1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. ALT.CONSPIRACY.JFK

  • Re: Devastatingly Accurate Point Made By Gil Jesus

    From Chuck Schuyler@21:1/5 to Ben Holmes on Wed Aug 23 13:46:01 2023
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 3:34:07 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

    If there was a coverup after the fact ( and we have all kinds of
    evidence that there was ), then a conspiracy existed.

    Another non sequitur.

    For example, the CIA could've have withheld from the Warren Commission knowledge they buried or ignored about Oswald's Mexico City visit or their interest in Oswald in some form, with Oswald alone responsible for 11/22/63.

    It doesn't matter who you believe was involved in the murder.

    Because if there was no conspiracy, then there was no need for a
    coverup.

    The coverup IS the proof that a conspiracy to kill JFK existed.

    Begged. Circular.

    Fix your arguments by removing the logical fallacies.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Aug 23 13:59:11 2023
    On Wed, 23 Aug 2023 13:46:01 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 3:34:07?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:

    If there was a coverup after the fact ( and we have all kinds of
    evidence that there was ), then a conspiracy existed.

    Another non sequitur.


    Not at all. You'll be unable to show this.


    For example, the CIA could've have withheld from the Warren
    Commission knowledge they buried or ignored about Oswald's Mexico City
    visit or their interest in Oswald in some form, with Oswald alone
    responsible for 11/22/63.


    No-one cares about matters that quite obviously bear on National
    Security.

    Now, explain why the NAA results were buried.

    Tell us why the medical testimony was classified.

    Indeed, tell us why the HSCA simply LIED about the medical testimony.


    It doesn't matter who you believe was involved in the murder.

    Because if there was no conspiracy, then there was no need for a
    coverup.

    The coverup IS the proof that a conspiracy to kill JFK existed.

    Begged. Circular.

    Fix your arguments by removing the logical fallacies.


    Killing you wouldn't be legal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 23 13:34:03 2023
    If there was a coverup after the fact ( and we have all kinds of
    evidence that there was ), then a conspiracy existed.

    It doesn't matter who you believe was involved in the murder.

    Because if there was no conspiracy, then there was no need for a
    coverup.

    The coverup IS the proof that a conspiracy to kill JFK existed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)