Naive And Gullible In The Extreme: Bugliosi's Incomplete Work
lazu...@webtv.net
complete and answers every conspracy theory etc. Now, I one day looked
thru the book, I don't have any desire to feel nauseous or get ulcers,
so I'm probably not gonna do it again, even out of curiosity's sake. 1.
No mention of Dr. Mantik's groundbreaking work on the X-Rays
demolishing the SBT( the most qualified individual ever to look at
X-Rays, & we know how much lone nutters worship credentials!
2. When tests were conducted by Dr. Joseph Dolce for The Warren
Commisssion using goat cadavers the MC bullets would invariably
mushroom...naturally this was suppressed. I understand Dolce is
footnoted and this is not in the main text. And doesn't it make you
wonder how Lattimer can go on about shooting MC Bullets that are
perfectly intact after being shot through several feet of ponderosa
pine, oh I get it-wood is not bone.
3. Many JFK Researchers have focused in on the paramilitary chief of
JM/Wave-David Morales as a prime suspect in the murder-you can read
about him in Talbot's Brothers-is Morales in the index of Bugliosi's
book? I really doubt it -he confessed to his Attorney and closest
lifelong friend.
4. The E. Howard Hunt confession is nowhere to be found in Bugliosi's
book. He could give his opinion in an interview, but since Hunt has a
long and sordid history with this case, and several of the people he has
mentioned are highly suspicious, and Bugliosi is so biased as to be
untrustworthy, yes I believe Hunt on his deathbed over Vince.
5. Billie Sol Estes- I don't know what he says about Estes, but remember
that Estes was the first person to mention Mac wallace and again there
is a long history of him and murders connected to LBJ's business
interests. Agriculture Dept. Official Henry Marshall was obviously
murdered, nobody commits suicide shooting themselves 5 times with a bolt
action rifle- who else but LBJ could have changed the cause of death?...
David Von Pein
Every item mentioned by Laz above is fully covered by Bugliosi in
RH...except, of course, for the Hunt "confession", because that
occurred after the book went into the printing stage. But, for some
stupid reason, Laz-Kook thinks it should be in the book too. Go figure
kooks.
And the next inane statement by the anti-VB crowd is?........
~Awaiting anxiously~
mome...@gmail.com
Does this mean that you would invest your hard earned dollars in one
of Billie Sol's "investments"?
And I was thinking Henry Marshall was shot more than 5 times.
Bill Clarke
Ben Holmes
lazu...@webtv.net says...
My favorite is where he shows that he's familiar with the '16 Smoking Guns', yet
refuses to discuss or refute them.
Rather cowardly, IMO.
eca...@tx.rr.com
> In article <26560-468C1424-...@storefull-3235.bay.webtv.net>,
> lazuli...@webtv.net says...
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ben, what do you hear from JWH?
It appears your fake "author" dropped
out of sight when you got popped for
10 outright lies in a row..
MR ;~D
lazu...@webtv.net
is his explanation for why the autopsists, AGAINST SOP, DID NOT PROBE
THE THROAT WOUND NOR DISSECT OUT THE THYROID GLAND? Dutifully, they did
remove other organs, even the lowly spleen, and weigh them. Did the
spleen underlay a wound? The thyroid did, but it was avoided like
poison.
What does he say about Dr. Finck's sworn testimony to the effect that
the autopsists' military superiors forbade the above procedure? I don't
expect he will acknowledge the obvious cover-up at autopsy, but I'd be
interested to hear how he dances around this troublesome
aspect.-----Conspiratorally yours, Old Laz
cdddraftsman
>
>
>
> > Looks like and sounds like .....it must be a quacking duck ! Old
> > Laz quacks again with worm eaten conspiranoid indigestion !
> > I love it when after someone dies , conspiranoids get all their
> > flustery , hussley , puckery quaetions all in a panty's knott and
> > imply that it was hidden hands that messed up the autopsy and
> > not RFK hoping to stem any mention of a peculiar bunch of ailments
> > that JFK had that would of prevented him from becoming president
> > had the public known ? But were wise to that old trick by now ......
> > Too bad Laz isn't .....He keeps repeating it hoping someone will
> > fall for the big lie ! Na na na na na na ! NAYET ! Had to speak to him
> > in his native tongue ! Heheheheheh !
tomnln
Did Bugliosi say that witnesses who saw Secret Service Agents behind the
fence were "Mistaken"?
Did Bugliosi say that witensses who saw Secret Service Agents behind the
TSBD were "Mistaken"?
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1183586411.4...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
They were all "in" on a covert, evil Govt. "plot"??? Could that be the
answer you require? If not, I'm forced to say .... Beats the hell out
of me.
>>> "They did remove other organs, even the lowly spleen, and weigh them." <<<
But not the brain, remember. Paul O'Connor says the whole brain (save
a few "bits") was blasted out of JFK's head prior to autopsy.
>>> "Did the spleen underlay a wound? The thyroid did, but it was avoided like poison." <<<
LOL.
How would they know if they never dissected it?
That's a howl. LOL.
>>> "What does he {V. Bugliosi, Esq.} say about Dr. Finck's sworn testimony to the effect that the autopsists' military superiors forbade the above procedure?" <<<
Why can't you get the book and look for your own damn self, Mr. Lazy-
Kook?
Anyway, I think Vince says something to the effect that all 3 autopsy
doctors were lying, rotten scumbags who were ALL on a mission to
suppress the real truth from the American people.
Is that what you want to hear?
Actually, the further "probing" of the neck wound (after an initial
probing failed to lead to a definitive bullet path through the body)
was frowned upon by the Kennedy family.*
* = That's the normal thing to say in this uncomfortable situation re.
the autopsy, isn't it? I.E.: The Kennedy family didn't want a full
autopsy; they didn't want the President mutilated any more than
possible; they wanted the autopsy to proceed very quickly, etc.
Well, like it or not, that's the truth.
So, piss on that explanation if you want to. But, regardless of any
further "probing" of the neck wound, the SBT is still an ironclad
fact, based on many, many different factors (including the LACK OF
EVIDENCE THAT WOULD PROVE IT WRONG).
Live with that fact, or go to hell. Your choice.
lazu...@webtv.net
you smoking? -the majority of people have always rejected it, no
replication has ever duplicated it, including the Discover channel,
which disproved this.. Even Fuhrman says it's impossible...How the hell
does a bullet go into Connally's leg deep leaving fragments near the
bone, make a very small hole ..then miraculously pops out where no one
in the ER sees it, and then presto pops up intact on a stretcher that
may have well been a black kid's that was brought in...That's ironclad?.
Along with the trajectory, and Nurse Audrey Bell holding in her hands
more fragments that could have come from ce 399.
David Von Pein
Yes...it is. Because ANY other theory that could possibly replace it
pales by comparison and dredges up FAR more unexplainables and
disappearing lead than does the SBT. And why anyone would accept those
type of alternatives when they COULD just accept the obvious truth of
the SBT, gives me pause to ~shrug~ incessantly.
(And yet *I'm* the "moron". Classic irony.)
>>> "What the hell are you smoking?" <<<
The weed of truth (and CS&L). What does your anti-SBT weed contain?
>>> "The majority of people have always rejected it..." <<<
Except, of course, for the two major Govt. inquiries....who put a
stamp of approval on the wholly-correct SBT.
What are you smoking again?
>>> "No replication has ever duplicated it, including the Discovery channel, which disproved this." <<<
As if it could ever be "duplicated" to a CT-Kook's satisfaction.
That'll never happen.
But the Discovery Channel re-creation did a remarkable job at
verifying the general path of CE399. But, being a kook, you cannot see
the obvious.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2
>>> "Even Fuhrman says it's impossible..." <<<
So? His theory is pure conjecture. Like all anti-SBT theories. It
relies on a crazy veering bullet that somehow misses Connally and
vanishes. Plus: it relies on a nicely-tangential strike to JBC's back
via a SECOND bullet. Amazing SBT-like coincidences all around.
But rather that accept the obvious (i.e., the SBT is correct)...Mr.
Fuhrman wanted to be "different", but wants to remain in the LN camp
(which is good; don't get me wrong)...so he invented his theory that
has the JFK bullet suddenly tipping upself upwards to (somehow) miss
Connally and then hits the chrome (another oddball theory for an LNer,
since that limits his possibilities for the head-shot fragments limo
damage; very odd indeed).
>>> "How the hell does a bullet go into Connally's leg deep leaving fragments near the bone, make a very small hole..." <<<
So, what do you think caused that wound? A slingshot? A spitwad? A
bazooka?
Even WITHOUT the SBT, the wound in JBC's leg is STILL THERE...and
without a bullet lying in it! Period.
So, you are arguing something that cannot be argued even by
CTers...unless you believe the shallow thigh wound suffered by JBC is
"fake" in some way. (I've never heard that one before.)
>>> "Along with the trajectory, and Nurse Audrey Bell holding in her hands more fragments that could have come from ce 399." <<<
Bullshit. She never measured any fragments. The best source for the
size of the JBC fragments is Charles Gregory. The following passages
come from my full-length review of "Reclaiming History"....
"In support of his position, which I concur with, that the bullet
fragments removed from Connally's wrist did not weigh more than the
2.4 grains lost from the stretcher bullet {CE399}, Gerald Posner
writes in "Case Closed" that Dr. Charles Gregory testified before the
Warren Commission that the bullet fragments he removed from Connally's
wrist were "flakes of metal" weighing "something less than the weight
of a postage stamp."
"But Dr. Gregory was not referring to the bullet fragments he removed
from Connally's wrist, which definitely were not flakes of metal, but
to the bullet fragments left in Connally's wrist, which were never
removed yet show up on X-rays." -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 441 of
Endnotes
DVP: I'm very nearly certain that Mr. Bugliosi is incorrect re. the
above statement. Because when we look at Dr. Gregory's WC
testimony....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/gregory1.htm
....there is no question at all that when Gregory said this to WC
counsel Arlen Specter --- "I would estimate that they {the metal
fragments} would be weighed in micrograms, which is {a} very small
amount of weight. .... It is the kind of weighing that requires a
micro-adjustable scale, which means that it is something less than the
weight of a postage stamp" --- Gregory was specifically referring to
the fragments which are visible on two PRE-operative X-rays taken of
Governor Connally's wrist (CE690 and CE691).
Which means that Gregory was referring to ALL of the metal fragments
(or "flakes") that were in Connally's wrist BEFORE Gregory ever
operated on the Governor to retrieve any bullet fragments.
Via comparison, when looking at CE692 and CE693 (which are POST-
operative wrist X-rays which were taken after Connally was operated
on), it can easily be determined that Exhibits 692 and 693 depict
FEWER fragments within the X-ray than are shown in 690 and 691.
It's possible that Dr. Gregory misspoke when he said that ALL of the
fragments visible in Exhibits 690 and 691 represented only "flakes of
metal", which is positively what he said, and, as I mentioned, he was
definitely referring to the PRE-operative wrist X-rays, even though
Gregory said that he, himself, removed "two or three" of the largest
fragments from Connally's wrist, and had a chance to determine at that
time whether the term "flakes of metal" really applied to those
removed fragments.
In any event, that is what the official Warren Commission record
reveals with respect Dr. Gregory's testimony in 1964 when he was
looking directly at CE690 and CE691.
And to my (layperson's) eyes, the visible hunks of metal that can be
seen in 690 and 691 certainly don't look very big at all. Perhaps the
word "flakes" would, indeed, describe them fairly well (at least when
looking at the X-rays only). .....
CE690:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0187a.htm
CE691:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0187b.htm
Later in Gregory's WC testimony -- after Arlen Specter asked,
"Approximately how large were those fragments {that were removed from
Connally's wrist}, Dr. Gregory?" -- we find these words being spoken
by Gregory:
"Rather thin...their greatest dimension would probably not exceed one-
eighth of an inch. They were very small."
Another semi-important point to all of this talk about the size of
Governor Connally's wrist fragments (which is a point I don't think
Mr. Bugliosi mentions anywhere in his book) refers to a portion of Dr.
Gregory's testimony where he, in effect, is saying that ALL of the
fragments that were seen in Connally's wrist (INCLUDING THE TWO OR
THREE FRAGMENTS THAT WERE REMOVED FROM THE GOVERNOR'S WRIST) were
located during surgery "by chance", and ALL of these metal fragments
could have been left inside Connally's body without causing the
Governor further physical problems in the future.
Here is exactly what Dr. Gregory said to the Warren Commission
regarding this matter:
"We know from experience that small flakes of metal of this kind do
not ordinarily produce difficulty in the future, but that the
extensive dissection required to find them may produce...consequences
and so we choose to leave them inside unless we chance upon them. And
on this occasion, those bits of metal recovered were simply found by
chance in the course of removing necrotized material {i.e., dead
bodily tissue}."
aeffects
> >>> "The SBT is not an ironclad fact..." <<<
>
> Yes...it is. Because ANY other theory that could possibly replace it
> pales by comparison and dredges up FAR more unexplainables and
> disappearing lead than does the SBT. And why anyone would accept those
> type of alternatives when they COULD just accept the obvious truth of
> the SBT, gives me pause to ~shrug~ incessantly.
>
>
justm...@gmail.com
You should know Healy...you suffer from SBT yourself. (Single brain-
cell theory) Only the theory has been debunked, researchers now know
its just a slimey growth between your ears incapable of any thought.
It was put there to keep your head from caving in.
lazu...@webtv.net
Bethesda-neither believe the SBT, along with O'Conner, Custer, Jenkins,
& Humes and Finck didn't buy it either at the Warren Commission
hearings...till they got religion by way of Specter's immaculate
conception.
lazu...@webtv.net
be a full-fledged theory at all. Therefore, it is only a hypothesis and
does not rise to the level of a theory, which requires undisputed facts
to support it.---Old Laz theorizes
aeffects
wrote:
fuck off snookum's....! In the old days called: into the re "TARD"
pit....
John McAdams
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.58.48.78
Which leads back to:
cpe-24-58-48-78.twcny.res.rr.com
If anybody can point to a *real* justme1952 post, it will look
different.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
bigdog
VB kicked CT ass big time which is why the CTs have gotten their
shorts in a wad.
Having won the battle for current public opinion, they are losing the
battle for the historical verdict of the JFK assassination. That
verdict will be that Oswald did it, ALONE. 43+ years of CT BS isn't
going to change that which is what really pisses them off. They know
that 100 years from now the WCR, RH, and CC will be the documents most
scholars look to for answers to the JFK assassination. That is because
these volumes are well researched, logical, and provide a plausible
conclusion. Bugliosi and Posner will be quoted long after we are dead
and gone while the likes of Lane, Lifton, Groden, and Marrs and a host
of others are left on the historical scrap heap.
I can imagine a discussion between Captain Kirk and Spock on this
subject.
Kirk: What was all this nonsense I've read about a conspiracy to
assassinate JFK.
Spock: I don't know, Captain. It seems totally illogical to me.
aeffects
So, how is it living in a wet dream? LMFAO!
<snip the moron raving>
Ben Holmes
says...
Hmmm... I seem to recall that you mentioned the Lincoln assassination...
Yet you were too gutless to respond when it was pointed out that your facts are
in error...
Perhaps I'll repost that one. :)