18-02-2013, 01:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 18-02-2013, 02:04 PM by Charles Drago.)
The disturbed and disturbing Vincent Michael Palamara, who has described himself (see below) as "the nicest 'lone-nutter' in the research community," is shamelessly promoting the upcoming publication of a revised version of his study of the performance of the Secret Service relative to the JFK assassination.
As Palamara is breathlessly proclaiming, his Survivor's Guilt: The Secret Service and the Failure to Protect the President will appear in the fall. Note the KEY title word: "Failure."
In other words, expect vacillating Vince to argue that what we're dealing with here is ineptitude ( he prefers "gross negligence") rather than conspiracy.
There is every good reason to conclude that Palamara will betray the truth yet again. But don't take my word for it. Instead, read Palamara's own words:
My goal is to surpass Richard
Trask as the nicest "lone-nutter" in the research community (he is
virtually the only one from the "dark" side CTers still like and
respect, to a great extent)! I STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THERE WERE MORTAL
THREATS AND CONSPIRACIES (PLURAL) TO KILL JFK THAT WERE BREWING/ IN
MOTION JUST BEFORE/ CONCURRENT WITH 11/22/63...just that, as much as
it pains me to admit (trust me, it does), Oswald beat everyone to the
punch. So, in THAT regard, I am hardly a lone nutter, per se. To make
an analogy: several groups were planning to rob the First National
Bank of Boston, but some lone individual pulled off the caper before
they got the chance to enact their nefarious schemes. Third, I
(OBVIOUSLY) STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE SECRET SERVICE'S GROSS
NEGLIGENCE LED TO THE DEATH OF JFK *AND* THERE INEPT HANDLING OF
PRE-11/22/63 THREATS TO JFK AIDED AND ABETTED BOTH OSWALD *AND* THE
POTENTIAL (SEPARATE) CONSPIRATORS WHO WERE, FOR VARIOUS REASONS,
UNABLE TO SEE THEIR GOAL COME TO FRUITION (BUT LOVED THE FACT THAT
OSWALD DID THEIR DIRTY WORK). Fourth, I REALLY AND TRULY READ VINCE
BUGLIOSI'S BOOK: EVERY WORD, EVERY SOURCE NOTE, FOOTNOTE...EVERY
DETAIL...DID YOU???? Or did you dismiss it out of hand, skim it, or
rely on just the nasty CT book reviews for your, ahem, "reading" of
his book? Well (answer truthfully)? From 1978 to April 2007, I
adamantly and forcefully believed there was a conspiracy in DALLAS and
that Oswald, if he acted at all (which I highly doubted), did NOT act
alone. I don't know what my friend Jack White was referring to
earlier: limited hangout???? From me???? I am on record, many times on
the net, in conference appearances, e-mails, etc. as espousing a firm
belief that there was a conspiracy in DALLAS...and, in a strong way, I
AM STILL ESPOUSING ONE---AGAIN, I STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THERE WERE
MORTAL THREATS AND CONSPIRACIES (PLURAL) TO KILL JFK THAT WERE
BREWING/ IN MOTION JUST BEFORE/ CONCURRENT WITH 11/22/63...but Oswald
"took the rap" for them by doing the deed by himself. Am I guilty of
trying to have it both ways? Guilty as charged---but it's a sincere
belief on my part. [emphases in the original]
Palamara is incapable of resisting the pathological need to associate himself with the JFK assassination superstar of the moment -- regardless of the conspiracy/LN position he or she may have taken. He is the quintessential apple-polisher, and in the case of the words above, the "apple" was none other than Vincent Bugliosi.
Never forget that he had endorsed Gerald Posner's disinformation at the time it first appeared.
My guess is that soon Palamara will be grabbing his ankles before Tom Hanks and/or Leonardo di Caprio.
Beware of Vincent Michael Palamara.
Beware of Survivor's Guilt.
As Palamara is breathlessly proclaiming, his Survivor's Guilt: The Secret Service and the Failure to Protect the President will appear in the fall. Note the KEY title word: "Failure."
In other words, expect vacillating Vince to argue that what we're dealing with here is ineptitude ( he prefers "gross negligence") rather than conspiracy.
There is every good reason to conclude that Palamara will betray the truth yet again. But don't take my word for it. Instead, read Palamara's own words:
My goal is to surpass Richard
Trask as the nicest "lone-nutter" in the research community (he is
virtually the only one from the "dark" side CTers still like and
respect, to a great extent)! I STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THERE WERE MORTAL
THREATS AND CONSPIRACIES (PLURAL) TO KILL JFK THAT WERE BREWING/ IN
MOTION JUST BEFORE/ CONCURRENT WITH 11/22/63...just that, as much as
it pains me to admit (trust me, it does), Oswald beat everyone to the
punch. So, in THAT regard, I am hardly a lone nutter, per se. To make
an analogy: several groups were planning to rob the First National
Bank of Boston, but some lone individual pulled off the caper before
they got the chance to enact their nefarious schemes. Third, I
(OBVIOUSLY) STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE SECRET SERVICE'S GROSS
NEGLIGENCE LED TO THE DEATH OF JFK *AND* THERE INEPT HANDLING OF
PRE-11/22/63 THREATS TO JFK AIDED AND ABETTED BOTH OSWALD *AND* THE
POTENTIAL (SEPARATE) CONSPIRATORS WHO WERE, FOR VARIOUS REASONS,
UNABLE TO SEE THEIR GOAL COME TO FRUITION (BUT LOVED THE FACT THAT
OSWALD DID THEIR DIRTY WORK). Fourth, I REALLY AND TRULY READ VINCE
BUGLIOSI'S BOOK: EVERY WORD, EVERY SOURCE NOTE, FOOTNOTE...EVERY
DETAIL...DID YOU???? Or did you dismiss it out of hand, skim it, or
rely on just the nasty CT book reviews for your, ahem, "reading" of
his book? Well (answer truthfully)? From 1978 to April 2007, I
adamantly and forcefully believed there was a conspiracy in DALLAS and
that Oswald, if he acted at all (which I highly doubted), did NOT act
alone. I don't know what my friend Jack White was referring to
earlier: limited hangout???? From me???? I am on record, many times on
the net, in conference appearances, e-mails, etc. as espousing a firm
belief that there was a conspiracy in DALLAS...and, in a strong way, I
AM STILL ESPOUSING ONE---AGAIN, I STILL STRONGLY BELIEVE THERE WERE
MORTAL THREATS AND CONSPIRACIES (PLURAL) TO KILL JFK THAT WERE
BREWING/ IN MOTION JUST BEFORE/ CONCURRENT WITH 11/22/63...but Oswald
"took the rap" for them by doing the deed by himself. Am I guilty of
trying to have it both ways? Guilty as charged---but it's a sincere
belief on my part. [emphases in the original]
Palamara is incapable of resisting the pathological need to associate himself with the JFK assassination superstar of the moment -- regardless of the conspiracy/LN position he or she may have taken. He is the quintessential apple-polisher, and in the case of the words above, the "apple" was none other than Vincent Bugliosi.
Never forget that he had endorsed Gerald Posner's disinformation at the time it first appeared.
My guess is that soon Palamara will be grabbing his ankles before Tom Hanks and/or Leonardo di Caprio.
Beware of Vincent Michael Palamara.
Beware of Survivor's Guilt.