J. Raymond Carroll Posted June 6, 2008 Share Posted June 6, 2008 If Vince Palamara was a plant, he did what he was supposed to do These repeated insinuations and accusations against Mr. Palamara are false and defamatory, and are calculated to bring this forum into disrepute. If you have any evidence beyond the imaginings of your own mind, then produce it, otherwise please cease and desist from impugning Mr. Palamara's character. Vince has produced, after many years of diligent research, the first detailed study of how the Secret Service of the United States failed in its basic mission, that of protecting the President. In his study, Vince quite rightly gives the SSA the benefit of doubt when trying to determine whether certain acts or omissions were deliberate. In logic, that is known as the PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY. In Law it is known as the presumption of innocence. It is one of the fundamental principles of civilization. THe question that Vince set out to examine had nothing to do with the identity of the assassin(s), and Vince's views on that subject are really irrelevant. and now he's made his exit from the stage, you say. IN YOUR DREAMS, I say. ROCK ON, VINCE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 (edited) If Vince Palamara was a plant, he did what he was supposed to do These repeated insinuations and accusations against Mr. Palamara are false and defamatory, and are calculated to bring this forum into disrepute. If you have any evidence beyond the imaginings of your own mind, then produce it, otherwise please cease and desist from impugning Mr. Palamara's character. Vince has produced, after many years of diligent research, the first detailed study of how the Secret Service of the United States failed in its basic mission, that of protecting the President. In his study, Vince quite rightly gives the SSA the benefit of doubt when trying to determine whether certain acts or omissions were deliberate. In logic, that is known as the PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY. In Law it is known as the presumption of innocence. It is one of the fundamental principles of civilization. THe question that Vince set out to examine had nothing to do with the identity of the assassin(s), and Vince's views on that subject are really irrelevant. and now he's made his exit from the stage, you say. IN YOUR DREAMS, I say. ROCK ON, VINCE. ********* Agreed this is all supposition, and if any enlightenment is to come about, then eventually we shall see...from Vince through his actions, as well as his associations... ......Till then it is somewhat a waste of resources to continue to guess at what Vince may or may not be thinking...doing, was, is, or may be.... His work on the SS still stands, and he has been nothing but kind and generous, with the sharing of his research......But I suppose some will think that is how he suckered us in.....wouldn't be surprised.... That worm turns so quickly...doesn't it..Give it a rest...... B... Edited June 7, 2008 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Frank Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? Bugliosi makes the claim in his book that he "proved" to a bunch of lawyers who believed in a conspiracy that they were not looking at it "intelligently" because they had not read the WCR. It's mostly the information that is not in the WCR that proves conspiracy. Funny how we haven't heard from Vince Palamara since his "epiphany." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted June 7, 2008 Share Posted June 7, 2008 OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? He certainly never stated or implied any such thing on this forum, or anywhere else that I know of. I think Vince's practice is to leave name-calling to the likes of you. You seem to be quite skilled in that department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? He certainly never stated or implied any such thing on this forum, or anywhere else that I know of. I think Vince's practice is to leave name-calling to the likes of you. You seem to be quite skilled in that department. Hey, I don't think Vince called us anything. But he did call Lee Harvey Oswald the sole assassin of President Kennedy and a Pipsqueak, a point I must take issue with. If LHO killed JFK all by himself without any assistnace then how come he's not the world's greatest assassin? That's what I want to know. Why is he a Pipsqueak rather than a great assassin? Which way is it Vince? And Vince's new Mentor VB, he has the same problem, as one the one hand he says the assassin did it all by himself, and on the other hand, he was such a jerk nobody would have had him as part of a conspiracy, a clear contradiction, except in their minds. BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter McGuire Posted June 8, 2008 Share Posted June 8, 2008 (edited) OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? He certainly never stated or implied any such thing on this forum, or anywhere else that I know of. I think Vince's practice is to leave name-calling to the likes of you. You seem to be quite skilled in that department. Hey, I don't think Vince called us anything. But he did call Lee Harvey Oswald the sole assassin of President Kennedy and a Pipsqueak, a point I must take issue with. If LHO killed JFK all by himself without any assistance then how come he's not the world's greatest assassin? That's what I want to know. Why is he a Pipsqueak rather than a great assassin? Which way is it Vince? And Vince's new Mentor VB, he has the same problem, as one the one hand he says the assassin did it all by himself, and on the other hand, he was such a jerk nobody would have had him as part of a conspiracy, a clear contradiction, except in their minds. BK Once again, well put Mr. Kelly. Which is it folks? If you believe Oswald got in some accurate shots with that vintage rifle (even at the time), then he has got to be characterized as a great assassin. Murderer, for sure, but he should be called a great assassin. And loathing should rain down on him for killing our beloved President. Do the likes of the Jackal and other notorious assassins get the same treatment? Why call this successful assassin a loser? Furthermore, he nearly got a way with it. He got out of the building and was on the loose for a great deal of time. Surely, since this was premeditated murder, he had an escape plan. But not this guy, he kills the president and zig zags around town for awhile and then traps himself in a movie theatre. Now that’s where he gets dumb. ( or he was told to go there) Edited June 8, 2008 by Peter McGuire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Frank Posted June 9, 2008 Share Posted June 9, 2008 (edited) OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? He certainly never stated or implied any such thing on this forum, or anywhere else that I know of. I think Vince's practice is to leave name-calling to the likes of you. You seem to be quite skilled in that department. Hey, I don't think Vince called us anything. But he did call Lee Harvey Oswald the sole assassin of President Kennedy and a Pipsqueak, a point I must take issue with. If LHO killed JFK all by himself without any assistance then how come he's not the world's greatest assassin? That's what I want to know. Why is he a Pipsqueak rather than a great assassin? Which way is it Vince? And Vince's new Mentor VB, he has the same problem, as one the one hand he says the assassin did it all by himself, and on the other hand, he was such a jerk nobody would have had him as part of a conspiracy, a clear contradiction, except in their minds. BK Once again, well put Mr. Kelly. Which is it folks? If you believe Oswald got in some great shots with that vintage rifle (even at the time), then he has got to be characterized as a great assassin. Murderer, for sure, but he should be called a great assassin. And despair should rain down on him for killing our beloved President. Do the likes of the Jackal and other notorious assassins get the same treatment? Why call this successful assassin a loser? Furthermore, he nearly got a way with it. He got out of the building and was on the loose for a great deal of time. Surely, since this was premeditated murder, he had an escape plan. But not this guy, he kills the president and zig zags around town for awhile and then traps himself in a movie theatre. Now that’s where he gets dumb. ( or he was told to go there) Bill and Peter have pointed out some [of the many] contraditions and unexplainable aspects of all Oswald-did-it-alone scenarios. In fact, only using tunnel-vision, rose-colored glasses or secret incantations can one conclude Oswald did it alone [or at all] when one takes a broad look at his life, defection [false], return, playing both the left and right; friends and associates; intelligence interest in him; cover-up and mysterious deaths; baby-sitters and persons positioning and setting-up LHO; pattern with other assassinations; etc.....one could go on to list several hundreds of others, but I'm sure most here know them all too well. The early critics had it correct [read Praise From A Future Generation], but we've been dueling with the hidden 'devil' of psyops and cover-up ever since. There is also the factor that some just can't bring themselves to believe that an internal coup can take place in America and will search for those tiny shreds that allow that denial to seem to have some basis. It has none other than the created 'legend' of Oswald. It seems people are pretty clear on Oswald NOT being a Lone Assassin or even a knowing participant in the plan to kill JFK. But Vince Palamara, the alleged hero who, for some reason, "sincerely" believes that LHO killed JFK, says absolutely nothing about why or how Bugliosi's book "showed him the light." But since Vince P is obviously so "sincere" in his newfound belief, perish the thought that anyone would say, "I smell a rat." Edited June 9, 2008 by Tony Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) Vince Palamara, I am a newbie "nobody" in the CT community, and at this forum. Nevertheless, I have the curiousity, the time, some patience/perseverance, and I've been told, decent search skills. On your new thread, I replied to questions about John W. Rice posted by Bill Kelly. I found the information I posted there below Bill's post, and what I am posting here, in less than four hours of searching, entirely online, aided by google, google news archive search, and from the resources provided to ancestry.com subscribers. You seem to have served up almost nothing on John W. Rice, except the info that he attended SS school in 1954. I am wondering why your coverage of such a seemingly central, and pivotal figure such as John Rice, has been so scant. Do you agree with Bill Kelly and others in assassination research that John W. Rice is one of the most important persons of interest from the November 1963, Secret Service roster, or not? If not, why not? Did you ever contact and interview or attempt to contact John W. Rice? The El Paso newspaper named below, published his El Paso home address in a November, 1961 edition. His wife was listed as residing there in 1993: 3208 Titanic Av, El Paso, Texas 79904-0801 Did you research Rice's November 22, 1963 SS investigation assignment, initial described JFK shooter, Jack W Martin? Do you think the directive to Rice to make "discreet inquiries" in Goldonna, LA about Martin, just an hour after JFK was shot, accompanied by a description from the Dallas SS office of Martin as the suspected shooter, was singularly odd enough to merit an intensive investigation of both John W. Rice and Jack W. Martin? What efforts have you made to pursue investigations of the backgrounds of either of them? Forgive me Vince, if you think I am out of line posting this, but isn't it reasonable for me to observe that, when it comes to the questions Bill Kelly asked on your other thread (re-posted above), that when it comes to the background of John W. Rice, your work has left a obvious hole in the narrative, big enough to drive a truck through? http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=173618Jack Wilburn Martin 1928 7 Oct Birth West Monroe, Ouachita, Louisiana USA Death Certificate d. 2 Apr 2002 Minneapolis, Hennepin, Minnesota File #:2002-MN-014126 Military AS US Navy WW II Start date 07 Nov 1945 end date 06 Oct 1947 I now have current names of both of John Rice's daughters, and contact info of one of them. I expect you have an interest in filling in this prominent gap in your comprehensive SS research. I offer you the opportunity to make contact with Rice's daughter because I have read about your success in approaching and obtaining interviews from John Rice's colleagues. Who better than you to take the opportunity to make new inquiries of Rice's surviving family? Please send me a PM if you are interested. Bill's post: The most important man in the Secret Service on November 22, 1963 was the Special Agent in Charge of the New Orleans office John W. Rice, who was never questioned about what his role was in the investigation of the assassination and may still be alive. Any information about him at all would be appreciated, but we've gone over every other Secret Agent a hundred times and we know nothing about the only one who really matters - John W. Rice. Where was he from? Where did he go to school? How did he get into the Secret Service? How did he get such an important position as SAIC of NO while so young? Who was the John W. Martin he was sent to investigate at 1 pm on 11/22/63? Why was John W. Rice, SAIC of the NO SS office in the office of the Special Investigations office of the US AFB at Schrieveport, La. when the assassination took place? What became of the official records of Adele Edisen's telephone contacts with him before the assassination and the interview records after the assassination? Was John W. Rice, SAIC of NO with the FBI liason with the SS Orrin Bartlett interviewing Adele Edisen in New Orleans at the time Ruby killed Oswald and what became of those records? Did Rice and Bartlett fly in a private plane from New Orleans to Dallas that afternoon, and if so, what became of those records? Since John W. Rice, SAIC NO SS was responsible for all aspects of the Secret Service investigations in New Orleans, why wasn't he questioned by the WC, HSCA or ARRB, and what became of him? Is he still alive? Why is no one else interested in locating him and interviewing him, or finding out where he came from and what happened to him? Thanks to anyone else who is interested in this person and for trying to answer any of these questions, Bill Kelly bkjfk3@yahoo.com http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/ My reply to Bill: (Info since I posted at the following link convinces me the SSI info on Rice is not for "our" John W. Rice) http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=173812 Bill Kelly, I hope the article below answers some of your questions. I'll post an update confirming if Vince contacts me. El Paso Herald-Post (El Paso, Texas) > 1954 > December > 15 Edited October 29, 2009 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter McGuire Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) OK, I take it all back. Vince Palamara is a saint. But since he is siding with Bugliosi, is Vince calling us a bunch of lunatics for questioning the official version of the assassination? He certainly never stated or implied any such thing on this forum, or anywhere else that I know of. I think Vince's practice is to leave name-calling to the likes of you. You seem to be quite skilled in that department. Hey, I don't think Vince called us anything. But he did call Lee Harvey Oswald the sole assassin of President Kennedy and a Pipsqueak, a point I must take issue with. If LHO killed JFK all by himself without any assistance then how come he's not the world's greatest assassin? That's what I want to know. Why is he a Pipsqueak rather than a great assassin? Which way is it Vince? And Vince's new Mentor VB, he has the same problem, as one the one hand he says the assassin did it all by himself, and on the other hand, he was such a jerk nobody would have had him as part of a conspiracy, a clear contradiction, except in their minds. BK Once again, well put Mr. Kelly. Which is it folks? If you believe Oswald got in some great shots with that vintage rifle (even at the time), then he has got to be characterized as a great assassin. Murderer, for sure, but he should be called a great assassin. And despair should rain down on him for killing our beloved President. Do the likes of the Jackal and other notorious assassins get the same treatment? Why call this successful assassin a loser? Furthermore, he nearly got a way with it. He got out of the building and was on the loose for a great deal of time. Surely, since this was premeditated murder, he had an escape plan. But not this guy, he kills the president and zig zags around town for awhile and then traps himself in a movie theatre. Now that’s where he gets dumb. ( or he was told to go there) Bill and Peter have pointed out some [of the many] contraditions and unexplainable aspects of all Oswald-did-it-alone scenarios. In fact, only using tunnel-vision, rose-colored glasses or secret incantations can one conclude Oswald did it alone [or at all] when one takes a broad look at his life, defection [false], return, playing both the left and right; friends and associates; intelligence interest in him; cover-up and mysterious deaths; baby-sitters and persons positioning and setting-up LHO; pattern with other assassinations; etc.....one could go on to list several hundreds of others, but I'm sure most here know them all too well. The early critics had it correct [read Praise From A Future Generation], but we've been dueling with the hidden 'devil' of psyops and cover-up ever since. There is also the factor that some just can't bring themselves to believe that an internal coup can take place in America and will search for those tiny shreds that allow that denial to seem to have some basis. It has none other than the created 'legend' of Oswald. It seems people are pretty clear on Oswald NOT being a Lone Assassin or even a knowing participant in the plan to kill JFK. But Vince Palamara, the alleged hero who, for some reason, "sincerely" believes that LHO killed JFK, says absolutely nothing about why or how Bugliosi's book "showed him the light." But since Vince P is obviously so "sincere" in his newfound belief, perish the thought that anyone would say, "I smell a rat." I believe that Mr. Palamara’s great and accurate research into the Secret Service involvement has put pressure on him to back off on this case. When you become a public figure that has accused the United States Secret Service (of 1963) in the involvement of the murder of the sitting president of the United States, you are surely going to get some heat. The United States Secret Service ( of 1963) is the smoking gun in the Coup D Etat of 1963 ( the assassination of JFK) , and clearly shows ( because of their inaction in Dealy) that they were ordered to "Stand Down" and allow JFK to be murdered. Edited October 29, 2009 by Peter McGuire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted October 29, 2009 Share Posted October 29, 2009 Vince Palamara,I am a newbie "nobody" in the CT community, and at this forum. Nevertheless, I have the curiousity, the time, some patience/perseverance, and I've been told, decent search skills. On your new thread, I replied to questions about John W. Rice posted by Bill Kelly. I found the information I posted there below Bill's post, and what I am posting here, in less than four hours of searching, entirely online, aided by google, google news archive search, and from the resources provided to ancestry.com subscribers. You seem to have served up almost nothing on John W. Rice, except the info that he attended SS school in 1954. I am wondering why your coverage of such a seemingly central, and pivotal figure such as John Rice, has been so scant. Do you agree with Bill Kelly and others in assassination research that John W. Rice is one of the most important persons of interest from the November 1963, Secret Service roster, or not? If not, why not? Did you ever contact and interview or attempt to contact John W. Rice? The El Paso newspaper named below, published his El Paso home address in a November, 1961 edition. His wife was listed as residing there in 1993: 3208 Titanic Av, El Paso, Texas 79904-0801 Did you research Rice's November 22, 1963 SS investigation assignment, initial described JFK shooter, Jack W Martin? Do you think the directive to Rice to make "discreet inquiries" in Goldonna, LA about Martin, just an hour after JFK was shot, accompanied by a description from the Dallas SS office of Martin as the suspected shooter, was singularly odd enough to merit an intensive investigation of both John W. Rice and Jack W. Martin? What efforts have you made to pursue investigations of the backgrounds of either of them? Forgive me Vince, if you think I am out of line posting this, but isn't it reasonable for me to observe that, when it comes to the questions Bill Kelly asked on your other thread (re-posted above), that when it comes to the background of John W. Rice, your work has left a obvious hole in the narrative, big enough to drive a truck through? http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=173618Jack Wilburn Martin 1928 7 Oct Birth West Monroe, Ouachita, Louisiana USA Death Certificate d. 2 Apr 2002 Minneapolis, Hennepin, Minnesota File #:2002-MN-014126 Military AS US Navy WW II Start date 07 Nov 1945 end date 06 Oct 1947 I now have current names of both of John Rice's daughters, and contact info of one of them. I expect you have an interest in filling in this prominent gap in your comprehensive SS research. I offer you the opportunity to make contact with Rice's daughter because I have read about your success in approaching and obtaining interviews from John Rice's colleagues. Who better than you to take the opportunity to make new inquiries of Rice's surviving family? Please send me a PM if you are interested. Bill's post: The most important man in the Secret Service on November 22, 1963 was the Special Agent in Charge of the New Orleans office John W. Rice, who was never questioned about what his role was in the investigation of the assassination and may still be alive. Any information about him at all would be appreciated, but we've gone over every other Secret Agent a hundred times and we know nothing about the only one who really matters - John W. Rice. Where was he from? Where did he go to school? How did he get into the Secret Service? How did he get such an important position as SAIC of NO while so young? Who was the John W. Martin he was sent to investigate at 1 pm on 11/22/63? Why was John W. Rice, SAIC of the NO SS office in the office of the Special Investigations office of the US AFB at Schrieveport, La. when the assassination took place? What became of the official records of Adele Edisen's telephone contacts with him before the assassination and the interview records after the assassination? Was John W. Rice, SAIC of NO with the FBI liason with the SS Orrin Bartlett interviewing Adele Edisen in New Orleans at the time Ruby killed Oswald and what became of those records? Did Rice and Bartlett fly in a private plane from New Orleans to Dallas that afternoon, and if so, what became of those records? Since John W. Rice, SAIC NO SS was responsible for all aspects of the Secret Service investigations in New Orleans, why wasn't he questioned by the WC, HSCA or ARRB, and what became of him? Is he still alive? Why is no one else interested in locating him and interviewing him, or finding out where he came from and what happened to him? Thanks to anyone else who is interested in this person and for trying to answer any of these questions, Bill Kelly bkjfk3@yahoo.com http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/ My reply to Bill: (Info since I posted at the following link convinces me the SSI info on Rice is not for "our" John W. Rice) http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=173812 Bill Kelly, I hope the article below answers some of your questions. I'll post an update confirming if Vince contacts me. El Paso Herald-Post (El Paso, Texas) > 1954 > December > 15 Thanks for that Tom, and all you do. I'll talk to Rice's daughter's if Vince won't. Maybe they have some official papers he left behind or stories he told. We will, eventually answer all the important questions, it's just a shame we didn't do it ten or twenty years ago when most were still alive. And did Vince ever answer my question as to why the lone assassin is a Pipsqueak and not the world's greatest assassin? BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted October 30, 2009 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Bill, Probably not going to get a request for the Rice family contact info from Vince, so I will probably soon take you up on your offer. What do you make of Vince's scant references (interest ?) to John W. Rice? I'll pass along an observation to illustrate how more doors may open to expand upon questions you have asked, now that we begin to have some background info on John W. Rice. In your the Jack W. Martin thread, you wondered what circumstances brought Rice to Barksdale AFB near Shreveport, LA on that fateful November friday. I came upon a source yesterday that says November 22 was a special date in the Rice family. The information I have is that November 22 was Rice's wife's D.O.B. I submit that no husband would voluntarily schedule a 300 mile, one way business day trip on a friday that happens to be his wife's birthday. I-49 did not exist back in 1963 and I don't know that the longer, alternate route from New Orleans to Shreveport in I-55 was completed, either: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&sour...ved=0CA0Q8gEwAA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_49#History http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=+I-...&lnav=hist2 HALF ROUTE TO NEW ORLEANS NOW FREEWAY Pay-Per-View - Chicago Tribune - ProQuest Archiver - Feb 27, 1964 At the Louisiana line, a pleas- ant young lady in an official tourist information center ad- vised us to take the 24 mile Lake Pontchartrain causeway [toll ... My last observation for now is that several choices of phone records should prove or at least support Adele Edisen's amazing story. The sources are the FBI headquarters, the Secret Service New Orleans office records, and the phone records of incoming calls to 4907 Magazine St., outgoing calls from Edisen's telephone if she made any of her calls from her home or office phone to Magazine St. in 1963, and the phone records of Jose Rivera. Also, there should have been a flight record for Rice's November 24 flight from New Orleans to Dallas described by Adele Edison. Don't you think the WC collected records of incoming calls to 4907 Magazine St. ....Oswald's landlords telephone, and that John W. Rice's office or the FBI collected and had possession of those records? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 El Paso Herald-Post (El Paso, Texas) > 1961 > June > 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blair Dobson Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 (edited) Hi, Ray:Boy, if it were only that easy LOL. It was not one, two, or 14 things that swayed me...it was the totality (quality and quantity) of Bugliosi's book (text/ source notes...I checked 'em all). If we held every conspiracy book to the same rigid standard some are applying to Bugliosi's book, I wonder how many would hold up. Since 1995, I have offered my "caveat" that "Oswald or no Oswald", my work holds up...the same exact way people find value in lone-nutter Trask's work, I know they feel the same way about my work. Although more forcefully stated recently, the groundwork for my 'turnaround' was there 13 years ago...and, once again, I am not entirely a lone-nutter (there were conspiracies and threats to JFK...it's just that Oswald beat them to the punch) Vince But, again, I read the book, I came, I saw, and I was conquered. Hi Vince: A number of people have observed that, in endorsing Bugliosi's (i.e. the Warren Commission's) theory, you made no comment on what it was precisely in Bugliosi's book that influenced your opinion. Bugliosi produced no new evidence that I can think of, and in fact he makes a complete fool of himself on the NAA/bullet lead issue, so inquiring minds are wondering if you could identify one or two key issues where you felt that Bugliosi has, after 45 years of confusion, clinched the case. if only it were easy to answer a simple question. "inquiring minds are wondering if you could identify one or two key issues where you felt that Bugliosi has, after 45 years of confusion, clinched the case." since you seem unable to answer this, let me make supposition: you can't. that's because there is nothing compelling in Bugliosi's book unless it's a clearance tag . your diffuse "answer" makes you look more the "buffoon" than "scholarly researcher". "Oh it was the wind in my hair, the smell of the hotdogs at the state fair, the way it was researched, the starch in my shorts..." I don't know you Vince but i have come across your stuff over the years, be that as it may, this Bugliosi prattle you are spouting is useless save to sell a few more books or gain more attention for yourself. IMHO Bugliosi is a man who has capitalized on the misfortune of others his entire career and at best uses too many assistants and copy editors if not outright ghostwriters to even qualify as a "writer" of anything other than sensationalized docudrama... a low life bottom feeder..or better stated, a lawyer. by aligning yourself with this ambulance chaser, you make yourself look foolish as well. but please feel free to post your ten page essay on what was so great about Bugliosis book.. I look forward to it... Edited October 31, 2009 by Blair Dobson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Hagerman Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 (edited) I bought RH the day it came out and read it in record time I think Bugliosi has a way with words, that is because he has been a lawyer for so long and has spent all that time trying to convince people of things I must admit I was under his spell until I hit the section about David Lifton (and right before that when he talks about other conspiracy authors) and it pissed me off Here he was talking about a researcher that I hold in the highest regard like he should be in the mental ward I didn't even feel like finishing the book after that, but I did and when I was done it cemented my beliefs in a conspiracy ten fold I'm glad I read RH, all Bugliosi could really do was call the real researchers names and make fun of every theory that was not Oswald acting alone I have read your online book Vince and I was stumped just like everyone else when I heard you jumped over to the other side I hope you have fun with the likes of David Von Pain (in the XXX) and other LNers. Edited November 2, 2009 by Kathy Beckett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now