The Worst Books Ever on the JFK Assassination

[Guest Robert Morrow]

I have not put much study into the Zapruder film fakery issues. From what little study I have put into it, I am not impressed with the arguments of the folks who say it was a fakery or a fabrication or has been altered signficantly. Apparently some frames have been chopped out of it; but I do not think the whole film is a fake.

I am willing to change my mind, but I am not there yet.

Speaking of physicists there is this super duper smart guy named Luis Alvarez. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Walter_Alvarez

Alvarez even won the Nobel prize in physics in 1968. Here is the wiki quote on him:

"The American Journal of Physics commented, "Luis Alvarez (1911–1988) was one of the most brilliant and productive experimental physicists of the twentieth century."[1]

"He was the author of 168 published papers in scientific journals, mostly in the field of physics, and was elected to the National Academy of Science in 1947 and the National Academy of Engineering in 1969. He was a member of the American Physical Society, a fellow in 1939, and served as President in 1969. He was awarded the Collier Trophy by the National Aeronautics Association in 1946. The trophy was presented by President Truman; and won the Presidential Medal for Merit in 1947. In 1960 he was named California Scientist of the Year; in 1961 he won the Albert Einstein Award. In 1963 he was presented the National Medal of Science by Lyndon B. Johnson; in 1965 the Michelson Award; in 1978 he received the University of Chicago Alumni Medal and was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame. In 1987, the US Department of Energy granted him its Enrico Fermi award.[2]

He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1968, and received over 40 patents, some of which proved commercially viable."

Alvarez wrote a famous paper "A Physicist Examines the Kennedy Assassination Film.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/issues_and_evidence/frontal_shot(s)/tobias_frontal_shots/Jet_effect.html

Alvarez, this super duper smart genius and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics was a staunch supporter of the Warren Commission farce and he believes the Zapruder film was legit and that Lee Harvey Oswald did all the shooting from the back and according to Alvarez the backward movement of JFK's head is all explained by something called the jet effect.

Now do I believe Luis Alvarez? No, I would trust a class of 3rd graders over this guy for their take on the Zapruder Film and what it means.

Just because you are a highly acclaimed genius physicist does not mean you can not be a 1) wrong 2)quack 3) a sophist 4) compromised. In fact, 5 or 6 Bowery bums could probably give me a better analysis of the Zapruder Film than Alvarez.

So just because a physicist tells me all the shots to JFK came from the back or alternatively that the Zapruder Film was fake, that does not necessarily carry a lot of weight with me. Sometimes common sense and simple observations are more accurate.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Robert Morrow

[Greg Burnham]

Yes, Robert.

But, you did something parallel (not equivalent) to writing a review on the books you placed on the "Worst Of" list. The only problem is that you failed to

study the specific subject adequately enough (by your own admission) to reach a "well informed" opinion.

I didn't say that these experts (Mantik, Costella, et al) are necessarily correct (although I personally believe that to be the case). My point was that I have

formed a well researched, informed opinion on the subject. You, on the other hand, haven't even read what they wrote at all! You are unable to refute

their claims due to lack of familiarity--yet that didn't stop you from categorizing these books as "worst of" on your list.

If you insist on characterizing these important contributions as "worst" -- I would hope you would familiarize yourself with their contents so that in the

future you will be able to make a cogent case for your summary rejection of them. As it stands now your rejection seems arbitrary and adolescent. I was

expecting more from you.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

From what little I have read on Zapruder Film alteration and fakery, it has not enticed me to read more about it. My current position is the film is basically legit and that it offers 99% proof of a conspiracy to murder JFK due to the "back and to the left" movement of JFK's head. If the government were faking the Zapruder Film it seems like they would have taken that part out! ...

Speaking of Luis Alvarez: how about some pure propaganda for the lone nutter fantasy as presented by the lone nutter-controlled Wikipedia?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Walter_Alvarez

"In November 1966, Life Magazine published a series of photographs from the famous film that Abraham Zapruder took of the Kennedy assassination. Alvarez, an expert in optics and photoanalysis, became intrigued by the pictures and began to delve deeply into what could be learned from the film. The result of this was that Alvarez proved conclusively both in theory and experiment that the backward snap of the Presidents head was completely consistent with his being shot from behind, which would have been the case if Lee Harvey Oswald were the assassin. He also investigated the timing of the gun shots and the shockwave which disturbed the camera, the speed of the camera, and pointed out a number of things which the FBI photoanalysts either overlooked or got wrong. While the results were not of enormous importance (the paper was intended as a tutorial), the pedagogical aspect of the paper, as well as its informal advice for the physicist intent on arriving at the truth is compelling."

So Wikipedia is telling us - quite mistakenly in my view - that this super duper genius Nobel laureate Luis Alvarez "proved conclusively both in theory and experiment that the backward snap of the Presidents head was completely consistent with his being shot from behind, which would have been the case if Lee Harvey Oswald were the assassin." ... My take on Wiki disinfo site and their glorification of Alvarez on the Zapruder Film: baloney, horse manure.

The JFK assassination is a prime example of people of prominence corrupting themselves in support of the Big Lie and in cover up of the 1963 Coup d'Etat. Luis Alvarez is a very prominent example of this.

I have the book "Discovering Alvarez": http://www.amazon.com/Discovering-Alvarez-Selected-Commentary-Colleagues/dp/0226813045/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1301975284&sr=1-1

In Chapter 18 (p. 203, Discovering Alvarez) there is an article by Richard Garwin entitled "Examining the Kennedy Assassination Evidence." That article examines Alvarez's folly in JFK research.

On p. 203, there is a picture of Luis Alvarez at Bohemian Grove, 1985. That means he used to mix with the power elite. And the power elite are the ones who murdered John Kennedy and kept it covered up. Almost all CFR members, and folks who attend Bilderberger and most folks at Bohemian Grove give you incredibly bad disinformation on the JFK assassination.

There is ALSO a picture of Luis Alvarez p. 202-203 (picture section) of Alvarez personally receiving the National Medal of Science from Vice President Lyndon Johnson. For new folks, please google my essay "LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK". So no wonder Alvarez by 1966 was such a staunch and public defender of the Warren Commission farce and why he was running around using sophistry disinfo, explaining the absurd "jet effect" excuse for JFK's back and to the left head movement.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Robert Morrow

[Greg Burnham]

Robert,

Your position is indefensible, IMO. This is a good opportunity for you to admit: "You're right, I will remove the books (not just Fetzer's)--that I have not actually read and/or not

thoroughly studied--from my Best & Worst lists. Until I actually read and thoroughly study the subjects in those books I am not competent to render a well informed opinion

as to their worth. Nobody--handicapped by ignorance of the issues--would be competent to make relevant judgments under conditions similar to mine."

Such an admission might go farther than you think in the rebuilding of your reputation. FWIW

.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Greg Burnham

[Dean Hagerman]

Robert,

Your position is indefensible, IMO. This is a good opportunity for you to admit: "You're right, I will remove the books (not just Fetzer's)--that I have not actually read and/or not

thoroughly studied--from my Best & Worst lists. Until I actually read and thoroughly study the subjects in those books I am not competent to render a well informed opinion

as to their worth. Nobody--handicapped by ignorance of the issues--would be competent to make relevant judgments under conditions similar to mine."

Such an admission might go farther than you think in the rebuilding of your reputation. FWIW

.

Greg if Robert did that he would have to remove almost every single book on his Worst JFK books list (and his Best JFK books list)

He has admitted to only reading 5 books on the assassination! He has "skimmed" through some other books

In his own words it is a waste of time to read books on the assassination from cover to cover!

How anybody ever took this guy seriously is beyond me

A waste of time!!!! He said that!

[Greg Burnham]

Seriously? No... surely you jest, Dean! He really said that stuff? I had no idea.

[Dean Hagerman]

Here you go Greg

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16984&st=0&p=213145&hl=+dean%20+robert%20+read%20+books&fromsearch=1entry213145

[Dean Hagerman]

And I was wrong it was 12 books not 5

I had read 12 books cover to cover on the assassination before I was 12 years old!

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Seriously? No... surely you jest, Dean! He really said that stuff? I had no idea.

No, I did not say that. I said last year that I had hundreds of books relating to the JFK assassination and I had read about 12 of them cover to cover. I have skimmed them all and I read selected passages and key chapters of them.

For about 3 years I have studied the JFK assassination intensively. I have read a lot of the best stuff online, not in a book. I read a lot of the new stuff: LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination, JFK and the Unspeakable, Brothers, etc. Those books are built on 45 years+ of JFK research and you get the best of the old stuff included in them.

The best of the early works has been in is in the new stuff, and the worst of the early works usually gets kicked out and ignored over time. I have Six Seconds in Dallas, but I do not plan on reading the whole thing. And shouldn't that title be 8.5 Seconds in Dallas? See what I mean about the new books being a better use of time?

As for lists of Best Books on the JFK Assassination and Worst Books on the JFK Assassination, for the main part, I have gotten these recommendations from OTHER RESEARCHERS! I just take all their picks, stick them on a list, and rank them according to my personal, subjective preference. When I first started my research, I called about 10 of the most experienced JFK researchers and asked what 10 books I should buy, then I bought them all off Amazon. I spoke to folks like Dawn Meredith, Walt Brown, Ed Tatro, Martin Shackleford just to name a few. I learned the LBJ angle early on.

A lot of times when I see Jim DiEugenio recommend a book I will put it on the list almost automatically; for example JFK: Ordeal in Africa or Battling Wall Street by Gibson. That is one thing Dean Haggerman has not figured out: some of the "best" books on the JFK assassination are books that are not completely about the JFK assassination. There is a tremendous about of critical knowledge in the "tangential" books ... books about Lyndon Johnson, Clint Murchison, H.L. Hunt, John McCloy, James Angleton, GHW Bush, Nelson Rockefeller... books that talk about JFK's foreign policy battles, his battles with Wall Street, books on the Council on Foreign Relations (Perloff) or Bilderberg (Tucker), books that talk about the Kennedy brothers wildly dysfunctional and yes weird personal lives like Heynmann's Bobby and Jackie. I do think it is weird for a guy like RFK, with 10 kids, to be having a torrid affair with Jackie, his own brother's wife. I've been told that this affair began PRE-JFK assassination! The Dark Side of Camelot is another fine book, written by a lone nutter, that gives us tremendous insight into the JFK assassination.

I just recently bought someone's entire JFK collection to add to my already quite signficant one. Included was some rare books like With Malice by lone nutter Meyers and Jesse Curry's JFK Assassination file. I already have Harvey and Lee by Armstrong - a book that I rate half genius and half pure baloney. Many JFK books are like that: great stuff mixed in with crap. You have to read critically.

Reading "Defrauding America" by Rodney Stich and googling "Chip Tatum Pegasus" will give you great insights into the JFK assassination. Because those books are all about the "secret team" the government within the government that Fletcher Prouty and Oliver North have spoken about.

The way I read a book is I underline them and mark them up, writing comments in the margins, putting stars and astericks near key sentences. Dean Haggerman, by contrast, I imagine just stares at his copy of Six Seconds in Dallas over and over again. I am marking up, writing all over Harvey and Lee and Hagerman is just worshipping/staring at Sylvia Meagher book. My JFK books are working copies, not collector's items.

Sometimes in a JFK peripheral book there will be just once sentence that will tell you all you need to know. For example in Clint, there is the anecdote about the usurper President Lyndon Johnson calling his benefactor Clint Murchison in December, 1963, and Clint telling the maid that he can't talk now because he is taking a nap. That shows who has hierarchy. Just one golden nugget that reveals so much.

Or in Kai Bird's book The Chairman on John J. McCloy, there are 2-3 sentences about John J. McCloy going dove hunting with Clint Murchison on Clint's ranch in Mexico in the summer of 1963. Key evidence of the close personal ties of Texas oil men with the PEAK of post WWII US intelligence. Remember that the next time DiEugenio tells you LBJ and Texas oil men had no role in the JFK assassination. They were the largest players - the CIA worked for those guys.

Or Robert Dallek's book Flawed Giant where he recounts the little known, but extremely significant friendship between Lyndon Johnson and Nelson Rockefeller and how LBJ was secretly supporting Nelson Rockefeller for president in spring 1968. I consider that to be of BLOCKBUSTER importance; most JFK researchers have no idea of such close ties between LBJ and the Rockefellers who I think were BOTH involved in the JFK assassination (if Lansdale was, then Allen Dulles was, if Dulles was then Nelson Rockefeller was ... then Henry Kissinger MIGHT have been. Got that?)

Hey, Haggerman, is "Flawed Giant" on your list of JFK books? It ought to be.

So the way I learn about the 1963 Coup d'Etat is that I read broadly, but I rarely read a whole book, especially the older ones; they just are not worth your time. The quality newer ones incorporate the best of the old research. I do recommend a book like History Will Not Absolve Us; it has stuff in there like Castro's speech on 11/23/63 deconstructing the JFK Assassination that NEED to be copied and put on the internet.

I learn by reading a few books, reading the best of many internet articles, skimming and reading selective chapters of many, many books. I will watch videos including Peter Jennings Beyond Conspiracy, which I highly recommend as an example of purely distilled CIA propaganda delivered by Bilderberger/CFR Peter Jennings 40 years post JFK assassination. That is why understanding the role of the Council on Foreign Relations in the JFK murder/cover up is so important; many of the key folks interviewed in that film are CFR members.

By the way, based on my extensively reading and study in the JFK assassination, I do currently NOT think the Zapruder Film has been fabricated or faked. Notice I used the word "currently" because I constantly change/update my views based on new information/analysis.

Basically, Robert Groden has it right, and you Zapruder film alterationists are barking up the wrong tree. Woof woof. That is my *current* take.

Edited April 6, 2011 by Robert Morrow

[Dean Hagerman]

but I rarely read a whole book, especially the older ones; they just are not worth your time

Wow

"Post Mortem" is a waste of time?

That is a book that you have top read cover to cover, in fact I have read it like 4 times

If any member can read the sentence that I quoted and still take Robert seriously please let me know who you are

[Guest Robert Morrow]

but I rarely read a whole book, especially the older ones; they just are not worth your time

Wow

"Post Mortem" is a waste of time?

That is a book that you have top read cover to cover, in fact I have read it like 4 times

If any member can read the sentence that I quoted and still take Robert seriously please let me know who you are

Well, Dean, why don't you write a book review on Post Mortem, so we can all benefit? I bet a LOT of Weisberg's work appears in other later books. Having said that, I don't think too much of Weisberg for his unwarranted and over the top criticisms of the movie JFK by Oliver Stone in 1991. I think that Oliver Stone JFK got the JFK assassination right, although the focus was on New Orleans.

http://www.amazon.com/Post-Mortem-Assassination-Cover-Up-Smashed/dp/0980121310/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302027907&sr=1-1

[Guest Robert Morrow]

And as for you, Greg Burnham, weren't you one of the ones squawking so much when I was addressing the dysfucntional sex lives of the Kennedy brothers, specifically the affair that Robert Kennedy was having with Jackie?

So, have you read Bobby and Jackie: A Love Story by David Heymann? I have and Heymann convinced me to within a 99% certainty that RFK and Jackie were having a torrid love affair. http://www.amazon.com/Bobby-Jackie-C-David-Heymann/dp/1416556249/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1302047018&sr=1-1 Heymann just has too many examples of TLC between Bobby and Jackie. If just a few of them are true, the RFK and Jackie were definitely having an affair.

I've been told by a credible JFK researcher that this affair actually began pre-JFK assassination. I can believe it.

Have you read "A Woman Named Jackie?" (also by David Heymann). David Lifton has and he said that it taught him a whole new angle to John Kennedy and that he assumed that JFK was blackmailable after reading that book.

http://www.amazon.com/Woman-Named-Jackie-David-Heymann/dp/0451172698/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302047122&sr=1-10

How about a "Question of Character" by Thomas Reeves - a lot of this book is about John Kennedy's LACK of character. http://www.amazon.com/Question-Character-Life-John-Kennedy/dp/076151287X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302047371&sr=1-1

Here I will quote: "Reeves reveals how indifferent Kennedy was to the moral and legal objections to the Bay of Pigs invasion, the overthrow of the Diem regime in South Vietnam, and plans for the assassination of Fidel Castro. There is a wealth of new material here concerning JFK's often precarious health, his relationship with his wife, his flagrant philandering. Reeves concludes that Kennedy abused his high position for personal self-gratification, that his reckless liaisons with women and mobsters were "irresponsible, dangerous, and demeaning to the office of chief executive." By the author of The Life and Times of Joe McCarthy , this is a solidly researched look at John Kennedy's morals or his lack thereof."

How about "Jack and Jackie" by Christopher Anderson? Or Edward Klein's "All Too Human" or Ronald Kessler's "Sins of the Father" about Joe Kennedy?

I always felt on those threads I posted, that the hysterical critics of me were just stone cold ignorant - had not read any of the books, just couldn't handle the ugly truth about their mythical heroes, the Kennedys.

So, Greg, have you ever read Bobby and Jackie by Heymann? ... I didn't think so. So what business did you have dismissing his thesis out of hand?

Edited April 5, 2011 by Robert Morrow

[Greg Burnham]

Robert I own every one of those books. They are right here on my book case--along with nearly 130 more. I read all of them.

[Jack White]

Seriously? No... surely you jest, Dean! He really said that stuff? I had no idea.

No, I did not say that. I said last year that I had hundreds of books relating to the JFK assassination and I had read about 12 of them cover to cover. I have skimmed them all and I read selected passages and key chapters of them.

For about 3 years I have studied the JFK assassination intensively. I have read a lot of the best stuff online, not in a book. I read a lot of the new stuff: LBJ: Mastermind of JFK's Assassination, JFK and the Unspeakable, Brothers, etc. Those books are built on 45 years+ of JFK research and you get the best of the old stuff included in them.

The best of the early works has been in is in the new stuff, and the worst of the early works usually gets kicked out and ignored over time. I have Six Seconds in Dallas, but I do not plan on reading the whole thing. And shouldn't that title be 8.5 Seconds in Dallas? See what I mean about the new books being a better use of time?

As for lists of Best Books on the JFK Assassination and Worst Books on the JFK Assassination, for the main part, I have gotten these recommendations from OTHER RESEARCHERS! I just take all their picks, stick them on a list, and rank them according to my personal, subjective preference. When I first started my research, I called about 10 of the most experienced JFK researchers and asked what 10 books I should buy, then I bought them all off Amazon. I spoke to folks like Dawn Meredith, Walt Brown, Ed Tatro, Martin Shackleford just to name a few. I learned the LBJ angle early on.

A lot of times when I see Jim DiEugenio recommend a book I will put it on the list almost automatically; for example JFK: Ordeal in Africa or Battling Wall Street by Gibson. That is one thing Dean Haggerman has not figured out: some of the "best" books on the JFK assassination are books that are not completely about the JFK assassination. There is a tremendous about of critical knowledge in the "tangential" books ... books about Lyndon Johnson, Clint Murchison, H.L. Hunt, John McCloy, James Angleton, GHW Bush, Nelson Rockefeller... books that talk about JFK's foreign policy battles, his battles with Wall Street, books on the Council on Foreign Relations (Perloff) or Bilderberg (Tucker), books that talk about the Kennedy brothers wildly dysfunctional and yes weird personal lives like Heynmann's Bobby and Jackie. I do think it is weird for a guy like RFK, with 10 kids, to be having a torrid affair with Jackie, his own brother's wife. I've been told that this affair began PRE-JFK assassination! The Dark Side of Camelot is another fine book, written by a lone nutter, that gives us tremendous insight into the JFK assassination.

I just recently bought someone's entire JFK collection to add to my already quite signficant one. Included was some rare books like With Malice by lone nutter Meyers and Jesse Curry's JFK Assassination file. I already have Harvey and Lee by Armstrong - a book that I rate half genius and half pure baloney. Many JFK books are like that: great stuff mixed in with crap. You have to read critically.

Reading "Defrauding America" by Rodney Stich and googling "Chip Tatum Pegasus" will give you great insights into the JFK assassination. Because those books are all about the "secret team" the government within the government that Fletcher Prouty and Oliver North have spoken about.

The way I read a book is I underline them and mark them up, writing comments in the margins, putting stars and astericks near key sentences. Dean Haggerman, by contrast, I imagine just stares at his copy of Six Seconds in Dallas over and over again. I am marking up, writing all over Harvey and Lee and Hagerman is just worshipping/staring at Sylvia Meagher book. My JFK books are working copies, not collector's items.

Sometimes in a JFK peripheral book there will be just once sentence that will tell you all you need to know. For example in Clint, there is the anecdote about the usurper President Lyndon Johnson calling his benefactor Clint Murchison in December, 1963, and Clint telling the maid that he can't talk now because he is taking a nap. That shows who has hierarchy. Just one golden nugget that reveals so much.

Or in Kai Bird's book The Chairman on John J. McCloy, there are 2-3 sentences about John J. McCloy going dove hunting with Clint Murchison on Clint's ranch in Mexico in the summer of 1963. Key evidence of the close personal ties of Texas oil men with the PEAK of post WWII US intelligence. Remember that the next time DiEugenio tells you LBJ and Texas oil men had no role in the JFK assassination. They were the largest players - the CIA worked for those guys.

Or Robert Dallek's book Flawed Giant where he recounts the little known, but extremely significant friendship between Lyndon Johnson and Nelson Rockefeller and how LBJ was secretly supporting Nelson Rockefeller for president in spring 1968. I consider that to be of BLOCKBUSTER importance; most JFK researchers have no idea of such close ties between LBJ and the Rockefellers who I think were BOTH involved in the JFK assassination (if Lansdale was, then Allen Dulles was, if Dulles was then Nelson Rockefeller was ... then Henry Kissinger MIGHT have been. Got that?)

Hey, Haggerman, is "Flawed Giant" on your list of JFK books? It ought to be.

So the way I learn about the 1963 Coup d'Etat is that I read broadly, but I rarely read a whole book, especially the older ones; they just are not worth your time. The quality newer ones incorporate the best of the old research. I do recommend a book like History Will Not Absolve Us; it has stuff in there like Castro's speech on 11/23/63 deconstructing the JFK Assassination that NEED to be copied and put on the internet.

I learn by reading a few books, reading the best of many internet articles, skimming and reading selective chapters of many, many books. I will watch videos including Peter Jennings Beyond Conspiracy, which I highly recommend as an example of purely distilled CIA propaganda delivered by Bilderberger/CFR Peter Jennings 40 years post JFK assassination. That is why understanding the role of the Council on Foreign Relations in the JFK murder/cover up is so important; many of the key folks interviewed in that film are CFR members.

By the way, based on my extensively reading and study in the JFK assassination, I do currently NOT think the Zapruder Film has been fabricated or faked. Notice I used the word "currently" because I constantly change/update my views based on new information/analysis.

Basically, Robert Groden has it right, and you Zapruder film alterationists are barking up the wrong tree. Woof woof. That is my *current* take.

Morrow is a book COLLECTOR, not a reader. However, he does read REVIEWS, and judges books by his feelings about the reviewer. Hmmmmm.

Jack