New Book By Vincent Bugliosi -- "Divinity Of Doubt" (April 2011)
David Von Pein
FYI---
"Reclaiming History" author Vincent Bugliosi will have a new 256-page
book on religion coming out on April 12, 2011, entitled "DIVINITY OF
DOUBT: THE GOD QUESTION" (to be published by Vanguard Press).
Pre-release blurb:
"In his most controversial book yet, bestselling author Vincent
Bugliosi turns his critical eye on both religious believers and the
atheists who reflexively oppose them. Here, the fearless attorney who
most memorably prosecuted Charles Manson, indicts both camps, calling
them out for the intellectual shortcuts each takes to arrive at their
convenient conclusions.
"In the process, he argues lucidly and persuasively why
agnosticism--and a healthy skepticism toward certainty of all kinds--
is the most responsible position to take with regard to such eternal
questions as the existence of God.
"With his trademark withering wit and humor, Bugliosi skewers
such popularizers of atheism as Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and
Richard Dawkins, while also examining such developments as the decline
of belief in evolution and the disturbing vengefulness of God as
depicted in the Old Testament.
"He also questions the very underpinnings of religious faith--
that an all-powerful and all-knowing creator would have so badly
miscalculated the fruits of human free will, leaving human beings to
persecute and murder their fellow human beings.
"In his trademark style--a combination of incisive logic and
devastating wit--Vincent Bugliosi's latest book sets a new course amid
the explosion of bestselling books on religion, pro and con--a middle
path that urges us to recognize the limits of what we know, and what
we cannot know about the ineffable mysteries of existence."
http://Amazon.com/dp/1593156294
------------------------------------------
http://Vincent-Bugliosi.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------
lazu...@webtv.net
worships the Warren Report?...Laz
bigdog
> Let's get this straight Bugliosi does not believe in God, yet he
> worships the Warren Report?...Laz
The Warren Report is based in fact.
aeffects
I think Vin is FINALLY facing his own mortality..... way to go Nutter
-- there's hope for you yet!
aeffects
hang in there troll.... your wet-dream will arrive someday, say, 50
years from now..... ROTFLMFAO!
lazu...@webtv.net
long time ago...but young, old, conservative, liberal, immigrant all
agree by and large.. it doesn't fly...laz
Baron Wrangle
> Let's get this straight Bugliosi does not believe in God, yet he
> worships the Warren Report?...Laz
Laz(arus):
That's about it. You can't say he didn't give us warning:
"When it comes to theology, I am too confused to be anything but an
agnostic. But if there is a God, as there may very well be, the deist
philosophy, which holds that after creating the universe, God bailed
out, indifferent to that which he created, would seem to do less
violence to the accepted principles of logic and common sense."
Vincent Bugliosi, "Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O.J. Simpson Got
Away with Murder" (New York: W.W. Norton, 1996), p. 252.
Watch God strike back with a revelation that will undermine
"Reclaiming History" and lead HBO to sell the miniseries to
MyNetworkTV.
BW
That which is crooked cannot be made straight, and that which is
wanting cannot be numbered.
Ecclestiastes
bigdog
Truth doesn't run for election. It is what it is whether anybody
believes it or not.
Ben Holmes
lazu...@webtv.net says...
>
>Let's get this straight Bugliosi does not believe in God, yet he
>worships the Warren Report?...Laz
Well, I guess you have to have faith in something!
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
Gil Jesus
> The Warren Report is based in fact.
ROFLMAO...SURE IT IS !!!
# 1 ---ON THE BULLETS RECOVERED FROM OFFICER TIPPIT'S BODY COMING FROM
OSWALD'S REVOLVER:
the testimony said:
Representative BOGGS. You cannot establish the fact that the bullets
were fired in that gun?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.
( 3 H 476 )
Mr. RHYNE. And with respect to the bullets that were found in the body
of Officer Tippit, you testified that you could not be positive that
they were fired by this weapon, Exhibit 143.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I could not identify those bullets as having been
fired from that gun.
( 3 H 482 )
But the WC Report said:
"Oswald killed Dallas Patrolman J. D. Tippit approximately 45 minutes
after the assassination".
( Report Chapter 1, Summaries and Conclusions, pg. 20, item 5 )
--------------------------------------
ON THE BULLET RECOVERED FROM GENERAL WALKER'S HOME COMING FROM
OSWALD'S RIFLE:
the testimony said:
MR NICHOL. ...so far as to say to the exclusion of all other guns.
This I could not do. ( 3 H 503 )
But the WC Report said:
"Oswald had attempted to kill Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker ........"
( ibid., item 4G)
--------------------------------------
ON LIMB AND PUBIC HAIRS FOUND ON THE BLANKET COMING FROM LEE HARVEY
OSWALD:
the testimony said:
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Stombaugh, are you able to say that the limb
hairs and pubic hairs which you found in the blanket .....came from
Oswald to the exclusion of any other individual?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I couldn't say that. I could not say that these
hairs came from Oswald. I could not say they definitely came from him
to the exclusion of all other Caucasian persons in the world.
( 4 H 69 )
But the WC Report said:
"Several of the limb and pubic hairs matched samples of Oswald's limb
and pubic hairs obtained by the Dallas Police...."
( Report, Appendix X, "Hairs and Fibers", pg 590 )
------------------------------------
ON FIBERS FOUND ON THE BUTT PLATE OF THE RIFLE COMING FROM OSWALD'S
SHIRT:
The testimony said:
MR STROMBAUGH. We cannot say, "Yes, these fibers came from this shirt
to the exclusion of all other shirts."
( 4 H 88 )
But the WC Report said:
"The Commission was able to conclude......that the fibers most
probably came from Oswald's shirt".
( Report, Chapter IV, "The assassin-ownership and possession of the
assassination weapon", pg. 125 )
Yeah, that's some basis of fact you got there.
Humorous Regards,
Gil Jesus
USA
mucher1
Clueless and proud of it...tsk tsk. Why do you keep recycling garbage
like that, Gilly? Who do you think you are? Ben Holmes???
curtjester1
Seems to actually fit, since he had to sell his soul to the devil to
write 'Reclaiming'. Maybe with him riding the Serpent's back, he will
take over Madeleine Murray O'Hare's spot as the new media God-
HateMonger.
CJ
aeffects
hey Queen.... you have a problem with the truth... stick around
shithead! We'll lead you out of the darkness! And THAT is great manna
for your pathetic soul!
David Von Pein
PETER FOKES SAID:
>>> "David, I know you are a big fan of Leave It To Beaver. I suspect when it comes to the JFK assassination and other things, you would advise all of us to .... Leave It To Bugliosi. :-)" <<<
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, Peter, I hate to nitpick your humorous analogy, but you've
actually got it backwards. Because if I were really inclined to "Leave
It To Bugliosi", I would, in effect, be saying "Leave It To Bugliosi
[to screw everything up and to get into all kinds of trouble and
precarious predicaments]".
The TV show title "Leave It To Beaver" isn't meant as a praiseworthy
compliment. It's meant as a subtle dig at the person who is always
getting himself into hot water (The Beaver).
If you want to utilize the "LITB" analogy accurately, I'd say it would
be best to use it in this manner:
"Leave It To The Conspiracy Theorists [to get everything wrong
regarding the murders of JFK and J.D. Tippit]".
Yes....that's much more appropriate and accurate. ~grin~
And, yes, "LITB" is, indeed, one of my favorite old-time TV shows:
http://Leave-It-To-Beaver-On-DVD.blogspot.com
Thanks, and Godspeed. :-)
BTW, June Cleaver (played by Barbara Billingsley, who recently passed
away) really did say this to husband Ward on "LITB":
"Ward, don't you think you were a little hard on The Beaver last
night?"
DVP
Gil Jesus
>
> Clueless and proud of it...tsk tsk. Why do you keep recycling garbage
I'm just quoting YOUR evidence....comparing the testimony with the
conclusions of the Report....now you're calling it garbage ?
Puzzled Regards
Gil Jesus
USA
Gil Jesus
Boy, I can't wait for your debate !!!!
ROFLMAO
Baron Wrangle
This is a shameless ploy to get American families to throw away their
bibles and make room for "Reclaiming History." Did you know that
"Reclaiming History" and the Jerusalem Bible have the same
dimensions? Coincidence? I don't think so!
BW
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
>
>On Nov 15, 4:18=A0pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> The Warren Report is based in fact.
>
>Boy, I can't wait for your debate !!!!
>
>ROFLMAO
Of course it's "based on fact". JFK was murdered on 11/22/63. That's certainly a
"fact".
LOL!!
David Von Pein
>>> "This is a shameless ploy to get American families to throw away their bibles and make room for "Reclaiming History."" <<<
LOL.
Good one. I like that one. :)
Additional LOL.
Ben Holmes
Gil Jesus says...
Indeed, it's great stuff! I'll have to add it to my list of evidence related
questions...
Trolls simply cannot defend the WCR - at the evidential level.
mucher1
> In article <5405b3cc-a95a-41a7-b088-9093fa0af...@d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> Gil Jesus says...
>
> >On Nov 16, 10:32=A0am, mucher1 <much...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Clueless and proud of it...tsk tsk. Why do you keep recycling garbage
> >> like that, Gilly? Who do you think you are? Ben Holmes???-
>
> >I'm just quoting YOUR evidence....comparing the testimony with the
> >conclusions of the Report....now you're calling it garbage ?
Your COMPARISONS are garbage, Gilly, not the evidence or the WC
conclusions. Let's have a look at your methology, shall we?
Here's item #2 from the list you posted previously:
------------------- Gilly ON -------------------
ON THE BULLET RECOVERED FROM GENERAL WALKER'S HOME COMING FROM
OSWALD'S RIFLE:
the testimony said:
MR NICHOL. ...so far as to say to the exclusion of all other guns.
This I could not do. ( 3 H 503 )
But the WC Report said:
"Oswald had attempted to kill Maj. Gen. Edwin A.
Walker ........" ( ibid., item 4G)
------------------- Gilly OFF -------------------
In other words, you don't think a firm conclusion can ever be made
unless every single piece of evidence conclusively points in the same
direction. Is that what you were taught at the police academy? It
sounds more like an accused criminal's wet dream. Do you have any idea
how dishonest it makes you seem? Even worse: if just ONE piece of
evidence turns out to be of limited value (e.g. the bullet that was
too mutilated to be positively matched to ANY weapon), then you feel
completely free to throw ALL the other evidence (e.g. Marina's
testimony) out the window! Amazing. Fortunately, the WC, unlike you,
had to take the totality of the evidence into account, and this is how
their conclusion regarding the Walker shooting was summarised:
"Conclusion.--Based on (1) the contents of the note which Oswald left
for his wife on April 10, 1963, (2) the photographs found among
Oswald's possessions, (3) the testimony of firearms identification
experts, and (4) the testimony of Marina Oswald, the Commission
has concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald attempted to take the life of
Maj. Gen. Edwin A. Walker (Resigned, U.S. Army) on April 10,
1963." (WCR 187)
As you can see, the conclusion is based on more than a single piece of
evidence, but since you like to pretend that only the bullet evidence
matters:
"Although the Commission recognizes that neither expert was able to
state that the bullet which missed General Walker was fired from
Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all others, this testimony was
considered probative when combined with the other testimony linking
Oswald to the shooting." (same page as above)
> >Puzzled Regards
> >Gil Jesus
> >USA
>
> Indeed, it's great stuff! I'll have to add it to my list of evidence related
> questions...
You're just as dishonest as Gil, so it's hardly surprising that you
think his "stuff" is great.
> Trolls simply cannot defend the WCR - at the evidential level.
CTs spread lies; LNs correct them.
Baron Wrangle
> In article <21529-4CE190DF-...@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net>,
> lazuli...@webtv.net says...
>
>
>
> >Let's get this straight Bugliosi does not believe in God, yet he
> >worships the Warren Report?...Laz
>
> Well, I guess you have to have faith in something!
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ben Holmes
> Learn to Make Money with a Website -http://www.burningknife.com
Yes, and Brother Belin worshipped at the same church. This is from
"Final Disclosure," p. 223: "After all, if the citizenry cannot
believe the finding of an independent commission chaired by the chief
justice of the United States appointed to find out the truth about who
killed their President, whom can it trust?"
How about you? Are you getting it in the front? Are you getting it
in the middle? Are you getting it in the rear? Well, I am! Back
off, Brother Bud!
BW
P.S. Vanguard Press or Vantage Press?
Bud
You don`t get it at all.
Baron Wrangle
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Praise the Lord that I don't!