revelarts
09-19-2014, 09:28 AM
Not posting this as a commentary on the JFK assassination, there's more info on that in other threads.
I'm posting it here as wonderful example of a civil debate
I watched this not long ago and was struck by the level of intelligent conversation by 2 people who are obviously at different ends of the spectrum politically but they can address the issue without partisan rancor and BS misplaced negative assumptions. Though there's some minor partisan comments on the issue both can acknowledge their biases and still speak clearly to the facts and attempt to make a case there pro and con. Buckley doesn't resorts to knee jerk dismissive accusations of "conspiracy theorist" to mentally shut down the very consideration the accusations. However it does seem that when he's confronted with difficult facts Buckley does try to deflect them rhetorically rather than address them directly. And he does challenge Lane's "thinking process" when confronting other facts. But he does so in a way that's somewhat rational and reasonable though -IMO- ineffective.
I have much respect for Buckley's intellect, debating skills and wit.
But Lane simply ---in this limited format--- makes a better case using facts that he amazingly has at his mental fingertips.
enjoy
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/fI7GwBtTRvc?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I'm posting it here as wonderful example of a civil debate
I watched this not long ago and was struck by the level of intelligent conversation by 2 people who are obviously at different ends of the spectrum politically but they can address the issue without partisan rancor and BS misplaced negative assumptions. Though there's some minor partisan comments on the issue both can acknowledge their biases and still speak clearly to the facts and attempt to make a case there pro and con. Buckley doesn't resorts to knee jerk dismissive accusations of "conspiracy theorist" to mentally shut down the very consideration the accusations. However it does seem that when he's confronted with difficult facts Buckley does try to deflect them rhetorically rather than address them directly. And he does challenge Lane's "thinking process" when confronting other facts. But he does so in a way that's somewhat rational and reasonable though -IMO- ineffective.
I have much respect for Buckley's intellect, debating skills and wit.
But Lane simply ---in this limited format--- makes a better case using facts that he amazingly has at his mental fingertips.
enjoy
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/fI7GwBtTRvc?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>