Bugliosi Is A CT (part 1 of 2)

[AmusedChild]

So he thinks that there was a conspiracy in the RFK murder, but not one (because there's no evidence of one) in the JFK assassination? Is that what this about? Big deal.

[mcjoe]

He calls people who believe in government conspiracies "zany" but he believes or believed in one. He says that goverments can't keep secrets that big yet he argued that they could, etc. He is a double-minded hypocrite. That's the big deal. Maybe you should stick to videos of kitties ma'am.

[ShunyamNiketana]

Demonstrating that Bugliosi has been inconsistent in his perspective on the possibility of conspiracy in the assassinations of JFK and RFK doesn't really prove much, does it? I happen to favor the conspiracy position with regard to the death of JFK, and I wouldn't be surprised by the games high ranking officials are willing to play, but I also respect Bugliosi's right to have seemingly inconsistent perspectives based on his own review of evidence.

[samiemma]

This Jerry Owen-Sirhan angle was HUGE. Too bad for us all that Bugliosi didn't pursue it, instead trying to rehabilitate the corpse of the Warren Report.

[ShutterBun2]

It's hard to consider the opinions of a guy who's done countless hours of research and written a gargantuan, comprehensive text to be "dismissive." If anything, his efforts give currently-held conspiracy theories more credit than they're worth.

[delmaroeb]

CIA Agent Morales was in the Hotel Lobby. There are photos that have come out. CIA Morales did not go anywhere unless there was a contract. Ruthless MF.

[luridplanet]

If anyone could prove that Oswald did it alone, it wouldn't challenge my world view. Could the would-be debunkers say the same if a conspiracy could be proven? Instead of reading Vinnie's book, read the ballistics reports and autopsy reports. Ironically, the Warren Report is a gold mine of evidence pointing to conspiracy, if you ignore their Orwellian conclusions.

[eXPerienceyeah]

The information is coming out - you';re replying to it claiming none of this ever comes out, classic, oh good one, maybe you have the belief system huh?

[librarianeric]

Here's what you conspiracy theorists just don't get - historians and investigators would LOVE nothing more than to discover conclusive evidence of a conspiracy. It would be HUGE! They would never have to work another day in their lives.

Stop taking things on faith and take a long, hard, CRITICAL look at your belief system. Historical and scientific analysis demands nothing less.

[bouncer97]

'' they would never work another day in their lives''

lol..EXACTLY moron!!!,..BUT for the heads of the media, that would blow the whistle,guarenteed ...they probably ''wouldnt LIVE another day of their lives!

''take a look at your belief system''

right,and i believe and any objective person would also believe what we are seeing in this truthful video, is a hypocrite PERIOD....nothing less

[bouncer97]

''they would never WORK anather day in there lives''

ha ha exactly,but the heads of these news companies probably,''wont LIVE another day in their lives'' the agency would make sure of that.

[giles422]

thanks man- I knew about how much Bug did to get at Owen- how he almost proved consp. in RFK, and now this 180 degree spin on JFK. He's clearly on the pad.

[dirtbagrob]

Have you guys heard about his new book - The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.

[mcjoe]

Very interesting his remarks about that book not doing so well. He says it's because of a "media blackout". Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

[ImeldaDavies]

Yeah, its good. His JFK stuff is totally shite however. He should have stayed put prosecuting psychotic hippies and warmongering imbeciles.

[jesslessthemess]

I remember laughing at conspiracy theorists as little as 4mo ago. Once u get bombarded w/ enough info that it rocks your understanding of the world, you can change 180 degrees in your view point. I can attest to that. But if you're getting mixed signals from this guy, then he probably does have an alterior motive. It doesn't make him incorrect.

[ImeldaDavies]

Good point. But Bugliosi is very incorrect. He didnt even write the book himself. So be cautious. I have been looking into this stuff for awhile now -17 years. When I realised their was a conspiracy...not my suspicion of one, the flood gates did open. Just be careful. Theres a ton of shit out there. So go to CTKA/ Probe, and Real history archives. Jim and Lisa rock. Read Jim Douglas's book as well it will send u in a good un bullshit David Lifton/John Hankey/Alex Jones direction.

[ij911]

RECLAIMING BULLSHIT! Just because his book is big makes it believable! AH NO NO NO! Quit believing that the second bullet went through Kennedy's throat, then went through Gov. Connally's rib, broke his wrist and hit his leg. Vincent Bugliosi, it takes a lot to build a good reputation, but very little to wreck it. Shame on you Vincent!

[idiggravez]

this has enlightened me... both video and conversation. thank you

[chubbychaser31]

yeah..you dont understand he's a hypocrite who,traded ideals for ambition.Its easy to say oswald was guilty..when you have that mindset to begin with.OH...and money to be made.BOGUS-LOSI=EXPOSED,LOL

[ImeldaDavies]

funny, bugliosi did apparently believe in a conspiracy for jfk before his book. Go to CTKA Probe for the best take down of Bugliosi currently available. Its by Jim Di Eugenio. Hes the best researcher currently out there, him and Lisa Pease. Check out all their stuff. Man dont bother with John Hankey. david Lifton and Alex Jones groooooooooooooaaannn.

[letsgodonk]

Lawyers are trained to argue BOTH sides, Bugliosi is brilliant at this and is a phoney in many ways, but all good lawyers are.

[chubbychaser31]

what dont you understand JK549?ALL HE'S PROVING IS THAT BOGUS-LOSI'S A HYPOCRITE!It's easy to find anyone guilty,when that was the plan from the jump,cmon lol

[jkbbr549]

I don't understand. Even if he did believe there was a conspiracy against RFK, what does that have to do with JFK?  And yes, he was approached from a British production company. The trial was filmed and showed on Showtime in 1987. I watched it. He himself said he didn't give the JFK matter much thought until he was asked to prove Oswalds guilt in a British court of law some 11 years after his words were spoken about RFK. People change when they learn more facts.

[mcjoe]

You don't understand...yeeeeah. I don't buy that. You know exactly what I am saying by this video and if you were honest you wouldn't have attempted this lame criticism. "Even if he did believe..." He said, based on the EVIDENCE before him, that there was a PROBABLE conspiracy in RFK's assassination.

[mcjoe]

"...what does that have to do with JFK?" Jesus, I really am going to have to spoon feed it to ya. Okaaay, here comes the airplane, open wide. JFK and RFK, two political murders. Both have allegations of conspiracy. Both have allegations of a high-level conspiracy orchestrating them. Bug says of one (RFK's) that there probably was a conspiracy based on the EVIDENCE.

[Decondition]

If anyone else claimed there was a conspiracy in RFK as well then they would be called a "conspiracy nut" or is claiming a conspiracy in RFK fashionable these days?

I guess as long as you deny there was a conspiracy in JFK then it's fine.

[mcjoe]

He said that "if there was one" (which is a cover so he doesn't have to say there was when we know he believed it was probable and he ran on that issue for DA) in the assassination that it was "likely...of considerable magnitude" and that "it would involve people in the highest levels of our government".

[mcjoe]

He believed that these high-level conspiracies CAN be kept secret ("...not hatched on television...") and can be proven without incontrovertible evidence ("...proven by circumstantial evidence", "proven bit by bit..", "form a mosaic", no need for a tape, etc.) He also associated with CT's, among them Jonn Christian.

[mcjoe]

Now, with JFK he says "no credible evidence" of a conspiracy, which means he would require incontrovertible, beyond all doubt, written by the finger of God in stone evidence to believe there was one (contradiction). He says nothing has leaked out about a high-level conspiracy in JFK's because there is nothing to leak out and three people can keep a secret only if two are dead (contradiction).

[mcjoe]

And then he calls people who believe the same way about the JFK case that HE believed (or believes, I have never heard him retract any statements about his RFK views and doesn't mention it in his overkill of a book) about RFK's case "zany" and "insane" and that there ideas are "pure, unadulterated moonshine" (contradiction).

[mcjoe]

Bug was arguing in court about a political murder of a man and the man's brother's murder is the grand-daddy of all American political murders and he "didn't give it that much thought"? This is creditable to you? Wow if only most of the American public were as impressionable as you. The WC would have had a cake walk.

[mcjoe]

And you're wrong, people don't change when they learn more facts", they change when they CHOOSE to (or in this case when the price is right). There are plenty of examples on this page of that. Facts don't get addressed when they contradict with a political agenda and a desire to win an argument.

[mcc1789]

@mcjoe So that means if you ever learned more facts that shed doubt on the JFK conspiracy theories you wouldn't change your mind? Good to know. Perhaps facts "help" people change their minds, does that make sense? For instance Bugliosis might have changes his mind after looking into these cases more. So if facts contradict your agenda or desire, then you ignore them? Everything you've said can apply to your own side too.

[Obelisk2290]

Funny how you start by quoting the biggest CT of all time. The existence of a God. The book is ALL EVIDENCE and is incontravetable. While CT have not produced one peace of evidence. Again what is the agendo for defending a double murderer who also tried to kill Edwin Walker. Your sonourous voice just shows your conviction. Get a life

[mcjoe]

God is a conspiracy theory? I quoted from the Bible which is at least considered literature. People do it, big deal. Bug's book is neither "all evidence" nor "incontravetable" [sic]. Bugliosi is a talented lawyer who can argue whatever side suits his interests as I have shown. The "evidence" is the same recycled WC/Posner nonsense.

[mcjoe]

There is overwhelming evidence of a conspiracy in-spite of the intimidation, coercion and murder of witnesses, forged affidavits, and destruction of evidence by government agencies, just for starters. My voice is "sonourous" [sic}? Do you mean sonorous? I have a full and deep voice that shows my conviction? I think you just complimented me, LOL.

[Obelisk2290]

more like monodynamic and lifeless but ok. 21 years of reasearch and evidence went into VB book. The first chapter alone "Four days in November" Comes alive with over a thousand end notes and citations that brings those days to life like never before. He has over 10000 citation throughout the book. Like him or not VB is prepared with EVIDENCE. CT can only cower with baseless acusations

[mcjoe]

Ok, then I guess you don't know the definitions (or how to spell) your own words you use. "Brings those days to life like never before", that has been done a dozen times before (Manchester, Bishop, et al.) nothing impressive there. All of the endnotes and citations are not impressive either, the WR had 7,000 footnotes. Bug beats them by 3,000, big deal. It's to impress those people, like Dulles said, who don't read.

[mcjoe]

But Jose, God, my voice or whether I like Bug or not is not even close to being important. The point of the video and what this discussion should be about (are you ready?) is Bug's contradictory statements about conspiracies, the possibility of high level conspiracies, and whether it is possible to keep them a secret. This is what needs to be discussed here and is the point of the video, nothing else. What is your answer about these three ideas of Bugliosi and HOW THEY CONTRADICT?

[Obelisk2290]

What does VB say that contradicts. NOTHING has come out in 44 years. If some politician or investigator found a TRUE conspiravy the would win the pulitzer. The other point is why are people so hard up to defend a double murderer who tried to kill before?

[mcjoe]

What does VB say that contradicts?

That's the closest you came to addressing the main points in the video. Are you sure you watched the video? Both parts? I'm not going to do the work for you. Watch it again and compare his 1975 statements about RFK's assassination and now his 2007 (same as 1986) statements about JFK's assassination. Compare them and tell me how there is no contradiction.

[mcjoe]

Two similar political assassinations, two different views on conspiracies, the possibility of high level conspiracies, and whether it is possible to keep them a secret. And the fact that he can associate with "CT's" in the 70's concerning RFK's assassination but others can't in the new millennium with JFK's assassination. Just that Jose, nothing else.

[Obelisk2290]

WB did what CT never do that dig in deep into research and modified and updated his knowledge just science is constantly questioning their findings and updating their knowledge while CT like fetzer, marrs and all the rest of the sorry lot see conspiracy in everythingg and are incapable of accepting a mound of info. For years I thought there was a conspiracy. Now I know better. Thanks for the discussion it was actually a pleasure

[mcjoe]

It's just to bad that you couldn't answer the points that were raised in the video about Bugliosi's double-speak. Maybe one day someone will.

[mcjoe]

You also tell me to "get a life"! WHAT?! Do you know me? How do you know I don't have one? I'm not the one who comments on just about every JFK video on the net, not just the ones on youtube, while not contributing any of your own. Did you ever speak to your students this way? I have no "agendo" [sic] Jose, do you?

[pajasa62]

People are PARANOID ABOUT conspiracies. I'm still waiting for the conspiracy clowns to fork up one bit of tangible evidence about JFK, RFK, not going to the moon,etc....and all the want to do is dance around the subject until they resort to cursing there way out or seamlessly bringing up another wild theory of theirs.

[mcjoe]

"People are PARANOID ABOUT conspiracies."

Bugliosi must be numbered with them then. He said "if" there was a conspiracy (and it's obvious that he believed in one at some point because of his later action described in the video) "it would involve people in the highest levels of our government..." If "CT's" are paranoid than so is Bug, the current hero of the Commission Apologists (CA) crowd.

[mcjoe]

In response to your comment about "conspiracy clowns" needing to come up with "tangible evidence" of a conspiracy in JFK's or RFK's assassination, It reminds me of when an attorney objected to Bugliosi trying to link Owen to the RFK assassination by saying, "there is no foundational proof for it".

[mcjoe]

Bugliosi said it best when he complained, "The court is demanding that I put on evidence, either a tape-recorded conversation or a film, showing Mr. Owen saying, 'Let's get Senator Kennedy!' Anything short of this apparently is not admissible in this courtroom." "These conspiracies are hatched in the shadows", Bug explained, not "with a megaphone".

[mcjoe]

You also say that "conspiracy clowns..resort to cursing there way out" of an argument. But I have found that Commission Apologists start with name-calling and personal insults right out of the gate. I am also finding out that people have refused to address Bugliosi's contradictory statements, yet they continue to pimp his book in blogs and message boards.

[pajasa62]

For 45 years people have been SEARCHING ACTIVELY for conspiracy and not just amatuers, but people that had alot to gain personally, career-wise, financially. Where's the evidence? I call them clowns because when you go out in public and say thing's like "it's obvious" or "I know" (like Jim Garrison) Sorry, but someone might just hold you accountable if you have NOTHING to back it up. Just like in real life........

[mcjoe]

Any opinions on Bugliosi, his contradictory statements? Anything about the info about him contained in this video?

[pajasa62]

This premise of this posting as I view it is pro-JFK conspiracy site - yes or no. We all know lawyers will sell there mothers for a fee. I'm sure CT hero Mark Lane's beloved flock cringe when they realize he was the lawyer for Jim Jones and was even in Jonestown as the suicides started. And which of our Pres. candidates isn't accused of flip-flopping? In this your comparing what Bugliosi said about RFK in '75 to JFK in '07 (32 years - different events/people)

[mcjoe]

The "premise of the posting" is to expose Bugliosi's unbelievable hypocrisy. His contradictory views about evidence, the nature of conspiracies, and his sarcastic, insulting language when speaking about "CT's" when he was or is one. He didn't just argue for a conspiracy because it was a job, which would cause me to be at least skeptical of his motives and methods in his book.

[mcjoe]

After the case he was involved in groups that were pro-conspiracy and he ran on the platform of re-opening the case when he ran for office! This is why I don't like debates, no one can pin anyone down on anything. The subject here is Bugliosi and nothing else.

[mcjoe]

Lawyers would "sell there [sic] own mothers for a fee". In-spite of this, Warren Commission Apologists seem to rely on them a lot, Posner and now Bugliosi. The WC refused to have investigators and instead relied on their lawyers for "investigation". Easier to twist, distort and leave out facts that way.

[mcjoe]

"In this your comparing what Bugliosi said about RFK in '75 to JFK in '07 (32 years - different events/people)"

You have to be honest with yourself. If you can't see the similarities between these two political murders and the surrounding circumstances I don't know what to say.

[mcjoe]

Bugliosi's statements about evidence, conspiracies and people who believe in them are completely contradictory, no matter how many years pass (doesn't matter) or the people and events being different (which, come on, are so similar it's ridiculous to deny).

[TKO11]

This is hilarious! I love the sinister music! Vince said 35 years ago that he didn't know if there was a conspiracy in the RFK killing means he's a "flip-flopper" on the JFK assassination? BRILLIANT! You go girl.

[mcjoe]

Again, I don't know what girl you think you're talking to. I've already explained Bug's "not knowing for sure" excuse in the video description, maybe you missed it when you were focusing on how sarcastic you were going to be in your comment.

[mcjoe]

I never said he was a flip-flopper in his views of JFK's assassination, just one in general because of his contradictory statements about the nature of conspiracies. His actions and methods are sinister, so I thought the music was appropriate, glad you liked it.

[Decondition]

Except he tried to defend KCOP by making the case that Owens was involved in the RFK assassination. Yeah he is a flip-flopper and a LAWYER. How much was he paid huh?

[mia0899cs]

5 stars! This was a great vid! I obviously do not agree with Bugliosi!