New Book!

[Bill Simpich]

It's very well researched.  Like most of us, it's when he starts speculating that he either hits gold or goes the wrong way (i.e., I tried to stay open, but I simply don't believe that LHO was a fascist.)

One of the best books on the right wing and their military connections out there.  I would get it for that reason alone.  His focus is more on the card-carrying right-wingers than fellows like LeMay who were simple fascists through and through.

[Gerry Down]

3 minutes ago, Bill Simpich said:

It's very well researched.  Like most of us, it's when he starts speculating that he either hits gold or goes the wrong way (i.e., I tried to stay open, but I simply don't believe that LHO was a fascist.)

One of the best books on the right wing and their military connections out there.  I would get it for that reason alone.  His focus is more on the card-carrying right-wingers than fellows like LeMay who were simple fascists through and through.

Thanks for the recommendation.

[Matthew Koch]

2 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

Thanks for the recommendation.

When I read the reviews on Amazon I saw James Dieugenio gave it a 1 star review, you should ask him what he didn't like. I assume it has to do with the Garrison investigation or trial. 

[Stu Wexler]

It is a deeply researched book on individuals and radical right networks with whom Larry Hancock and I are very familiar. It adds a lot in that regard. While we do not doubt that people in that milieu were actively considering plots against JFK and others, the book falls short when it attempts to paint Oswald as some kind of right winger and when they attempt to drill down to an actual Dealey Plaza plot.

Stu

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said:

When I read the reviews on Amazon I saw James Dieugenio gave it a 1 star review, you should ask him what he didn't like. I assume it has to do with the Garrison investigation or trial. 

Here it is for all to see.

1.0 out of 5 stars is not the best. There is some interesting material on the hard ...

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on March 12, 2016

Verified Purchase

A overlong, pretentious and overblown book that does not prove any of its key theses. Even some of the footnotes are wrong in that they do not follow standard formatting, or do not include the proper page numbers. The author never proves that there was a connection between Walker and Oswald, or Ruby; or Milteer and Oswald or Ruby. And the reliability of his chief witness, Mr. Somersett, is not the best.

There is some interesting material on the hard right in that time period. But as far as the JFK case goes, this book does not cut it.
See my longer review at [...]

[Matthew Koch]

5 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Here it is for all to see.

1.0 out of 5 stars is not the best. There is some interesting material on the hard ...

Reviewed in the United States 🇺🇸 on March 12, 2016

Verified Purchase

A overlong, pretentious and overblown book that does not prove any of its key theses. Even some of the footnotes are wrong in that they do not follow standard formatting, or do not include the proper page numbers. The author never proves that there was a connection between Walker and Oswald, or Ruby; or Milteer and Oswald or Ruby. And the reliability of his chief witness, Mr. Somersett, is not the best.

There is some interesting material on the hard right in that time period. But as far as the JFK case goes, this book does not cut it.
See my longer review at [...]

Here's the article: https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/627

Edited February 23 by Matthew Koch