Vince Palamara now believes Oswald did it

[Brian Smith]

Glad to hear from Charles on this.

Also heard from another researcher who worked closely with Vince...

A theory exists that Vince all along has been a LIMITED HANGOUT MOLE to promote

NEGLIGENCE as opposed to SS being involved in CONSPIRACY...this from someone who

has worked closely with him in the past.

Limited hangout is part of the intelligence arsenal to divert us down false trails.

Cited was his UNLIMITED ACCESS to so many SS agents, and that all confessed

to negligence, not involvement.

Also cited was the fact that Vince has never subscribed to ANY conspiracy theory.

Jack

I am hesitant to say it but I have a hunch this is in fact the case. Can't prove it, but it does seem to add up.

[Lee Forman]

Glad to hear from Charles on this.

Also heard from another researcher who worked closely with Vince...

A theory exists that Vince all along has been a LIMITED HANGOUT MOLE to promote

NEGLIGENCE as opposed to SS being involved in CONSPIRACY...this from someone who

has worked closely with him in the past.

Limited hangout is part of the intelligence arsenal to divert us down false trails.

Cited was his UNLIMITED ACCESS to so many SS agents, and that all confessed

to negligence, not involvement.

Also cited was the fact that Vince has never subscribed to ANY conspiracy theory.

Jack

While I find it hard to subscribe to this view Jack - I have always looks at Vince as someone who, like like Tantulus - struggled to reach fruit within inches of his fingers and was never rewarded. He always appeared to be within inches of a smoking gun. I can see how that would bring on a great deal of disappointment if indeed that was the case. However - the man himself is a member here, and as a professional researcher, can and should provide a response himself. I have also sought to contact him myself through alternate channels - if he choses to forego responding here and elsewhere, well then - move along...move along - nothing to see here.

- lee

[Paul Rigby]

Glad to hear from Charles on this.

Also heard from another researcher who worked closely with Vince...

A theory exists that Vince all along has been a LIMITED HANGOUT MOLE to promote

NEGLIGENCE as opposed to SS being involved in CONSPIRACY...this from someone who

has worked closely with him in the past.

Limited hangout is part of the intelligence arsenal to divert us down false trails.

Cited was his UNLIMITED ACCESS to so many SS agents, and that all confessed

to negligence, not involvement.

Also cited was the fact that Vince has never subscribed to ANY conspiracy theory.

Jack

Excellent analysis, Jack, and one not without precedent. Two friends and I spoke with Palamara in the mid-1990s and one of them - take a bow, Doctor - suggested precisely this interpretation. Access, he noted, comes at a price; or is the consequence of "arrangements."

Delighted to hear from CD, too.

[Paul Rigby]

Glad to hear from Charles on this.

Also heard from another researcher who worked closely with Vince...

A theory exists that Vince all along has been a LIMITED HANGOUT MOLE to promote

NEGLIGENCE as opposed to SS being involved in CONSPIRACY...this from someone who

has worked closely with him in the past.

Limited hangout is part of the intelligence arsenal to divert us down false trails.

Cited was his UNLIMITED ACCESS to so many SS agents, and that all confessed

to negligence, not involvement.

Also cited was the fact that Vince has never subscribed to ANY conspiracy theory.

Jack

Excellent analysis, Jack, and one not without precedent. Two friends and I spoke with Palamara in the mid-1990s and one of them - take a bow, Doctor - suggested precisely this interpretation. Access, he noted, comes at a price; or is the consequence of "arrangements."

Delighted to hear from CD, too.

Would someone who has his private email or phone number be so kind as to invite his participation here on the Forum, perhaps he can convince the rest of us and save us all so much time and trouble . Seriously, I think it would benefit him and us and truth. Jack's analysis may well be so - uncanny access can mean uncanny arrangements - or dogged persistance. Limited hangouts have plagued us from the get-go. I'm sure it pays better than being on the side of exposing the truth and fighting the powers that be [which pays in pain and trouble, for the most part - only 'rewarding' in the moral sphere]. Another interesting issue is always the one of timing. Why now?

This brings me to an old theme. The real division within the "research community" is not between CT-ers and LN-ers - a thorougly misleading construct - but between those who deny Secret Service complicity and those who follow the abundant evidence of the Dallas detail's centrality to the murder. All the other divisions are secondary.

And on the subject of what "access" invariably indicates, I recall Malcolm Muggeridge's line: "No exclusives go to the awkward squad." You bet.

Paul

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Also cited was the fact that Vince has never subscribed to ANY conspiracy theory.

Jack

Not so. Vince has been attracted to various theories over the years. Not too long ago Vince wrote this on Amazon:

There WAS indeed a conspiracy involved in the death of JFK...and "Ultimate Sacrifice" lays out the 'who', the 'what', and the 'why' better than any book I have ever seen. Get this book asap!

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2IK62R9OYUK

I am tempted to conclude that in evaluating books about the assassination, Vince is more impressed by the SIZE of the book than by its content. Ultimate Sacrifice was a very BIG book, and therefore merited belief, in Vince's eyes, but then came Reclaiming History, which is almost certain to be the biggest book ever on the case, so it trumps all the rest.

More seriously, though, I think Vince is unduly swayed by the CREDENTIALS of the author. He is impressed by Hartmann & Waldron because they are "historians," but then along comes Bugliosi who is a bona fide, certified heavy hitter and besides, he praises Vince's own work.

But the idea that Vince is perpetrating some kind of "limited hangout" is as wide of the mark, IMO, as Vince's own latest theory that Bugliosi has solved the case.

Edited May 25, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Jack White]

I wish to repeat:

In all my dealings with Vince he seemed perfectly on the level; nice guy.

The limited hangout theory came from another researcher who knows him better than I do.

My opinion is that his current behavior exhibits some sort of emotional distress.

Subsequent events may reveal the truth.

Jack

[Gil Jesus]

Let me stick my two-cents worth in here if I may and tell yuou how I found out about it.

Lancer member Richard van Noord, who knew Vince was a friend of mine, e-mailed me to let me know that Vince had posted a glowing review on Bugliosi's book and the review was on the book's website.

I went there, to see for myself and sure enough it was there. Concerned with his "conversion", I e-mailed Vince to ask him if he wanted me to remove the 5-part video presentation that he he gave last year at Slippery Rock University from my Youtube channel.

His reply was No. "My work still stands". He explained that although he still believed that there were conspiracies to kill Kennedy, he was now of the belief that Oswald simply "beat them to the punch" as he put it.

Of course, this made no sense to me. How does one reconcile the SS actions before and lack of action during the shooting with some guy who brings his rifle to work one day to kill the President ?

The inconsistencies in the evidence alone, the lack of a chain of possession, the altering of affidavits, the ignoring of witnesses, and the unfair police lineups all point to a conspiracy, at the very least, to cover the crime up.

And the Secret Service --- not only did they REMOVE the protection that the Dallas cops had positioned to protect the President during the motorcade, they made a CONSCIOUS EFFORT when the shooting began, to order their agents NOT TO MOVE and then slowed the car to almost a complete stop.

Or as Ralph Yarborough put it, "they just looked around casually".

Vince knows this. It was HIS research that revealed all of this.

In the Video "Ambush!: How the Secret Service set up JFK" on my youtube channel, there is a scene from TMWKK, where Vince asks this question:

"During November 1963, when there is an increase in conspiratorial activities, the Secret Service reacts as though no threat ever existed. WHY ?"

Well, it's pretty obvious.

It's hard to imagine anyone who has investigated this crime this deeply could be convinced that it was anything other than the result of a conspiracy. But I guess it's possible.

So I'm as puzzled as anyone else as to what caused his "conversion". I think he was just "schmoozed" by a snake charmer.

In my dealings with Vince P, he's always been honest and helpful and I find it hard to believe that he's ever been anything more than a guy in search of the truth.

As far as him being part of a "limited hangout", well I'd have to see evidence of that before I could believe it.

And although I don't agree with his new position, he's entitled to his opinion and to change that opinion anytime he wants to.

[Michael Hogan]

It's been more than two years since Vince Palamara's Amazon review of Vince Bugliosi's Reclaiming History:

The best Oswald-did-it book, but..., January 13, 2006

Vince Bugliosi is to be commended for the MASSIVE research that this book entailed: 1600+ pages, in addition to 950+ pages on the enclosed disc for the seemingly endless end notes and source notes! There is no doubt that this is THE best Oswald-did-it book...ever. That said, I am sad to say, this is a very skilled prosecutor's brief (or is that length?). Still, I am a proud contributor (on 16 pages). For the serious student of the JFK case.

Since then Palamara authored these reviews on Amazon:

JFK and the Unspeakable

by James Douglass

Masterful job: tremendous depth of research, great writing!, May 9, 2008

As the leading civilian authority on the U.S. Secret Service (and their interaction with a host of presidents, in particular, JFK), I was most anxious to acquire this volume, as Mr. Douglass had contacted me several times in the past regarding his then work-in-progress (for example: I was able to put him in touch with former Secret Service agent---and current outstanding author---Abraham Bolden). So, with these factors in mind, I happily report that this book is a very fine volume, indeed. The tremendous depth of research, as well as the very nice writing style, is most impressive. Douglass goes to great length to nail down each and every idea he has to offer; this is no amateur book, to be sure. What more can one say? Get this one asap!

The Echo From Dealey Plaza

by Abraham Bolden

Fantastic book from a former Secret Service hero, March 4, 2008

As the leading civilian authority on the U.S. Secret Service (and one who has interviewed and/ or corresponded with over 70 former agents, including, on quite a few occasions, the author), I highly recommend this seminal work from former Secret Service hero Abraham Bolden. The book is very well written and gripping in its narrative. Whether one views the JFK assassination as the work of one man (who beat the conspirators to the punch) or the work of a deadly conspiracy, Bolden's book holds up in any case, for it is the tale of injustice done to him, as well as the detailing of prior threats to President Kennedy's life.

As one who has studied the Secret Service and President Kennedy's life and death in great detail, I find this book fascinating and indispensable. What more can I say? Get this asap!

Brothers

by David Talbot

Outstanding book--get this asap, May 10, 2007

This is an amazing book on RFK and JFK. David Talbot is to be commended for such a well written volume that treads new ground at this late date. I agree with all the other 5 star reviews. Get this asap!!!

Someone Would Have Talked

by Larry Hancock

Outstanding!, November 14, 2006

As an experienced author and researcher myself who has "seen it all" (so to speak), I have become somewhat jaded in terms of dealing with new books on the subject of the JFK assassination, as many promise more than they deliver or, quite frnakly, have little in the way of anything truly new and exciting to offer. To compound the matter, a number of these books are not very readable ("Oswald and The CIA" comes painfully to mind...ouch!).

Then, like a breath of fresh air, comes a truly remarkable and tenacious researcher, Larry Hancock, with "Someone Would Have Talked." Tremendous documentation, organization, and, above all, READABILITY will greet the reader in welcome fashion. Perhaps most important of all, much of the information in the book is new or, at the very least, will be new to 99% of the average citizens out there. In addition, there are many great and obscure photographs in the book, adding to the rich narrative. And, to top it all off, there is an amazing cd packed with information included.

Larry Hancock has truly hit a home run here. While I HAVE sung the praises of a few other deserving titles in recent years (albeit out of a literal mountain of prose), NO other book carries the detailed perspective on the nuts and bolts of the actual CONSPIRACY itself---apart from issues of forensics, etc.---like "Someone Would Have Talked." I am very impressed...and, at this late juncture, that is getting exceedingly harder to do. Buy it!!!!

A Simple Act of Murder

by Mark Fuhrman

gosh, is this awful!!!, May 2, 2006

Avoid this book by Mark "The N Word" Fuhrman at all costs. It is Poor Man's Posner, and POSNER'S book was awful...so you know what THIS book is like: pretty bad. What Furhman and all the other lone-nutters forget is that rhetoric is no subsitute for EVIDENCE...and there is no proof that Oswald acted totlaly, 100% alone; the same can be said for Ruby, too. Avoid.

Oswald's Tale

by Norman Mailer

The second of the one-two punch from 1993-1994, January 14, 2006

The first was Posner's awful "Case Closed", while this was the second; the ole one-two punch from the media and publishing world to try to close---kill---the JFK assassination case. Thank God for the ARRB, COPA, Probe, even (gulp) Lancer, as well as the hundreds---thousands---of researchers and authors who battled to keep the case alive and not to rot on the vine like Mailer and Posner would have prefered.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-review...view&page=1

[John Kelin]

I tried to make the following post right after this Vince Palamara issue arose, but had some trouble logging in to this site. Since then the points I was going to make have been made by others. But, what the heck. Here is what I wrote (offline) to post here:

I"ve met Vince Palamara a couple of times but cannot say I know him, so guessing at his motives or true self is only that, a guess. But he is not the first defector from our ranks, nor will he be the last.

I watched his YouTube video. What I found most interesting about it was that he did not offer a single instance of how Bugliosi's book changed his thinking. One would expect, even demand him to say how and why Bugliosi's book did this. But he does not.

Instead we get meaningless one-liners, like Bugliosi's book is "devastating" and "re-aligned the universe" for him.

He adopts lone nut jargon by referring to LHO as "this little pipsqueak." This, in place of solid arguments.

He says, and I quote, "I challenge anybody to honestly read this book, and come away -- you have to say Oswald did it." You have to? Why, Vince? Convince me. Co-Vince me.

It's a short and obvious step to conclude that he doesn't elaborate with anything concrete, because he can't.

I also find it extremely self-serving that he says while he believes Oswald was the assassin, his own work still stands up.

Vince, we hardly knew ye.

John Kelin

[Peter McGuire]

Vince, we hardly knew ye.

John Kelin

This does not surprise me. If you read his non-SS writing , you will see this little weasel has always believed "Oswald did it" in that writing. I don't know about a limited hangout here, but I have seen this coming from day one. So unfortunate because what he has learned about what the SS did and didn't do stands.

Judas , I mean Vince, how are those pieces of Gold? I mean silver, and thanks by the way for exposing the United States Secret Service of 1963 for what they did.

Edited May 25, 2008 by Peter McGuire

[Pat Speer]

I think those suspecting Vince was bought off or part of some larger plot are way off-base. The Youtube video is amateurish, and slightly embarrassing. I doubt it will convert anyone. The fact is that many CTs are under-informed about many of the facts, and that many of them could be converted by Bugliosi's book, should they read it with an open mind. Which is why Bugliosi was so loud about how he includes everything in his book--he thought if he repeated it enough people would read his book and be swayed, without DOUBLE-CHECKING.

I suspect that, beyond being swayed by Bugliosi's long arguments, Vince is a little star-struck. WOW, Bugliosi is kinda famous. WOW, he read some of my research. What Vince Palamara MISSES is that, while Bugliosi calls Oliver Stone's admitted work of fiction, JFK, "one continuous lie", it is in fact Bugliosi's book--a work supposedly dedicated to the truth and the historical record-- that is "one continuous lie". Bugliosi uses facts, true, to tell this lie. But he deliberately excludes the most painful facts, and deliberately twists those he can't get around. For example, when discussing bullet lead analysis, rather than deal with it honestly, and admit that Guinn's work has been called into question by the scientific community, Bugliosi cites the work of Rahn and Sturdivan as scientific support. He hides from his readers that they are noted LNs with an agenda and that their work has not been embraced by the scientific community. Instead--and this is why I call him a xxxx--when asked about the recent studies in radio interviews--he tells the listeners that he debunks the recent studies disputing Guinn's work in his book, and that these studies are symbolic of how desperate "these people" are to get their names in print. He creates the illusion that the scientists engaged in these studies are all CTs, and with weaker credentials than Rahn and Sturdivan, which is just not true.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

this little weasel .... Judas , I mean Vince, how are those pieces of Gold? I mean silver,

Name-calling says so much.

[Brian Smith]

It smells strange, but only those of you who know him, would even have a clue. From the 'outside' it really seems bizarre and perhaps planned. Yes, he is entitled to whatever he wants to believe. One can also believe in the tooth-fairy. I give the tooth-fairy odds over LHO as the shooter, myself.

In previous posts it has been suggested that he could be some type of mole who was planted in the CT research community, but, on second thought, without really knowing the man myself, and without proof to substantiate such a claim, I think it is best to give him the benefit of the doubt. To someone like me who has not read much of his work and is not acquainted with him personally, his sudden change of opinion just seemed a little suspect. These things do happen occasionally. Maybe he will see the light once again and realize his recent error in judgement.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Vince, .... thanks by the way for exposing the United States Secret Service of 1963 for what they did.

Yes, thanks Vince and that's more than just by-the -way. You did TREMENDOUS work and as I've told you in the past you deserve to find a commercial publisher. A little bird on Lancer says you HAVE found a publisher, and if so congratulations and I hope the book is properly published as it deserves.

But just in case the editors make you tone down (or even eliminate) some of the more thorny and problematical issues you have spotlighted in SSA behaviour, and just in case said publishers insist on your removing the ORIGINAL book from free access on the web at http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n1.html

I have taken the precaution of downloading the entire book onto my computer.

[Myra Bronstein]

For two very good reasons I am obliged to break my self-imposed public silence on the JFK assassination and address the theme of this thread.

(Before I go into detail, let it be noted for the record that, since the early 1990s, I have thought of Vince Palamara as a friend as well as a comrade in arms. We've enjoyed many important [to me, at least] conversations on the subject of Secret Service culpability and related issues, and I'll never forget the impact of Vince's initial screening, to a JFK Lancer audience in Dallas, of the footage he discovered of Henry Rybka being ordered to stand down at Love Field. For now, the friendship remains intact. But Vince will forgive me if I look elsewhere for someone to watch my six.)

Reason One: Within just a few weeks of its publication, Vince phoned me to ask if I'd had the chance to read Case Closed. I responded in the affirmative, and then proceeded to offer what amounted to a brief but, if I may say so, absolutely sound expose of just a few of the near-countless fatal flaws in Posner's confused and/or criminal (see below) presentation. Here's the important part: Vince said to me -- and I'm quoting nearly verbatim -- "Thanks, Charlie, because for a while I thought we'd been proven wrong. I was ready to say, 'Hey, you guys were right all along.'" He literally sighed in relief.

Apparently Vince is not the ideal foxhole partner.

In other words, his current behavior is hardly without precedent.

Reason Two: It was my friend and mentor George Michael Evica who gave to Vince the first three words of the title of the latter's most important work: The Third Alternative.

George Michael expects me to respond. He valued Vince's dogged persistence as a researcher and his ability to charm the most difficult of interview subjects. When I informed him of our young friend's less than steadfast response to Posner, he was neither surprised nor disappointed.

Which just about sums up my own thoughts on the man.

The strength of Vince's Secret Service work should not be diminished by our recognition of his personal weaknesses. If in fact he has been bought off by Bugliosi and his masters, then to hell with him. But unless I miss my guess, this is just a case of Palamara being Palamara. He'll be back.

So ... I'll take my leave yet again, but not before thanking Don Jeffries for referencing the following:

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in this case who does not conclude that JFK was the victim of a criminal conspiracy is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.

Good to e-see you Charles.

While I appreciate the research done in Survivor's Guilt, I mistrusted Vince from the start for a couple of reasons and now feel somewhat vindicated. Rather than restate the reasons for my mistrust, I'll just quote the explanation I posted here long ago:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofivers....php/t8640.html

"Well I'm really puzzled here. I've read a fair amount of Palamara's research and I disagree with his conclusions about Kellerman. So many sources show Kellerman's behavior to be beyond suspicious that I just have to wonder if Palamara saw these sources. He gives a brief review of about every JFK assassination book on Amazon, so I doubt he missed seeing the books.

And he gives a glowing review to "Ultimate Sacrifice," which I consider the official bible of the mob dunnit sect bent on advancing the official post HSCA mythology, which also makes me wonder.

...

Yup, the mob dunnit.

Kellerman, in particular, seems dirty as hell. In "Trauma Room 1" he's consistently shown as the "thug" who is in charge of stealing President Kennedy's body from Parkland. He actually pulls a machine gun on the doctors and officials attempting to prevent the theft, and Dr Crenshaw, the author, feels certain he would have killed anyone in his way.

In "Body of Evidence" Kellerman is shown, in a transcript, to be actively arranging the diversion of the body to Walter Reed (for alteration) as the empty casket goes to Bethesda.

Kellerman's behavior during the Dallas trip was outrageous. He sat and watched Kennedy die as his counterpart SS agent in LBJ's SS car supposedly shielded his charge.

...

And, in fact, Palamara's endorsement of Ultimate Sacrifice is one of the red flags about him. I consider that book to be out and out disinformation, a mob dunnit smokescreen."

Etc.

Back to the present.

I've chosen to post in this thread instead of the one Vince is now posting in (with noticeable vagueness) because...

Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in this case who does not conclude that JFK was the victim of a criminal conspiracy is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime/cover-up.

I do wonder though why Debra Conway opted not to be involved with Vince's book.

She posted a little on the subject in the past and was properly non-specific and polite about why Vince and Lancer didn't team up on his book.

I respect her discretion, and yet I now can't help wonder if she had some insights long ago.