When do you Admit Bugliosi Dropped the Ball?
RICLAND
book, blunders so foolish and irresponsible even the most bullheaded
lone nutters have yet to defend them; incredible blunders like the one
on pages 543-4 (of the endonotes on CD) where Bugliosi gives a wild-eyed
harangue about how there's not a "shred of evidence" showing Judyth
Baker worked for the Reily Coffee Company in New Orleans, when this
allegation was disproved here on the internet years ago by Baker's W-2
from Reily's.
Fifty of such magnificent blunders, incredulous blunders even the most
rank newbies in this newsgroup have yet made, there in all their moronic
wonderment for the world to see until the end of time.
Please go to my site and count them.
Mind you, we're not talking about Oswald's guilt or innocence; that's
not the question I place before you. We're talking about your sense of
integrity. We're talking about a document so riddled with blunders,
omissions, distortions, and outright lies that even the most dedicated
Warren Commission apologist should feel a moral obligation to give this
horrendously sloppy book the name it surely deserves -- disaster.
When are you going to do this, John McAdams?
ricland
--
Max Holland on Bugliosi:
"He is absolutely certain even when he is not necessarily right."
-- Max Holland
---
Reclaiming History -- Bugliosi's Blunders
The Rebuttals to Bugliosi's JFK Assassination Book
http://jfkhit.com
justm...@gmail.com
YAWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
eca...@tx.rr.com
Connect-the-dots on why nobody goes to your
one-man site: It sucks like a chest wound.
MR ;~D
RICLAND
> To "Sgt. Fury" aka Ricland the fake VN vet:
> Connect-the-dots on why nobody goes to your
> one-man site: It sucks like a chest wound.
> MR ;~D
>
You know, Ed, when most posters decide to act like a child they do so
under the guise of a nickname.
And I know you don't like it when I tell everyone your assignment as a
tank gunner in Nam meant your military aptitude scores were several cuts
below the IQ required of an infantryman, but how do you expect readers
not to believe this when every time you post you prove the Army aptitude
testing boys had you down cold?
ricland
justm...@gmail.com
Ricland give it a rest...you're no better then any other person here.
Stop trying to be Mr. Popular.
Actually, your getting as bad as Rossely with the spamming on this
group. Same shit, different day.
David Von Pein
Don't you ever get tired of having others do your "research" for you,
Ric? Surely that gets tiresome, esp. when you are made out to be a
fool time after time.
Vince Bugliosi (twice) comes right out and says that Judyth Baker "may
have worked there" (at Reily's) in 1963. But it's followed by the
correct "So what?" as well.
Below I've copied the full VB passage re. Vary-Baker's attempts at
establishing the "kernel of truth" she so desperately sought -- i.e.,
the ONLY possible "link" between herself and Lee Oswald, and that
would be the fact they might have worked at the same company in '63.
(How many people think Judyth was a machine greaser, btw? She probably
never even saw Oswald, even if she did work at the same company.)
The Baker "kernel" of possible truth reminds me of Garrison's one and
only "kernel" re. a "Shaw/Ferrie/Banister/Oswald" linkage....and
that's the 544 Camp St. address...and that's it. Nothing else. A great
way to build a conspiracy against an innocent man, huh? Pathetic.
[QUOTING BUGLIOSI....]
"She {Baker} makes her greatest effort in trying to show that she and
Oswald worked at the Reily coffee company at the same time and had a
close relationship with him at work and outside of work. But nowhere
does she come up with any evidence that she even worked at the coffee
company.
"She keeps showing document after document in her book, such as
canceled checks and time cards (pp.181, 376), to prove that Oswald
worked there. But we already knew that. When she tries to prove she
herself worked there, she presents many William B. Reily and Company,
Inc., check stubs, but the problem is that poor Judyth's name doesn't
appear on any of them (e.g., pp.269, 374). The only documents from the
Reily coffee company that she presents have Oswald's name on them, not
Baker's.
"The closest Baker comes to establishing that she worked at the Reily
coffee company is a copy of a May 27, 1963, check from Judyth to the
A- l Employment Agency for $17.44, representing a fee she paid the
agency for getting her a job. But where? Judyth says the $17.44 was
"approximately half of my May 24 Reily paycheck" (p.230).
"But since she never established that she worked at the Reily coffee
company, this fee could have been for a job A-1 got Judyth somewhere
else. (It turns out that A-l was the same agency Oswald used to get
his job at the Reily coffee company [CE 1951, 23 H 753-755].) The
point is that even if Judyth did work at the Reily coffee company
around the time Oswald did (which she struggled so hard to prove but
couldn't, although she may have worked there), so what? It proves
absolutely nothing." -- Vince Bugliosi; "Reclaiming History" (Endnote
Section)
RICLAND
>>>> "Incredible blunders like the one on pages 543-4 (of the endonotes on CD) where Bugliosi gives a wild-eyed harangue about how there's not a "shred of evidence" showing Judyth Baker worked for the Reily Coffee Company." <<<
>
> Don't you ever get tired of having others do your "research" for you,
> Ric? Surely that gets tiresome, esp. when you are made out to be a
> fool time after time.
>
> Vince Bugliosi (twice) comes right out and says that Judyth Baker "may
> have worked there" (at Reily's) in 1963. But it's followed by the
> correct "So what?" as well.
>
> Below I've copied the full VB passage re. Vary-Baker's attempts at
> the ONLY possible "link" between herself and Lee Oswald, and that
> would be the fact they might have worked at the same company in '63.
> probably never even saw Oswald, even if she did work at the same
> one and only "kernel" re. a "Shaw/Ferrie/Oswald" linkage....and that's
> the 544 Camp St. address...and that's it. Nothing else! A great way to
> build a conspiracy against an innocent businessman, huh?
> Pathetic.).....
Like you, David, I think Judyth's story about a romance with Oswald is
"complete moonshine," but don't you see, David, that's not the point.
The point is that time again Bugliosi shows he's blissfully unaware of
the most communally known knowledge.
When he writes "she struggled so hard to prove, but couldn't" that means
he never heard of her W-2. It means he's making an erroneous claim. It
means his research was sloppy and irresponsible. It means he's calling
the woman a liar on a point she's telling the truth about.
Working for Reily Coffee Company is the ONE thing Judyth Baker DID prove
yet Bugliosi tells us -- "she struggled so hard to prove but couldn't."
In summation, Max Holland said it best: "He (Bugliosi) is absolutely
certain even when his is not necessarily right."
tomnln
<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182335246....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1182338378.8...@c77g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
Have you seen the Reily pay stubs with BAKER'S NAME ON THEM, proving
she worked there in '63?
RICLAND
"Pay stubs"? What are you talking about?
I said W-2.
David Von Pein
Oh, yeah. That's right.
So, have you seen that W-2 with Judyth's name on it proving she worked
at Reily's in 1963?