Who Should Debate Bugliosi?

[Kathleen Collins]

This nasty must have come from the pen of Josiah Thompson. It certainly does not read like something a woman would have written. O'Reilly is tough. Compare my appearances on "Hannity & Colmes", which are also archived on YouTube. Try either http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojY4VF52JJQ...ted&search= (Norman Mineta's retirement was announced the next morning) or

(where I was even able to say they had their "facts Foxed" for the second time).

Several years ago, I had an inappropriate relationship with a woman, who happened to be the Chancellor's best friend. For reasons I still do not understand, she turned on me and I paid for it. I retired several years later, after 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning. It was a great career. Anyone who wants to check it can visit http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ for themselves. If Tink was not behind this post, which trades on rather obscure information, I will eat my hat! Someone around here is a pussy, but it ain't me.

Anyone with a serious interest in Bugliosi's book should visit http://www.assassinationscience.com, especially the section entited "The Latest on JFK", which includes a recent piece by Gerald Posner, my response, the H. L. Hunt "confession", a piece I published in THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE HUMANITIES, and reviews of Bugliosi's book by David Mantik and me. That might provide a more suitable basis for drawing inferences about my ability to debate the author of this monstrous book than this carefully contrived attack. I would relish the opportunity to confront him in a public forum.

Well, I know of one person who shouldn't debate Bugliosi: Jim Fetzer. I just saw him interviewed by Bill O'Reilly on youtube.com. I don't know if I'm allowed to say this on the Forum, but he came across like such a pussy! No substance to him! At least try to talk over O'Reilly. He sat there like a mummy. I also think he should have dressed better. Oh, and I was surprised he's a retired Professor. Didn't they throw him out for some reason? Harrassing a woman or something?

See if you agree:

Kathy

Jim Fetzer -- I apologize to you. I know things that go on in people's private lives and the unfairness that can develop out of it. I do not know Josiah Thompson. It was 100% my opinion. I came across the video by accident. It seemed he walked all over you and you just let him go on and on. What you should do is yell over him with your opinions or facts. It's better than sitting there quiet. He kept calling you a nut, and so he's saying it about all of us.

Maybe you'll remember me. I was the one who sent emails out one morning before dawn while in an altered sleep state. The admin at that forum called me the Manchurian Candidate and it was about Jane Fonda. And you published it in some local free newspaper along with my name. Remember?

God help us all.

Kathy

[Terry Mauro]

This nasty must have come from the pen of Josiah Thompson. It certainly does not read like something a woman would have written. O'Reilly is tough. Compare my appearances on "Hannity & Colmes", which are also archived on YouTube. Try either http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojY4VF52JJQ...ted&search= (Norman Mineta's retirement was announced the next morning) or

(where I was even able to say they had their "facts Foxed" for the second time).

Several years ago, I had an inappropriate relationship with a woman, who happened to be the Chancellor's best friend. For reasons I still do not understand, she turned on me and I paid for it. I retired several years later, after 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning. It was a great career. Anyone who wants to check it can visit http://www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/ for themselves. If Tink was not behind this post, which trades on rather obscure information, I will eat my hat! Someone around here is a pussy, but it ain't me.

Anyone with a serious interest in Bugliosi's book should visit http://www.assassinationscience.com, especially the section entited "The Latest on JFK", which includes a recent piece by Gerald Posner, my response, the H. L. Hunt "confession", a piece I published in THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE HUMANITIES, and reviews of Bugliosi's book by David Mantik and me. That might provide a more suitable basis for drawing inferences about my ability to debate the author of this monstrous book than this carefully contrived attack. I would relish the opportunity to confront him in a public forum.

Well, I know of one person who shouldn't debate Bugliosi: Jim Fetzer. I just saw him interviewed by Bill O'Reilly on youtube.com. I don't know if I'm allowed to say this on the Forum, but he came across like such a pussy! No substance to him! At least try to talk over O'Reilly. He sat there like a mummy. I also think he should have dressed better. Oh, and I was surprised he's a retired Professor. Didn't they throw him out for some reason? Harrassing a woman or something?

See if you agree:

Kathy

Jim Fetzer -- I apologize to you. I know things that go on in people's private lives and the unfairness that can develop out of it. I do not know Josiah Thompson. It was 100% my opinion. I came across the video by accident. It seemed he walked all over you and you just let him go on and on. What you should do is yell over him with your opinions or facts. It's better than sitting there quiet. He kept calling you a nut, and so he's saying it about all of us.

Maybe you'll remember me. I was the one who sent emails out one morning before dawn while in an altered sleep state. The admin at that forum called me the Manchurian Candidate and it was about Jane Fonda. And you published it in some local free newspaper along with my name. Remember?

God help us all.

Kathy

*********************************************************************

Thanks for stating that, Kath.

Ter

[Kathleen Collins]

Jim Fetzer -- I apologize to you. I know things that go on in people's private lives and the unfairness that can develop out of it. I do not know Josiah Thompson. It was 100% my opinion. I came across the video by accident. It seemed he walked all over you and you just let him go on and on. What you should do is yell over him with your opinions or facts. It's better than sitting there quiet. He kept calling you a nut, and so he's saying it about all of us.

Maybe you'll remember me. I was the one who sent emails out one morning before dawn while in an altered sleep state. The admin at that forum called me the Manchurian Candidate and it was about Jane Fonda. And you published it in some local free newspaper along with my name. Remember?

God help us all.

Kathy

*********************************************************************

Thanks for stating that, Kath.

Ter

You're welcome. As David Healy said, I was out of line.

Kathy

[Terry Mauro]

Jim Fetzer -- I apologize to you. I know things that go on in people's private lives and the unfairness that can develop out of it. I do not know Josiah Thompson. It was 100% my opinion. I came across the video by accident. It seemed he walked all over you and you just let him go on and on. What you should do is yell over him with your opinions or facts. It's better than sitting there quiet. He kept calling you a nut, and so he's saying it about all of us.

Maybe you'll remember me. I was the one who sent emails out one morning before dawn while in an altered sleep state. The admin at that forum called me the Manchurian Candidate and it was about Jane Fonda. And you published it in some local free newspaper along with my name. Remember?

God help us all.

Kathy

*********************************************************************

Thanks for stating that, Kath.

Ter

You're welcome. As David Healy said, I was out of line.

Kathy

********************************************************************

Good girl!

[Charles Drago]

I'm so cheered by all this rational second thinking.

Terry ... Do you enjoy Big Sur in autumn?

Enquiring Mind

[Charles Black]

I'm so cheered by all this rational second thinking.

Terry ... Do you enjoy Big Sur in autumn?

Enquiring Mind

I too would like to add a bit more second thinking. Tho I do believe any "timed" debate or confrontation would probably not advance the cause....I feel that there is one point that might help prevent such debate from becoming a complete quagmire. Only "Conspiracy Itself" should be the forefront of argument. There are such differences of opinions among supporters of conspiracy, as to whether Mafia or one of the groups of Cubans was involved, that I feel every attempt should be made not to become again "mired" in this point. Tho I personally believe that this was an operation of elements of U.S. government only, and that they are the only force that could have prepared and maintained the cover for this period of time.....that can come later !

First only, that there "WAS CONSPIRACY" !

Charles Black

[Terry Mauro]

I'm so cheered by all this rational second thinking.

Terry ... Do you enjoy Big Sur in autumn?

Enquiring Mind

*******************************************************

Sorry, if I seem to be ignoring you, C.B. But, I'm not, really. You seem to maintaining an even keel these days, which I greatly admire. I think we've always shared the same suspicions, haven't we? I, on the other hand, am merely trying to keep the peace and pass on a little "healthy" encouragement, if you will.

"I'm so cheered by all this rational second thinking.

Terry ... Do you enjoy Big Sur in autumn?"

Hi C.D.,

I couldn't afford to make the trip, even if I wanted to, nor do I have the time, at present. It would take a death befalling one of my extended family up in that area, at this point. I'm down in SoCal, remember? Aside from the fact, if I was ever planning on enjoying Autumn anywhere in the United States, it would more than likely be in New York, where the paternal side of my family is still in residence. The color more spectacular, and rivaling anything I've ever seen out here on the Left Coast. And, since I've lived here longer than anywhere else in the States, at this stage in my life, I know from where I speak.

"Enquiring Mind"

That's Inquiring Mind, darlin'.

I just love my two Charlies'!

Carry on, Luvs.

Edited July 15, 2007 by Terry Mauro

[Alan Kent]

Any "debate" with Bugliosi must focus on cutting-edge CORE evidence of conspiracy, and the combatant must stress that "Reclaiming..." is, despite its length, not a serious book. An important example of Bugliosi's frivolity on a crucially important issue is his treatment of the John Martino story. Martino's confession of involvement in a conspiracy, first voiced to his family on the day of the assassination, opens up a hundred cans of worms pointing directly to many of the participants in the crime and, with careful time-line analysis (see, of course, Larry Hancock's work), brings into focus the overarching structure of the plot.

How does Bugliosi deal with Martino? Martino was, apparently, suffering from "dementia" late in his life, which led to his contacts with Fred Classen and John Cummings. Not only is their no reason to believe that this was the case, but Bugliosi DOES NOT MENTION the family corroboration of Martino's story, even though he clearly is aware of it. (Whether Martino's dementia is similar to or different from that which he attributes to Doug Horne, Bugliosi the clinical diagnostician does not say...)

I contend that the central thrust of Bugliosi's book can be virtually refuted simply by recounting the Martino story and laying out its logical implications.

On several other "core" issues there is virtually nothing. Mantik's simple, elegant, dispositive refutation of the single-bullet theory is not dealt with. Lifton's meticulously documented case for body tampering is given 14 pages (count 'em, 14), in which the courtroom-calibre evidence of three seperate casket entries on the night of the assassination that was developed by the ARRB is not mentioned. Bugliosi's challenge to Horne's case for two brain examinations is juvenile as well as libelous.

Let's not engage Bugliosi in polemics based on the circular reasoning and evasion that engulf his book, letting him wander through the case on his own terms. IF it is deemed useful to engage him in public dialogue, he must be hit hard, fast, and with the mature, well-developed case for conspiracy which many amongst our ranks are quite capable of delivering. Bring the hammer down on him!