Best Spokespersons for the Truth for 50th Anniversary

[Cliff Varnell]

BTW, I cannot help but note that at Spartacus, the last three people on this thread are the shirt man, Varnell, Craig Lamson, and Von Pein.

Hmm.

You don't need an advanced degree in metallurgy to debunk the SBT.

All you need for that is to watch the movement of your shirt when you wave your arm -- it indents along the shoulder-line invariably, the opposite of that posited by the SBT.

I'm advancing the same argument advanced by Vincent Salandria and the late great Gaeton Fonzi.

Jim, on the other hand, wants so bad to be "the face" of JFK research he can't wait to tour the talk shows and pitch the work of 5 researchers analyzing the provenance of CE399 by way of seguing into a thorough review of Neutron Activation Analysis requiring a couple of guys with advanced degrees to verify. That's how he wants to debunk the SBT -- calls it "efficient."

And he wants to pitch it to the kids!

All I'm asking is for you to turn your head to the right, wave your right arm, and look under your nose.

As far as that thread over at the EF...I may have to pull a George Costanza and split that joint. This may be my best work:

[quote name='Jim DiEugenio' timestamp='1360424945' post='266549']
That's are really dumb move on your part Davey, but no one ever praised you for your intelligence.

Because without me, you are a big zero.

The reasons I ever took you on were:

1. To show what a paper tiger your were
[/quote]



[quote name='Cliff Varnell' timestamp='1360433403' post='266557']

Yeah, I had this attitude toward Craig. I thought people would readily see through his bluster but actually it doesn't register that way. It's indulging the false equivalency -- that there are two sides to the issue.

The fact of conspiracy precludes fact-based rebuttal. Von Pein admits he has no rebuttal.

It's a big mistake to go back and forth with these guys unless you have something that makes them agree with you (as David has stipulated) or makes their heads explode into cascades of insults, non-sequiturs and shameless whoppers.

And even then, it gets old in a hurry.

All we're producing with these guys, Jim -- you and I -- is Assassination Porn.

We're Assassination Porn addicts, the both of us. After a certain point there is no redeeming value to our back and forth arguments with these LNers.

However, I am in recovery. I've responded only to one percent of Lamson's posts over the last year or so -- as soon as he admitted that JFK's jacket collar was in a normal position at the base of the neck. I had wrung one concession to reality out of the guy in 5 years and I cut way back on my responses to him.

Now I'm down to nothing. Thank you John Simkin for the "ignore" function!

Jim, going forward, maybe we should form Assassination Porn Anonymous and refuse to respond to these guys at all...except to remind David Von Pein his stipulations to the clothing evidence, of course.

After all, with that you have NO back and forth.
[/quote]


Von Pein has no rebuttal to my arguments.

Neither does Jim DiEugenio.