Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" Wins "Edgar Allan Poe Award"
David Von Pein
On May 1, 2008, the winners of the annual "Edgar Allan Poe Awards"
were announced, and Vincent Bugliosi's true-crime book "RECLAIMING
HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY" took home the
prize for "Best Fact Crime" book of 2007.
Nice job, Vince. Congratulations. It's a well-deserved victory.
It's the third "Edgar" won by VB.
Jas
james
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1a750157-b0e8-4573...@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
pin head
wrote:
i can't go into detail because i have not read his book HOWEVER I was Very
Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by ommision.
These things come down to who votes on em......sorta reminds me of the
rolling stone magazine's 100 greatest guitarist of all time and Django
Rhiendhart AND Steve Vai don't even make the list....thats like the joke
of the decade.
Anthony Marsh
> On May 1, 2008, the winners of the annual "Edgar Allan Poe Awards"
> were announced, and Vincent Bugliosi's true-crime book "RECLAIMING
> HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY" took home the
> prize for "Best Fact Crime" book of 2007.
>
> Nice job, Vince. Congratulations. It's a well-deserved victory.
>
Sure, for a work of FICTION.
David Von Pein
>>> "Sure, for a work of FICTION." <<<
Gee, what a thoroughly-original retort.
~proverbial smirk emerges on DVP's facial region~
======================================================
"Waiting for the conspiracy theorists to tell the truth is a
little like leaving the front-porch light on for Jimmy Hoffa." -- VB
======================================================
Jas
ommision."
Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to mention
in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's NSAM 263,
and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's plan?
James
"pin head" <longiis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9h4n14hnv79irk8uo...@4ax.com...
pin head
>Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
>HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
>ommision."
>
>Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to mention
>in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's NSAM 263,
>and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's plan?
>
>James
>
In Fact Yea Stone served up a good deal of total BS himself
pin head
>Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
>HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
>ommision."
>
>Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to mention
>in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's NSAM 263,
>and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's plan?
>
>James
>
Yea sorta Stones movie was chock full o horse shit as well
Anthony Marsh
> Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
> HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
> ommision."
>
> Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
> mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
> NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
> plan?
>
Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
273 at all.
pin head
>Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
>HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
>ommision."
>
>Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to mention
>in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's NSAM 263,
>and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's plan?
>
>James
>
yea pretty much stone was chock full o shit as well
tomnln
ALL movies based on Historical events empoloy "Poetic Lisence".
How many other movies have you complained about???
billc...@live.com
> Jas wrote:
> > Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
> > HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
> > ommision."
>
> > Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
> > mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
> > NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
> > plan?
>
> Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
> 273 at all.
Well the man was much more honest about NSAM 273 than you and Peter
Dale Scott. I know Scott’s major, what was yours.
Keeping in mind, Marsh, that NSAM 273 was drafted for JFK, there is of
course a small change in NSM 273 from NSAM 263. The small change is
insignificant to all except the Camelot groupies, English majors and…
er…other people with an agenda to fill. Dr. Moise says, “It didn’t go
much farther”. That is most folk’s take on it.
Bill Clarke
Dave Reitzes
Hmmm. This seems to me to be a bit of a backhanded compliment.
I like Poe's writing quite a bit, but have you ever read his "Murders
in the Rue Morgue"?
It's the short story credited with launching the entire murder mystery
genre, which I presume is why the Mystery Writers of America would
name their award after him, and yet, it's terrible, just atrocious.
Poe's sleuth employs a brand of reasoning that has more in common with
Jim Garrison than Bugliosi. And the murderer turns out to be -- well,
in fairness to Poe, only SLIGHTLY more unlikely than some of the
"suspects" trotted out by the CTs.
Dave
Anthony Marsh
> On May 4, 5:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Jas wrote:
>>> Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
>>> HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
>>> ommision."
>>> Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
>>> mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
>>> NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
>>> plan?
>> Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
>> 273 at all.
>
> Well the man was much more honest about NSAM 273 than you and Peter
> Dale Scott. I know Scott’s major, what was yours.
>
Who was?
And what is this attempt at Argument by Authority?
My major is not pertinent. I could likewise ask you what your major was
and it would be war.
> Keeping in mind, Marsh, that NSAM 273 was drafted for JFK, there is of
> course a small change in NSM 273 from NSAM 263. The small change is
> insignificant to all except the Camelot groupies, English majors and…
> er…other people with an agenda to fill. Dr. Moise says, “It didn’t go
> much farther”. That is most folk’s take on it.
>
No, and you can't seem to realize that if Moise says it didn't go MUCH
farther that is admitting that it was changed.
> Bill Clarke
>
billc...@live.com
> billcla...@live.com wrote:
> > On May 4, 5:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Jas wrote:
> >>> Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
> >>> HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
> >>> ommision."
> >>> Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
> >>> mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
> >>> NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
> >>> plan?
> >> Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
> >> 273 at all.
>
> > Well the man was much more honest about NSAM 273 than you and Peter
> > Dale Scott. I know Scott’s major, what was yours.
>
> Who was?
Pin Head.
> My major is not pertinent.
It is to me. It is my thought that English majors that wander over
into history with their mind already made up cause much of this
twisted history that is put out.
> I could likewise ask you what your major was and it would be war.
Actually Marsh, I didn’t much care for war.
Bill Clarke
David Von Pein
>>> "I like Poe's writing quite a bit, but have you ever read his "Murders
in the Rue Morgue"?" <<<
Never read the book....but I've seen a few of the screen adaptions,
including the oldie starring Lugosi (not Bugliosi):
"The Tell-Tale Heart" was a favorite Poe story for me as a young-un. That
one could really cause the shivers on a dark night. As well as "The Pit
And The Pendulum". The '61 Vincent Price (not Vincent Bugliosi) version of
"Pit" is a classic for sure.
"...Eyes gouged from bloody sockets....flesh burned black!"
(Please note the multiple associations with VB to keep this post on
target.) ;)
>>> "Poe's sleuth employs a brand of reasoning that has more in common
with Jim Garrison than Bugliosi." <<<
LOL.
>>> "And the murderer turns out to be -- well, in fairness to Poe, only
SLIGHTLY more unlikely than some of the "suspects" trotted out by the
CTs." <<<
Including Dave Ferrie and Jimmy Files even??
"Rue" must be pretty bad then.
Dave Reitzes
> >>> "I like Poe's writing quite a bit, but have you ever read his "Murders
>
> in the Rue Morgue"?" <<<
>
> Never read the book....but I've seen a few of the screen adaptions,
> including the oldie starring Lugosi (not Bugliosi):
>
> www.amazon.com/dp/B0009X770E
>
> "The Tell-Tale Heart" was a favorite Poe story for me as a young-un. That
> one could really cause the shivers on a dark night. As well as "The Pit
> And The Pendulum". The '61 Vincent Price (not Vincent Bugliosi) version of
> "Pit" is a classic for sure.
>
> � � � "...Eyes gouged from bloody sockets....flesh burned black!"
>
> (Please note the multiple associations with VB to keep this post on
> target.) ;)
I have fond memories of "The Cask of Amontillado." Read it with some of
our esteemed research colleagues in mind. \:^)
> >>> "Poe's sleuth employs a brand of reasoning that has more in common
>
> with Jim Garrison than Bugliosi." <<<
>
> LOL.
>
> >>> "And the murderer turns out to be -- well, in fairness to Poe, only
>
> SLIGHTLY more unlikely than some of the "suspects" trotted out by the
> CTs." <<<
>
> Including Dave Ferrie and Jimmy Files even??
Spoiler alert! An orangutan did it.
To the best of my knowledge, no one has placed a monkey in Dealey Plaza .
. . but I could be wrong. \:^)
> "Rue" must be pretty bad then.
Yeah, but it was the first murder mystery, so it's a part of history. I'm
not a mystery buff, but I'm guessing it was probably Arthur Conan Doyle
who made the genre credible. (I was never much of a Sherlock Holmes fan,
though.)
On the other hand -- and to drag this thread even more off-topic (hey, if
everyone else can do it, why can't I?) -- Doyle also happened to be one of
the most gullible promoters of paranormal gobbledygook the world has ever
seen. He makes Team Judyth look like Walter Cronkite.
If you don't know what I mean, check out this especially noteworthy
example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottingley_Fairies
Dave
Anthony Marsh
> On May 5, 7:06 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> billcla...@live.com wrote:
>>> On May 4, 5:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Jas wrote:
>>>>> Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
>>>>> HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
>>>>> ommision."
>>>>> Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
>>>>> mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
>>>>> NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
>>>>> plan?
>>>> Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
>>>> 273 at all.
>>> Well the man was much more honest about NSAM 273 than you and Peter
>>> Dale Scott. I know Scott’s major, what was yours.
>> Who was?
>
> Pin Head.
>
>> My major is not pertinent.
>
> It is to me. It is my thought that English majors that wander over
> into history with their mind already made up cause much of this
> twisted history that is put out.
>
Who cares what YOU think?
billc...@live.com
> billcla...@live.com wrote:
> > On May 5, 7:06 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> billcla...@live.com wrote:
> >>> On May 4, 5:37 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>> Jas wrote:
> >>>>> Pin head wrote: "i can't go into detail because i have not read his book
> >>>>> HOWEVER I was Very Unimpressed by his videos, where at times he lied by
> >>>>> ommision."
> >>>>> Hmmmm. You mean, uh, like when Oliver Stone conveniently failed to
> >>>>> mention in "JFK" that NSAM 273 was really just an amendment of Kennedy's
> >>>>> NSAM 263, and that it wasn't totally LBJ completely reversing Kennedy's
> >>>>> plan?
> >>>> Naughty, naughty. You are not supposed to admit that LBJ changed NSAM
> >>>> 273 at all.
> >>> Well the man was much more honest about NSAM 273 than you and Peter
> >>> Dale Scott. I know Scott’s major, what was yours.
> >> Who was?
>
> > Pin Head.
>
> >> My major is not pertinent.
>
> > It is to me. It is my thought that English majors that wander over
> > into history with their mind already made up cause much of this
> > twisted history that is put out.
>
> Who cares what YOU think?
Now now Anthony. I care what you think because it is usually pretty
funny.
Bill Clarke
MattyO
>
> - Show quoted text -
I have seen VB's book in the discount rack at both Borders and Barnes &
Noble for less than ten bucks. I'm sure that very few people have
actually read it, but that wouldn't stop them from agreeing with his
conclusions. Just like the Warren Report and Case Closed.
MickeyDal
It is a good book, for what it is: A prosecution of a case.
Jerry Dealey
Jas
have actually read it, but that wouldn't stop them from agreeing with his
conclusions. Just like the Warren Report and Case Closed."
Oh really? Which Barnes and Noble and Borders are you talking about?
How about their phone numbers and addresses so I can check out your
allegations.
And, you can check out a copy of it at the local library for free, just
like any other book there. So, what's your point?
James
"MattyO" <matto...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ccbcf0c8-252e-48df...@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
> Matty wrote: "I have seen VB's book in the discount rack at both Borders
> and Barnes & Noble for less than ten bucks. I'm sure that very few
> people have actually read it, but that wouldn't stop them from agreeing
> with his conclusions. Just like the Warren Report and Case Closed."
>
> Oh really? Which Barnes and Noble and Borders are you talking about?
>
> How about their phone numbers and addresses so I can check out your
> allegations.
>
> And, you can check out a copy of it at the local library for free, just
> like any other book there. So, what's your point?
>
That the public knows his book is worthless. It was never a best seller as
some WC defenders predicted it would be. Several conspiracy books have
been best sellers. Few WC defender books have.