Re: JAMES DiEUGENIO VS. DAVID VON PEIN -- SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
David Von Pein
www.blackopradio.com/black432a.ram
www.blackopradio.com/black432b.ram
www.blackopradio.com/black432c.ram
=================================
Conspiracy theorist James DiEugenio's appearance on Black Op Radio
Show #432 on July 16, 2009, included more pro-conspiracy garbage.
(Gee, there's a surprise, huh?) The July 16th program, which is linked
above, was another dry-as-dust snoozefest (like most Black Op programs
are, of course.)
But before Show #432 turned into a quick remedy for insomnia,
DiEugenio totally misrepresented my comments relating to the subject
of the unsuccessful "probing" of President Kennedy's upper-back wound
during JFK's autopsy at Bethesda on 11/22/63.
Unfortunately, since Mr. DiEugenio apparently refuses to actually read
for himself anything I've written about the JFK case, Jim has to rely
on second-hand misinformation that somebody else provides him. Such is
the case with the "probing" issue.
Someone evidently e-mailed Jim D. about my supposed online comments
concerning "Arlen Specter" and the probing topic, with DiEugenio then
telling the Black Op audience this falsehood -- "So what does Von Pein
do? He quotes Specter examining Humes [referring to Dr. James J.
Humes' 1964 Warren Commission testimony]."
But this is not accurate at all. When responding to one of DiEugenio's
incorrect rants about the JFK assassination (and about Vincent
Bugliosi's book) during Jim's Black Op Radio appearance of December
11, 2008, here's what I wrote about the "probing" issue:
============================
"RE: "PROBING" THE BACK WOUND.....
"Jim [DiEugenio]...wants to believe (naturally) that since the probes
wouldn't go through the upper-back wound to form a bullet "track"
through Kennedy's body during the attempted probing of the wound at
the autopsy, this must mean that the bullet that entered JFK's back
couldn't possibly have exited from the front of his neck.
But that notion...is nonsense. Two of JFK's autopsy doctors, in 1996,
provided very reasonable explanations for why the probes failed to go
all the way through the President's body, and the official ARRB
testimony given by Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes should have put this
"probing" issue to bed once and for all. But, of course, no amount of
logical and reasonable-sounding testimony is likely to convince a
person who desperately wants some kind of conspiracy to exist in this
case.
JFK's back muscles had tightened and "closed" (per Boswell), so that
no probing of the upper-back wound was possible, as fully indicated by
the testimony of the two doctors I'm going to cite below (although
both of the doctors, even in 1996, were still referring to the upper-
back wound as being located in the "neck" for some reason).
Dr. J. Thornton Boswell said this on February 26, 1996, during his
ARRB testimony:
"We probed this hole which was in his neck with all sorts of
probes and everything, and it was such a small hole, basically, and
the muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and you
couldn't get a finger or a probe through it."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/boswella.htm
And there is also this 2/13/96 ARRB testimony from the leading autopsy
surgeon, Dr. Humes:
QUESTION -- "Do you know what the standard autopsy protocol is for
gunshot wounds and autopsy of the neck?"
DR. HUMES -- "Well, no. I haven't seen that in--what you say,
standard, I mean, many times if you have a track of a missile, it's
helpful to take a long probe and put it in the position. It can tell
you a lot of things. If you know where the point of entrance and the
point of exit are, it's duck soup. But for me to start probing around
in this man's neck, all I would make was false passages. There
wouldn't be any track that I could put a probe through or anything of
that nature. It just doesn't work that way."
QUESTION -- "Was any probe used at all to track the path--?"
DR. HUMES -- "I don't recall that there was. There might have been
some abortive efforts superficially in the back of the neck, but no.
And if there's a standard protocol, I don't know where you'd find it,
to tell you the truth."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humesa.htm
Naturally, given what DiEugenio had said about Humes' supposed lies
regarding the burning of the original autopsy papers, he (DiEugenio)
isn't likely to believe anything else uttered by Humes either.
So I guess the above testimony coming from the lips of Humes wouldn't
impress Jim D. very much. But, those under-oath words of Dr. Humes are
in the official record nonetheless, whether Jim D. likes them or not."
-- David Von Pein; December 2008
ORIGINAL 12/13/08 POST:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/f40f7c3d2563783f
============================
So, contrary to what DiEugenio thinks I said, I never mentioned Arlen
Specter at all when discussing the "probing" matter. And I didn't talk
about Dr. Humes' 1964 Warren Commission testimony either. Instead, I
focused my attention in that 2008 article on the 1996 ARRB testimony
of both Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes.
And the following words from Boswell should be of particular
importance to James DiEugenio and all other conspiracy theorists who
think there's something rotten in the state of Denmark (or Bethesda,
Maryland) when it comes to the question of -- "WHY WASN'T PRESIDENT
KENNEDY'S BACK WOUND PROBED?":
"The muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and
you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it." -- DR. BOSWELL; 1996
Also -- The above words spoken by Dr. J. Thornton Boswell apply to
WHATEVER MUSCLES WERE DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH THE BULLET HOLE IN PRESIDENT
KENNEDY'S UPPER BACK*, and not necessarily the "strap muscles" only,
which are the two words ("strap muscles") that DiEugenio was making a
big deal about during his 7/16/09 radio appearance. But James
evidently wants to totally ignore the '96 ARRB testimony of Dr.
Boswell (and Dr. Humes too).
Plus (AND THIS IS A PRETTY BIG "PLUS" HERE) --- James DiEugenio's
complaint regarding Arlen Specter and James Humes supposedly talking
about how the "strap muscles" of President Kennedy prevented a probe
from going all the way through JFK's body is a complaint that is
COMPLETELY BASELESS ALTOGETHER.
Why?
Because the words "strap muscles" are only spoken ONE TIME during Dr.
Humes' entire March 16, 1964, Warren Commission session (and those
words aren't uttered by Arlen Specter at all) -- and the one time the
words "strap muscles" come out of Humes' mouth was at a time when
Humes wasn't discussing "probing" at all. Humes was talking about
something else entirely when he said the words "strap muscles" in his
WC testimony:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humes.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh2/html/WC_Vol2_0178a.htm
For clarification -- I'm not implying here that JFK's back muscles did
NOT "close" and thus prevent a probe from being pushed through the
President's upper back and neck at his autopsy. The testimony of Dr.
Boswell in 1996 makes it quite clear that the back muscles of JFK had,
in fact, "closed" and prevented any probing of the wounds.
I am saying, however, that the exact words "strap muscles" never came
out of the mouths of either Arlen Specter or James Humes when those
two men were DISCUSSING THE PROBING OF THE WOUNDS during Humes' '64 WC
session.
But Mr. DiEugenio seems to be of the opinion that Specter and Humes
DID make such comments about the "strap muscles" in 1964. But, as I
said, he's wrong. And the misinformation continues to another level
when DiEugenio claims that I, myself, have QUOTED Specter and Humes as
having said things that they never said in front of the Warren
Commission (as anyone can easily see for themselves by merely
performing a quick check of Humes' testimony by using their web
browser's "Word Find" tool).
So it appears as though Mr. DiEugenio should re-familiarize himself
with the Warren Commission testimony of Dr. James Joseph Humes.
Because it's fairly obvious (via his 7/16/09 comments on Internet
radio) that DiEugenio doesn't know what he's talking about (again).
Also -- It seems to me that DiEugenio still wouldn't have a leg to
stand on regarding this "strap muscles" topic even if Humes HAD said
in his WC testimony that the "strap muscles" (which are in the neck)
were the muscles that prevented any probing of JFK's wounds.
Why do I say that?
Well, mainly because of the fact that President Kennedy WAS wounded in
the NECK (i.e., bullet CE399 exited from his throat, which is located
in the front of his NECK).
So I cannot really see why DiEugenio seems to think that the closing
up of Kennedy's "strap muscles" would be incompatible with the notion
that it was those precise muscles that prevented the autopsists'
probes from passing through the known wounds that Kennedy sustained in
November 1963?
The strap muscles are in the NECK. And one of the wounds in question
was in the NECK (the throat wound).
So, Jim, what's out of bounds there?
Beats me.
~shrug~
===================================================
* = As I pointed out in my December 2008 post, for some reason Dr.
Boswell and Dr. Humes in 1996 both continued to say "neck" with
respect to the upper-back wound location, which we know is inaccurate
because of Boswell's very own Face Sheet diagram which provides the
details of where that wound was located -- "14 cm. below tip of right
mastoid process" -- which is in the BACK, not the NECK.
===================================================
www.google.com/group/Reclaiming-History/browse_thread/thread/4de239e56e02f210
www.ctka.net/2008/von_pein.html
===================================================
aeffects
Troll, you're Nervous, with a capital 'N' ... lest why bother,
shithead?
-AND-
yopu guessed it, NO advertising.....
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7c0060dc61198524
>>> "My goodness, you're right there. Bet you listened [to Black Op Radio] LIVE, eh?" <<<
Nope. I don't think Len Osanic did the show "live" on 7/16/09 (unless
Len changed the time of the live broadcast). By the normal "Black Op"
air time of 9:00 PM EDT, the archived download links were all in place
and active. That's never happened before, AFAIK.
~shrug~
>>> "Troll, you're Nervous, with a capital 'N' ... lest why bother, shithead?" <<<
Huh? What the hell are you talking about, Mr. Healy?
BTW, I don't suppose it bothers you in the least that Jim DiEugenio
keeps misrepresenting evidence, does it? (Like the "Specter/Humes/
strap muscles" thing I talked about in my thread-starter above.)
And you probably want to slap Mr. DiEugenio on the back for also
misrepresenting what I wrote about the "probing" issue too. Right,
Healy?
IOW -- As long as a CTer is trying to rip an LNer a new asshole
(regardless of the fact that the CTer is dead wrong)....it's okay with
Dave Healy?
Right, Davey?
lazu...@webtv.net
Knudsen and others,what Knudsen said proved the conventional SBT was
impossible. Ironically, I think he said photos showed the trajectory was
from roughly the EOP out the throat, which is what researcher Pat Speer
believes..also Captain Richard Lipsey said to the HSCA JFK was shot 3
times from the rear-back-didn't penetrate-EOP and middle rear of head.
He also had a revealing comment" something's rotten in Denmark" about
the final results of the Autopsy.
Gil Jesus
what a coward you really are.
As does the fact that you accepted an invitation to appear on Anton
Batey's program, then backed out, causing him to turn to McAdams.
Go cry to the world David, we all know you're a coward.
David Von Pein
>>> "As does the fact that you accepted an invitation to appear on Anton Batey's program, then backed out..." <<<
Of course that never happened. I accepted no invitation from Anton at
all. The fact you say I did shows what a rotten "researcher" you are.
IOW--you couldn't get anything right if your life depended on it.
Gil Jesus
> That you choose to "respond" to DiEugenio's remarks here demonstrates
> what a coward you really are.
>
> As does the fact that you accepted an invitation to appear on Anton
> Batey's program, then backed out, causing him to turn to McAdams.
As does the fact that you hide----you were thrown off the Education
Forum for refusing to post your picture as required.
I compare your tactic to one where a man hears something said about
him at Sears, then runs off to the supermarket to respond.
HERE'S A CLUE FOR YOU DAVID----NO ONE AT THE SUPERMARKET GIVES A SH*T.
Go confront the guy who said it where he said it.
Otherwise, you're no man.
David Von Pein
>>> "Go confront the guy who said it where he said it. Otherwise, you're no man." <<<
Is that another one of the Kook Rules that I must follow, Gilbert?
Via that glorious rule, nobody could ever take on Jim Garrison or
Oliver Stone or Mark Lane or many other CT-Kooks, because those people
don't post on forums.
So I guess I must respond to Garrison and Stone and Lane face-to-face
(somehow) in order to debate their kooky theories. (And that won't be
easy when it comes to Mr. Garrison....since he's gone to Conspiracy
Heaven.)
Ya gotta love Kook Rules -- because they're always kinda stupid (just
like the rule's authors).
>>> "HERE'S A CLUE FOR YOU DAVID----NO ONE AT THE SUPERMARKET GIVES A SH*T." <<<
Got any cantaloupe?
I know your bologna aisle is always well-stocked. But I hate that
stuff.
David Von Pein
MORE HILARIOUS NONSENSE FROM JAMES DiEUGENIO....AND (EVIDENTLY) JIM
DOESN'T EVEN REALIZE HE'S TALKING ABOUT A CONVERSATION THAT NEVER TOOK
PLACE! ......
On the July 16, 2009, "Black Op Radio" broadcast, conspiracy theorist
James DiEugenio not only misrepresents what Arlen Specter and Dr.
James Humes said during Humes' 1964 Warren Commission testimony....and
misrepresents what I had to say in December 2008 regarding the
"probing" issue....
But DiEugenio takes it one big step further into "Misrepresentation
And Deception Land" when he decides to INVENT A SINISTER MOTIVE for
Arlen Specter saying something that he NEVER SAID AT ALL during Dr.
Humes' 1964 Warren Commission session!
Yes, indeed, you heard right -- Jim DiEugenio, a respected JFK
researcher in many quarters, has applied a make-believe motive to
Arlen Specter's NON-EXISTENT WORDS!
Here's exactly what DiEugenio said about Mr. Specter on 7/16/09
(regarding words that never came out of Arlen Specter's mouth in the
first place!):
========================================
[DiEUGENIO QUOTE ON:]
"Specter and Humes understood that the probe was gonna be a big
problem. They thought the photographs would never be declassified. So
Specter made up this B.S. story about the strap muscles, never knowing
that that story was going to be exposed.
"And Von Pein goes ahead and quotes him [WHICH NEVER HAPPENED,
OF COURSE; BECAUSE HOW COULD I QUOTE SOMETHING THAT WAS NEVER SAID IN
THE FIRST PLACE?].
"This is the reason he doesn't want to debate me, of course.
Because this is one thing I would just rip him open on." -- James
DiEugenio; 07/16/09
[/DiEUGENIO QUOTE OFF.]
========================================
Now, let me get a handle on this thing, Jim --- You think you can "rip
[me] open" with respect to something that you think Arlen Specter
said...something that NEVER HAPPENED AT ALL?!!
I'm not sure if I should feel sorry for Jim....or laugh until my
notoriously weak bladder bursts! (Or both.)
Unbelievable, isn't it?
To sum up....
It appears to me that the following situation has taken place here:
1.) Jim DiEugenio (probably for years) has ASSUMED that Arlen Specter
and James Humes talked about the "strap muscles" being the reason that
probes couldn't be placed through JFK's wounds during Kennedy's
autopsy.
2.) Believing (for some reason) that the "strap" muscles couldn't
possibly have been located at the same general level as that of the
flight of the bullet that entered JFK's upper back and exited his
throat (even though Dr. Humes testified in '64 that the strap muscles
in the front of JFK's neck were, indeed, "bruised" by the passage of
the bullet; in fact, this is the one and only reference to "strap
muscles" in Humes' WC testimony), Mr. DiEugenio now decides he must
apply a sinister and devious motive to Specter's and Humes' "B.S.
story" about the "strap muscles" causing the probing to fail. (Which
is WC testimony concerning "probing" that doesn't exist at all, of
course.)
3.) DiEugenio, quite obviously, never bothered to double-check the
official Warren Commission records (Volume 2 of the WC's 26 volumes)
to confirm #1 above. Because if he had looked up Humes' testimony to
check on this matter, he would have seen that neither Specter nor
Humes ever ONCE mentioned "strap muscles" with respect to the
"probing" topic.
http://history-matters.com/archive/contents/wc/contents_wh2.htm
(BTW, just for the record -- The words "strap muscles" never ONCE
escaped the lips of Dr. Humes during his entire 1978 HSCA testimony
session or his 1996 ARRB deposition either. Not once.)
A situation like this one makes me wonder how many other "CT myths"
Mr. DiEugenio has fallen for over the years.*
* = The likely answer to that last inquiry is -- Quite a few. Such as:
The Mauser myth. The Double Oswald myth. The Grassy Knoll Shooter
myth. Jim Garrison's crackpot myths and fairy tales about a New
Orleans "plot" to murder John Kennedy. And God knows how many others.
That's a shame too. Because James DiEugenio is obviously a very bright
man. And as I've said before on this forum....Jim would make a great
LNer (given his vast knowledge about a lot of stuff connected to the
JFK case).
It's just too bad that the "Conspiracy Albatross" is so firmly tied
around Jim's neck.
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7c0060dc61198524
www.google.com/group/reclaiming-history/browse_thread/thread/28d2b874f20d7511
mucher1
Just to straighten the record a little, here's Lipsey's "something's
rotten in Denmark" remark in context:
LIPSEY: Are you, so...if, I can ask you this, you’re concerned more,
obviously, with just talking with me and other people about the
autopsy and whatever, your investigation I presume, covers the whole
realm of the assassination...
Q: We’re investigating the assassination generally.
LIPSEY: Generally, conspiracy, whatever, you’re investigating the
whole thing. Obviously, I know nothing about that. I was just curious.
I guess everybody in the whole world is curious since Oswald [sic;
Kennedy] was killed, and then Ruby [sic; Oswald] was killed. There’s
something rotten in Denmark, obviously, somewhere. I don’t know that
we will ever find out.
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm
He doesn't seem to be referring to the autopsy above, but rather to
the curious fact that Kennedy's murderer was himself killed. Perhaps
the most "revealing" thing about this remark is that it shows Lipsey
to be somewhat of a CT(?)
mucher1
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7c0060dc...
Oh, truth and logic stopped mattering to Healy a long time ago. Like a
few others I could mention, he has deluded himself into believing that
he has found a *higher* truth, which means that he (perhaps
conveniently) can't be bothered with trivial details, such as the
actual mechanics of the assassination. Nowadays, he just want to have
fun, play games, and lick his master's "crystal balls"...
tomnln
"aeffects" <aeffe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:daed3187-8f6c-4859...@12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ebd0a012-3b50-45bf...@m11g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> I know your bologna aisle is always well-stocked. But I hate that
> stuff.
David is a KOOK-SUCKER
(Sorry 'bout the typo)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4261e975-181a-4c5c...@g23g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
> throat, Mr. DiEugenio now decides he must apply a sinister and devious
> motive to Specter's and Humes' "B.S. story" about the "strap muscles".
> (Which is WC testimony that doesn't exist at all, of course.)
David Von Pein
www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,822.0.html
>>> "David, if you find any slips of the pen, you may keep them. The difference between you and [James] DiEugenio is: you are stuck-up in your dependant [sic] (from McAdams, G. Mack, V. Bugliosi,...) thinking, whereas he is open for dialogue in his independant [sic] thinking. You refuse dialogue; he offers it. You know in advance that he is 100% wrong; he knows afterwards, after checking through, what was wrong and what was right with you. Just a quality difference, you know. /s/Chris" <<<
What a bunch of nonsense you just wrote above, Chris.
The ONLY thing that DiEugenio confronted me on during his 7/16/09
Black Op appearance was the stuff about the "probing" of Kennedy's
wounds....and I totally destroyed him on that matter (in my first two
posts in this thread; linked above) by proving beyond ALL doubt that
Arlen Specter & Dr. James Humes never said the things that DiEugenio
attributes to them.
Chris .... Do you, therefore, endorse the untruths spouted by
DiEugenio on July 16th?
Is there any chance that ANY conspiracy theorist will ever say
something negative about the great and all-knowing James
DiEugenio....even when he has been proven to be dead-wrong about
something (like the "probing" matter)?
What are the odds that the answer to my last inquiry is Yes?
Pretty low I would surmise. Because DiEugenio apparently walks on
water (according to many conspiracy-thirsty kooks).
Todd W. Vaughan
Healey,
Von Pein kicked DiEuginio's ass in the above post, bad, but you're
just too stupid to realize it.
Todd
David Von Pein
www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,822.msg10218.html#msg10218
>>> "Instead of alleging that conversations didn't happen, just debate him [James DiEugenio] on the radio...live. Don't listen to paranoid people who say that it will be edited or something like that. That's paranoid talk. I think Von Pein should just debate him on the radio." <<<
Oh, for Pete sake, Pasquale. There's no "alleging" about it. I'm
stating the easy-to-verify facts about DiEugenio's error regarding
Specter and Humes and the "probing" issue.
And EVERYBODY online can easily check it out for themselves. Just
search Humes' WC testimony and search for the words "strap muscles" --
those are the key words that DiEugenio thinks Arlen Specter decided to
invent a "B.S. story" about while Specter was questioning Dr. Humes
("B.S. story" is DiEugenio's exact quote from 7/16/09).
Although just HOW Arlen Specter managed to get Humes to shed his
backbone and his professional integrity and go along with this so-
called "B.S. story" about the strap muscles is anybody's guess.
Apparently DiEugenio thinks that Humes would just obediently and
slavishly go along with such a "B.S. story", instead of showing a
little backbone and refuse to tow the Specter line.
The idea that CTers think that Government people like Specter of the
Warren Commission would have been able to just snap their fingers and
get anyone on the witness stand to say any damn thing that Specter (et
al) wanted them to say is just silly beyond all belief.
But, evidently, people like James DiEugenio seem to think that Specter
(et al) did, indeed, possess that kind of power. Crazy.
Back to Humes' testimony.....
You'll find ONE reference to "strap muscles" in Humes' testimony
linked below....and that one reference isn't referring to the
"probing" matter at all. Humes was talking there about the "bruising"
of the strap muscles in JFK's neck.*
* = Which, in fact, defeats DiEugenio in another area of his BlackOp
appearance from July 16th, because Jim was arguing that the "strap
muscles" were WAY ABOVE the area where the bullet passed through John
Kennedy's body....which just is not true, because those very "strap
muscles" were BRUISED BY THE PASSAGE OF THE BULLET THROUGH KENNEDY'S
NECK.
Do you think you can check something like Humes' detailed testimony
while listening to a RADIO debate? I kinda doubt it.
You need your computer to check something like this out. And it can be
done in less than 10 seconds via your browser's "Word Search" utility
tool.
DR. HUMES' WC TESTIMONY:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humes.htm
Also -- In case any conspiracist might think that John McAdams has
rigged something with respect to the above-linked testimony of Dr.
James Humes (which is linked through a "McAdams" URL), you can always
check out the PDF files from the History-Matters.com site, which
contains all of the WC testimony as well.
In fact, just to double-check my facts on this "probing" matter a few
days ago, I did that very thing with the History-Matters PDF files
(which are replications of the EXACT PAGES that appear in the 26
Warren Commission volumes). And via such a double-check, I confirmed
that neither Specter nor Humes ever said what DiEugenio attributes to
those men regarding "strap muscles" in relation to the probing issue:
DR. HUMES' TESTIMONY (SEARCHABLE PDF FILE VERSION):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh2/pdf/WH2_Humes.pdf
David Von Pein
www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,826.msg10222.html#msg10222
>>> "How long did it take you to figure out that I'm calling you a liar? Wow, you actually figured out that I'm calling you a liar? It took you this long?" <<<
LOL. Oh, yes, I know that kooks like you think I'm a "liar" in a
general sense via promoting the obvious lone-assassin and "Reclaiming
History" truth re. the JFK assassination.
But that's not what I asked you, Mr. Dolt.
I asked if you think I'm a liar with regard to this quote:
"I got an inscribed copy of the book for free from Mr.
Bugliosi. .... Other than the autographed copy of the book and the
satisfaction of spreading the "RH" truth around the Internet....I
guess I'm getting nothing at all." -- DVP
Naturally, you (like most kooks) can't answer a simple question in
less than 45 Internet posts. So, just forget it.
>>> "I think you're lying if you say that you're not looking for anything else regarding Bugliosi. I've been saying that all along." <<<
Well, via e-mails sent to Vincent's secretary, Rosemary Newton, I did
offer to proof-read every last page of "RH" for any potential re-
release of the book (which probably won't happen, but I'd like to see
a few of the minor errors corrected for any future re-release of the
book; such as VB's contradiction on Pages 423 and 424 and the obvious
error Vince made about the number of bullet fragments that were left
inside Governor Connally's body after he was operated on at Parkland).
But I certainly wasn't offering my "proof-reading" services out of
some sort of "obligation" or money-grabbing scheme. I'd do that job
for absolutely nothing.
>>> "His [Bugliosi's] book is disinformation and lies to promote the Oswald-did-it-alone idea." <<<
Yeah, right.
~yawn~
And your next stupid statement will be....
>>> "As I said repeatedly, in my opinion, if you're promoting Bugliosi's lies in that stupid book of his, th[e]n either you don't know any better or you have a motive. Since I don't think you're a complete dolt [UNLIKE DVP'S CURRENT OPINION OF PASQUALE DiFABRIZIO], my guess is that you have a motive." <<<
Yep...I was right. That's a stupid statement alright.
Next....
>>> "Being that you said you have two copies of the book already and then you said you received an inscribed free copy from Bugliosi, I'd say that you must being doing something he wants and therefore working with someone (Bugliosi) who is putting out lies." <<<
LOL.
In other words -- Everything's a "conspiracy". Right, Pasq?
The next idiotic utterance is.....
>>> "If you're getting a pat on the back from someone like Bugliosi, you're doing something wrong in my opinion." <<<
Yep....that's idiotic.
And just think -- the above nonsense was written by someone who
endorses the "Jimmy Files Did It" fairy tale.
As I said, I practically never stop laughing when talking with
conspiracy-giddy kooks.