The Best Points to Make...

[Michael Dell]

I mentioned this in another thread, but I tend to introduce conspiracy topics to an audience unfamiliar with the subject matter. The crowd I'm preaching to comes to me through sports, movies, TV, and other such nonsense, and then I try to slip some truth in there along the way. Well, of all the conspiracy topics I've covered, and I've done some rather obscure ones, the Kennedy assassination has drawn the most negative feedback. People always insist on pointing towards Bugliosi, Mack, Posner, etc as proving I'm all oatmeal north of the eyebrows. In response, I usually point them to Jim DiEugenio's work, the "Evidence of Revision" films, and the CTKA 10-point program.But the question is when you encounter someone who doubts conspiracy, what key points of evidence do you use to state your case?I try to focus on the number of bullets needed, the fact Ford admitted moving the back wound, and Oswald's history. I think if you go too deep into things, the person gets overwhelmed and slowly starts to back away from you in search of the nearest exit. So I think one or two key points work best. Which would you recommend? Thank you.

[Bob]

The SBT doesn't work without Ford moving up the back wound (it really doesn't work anyway). Therefore...there HAS to be at least two shooters. Therefore...a conspiracy. It's that simple.

[kenmurray]

Bob wrote:The SBT doesn't work without Ford moving up the back wound (it really doesn't work anyway). Therefore...there HAS to be at least two shooters. Therefore...a conspiracy. It's that simple.But Bob. The SBT does work in Dale Meyers cartoon world.

[Kirk]

Michael,I think everybody is entitled to an opinion, and entitled to take one side over another etc. I think in the case of some sides it is a competition between what can not be so because of what the evidence over time shows versus what is mostly still possible based on what is known so far. We live in a time where almost anything can be possible, but only has increased probability by the idea of it's existence, and nothing more.The Warren Commission/ Single bullet etc. is possible, but it is not probable anymore. I try to think of how it would play to people that really didn't know anything about it, and were an impartial jury. Of course you would want to keep it simple, no matter which side you were on, but the other side would have it's own ideas of what is pertinent and relevant. Of course we are not there yet, but I do believe when that days comes. We will have plenty of impartial people to choose a jury from. Because so many do not care, or do not know anything about it. Blair's Rabbit Hole.Since we are not there. I say bring it all on. Any information, no matter how crazy it sounds. Let us weigh it for probability.Kirk

[SeamusCoogan]

I usually point them to Jim DiEugenio's work, the "Evidence of Revision" films, and the CTKA 10-point program.Earlier he was despicable, now your trying to ingratiate everybody with your love of Jim. Lol and you say you have never heard of me lol.Oh man how many more threads can Michael read. How many more ideas can he get this is hilarious Bob, oh for the life of me please.I'm sorry, but you are now officially Robert Plant. Seriously. I love this guy.

[Michael Dell]

SeamusCoogan wrote:I usually point them to Jim DiEugenio's work, the "Evidence of Revision" films, and the CTKA 10-point program.Earlier he was despicable, now your trying to ingratiate everybody with your love of Jim. Lol and you say you have never heard of me lol.Oh man how many more threads can Michael read. How many more ideas can he get this is hilarious Bob, oh for the life of me please.I'm sorry, but you are now officially Robert Plant. Seriously. I love this guy.Egad, man. What is wrong with you? Yes, as incredible as it may be for you to believe, your review of John Hankey's work was the first piece I've ever read that you wrote. Some of us actually have lives and interests beyond the Kennedy assassination. Again, forgive me for not bowing down before your holiness. And I said I found Mr. DiEugenio's laughing at John Hankey despicable, and I still do. It in no way changes the research he's done or my opinion of his collective work. Is this really how you react when someone doesn't agree with you? It must be nice existing in your world of "peer review" groups that consist of only friends and people who share your opinion.

[SeamusCoogan]

Oh and Bob, Thom, Ken and Bob Franklin agree with me right. lol. Do I call anyone of them a plant.No I respect their opinions no matter how they view mine.If your a regular visitor to CTKA which you seem to be insinuating how could you have missed my names up there and my interview.This isnt about ego. Its about being disingenuous.And yeah you think Jim Di Eugenio, Lisa Pease and Greg Parker are kind and friendly with my work.You just insulted Jim and these guys again, by saying I sit around with my friends and back slap.Well done Jim fan!

[Michael Dell]

SeamusCoogan wrote:Oh and Bob, Thom, Ken and Bob Franklin agree with me right. lol. yeah you can see that clearly lol.And yeah you think Jim Di Eugenio, Lisa Pease and Greg Parker are kind and friendly with my work.You just insulted Jim and these guys again, by saying I sit around with my friends and back slap.Well done Jim fan!Well, then if they're so hard on you, why are you so outraged with me for not liking your review? Shouldn't you be used to it? Iron sharpens iron and all that.But again, this is a perfect example of what I was trying to illustrate in my original post regarding your review. Look at how you're treating me. I voiced my opinion on your review. You respond with insults and paranoia, calling me a plant. After I think we've buried the hatchet and moved on, you follow me into other threads and continue to insist I'm a plant. When I send you a PM expressing that I hope there are no hard feelings and that I hope to learn from you in the future, you respond by again calling me a plant and telling me to "talk to the hand" and telling me "no one likes you" and I should leave the forum.How is your behavior doing anything but giving your work and our collective pursuit of truth a bad name? This isn't about you or your ego. This isn't about showing how smart you are or how you're the first person to find something. It's about everyone working together for a common goal. Yet because of people like you, we remain fractured. How do you think our interactions are reflecting on your work? Do you really think I'm ever going to read another thing you write now? And if you're any representation of the other people at CTKA, I want nothing to do with them either.So I guess you won. You drove away the "plant." Congratulations.

[SeamusCoogan]

Um a lot of people here struggled with my piece Bob Franklins the most full on attack and I respect his point of view. I'm sorry, but your angle I cant handle criticism just holds no water what so ever.I'd be deeply concerned were CTKA to incorporate you anyhow.And you just so happened to join up offer nothing in any argument. You joined up to attack me, you have practically admitted so.I mean really for the good of the community. lol.

[Michael Dell]

SeamusCoogan wrote:And you just so happened to join up offer nothing in any argument. You joined up to attack me, you have practically admitted so.I mean really for the good of the community. lol.I didn't join up to attack you. And I think the tone of my replies shows that. I joined to express my opinion of your review. I can't help but wonder how you'd be treating me now had I said I loved it. The quality of the review wouldn't have changed, but I'm sure your behavior towards me would have. Again, as I stated in the earlier threads, I want to learn. If Mr. Hankey made mistakes, I want to know what they are so I can learn. But the tone of your piece was full of mockery, sarcasm, and personal attacks, so much so that I, personally, had a difficult time reading it. Yet instead of merely accepting my opinion as just that, my opinion, or asking me to elaborate further on my concerns, you just launched into more personal attacks and insults. Now you're pursuing me all across the forum and taunting me as a "plant." I've stated the following sentiments in other threads, and I've stated them to you privately, but I will once again express them publicly. I thank you for your time, and I appreciate you responding to my posts. I apologize if anything in my original post offended you. I further apologize that I resorted to sarcasm in answering your continued taunts. In fairness, I don't know what past experiences you are bringing to our exchange. Perhaps you've been unfairly attacked by legitimate plants in the past, and I'm sorry if that's the case. I realize nothing I've said here or elsewhere may change your opinion of me. But I can only hope my actions will eventually allow you to accept me as someone with a common goal. And that is to find truth. Namaste.