JFK Facts is taking assassination research to the next level by creating a secure communications channel for whistleblowers with access to illicitly classified information. Its called Secure Drop.
And you can help.
Days
Hours
Minutes
Technical assistance courtesy of the Mary Ferrell Foundation | Designed by iWebResults
Jonathan, I think that may largely be that most of the long time “researchers” intuitively feel there was a conspiracy and they really desire to know concrete details – who shot from where, how the attack was set up, exactly what role Oswald and/or Ruby had..etc. For decades they have been either tackling the WC and HSCA data head on trying to either derive leads from it or show it to be insufficient or just plain misleading. So…you get a lot of very detailed analysis. Of course readers and the media love details too, when I do an interview with a new host one of their first questions is about how many shots and where they came from…
Of course the other part of the answer is for many cutting to the chase requires that you take the plunge and present a solution to the conspiracy not just the crime. Actually my impression is that sells lots more books because that’s what the media – and general readers – love. I did both, going into extensive bottoms up detail in SWHT and then tops down, cut to the chance in NEXUS. SWHT was truly written for researchers, to put out the data I had collected and evaluated, NEXUS was to tell my view of the conspiracy. NEXUS is a lot shorter, more easy to talk about and hopefully a better read…because it does cut to the chase. So part of your answer might also be that individuals who didn’t beat themselves to death over three or more decades doing primary research would tend to just jump in and “cut to the chase” as you say.
— just an opinion of course, Larry
Larry,
I’ve already given; and I have your book “Someone Would Have Talked.”
Thanks for being here.
Question: Why do most high-profile researchers focus on the micro details when Dr. Schatz has established there is really no debate?
It seems to me the attention to micro details is good for selling books, which are quite interesting. Dr. Schatz, I believe, cuts to the chase.