Assassinations Books

The author did a great job in researching this book. Also presented the facts well. It does look like maybe Mary Surratt was not involved in the planning or discussions about Lincoln's assassination. Very sad.

this book did its best to introduce doubt about her involvement in the plot against lincoln, but the facts are simply too compelling against her.i thought her background was well researched, but when it came to the matter of her guilt and trial, it was all sentimentality, supposition and pity. the old woman was up to her neck in it.

Having grown up in the town whre all of this occured, I am glad that there are those that still hold an interest in this part of history, however sad it may be. I look forward to reading this book again.

This is an excellent book. Anyone who is interested in the Civil War era and Abraham Lincoln, will really enjoy this book. Also anyone who studies the law will also find this book fascinating. This book touches on our constitutional rights and how they can be overlooked when a horrible crime has been committed and the government and the people want someone to pay for the crime. Anybody. This is just an excellent book!!!

This book has some great strengths and a few weaknesses. The research is very thorough and it shows. It also makes it a fine reference sourse for scholars of the subject. However some of the stuff included should have been edited out.

I find fault the writing style, though this is a personal thing. While loaded with gems of information, the writing is a bit repetitive, even turgid in places as if the writer had an agenda of her own. This is a pity because she did all the hard work. The writing style should have made more of it. Other readers may like the writing style.

The other fault I find is that two key pieces in information presented have no reference sourse. If prosecution witnesses were paid money to perjure themselves we should know what is the sourse of this information. This would have added so much more to the storyline and to the case.

For all of that the book is persuasive in making the case that Mary Surratt did not recieve a fair trial. The fact that her son walked free after his trial before a civilian jury makes the case stronger. A good read with a solid information that might have been a really great read.

L. Power, Ireland.

Interesting read, closley follows JFK Murder Solved web site. James Files did it with help of others.

I recommend this book to anyone. I got hooked into reading the whole book, by just the first page. It is an interesting book that will even get those loyal JFK fans thinking!!! I wish i'd known about this book a long time ago. If you have not read this book, then you don't like learning the history of this country.

Reviewed by Joanne Benham for Reader Views (8/06)

There have been so many books written about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, one would wonder why someone would bother writing another. There are two schools of thought about the assassination. One theory is that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone gunman, working on his own initiative. The other theory is that the assassination was a giant conspiracy involving the FBI, the CIA and the Mafia.

One name that comes up time after time in the conspiracy theory camp is Sam Giancana, the Mafia chief of Chicago during the late 50s and 60s. This book is co-authored by Sam's daughter, Antoinette, who had intimate access to several of the main characters named in the conspiracy theory. Her co-authors are doctors in the fields of neurology, neurophysiology and neuropsychiatry who provide expert analysis about what could and could not have happened that day in November, 1963.

The authors lay out a logical sequence of events, showing the strong links between the Kennedy family and Sam Giancana; links stretching back to prohibition days when Joseph Kennedy was a bootlegger with a contract on his head for running his rum through Mob territory without permission.

Whatever theory you believe, this book is fascinating, delving into the inner workings of politics and the Mafia. I could hardly put the book down, although I had to keep skipping ahead to follow a particular story thread because the authors would throw out a tantalizing bit of information and then tell you they would explain it more fully in a future chapter. I couldn't wait to get to that chapter.

This is an outstanding book. It reads nicely and easily and gives a good overview of the case, also for beginners. This should not come as a surprise from me as I conversed a lot with author John Hughes and shared some of my research and materials for this book. Nevertheless a few tiny errors slipped into the last two chapters that deal with confessed grassy knoll shooter James E. Files. Such as that he used a .221 bullet, while in fact it was a .222 bullet. But these small errors are forgivable since they don't take away from the big picture, although the involvement of the CIA and the highest elements of US government could have been emphasized more. But then again, any child can grasp that Organized Crime alone could not have executed this coup d' état, not to mention its cover-up.

Five stars.

Wim Dankbaar

- author "Files on JFK"

Absolutely astonishing. Being new to the whole Kennedy assignation field of study this book was my first introduction to this intriguing subject. I was so fascinated by the information presented by the book I was even inspired to purchase the DVD of the taped interview with "Deadeye". I would highly recommend this book largely due to the fact it has kindled an interest in me I never thought I would have. I am still amazed at the idea that the man responsible for the shooting of JFK is alive and well in a prison in Joliet, IL. Even more remarkable is the thought that the world doesn't know

Uprising had me going till the very last page. I didn't know what was gonna happen. My only regret is that senator... well, I guess I won't give it away. Good book!

I would have given this book one star but the premise of the story was interesting enough to rate the second star despite the very poor writing. This novel was a reminder for me not to purchase a book just because it has a gay theme and is written by a gay author. The characterization was so wooden that it was almost humorous. The reviews I read must have been written by the author's friends or someone who has a lot of copies in inventory. I normally wouldn't dream of doing this, but I actually threw the thing in the trash after forcing myself to finish it. I don't mean to be nasty, but I felt a little betrayed by the reviews. It's hard to imagine very many readers giving this 4 stars.

The premise of this book really got my attention, however I felt somewhat disappointed when it was all over. Although I enjoyed the book, I felt like it was missing that certain something that would have made it great. I wish that there could have been more exploration of The Three Wisemen and an epilogue about what happened to everyone. Overall, a good read, but I wouldn't spend my last dollar on it.

Unlike other amazon reviewers, I liked the last part of the book (more than "the ending") the best. I have had some of the fantasies that propel the action of the book. The convergence of the three "Wise Men" stretches disblief, but what gave me the most difficulty was believing that the FBI would send someone undercover with as little "basic training" (like, say vocabulary drill) or backgrounding as Raider has, and that anyone could cover up such ignorance.

Some of the characters (Freedom, Deon) were developed; others (Jasper, Bruce, and the way-too-unsuspicious Othello) were insufficiently developed (with Raider somewhere in between). The book was sufficiently interesting to keep me reading.

UPRISING by Randy Boyd is that rare creature, a gay political thriller. This kind of story is most often found in the work of Michael Crichton and John Gresham, not on the gay fiction shelves. I can actually only think of one other book like this one, Felice Picano's totally engrossing THE LURE. Both books deal with undercover espionage within gay political groups and both entertain their readers as well, if not better, than their straight counter parts.

UPRISING features Othello, one of the biggest music stars on the planet, and a closeted homosexual. After finding out that he is HIV positive, Othello has a burning need to help jump start a gay revolution. To this end he enlists two other high profile closet cases, one a media mogul (think Ted Turner) the other, Americas greatest basketball player (think Michael Jordan). Together these three become the "Wise men" anonymously funding gay charity work and covertly funding gay counter-bashing across the country. Into the picture steps Raider Kincaid, an undercover FBI agent and the walking epitome of everything Othello has ever wanted in a boyfriend. He is a former lacrosse star and blonde Adonis out to bust this gay conspiracy. He is a man's man, but is he as straight as he thinks he is?

It is my sincere wish that more novels like this were available in the gay market. Randy Boyd has truly created an exciting piece of fiction here, full of breath taking close calls and heart pounding bravado. At the same time we the reader care about the characters in this novel. All are three dimensional and beautifully thought out. Some might argue that the entire premise is too far fetched to be believed, but isn't that what a political thriller is all about? Does anyone really think THE FIRM was viable? NO...but that didn't stop it from selling a gazillion copies. If the story is riveting, and this one certainly is, we are able to suspend our disbelief and dive right in to the churning narrative pool. I could not stop eagerly swimming through this book until I reached the highly dramatic conclusion, and what more could work from this genre ask for?

very simple review There is nothing new here. This seems like a conglomeration of everything already printed weather factual or speculative. very disapointing

First and foremost, this little book is too brief to convince anybody of anything--I counted only 104 pages of true text.What was most disappointing for me was that the author was extremely selective about the "evidence" he presented that there was a cover-up. For example, even though the autopsists did not use approved methods when they noted that JFK's upper-back wound was "14 cm from the tip of the acromium process and 14 cm below the tip of the right mastoid process," this measurement at least fixed the location much more precisely than the "X" they marked on the autopsy face sheet. But, Galanor, of course, only mentions the "X." Also the autopsists stated the wound was "just above the upper border of the [right] scapula." Here again the author conveniently omitted their attempt to be more precise.Later, the author states that a paraffin test that showed no presence of nitrates on Oswald's right cheek was "consistent with the possibility that Oswald did not fire a rifle." This is true of course, but didn't Galanor think the readers might want to know that an FBI agent, who fired three shots in succession with the same rifle found on the sixth floor of the depository, also tested negative.I could go on but I don't want to beat a dead horse.So, if you're looking for the truth about the assassination of President Kennedy, I suggest you don't look for it here.

Galanor has accomplished a feat that most students of this case have thought was next to impossible: a concise account of the most basic aspects of the assassination of JFK that enables new students to understand most of the crucial issues and old hands to fully appreciate their fundamental importance. In some ways, this stunning feat might have been expected from an author whose earlier work made calculus--perhaps the most difficult of undergraduate courses--accessible to students with no flare for mathematics.

In my own book on this case, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), I provide a set of 16 "smoking guns", beginning with two drawn from Galanor's book; and at the conclusion of my "Prologue", I advise my readers to begin with COVER-UP (1998) before they read mine. So don't be taken in by the book's easy-to-read style or by the abundant photographs, diagrams, and illustrations that make this case accessible to everyone who can read. It takes experts years to master this material. Galanor makes it accessible in hours.

Although one can quibble with a few details, this book is the most up-to-date concise introduction to the issues in the assassination of President Kennedy currently available. Anyone seeking a brief, informative and well-illustrated alternative to the dismal "Oswald did it" propaganda of Gerald Posner should give Galanor a read. There have been some good previous concise summaries of the evidence for conspiracy, but all are somewhat dated at this point. Stewart Galanor has ably filled an obvious gap in the literature.

Stewart Galanor's book "Cover-Up" is one of top most powerful and informative reads you will find on the JFK assassination! It is loaded with many revelations not found in other books on the subject, and for those of us who have studied and researched the various books and articles on the subject for years, many examples of extremely close attention to details showing just how much evidence was tampered with or clearly altered in the course of the Warren Commission's investigation.

The pictures and documentation of the phyiscal evidence and the efforts to duplicate what is told to us as truth by the FBI and other investigative groups prove that without a doubt, we haven't been told the entire truth about what happened. Just the study and comparison of the wound analysis and ballistics PROVES that the whole premise that Lee Oswald did it alone is untenable.

Using the Scientific Method, one is able to prove or disprove predictions based on facts learned from trying to create and recreate results, and then using different variables to learn even more information. Galanor's "Document 24" is just one of many proofs that the evidence had to be altered because it could not be duplicated--the Sixth floor window is 60 feet from ground level, while the tower that was used to attempt to duplicate the shots from the "sixth floor elevation" at the Army's Aberdeen Proving Grounds (Warren Commission Exhibit 579) is only 30 feet high. There are many other startly examples in the book.

This is without question one of the best books on the JFK assassination you could read. It helps to bring together a lot of the facts that have been missed by others, and it powerfully illustrates that much of what we have been told as fact is ridiculous. If your views are those that support the findings of the Warren Commission, this book will shatter them. If your views support the idea that Oswald acted alone, the evidence in this book will show you how that position is no longer valid, simply because that which is purported to have been done by "Oswald" could not be duplicated.

Mr. Galanor should be commended for his interest and study of the records on which his work is based--obviously very few have devoted as much time with the keen eye for detail he has shown in finding much within the Warren Commission materials disproving their own positions after all these years. Harold Weisberg and Mark Lane were two of the first, and Galanor adds much to this ever-increasing long list of inaccurate information sold to the American people as fact.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone wanting to settle the doubts in their minds about whether or not we have ever been told the whole truth about the investigations into the JFK assassination!

I have no idea why this book is no longer in print. Jim Bishop wrote an earlier book about the day Lincoln was killed ("The Day Lincoln Was Shot") that is still in print (and it's great), but this one has apparently fallen out of favor. Strange.

So why a minute-by-minute examination of a single day, even a day as momentous as this one? That's not necessarily an easy question to answer; it is a kind of subset history genre, the close examination of Kennedy's death, or Lincoln's, or Christ's, or 9/11, etc. On first blush it might seem of value only to the researcher writing from a larger historical perspective, but in fact a work of history with this kind of focus can be far more interesting than any other approach to the subject. In the case of JFK, the incredible tension that builds naturally from a chronicle of the day he was killed makes for a more thrilling story than a novel on the same subject could ever hope to achieve.

The book follows not only Kennedy but all the players, Jackie, Oswald, his mother & his wife, LBJ, RFK, J.D. Tippett, and so on. At times these separate strands converge, but mostly they're followed separately and Bishop does a masterful job of keeping all the threads tight. It's hard to imagine the amount of research and organization that went into telling this story so cleanly, because it is certainly one of the most confusing, contradictory days in world history, but Bishop makes it look easy. He is a brilliant storyteller, and anyone will tell you that is what a great reporter has to be. It's not just the facts, ma'am, it's the narrative drive, and this one moves like a supercharged Hummer.

So why has it fallen out of print? And why has another book on the same topic, William Manchester's "Death of a President," also fallen out of print? I'm not much on conspiracy theories; there's nothing in either book that the "military-industrial complex" would find terribly distressing. Bishop does mention several eyewitnesses who saw or heard shots coming from the famous grassy knoll---as, incidentally, do the live news accounts of November 22---but by far most of the evidence Bishop (and Manchester) collects points squarely at Lee Harvey Oswald. I think this excellent book is out of print now because people just don't care who killed Kennedy anymore, and they certainly aren't interested in a blow-by-blow account of the assassination.

To say this is "too bad" would be an understatement of biblical proportions. Every day, every hour, we are losing our sense of wonder and curiosity about our country, and we are most particularly forgetting the lessons the Sixties taught us: don't trust the official story. They may be right (in this case, I think they actually are: I believe Oswald did act alone and the "coverup" all these years has been the CIA, FBI, Dallas police dept., etc. covering up how incompetent and ineffectual they were protecting Kennedy that day), but you should ALWAYS look into the story for yourself. Books like "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" (and Oliver Stone's masterwork film "JFK") help us do that, by marshalling all the available information into a powerful narrative thrust. If we forget, or more importantly if we simply cease to care, then the ones who want us to sleep our lives away have won before we're even out of the starting gate.

Read this book, not just because it is about one of the most important days in American history, and not just because it is a remarkably well-written thriller, but also because it is important, SO important, that we never forget this man and how he died and the lessons his death taught us.

As the leading civilian authority on the Secret Service, I recommend this book for its clasic status. That said, there are several errors throughout and, like Manchester before him, Bishop has an obvious lone-nut bias. I know for a fact that Bishop spoke to former Secret Service agents Bill Greer and Jim Rowley...beyond that, it is hard to tell who (if anyone) else.
Vince Palamara-JFK/ Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of two books, in over 30 other author's books, etc.)
Pittsburgh, PA

"The Day Kennedy Was Shot" is one of the most well written books I've read so far this year!! At first glance, this book is like looking at a script of the TV series "24", but sadly Jack Bauer wasn't there to help and the tragic events of November 22nd, 1963 were not fictional, but a tragic reality. How an authour, yet alone anyone, can piece together the events of a single day in such mintue detail is beyond me. The scenes he masterully recreates make the reader feel like they are there. This book was gripping and hard to put down! The only thing that this book lacks (while taking nothing away from the theme and I suspect, the intent of the book) is an exploration of possible conspiracy theories. (If you're looking for another "conspiracy" book, this one is NOT for you) But if you're looking for a complete account of that day's events. (The book's chapters are divided into hourly sagments running from 7AM-3AM CST) this is THE ONE! I would recomend this book as an ideal source to use if you're writing a report about that fateful day. I would defy anyone to match its exactness of detail!

From the opening sequence depicting the alleged events in the Kennedy's suite at the Hotel Texas in Fort Worth that morning, complete with the character's imaginary thoughts, one immediately gains the uncomfortable impression that Mr. Bishop is merely making this stuff up. His detailed analysis of those fateful 60 seconds in Dealey Plaza is worse than conjecture, it is utterly IMPOSSIBLE. Not only does he treat us to a detailed description of Oswald's alleged actions and even thoughts as he supposedly sits in that window in the School Book Depository (from which we now know at least some of the shots could not have been fired) with a complete absence of witnesses or testimony, he then goes on to describe how the first bullet missed, hit the street BEHIND the car yet managed to spray the occupants in their FACES with "cement dust", and then somehow ricocheted over, under, or around the car to then hit the curb two streets away and account for Mr. Tague's facial injuries. Not only is this feat of physics utterly impossible, it is not recounted in this manner by one single witness to these events. Even if the reader were predisposed to believe that Mr. Oswald acted alone, which not only is not plausible but is not possible in the face of known evidence, it is ridiculous to imagine that Mr. Bishop would know it to be due to Oswald's wife and mother not treating him sufficiently like a "man". The concept of an impartial analysis of the day's events is an interesting one, but having amassed quite an assassination library myself I would strongly recommend that this early apologist effort be passed over. You can get a better accounting of the details with a great deal less spin in Jim Marrs' "Crossfire".

John F Kennedy, the 35th. American President, served from January 20, 1961 until he was assassinated in Dallas-Texas on November 22, 1963.

During his short term in office important events took place and some of their effects, after forty-four years, are still living with us up to this day.
For instance, Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, Cuban Missile Crises and his confrontation with Nikita Khrushchev - American U2 Spy Plane.
The establishment of the Berlin Wall and USA subsequent estrangement with USSR.
The Space Race with the Soviets and his solemn promise to America to outpace USSR by pushing research and development of the Space Program.
The beginning of Vietnam crises.
The energetic inauguration of American Civil rights.

The book referred to all the above, but did not touch base with something equally important.
Israel.
The Negev Nuclear Research Centre located about ten kilometres to the south Dimona in Israel.

It has never been a secret that in 1958, the French helped Israel construct the centre.
{{{The year 1958 was filled with open unrest in the Middle East. a) Union between Egypt and Syria. b) Civil disturbances in the Lebanon c) Coup in Iraq - suspected as communists. d) The Marines landed in Lebanon, and e) The height of the Algerian Revolution and its adverse impact on the Franco-Egyptian relations}}}.

Nevertheless, officially the centre was built as nuclear reactor to help produce additional power for `desalination plant' to water the Negev desert.
The world concluded that the purpose of Dimona was not as announced. Israel constructed it to build nuclear weapons. The Arab world, estranged with Israel since day one, suspected the Israelis were applying a policy shrouded in ambiguity and equivocation.

Dimona began active work in the beginning of 1962 and was able to produce plutonium. Arab university professors gathered in Cairo and their forum reached the conclusion that enriched uranium was also produced.

USA intelligence was able to assess the purpose of Dimona since the beginning of 1960 and insisted that Israel should agree to comply with international standards of `inspection' (Israel never signed the Nuclear non-Proliferation Pact that began late in 1960).
Indeed, Ben Gurion agreed to international inspection provided 1) Inspectors are USA citizens or under the sole supervision of the USA, and 2) that Israel would receive advance notice of the schedule of inspection.
Some suspected that since Israel was able to receive advance warning of the date of inspection, it was a lot easy to makeover, hide, evade, and cover, ahead of time, sensitive data at the site away from the scrutinizing eyes of the inspectors.
The inspectors informed USA administration of their qualms and complained that their work, in the absence of professional surprise check, would be rendered futile, useless and a waste of time. The inspectors didn't agree to any restrictions put to them by the Israelis concerning the `areas' or `the facilities' they intended to check.

Ben Gurion was adamant "there will be no surprise visits", and Kennedy was determined to `go by the book', `the inspectors should apply the guidelines to the letter and produce their appraisal, independently, as in any other place in the world. Exempting Israel would be taken as precedent'.
As expected, the charismatic young American president won over the old man of Israel. Dimona was put under the Inspectors Microscope.
But for how long??

When Lyndon B Johnson succeeded the assassinated President he did not pursue the same stringent approach as his predecessor.

Dimona was completed to the best of Israel's abilities...............

In essence, this is a real sad story about a mid-level KGB officer who made a wrong bet by deciding to sell himself to Boris Berezovsky. He had to escape from Russia and to get associated with "real friends" Berezovsky and his proprietary storyteller Goldfarb. I feel very sorry for Litvinenko. Goldfarb makes good profit on the story - keeps writing horror stories about Russia - junk.

Read Paul Khlebnikov's "Godfather of the Kremlin" if you want to know who Berezovsky is.

The title and the cover of the book are somewhat misleading, because the protagonist is Berezovsky. And though Berezovsky's analysis of Russian politics is interesting, it nevertheless is self-interested.

Some chapters are written very thriller-like, almost on the verge of loosing a sense of reality. This inkling comes because while reading one can't leave behind the impression that the book is written to undertake a certain mission. And in that case, I would more willingly have liked to see the direction Russia is moving these days, rather than to find out whose favourite vine is Château Latour.

This is the story of former Russian intelligence officer Alexander "Sasha" Litvinenko, who in November 2006, was poisoned by the rare radioactive element polonium. Polonium is so rare that it is very hard to detect. In fact, in radioactive cases, hospitals do not try to search for it, and most health officials do not even know of it. It has also never been used in war or assassinations by any organization, whether governmental or terrorist. Russia is known to possess polonium, but according to the author, it is very hard to get a hand on it by individuals or terrorist organizations not supported by the Russian government. Polonium is only dangerous if ingested; it can thus be transported without risk. Only a minute amount is necessary to kill an individual. There are no antidotes. The reason it was detected in Litvinenko was because of his resilience and his survival time of a few weeks, which gave British health officials more time to solve the puzzle and detect polonium. Should Litvinenko have died quicker, the cause of death would probably never have been known.

Livinenko, who defected from Russia and became a British citizen, became the first man in history to be the victim of a nuclear terrorist attack. Within days, because of the nuclear radiation, he had aged almost 20 years! A few weeks later he died at a London hospital. The FSB, the successor to the KGB, and the Putin regime were suspected. Traces of polonium radiation were found on some airplanes originating from Russia, suggesting the terrorists had traveled from there. A pub and the Sushi restaurant where Sasha was poisoned were closed due to traces of radiation. You may recall in the news seeing British personnel in yellow protective suits (to protect them from radiation) searching the sushi restaurant.

Sasha's wife, who tended to her husband and was exposed to his vomit, was found to have been exposed to polonium. But the exposure was minimal and did not pose an immediate health risk to her. His children however were not exposed to polonium. According to the author, Scotland Yard knows who the terrorists are, and who is behind them, but the information is classified. Is it because of the political ramifications? Should such information be withheld from the public?

Ever since 1998, when Litvinenko denounced the FSB for ordering him to assassinate tycoon Boris Berezovsky (who's story is told of how he made his billions), he had set out to exposing the FSB's darkest secrets. According to Litvinenko, the FSB were responsible for the assassinations of oligarchs (government by the few), politicians, and journalists. He believes that the FSB were also behind the assassination of Ukrainian presidential candidate Viktor Yuschenko who was poisoned during his campaign. He also exposes the dirty deeds of the FSB during the war in Chechnya. Litvinenko warns the west that the KGB is back with a vengeance. For these reasons, many in Putin's government viewed Litvinenko as a traitor, and, according to the author, may have wanted him killed.

In an address to the Russian people, Putin flatly denied having been involved in the murder of Litvinenko, saying that Litvinenko is insignificant. But then all politicians lie, don't they? It is part of their job description.

The book revealed to me so many traits about Putin that I never knew, but I don't want to use this book to pass judgment on the man. After all, the author does say that the beliefs and conclusion of the book are those of Litvinenko and his own, and that he does not claim to be a neutral observer.

According to the author, Putin was on holiday during the Russian submarine accident that made headlines throughout the world. The west volunteered to help, but Putin refused any kind of help until it was too late. All sailors on board the submarine died many days later. They could have been saved by an immediate rescue attempt. During the whole incident, Putin remained on holiday. I found this shocking. Do his people mean so little to him?

The author reveals more of Putin's character during the Chechnya war and the atrocities that took place there. He also accuses Putin for the Moscow bombings and killings of innocent Russians. Again, we should not take the author's word, but we should keep an open mind.

The author also says that Putin never liked the west but only pretended to, and that when the occasion arises, he would separate from them. He also says that it was the Americans who kept him in power. You may recall hearing in the news a few months ago that Putin resumed his nuclear air patrol to protect Russia from a possible nuclear attack from the west. Is the tension of the cold war repeating itself?

I really enjoyed this book, and it opened many questions I never thought of before. I don't want to use this book alone to pass judgment on Putin and the Russian government. This book opened for me a door to learn more about this ex-superpower that might turn out be a sleeping giant.

This book also exposed to me the evil that man can do in the name of power. Do politicians sleep peacefully at night? Would the world be a better place without politicians? One thing is certain: in the name of power, man is capable of untold atrocities!

Alexander Valterovich Litvinenko was a lieutenant-colonel in the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (formerly the KGB), who later fled to the United Kingdom, where he was granted political asylum. In November of 2006, Litvinenko fell ill and died under extremely suspicious circumstances. After his death, he was found to have been poisoned with the radioactive material, polonium-210. Alexander Litvinenko was the first man in world history to have been killed in an act of nuclear terrorism. But, who did it, and why?

In this fascinating book, Alexander Goldfarb, a Jewish-Russian microbiologist and activist, presents his story of his time with Alexander Litvinenko and what he learned from him. The book tells Litvinenko's story from his recruitment into the KGB, through his time amongst the upper levels of Russian society, and on to his post-defection work in the West and his eventual death. Along the way, the reader is treated to a thorough look into what happened in post-Soviet Russia, including the rise and fall of the robber barons, the rise and further rise of the security services, and what was really going on behind the scenes in all of the major events in recent Russian history.

Overall, I found this to be a gripping book, one that kept me spellbound for hours. Now, Mr. Goldfarb is not an entirely dispassionate critic of the Russian scene, and as such his view of events in Russia is bound to be slanted. But, that said, I found his history of Russia to be fascinating, and to be fully in accord with what many other commentators have said.

As such, I must say that if you really want to understand where Russia is today, and how it got there, then you must read this book. I highly recommend it to everyone.

After reading Politkovskaya's Putin's Russia & A Russian Diary, Klebnikov's Godfather of the Kremlin and Felshtinsky's Blowing Up Russia, I have to admit this book is excellent as it corraborates all the information and adds more details to the information printed in the aforementioned books. The only thing I believe is not accurately depicted is Berezovsky himself. It is true he looted, it is true he made his money in dubious ways like all of the oligarchs. Goldfarb's positive treatment of Berezovsky must have something to do with them being friends, but this is to be expected. Overall, however, Berezovsky is not a bda character and the book itaelf is excellent.

Book was shipped promptly within the projected time frame. Quality of book met my expectations. Speedy delivery.

The authors goal of trying to show how the 20th century was going to be radically different from the 19th is a tough one to pull of but Rauchway makes a valiant effort. This book deserves five starts because it takes a topic that no one else has attempted and presents the information well. There are a few minor errors that I discovered but on the whole it presents a useful history that when taken in context is an excellent segway into the era of American imperialism. Overall this is a good book that is a great read for those who have knowledge about the Gilded Age.

Those who have noticed my growing list of reviews will find a lot of things reviewed, including several books on history. If you are one of those, you may notice that these books deal with presidents of the late 1800's and early 1900's. Considering that McKinley is my favorite president, this book captured my interest. However, it failed to maintain it.

I noticed it goes along with the traditional view that McKinley was basically conservative, and that progressive Roosevelt became vice-president to get him out of the hair of NY boss Sen. Tom Platt. Having read Kevin Phillip's biography, I disagree with this assessment. I also found the comparisons between McKinley's assassin Leon Czolgosz (pronounced "Cholgosh") with Garfield's killer Charles Guiteau interesting, having read "Dark Horse" about Garfield.

This book looks at various aspects of the turn of the century outlook. It seems to see Roosevelt as the beneficiary of Czolgosz's crime. I find some of the former interesting, but the book continued to bore me. Like "Dark Horse", it is told as a story, but it would make an excellent bed-time story because I would be asleep in no time.

If you have a keen interest in the mindset of that period of time, I would recommend this book to you. Likewise, if you want to deal with what constitutes insanity, I would also suggest you read this book. However, if you want a book to keep your interest, this is not it.

I'm sure the statement, as fact, that Emma Goldman "dismissed [Czolgosz] as a police informant" would come as a great surprise to Miss Goldman. Anyone who read her autobiography, living my life, or looked into the subject at all would know that it was her friend, the Mennonite anarchist Abraham Isaak, who published a warning about Czolgosz being a spy in his newspaper "Free Society." Goldman didn't really know Czolgosz (or even his real name), but she demanded Isaak publish a retraction as he had no proof of his allegation. She later blamed this kind of hostile treatment from the very Chicago anarchists she'd introduced Czolgosz to for driving him to "prove himself" through his attentat.

If you want to know about Anarchism and the period, don't buy this book. Buy "Living My Life," or read it right here for free: [...]

Frankly, that's what the author would have done if he'd cared about getting even the most basic facts correct.

The assassination of William McKinley is far less examined than those of Lincoln and Kennedy. If only for the relative obscurity of the topic alone, this deserves a look. While somewhat disappointing for a lack of focus, the book is quite informative.

The author's thesis seems to be that the assassination of McKinley was symbolic of America's discontent with conservativism and big business's hold on politics, bringing about the progressive movement and the emergence of Theodore Roosevelt. The title of the book would seem to imply a focus on the assassination of McKinley, which is not accurate. Make no mistake about it, the title of the book is deceiving. Rauchway goes for several pages at a time examining nothing but the rise of Roosevelt. In that respect, the author strays from delivering what the title of the book suggests and at times from supporting his apparent thesis.

One of the issues the book does a reasonable job of addressing is the story behind McKinley's assassin, Leon Czolgosz. Alienist Vernon Briggs investigated the life of Czolgosz only to find the powerful businesses that McKinley shielded were a key part of the environment that created the assassin. In the process of his investigation, Briggs brings the issue of the insanity defense to the attention of the American justice system. In this respect, Briggs's research had a major impact on the judicial system.

Without the significant digressions into the social changes brought about by the Roosevelt administration, this book would be much thinner. Perhaps that is why Rauchway chose to include it. Even with the digressions, the book is decidedly thin. I enjoyed the book even though I believe it could have been composed with a much better sense of focus.

This book is an expose' of J.Edgar Hoover and his actions as Director of the F.B.I.
Mr. Summers covers Hoover's entire career and his rise to fame thanks in part to his personal PR man. He was definitely an oppurtunist and exaggerated his stories frequently. Thoughts expressed by his nieces were candid and of interest in that aspect.
Hoover had far too much power and that becomes more obvious through the relationships he had with the Presidents he was supposed to serve. FDR made the regrettable decision to enhance Hoover's powers.
That fateful decision adversely affected a lot of people including Charlie Chaplin and John F.Kennedy to name a few.
Hoover was the most powerful figure during most of his tenure. He used that power to gather as much blackmail material as possible and he frequently used it. Often-times blackmail was used for his job security or, as in the case of the 1960 Democratic ticket, to force political decisions. His longevity was due in large part to fear. He wasn't trusted by most of the Presidents during his directorship.
Anthony Summers wrote about other abuses by Hoover which includes the free vacations he took with Clyde Tolson,the backing by Organised Crime figures of his horse racing bets,the staggering amount of taxpayer money spent on Hoover's luxuries.
There were a lot of pages dedicated to Hoover's relationship to many mafia figures. The Mob's blackmailing of Hoover was covered in detail also.
This book is easy reading and covers J.Edgar Hoover from birth to death. There are some startling details of his abuse of power. A very good book overall!

It's incredible how some still think that J. Edgar Hoover was a great American. Maybe these people should read this book to see how he really was. Anthony Summers did a great job investigating the life of number one of the FBI. Although written in a kind of a tabloid style, it still gives us some shocking details of the life of this man.

Thanks to his vast knowledge, Hoover blackmailed his way through American society. Because of his 'compromising documents' he was able to keep the members of Congress and the presidents quiet. The fact that Hoover told the people what they wanted to hear, made a hero out of him. If only they had known what we know now.

Hoover was corrupt and received a lot of nice presents from his rich friends. The fact that Hoover hated homosexuals was all the more strange, because it was a well kept secret that his 'friend' Clyde Tolson was more than just a friend. The incompetence of the FBI was never questioned, because Hoover was able to lie his way through his career.

Well written and interesting new facts.

Anthony Summers has written a masterpiece; no other way to put it. Well written and researched--the best book on HOOVER, bar none. Get this! Vince Palamara
Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of 2 books, in over 32 other author's books, etc.)

This book is important to read in the post-9/11 era. At a time when every cable-news pundit is crying out for Congress to take the shackles off the FBI, it is good to remember why Congress slapped those shackles on in the first place.

The author makes a pretty strong case that J. Edgar Hoover was a thoroughly corrupt, racist, mentally unbalanced megolomaniac who egregiously abused his powers for financial and political gain. I'm skeptical of some of the author's wilder allegations -- for example, a suggestion that Richard Nixon may have had Hoover killed by poisoning his toothpaste. However, many of the abuses of Hoover's FBI were well-documented in Congressional investigations in the 1970's: the secret files; the unfettered use of wiretaps, bugs, infiltration, warrantless searches and seizures (i.e., burglaries), and other methods of surveillance, all done without any judicial oversight and often without any legitimate law enforcement purpose; harassing Vietnam War protestors, people in the Civil Rights movement, suspected "Communists," and other political "enemies."

One of the book's main points is that Hoover kept himself in power for so many years -- despite evident corruption and manifest incompetence -- by blackmailing successive presidents with the dirt he had gathered on their private lives. Although largely speculative, the possibility does seem to be frighteningly plausible. Other allegations that appear to be supported by fairly good circumstantial evidence include Hoover's ties to the Mafia and his sexual hypocrisy.

I'm giving the book only 4 stars because the author's breathless, tabloid style makes it difficult to really sort out established facts from mere rumor, innuendo and hearsay. Still, it is a very entertaining and thought-provoking read.

Britisher Anthony Summers is a crack researcher who was seasoned in the finest documentary atmosphere available, that of the legendary BBC. This book is every bit as fascinating as Summers's work on Richard Nixon. While the Nixon book was entitled "The Arrogance of Power," this work on the life and times of controversial FBI director J. Edgar Hoover could well be titled "The Abuse of Power."

Summers reveals how Hoover was a man in between who was trapped by the same method he used to compromise and place in fear presidents and members of Congress. A tenacious investigator, he turned his agent-bloodhounds loose on men in power, gaining enough information to compromise them. The moment an influential House or Senate member would complain about FBI abuse, he would receive a call from Hoover informing of information he held. At the same time, Hoover was in turn compromised by what the Mafia held on him. Hoover, an outwardly homophobic director who stated bluntly that he did not anyone of that persuasion working in his Bureau, had a homosexual life he attempted to keep secret. Frank Costello and other Mafia chieftains let him know that if he threatened their domain they had important information they would use against him.

Another fascinating element of Summers's book is his detailed revelations about Hoover's influence with U.S. presidents. He was said to have influenced John F. Kennedy's choice of Lyndon Johnson for his running mate in 1960 because Hoover held potentially damaging evidence on Kennedy's womanizing, which would have destroyed efforts to paint the Massachusetts senator as a loyal family man in the hard-fought 1960 campaign against Richard Nixon. Nixon was a politician who also had reason to fear Hoover. He was never willing to replace him for that reason, despite an expressed preference to do so.

This is a book that takes the readers to the highest portals of power and uncovers many secrets. Hoover had a profound influence on American politics from the thirties until his death in 1972.

I found this to be a very interesting book, and thought provoking. At times I would read some of it to my girlfriend who was a young girl when this happened, and she would ask me to not read any more as it angered her so bad. I used this book along w/ other sources for a final paper in College. The thing I found most interesting was the fact the Mr. Zirbel never really states his opinion. He does make you think. And although we will never be told the truth behind JFK's untimely demise, this does give food for thought. I will have to buy myself another copy as the first ones I bought(in hardcover) I ended up giving away as presents. Perhaps I should buy more than one. Kudos Mr. Zirbel

To say that the Kennedy assassination is a "C.I.A. thing" is the equivalent of saying a tornado is a "weather thing."

No kidding.

But me-doubts that the C.I.A. would try to pull this off on its own without some "assurances" that it would not get caught.

After all, it would need help in controlling the Secret Service, the DPD, the Bethesda autopsy and, especially, any subsequent investigations.

That is to say, the cover-up would begin not with the soon-to-come Warren Commission but would have to commence with the firing of the first shot.

I'd say that the tandem of LBJ & J. Edgar Hoover could accomplish all of that, maybe with a bit of "local" assistance from an H.L. Hunt sort.

And it is this idea of people at the very top of our government knocking each other off like gangsters that is troubling to say the least, the angle that has kept this whole affair under the tightest of wraps for almost 45 years and 15 years after the end of the Cold War, to boot.

Scary ... but as we (almost) all know by now, America is a very scary place.

Zirbel provides the most convincing and logical
theory. His writing is tight and compelling.
Though it is possible he paraphrased or took out of
context some comments from the Warren Report,
Johnson was indeed the only person in a position
to connect the dots.
Granted, some of his critical observations are not
cited. For example, who actually observed
Marina Oswald going into Hunt's office? Another example: who were the witnesses who claim Earl Warren had tears in his eyes

after a 30 or 40 minute discussion with Johnson? What evidence is there that Warren was reluctant to serve on Johnson's commission?
Nonetheless, having lived in Texas and worked here
several years in journalism, I have a gut feeling this explanation is the clearest
and most likely scenario.

What a wonderful book this was! Author Craig Zirbel does a great job of doing one of the most important things: analyzing the motivations of one of the most powerful figures in the Kennedy Assassination Investigation.

After reading the book, I have no doubt that Lyndon Baines Johnson was, at a minimum, involved in covering-up the killers of Kennedy and, at maximum, actually orchestrated the entire plot in conjuction with wealthy businessmen as his backers.

This book brought out one of the most important points, which that Kennedy and Johnson DID NOT get along and Kennedy was going to drop Johnson from the Democratic ticket before the next election. Johnson was also: profane, an adulterer, in bed with big business interests, politically ruthless and absolutely obsessed with becoming the president of the USA. Zirbel points out correctly in the book, that we the people, instead of sending this man to an elected office, should have been sending him to jail.

One of the other things this book does is also suggest (though not actually say) why it was that Bobby Kennedy had to be killed later on, which is that Bobby Kennedy, if he had become president, would have had the power to reopen the investigation and hold LBJ accountable for murder.

It's also hard to believe that a president that signed the Freedom of Information Act into law would be okay with the Warren commission sealing all the evidence in the Kennedy case until 2039. To say this stinks of cover up would be putting it mildly.

I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in the Kennedy assassination get and read this book!

Craig I. Zirbel read almost every book, article, or newspaper dealing with the JFK assassination for 25 years. This book is the result of his studies. If it happened in a foreign country, 11/22/1963 would be viewed as a coup d'etat. If finding a motive for murder exposes the killer, then motive could explain why JFK was killed. This book explains why the Warren Commission and others are not credible. The most likely solution may be the most obvious, not the most complex (p.4).

After JFK's death LBJ refused to leave Dallas until JFK's body was placed on the plane. The Warren Commission decided there was no conspiracy; Oswald was a lone gunman. Page 17 tells of the faults in the autopsy of JFK. The Warren Commission was created to investigate the crime (p.23). They would examine the evidence developed by the FBI. LBJ was never called as a witness (p.27). Chief Justice Warren would not listen to Jack Ruby (p.29)! LBJ created and controlled this Commission, when he was one of the logical suspects (p.33).

Page 35 explains why political assassinations occur, and why some are covered up. Page 37 explains why Oswald did not fit the pattern of assassins (not insane, no motive). His quick elimination hints at a wider conspiracy. Page 43 tells of the problems in that mail-order rifle. Page 47 tells of the failures with a stationary target. (A telescopic sight adjusted to shoot "high and to the right" would have the built-in lead exactly needed for the shots fired that day! But was this done before that day?)

Chapter 7 analyzes various assassination theories, and tries to discredit them all in a few pages. (You may not agree with it once you've read other books.) Does the photograph on page 82 resemble the villain in "From Russia With Love"? Chapter 8 discusses his theory of "right hand man assassinations". I don't think his examples prove his theory. Chapter 9 announces that he will try to pin it on LBJ alone (p.95). The big problem in this is the lack of any defender who may dispute his charges. Being dead, there is no way LBJ can defend himself. So his arguments are one-sided. Is that fair?

Chapter 11 tells of LBJ's moral rules. Chapter 12 tells of his support by Big Business, page 113 tells how the NASA Space Center was built. How did LadyBird buy those radio stations? See pages 117-8. Page 122 tells of the crash of LBJ's airplane. Chapter 18 hints at the reason why LBJ didn't run in 1968: a strenuous campaign could cause a heart attack (he died in 1973). Chapters 22-23 describes the three major scandals of the Vice-President. Chapter 27 explains how the unsafe detour past the Schoolbook Depository was done against Secret Service wishes. Chapter 29 list the mistakes and problems in Oswald's capture. Chapter 31 tells of Oswald's activities; these may be explained as that of a secret agent who is controlled by others. Could the failure to record Oswald's interrogation be explained by the knowledge that he was doomed? Chapter 35 relates various strange acts: LBJ bought "presidential china" (p.256) in the fall of 1963! Chapter 37 lists 9 reasons for a conspiracy (p.282). Chapter 38 provides a parallax view to the events. Chapter 39 asks you to form your own conclusion. Do this after reading other books, such as Mark North's "Act of Treason".

I loved this book! It was only after I had completed it that I found that there were questions concerning Dr. Crenshaw's integrity and account of the assasination. Even if some of what he writes is exaggeration, this just can't be complete fabrication and still makes me think in terms of conspiracy. Regardless, this book, if nothing else, gives a new view of the assasination and is worth reading. Entertaining!

Dr. Charles A. Crenshaw worked to save President JFK, and later Lee H. Oswald, at Parkland Hospital. He
had firsthand personal experience with the crime; he saw that JFK was struck twice from the front: once in the neck, and once in the right side of the head. President LBJ called him to ask for a "deathbed confession" from Oswald. Dr. Crenshaw and the other personnel in the emergency room were ordered not to speak about the events, citing the standard medical confidentiality.

Charles A. Crenshaw was a surgeon for over thirty years. He watched thousands of trauma victims enter the emergency room. Trauma is the greatest killer of America's youth, and can affect anyone regardless of age, race, sex, occupation, or status. It also has psychological after effects on survivors.

When Oliver Stone's "JFK" was filmed in Dallas the doctors were again warned to keep quiet. The hundreds of similar gunshot cases seen by Dr. Crenshaw since 1963 have confirmed his conclusions on JFK's wounds. He finally decided to write his story in November 1990 when his career was over and he no longer feared the "men in suits". Dr. Crenshaw saw photos of JFK's Bethesda autopsy - it showed a different wound to the back of the head, one that would support a theory of a lone gunman firing from the back. The front of JFK's neck showed a larger and jagged opening than was seen in Dallas (p.111). According to reports, JFK's body was wrapped in a white cloth and placed in a bronze casket in Dallas. At Bethesda the body was in a zippered body bag in a gray casket. This book was written to present his witness to the events.

There is one thing that I remember from that time. Right after the assassination the first newspaper reports said JFK was shot from the front. J. Edgar Hoover then said that JFK was shot while the limousine was heading towards the School Book Depository Building. When photos were printed to show that didn't happen, this story was changed. To learn more about this, read "Act of Treason" by Mark North.

Could the "alterations" in the wounds between Dallas and Bethesda be explained by use of a "body double"?

This book is absolute pulp fiction trash. Charles Crenshaw is trying to "cash in" on the Kennedy assassination by writing a book about his recollections at Parkland Hospital on the day Kennedy was shot. Crenshaw makes it sound like he was a major player in the trauma room where Kennedy was treated for his gunshot wounds, yet, the other doctors, including the doctor in charge of the case, cannot recall if Crenshaw was even in the room! Clearly, Crenshaw is writing this book for the money, and not to blow the lid off the assassination. It is a pathetic attempt to make money off a dead man.

Crenshaw brings up conspiracy issues of which he knows little or nothing. He writes about the possibility that Oswald was picked up by Jack Ruby at the Texas Schoolbook Depository after teh shooting occurred! This "truth" of Crenshaw's is based on the unreliable account of a Dallas policeman who later suffered a mental breakdown and killed himself. How utterly ridiculous, yet, this is the kind of innuendo, lies, and half-truths that Crenshaw spins to make his book intriguing to the reader to sell more copies. Crenshaw is a Kennedy assassination fraud and his fellow doctors at Parkland have said as much about him in other publications.

This book does nothing to advance research on the Kennedy assassination. To the uninformed reader, it sends one down a path of conspiracy that is not provable nor feasible. I'd give this book a negative star rating if I could. Avoid it all all costs unless you want to read it for pure fiction, for that is what it is.

Jim "Konedog" Koenig, Kennedy Assassination Buff

Few actual eyewitnesses to the JFK assassination and cover-up have provided us with an inside look into the happenings of that November 22, 1963. Dr. Crenshaw finally does so. His book is simply written, void of complicated medical terms and clearly illustrates the fact that the information provided by the government and certain investigative agencies was untrue. A small book, easy to read and although there is no real "smoking gun" here, the information provided grants credence to the conclusion millions of U.S. citizens have arrived at: President John F. Kennedy's assassinated was a high-level conspiracy and cover-up.

Chuck Crenshaw was a friend of mine at Parkland Hospital. We both were there at the time of the assassination. We were both residents in general surgery. He was in the trauma room with Kennedy. My only criticism with his book is in his exaggeration of his role. The facts he related were identical to those of all the other physicians who were in attendance. They were all friends of mine and I knew them well. I heard what each of them had to say moments after the ordeal. They all saw the same wounds which were described by Dr. Crenshaw. The things seen at Parkland and reported by all these doctors are clear evidence of a conspiracy. Who and why are issues not addressed. Those would require another book and a huge paradigm shift in thinking on the part of most Americans. Another good book is "Best Evidence." It is more thorough.