On Mar 14, 10:34*pm, "Dave Bugg" wrote:
wrote:
9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims.
This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna
station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and
demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some
weight (because it's "happened before".) They do not pause to reflect
that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more
unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which
they make comparison, or that the fact that something might
potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other
than extremely unlikely.

so you are going to tell me that the warren commision and the findings
of the hsca are consistant with each other?

He isn't saying anything other than "Once a k00k, always a k00k?



so you 2 are among the 3 in 10 people that actually still think oswald
acted alone?
That is what you are saying, right?