Jump to content

How Intelligent is Robert Charles-Dunne?


Tim Gratz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Terry,

My point was simple: It is ridiculous to claim that intelligent people cannot believe that Castro did it (or someone acting on his behalf.)

To argue that Califano is not a "nice guy" is irrelevant to whether he is intelligent.

Califano may or may not be a "nice guy" (he was a Democrat after all). But his intelligence, presumably, cannot be doubted.

Nor can the intelligence of Alexander Haig (who also may or may not be a "nice guy").

Ditto the intelligence of Joseph Trento and Gus Russo.

At the risk of immodesty, I am intelligent and I am a nice guy. And I honestly think there is a lot of evidence pointing toward Cuban involvement in the assassination.

To argue that no intelligent people believe that Castro did it one must argue that each of the above is either: a) not intelligent (and that is absurd, of course); or dishonest (although publicly stating they think Castro did it, they do not actually believe that he did.

I suspect that whether or not Castro did it, Califano, Trento and Russo think he did (and Goldfarb at least has his suspicions).

So I understand you do not like Califano but my point stands.

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

"Califano may or may not be a "nice guy" (he was a Democrat after all). But his intelligence, presumably, cannot be doubted."

"Nor can the intelligence of Alexander Haig (who also may or may not be a "nice guy")."

Who's inferring they're not intelligent? They're extremely intelligent, as well as crafty. I find them to be dishonest in their motives, especially when it comes to keeping the best interests of the citizenry in mind, whether it relates to their dismantling of Medicare, or whether they think Castro killed Kennedy. The fact that Califano is/was a democrat means absolutely nothing to me, from what I've observed of both party's agendas. It's been one party - two branches since 1972, as far as I'm concerned. People are judged by their deeds. Califano's and Haig's are dubious based upon their actions in the political arena regardless of what party they belong to. Trento and Russo are far too compartmentalized by their affiliations with covert operations for me to venture in making any fascimile of a fair comment on them. And, to be honest with you, I haven't read Trento's book, and am only familiar with Russo from what I've read about him on the net. Califano and Haig, on the other hand were elected officials. Maybe I should've put quotation marks on the word "nice," because it was meant in a sarcastic way.

Actually, the wording I used was great guy. Oops, I meant "great" guy.

Edited by Terry Mauro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday Robert Charles-Dunne wrote:

What I've done in Castro's case is to repeatedly point out for the benefit of others that the case you make against the Cubans is non-existent, and that all you do is regurgitate the script prepared by CIA. That it is baseless is clear to any schoolchild with a small modicum of mental acuity

From Charles-Dunne's ridiculous statement, Mr. Goldfarb must have less intelligence than a schoolchild (just like Joseph Califano and Joseph Trento and Gus Russo).

Mr. Goldfarb's biography is set forth in a following post. I seriously doubt that Charles-Dunne's intelligence comes close to that of Goldfarb.

Intelligence is very difficult to measure. However, I have had the job of measuring intelligence for over 25 years. Clearly, Robert is extremely intelligent. If I was you Tim, I would not get involved in debates with Robert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron, I fail to understand.

It would appear so, Tim - as shown by what you say below.

No intelligent person can dispute that there are intelligent people who believe there may have been Cuban involvement in the assassination. Robert Charles-Dunne's assertion to the contrary must stand as one of the most bizarre posts made here. I should have probably put it under James Richard's thread: "Bizarre Behavior."

Never have I ever indicated that intelligent people cannot possibly believe that the CIA did it; that LBJ did it; etc. etc. Charles-Dunne's implied assertion that only fools can believe that Castro did it shows either that he is disingenuous or that he is foolish himself. At least it was a very foolish statement to make.

Robert did not assert that anyone who believes Castro did it lacks intelligence. What he did say - quite clearly - was that it takes only a modest intellect to grasp that that there is no basis for such a belief.

Kind of like believing Saddam had WMD. A lot of intelligent people fell for that one.

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, John, I win the debate hands down when Robert tries to defend his proposition that not a single intelligent person honestly believes that Castro or Cuba was one of the conspirators.

Robert may not be a fool but that was clearly a foolish and non-defensible statement.

And to Greg, the above was clearly a correct paraphrase of what he said ("a schoolchild with a modicum of mental acuity"), and consistent with the context of the paragraph.

My other point of course is that we can now add Mr. Goldfarb, a member of the Kennedy administration, to the list of people who suspect Cuban involvement.

I would not put my converse quite as strongly but I would say this:

Given the continuing US efforts to assassinate Castro and the US plans for a second invasion, and the reports of DGI agents in Dealey Plaza (which cannot be dismissed out-of-hand) it is very difficult to believe that any person of reasonable intelligence, familiar with those facts, will not admit the possibility of Cuban involvement.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...