+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser (/thread-13707.html)
Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser - Scott Kaiser - 21-02-2015
This guy really cracks me up, in this video he makes a statement and says, "there is no credible evidence the CIA, mob or any of these groups was involved in the assassination, nothing", then he says "and here we have a situation where close to forty four years later not one word, not one syllable has leaked out, why? Cause there's nothing to leak out". Allow me to address these statements, first off, Bugliosi should have waited fifty years to find out that someone did know, and in-fact I'm willing to bet everything I own, everything I have, and put a million dollars on top of that, that Bugliosi didn't even know who the sixth burglar in Watergate was. Then he said, "secondly, there is no evidence that Oswald had any association or connection with any of these groups". Again, Bugliosi never heard of my father. Evidently, they didn't check out Oswald hard enough, or someone would have known that Oswald was in Miami in January of 1963 where he meets my father. Bugliosi then says, "I mean today, who defects to the Soviet Union? How about Edward Snowden? Here's the thing folks, Bugliosi is speaking as if one of these groups wanted to use Oswald to kill the president with this twelve dollar mail ordered rifle, and as Bugliosi puts it. Oswald was a poor shot. No! I know that none of these groups relied on Oswald to fire a shot, the point I'm trying to make is that Bugliosi tries to use Oswald as their cut-out for a group. Bugliosi portrays Oswald as the man a group would use. But, acted alone. And, what I'm telling you is that Oswald never seen it coming, so how could any group use him? I would go up against Bugliosi anytime, anywhere. Enough said....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JktLkQbtVbE
Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser - Albert Doyle - 22-02-2015
Bugliosi's a legal weasel. He stresses no "credible" evidence of conspiracy or involvement of Oswald with CIA.
Like Von Pein, he will then spend endless effort explaining why all the evidence isn't "credible". It's semantic word games.
When Jesse Ventura tried to confront him he literally got up and ran away.
Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser - Gordon Gray - 24-02-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Bugliosi's a legal weasel. He stresses no "credible" evidence of conspiracy or involvement of Oswald with CIA.If I were physically confronted by Jesse I'd run a way too. But I'm sure Vince got a handsome advance from some CIA cutout publisher.
Like Von Pein, he will then spend endless effort explaining why all the evidence isn't "credible". It's semantic word games.
When Jesse Ventura tried to confront him he literally got up and ran away.
Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser - Albert Doyle - 24-02-2015
I think Jim D traced the origins of Bugliosi's encouragement to write Reclaiming History. It came from the usual haunted house of official history peddlers and their masters.
Bugliosi vs Scott Kaiser - Scott Kaiser - 25-02-2015
I don't worry about going up against an eighty year old man with the information I'm now armed with. Bugliosi wouldn't stand a chance, and I wouldn't want to feel responsible for giving an old man a heart attack after he learned the truth.