Religion | Gaming | Film | Fashion | Sex | Philosophy | Education | History | Arts | Music | Travel | Photography

Vincent Bugliosi on the Assasination of JFK

More from this series:

The JFK Assassination: 50 Years Later

More videos from this partner:

0
Likes
0
Dislikes
RATE

  • Info
  • Bio
  • Chapters
  • Preview
  • Download
  • Zoom In
Advertisement
There are 5 comments on this program

Please or register to post a comment.
Previous FORAtv comments:
DeanFox Avatar
DeanFox
Posted: 10.30.10, 01:14 AM
Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue Some points: Lane, Mark "Rush To Judgement" `1966 Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue 1. Aside from his corny jokes and courtroom tactics Mr Bugliosi does not address any of the facts in this scholarly book of the time. The facts are that there is no witness, essential to a trial, who identified Oswald as the shooter. Every witness in Dealey Plaza including the authorities rushed the grassy know thinking the shots came from there. This is simply fiction and is proven to be fiction if you actually watch all the film evidence and not take the word or a conspiracy author. Clearly in the films not ALL the witnesses are rushing to the knoll. To even claim something so easily refuted by photographic and film evidence as well as many eye witness who also identified the shots as coming from building including the Book Depository is to demonstrates that you really have not looked at this honestly for yourself but instead take the word of a conspiracy author as more informed and more authoritative than the Warren Report and the House Select Committee reports both of which I would be real money you have never read or looked at in any real detail. Do you really consider that wise? Secondly There was at least one witness Howard Brennen (sp) identified Oswald as the shooter. Others saw someone shooting from the 6th floor window, Harold Norman heard the shots above him from the 5th floor window and heard the casings hitting the floor... we can go on and on but clearly you have not paid any attention at all to actual evidence in the least. Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue 2. It was physically impossible for Oswald or any other shooter to fire the 3 rounds stated by the Warren Commission report including the missed round (bullet was found on street by police) with the archaic bolt action rifle. that's the reason for the "Magic Bullet Theory" Also totally untrue. Several people have demonstrated over many years that not only is this possible but they have also gotten the shots off in less time than Oswald did. Again, you have not looked at all the evidence. I believe one of the first to demonstrate that it was possible to fire the shots in less time that the Warren Commission concluded it took was Specialist Miller, I may have that name wrong right now I am not looking it up just going by memory but it is a starting point if you really want to look at real evidence and learn what might have really happened not what some profit motivated conspiracy author tells you happened. Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue 3. Even if didn't stop in mid air and turn 180 degrees it was still a "magic bullet" because it caused three injuries in two different people without any smashing of the bullet. Another total fallacy told by conspiracy authors. The "magic" or "pristine" bullet did not emerge with no damage or "smashing" that is a complete lie and the photographs of the bullet, if you bother to look at ALL OF THEM show that it is a lie. Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue 4. 8 of The doctors at Parkland Hospital (all) agreed that the wound in Kennedy's neck was an entrance wound. Subsequently autopsy photos were destroyed. I don't think you can demonstrate by evidence that ALL doctors at Parkland agreed to any such thing. In addition the doctors at Parkland were engaged in trying to save the President's life they did not do an autopsy and were not engaged in trying to determine the nature of the evidence at the time that observation was made. There is a tremendous difference between an observation made while conducting life saving efforts and those of an acutely autopsy that has the benefit of proper time and knowledge of a pathologist. Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue 5. Oliver Stone didn't represent his film as fact but a "counter myth" to the myth of the Oswald Lone Nut theory. Stone can say what he want's about any of his films he is a skilled film maker but is also a clear propagandist serving only his own ends for his own means. His movie was an entertaining bit of fiction and nothing more anyone who assumes it is historical in nature is a fool and knows nothing of the events in Dallas on that day. Quote: Originally Posted by antarblue Despite his histrionics and constant demonization of so-called "conspiracy theorists" Mr Bugliosi is not convincing. Makes me wonder about the Manson case! If you wonder about Manson and the Manson case you really have no grasp on reality. The problem here is people have become so invested in conspiracy claims they no longer care about the truth and have no interest at all in looking at the evidence. I have not even read all 26 volumes of the Warren Report but I have read most of the interviews with the eye witnesses several times and know more about what was actually reported than most people as a result. What is written in conspiracy books is usually only minutely related to the truth of the case and the truth of what eye witnesses reported. If you really want to know what happen I would suggest you give at least as much time to reading actual testimony as you have to reading conspiracy theory. I started out believing in a conspiracy but eventually had to come to the conclusion that there is no real evidence of any conspiracy. In all things we must go where the facts lead us not where distortion and absence of evidence allows whimsy to take us, particularly at the leading of motivated propagandists. I find it troubling that so many want to question the motives of hundreds of witnesses who disagree with the conspiracy theorist and want to believe massive conspiracy involving thousands in the Government but never once bother to ask if profit motivations might be behind distortion of evidence by conspiracy authors.
antarblue Avatar
antarblue
Posted: 04.19.10, 07:11 PM
Some points: Lane, Mark "Rush To Judgement" `1966 1. Aside from his corny jokes and courtroom tactics Mr Bugliosi does not address any of the facts in this scholarly book of the time. The facts are that there is no witness, essential to a trial, who identified Oswald as the shooter. Every witness in Dealey Plaza including the authorities rushed the grassy know thinking the shots came from there. 2. It was physically impossible for Oswald or any other shooter to fire the 3 rounds stated by the Warren Commission report including the missed round (bullet was found on street by police) with the archaic bolt action rifle. that's the reason for the "Magic Bullet Theory" 3. Even if didn't stop in mid air and turn 180 degrees it was still a "magic bullet" because it caused three injuries in two different people without any smashing of the bullet. 4. 8 of The doctors at Parkland Hospital (all) agreed that the wound in Kennedy's neck was an entrance wound. Subsequently autopsy photos were destroyed. 5. Oliver Stone didn't represent his film as fact but a "counter myth" to the myth of the Oswald Lone Nut theory. Despite his histrionics and constant demonization of so-called "conspiracy theorists" Mr Bugliosi is not convincing. Makes me wonder about the Manson case!
HFergel Avatar
HFergel
Posted: 12.29.08, 11:42 PM
Vincent Bugliosi in Dallas
I am astonished!! This man is a lawyer?!! He mentions his problems with memory. Perhaps Mr. Vincent Bugliosi suffers from Alzheimer's Disease.
Advertisement

Advertisement
FORA.tv ticker
FORA.tv ticker