Assassinations Books

This book is extremely well written, which is to be expected, I suppose, since Fonzi is, by trade, a journalist. This book does not focus on the JFK assassination per se, but rather on the mid-1970s congressional investigations of it. To that extent, his story is a fascinating one, and one that is a first-hand account. In addition, the main focus here is US intelligence agencies' involvement in the JFK assassination- one touchy (and important) subject. And while it certainly seems clear that David Phillips lied to Fonzi regarding the identity of Maurice Bishop (an alias that Phillips used), just because Bishop/Phillips was seen in a Dallas lobby talking with Oswald a month before the assassination, it doesn't necessarily mean that Phillips had a hand in the assassination. In fact, in Ultimate Sacrifice, we are led to believe that Phillips was setting Oswald up to be a patsy for an assassination of Castro. (The same could be said of Morales' quote, "We got those little...(expletive)"...referring to JFK and then RFK. The use of 'we' does not establish direct involvement in an assassination. In short, while I sympathize with those working on uncovering a JFK (or RFK) conspiracy, the fact remains that there's very little here that demonstrates direct involvement in the planning and/or carrying out (or covering up) of the JFK assassination (at the end of the book, Fonzi writes that Oswald and Phillips had to be up to something connected with the planning of the JFK assassination because if they weren't, then why would Phillips later lie to him about it? Well...? I can think of a few good reasons...). Garrison's "On the Trail of the Assassins" is far more eye-popping in this important respect. The Last Investigation is, I agree, an important contribution. But, in the end, it's too far removed from the events surrounding November 22nd, 1963 to be considered the smoking gun that conspiracy theorist minded folks like myself yearn for.

What most attracted me about this book was the fact that its author, Gaeton Fonzi, is an investigator who can write not based on other researchers' data and conclusions, but on the evidence he himself gathered during the House Committee on Assassinations lifetime.
In this book you will learn about how the CIA planted a fake "communist" Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City in order to put the blame on Communists, specifically Fidel Castro. Fonzi greatly reinforced my conviction that the CIA was behind this coup d'etat.

America owes a debt of gratitude to Gaeton Fonzi, former House Select Commitee on Assassinations investigator.
The HSCA was formed to give we the people the truth about the Asassination Conspiracy of President John F Kennedy, but instead, tons of HSCA documents are sealed away for decades to come!
What the HSCA didnt want to make too public, and what the media has totally hidden, is that the HSCA investigation proves once and for all that Lee Oswald was being framed for the assassination MONTHS before it happened!
Gaeton Fonzi is one of the few investigators for the HSCA who has gone against the grain, and who has come out to tell the American People the truth. He did so by writing this book.
One of the main points of Fonzi's book, is that CIA man "Maurice Bishop", was an alias used by David Atlee Phillips, former head of the CIA's Western Hemisphere division!
The identity of "Bishop" has long kept JFK assassination researchers interested because "Bishop" was seen with Lee Oswald in Dallas not long before the assassination, proving that the CIA had a link with Oswald, even though they said they didnt.
Couple this with the fact that Philips ("Bishop") did work for the CIA in Mexico City WHERE AN OSWALD IMPERSONATOR FRAMED HIM (Oswald) BEFORE THE ASSASSINATION, and the JFK murder mystery becomes much clearer.

Another good companion volume to Ultimate Sacrifice
Former Senate investigator Gaeton Fonzi, of whom I have corresponded with, is to be commended for writing an excellent book about the HSCA, Cuba, and the JFK assassination. It is scholarly works like this that give the research community a good name. Get this!
Vince Palamara
Secret Service expert, author of 2 books, in over 32 other author's books, History Channel,etc.

I highly recommend former HSCA investigator Gaeton Fonzi's book, as it is a great companion volume to Ultimate Sacrifice. Fonzi's book is very well written and put together. You can't go wrong with this one. Get it!
vince palamara

I had the pleasure of being a student of Terry Parssinen around the time this wonderful story was released. Needless to say, I couldn't be any more prouder as to what he has uncovered. It is a refreshing book to read in regards to his opinion as to what might have happened; And I'm not just saying that because I was once his student. Excellent read!

To see how close WWII could have been stopped at least in the European Theatre, this book keeps you on the edge, even though you know the outcome. Excellent.

An interesting book about a fascinating "what if" of history. Parssinen makes a convincing case that the plotters of 1938 were closer to success then is generally credited. His case also illuminates the tragedy of appeasement for Great Britain, Germany and the rest of the world.

I learned a lot I did not know about Hans Oster, who comes off as an extremely admirable person and plotter.

Few history books raise to the high bar of objectivity that we're expecting from sciences in general. And objectivity in this context has mainly to do with the broader political context of the times in question rather than just a selective exposition of facts. Too many times, focusing on a certain historical issue without the proper context leads to erroneous interpretations.

Interpretation is not only an academic concern, especially when applied to political sciences. The meaning assigned to facts, the interpretation given has practical consequences, and the book "The Oster Conspiracy of 1938 : The Unknown Story of the Military Plot to Kill Hitler and Avert World War II" points out to little thus far known details about those times, about the framework, internal and international in which Hitler operated, about the blown chances to recognize the opportunity (when it presented itself) to deal with the hitlerite threat in a much less fatal fashion.

The account in this book is fundamentally different than in a typical "what if" book. "What if" books border on fiction. Their premise or starting point is fictitious. This book's premise is not fictitious at all. It's researched facts. The only "what if" part of it is the argumentative interpretation of the British politicians both a priori and a posteriori of the chances of a coup d'etat in Germany, had they agreed to send an unmistakable signal that they do not accept to be bullied and made a joke of in front of the whole world at gunpoint.

A good, objective and reflective read. At times it feels just like a novel and not a researched history text.

It's shocking to me that the events in this book aren't chronicled in every high school and college World History class. The fact that, as Hitler resolutely thrust Germany toward war in September 1938, nearly all his troop commanders had decided to revolt against a war they were certain would mean the destruction of Germany, casts a long and dark shadow on modern-day attempts to deal diplomatically with fanatical national leaders.

Ironically, Hitler's generals had realized what the leaders of the Western democracies had not: that Germany stood to be quickly and decisively defeated in a war against England, France, and Czechoslovakia. On the very morning that Chamberlain, in a pitiful "if Daddy says no, ask Mommy" display of desperation, was grovelling with Mussolini for a peace conference to negotiate German occupation of western Czechoslovakia, armed men were positioned to storm the Reich Chancellery and kill Hitler at the first announcement of war.

More than just a surprising lesson in history, this work speaks volumes to today's leaders of free and peaceful nations in dealing with hostile regimes in the Middle East or Chinese aggression toward Taiwan. Peace kept by capitulation and appeasement is a peace that cannot last, and serves only to sustain and embolden expansionist, warmongering tyrants.

As someone that lived through the events depicted, and someone who was enamored with JFK, I found the book quite good. Its a mixture of fact and opinion and is quite successful in bringing the two together.Its focus is on how the legacy of JFK differs from the facts, and how opinion about him was shaped beginningthe day of his death. I found it to be persuasive.

Lee Harvey Oswald was Kennedy's would-be lone assassin. I said "would be lone assassin" because the circumstances surrounding Kennedy's death were a little more outré than those suggested by the Warren Commission. Interested readers should refer to the suppressed out-of-print gem "Mortal Error" by Bonar Menninger.

That having been said, Oswald was as guilty of Kennedy's murder as if he'd fired the shot to the head that killed him and he was the only individual morally responsible for Kennedy's death. He acted as a committed Marxist-Leninist in order to fulfill Marxist-Leninist ends. Those who would argue otherwise are either stupid, ill-informed, or evil (or a combination of the three), and their arguments are a product of their deficiencies.

James Piereson bypasses the conspiracy theorists, musing how fanciful conspiracy theory changed identities after the fifties, becoming a tool of the far left, instead of the far right. This shift was indeed a result of JFK's death, and the change in the appearance of left-liberalism in the aftermath is what Piereson primarily focuses on.

Notwithstanding the Left's control of the news media, the academic theocracy, and the entertainment industry, I'd long wondered how Kennedy's death (largely) at the hands of a committed Communist had somehow merged into a bloody shirt around which the LEFT (not the Right) was able to rally.

Piereson provides as coherent explanation for this development as any. It could have been more concise though. There was no need to fill out his 2006 Commentary article into the size of a small book. By doing so, Piereson allowed his argument to become somewhat repetitious.

Still, his explanation "works" and a lot of it has to do with the loony widow herself, Jacqueline Kennedy. Piereson tries to contrast the cool detachment that the former Mrs. Onassis displayed after the homicide with the mental unraveling displayed by Mrs. Lincoln. But I'd say that both widows were mentally unhinged in their own way -- Mrs. Kennedy maybe a little more so before the fact.

For the pink-pillboxed ditz to decry that her husband didn't even die for "civil rights" but instead died at the hands of "some silly little Communist" shows incredible ignorance of Cold War realities - especially given that her stupid observation was made only a little over a year after that Cold War came close to exploding into a Mega-Hot One. Jackie was a silly little First Lady.

And "Camelot" was entirely a myth created post-mortem by the loony widow, and Piereson shows how that myth helped change the face of liberalism from forward-looking and optimistic to that of dark, brooding, and vengeful after Kennedy's death. After all, the ORIGINAL myth of Camelot, which Piereson goes into an interesting description of here, does suggest that the good times are over with the passing of the kingdom.

But I think that Piereson is exaggerating the change that he describes - liberalism and leftism have always had their dark sides. Maybe Kennedy's death just brought them closer to the surface. But again, his description of the synthesis is well worth reading.

What's needed now are a second and maybe third part to Piereson's narrative. If the Left misappropriated JFK, so did the Right, in general, and the neo-cons, in particular. Piereson doesn't really discuss that misappropriation. But if JFK wasn't really a closeted Cumbaya-singing Sixties peace activist, neither was he a die-hard Reaganaut. He was a consummate Democratic pol who used what means were at his disposal to try to destroy the Right when he was alive.

So why did Reagan and others successfully assume the mantle of JFK and why did they want to, in the first place? More to the point, what can knowledgeable individuals of all stripes who recognize the fraud inherent in the myth of Camelot do to educate the yokels of its dangers and thereby help create a world without Kennedys?

The premise of this work is that while assasinating President Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald put American liberalism in its grave. The contortions that liberals had to go through to avoid the idea that their hero had been killed by a communist transformed them, in the end, from the optimistic, future oriented people they were in 1963 to the hateful and hating maniacs that they are today. The irony is that if JFK were to be brought back to life today, he would shortly be drummed out of the modern, Democrat Party.

There are no guarantees when buying books. We often eagerly anticipate a release hoping it will be a classic but soon discover that it belongs on the ash heap of history alongside the collected works of Marx, recordings of the Back Street Boys, and every single movie featuring Madonna. Occasionally however, we unfurl a package and find that its contents widely exceed our expectations. One such work is James Piereson's Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism.

Whatever the angle or line of rumor, the one thing for certain is that a sizable plurality of Americans agree that Oswald was who he said he was...just a pawn in the game. Piereson's text dispassionately, but skillfully, refutes this thesis. In one of his strongest chapters, "Assassin," he reexamines the facts of Oswald's life. To say that his case history lacks nuance is an understatement. The man who liquidated our 35th President was a diehard Marxist and anything but a shill for the military. Oswald's acceptance of Marxism came in 1953 after he was handed a bill advocating clemency for the Rosenbergs. His allegiance to communism meant, as it does for so many angry radicals, that this alienated and troubled young man would no longer be alone.

The infamous gunman had nothing but contempt for American history and its institutions. He hated the radical right and attempted to kill segregationist, General Edwin A. Walker, six months before he trained his sights on Kennedy. Oswald went to the Soviet Union to savor the worker's paradise but found a bureaucratic nightmare instead. He returned, albeit begrudgingly, to his homeland. The FBI's refusal to take him seriously was a disgrace and a testament to their incompetence; while the media's refusal to consider the possible significance of his visits to the Cuban and Soviet embassies [in Mexico] is a testament to their bias. That he conferred with KGB agent Valeriy Kostikov a few months before taking aim should be of interest to anyone in pursuit of the truth.

Why did Oswald do it? Mr. Piereson's explanation resonates far more than the conspiracies contaminating our public square. His purpose was to get the attention of Fidel Castro and also to preserve the life of the dictator. The Cuban Marxist was the last leader for whom Mr. Oswald had any faith. After he threatened the president in a 1963 interview, the deluded and alienated communist may have interpreted his words in the same manner as King Henry II's deputies. Oswald happily answered the question, "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?" by stepping forth to the window of the book depository in Dallas.

By itself, reminding the world of who Oswald actually was is an important achievement, but it is just one of the many rejuvenating and provocative arguments elucidated in Camelot and the Cultural Revolution. His discussion of "punitive liberalism" is potent and completely transferable to the present day. The practitioners of this school deem America--in lieu of its historical crimes--as a land and country in need of punishment. The founding of the new world coincided with slavery, the death of hordes of Indians, and, eventually, the internment of Japanese citizens during the Second World War. The punitive liberal believes that we deserve a comeuppance for what we have done.

Piereson destroys this emotive reasoning with aplomb. Blaming America for the slaughter of the Kennedy brothers is entirely irrational. The punitive liberal hates everything about his homeland, but becomes outraged whenever this is pointed out to him. For some reason, conservatives allow the left to frame the debate on this issue. Many timidly retreat from coming out and saying that left is unpatriotic. This is puzzling because their anti-Americanism is blatantly obvious. When they gaze at Old Glory "jingoism and vengeance and war" come to mind.

Mr. Piereson's concise account is a tour de force and not merely a historical study. It is a theoretical work which increases our understanding of both the past and present. Of a book we can ask for nothing more.

Over the years, I have heard many Left-wing people explain that it was the Kennedy assassination of 1963 that destroyed their faith in the system, and radicalized their politics. In this fascinating book, author and political thinker James Piereson examines the mythology that surrounds the Kennedy administration, how it was created, and the strange, unhinging effect it had on the American Left.

This book came highly recommend to me, and I can see why. The author does an excellent job of showing how we got from the intelligent Left of the immediate post-War era to the loony Left of today. In the 50s, the loonies were on the Right, finding Communists under their beds, and fighting such devious plots as fluoride in the water. And now we have Fahrenheit 911 and Leftists seeing a "vast Republican-wing conspiracy." Want to know how we got here? Then read this book and find out!

Like most people that lived through the JFK assassination I can remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I heard the news of his death like time stoped. I never believed what the United States government passed off as factual rationale, for the cause of this tragedy. The Warren Commission report did not make sense. I read it in the 1965 and could sense that something was not right. A friend of mine recommended this book to me she knew I was like a majority of people alive, thinking that we would go to our grave not knowing what really happened to JFK. It was her husband a career law enforcement official that convinced me to read this story; it was the best documentation surrounding the crime he claimed. Mr. Hemingway takes you on a trek that only he and JFK traveled while presenting new facts that I have never heard and would have never thought of. I would have never imagined that murdering someone over a political mistake could have caused the turmoil it did. So much of the story sounds like what is going in the United States today, it borders on surreal. The book made me livid. When I was finished; there was a lot of corruption exposed. Truly I can accept this research as fact and this gives me a sense of closure to this grave incident in United States history. Some minor editing changes could be made but it did not overshadow the ground breaking content and earthshaking ideas made this incredible.

MR. HEMINGWAY SHOULD FIRE HIS PROOFREADER!!! ASIDE FROM THE TYPIGRATHICAL ERRORS THIS BOOK IS AMAZING!!!FINALLY SOMEONE IS GIVING IT TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC STRAIGHT. THANK YOU MR. HEMINGWAY IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW. THIS IS A MUST READ.

This is a whole new twist on the JFK assisination. The writer presented some very interesting facts which I think should be looked into further. Possible movie plot???

It is becoming more and more clear that the US Government has not be honest with the masses. This book helps the reader draw a FACTUAL conclusion of what the US Government has been up to using strong and organized evidence. While the first edition has some typographical errors, it remains that Hemingway delivers a strong case.

This book reveals a highly plausible theory as to why JFK was eliminated. It is a fascinating theory full of detail and research on why JFK was killed. A must read for anyone who doubted the Warren Commission findings. This book belongs in our Universities and all JFK buffs' collections.

Apolitical acress Viola Lark is reluctantly drawn in to a plot to assassinate Hitler. She becomes even more reluctant to get involved when she finds out who else is likely to be affected. Inspector Carmichael is upholding the law for a government he dislikes while investigating an explosion that killed a different actress. Both are sympathetic characters trying to do the right thing in morally ambiguous situations. Since this is an alternate history and anything could happen, Walton keeps the suspense high right until the end.

This is a solid, and in some respects cleverly constructed, alternative history story. This book , set in an alternative 1948, and its predecessor are set in a Britain that sought peace with Germany in 1941 and is becoming an authoritarian-fascist state. The book concerns a plot to assassinate Hitler and the British Prime Minister. Walton uses a clever piece of plot construction. One of the primary characters is an actress appearing in Hamlet. Walton makes good use of the play within a play device specifically with Shakespeare's own device of a play within a play and plot to kill a king in Hamlet. This is similar to her last book where she used a traditional country house murder mystery format as the basis for the plot. Walton also uses a clever appropriation of history for some of her characters. Several of her important characters are based on the notorious Mitford sisters, the daughters of the notoriously reactionary Lord Redesdale. Again, this is similar to her last book where she based characters on the prewar Cliveden set.
Other aspects of this book are less impressive. The plot is not particularly suspenseful, character development and prose are competent, as opposed to really interesting. As a alternative history, this book has problems. Its certainly plausible that Britain might have sought accomodation with Germany. Walton, however, has this happening after the Blitz. The most likely time when Britain would have attempted a peace treaty was after Dunkirk, when the British cabinet had serious discussions about opening negotiations with the Germans. I don't find the slide to authoritarianism convincing. For example, Walton presents the Labor Party as complaisant. The Labor leader Clement Atlee was hardly a "sheep" (among the admirers of his character is Margaret Thatcher, not someone predisposed to say nice things about Labor politicians) and the Labor Party included individuals like the powerful and pugnacious Ernest Bevin. Walton also has the Germans fighting the Soviets in the Western Soviet Union, hardly likely. Finally, Walton shows the Hitler of her 1948 as the vigorous Hitler of the 1930s. Hitler had Parkinson disease, was significantly affected by 1945, and would have been a wreck by 1948.
I have to address some remarks made about Nazism and its relationship to conservatism by a prior reviewer, SM Stirling. Mr. Stirling's comments deserve serious consideration as his alternative history books show him to be a serious and astute reader of history. In this case, however, Stirling is wrong. This assessment will depend on the definition of conservatism but Fascism was a logical, though not inevitable, development of several trends in 19th century conservatism. The rejection of modernity, reason as a principal value, democratic political institutions, and the ideas of universal human values and rights were held in common by all 19th century conservative strains. Stirling errs as well in stating that Nazism was an attack on the middle class. The Nazis received considerable support from many middle class groups and presented themselves as defenders of traditional values. German physicians, for example, were strong supporters of the Nazis and the Nazis also received strong support from a substantial fraction of the Protestant clergy. The disaster of the Second World War had the effect of discrediting a large spectrum of conservative political movements and contributed to making Western Europe the center to left political society it is today.

Great alternate history and a gripping thriller. The two protagonists (a rebel aristocrat-turned-actress--with a gaggle of eccentric, high-profile sisters obviously inspired by the real-life Mitford women--and a police inspector with 'county' roots and a few secrets of his own) are well characterized throughout. I hope Walton has more of this series to come!

Once again, Jo Walton has written a book with a gripping plot, interesting characters, and good period flavor. It's a notable addition to the list of alternate histories centered on WWII and the 'German Question', thoroughly well-written, and I recommend it.

If there's a weakness in this book -- and its predecessor -- it's a misunderstanding of the nature of fascism.

Fascism wasn't an extreme or radical form of conservatism, which is more or less how Walton portrays it. Fascism led by aristocrats and the Establishment, which is approximately what Walton has happening in Britain, is more or less a contradiction in terms.

Fascism was, at least in every country where it actually took power on its own or came close to doing so, a form of plebian radicalism.

It was hostile to both the middle classes as the term was understood in Europe at the time, and especially to the groups which had traditionally been socially dominant, like the aristocracy. Everywhere it took power there was a 'turnover of elites' with 'new men' replacing the former old-boy networks with new ones of their own. Its aim was not to shore up traditional hierarchies but to smash them and institute new ones.

The German variety called itself "national socialism", and for good solid reasons. Organizationally and in terms of its internal political culture and general worldview it had far more in common with Third International-style Leninist parties than either did with social democrats or the ordinary conservatives of the time.

And fascism was a mass movement, numbering its supporters in the millions in the countries where it came to power, drawn mostly from rootless 'popular' elements, small farmers, and the like.

The typical modus operandi of the aspiring fascist wasn't plotting in aristocratic clubs, it was brawling in the streets or trooping _en masse_ to the voting booth, or both. Its characteristic institution was the para-military party militia in colored shirts.

Note that the only people in Germany who actually tried to kill and overthrow Hitler were Prussian military aristocrats, and most of their class had despised him from the beginning as an unspeakably vulgar parvenu, the "Bohemian corporal". He, in turn, had always hated and (with good reason) distrusted them.

Hitler, the private soldier and declasse street-artist, Himmler the chicken farmer and all-around weirdo occultist, Mussolini the sometime-socialist journalist, all these were typical fascist leaders of the interwar period. Many of them were also veterans of WWI, but usually as private soldiers and noncoms.

Fascists were sometimes _allied_ with conservatives, and conservatives sometimes opportunistically used fascist symbols and slogans, both most notably in Franco's Spain, but this was an alliance of convenience, like ours with Stalin's Russia during WWII. About the only thing that fascists and true conservatives, even ultra-conservatives, had in common was nationalism and hatred of communism.

German conservatives and big-business figures who thought they could 'use' Hitler found out to their cost when he turned on them that conservatism and fascism were enemies. The fascist Falange found out the same in Spain, where they were used and then betrayed by Franco, a perfectly traditional clerical-conservative Iberian caudillo, who was no more an actual fascist than he was a Unitarian, and who had never had the slightest intention of allowing them any real power.

I read a lot of junk; I'll admit it. But every once and awhile, I have to read something that causes me to think. Ha'penny fits this category. A sequel to Farthing, this alternate history continues that fine book's exploration of what may have happened if the U.S. did NOT help Great Britain during WWII. Profoundly chilling, beautifully written--and challenging, Ha'Penny is a subtle and personal exploration of how individuals in postwar London are affecting by the wave of facism which has reached Britain's shore. Each successive tide strengthens the power of the wave, yet lessens the resistance. British citizens start to accept the unacceptable.

The plot is complex; I won't reveal it here. But the resistance features a pitiable, almost laughable combination of military patriots, peers, terrorists and theatre types who try to assassinate the fascist leaders of England and Germany with inept plots, and amateur explosives.

Fascinating. One of the things that amazed me is that I kept rooting for the "wrong" side! Like the protagonist, I did not know which side were the "good" guys. The Scotland Yard Inspector who becomes the "hero" realizes that he may have done more harm than good. I can not wait for the next installment of this literary jewel of a series, which combines alternate history, real history, mystery and social commentary.

If you are willing to take the time to read this somewhat short book, I guarentte you will love the contents. It opens your mind to every possible scenario of every possible minute of Lincoln's Last hours. I reccomend this to anyone/everyone!

This little gem combines the readability of journalism (the author's teaching profession) with in-depth historical research, an unusual combination. It is a well-known subject, but here are some new perspectives:

--the photo often described as Lincoln's last portrait was
actually taken in February, 1865. This book shows you the
real last one.
--Booth didn't bore the peephole in the door to Lincoln's
box or make the bar obstructing the door leading to the
corridor of the boxes - that had been done some time before
by or for Lincoln's guards.
--Booth's illegitimacy preyed on his mind as a youth - perhaps shaping his character in a perverse way. One must
wonder about the same effect in some other, modern day
individuals with the same origin (Fidel Castro, Ted Bundy
and a recent US President).
-- Most telling are the widely varied descriptions of events by eyewitnesses. The author evaluates these and tells you the most likely version. Here is proof that circumstantial evidence
(including letters, bloodstains, etc.) is often more reliable than such eyewitnesses.
A minor issue - it is mentioned that the entry in Booth's diary for the day of the assassination states he cried "Sic
semper" - omitting "tyrannis" - and that he may have done so
because he didn't know how to spell tyrannis. It is, however, pointed out that he had asked about this spelling beforehand
(so he knew it). Also, Booth was undoubtedly familiar with the
6th verse of the Confederate song, "Maryland, My Maryland," which runs "Sic semper! 'tis the proud refrain" and he might have used the shortened phrase in his diary just as an abbreviation. Incidentally, as the book states, Lincoln's wallet contained several newspaper clippings. Not mentioned is that among these were laudatory articles. Lincoln had been the
subject of many cruel newspaper attacks and it is pathetic that even a great man apparently needed to know that someone approved of him.

I, too, purchased this book at Ford's Theatre. At first, I thought it would be one of those whodunnit books, but I was wrong. The author obviously put alot of effort, time & research into the book. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I finished the entire book during the plane ride back to Los Angeles. I lent it to my family members and they, too, enjoyed it!

This book captures the readers attention and takes him on a step by step discourse of the hours before Lincoln's assassination. A very sad image is presented in the book because it's obvious Lincoln's last day of life may have been his happiest day of life. Lincoln was overcoming the anxieties of war, but was cut down when he had a handle on life. In this book the reader learns of the threats to the president's life and what could have been done to prevent Lincoln's death. Infortunately in 1865 all Booth needed to end the president's life was a passion against Lincoln. Great book!

A. Lincoln: His Last 24 Hours is one of the best books I've read about the fateful day in April 1865 when the 16th President was shot and killed at Ford's Theater. It paints a fascinating picture of a very tragic man on the last day of his too-short life. The relief and joy that Lincoln must have felt with the end of the Civil War finally at hand, his concern for how to achieve the nearly impossible task of reconstruction, and the never-ending personal challenges he faced in dealing with his wife are all captured in the words of Mr. Lincoln himself as well as through comments from observers who had contact with him on that day.

The book reads very much like a novel but is obviously very well researched with plenty of reference material documented via footnotes throughout. The author knows the subject well and is careful to note when conclusions not fully supported by documented research are drawn. The result is wonderfully readable and highly informative unlike many other accounts of that day.

If you have ever put up with mickey mouse bull in the military, or been horrified at the actions of politicians, you will feel right at home with this book.

Bill,
Excellent book, an edge of the seat read that I couldn't put down. The details were amazing but it was the story that held my attention and made me want to read more......I'm on to the next book!!! I can't wait.
Sincerely,
Connie McCall-Suminski

AWESOME! I actually bought this for $1 in a hardware store, thinking it was gonna be junk! Non-stop action and a REAL believable story. The shootout at the end in the White House was insane!

This is a book that HAS TO be made into a movie.

After Iranian commandos sink a US warship in the Persian Gulf, the US retaliates by destroying the facilities on Kharg Island, vital to Iran's oil industry. Rather than risk a head on confrontation with the vastly more powerful US military, the Iranians seek their revenge on US soil. A daring planned is conceived, using commandos and suicide bombers, to first strike the marine base at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, and then launch an attack on the White House to kill the president. The rest of the story unfolds with the perfect combination of action, exposition, and characters. In a genre where it's easy to resort to the use of cliched stock characters, this book offers characters with depth, particularly the Iranians. Instead of portraying them as nothing more than religious fanatics, the author does an excellent job of explaining their tactics from their perspective. Add to this the chillingly plausible, relatively low tech methods of attack and you've got a real page-turner.

The original copyright for this book is 1992. But just about everything described in this book has happened for real since it was written.

First the Iranians attack the USS Makin Island with a devastating bombing that almost sinks the ship (can you say USS Cole). The United States retaliates with an attack on Iran's main oil depot at Kharg Island (cruise missiles and high technology weapons). The Iranians respond with a command attack on a major oil pumping station in the United Arab Emirates, and then go one step further. They decide it is time to take the war to the United states and target the President. A small dedicated terrorist group penetrates America and slips behind the barrier of missiles, ships and planes defending the country (it is a 9-11 style attack except with commandos).

Through it all defense analyse Rich Welsh suspects the truth and tries to get somebody to listen. (I suspect he has a few real life aanalogues who saw the coming storm, but whose warnings went unheeded.) The Welsh character conveys the author's feelings about structural problems that plague the Marines and the Pentagon mentality.

This is a well written and well paced book. Get a copy today, this guy deserves a better sales ranking!

I absolutely love this series. They are the kind of books you cannot put down until you have finished them.

This second book in the Jaz Parks series is every bit as good as the first (which was, incidentally, great). Sarcasm, humour, action, mystery, romance... These book really run the gamut, without ever letting up. There are continuously things that are being thrown at Jaz, Vayl, and their companions, making each page a study in 'how to keep your readers flipping.' It was, quite truthfully, very hard to put this book down, because it was so chock full of Important Conversations and Pivotal Events. You couldn't help but keep reading.

As the second book in a series, Another One Bites the Dust certainly delivers. There are some answers for questions brought up in the first book, some (halfway?) resolutions, but then there are also new questions raised which have me iching to get my hands on the next books. This looks to be the start of a new favourite series!

Ever since the Anita Blake series turned into bad porn, I've been hunting for a good urban fantasy series, with plenty of action, vampires and a likable yet tough female lead.

Well, I may have found what I'm looking for, in Jennifer Rardin's Jaz Parks. Her second novel "Another One Bites the Dust" has plenty of guns, gore, evil vampires and brewing world wars, but Rardin doesn't lost her grip on the inner intricacies of the characters, or the tongue-in-cheek way they do their jobs.

New target for the team: a Chinese vampire and his acrobat troupe, who are performing at the Corpus Christi Winter Festival. Even worse, he stole Bergman's invincible "dragon armour."

So while Jaz struggles with the prospect of public belly-dancing, she finds herself facing a crabby undercover team, soul-devouring reavers, religious fanatics, and a luxury yacht full of vampires consulting with Chinese generals. As if that wasn't bad enough, Jaz is being haunted by nightmares about her fiance and brother, which always end with her almost getting killed -- for real.

And it's getting progressively more dangerous to poke around the acrobats and their bosses, especially when Jaz finds that reavers are only called in for one thing -- to start world wars. The armour, reavers, and acrobats are all wound up in an international conspiracy -- and to stop the big bads, Jaz will need all her team's technical and supernatural skill.

That stiletto boot with knife in strap sort of suggests that this is some sort of vampire-slaying chick-lit. That's rather deceptive, because "Another One Bites the Dust" has none of that.

In fact, it's sort of a vampire-slaying secret-agent story, complete with dress-ups, romantic tension, lots of gory death and torn-up bodies, and a gloriously explosive, kinetic final chase scene that is worthy of an action movie. Rardin weaves in some enjoyably comic moments and entertaining dialogue ("It sounds like someone's seesawing dental floss inside her nose!" "Are you sure she's not our target?").

But she balances out the fast-bang action and international conspiracies with a healthy dose of Team Jaz exploration. Since all the good guys are crammed into a largish RV, we get to see how these guys operate when they're forced to spend a lot of time living together-- and it's a credit to Rardin that she keeps things from ever turning sitcommy. Blech.

But none of this would matter if Jaz weren't a likable, tough, believable heroine... and she is. She's smart, funny, a little too reckless, and acutely attached to all of her coworkers. But this time, she's forced to deal with her unresolved, guilt-riddled feelings about the death of her fiancee, and the source of her suicidal nightmares.

And her team is no less likable -- Vayl is one hot gypsy vampire, though I'm glad the smoldering tension between him and Jaz doesn't overwhelm the storyline. Cole, Bergman and Cassandra add their own quirky, sometimes dramatic edge to the story, and we get some very nasty villains, including a "Dragon Lady" vampire and a bunch of ravenous three-eyed reavers.

"Another One Bites the Dust" is a solid, enjoyable story for anyone who likes their vampire stories fast and witty, and their heroines strong and likable. Definitely an author to watch.

I am a total book addict, I read at least two books a week. I read a lot of this type of book. I keep up with the majority of the most popular series out there right now. (Sookie Stackhouse, Eve Dallas, Joanna Archer (Zodiac series), Joanne Baldwin (Weather Warden series), Dante Valentine, Rachel Morgan, Betsey Taylor (Undead/Unwed series), Aisling Grey, etc. etc.) However, I hate talking the time to write a review. The fact that I'm doing so for this series is a sign that I really, really, like it.

Honestly, I've O.D.'d on this genre. I picked up the first book in the series (Once Bitten, Twice Shy) from the library only because I couldn't find anythig better to check out that day. I really wasn't expecting much. Wow! What a nice surprise.

The books are smart, action packed and well written. Jaz Parks (the heroine) has a great, snarky sense of humor. Some of her observations and comments had me literally laughing out loud. In addition, I'm a sucker for romance, and the chemistry between Jaz & Vayl is great. If I have any complaints about the series so far it's that it's taking too long for the two of them to REALLY act on their attraction.

Oh well, I guess I'll just have to hang in there. I can't wait for the 3rd book to be released. I hope it's as good as these first two have been.

Jaz and Vayl's latest mission finds them pursuing stolen biotechnology, and saving the world...again. :) Also along for the ride are Cole, Bergman and Cassandra. The group goes undercover at the Corpus Christi Winter festival - fighting reavers, human extremists and dragons. Jaz is still dealing with her unresolved issues and once more the ultimate villain (Samos) proves to be elusive.

The thing I adore about this series is the relationship between Jaz and Vayl. They have great chemistry together, but the situation doesn't feel forced or rushed. They are still having misunderstandings, very realistic as he's a vampire and is over 300 years old. At certain points in the book Jaz is somewhat self-involved, and thus there's a delay between Vayl's actions and her grasping what he's about. Unfortunately by the time she's up to speed, he's brooding. It's realistic though, because she's still dealing with the death of her fiance. She's trying to resolve the issues in her sleep, so you have to pick up the cues when surreal stuff starts happening, as she doesn't always realize she's dreaming. Very well written.

The dialogue is again snippy, sarcastic, witty and self-depracating and I find Jaz's internal commentary hilarious. The banter between the characters means you are racing through the pages whilst at the same time not wanting it to end. There are so many quips to choose from.

"Something was stuck in my throat. If I was a guy, I'd have sworn they were my testicles."

My favourite is the 'snippy' comment on p59 of the UK issue. Just like book 1 the story is peppered with moments that make you laugh, wince and surprise you. And for those of you who've read book 1 and remember the hula dancing quote, p3 'belly dancing'. nuff said.

We learn more about the other members of the team in this book. Especially Bergman and Cassandra. Though it's not necessarily in what they say, but more in their behaviour and actions towards each other. There's a definite friction between them, which makes for some snappy dialogue. He's very much of the technological and Cassandra is of the magical.

There are also things left unresolved here that I think it will be important in upcoming books. Especially Cassandra's vision. Of some concern is that it's hinted Jaz might be developing new powers. Always a bit of a worry in urban fantasy that your hero/heroine is going to be 'The One' and become super-powerful and boring. But that's a concern for a future book.

Also available:-
Book 1 - Once Bitten, Twice Shy
Book 3 - Biting the Bullet

Here's a young adult novel that holds up beautifully some 40 years later. If its period references place it in a particular time, its message is as fresh as ever. And if you ever had a song, or book, or film, or painting change your life, open up wider vistas to you, then this story will resonate all the more. Sometimes that single, soul-wrenching encounter with art can change your whole life & set it going in a new direction.

I love that Dave's version of "Suzanne" is the Noel Harrison one, and later the Judy Collins one, because that's how a teenager in the Midwest would have been likely to hear it. No artistic snobbery here, no "cooler than thou" attitudes -- the emphasis is on honesty, both with others & one's own self. Dave & Kate come across as very real, struggling with the need to be individuals, to be more than what they're supposed to be, to change & to grow. Each gains precious insights into themselves & the world around them. And you'll never look at a chicken the same way again, either!

My paperback copy became so worn out that I finally tracked down a hardcover copy for my shelves. It remains very re-readable, even if you're now as old (or even older) than Dave's parents. A thoughtful, perceptive little gem, most highly recommended.

This book was my "Catcher in the Rye" because I was a huge Leonard Cohen fan and Suzanne was my mantra.
This book meant more to me than almost any thing I had read.
I had my kids read it when they were in 6 or 7th grade and they felt the same way.
The book still gives me chills.
What's happening with Mr. McKay these days?

I first read this book 35 years ago, when I was in 7th grade. It swept me into a world of characters with feelings like my own, something I'd seldom known. I immediately rushed out and bought a copy of Judy Collins singing "Suzanne," and wore out the record. I wore out the book, too - had to buy another copy.

Now, many years later, I still return to this beautiful book time and again, and recommend it to young friends.

This was one of the first novels I read back in 7th grade. (I had to sneak to the library to get it, I wasn't allowed to read novels) It touched me in so many ways. Most profoundly by the sense that others had the same or similar feelings and hopes, dreams, and fears that I did. I'd recommend this book to anyone who wants to remember the intensity of our younger selves or to share with your own children.

When I first read this book I was baffled by why I loved it so much. The story line seems basic and the plot is conventional, but the characters--they are incredible. The author creates a hero and heroine that draw you to the book time and again. I can't help but read it at least once a month, just to remind myself why I like chickens. Andrea Rasmussen

this book smashes the Warren report into a million peices in an unbiased way based upon facts logic and evidence.Mrs.Meagher proves that Oswald was innocent and that the warren report was a sham!she examines and dismantles every so called evidence the report had on oswald!!Oswald was innocent we the people are his defense counsel!this book has to be reprinted get it out there!!highly recommended!

Ms. Meagher's book is well documented, insightful and detailed. She skillfully takes the reader through discrepancies in the Warren Commission report and lays it all out for the reader. Her conclusions are based on facts that are very clearly presented, and on common sense. At no time did I get the impression that this book was attempting to influence my views on the work of the Warren Commission. Ms. Meagher spells it out for the reader step by step.

Reading this book makes you wonder how many police departments and courts actually did what they were supposed to back in the 1960s, and how they're doing today. Ms Meagher does an excellent job breaking down the Warren Commission's report and demonstrating that their synopsis of events is based on multiple errors, misstatements, and wishful thinking. Having come out before most of the "conspiracy theory" genere that surrounds JFK assassinations tories today, Ms. Meaghers book stands above all of them. She refuses to let her book wander into sensationalism, does not implicate UFO's or any such things, nor does she mix in photos which claim to show the truth but are often blurry, grainy or totally unrevealing to the lay reader. Instead, she stays on target, picking apart the Warren Commission's flawed analysis with nimble wit and skill.

Of all the books about the JFK assassination, why is ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT out of print? If you want to read books on how the Norweigian mob hired hitmen from the Planet Glixorg and had the assassination covered up by their media insider, Soupy Sales, there are dozens of books. But the one book to take a serious look at the Warren Commission's Report, to pick apart its inaccuracies, and to analyze its contradictions, is becoming harder and harder to find. Even Gerald Posner, in his tantrum, CASE CLOSED, could not lay a finger on the late Sylvia Meagher's masterwork. Why? Because it is a precise, unimpassioned, and brilliant piece of exploratory surgery on a very sick Warren Report. This book proves the Commission had a single purpose, and finding the truth was not that purpose. The lack of access to Sylvia Meagher's ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT is, to me, a tragic mistake and possible proof of a continuing cover-up.

Back in the early 70s I worked on Capitol Hill as a legislative aide on a Senate Commitee trying to reopen the Kennedy assassination or generate support for a House investigation. This was in the post-Garrison era and the credibility of anyone challenging the Warren Commission was suspect. (We now know that many of Garrison's failings were due to sabotage, but back then he was still radioactive to Senators, Representatives, and their staffs.)

Anyway, after all the backlash following the Clay Shaw acquittal it was still a tough sell, and the typical Congressman would give you no more than 5-10 minutes time to make your case, so we needed a one or two page list of powerful bullet points demonstrating that Oswald could not have acted alone, if he acted at all, and showing that the Warren investigation was compromised by the FBI and the CIA. These were serious allegations, so each
point had to be backed up by solid proof.

At the time, there were 5-6 serious books damning the Warren Commision Report: Inquest, by Edward J Epstein; Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane; Six Seconds in Dallas by Josiah Thompson; Whitewash by Harold Weisberg; and They've Killed the President by Robert Sam Anson.

In creating that fact sheet, no book was more carefully documented than Accessories after the Fact, and no book was more comprehensive and meticulous.

When we had to source each bullet point Meagher's book did the best job in directing us to the proof.

I left the Hill in 76--before the HSCA was created, and it has always bitter disappointment to me how its own work appears to ha ve been sabotaged, not unlike what happend to Garrison.

In the years since I have retained a keen interest in this topic, and at last count have read over 40 books. Meagher's book still remains one of the two or three best books written about JFK's death. In fact I consider it one of the best forensic investigation reports I have ever read in 25 years of practicing civil rights litigation.