At Kennedys and King, my review of the Savastano book on the murders of both Kennedys and MLK, adroitly titled Two Princes and a KIng
I appreciate the intent and the effort, I disagreed with some of the execution.
https://kennedysandking.com/reviews/carm...and-a-king
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:At Kennedys and King, my review of the Savastano book on the murders of both Kennedys and MLK, adroitly titled Two Princes and a KIng
I appreciate the intent and the effort, I disagreed with some of the execution.
https://kennedysandking.com/reviews/carm...and-a-king
I'm not at all injecting any arguable points in what he's dug up. Truthfully, I may never get around to reading it, nor can I for the life of me understand how anyone can blame this, that or the other for something they don't know. If one murder cannot coherently ascertain credible evidence, then what would qualify him in helping to solve any murder?
Is this about wanting to know why, what and who did this? The purpose thereof rather then spinning around in circles by birthing the same old same old? I don't know, but it seems to me that people are afraid of the unknown, and perhaps, it takes someone, an idealist to help us [think-outside-the-box]? Maybe?