71% Of Amazon Reviewers Give "Reclaiming History" A Positive Rating
David Von Pein
As of this writing on January 3, 2008, 56% of the 141 reviews for VB's
book at Amazon are 5-Star reviews, which is a darn good percentage if
you ask me (especially considering the fact that 75% of all Americans
with an opinion on the matter believed in a conspiracy prior to the
release of VB's "Reclaiming History" on May 15th, 2007). .....
In addition, 71.6% of those first 141 Amazon reviews for VB's book are
"3-Star" reviews or higher.
In other words, almost 3 out of every 4 Amazon reviews for "RH" (to
date) are essentially "positive" reviews (at least as far as basic
"star" ratings are concerned, with a 3-Star rating certainly being a
"positive" rating, based on the fact that it's a rating that includes
more than 50% of the maximum number of rating stars allowed). Not bad
stats for "Reclaiming History" at all, IMO.
Also -- Only 22% of the Amazon reviewers (to date) have given "RH" a
bottom-of-the-barrel 1-Star rating. Per the kooks in this place, that
"1-Star" stat should probably be closer to 80% or 90% (or even 100%),
huh?
Just goes to show (albeit only in a rough, unscientific form, based on
141 book reviews posted at Amazon.com) that a majority of people
interested in the JFK assassination don't possess the same mindset
regarding the case that most of the rabid CTers at this forum possess.
(At least after reading "Reclaiming History" at any rate.)
A sampling from two 5-Star reviews posted at Amazon.com in December
2007 reveal comments like these.....
"The conspiracy theorists were always wrong when it came to the
JFK assassination. Bugliosi's new book is amazing, it makes one think
they were a buffoon for ever believing that the hapless Oswald
could've ever taken part in a conspiracy involving the CIA, mafia, or
military-industrial-complex to kill the president. ....
"The facts and evidence Bugliosi unearths is astonishing. He
makes many of the conspiracy writers look like frauds, there's simply
no other way to put it. It presents a near perfect account of the
assassination and a meticulous dissection of virtually every
conspiracy theory surrounding it. .... Bugliosi takes on every angle
and easily convinces anyone who chooses to see that Oswald acted alone
and wasn't involved in any conspiracy. ....
"Mr. Bugliosi has provided an incredibly valuable service to the
world with his Magnum Opus. He doesn't just shut the door on any more
thoughts of a conspiracy, he drop kicks it shut with a resounding slam
that will echo for generations to come. Reclaiming History will no
doubt go down as one of the seminal pieces of investigative historical
truth telling ever written." -- Drew Hunkins; Amazon Reviewer;
12/29/2007
www.amazon.com/review/R3OB2286HEWSIR
======================
"This is by far the single best work I have seen on the JFK
assassination. I was expecting another Posner-ish type book, but boy
was I pleasantly surprised. One by one the conspiracy theories are
falling by the wayside. ....
"I currently find myself in the position I never thought I would
be in. It is hard to let go of all the conspiracy baggage I have been
carrying the past twenty years. I have invested a lot of time and
money on this quest to find the answer to "who did it".
"During the course of my investigation I have determined that
JFK made many enemies during his presidency; some even to the point of
creating a motive for murder, however in the end, it appears to me now
that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone. This will be
the last book I ever read on the JFK assassination." -- Daniel Gibson;
Amazon Reviewer; 12/18/2007
www.amazon.com/review/R29BE2LUMEKYEG
======================
www.amazon.com/review/R2R0RQ0Q9AZY0M
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
======================
Lone
> www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=cm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencod...
>
> As of this writing on January 3, 2008, 56% of the 141 reviews for VB's
> book at Amazon are 5-Star reviews, which is a darn good percentage if
> you ask me (especially considering the fact that 75% of all Americans
> with an opinion on the matter believed in a conspiracy prior to the
> release of VB's "Reclaiming History" on May 15th, 2007). .....
>
I give you a more negativ rating.
David Von Pein
Gee, I don't know how I can continue to survive after having read that
comment from a kook.
Hari-kari must commence.
Phil Ossofee
Last time I checked 90% of the reviewers of Mortal Error thought that
was the last book they ever needed to read.
let's see Bugliosi got what a mllion dollars to take 20 years and twist
hundreds of witness statements into the lone nut conluson? Honorable?
What a friggin' joke.
justm...@gmail.com
Apparently you have Bugliosi confused with Gil Jesus, twisting witness
testimony is his specialty LOL.
Gil Jesus
wrote:
> Apparently you have Bugliosi confused with Gil Jesus, twisting witness
> testimony is his specialty LOL.
Just HOW did I twist witness testimony ? Was I able to reproduce all
their voices ? Did I dub in their voices ? And how did I get the lips
in the videos to match my dubbing ?
Don't accuse, tell everyone how I did it.
Another jackass opinion from our # 1 mental case, JUST MEntal.
justm...@gmail.com
You put misleanding comments to your videos. A prime example would be
JFK coughing up a bullet. This was your idea...you created a video
stating so. Other videos you post links too with your own ideas
attached ....not to mention going around the internet copying the
videos of others and calling them your own on your youtube site. You
imply the most ridiculous scenerios...the best yet is the entire DPD
was part of a conspiracy. You're a fraud, and a lying piece of shit
Jesus. You want to show you're not trying to fool the public eye?
Enable the comments sections of your videos. Stop using the excuse of
porn and spam. You can delete that just as easily as you deleted all
the negative comments before you disabled the comment section. If
you're so sure of yourself you'd let people voice their opinions. You
can't handle the rejection you would get...and you know it. This is
your way of pretending everyone agrees with you. You're a coward, a
fraud and a liar. Got news for ya Chico, if anyone has JACKASS
opinions it's you.
Now lets see if you enable the comment section. If you don't it proves
my point, you're a misleading liar.
justm...@gmail.com
tomnln
> On Jan 3, 6:53�am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> > Apparently you have Bugliosi confused with Gil Jesus, twisting witness
> > testimony is his specialty LOL.
>
> Just HOW did I twist witness testimony ? Was I able to reproduce all
> their voices ? Did I dub in their voices ? And how did I get the lips
> in the videos to match my dubbing ?
>
> Don't accuse, tell everyone how I did it.
>
> Another jackass opinion from our # 1 mental case, JUST MEntal.
You put misleanding comments to your videos. A prime example would be
JFK coughing up a bullet. This was your idea...you created a video
stating so. Other videos you post links too with your own ideas
attached ....not to mention going around the internet copying the
videos of others and calling them your own on your youtube site. You
imply the most ridiculous scenerios...the best yet is the entire DPD
was part of a conspiracy. You're a fraud, and a lying piece of shit
Jesus. You want to show you're not trying to fool the public eye?
Enable the comments sections of your videos. Stop using the excuse of
porn and spam. You can delete that just as easily as you deleted all
the negative comments before you disabled the comment section. If
you're so sure of yourself you'd let people voice their opinions. You
can't handle the rejection you would get...and you know it. This is
your way of pretending everyone agrees with you. You're a coward, a
fraud and a liar. Got news for ya Chico, if anyone has JACKASS
opinions it's you.
Now lets see if you enable the comment section. If you don't it proves
my point, you're a misleading liar.
Walt
> www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=cm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencod...
>
> book at Amazon are 5-Star reviews, which is a darn good percentage if
> you ask me (especially considering the fact that 75% of all Americans
> with an opinion on the matter believed in a conspiracy prior to the
> release of VB's "Reclaiming History" on May 15th, 2007)
Oh, verrry cleeeever, Von Pea Brain...... Cleverly comparing apples
and oranges......What percentage of the 141 readers were CT's ( the
75% ) before they zombie like stumbled through Da bug's tome. I'd
wager that 95% of the 141 reviewers were LNer's before they ever read
History Retwisted. They were looking for more BS to bolster their
sagging egos.
Walt
.....
>
> www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/002...
aeffects
> On 3 Jan, 02:33, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=cm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencod...
>
> > As of this writing on January 3, 2008, 56% of the 141 reviews for VB's
> > book at Amazon are 5-Star reviews, which is a darn good percentage if
> > you ask me (especially considering the fact that 75% of all Americans
> > with an opinion on the matter believed in a conspiracy prior to the
> > release of VB's "Reclaiming History" on May 15th, 2007)
>
> Oh, verrry cleeeever, Von Pea Brain...... Cleverly comparing apples
> and oranges......What percentage of the 141 readers were CT's ( the
> 75% ) before they zombie like stumbled through Da bug's tome. I'd
> wager that 95% of the 141 reviewers were LNer's before they ever read
> History Retwisted. They were looking for more BS to bolster their
> sagging egos.
"History Retwisted" ROTFLMFAO!
Ben Holmes
Walt says...>> www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=3Dcm_cr_pr_recent?%5Fencod...=
>
>>
>> As of this writing on January 3, 2008, 56% of the 141 reviews for VB's
>> book at Amazon are 5-Star reviews, which is a darn good percentage if
>> you ask me (especially considering the fact that 75% of all Americans
>> with an opinion on the matter believed in a conspiracy prior to the
>> release of VB's "Reclaiming History" on May 15th, 2007)
>
>Oh, verrry cleeeever, Von Pea Brain...... Cleverly comparing apples
>and oranges......What percentage of the 141 readers were CT's ( the
>75% ) before they zombie like stumbled through Da bug's tome. I'd
>wager that 95% of the 141 reviewers were LNer's before they ever read
>History Retwisted. They were looking for more BS to bolster their
>sagging egos.
>
>Walt
What *I* noted is the implication that any CT'ers changed to LNT'ers based on
their reading of Bugliosi's tome.
That has yet to be demonstrated.
> .....
>>
>> www.amazon.com/review/product/0393045250/ref=3Ddp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/002...=
>
>>
>> In addition, 71.6% of those first 141 Amazon reviews for VB's book are
>> "3-Star" reviews or higher.
>>
>> In other words, almost 3 out of every 4 Amazon reviews for "RH" (to
>> date) are essentially "positive" reviews (at least as far as basic
>> "star" ratings are concerned, with a 3-Star rating certainly being a
>> "positive" rating, based on the fact that it's a rating that includes
>> more than 50% of the maximum number of rating stars allowed). Not bad
>> stats for "Reclaiming History" at all, IMO.
>>
>> Also -- Only 22% of the Amazon reviewers (to date) have given "RH" a
>> bottom-of-the-barrel 1-Star rating. Per the kooks in this place, that
>> "1-Star" stat should probably be closer to 80% or 90% (or even 100%),
>> huh?
>>
>> Just goes to show (albeit only in a rough, unscientific form, based on
>> 141 book reviews posted at Amazon.com) that a majority of people
>> interested in the JFK assassination don't possess the same mindset
>> regarding the case that most of the rabid CTers at this forum possess.
>> (At least after reading "Reclaiming History" at any rate.)
>>
>> A sampling from two 5-Star reviews posted at Amazon.com in December
>> 2007 reveal comments like these.....
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "The conspiracy theorists were always wrong when it came to th=
>e
>> JFK assassination. Bugliosi's new book is amazing, it makes one think
>> they were a buffoon for ever believing that the hapless Oswald
>> could've ever taken part in a conspiracy involving the CIA, mafia, or
>> military-industrial-complex to kill the president. ....
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "The facts and evidence Bugliosi unearths is astonishing. He
>> makes many of the conspiracy writers look like frauds, there's simply
>> no other way to put it. It presents a near perfect account of the
>> assassination and a meticulous dissection of virtually every
>> conspiracy theory surrounding it. .... Bugliosi takes on every angle
>> and easily convinces anyone who chooses to see that Oswald acted alone
>> and wasn't involved in any conspiracy. ....
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "Mr. Bugliosi has provided an incredibly valuable service to t=
>he
>> world with his Magnum Opus. He doesn't just shut the door on any more
>> thoughts of a conspiracy, he drop kicks it shut with a resounding slam
>> that will echo for generations to come. Reclaiming History will no
>> doubt go down as one of the seminal pieces of investigative historical
>> truth telling ever written." -- Drew Hunkins; Amazon Reviewer;
>> 12/29/2007
>>
>> www.amazon.com/review/R3OB2286HEWSIR
>>
>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "This is by far the single best work I have seen on the JFK
>> assassination. I was expecting another Posner-ish type book, but boy
>> was I pleasantly surprised. One by one the conspiracy theories are
>> falling by the wayside. ....
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "I currently find myself in the position I never thought I wou=
>ld
>> be in. It is hard to let go of all the conspiracy baggage I have been
>> carrying the past twenty years. I have invested a lot of time and
>> money on this quest to find the answer to "who did it".
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "During the course of my investigation I have determined that
>> JFK made many enemies during his presidency; some even to the point of
>> creating a motive for murder, however in the end, it appears to me now
>> that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone. This will be
>> the last book I ever read on the JFK assassination." -- Daniel Gibson;
>> Amazon Reviewer; 12/18/2007
>>
>> www.amazon.com/review/R29BE2LUMEKYEG
>>
>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>>
>> www.amazon.com/review/R2R0RQ0Q9AZY0M
>>
>> www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
>>
>> www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com
>>
>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
Gil Jesus
> you're so sure of yourself you'd let people voice their opinions. You
> can't handle the rejection you would get...and you know it. This is
> your way of pretending everyone agrees with you. You're a coward, a
> fraud and a liar. Got news for ya Chico, if anyone has JACKASS
> opinions it's you.
> Now lets see if you enable the comment section. If you don't it proves
> my point, you're a misleading liar.
The comments sections were disabled to prevent PORN sites from
advertising there.
On Sept 5, 2007, you were told this.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/da6cb48a54bbec09
Since then, you've been told this time and time again, you lying
jackass.
Find something else to cry about.
Gil Jesus
>
> - Show quoted text -
Walt, I'll bet that 140 of the 141 reviews came from Von Pein himself.
tomnln
aeffects
> >>> "Oh, verrry cleeeever, {Mr. D.R. Von Pein, sir, master of CS&L}....Cleverly comparing apples and oranges. What percentage of the 141 readers were CT's...before they zombie-like stumbled through Da bug's tome?" <<<
>
> Beats me. I was just citing the raw statistics (based on the first 141
> reviews for the book @ Amazon).
>
> If you don't like (or approve of) those 71% "positive"
> reviews...goodie for you. You obviously disagree with that
> 71%...because you, of course, are an ABO Kook.
flattery will get you nowhere, son.... the best you've got is calling
others kooks, quoting the WCR endlessly does NOT avance the Nutter
cause, actually it make you and daBugliosi look like fools..... and
I'm content with that....
> But those figures are still there nonetheless.....almost 3 of every 4
> people who has volunteered to write a review for "RH" at Amazon have
> given the book a good or very good (or perfect) rating.
bullshit -- you know and I know its how many books he sells, the
fucking thing was a flash-bang DUD!.... What are the numbers to this
day? How many sold?
> Live with those stats, Mr. Conspiracy. And then live with the
> realiztion that you (an "Anybody-But-Oswald Mega-Kook") and your ABO
> ilk are NOT in the majority...and never were.
live with the sales Mr. Lone Nut-Kookster....
> Most people, even CTers, think that Oswald took some shots at JFK (and
> also believe that LHO killed J.D. Tippit, too, which is a murder that
> only a person with zero working brain cells could believe was
> committed by somebody other than Lee Harvey Oswald).
ahh, where are those cites, son? Why do you insist on masking yourself
look like a fool.... "Most people..."? Now your sounding like
heroworship......
> Choke on those "reality" stats, Mr. Moron.
choke on the book sales Mr. Lone Nut Kookster -- now Dave.... tell us
about Bob Vernon project... ever get off the ground?
<snip the Lone Nut Kookster wetdream>
aeffects
David Von Pein
Beats me. I was just citing the raw statistics (based on the first 141
reviews for the book @ Amazon).
If you don't like (or approve of) those 71% "positive"
reviews...goodie for you. You obviously disagree with that
71%...because you, of course, are an ABO Kook.
But those figures are still there nonetheless.....almost 3 of every 4
people who have volunteered to write a review for "RH" at Amazon have
given the book a good or very good (or perfect) rating.
Live with those stats, Mr. Conspiracy. And then live with the
realization that you (an "Anybody-But-Oswald" Mega-Kook) and your ABO
ilk are NOT in the majority...and never were.
Most people, even CTers, think that Oswald took some shots at JFK (and
also believe that LHO killed J.D. Tippit too, which is a murder that
only a person with zero working brain cells could believe was
committed by somebody other than Lee Harvey Oswald).
Choke on those "reality" stats, Mr. Moron.
==============================
POLLING QUESTION (with 1,031 people responding):
"Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald was the only gunman in the Kennedy
assassination, do you think there was another gunman in addition to
Oswald there that day, or do you think Oswald was not involved in the
assassination at all?".....
ONLY OSWALD ----------- 32%
ANOTHER GUNMAN ------- 51%
OSWALD NOT INVOLVED -- 7%
NO OPINION ------------- 10%
www.pollingreport.com/news2.htm#Kennedy
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c0189f6da4be3133
(Footnote -- The ABC poll on which the above stats are culled, btw,
includes an overall polling sample of individuals which is TWICE as
large as the Gallup Poll sampling from the same November 2003 period.)
==============================
>>> "I'd wager that 95% of the 141 reviewers were LNer's before they ever read {VB's masterpiece}." <<<
Better re-think that stat, Mr. Moron. Because 29% of those 141 people
gave "RH" a "negative" (1-Star or 2-Star) review.
Or do you think a goodly number of LNers were turned into conspiracy
kooks like you AFTER reading VB's tome? Somehow I doubt that
transformation has occurred to even one "RH" reader.
David Von Pein
And what exactly does the above statement (written by a Mega-Kook, of
course) have to do with this carefully-worded comment to which you
were directly responding?......
"Almost 3 of every 4 people who have volunteered to write a
review for "RH" at Amazon have given the book a good or very good (or
perfect) rating."
>>> "Live with the sales." <<<
Which I don't think are really very bad at all, considering all the
built-in things that are working against Mr. Bugliosi's book -- e.g.,
the large pct. of CTers in the USA (75% as of Nov. 2003); the massive
size of the book; the high price of the book; and the fact that it's
been 44 years since the assassination, which means a huge pct. of
people reading the book weren't even born when the assassination
occurred, which probably doesn't make selling the book any easier.
>>> "Where are those cites, son?" <<<
Already provided them, idiot....in full non-linked form even! (Plus
the linked poll too.) .....
ONLY OSWALD ----------- 32%
ANOTHER GUNMAN ------- 51%
OSWALD NOT INVOLVED -- 7%
NO OPINION ------------- 10%
http://www.pollingreport.com/news2.htm#Kennedy
Only 7 of every 100 respondents via that cited poll think that Oswald
was not a shooter.
So, even when the "cite" is right in front of his crack-happy face,
Healy can't see it. (Lovely.)
Or maybe Healy thinks I should have gone door-to-door and gotten a
personal signed affidavit/statement from every one of the 1,031 people
who make up the above-cited poll results.
I'll work on that, Healy.
In the meantime, maybe you could work on refining your "ZAPRUDER
WASN'T THERE, EVEN THOUGH ABE ADMITTED ON LIVE TELEVISION WITHIN 90
MINUTES OF THE ASSASSINATION THAT HE WAS ON TOP OF A 'CONCRETE BLOCK'
NEAR THE UNDERPASS FILMING THE MOTORCADE" theory.
Plus....coming up with at least one non-Oswald bullet might help your
half-assed conspiracy case too. Ya think?
Get busy on those things, will ya? (If you can pry yourself away from
your crack dealer for a few minutes, that is.)
>>> "Why do you insist on making yourself look like a fool." <<<
I've got a much better question --- Why does Healy insist on putting
all those illegal substances into his conspiracy-happy system?
tomnln
(I helped)
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19bdeed6-d30f-4c1d...@m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "Bullshit -- you know and I know it's how many books he sells..." <<<
>
>
> And what exactly does the above statement (written by a Mega-Kook, of
> course) have to do with this carefully-worded comment to which you
> were directly responding?......
>
> "Almost 3 of every 4 people who has volunteered to write a
> review for "RH" at Amazon have given the book a good or very good (or
> perfect) rating."
>
>
>
>