Vincent Bugliosi and Ghostwriting

[Terry Mauro]

"Von Pain," as I've referred to him on Lancer, and in retorting him on amazon.com, is nothing more than a shill, for Bugliosi.

An out and out LN "shill," for Bugliosi.

Von Pinhead was hawking Bugliosi's book a year before it was published on various forums on the web.

He is a subscriber of the official version and like Bugliosi, refers to and considers anyone who disagrees with him a "kook", often referring to them as "Mr. Kook". Not only is Von Pein in complete denial even when presented with evidence of a conspiracy, he has suffered the misfortune of being thrown off reputable forums like JFK Lancer. In newsgroup alt.conspiracy.jfk, one can see that a typical Von Pein post may include links to previous Von Pein posts. In other words, he posts opinion, then uses it as a factual reference in a later post. I've never seen anything so ridiculous: using oneself as a source.

Of course, when you have nothing else, I suppose, you dock at any port in a storm.

In Von Pein's world, there is no such thing as tampering with evidence. There is no such thing as altering affidavits. There is no such thing as evidence substitution. There is no such thing as staged police lineups. There is no such thing as coerced witnesses.

In Von Pein's world, 80 % or more of the public, who believe that John Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, are simply "kooks".

For Von Pein's sake, I hope Bugliosi doesn't stop short one day.

I've been following the antics of the lone nut shills over at the alt.conspiracy.jfk site for several months now. Do Von Pein and those other people really think they are fooling anybody? Anyone who has to hurl insults, in lieu of actual fact based arguments, has already lost the debate. I haven't read Bugliosi's book, and don't intend to (no need to waste my time on a book arguing the thesis that the world is flat) but from what I have heard, he stoops to the same level of name calling that the lone nut internet forum brigade engages in as a regular routine. At this late date, with all the new revelations from the ARRB added on to what was previously known, anyone seriously arguing the Warren Commission line is either in a severe state of denial, or is a paid shill of the establishment. Pathetic.

Brian:

I, like you, have not bought nor read Bugliosi's "cinder block" book. And I also have no intention of doing so. I have the WC 26 volumes on CD-ROM and I've read Case Closed (then threw it in the trash), so for me, the-same-old-same-old is just a waste of time and money.

The purpose of the childishness of the McAdams-sent trolls at a.c.j. is to distract the discussion away from evidence and testimony and away from exposure of the truth by using off-topic postings that have nothing to do with the JFK assassination but instead serve to sidetrack everyone.

As you know, more often than not, the ones who hurl the first insults are those on the LN side. Many times, Cters (myself included) fall for their tactics and retaliate. But I'm learning not to fall into their trap.

Trolls don't care about the case. They just care about being a-holes to whomever. Many don't like the Kennedys. Many more don't like people who believe in conspiracies.

So this case draws quite a few "nut jobs" from all over the map. Some of whom wish to please their master, who has vowed to destroy a.c.j.

http://www.prouty.org/mcadams

I find it funny that those who ridicule conspiracies are, in fact, part of a conspiracy to destroy a newsgroup.

************************************************************

"...Bugliosi's "cinder block" book."

Just loved that reference to it, Gil.

Myra Bronstein referred to it as, "Bugliosi's Tonnage."

I like to think of it as a "door-stop," for all that it's not worth.

DL once told me, "What's the use of having all these documents and data in your hands when you don't know the first thing about piecing it all together?"

It's like taking a person who does not make it a hobby of working on thousand piece puzzles, handing them a bagful of thousands of pieces, and encouraging them to "run with it." And, that's how Bugliosi comes off, in my opinion.

Then, to top it all off, he comes out swinging with both fists, ranting and raving like a rabid dog, against the opposition. All the while resorting to school yard name-calling tactics, and slinging ad hominems in the direction of any "so-called" conspiracy theorem. Every contradiction, or contra-indication, against a case for conspiracy has all the earmarks of a totally irrational mindset. And, Bugliosi wears it out.

[William Kelly]

I was wondering what the Ghostwriters think of Bugliosi selling the movie rights to Reclaiming History for a Tom Hanks $100 million TV production, which will probably use more of their Ghostwriten chappters on Oswald and the real story than they will of Bugliosi's ranting and raving about conspiracy theorists.

Tonight (Sunday, March 16) begins a $100 million epic HPO biography of John Adams, American founding father and second president, which will probably bore the pants off anybody who bothers to watch it, but gives you an indication of how much and how far Hanks & Company can go to produce what they want.

Now that this show is in the can, if they put as much time and money into the Bugliosi book, we can expect something that will get a lot more attention.

If it isn't too much foresight to see a falling out of the principles over credit and money, I can see them getting together again if the money is right.

I don't think we've heard the last of the Ghostwriters, and will hear more from them, either in court (ala Sopranos) or as co-writers on the script.

The most significant thing about Reclaiming History, as opposed to say JFK, is that its supposed to be non-fiction, and they can't spice it up with car chases, guns, girls and gadgets.

I mean, do you want to sit through eight hour story about a disenchanted, lone nut who couldn't hold a job, beat his wife?

I don't think so.

BK