald's Game", "Phantom Shot" and Peter Knight's "The Kennedy Assassination" I expect you would find a rather different set of figures."

You're becoming more & more absurd and illogical, Patrick... Couldn't I just as easily say, "If those same voters read 'Rush to Judgement', 'Someone Would Have Talked', 'The Man Who Knew Too Much', 'JFK: The Unspeakable" and so on, the polls would be significantly in the favor of a conspiracy"?

[Patrick C]

The fact is Lee that most people DO read the pro C books .....and not the pro lone gunman books.....precisely because a conspiracy is more interesting. That is my point !!!



Look at YOU......you have advised me on other forums that you have never read a pro no conspiracy book....you have not read....

Posner
VB
Peter Knight
Mike Majerus
Mel Ayton
Jean Davison
Albert Newman
Stephen White........

And yet you know far more than most about the case.....!

Granted Posner is an exception as his book was a best seller......but still I imagine read by only a small % of the US population.......I imagine a FAR GREATER number of people have read one or more of Lane, Livingstone. Marrs, Summers, Hurt.........

So sorry I disagree I am not becoming illogical and absurd Dex.......

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:Posner
VB
Peter Knight
Mike Majerus
Mel Ayton
Jean Davison
Albert Newman
Stephen White........

Even the best of 'em simply couldn't explain the evidence... and the more detail they went into, the more they provably lied.

Nor can you defend those lies... or even admit that they are lies...

What do those facts tell you?

[Lee Abbott]

Patrick, reading all the pro-lone gunman books ever written will never explain away the WR's deception.... You're like a door-to-door salesman who won't give up and you're embarrassing yourself.

[Patrick C]

I am not suggesting anyone needs t read every pro lone gunman book. I am suggesting a small handful to give an appreciation of the other side of the coin ref this case. Less than ten would suffice. You might like to start with ONE to begin with and I would suggest Peter Knight or Mike Majerus would be a good start.

The analogy of the door to door salesman is silly. I have no interest in "selling" you an idea. We are here discussing the assassination and unlike some like Ben who has clearly read a lot of pro Lone Gunman material, it seems you have yet to start - other than web based sources.

Have you for example even read the Warren Report summary volume - let alone the full 26 volumes...?

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:Have you for example even read the Warren Report summary volume - let alone the full 26 volumes...?

A self-defeating suggestion... the more someone actually learns about the evidence, the more clearly it's seen how the Warren Commission flat lied.

A simple example is James Chaney... the closest police eyewitness to the murder - captured in a photo looking directly at JFK at the time of the crime from less than a dozen feet away.

Patrick, along with the other dozen or so WCR apologists throughout the world; cannot explain why James Chaney was never questioned for the Warren Commission.

I can.

[Nick Principe]

Patrick C Wrote:We are here discussing the assassination and unlike some like Ben who has clearly read a lot of pro Lone Gunman material, it seems you have yet to start - other than web based sources.

Once one knows the "official" version of events, what can your beloved pro-LN books teach that we don’t already know? Let's take every LNer's Bible, Bugliosi's Defaming History as an example of what we can "learn"....

We learn that "Anyone who could believe [Oswald] was not guilty would probably also believe someone claiming to have heard a cow speaking the Spanish language."

We learn "Waiting for the conspiracy theorists to tell the truth is a little like leaving the front-porch light on for Jimmy Hoffa. "

We learn that anyone who doesn’t read the morning newspaper, pack a lunch, or who changes their trousers in the middle of the day had better hire a good lawyer.

We learn Kennedy’s throat wound was "ragged"...which IS great information for historians, since no one actually saw the throat wound.

We learn all the "Lincoln-Kennedy" coincidences, as if that means anything.

And we learn, in Gish Gallop form, of all the people and groups involved in the plot to kill Kennedy ( - RC “Bookends”), which is nothing more than a glorified Appeal to Ridicule.


A researcher can learn more from this one single post you won’t read....

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx1ZC6V16QAEBJC&cdMsgNo=3239&cdPage=130&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx3S6UAIF5802TL#Mx1ZC6V16QAEBJC">http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref ... 6V16QAEBJC</a><!-- m -->

...than they will from Bugliosi’s 2,500-page cinder block. The only thing his book is good for is if you buy four of them, you can use them to jack your car up to change a tire.

[Patrick C]

Ben Holmes Wrote:A simple example is James Chaney... the closest police eyewitness to the murder - captured in a photo looking directly at JFK at the time of the crime from less than a dozen feet away.

Patrick, along with the other dozen or so WCR apologists throughout the world; cannot explain why James Chaney was never questioned for the Warren Commission.

I can.

I find it rather astonishing that the WC did not call Chaney, or the Newmans for example. But I do not find it suspicious. Chaney after all said the sounds came from behind him. As did Bobby Hargis - who heard only two shots by the way.

[Ben Holmes]

Patrick C Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:A simple example is James Chaney... the closest police eyewitness to the murder - captured in a photo looking directly at JFK at the time of the crime from less than a dozen feet away.

Patrick, along with the other dozen or so WCR apologists throughout the world; cannot explain why James Chaney was never questioned for the Warren Commission.

I can.

I find it rather astonishing that the WC did not call Chaney, or the Newmans for example. But I do not find it suspicious. Chaney after all said the sounds came from behind him. As did Bobby Hargis - who heard only two shots by the way.

"Astonishing" is an understatement... there's absolutely no explanation possible from believers, and you've offered none.

And naturally you claim not to have found anything suspicious... but tell us Patrick, if it were your intent to coverup facts about the JFK assassination, and to frame a patsy - CAN YOU GIVE A DIFFERENT SCENARIO THAN THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

In other words - if you wanted to redefine the number of shooters, and the directions of the shots - you'd be REQUIRED to avoid such witnesses as James Chaney, as well as other close witnesses.

P.S. Your dishonest implication that Chaney supported the official version is quite despicable. An honest man would admit that Chaney wouldn't have been a good witness for believers in the WCR. And, "back over my right shoulder" is quite far from the lie you told that "the sounds came from behind him".

[Patrick C]

Ben Holmes Wrote:Astonishing" is an understatement... there's absolutely no explanation possible from believers, and you've offered none.

How could I offer an explanation - I did not work on the commission and I do not know anyone who did and I do not recall reading about why specifically Chaney was not cold. I can but hazard a guess....but guessing on this would be pointless.