BOOK REVIEW -- "Reclaiming History" (Mega-Review Version)
David Von Pein
my review for Vince Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History"......
http://hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=3200858&postcount=1
garyb
Where do you find the time? An impressive review and I think I will
link to it on my blog http://coverthistory.blogspot.com
Note: I have received two emails recently thinking that I am Gary
Aguilar. I am Gary Buell.
eca...@tx.rr.com
David this is as fine of a post as I have seen.
Even those who think Oswald didn't kill Kennedy
would have to give it an above average rating
in my view.. Even if they disagreed with it
they would still have a gob of information to
dispute or counter argue..
BUT NO.. Somebody gives it a 1 star.. Out of
frustration I suspect. Yes folks, among *KNOWLEDGEABLE*
researchers this 11-22-63 thing is really winding
down.. All of the CT books went bye-bye.. Very
few CTers even have a conspiracy theory! Except
for Anthony Marsh of course, who says Helms was
behind the assassination.. Evidence? He answers
that pesky question with "Learn to Google."
Great post DVP! You're the MAN!!
Ed Cage
1716Jul2607
eca...@tx.rr.com
Thanks Gary B. There appears to be a large
difference between you and Gary A. I did not
digest your entire site but I liked it a lot..
VERY interesting. Please except sincere
encouragement from me.
ALSO do you know much about the Libertarian
candidates?
Phillies? Paul? I'd enjoy more *political*
discussions in here.. Also I'm a WW2 buff..
Your site is a good one Gary.
Ed Cage
1729Jul2607
On Jul 26, 12:28 pm, garyb <garyn2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jul 25, 7:43 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > The link below leads to an expanded and photo-enhanced mega version of
> > my review for Vince Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History"......
>
> >http://hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=3200858&postcount=1
>
> Where do you find the time? An impressive review and I think I will
> link to it on my bloghttp://coverthistory.blogspot.com
David Von Pein
Thanks, Gary. That's nice of you. The more LN truth that be spread to
refute the silliness of the CT position....the better.
David Von Pein
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=3201001
[Continuation of linked thread in my first post above.....]
============================================
>>> "You could say that a ton of books 'prove' a conspiracy." <<<
Name one. (A theory without evidence to support it doesn't count.)
The only thing that a JFK conspiracy author has is his/her own
imagination. They certainly have no hard physical evidence. None.
I'm still waiting for that first non-Oswald bullet to rear its ugly
silver head...somewhere. Hasn't showed up yet. Maybe by 2033 we'll see
one, ya think? :)
>>> "For every piece of evidence that makes you lean one way, there's
probably an equally compelling piece of evidence that can make you lean
the other way." <<<
Okay, I'll put this to the test.....
1.) Oswald's rifle is found in the Book Depository Building (from where
shots came).
2.) Bullet fragments from Oswald's gun are found IN THE CAR where JFK
died.
3.) Bullet shells from Oswald's gun are found under the window from where
an "Oswald-like" fellow was seen firing a rifle.
4.) Oswald kills a Dallas policeman less than an hour after JFK was shot
from directly in front of the building where the policeman's killer worked
(and from where the policeman's killer's rifle was found and from where
the policeman's killer fled within three minutes of the President being
shot).
Now....I need to know what "equally compelling piece[s] of evidence" can
possibly make me "lean the other way" (i.e., away from the notion that Lee
Harvey Oswald was a double-killer) when assessing the 4 points of evidence
listed above.
Good luck. :)
jim....@fuse.net
Would that be the FBI evidence? The FBI-CIA psych-ops technique of relying
on the public's "presumption of regularity" for FBI-CIA and other
government controlled investigators to convince the public that the
"official" government investigators were just doing their regular work and
collecting "evidence" in a regular way and were reliable and trustworthy
and told the truth about what had happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.
We now know the FBI can and will frame anyone they choose with bogus
"evidence." We now know the CIA can and will withhold information
whenever they choose even if a presidential order requires them to turn
over any requested files and reports about the JFK assassination they are
still withholding. I believe that is what is called stonewalling.
On Thursday 7/26/07 at a trial in Boston a federal judge ordered the
Federal Government to pay $101.8 million dollars to the one surviving
victim and to the 3 other victim's families because the judge determined
from the evidence presented at trial that the FBI FRAMED 4 men in 1965 for
a murder they did not commit to protect a Mafia informant. Federal
District Judge Nancy Gertner said "It took 30 years to uncover this
injustice." Judge Gertner went on to say the case was "about the framing
of innocent men and that FBI officials allowed their employees up the line
to ruin lives." WOW! Do you think that could be the reason the JFK
assassination has been so difficult to close for all these years? Were
the FBI investigators and CIA agents messing with the evidence to frame
LHO? Remember document CE2011? Remember the "Magic Bullet" and bullet
fragments? The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to
you on one point, you may reject all of his testimony. So should we
reject the FBI testimony about the "evidence" and the CIA excuses for
stonewalling and withholding information about the JFK assassination? That
seems a reasonable position at this point don't you think? Regards, Jim
David Von Pein
Yes, indeedy, like it or not, on 07/27/2007, all 3 parts of my "RH"
mega-review have been revised and expanded once again.....
More great (and rarely-seen) photos!
More links!
More info!
More SBT talk added to the mix!
More LN common sense for the entire family to enjoy!
Now available at the following link!......
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=3200858
David Von Pein
>>> "Would that be the FBI evidence? The FBI-CIA psych-ops technique of
relying on the public's "presumption of regularity" for FBI-CIA and other
government controlled investigators to convince the public that the
"official" government investigators were just doing their regular work and
collecting "evidence" in a regular way and were reliable and trustworthy
and told the truth about what had happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63."
<<<
Oh for God sake, what a load of feces.
>>> "We now know the FBI can and will frame anyone they choose with bogus
"evidence"." <<<
Oh for God sake. Another load of excrement. Nice. The pot's filling up.
Better flush.
>>> "So should we reject the FBI testimony about the "evidence"? ... That
seems a reasonable position at this point, don't you think? <<<
But the FBI didn't collect any of the first-day evidence in the JFK case.
The DPD did. Are they all crooks and liars too? Was all of the
DPD-collected evidence "switched" conveniently for LHO-implicating stuff
by the evil and dastardly Federal Bureau of Investigation?
If so, why the hell would they even WANT to frame the man they should have
had a better eye on (a certain Mr. Oswald, that is)?
Getting Oswald OFF the murdering hook would be much better for J. Edgar
and his boys than it would have been to FRAME AN INNOCENT OSWALD. Correct?
(Of course it's correct.)
Can any reasonable person really believe such nonsense about the big, bad
FBI and the JFK case?
If you can't believe such nonsense, then the evidence is valid....and
Oswald's certainly guilty. That seems a reasonable position at this point,
don't you think?
John McAdams
<jim....@fuse.net> wrote:
OK, so you guys are going to stop using FBI evidence when it's
convenient for you, right?
No more use of the Dealey Plaza recreation with the back wound too
low, right?
No more nonsense about the photo with Billy Lovelady wearing that
shirt, right?
No more quoting FBI reports of witness testimony when it's convenient
to do so, right?
Somehow I don't think you want to discredit FBI evidence that you guys
find convenient.
.John
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "Would that be the FBI evidence? The FBI-CIA psych-ops technique of
> relying on the public's "presumption of regularity" for FBI-CIA and other
> government controlled investigators to convince the public that the
> "official" government investigators were just doing their regular work and
> collecting "evidence" in a regular way and were reliable and trustworthy
> and told the truth about what had happened in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63."
> <<<
>
> Oh for God sake, what a load of feces.
>
>
>>>> "We now know the FBI can and will frame anyone they choose with bogus
> "evidence"." <<<
>
> Oh for God sake. Another load of excrement. Nice. The pot's filling up.
> Better flush.
>
>
>
>>>> "So should we reject the FBI testimony about the "evidence"? ... That
> seems a reasonable position at this point, don't you think? <<<
>
> But the FBI didn't collect any of the first-day evidence in the JFK case.
Depends on your time frame. It was the FBI and SS which collected the
bullets and fragments, not the DPD.
> The DPD did. Are they all crooks and liars too? Was all of the
Maybe, but so what? Incompetence can explain almost as many things.
> DPD-collected evidence "switched" conveniently for LHO-implicating stuff
> by the evil and dastardly Federal Bureau of Investigation?
>
> If so, why the hell would they even WANT to frame the man they should have
> had a better eye on (a certain Mr. Oswald, that is)?
>
The DPD could not have had a better eye on Oswald, because as they
explained in a press conference, the FBI had not notified the DPD of his
presence in Dallas.
> Getting Oswald OFF the murdering hook would be much better for J. Edgar
> and his boys than it would have been to FRAME AN INNOCENT OSWALD. Correct?
> (Of course it's correct.)
>
Huh?
> Can any reasonable person really believe such nonsense about the big, bad
> FBI and the JFK case?
>
Can any sane person fall for your strawman arguments?
David Von Pein
the DPD." <<<
Yes, that's correct. Good point. (Although it doesn't apply to any of the
Tippit bullets and fragments.)
Which, of course, would really make it a THREE-TIERED (3-TEAM) EFFORT of
complicity in this case if a whole lot of the ballistics (and other)
evidence had really been faked or switched or what-have-you.
How likely is it that the DPD and the FBI and the SS got together and
decided to ALL become crooks in a coordinated effort to frame an innocent
patsy on 11/22? Not very.
Plus....with respect to Jim Lewis' earlier remarks re. the FBI
specifically, I wasn't really off base with respect to the bullets found
by non-DPD entities. The FBI found none of the ballistics stuff first
(save the tiny fragments under Nellie's seat). It was either the DPD or
the USSS who initially handled CE399/567/569.
>>> "Incompetence can explain almost as many things." <<<
I wonder if any CTers who think CE399 was "planted/switched" (which is
almost 100% of all CTers by my latest count...at least on forums such as
this) think it would have been possible for mere "incompetence" to explain
away the "planting" of a bullet?
Clever and wise one minute.....incompetent beyond all belief the next.
This is the strange, upside-down world that so many CTers reside in daily
when attempting to reconcile their skewed beliefs with respect to the
authorities who investigated the Kennedy murder.
Go figure.
>>> "The DPD could not have had a better eye on Oswald, because as they
explained in a press conference, the FBI had not notified the DPD of his
presence in Dallas." <<<
Yeah? So? You're confused. My earlier comment said nothing about the DPD
knowing of LHO on 11/22. It was all about the FBI knowing of Oz's presence
in Dallas.
>>> "Can any sane person fall for your strawman arguments?" <<<
And can Tony M. get through just one post without using the word
"strawman"? (Highly doubtful.)
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "It was the FBI and SS which collected the bullets and fragments, not
> the DPD." <<<
>
> Yes, that's correct. Good point. (Although it doesn't apply to any of the
> Tippit bullets and fragments.)
>
> Which, of course, would really make it a THREE-TIERED (3-TEAM) EFFORT of
> complicity in this case if a whole lot of the ballistics (and other)
> evidence had really been faked or switched or what-have-you.
>
> How likely is it that the DPD and the FBI and the SS got together and
> decided to ALL become crooks in a coordinated effort to frame an innocent
> patsy on 11/22? Not very.
Straw man argument. Each agency is quite capable of making its own
mistakes and covering for itself independently.
>
> Plus....with respect to Jim Lewis' earlier remarks re. the FBI
> specifically, I wasn't really off base with respect to the bullets found
> by non-DPD entities. The FBI found none of the ballistics stuff first
> (save the tiny fragments under Nellie's seat). It was either the DPD or
> the USSS who initially handled CE399/567/569.
>
When did the DPD ever handle CE 399 or CE 567 or CE 569?
>
>
>
>>>> "Incompetence can explain almost as many things." <<<
>
>
> I wonder if any CTers who think CE399 was "planted/switched" (which is
> almost 100% of all CTers by my latest count...at least on forums such as
100%? No. I have often said that I am not sure whether CE 399 was
genuine or planted. It could have been genuine, but not done everything
that WC defenders claim it did.
> this) think it would have been possible for mere "incompetence" to explain
> away the "planting" of a bullet?
>
Incompetence might explain away mishandling of evidence.
> Clever and wise one minute.....incompetent beyond all belief the next.
You talking about the FBI?
> This is the strange, upside-down world that so many CTers reside in daily
> when attempting to reconcile their skewed beliefs with respect to the
> authorities who investigated the Kennedy murder.
>
It's the real world where our intelligence agencies are screw-ups.
> Go figure.
>
>
>
>>>> "The DPD could not have had a better eye on Oswald, because as they
> explained in a press conference, the FBI had not notified the DPD of his
> presence in Dallas." <<<
>
> Yeah? So? You're confused. My earlier comment said nothing about the DPD
> knowing of LHO on 11/22. It was all about the FBI knowing of Oz's presence
> in Dallas.
>
Hosty blames himself for not keeping track of Oswald.
>
>
>>>> "Can any sane person fall for your strawman arguments?" <<<
>
>
> And can Tony M. get through just one post without using the word
> "strawman"? (Highly doubtful.)
>
Hey, that's a strawman argument. Can't you get through any message
without making up a strawman argument?
>
David Von Pein
"Reclaiming History" by Vince Bugliosi has performed a nice rebound in
sales rank (at Amazon.com anyhow). It had dropped below #2,500 at one
point.
But as of this exact moment on 07/29/2007, "RH" is the 411th best-
selling book at Amazon. Not bad at all. .....
"Amazon.com Sales Rank: #411 in Books".
curtjester1
That title says it all. Reclaiming what the WC wanted to pawn off on
the public. I saw the Bugster on CSpan Books and wanted to take in
every word. He was senile-pathetic I just had to turn the channel.
The guy really thinks he is a 'Star'. Don't send Vinnie into the
Conspiracy Pool, he will get eaten up by the pirrahnas!
CJ
David Von Pein
That's a good word to describe many CTers -- piranhas. (With just about
the same amount of common sense too.)
=================
Vince CS&L Break Time!..........
"The conspiracy community regularly seizes on one slip of the tongue,
misunderstanding, or slight discrepancy to defeat twenty pieces of solid
evidence; accepts one witness of theirs, even if he or she is a provable
nut, as being far more credible than ten normal witnesses on the other
side; treats rumors, even questions, as the equivalent of proof; leaps
from the most minuscule of discoveries to the grandest of conclusions; and
insists that the failure to explain everything perfectly negates all that
is explained." -- Vince Bugliosi
================
The accuracy that flows through the above statement uttered by Vincent T.
Bugliosi, Esq. (aka: A "pathetic, senile" ex-prosecutor, per some
individuals who shall remain nameless) is undeniable, irrevocable, and
just flat-out superb in its raw, laid-bare truth.
Not too bad for a "pathetic, senile" old coot, huh?
curtjester1
The LNT Community loves the pablum served to them and will find
horrendous ways to justify it's recipe no matter how many glaring
pieces of evidence outside the recipe they chose to ignore, twist,
offer ridiculous explanations for to brown nose continually the
scoundrels that they do their bidding for.
It simply amazes me that a man that can come up with the missing
bullet to obviously enhance the RFK Conspiracy, can do such an about
face and avoid the connections between the two cases.
CJ
David Von Pein
here}..." <<<
Has anybody ever whipped up a good "CT Recipe" that features all of these
ingredients (and yet still, somehow, manage to have a multi-gun plot be
TRUE)?.....
1.) ZERO bullets from non-C2766 guns.
2.) ZERO guns other than C2766.
3.) ZERO witnesses to any shooter other than a resident patsy (even though
a Knoll shooter would be easily visible to anyone who turned his head
right after the shot/shots from there).
4.) Only 5 out of 104 polled witnesses who spice up the CT recipe by
saying they heard shots from 2 directions. ....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots4.jpg
5.) An incredibly-small percentage of witnesses who heard more than 3
gunshots. ....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/shots3.jpg
6.) And ZERO pieces of overall PHYSICAL evidence to support such a
conspiracy concoction/recipe?
That CT recipe must be only for people on strict diets -- No calories, No
fat, No substance, and No bullets to get clogged in your throat either.
Just a whole lot of empty air.
>>> "It simply amazes me that a man that can come up with the missing
bullet to obviously enhance the RFK Conspiracy...." <<<
Vince B. didn't come up with any "missing" non-Sirhan bullet(s) in the RFK
case. Why are you saying he did?
At one time (due to the many bullet holes in the kitchen doors/walls) VB
thought a conspiracy involving more than just Sirhan's gun might have been
involved in the RFK murder.
However, AFAIK, Vince no longer believes in an RFK conspiracy at all. (I
could be mistaken about that, but I don't think I am. But VB doesn't talk
much about the RFK case at all. Perhaps he's embarrassed for ever having
believed in a conspiracy in that case in the first place. Beats me,
though.)
David Von Pein
MISC. ASSASSINATION CRAZINESS............
==============================================
>>> "David Healy thinks a mysterious Abe Zapruder "double" fake-filmed the
whole assassination." <<<
Yes....even though Zapruder HIMSELF told the world on LIVE TELEVISION
within 2 hours of the shooting that he, himself (Abraham Z.), filmed the
motorcade from "one of those concrete blocks they have down there by the
Underpass". (And he confirmed there was a "girl from my office standing
behind me" as he filmed.)
But that's not good enough for Healy, or for Jack "I NEVER SAW A FILM/
PHOTO THAT DIDN'T LOOK FUNNY TO ME" White.
I guess Mr. Zapruder HIMSELF must've been in on the plot re. his "faked"
and "wholly fabricated" (per Fetzer's silly Hoax book) 26- second motion
picture.
Or: Maybe Zapruder was "replaced" by some alien force on the "concrete
block" in Dealey Plaza. It was possibly a "phony" Abe Zapruder we saw
talking to Jay Watson on WFAA-TV on 11/22/63!
But, then too, the plotters (per many a-CTer) were smart enough to find a
wide assortment of perfect "Oswald Look-alikes" to perform a variety of
jobs on and before November 22nd. So why not "Zapruder Imposters" too?
Look into that Healy. It's worth investigating. (If you need a "plot" at
all costs, that is. And what CTer doesn't qualify there?)
=======================
IS THIS ABRAHAM ZAPRUDER? OR JUST A WANNABE ABE? FIND OUT....ON THE
NEXT "MONTEL"!.....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/zap.gif
=======================
David Von Pein
A fabulous LN rebuttal to Don Thomas' ultra-silly anti-Bugliosi rant.
Long, but definitely worth reading:
http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/news/news_08010701.htm