VINCE PALAMARA SAID:
Yes, I'm baaaaaaaaaaack, DVP (please read)....
Man, I know why you are known as "O.J." Von Pein: your comments cut like a knife LOL :O)
Yes, it is true that a) I was a fervent believer in a conspiracy in JFK's death from approx. 1978 to early 2007 and b) that I changed my mind via Vincent Bugliosi's MASTERPIECE, "Reclaiming History", THE best Oswald-did-it book---and one of the best books ever---on the JFK assassination (although I DID still believe there WERE conspiracies [plural] to kill Kennedy...just that Oswald beat them all to the punch and, as Vince Bugliosi even acknowledges, the Secret Service were grossly negligent).
Why people care so much about my opinion is both flattering and bemusing---WHO GIVES A ^%^$$#!!!!! It is a free country and everyone is entitled to one (and you know what they say about opinions LOL...).
That said, for the record: I am back to believing there was a conspiracy, thanks largely to Douglas Horne's amazing new books [again, PLURAL]!
FANTASTIC ANALOGY THAT I REALLY LIKE AND ALOT OF PEOPLE CAN RELATE TO (50-60% divorce rate...and I, myself, am twice divorced LOL):
My first marriage = belief in conspiracy...
My second marriage = change of heart.
Now, didn't I (and millions of once married people) love their wife once upon a time? Wasn't it legit? Does anything that transpires AFTER negate the sincerity of those feelings for the time? Of course not. When I and millions of other second-timers married again, THOSE feelings were sincere and legit, as well; everything--and everyone---lives in the context of the times (pre-June 1994: O.J. Simpson was just a great football player, pre-November 2009, Tiger Woods was an untainted Golf star..get it? LOL).
Now, when I got divorced again, along came...
New girlfriend = back to belief in conspiracy, albeit somewhat different view.
"In one of the articles I mention Vincent Palamara's name. It seems that Palamara has now decided to stab Mr. Bugliosi in the gut (so to speak) via his admission that he still believes in a conspiracy in the JFK case (despite his apparent total switch to "LNism" in 2007 after reading Mr. Bugliosi's book)."
[End DVP Quote.]
----HUH? THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY. ONE IS NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE THEIR MIND????? I HAVE ENORMOUS RESPECT FOR VINCE BUGLIOSI AND HIS BOOK (S). USING THE ANALOGY ABOVE, NO ONE IS PERMITED [sic] TO MARRY AGAIN---HEY, YOU SWORE A BLOOD OATH TO THE FIRST ONE. LOL.
"To tell you the truth, Rosemary, I always knew that Palamara wasn't really ever completely "converted" into a lone-assassin believer. This became obvious to me when I saw that Palamara was continuing to write 5-star reviews at Amazon.com for pro-conspiracy books many months after he went on record endorsing Bugliosi's book (such as Palamara's glowing review in 2008 of Jim Douglass' book)." -- DVP
JIM DOUGLASS WROTE A GREAT BOOK. GEEZ, SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SOVIET-INSPIRED DOCTRINE TO FOLLOW NOW??? :o)
"It's just a shame that Mr. Bugliosi placed so much faith in Palamara's supposed "turnaround" into an LNer." -- DVP
I SINCERELY DOUBT HE DID. CIRCA EARLY 2007, MY BOOK BLURB WAS 100% (NOT EVEN 99%) SINCERE...USING MY OJ ANALOGY, THIS WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO SAYING "VINCE, YOU'RE A REAL JERK: I HAVE THIS *1993* ARTICLE OF YOURS WHEREIN YOU STATE WHAT A WONDERFUL PERSON OJ IS--YOU CREEP!!" AGAIN, CONTEXT/ CONVICTION OF---AND AT---THE TIME :o)
"I winced when I saw Palamara's positive review for "Reclaiming History" appear in VB's 2008 follow-up volume, "Four Days In November". Because now, as of late 2009, that pro-LN blurb for "RH" appears to be totally phony." -- DVP
"I've known for several years now that Palamara (in my own opinion) appears to be a person who seemingly doesn't know which side of the JFK fence he wants to reside on." -- DVP
HMMM: AS OF 2005-2007ISH, GUILTY AS CHARGED---I WAS RIPE FOR THE TAKING WHEN VINCE'S MASTERFUL BOOK CAME OUT [YES, YOU *CAN* HAVE YOUR CAKE AND EAT IT. I KNOW LOTS OF PRO-CONSPIRACY PEOPLE WHO LOVE RICHARD TRASK'S BOOKS...AND HE IS A LONE NUTTER ALL THE
WAY...SO? :o) ]
"His #1 goal, it seems, is to have his name show up in as many JFK books as possible." -- DVP
WELL, NOT #1, BUT IT IS KINDA COOL LOL :o)
"And I fear that was his main motivation for vigorously supporting Mr. Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History" in 2007. That's kind of sad, but probably true." -- DVP
"Again, that's just my own personal opinion about Mr. Palamara's possible motivations. I admit, I could be 100% wrong about that." -- DVP
YOU ARE. :o)
"But that's the feeling I get from reading his non-stop self-promoting articles and blurbs that appear at many Internet locations." -- DVP
NOPE, THAT'S JUST MY EGO GETTING IN THE WAY. LOL. WHEN PEOPLE MEET ME IN PERSON, THEY ALWAYS SAY "GEE, YOU DON'T SEEM ANYWHERE NEAR AS EGOTISTICAL AS YOU DO ONLINE". LOL :o) :o) LIFE IS SHORT---HISTORY BELONGS TO THOSE WHO WRITE IT...AND YOU MUST PUBLICIZE YOUR OWN GOOD WORKS THESE DAYS.
Vince Palamara :O)
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Gee, what a convoluted mess Vincent Palamara's post above is, as he attempts to HAVE IT BOTH WAYS -- he wants to believe that Vince Bugliosi's JFK book is a "masterpiece", but at the very same time he is now "back to believing there was a conspiracy, thanks largely to Douglas Horne's amazing new books" [V. Palamara; 12/15/09].
Talk about contradictory thinking....Mr. Palamara's got it.
In order to believe in ANY of the conspiracy-tinged nonsense that Douglas Horne believes in, a person must AUTOMATICALLY disbelieve the things that Vincent T. Bugliosi believes in.
And Mr. Palamara's "marriage" analogy is simply a howl. Marriage isn't akin to the JFK assassination situation at all. Not even close.
Either Lee Oswald killed Kennedy alone (as Bugliosi posits) or he didn't (as Horne posits). You cannot believe that BOTH Bugliosi's and Horne's versions of the JFK story are true. They are like water and oil. They cannot co-exist.
It makes me wonder if Vince Palamara will soon give some credence to Brian David Andersen's conspiracy theory about how JFK faked his own death. Only time will tell. It depends on which direction the wind is blowing on any particular day, it would seem.
In short, it appears that Vince Palamara's opinions regarding the John F. Kennedy murder case are about as steady as the colors of a chameleon.
David Von Pein
December 16, 2009