Assassinations Books

I was very excited about this book because it was toted as a book that reveals the characters of the people involved with this murder. This is true, but in a straight up crazy extreme way.
Shearing exalts Corday insanely! She is the most virtuous falutless angelic creature to ever walk this earth. Marat is a putrid "bile filled" monster. Its ridiculous!

I give the book one star because haven't read the book yet. And I wouldn't but I have to read a book on a twentith century President and I chose him.

An amazing story about the Life & Death of President John F. Kennedy. This book tells a compelling story about the events leading up to, during and immediately after the fatal day in Dallas Texas when President John F. Kennedy was rolling down the streets of Dallas in the Motorcade when shots rang out..suddenly our beloved JFK was dead. This book tells the facts and gives you so many amazing black & white photographs showing the Motorcade, the chaos when the shots began, the funeral procession and more. It is a must for any collector of presidential items, and in particular of John F. Kennedy.

"Peter Salmon said" By: Peter Salmon

Peter Salmon said, "In Edward Hower's article 'Reviewing books', he explains how he doesn't trash books in his reviews, saying 'Not I. If I can't find at least something to like in a book's first twenty or thirty pages, I send it right back, so another reviewer can try it' (p.26). Unfortunately for me, and any other poor sap who bought Nicholas Mosley's Assassins, we can't just send the book back to the publisher. We bought it for the cover price of $12.95, and say to ourselves, 'Hey...they should've given me $12.95 just for reading the first chapter.' "

Peter Salmon said, "On the book's very first page, a title is given for all the comments from big-time books reviewers, 'Praise for Assassins'. Here they describe this book, 'thoroughly imagined', 'an adroitly organized political thriller', and 'a cocoon of dismay and terror'. It is not these descriptions that I disagree with. In fact the thrilling plot is what counteracts Mosley's childish style. Set in England during the mid-sixties, the daughter of Sir Simon Mann, England's Foreign Secretary, stumbles upon a young assassin. The assassin takes Mann's daughter, who interrupts his deadly plans, and locks her in an abandoned cottage away from her home. When let loose to be part of a grander plot, she hides her fateful knowledge, unaware of everyone's outcome."

Peter Salmon said, "Maybe you are wondering why each paragraph begins with 'Peter Salmon said'. It is my way of satirizing Mosley's monotonous and childlike style. What makes me want to pull my hair out is the fact that every quotation is begun with the word 'said'. I found three instances (and yes I did count) when he did not use 'said'. Along with this, for many characters, he did not give names. He simply regarded them as 'the man with...'. When these two styles are put together on the same page, it is twice as annoying than having just one."

Peter Salmon said, "If you think you may be interested in this book, I beg you to go to a bookstore and read page 52. If you can tolerate Mosley's style for that one page, then you are certainly one of a kind."

In my view, President John F. Kennedy's 1963 assassination was the work of one lone gunman -- Lee Harvey Oswald. Ample evidence exists to support this "Lone Nut"/"Lone Assassin" stance.

Those who berate the whole notion of the "Single-Bullet Theory", including Mr. Roy L. Schaeffer in this book ("The Case Against The Single Bullet Theory") are just simply not relying on good enough (or sound enough) information with which to draw that conclusion, IMO. The "SBT" is by far the "best evidence" to date to explain the simultaneous wounding of both President Kennedy and Texas Governor John B. Connally (who was sitting nearly directly in front of JFK in the limousine during the Dallas motorcade).

NOT having a "SBT" in place, IMO, raises way more questions and "unexplainables" than it answers. But most conspiracists don't seem to care about those "holes" in any conspiracy "plot" that would be "replacing" the SBT. (Such as: HOW did a shooter manage to even hit Connally WITHOUT striking Kennedy FIRST? .... Or: Where did all THREE of these bullets go, lacking a SBT to explain the shooting? No bullets were left inside the bodies of the victims. And WHY didn't at least a few non-plotters physically SEE any of these three "AWOL" bullets at any time after the shooting?)

There's also evidence to link the so-called "Magic Bullet" ("CE399") to BOTH Oswald's rifle PLUS to the bullet fragments which came out of Connally's wrist and thigh. Dr. Vincent P. Guinn, who (under oath in 1986) testified that the ONLY bullets that hit President Kennedy or anyone in the car were definitively linked to Oswald's weapon (Serial Number C2766 -- and the Warren Report has stated that only one rifle ever manufactured had this exact serial number).

Prosecutor Vincent T. Bugliosi asked Dr. Guinn the following question during the 1986 "Mock Trial" of Lee Oswald ..... "There may have been FIFTY people firing at President Kennedy that day -- but if there were --- they all missed; only bullets fired from Oswald's Carcano rifle hit the President; is that correct?"

Dr. Guinn's under-oath response was ..... "That's a correct statement; yes."

This same Dr. Guinn also had previously testified in the House Select Committee (HSCA) hearings in the late 1970s, and stated very similar beliefs and findings regarding CE399. Guinn, an expert in the field of bullet analysis, concluded beyond any and all reasonable doubt that CE399 had, indeed, struck Governor Connally on November 22, 1963. *

* = By extrapolation, it can also be determined that President Kennedy HAD to have ALSO been hit with bullet CE399, even though no trace evidence of the bullet was left inside him. How? -- Because: Connally WAS definitely hit by CE399 .... and CE399 definitely came out of the barrel of rifle #C2766 .... and C2766 was found on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository .... and the only gun seen sticking out of any window in Dealey Plaza was seen extending from the SOUTHEAST corner window of the TSBD .... and from that exact window (given the known positions of the two victims in the limousine) the ONLY possible way for CE399 to have struck Connally's back is for it to also have travelled through the man sitting directly behind him, who was IN THE WAY at the time -- John F. Kennedy.

Another thing I've yet to hear any conspiracy theorist ("CT") adequately explain is the following ..... If the "Magic Bullet" (CE399) was "planted" in Parkland Hospital, as nearly all CTers seem to believe, someone on the "CT" side of the fence is going to HAVE to explain how on Earth (in the REAL world in which we all reside) the "planters"/"plotters" were able to perfectly mirror the exact characteristics and exact amount of damage that would be expected (and needed) of a bullet that did the damage to TWO victims and that left only the TINY amount of lead grains in BOTH bodies combined (just 0.9 grains found inside Connally, with none found in JFK)?

CTers claim (obviously) that CE399 was fired from Oswald's Carcano rifle sometime prior to 11/22 (although how the conspirators accomplished this little trick without detection is yet another one of those many "CT Mysteries" that's really just one of many "pure guesses" by CTers) -- HOW, then, did this "pre-assassination" firing of the bullet miraculously mirror PERFECTLY all the missing lead amounts and matching characteristics of bullet CE399 and the SBT in general?

CTers feel that the SBT has strayed into the realm of "fantasy" over the years. In fact, the MORE it's studied and tested (like the 2004 Discovery Channel test and Dr. Lattimer's experiments verifying the SBT was possible as well), the Single-Bullet Theory moves further and further AWAY from the realm of "fantasy", and well into the world of "Reality".

Given the bullet (as it is, with the slight flattening and the very slight oozing of lead at the base, et al) -- AND given the known wounds to both JFK and John Connally -- and given the known positions of the two men in the Presidential limousine -- anyone looking at the JFK case objectively, without a CT axe to grind, would come to the conclusion (at the very LEAST) that the SBT was certainly a "possibility", if not actually the ONLY possible way the wounds to both men could have occurred.

To believe otherwise is to believe that MULTIPLE rifle shots, from MULTIPLE locations, JUST HAPPENED to "line up" in very-nearly-perfect alignment to make it LOOK as if a SINGLE BULLET could have done ALL this damage to the victims. And not just ONE victim, but instead the paths and trajectories of all seven wounds, coming from multiple locales and from multiple gunmen, would have had to "line up" to perfection (or darn-near perfection at any rate) in TWO separate victims in the limousine! Right down to having the bullet that struck Connally's back enter SIDEWAYS, fooling everybody in the Government's Official Warren Commission panel into THINKING (falsely) that the wound had hit something/someone FIRST, prior to penetrating Governor Connally's back.

I ask -- What are the odds of this "coincidence" occurring?

The only reason this book rates 'one star' is because the option of 'zero stars' is not available.

This book has to be one of the all-time worst books written about the assassination, right up there with the likes of 'Case Closed' and 'Final Disclosure.'

Like 'Case Closed,' Hartwright's book is full of lies, deception, and misinformation.
In addition, it is poorly written and contains multiple grammatical errors.

The book also engages in bashing of liberals, homosexuals, Jews, Israel, and President Lyndon Johnson, just to name a few.

Hartwright contends that Oswald supposedly acquired a high-tech 'exploding' bullet and intentionally loaded it as his third cartridge out of four. Any experienced assassination researcher would realize how ridiculous that theory is.

Don't waste your hard-earned money on this volume of trash...

First, I'll admit that I didn't read this novel very closely after the first 50 or so pages; essentially I just skimmed the rest to see where it went. I seldom do this with even the most disappointing books, but the sloppy historical research apparent in this novel finally convinced me that it was not worth the time to read thoroughly.

Historical novels -- especially counter-factual, "what-if" historical novels -- require precision. The changes that an author makes in factual history must be exacting, the fewer the better, to make their point about the fine lines between life and death, success and disaster in events. Slater starts with an interesting premise: He imagines a Japanese attempt to assassinate Gen. Douglas MacArthur in April of 1943 (not unintentionally, I would think, the same month that the U.S. Army and Navy succeeded in assassinating Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto, commander of the Imperial Japanese Navy's Combined Fleet). His basic idea -- a Japanese submarine launches a single aircraft to attack MacArthur's residence in Brisbane, Australia -- is not implausible.

But the devil is in the details, and for those us who are steeped in the history of the Pacific War, Slater's lack of knowledge is painfully obvious. He obviously read some books on World War II, but his grasp of the subject at the time of writing "MacArthur Must Die" was weak and shallow. This may seem like nit-picking to some, but again, it is the author's ability to make each detail of a counter-factual novel sound authentic that makes the difference between credibility and "Oh, no, not again."

I am not inclined to list every error, but I'll mention three examples: (1) The Japanese assassin is chosen for his familiarity with the Brisbane area; but when the initial scheme for killing MacArthur goes awry, the same young man is detailed to carry out the air mission, despite the fact that he obviously has had minimal flying experience to carry out such a precision bombing attack. Slater's overall plot relies on the young man's central role, but I can't buy that the Japanese Navy would send such a young, inexperienced pilot on such an important mission. (2) The aircraft that the pilot flies off the Japanese submarine is a U.S. Navy F4F Wildcat fighter, "captured in the Philippines." A little research would have revealed to Slater that neither the Navy nor the Marine Corps had any Wildcats in the Philippines during the Japanese invasion and occupation of 1941-42. (The Japanese might have captured an F4F on Wake Island and put it back into flyable condition, but I doubt it.) (3) At different times, Slater describes his submarine as armed with a "5.5mm" deck gun and ".25mm" machine guns (real tiny bullets!). The correct designations, the "5.5 inch" deck cannon and twin "25mm" antiaircraft guns, appear in other spots. The "Japanese Wildcat" is armed with Browning machine guns, at one point, but a few pages later it's firing its "cannons." Sloppy writing and abominable editing.

One might be able to overlook the technical and historical errors if the book contained believable characters who transcend stereotype. No such luck. The young Japanese assassin's transformation from love-struck schoolboy to ruthless killer is implied, I suppose, but hardly believable. His sweetheart and her family are convenient plot fixtures. Given the number of errors about MacArthur's life, it's not surprising the General himself is reduced from a fascinating man to a uniformed mannequin; his only role, really, is as the target. Slater does have some facility for describing the topography and flora of his native Australia, but that's about the extent of the writing ability on display here.

I suppose some people will find this book entertaining, especially if they are stuck on a runway and have some time to kill -- and if they don't know much about the Pacific War to begin with. But if you are a WWII student or buff looking for a stimulating alternate history, this book is a regrettable waste of time.

This is the most misrepresented book I have ever seen. There is no way "photographic" applies here. It is a case of blatent false advertising.

Former President Ford, freemason and member of many secret societies, writes as if it would be proved that Oswald would have been the assassin. Many investigations have shown, that Oswald was a patriot and a loyal CIA man, who was duped by the CIA and had to be the patsy. It is proved that Oswald couldn't have been able to fire so many shots in such a short time with that rifle and that the fatal shot came from grassy knoll instead from Mafia- and CIA-hitman James Files. It is also proved that Ford faked the actual shot position in Kennedy's back to support the magic bullet nonsense theory for the Warren Commission, which faked almost everything and consisted of Kennedy-haters only. Disgusting how politicians can lie to the American People!

Matthew Smith clearly has a good heart and a thankfully straightforward prose style, accentuated by his mercifully short chapters which get right to the point without bogging down in unnecessary detail.
Unfortunately, his book will disappoint all but those few readers who don't already know the basics of JFK assassination conspiracy theory.
Smith posits a none-too-original theory about Lee Harvey Oswald's mysterious trip to Mexico two months before the president's killing and he expresses ideas about Jack Ruby that could only come from a non-American unfamiliar with the 1960s' dominance of the Mafia in major U.S. cities. The author lists Mary and Ray LaFontaine's excellent "Oswald Talked" in his bibliography, but makes no mention of its major revelations including the fact that Ruby AND Oswald were involved in a major arms heist from nearby Fort Terrell earlier in November 1963.
Smith presents rehashed and hackneyed analyses of oft-surveyed assassination details such as the botched autopsy, the shooting of Officer Tippit, the suspicious deaths of many witnesses, the "pot shot" at Gen. Edwin Walker and the Garrison probe.
With the help of a European computer graphic wizard, Smith prints several pages of Dealey Plaza "3-dimensional" drawings purportedly proving that shots originated from the Grassy Knoll. There's no doubt they did -- all we have to do is watch Zapruder's film and read the testimony of more than four dozen witnesses who were there that day, including Jackie Kennedy who had to crawl on the BACK of the Lincoln to retrieve part of her husband's head -- but Smith's computer graphics and accompanying text are simply dizzying.
Perhaps Smith's most eye-opening, most harrowing story is told by airplane mechanic Hank Gordon, who recalls working at Red Bird airfield in Dallas that awful Friday afternoon, and how Kennedy's murder had been brazenly predicted by a Cuban military pilot there.
The best thing in Smith's book by far is the Foreward by Jim Marrs (author of Crossfire and Rule by Secrecy, both highly recommended). The longtime JFK researcher aptly scolds U.S. citizens, and especially its corporate-controlled media, for letting the murder of our president go uninvestigated, unsolved and unpunished. George H. W. Bush was in Houston on Nov. 22, 1963 (See Bruce Adamson's "1,000 Points of Light") and he alerted the FBI to some suspicious character there...Bush Sr., the oil magnate, may have employed Oswald's "friend" George deMohrenschildt...and Bush Sr. headed the CIA in the 1970s, just in time to shred plenty of paper that might otherwise have fallen into the hands of the Church or Rockefeller committees or, worse yet, the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
As Marrs points out, any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets.