Product link Amazon reviews: A GREAT way to get WAY more eyes on the best books.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

For some reason ,"Ride the Hand Grenade" has never been a slogan in the annals of Military History.

But a hand grenade is exactly what this new book by Thurston Clarke is. It WILL GO best-seller possibly number one.

This book is really surprising the hell out of me. I cannot believe some of the things in here.

There are also, next to the "good shrapnel" a fair amount of "bad Shrapnel" which is very misleading. It is narrative history and not 1000 pages so that vignette-happy approach is going to lead to vast-oversimplification. Which can be forgivable if it serves to open new curiosities in the reader, but it can also by too pat when it offers oversimplifications about such complex stuff as the August '63 Vietnam cables.

It is the best of doorways, it is the worst of doorways. This book is opportunity and it will hit an amazing number of eyeballs. Please get on it now. A great way to introduce new readers to the best material. http://www.amazon.com/dp/159420425X/?tag...g0uc35k1_e

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Judging from Today's amazon sales I'm pretty sure today JFK's Last Hundred Days was reviewed in todays NYT or other big book reviews. But be sure to get your reviews with product links up now, because that means all the more eyes will see them! IN A WORLD where all good books are censored, even off mainstream internet sites..... Amazon product links are one of the best oxygens of democracy.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Here is my review so far on Amazon. Plan to add a couple of more paragraphs tomorrow. Please like this review if you can on Amazon. There is an Unspeakable product link, and Hundred Days is starting to leap in sales now that we are inside the 100 days till Dallas. The billionaires prevent real books from ever getting a chance to be known a lot much less purchased. If we are in a war let us use any means necessary to try to even out the playing field.... a bit.
-------------- http://www.amazon.com/JFKs-Last-Hundred-...LLI2LTQCB6
3.0 out of 5 stars JFK and the Unspeakable, LIGHT!, July 28, 2013
By Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer" (NYC) - See all my reviews
Edit Review
Delete Review
This review is from: JFK's Last Hundred Days: The Transformation of a Man and the Emergence of a Great President (Hardcover)
This book is best discussed with reference to JFK and the Unspeakable, which has been completely censored by the Corporate media for reasons w apparent about 7 minutes after one begins reading it. There are some unique things about Clarke's book, but also some severe limitations inherent in its form, which is a day by day account of the last hundred days. The day to day vignettes are at once refreshing and restrictive. In general, this book can serve as good introduction to an incredibly busy period that is the most important period in terms of understanding America right now, when elected officials are pawns to intelligence agencies and their corporate masters.

The best aspect of Last Hundred is a unique admission-- for a mass marketed book-- of just how fast JFK was changing the dynamics of US foreign policy in 1963. FINALLY, a book that will be widely known, is formally slaying the horrible "Best and the Brightest" by David Halberstam!

In reality the academic works showing that JFK was not "just another Cold Warrior" have been available for years, and have been especially persuasive on the JFK as detente midwife theme since the new records of the Assassination Records Review Board ARRB forced release ofmore than six million new documents in the late 1990s. It takes a while for those to be analyzed by historians. However, by around 2008 about seven new academic works on, for example Vietnam between 1960-65, have all shown that the evidence that JFK was getting out of VIetnam was far stronger than had perviously been known.

Hundred Days, to its credit, is very clear in stating this abrupt contrast with LBJ's hawkishness.

The major weakness of the book stems from its form, namely its strict narrative focus on the life of JFK and his family. Why is this a weakness? Because in dealing with US foreign policy in 1963 we are truly at a fork in the road. Yes the US had already become "globocop" i.e. completely interventionist since at least 194, but there was still some ambiguity-- more than most would think-- about whether the US should perceive third world colonial struggles as inherently between communist and non-communist ideologies. In fact, JFK was unique in the US Senate of the 1950s in arguing that all colonial struggles were not inherently pro or anti-communist, but were essentially longings for liberty from imperialism. Clarke does manage to sneak in some background here, but not enough to show just how unique JFK was.

This emphasis is really needed because of the degree to which polemicists, especially those ALLEGEDLY on the left such as Chomsky, have inaccurately maintained the Cold War Liberal catechism that JFK was "just another Cold Warrior."

Much of the book is focussed on JFK's Vietnam policy, as it should be. The problem here is that some in-country background is absolutely essential. This is because the CIA was, in actuality, making its own policy in VIetnam, as even a front page New York Times article of October 3rd, 1963 argued. [ look up October 3rd, 1963 Black Op Radio to read the Arthur Krock piece] Clarke's book is critical of JFK for being ambiguous about the coup. But that criticism is impossible to evaluate without more knowledge of the intense conflict between CIA and their ostensible masters in the White House, unless we know more about this "Intra-Administration" conflict as Krock piece put it, i.e. the conflict between Kennedy and CIA, which was evident in nearly all of his foreign policies from Laos to Vietnam and also involving Cuba, Indonesia, Brazil, Congo and the USSR.

In a 2013 world in which we increasingly see the limitations of elected pols that are imposed by intelligence agencies [e.g. the NSA phone tapping and what this implies for Representation] 1963 is the point of no return.

It is the last point at which we can, if the author is brave enough, see presidents struggle against the restrictions of CIA.

And that is where a contrast with 100 Days is needed. JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters is a book originally published in 2008. Later it was reissued by Touchstone in 2010. It is the most important book published since 1945.

Unspeakable has more than 2,500 footnotes mostly from author interviews of first hand participants and also from academic sources. It has earned the highest praises from Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers fame, from Marcus Raskin, who worked in the Kennedy White House under McGeorge Bundy, from Ray McGovern who was CIA pdb to President H.W. Bush and from academics from Princeton to Berkley.

Yet this book argues that JFK was assassinated by CIA. Therefore it is completely censored in the US media in spite of the 20 years of research which shows in every page. The book has not received a single mention in US corporate Media save one occasion: on January 11th in Dalls RFK Jr and his sister Rory were interviewed before an audience of ten thousand, and he mentioned this book as having convinced the entire family, once and for all, of the case for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.

YET WHERE IS THAT INTERVIEW ON THE INTERNET? It ended up never even being shown on Charlie Rose. The next day in the very municipal-minded Dallas Morning News, there was a brief mention of The Unspeakable, but only in condescending terms that completely ignored its scholarly heart.

JFK and the Unspeakable is truly a dissident book in the United State of 2013. Here we don't Siberia the authors we just confine their books to desperate please written with amazon inserts. Please look up this book, see what's been written about it. { one source is Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA by Ray McGovern, see the last half of that long article.}

Hundred Days is a good introduction to the new research, but several of its assertions are dubious without analysis of the sourcing, particularly with regard to JFK's personal life. More axes have been ground into JFK's back than q-tips into Bush ears, all while the media protest they have been too easy on the 35th president. They protest too much as a contrast with Krock's less corrupt piece shows.

If you read only one book on JFK, it should be unspeakable. In a completely corrupt corporate media world we need to most need to hear dissidents about 1963. It was when the CIA was unsweetened 16. It was the last time we see the seem. And there is much more to see than one might think. America you are too processed! Listen to your best dissident! JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters

"With penetrating insight and unswerving integrity, Douglass proves the fundamental truths about JFK's assassination . . . by far the most important book yet written on the subject."--Gaeton Fonzi, former Staff Investigator, US House Select Committee on Assassinations

"An unfamiliar yet thoroughly convincing account of a series of creditable decisions of John F. Kennedy--at odds with his initial Cold War stance--that earned him the secret distrust and hatred of hard-liners among the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA."--Daniel Ellsberg, author, Secrets: A Memoir of the Vietnam War and the Pentagon Papers

"Douglass writes with moral force, clarity, and the careful attention to detail that will make JFK and the Unspeakable a sourcebook for many years to come, for it provides us with the stubborn facts needed to rebuild a constitutional democracy within the United States."--Marcus Raskin, co-founder, Institute for Policy Studies

"Remarkable . . . . This book should be required reading for every American citizen."--Richard Falk, Milbank Professor of International Law Emeritus, Princeton University

[Anthony Thorne]

Out of interest, here's a review I did a couple of years ago for Jesse Ventura's AMERICAN CONSPIRACIES. The review was mainly done to introduce readers to other, relevant works of political research. I plan to reuse the bolded section in some forthcoming reviews of JFK assassination volumes on Amazon over the next couple of months, but will add and change a couple of titles to include the new works by DiEugenio, McBride, the reprint of Meagher's ACCESSORIES and a tentative mention of the upcoming CIA ROGUES AND THE KILLING OF THE KENNEDYS by Patrick Nolan.

AMERICAN CONSPIRACIES arrives at a time when conspiracies, specifically American conspiracies, are in the news now more than they have been in years. Oliver Stone appears on the Bill Maher show with a copy of JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE by James W. Douglass, and the book becomes a national bestseller. Elsewhere, ABC news reporter Chris Bury, at a conference in Philadelphia, labels noted FBI whistleblower Colleen Rowley a conspiracy theorist on camera after she critiques the Bush administration's curious activities prior to 9/11. The phrase `conspiracy theorist' is wielded as an all-purpose put-down by some, and unwillingly adopted by others who now question the `official story' surrounding any number of events.

As Rowley noted to her aggressive interviewer, a conspiracy is quite often simply "people deciding to do something bad". People who make such a decision aren't likely to announce it in a press release, hence the logical requirement of secrecy. Likewise, some misdeeds would require more than one person to be successfully carried out, hence the accompanying notion of collusion in private. Yet the idea of two, three or more people in key positions of power privately deciding to do something nefarious is viewed by the mainstream media as an invention of the mentally insane. Criminals might do it, the Mafia might do it, doctors or dentists or lawyers might occasionally do it (as folks from all walks of life are prosecuted for criminal acts every year), but the idea of certain politicians or elements within a government colluding to commit a criminal act is somehow viewed as beyond the pale.

With the vast amounts of power and profit available to those in government, you don't have to buy the premise of every conspiracy theory going to realize that - no matter how big or small - private collusion for personal gain, and a subsequent cover-up by those involved, is going to occur at some point or another. Likewise, there would be few incentives for later politicians to shed light on the events, and many more incentives, both professionally and privately, to keep their big mouths shut. It may all simply depend on the personalities involved. To suggest a hypothetical, can anyone think of any recent, powerful leaders of mainstream American political parties who largely avoided intensive scrutiny by the press, encouraged governmental secrecy, and displayed a notable interest in enhancing their private wealth while in office? Even better - and to extend the argument into areas covered at one point in Ventura's book - can you think of two such upstanding folk, perhaps with a shared background going back some years? This is not to point the finger (if you browse the later book and DVD recommendations in this review, you'll find material that clearly does), but simply to note that the extremes of long-held ideology, paired with the potential for wealth and the accumulation of power, would provide fertile grounds for conspiratorial behavior to be encouraged, rather than reduced.

Ventura's interest in the topic seems both sincere and substantial. Photos of a launch event for the long out-of-print deluxe hardcover of John Armstrong's HARVEY AND LEE (a massive volume discussing curious events in the background history of Lee Harvey Oswald) depict a smiling Ventura holding his own personal copy. A more recent filmed interview with Ventura on the Alex Jones show a few years back concluded with Jones passing Ventura a copy of his documentary TERRORSTORM, and requesting him to watch it. Ventura agreed that he would, and parted with a handshake. Concluding footage of Ventura's car pulling out and driving away revealed, with a zoomed-in shot, the former Governor solemnly reading the back cover of the DVD. (Ultimately, Ventura not only watched the film, but later appeared on camera in an expanded second edition of the movie). Since then, Ventura has appeared in the Alex Jones film TRUTH RISING, debated potential conspiracies with numerous TV and radio personalities, and hosted his own TruTV show on the topic, bluntly titled CONSPIRACY THEORY. The quality of the episodes of the latter that I saw struck me as varying from mixed, to quite good, but not for a moment have I doubted Ventura's own curiosity about the subject.

As author, Ventura could have chosen any number of conspiracy theories to discuss in this volume, but the selected few are compelling and backed up with detailed research. The Wall Street plot against Roosevelt - a very public conspiracy neutered by General Smedley Butler, and now almost forgotten - is covered in detail. The assassinations of Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King are also examined. (As noted in other reviews, the King family ultimately won a court case that suggested the official story explaining MLK's shooting was contrived to cover up government involvement in same). Watergate (a topic thoughtfully covered in earlier books like Jim Hougan's SECRET AGENDA) is dipped into, as are the chances of vote-rigging in the two elections won by George W. Bush, and how the recent Wall Street bailout has benefited a chosen few. 9/11 - the subject of a recent article by Ventura, written on the request of the Huffington Post, then censored by the same site within hours of being posted - is covered in particular detail. Ventura's co-author is Dick Russell, a fine writer of past works on the JFK assassination (such as THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH) who lends a tremendous depth of research to Ventura's gruff, singular writing voice.

Some readers might wish to dig further into the topics explored in AMERICAN CONSPIRACIES. On the assassination of JFK, I highly recommend James W. Douglass's JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE, Philip H. Melanson's SPY SAGA (covering the background of Lee Harvey Oswald), Hinckle and Turner's DEADLY SECRETS (documenting the CIA's use of anti-Castro mercenaries for covert activities), Gaeton Fonzi's THE LAST INVESTIGATION (recounting the abortive House Select Committee on Assassinations inquiry from the mid 70's), and Gerald D. McKnight's BREACH OF TRUST, (studying the machinations of the Warren Commission after the event). On the death of MLK, Melanson's THE MURKIN CONSPIRACY (`Murkin' being the code chosen by the FBI for their investigation into King's death), and William Pepper's AN ACT OF STATE are both exemplary. On the shooting of RFK, THE ROBERT F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION: NEW REVELATIONS ON THE CONSPIRACY AND COVER-UP by Philip Melanson (currently only available from Amazon marketplace), THE ASSASSINATION OF ROBERT F. KENNEDY by William Turner, and Shane O'Sullivan's recent, extremely thorough WHO KILLED BOBBY? are the best works available, and each generally supports the conclusions and evidence presented by the others. (It should be noted that James Douglass is at work on books of his own about the murders of King and Robert Kennedy).

On the subject of 9/11, (and in recommended order), I'd suggest the key books by the indefatigable David Ray Griffin, those being THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT: OMISSIONS AND DISTORTIONS, THE NEW PEARL HARBOR REVISITED and THE MYSTERIOUS DEATH OF WORLD TRADE CENTRE 7. These can be supplemented with the most thoughtful and comprehensive overviews of the entire event, Jim Marrs's THE TERROR CONSPIRACY, Webster Tarpley's superlative 9/11 SYNTHETIC TERROR, and the overlooked but extremely incisive 9/11: THE NEW EVIDENCE, by British journalist Ian Henshall. Peter Dale Scott's THE ROAD TO 9/11 is a lengthy, heavily annotated University of California Press volume that suggestively fingers two ex-Bush administration members as being busier that morning, with clearly deleterious results, than you may have realized. The major documentaries on the topic are the aforementioned TERRORSTORM: SECOND EDITION, the recent LOOSE CHANGE FINAL CUT and LOOSE CHANGE 9/11: AN AMERICAN COUP, and the disquieting CORE OF CORRUPTION: IN THE SHADOWS. Readers (or viewers) pondering the subject of 9/11 anew might like to contemplate the subject of the various military drills that took place on 9/11 - notably, `Vigilant Guardian' and the other suggestively titled drills re-enacting mock hijacking scenarios on the day of the attacks - and how beneficial they were to the success of the actual hijackings on the day. (General Richard Myers, in a Commission interview, enthused at one point that the drills had actually helped, not hindered, their response on 9/11, presumably suggesting that if the drills had not been present, the US military response - which failed to intercept any of the planes, or prevent any of them from reaching their targets - would have been even worse. The clear embarrassment of General Myers and NORAD commander Ralph Eberhart towards those `coincidental' hijacking drills that mirrored the hijackings they failed to prevent, magically predicted the who and the how and where and when, and fortuitously helped to confuse the immediate response of others, is outlined in detail in Chapter 21 of Michael C. Ruppert's CROSSING THE RUBICON). For a perceptive and sympathetic overview of the entire topic of conspiracy, I'd recommend THE ROUGH GUIDE TO CONSPIRACY THEORIES, a lengthy volume now available in an expanded second edition. Finally, two volumes that exemplify the interconnected nature of much of the above material are Russ Baker's FAMILY OF SECRETS, a Bush family biography (following the exploits of Dubya's Presidential father George H.W. through CIA-linked involvement in Watergate and - possibly - the killing of JFK), and H.P. Albarelli Jr's A TERRIBLE MISTAKE: THE MURDER OF FRANK OLSON AND THE CIA'S SECRET COLD WAR EXPERIMENTS, a recent, mammoth volume that sheds light on much that was once unclear about the CIA's involvement in MK-Ultra, the covert program that dumped much of its documentation following shred orders from nervous, odious CIA head Richard Helms.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Last 100 days is now 528 on Amazon.

Here is an updated version of my Amazon review. Amazon has not yet replaced it for the older one.

Please like this review on Amazon if you are able to. I will now turn my attention to writing a real review of Destiny Betrayed. That book really has not gotten the wider readership it deserves. What are other Rhode Island Green Mountain Boys doing about that? The bluefish gotta know that the food exists before they bite? The garbage books don't need chum thrown overboard: they have humble vessels like the NewYork Times Book Review and Good Mornings America. Soldier on, because I heard somewhere that there might be a war on.
________________

12 of 20 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars JFK and the Unspeakable, LIGHT!, July 28, 2013
By Brookbird34 "Nathaniel Heidenheimer" (NYC) - See all my reviews
This review is from: JFK's Last Hundred Days: The Transformation of a Man and the Emergence of a Great President (Hardcover)
This book is best discussed with reference to JFK and the Unspeakable, which has been completely censored by the Corporate media for reasons apparent about 3 minutes after takeoff. There are some unique things about Clarke's book, but also some severe limitations inherent in its form, which is a day by day account of the last hundred days. These vignettes are at once refreshing and restrictive. In general, this book can serve as good introduction to an incredibly busy period that is the most important one in terms of understanding America right now, when elected officials are pawns to intelligence agencies and their corporate masters. Now the National Security State is 65. Under JFK it was 13-16: things were not yet set in stone and much of today's corporate media censorship of the latest academic research is designed to keep us in the dark about this period of fluidity when the National Security State, suddenly had a new, and very different daddy.

Especially after the Eisenhower-Dulles period, the contrast in presidential-CIA relations was extreme, although, as Gareth Porter points out in his absolutely essential book Perils of Dominance, there were also some similarities. Hence this question of Presidential-CIA relations is not solely a personal JFK v. Dulles "thing" but contains key structural elements in US Cold War political and economic evolution.

The best aspect of Last Hundred is a unique admission-- for a mass marketed book-- of just how fast JFK was changing the dynamics of US foreign policy in 1963. FINALLY, a book that will be widely known, is formally slaying the horrible "Best and the Brightest" by David Halberstam!

In reality the academic works showing that JFK was not "just another Cold Warrior" have been available for years, and have been especially persuasive on the JFK as detente midwife theme since the new records of the Assassination Records Review Board ARRB forced release ofmore than six million new documents in the late 1990s. It takes a while for those to be analyzed by historians. However, by around 2008 about seven new academic works on, for example Vietnam between 1960-65, have all shown that the evidence that JFK was getting out of VIetnam was far stronger than had perviously been known.

Hundred Days, to its credit, is very clear in stating this abrupt contrast with LBJ's hawkishness.

The major weakness of the book stems from its form, namely its strict narrative focus on the life of JFK and his family. Why is this a weakness? Because in dealing with US foreign policy in 1963 we are truly at a fork in the road. Yes the US had already become "globocop" i.e. completely interventionist since at least 194, but there was still some ambiguity-- more than most would think-- about whether the US should perceive third world colonial struggles as inherently between communist and non-communist ideologies. In fact, JFK was unique in the US Senate of the 1950s in arguing that all colonial struggles were not inherently pro or anti-communist, but were essentially longings for liberty from imperialism. Clarke does manage to sneak in some background here, but not enough to show just how unique JFK was.

This emphasis is really needed because of the degree to which polemicists, especially those ALLEGEDLY on the left such as Chomsky, have inaccurately maintained the Cold War Liberal catechism that JFK was "just another Cold Warrior."

Much of the book is focussed on JFK's Vietnam policy, as it should be. The problem here is that some in-country background is absolutely essential. This is because the CIA was, in actuality, making its own policy in VIetnam, as even a front page New York Times article of October 3rd, 1963 argued. [ look up October 3rd, 1963 Black Op Radio to read the Arthur Krock piece] Clarke's book is critical of JFK for being ambiguous about the coup. But that criticism is impossible to evaluate without more knowledge of the intense conflict between CIA and their ostensible masters in the White House, unless we know more about this "Intra-Administration" conflict as Krock piece put it, i.e. the conflict between Kennedy and CIA, which was evident in nearly all of his foreign policies from Laos to Vietnam and also involving Cuba, Indonesia, Brazil, Congo and the USSR.

In a 2013 world in which we increasingly see the limitations of elected pols that are imposed by intelligence agencies [e.g. the NSA phone tapping and what this implies for Representation] 1963 is the point of no return.

It is the last point at which we can, if the author is brave enough, see presidents struggle against the restrictions of CIA.

And that is where a contrast with 100 Days is needed. JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters is a book originally published in 2008. Later it was reissued by Touchstone in 2010. It is the most important book published since 1945.

Unspeakable has more than 2,500 footnotes mostly from author interviews of first hand participants and also from academic sources. It has earned the highest praises from Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers fame, from Marcus Raskin, who worked in the Kennedy White House under McGeorge Bundy, from Ray McGovern who was CIA pdb to President H.W. Bush and from academics from Princeton to Berkley.

Yet this book argues that JFK was assassinated by CIA. Therefore it is completely censored in the US media in spite of the 20 years of research which shows in every page. The book has not received a single mention in US corporate Media save one occasion: on January 11th in Dalls RFK Jr and his sister Rory were interviewed before an audience of ten thousand, and he mentioned this book as having convinced the entire family, once and for all, of the case for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.

YET WHERE IS THAT INTERVIEW ON THE INTERNET? It ended up never even being shown on Charlie Rose. The next day in the very municipal-minded Dallas Morning News, there was a brief mention of The Unspeakable, but only in condescending terms that completely ignored its scholarly heart.

JFK and the Unspeakable is truly a dissident book in the United State of 2013. Here we don't Siberia the authors we just confine their books to desperate please written with amazon inserts. Please look up this book, see what's been written about it. { one source is Are Presidents Afraid of the CIA by Ray McGovern, see the last half of that long article.}

Hundred Days is a good introduction to the new research, but several of its assertions are dubious without analysis of the sourcing, particularly with regard to JFK's personal life. More axes have been ground into JFK's back than q-tips into Bush ears, all while the media protest they have been too easy on the 35th president. They protest too much as a contrast with Krock's less corrupt piece shows.

If you read only one book on JFK, it should be unspeakable. In a completely corrupt corporate media world we need to most need to hear dissidents about 1963. It was when the CIA was unsweetened 16. It was the last time we see the seem. And there is much more to see than one might think. America you are too processed! Listen to your best dissident! JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters(see a few of the recommendations bellow)

A few other points about Hundred Days... First Clarke seems convinced that the Bobby Baker scandal was as much a threat to JFK's 1964 electoral prospects as it was for LBJ's. Well, not even Robert Caro's terrible volume 4 LBJ bio [ hey I loved the first 3, especially volume 3 which is a near masterpiece!] -- which is about as pro LBJ and anti-JFK as you can get outside the Dalek-Chomsky-Hersh and the always widely reviewed NYT complex-- gets anywhere near that view. Clarke is certainly free to argue this, but he doesn't. Yes, asks us, in effect, to assume with him that the Baker scandal, which is much more complex than he presents involving key figures in the aerospace industry, and prostitutes wrapped by hidden camera film footage, was as much a threat to JFK as to Johnson, although the key figures in that scandal were all from the Johnson wing of the Democratic Party. Clarke needs to back up this leap of logic with evidence. He offers virtually none. If he's going to challenge the consensus view he need to put a lot more in that slingshot. His writing is smooth as silk. Here is one more example of narrative dexterity purchased at the price of historical context.

Clarke's sheering of the Quarum Club/Bobby Baker sullied lamb robs us of a key glimpse of how the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Without the aerospace dimension, the corruption is reduced to mere beltway scandal, rather than a source of insight into the structural dimensions of the MICC which can help explain our transformation into a Garrison State, and also explain the clear differences between LBJ and JFK over Vietnam policies. As stated above, Clarke is very clear on these differences, but he is too shy about exploring their structural explanations within the early Cold War US economy.

Now, one might ask, isn't that demanding a bit much for a narrative history that does a good job of succinctly summarizing the most recent diplomatic history on the US and Vietnam btw. 1960-65? Well it depends on how much the author "let's the roots dangle" to use a phrase of the flint-like poet Charles Olson. The role of such a curiosity-peeking, cursory book is to suggest trap doors for readers who wish to dig deeper. Much of today's mass market circulation Cold War history books might be described as subtle propaganda, to the extent that they cover these trap doors rather than tap them to expose the broad avenues of revelations they offer about the MICC. Clarke lets the roots dangle for other aspects of his narrative, but not for the most important parts.

Clarke's reluctance to even hint at the abundant evidence that CIA was making its own policies--as opposed to carrying out orders of the Commander In Chief-- is especially glaring when discussing the role of Bobby Kennedy and his relations with Anti-Castro Cubans in Operation Mongoose and the subsequent clamp down JFK executed against these CIA operatives in 1963. He seems to take Richard Helms literally, a language deficiency for which there is no app save promotion at the New York Times, gods help us.

Re JFK's economic policy Clarke has his finger on the right pulse of the moment, in a key early reelection meeting JFK had in November. There, Clarke suggests that JFK was confronted by the cruel electoral choice of either supporting new federal anti-poverty programs or courting new, mostly white, suburban lower middle class voters by playing into Republican smaller government rhetoric.

Clarke is prescient in his sensing of this later dichotomy for the Democratic Party as early as November 1963. The problem is that he reifies the dichotomy to early: the key point about JFK's economic policy was that he was a Full Employment Democrat, a species that suffered severe habitat destruction between the years 1963-68. Clarke points out several times that Unemployment was around 5.5%. He fails to mention that the rules for measuring unemployment have been changed twice since the JFK years. Hence 5.5% in 1963 would be closer to 4.0% right now. Now consider that JFK was increasingly switching to Full employment glide mode as he recognized the need to reemphasize economic common denominators -- and wide screen, not on the internet before targeted audiences-- to compensate for the racial divisions that threatened the New Deal Coalition. Clarke discusses "the Kennedy Tax Cuts" as they have come to be artfully foreshortened, without mentioning the areas where taxes would increase: taxes on repatriated profits of US based multi-national corporations. He also fails to mention that, unlike the later Republican tax cuts, JFK's domestic tax cuts were strictly tethered to domestic reinvestment, in a way that later Republican Financial Sector legislation never was. Again, there is significant baby sacrificed with the conflation, bathwater phrase "tax cuts"

This relates to another key point Clarke glosses: JFK's relations with the Luce Press (today Time-Warner) Clarke tells us that JFK viewed the Luce media empire as hostile to his presidency and his policies. The author virtually scoffs at this view, and contextualizes it in terms of what he feels is JFK's somewhat vain, over-concern with his historical legacy. I am not so sure his readers would join him if his they knew more about the Luce-Kennedy relationship. There is heck of a lot of there there and its in North Virginia not Oakland. For more on this relationship see the famous article by Carl Bernstein, of Watergate fame on the role of the CIA in the US media. Also see these books: the essential Battling Wall Street by Donald GibsonBattling Wall Street : The Kennedy Presidency, Total Cold War by Kenneth Osgood, Nervous Liberals by Brett Gary, and The Mighty Wurlitzer by Hugh Wilford.

----------------
ON JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters by James W. Douglass. PS This book is or was available on Kindle but now seems not to be available on kindle at last for the last two weeks. I have never seen that happen with Kindle editions of any other book...This is the one book the government does not want to take off again before 11/22/13.

"Arguably the most important book yet written about a U.S. president ... Should be required reading for all high school and college students, and anyone who is a registered voter!"--JOHN PERKINS, author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman

"With penetrating insight and unswerving integrity, Douglass proves the fundamental truths about JFK's assassination . . . by far the most important book yet written on the subject."--Gaeton Fonzi, former Staff Investigator, US House Select Committee on Assassinations

"An unfamiliar yet thoroughly convincing account of a series of creditable decisions of John F. Kennedy--at odds with his initial Cold War stance--that earned him the secret distrust and hatred of hard-liners among the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the CIA."--Daniel Ellsberg, author, Secrets: A Memoir of the Vietnam War and the Pentagon Papers

"Douglass writes with moral force, clarity, and the careful attention to detail that will make JFK and the Unspeakable a sourcebook for many years to come, for it provides us with the stubborn facts needed to rebuild a constitutional democracy within the United States."--Marcus Raskin, co-founder, Institute for Policy Studies

"Remarkable . . . . This book should be required reading for every American citizen."--Richard Falk, Milbank Professor of International Law Emeritus, Princeton University

[Albert Rossi]

Last 100 days is now 528 on Amazon.

Here is an updated version of my Amazon review. Amazon has not yet replaced it for the older one.

Please like this review on Amazon if you are able to.

I liked the old one for the moment.

Thanks for this Nathaniel. We're constantly swimming against the current, but swim one must.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Fixed up review somewhat.

MORE IMPORTANTLY this MUST BE RESPONDED TO HOPEFULLY BY SEVERAL PEOPLE.

UNFORTUNATELY AMAZON SUSPENDED MY COMMENTING PRIVELEGES BUT THEY LET ROBERT MORROW POST EVERYWHERE AND HE IS....

Please respond to this in the comments section..

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars A controversial book !, August 17, 2013
By Paul Gelman "PAUL Y. GELMAN" (HAIFA , ISRAEL) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: JFK's Last Hundred Days: The Transformation of a Man and the Emergence of a Great President (Hardcover)
I must confess that at the beginning I thought that I would give this book 5 stars. It is well written and the style is extremely elegant. Add the fact that there is not even one boring moment during its 362 pages of text.
But.. Here come the "But".
The problem with the book is at the end of end, ot to be more precise: with the last chapter, called "After Dallas". There, on page 353, Mr. Clarke remarks that:
"What might have been" is speculation, but what Kennedy intended to do is not".
To follow this line of thought and to develop it, one is supposed to supply evidence for such a statement. However, there is nothing which could satisfy the professional historian, since in the best case, this book takes a U-turn and becomes a counterfactual history.
To discuss what Kennedy intended to do, one must have proof for it. Here Mr. Clarke produces some statements uttered by some presidential aides and other figures, but all in all, he sounds extremely unconvincing.
On the very contrary, there is evidence that Kennedy has never given up the plan to get rid of Castro, and the best proof for this is the "Mongoose Plan", which was the brainchild of his brother, Bobby, and there is not even today one iota of evidence in the archives to refute this claim. The Presidential Recordings of those times augment this view.
I therefore rest my case. One can say that, in the best case, this book is a hagiography of Kennedy and nothing else. Or, it had to carry another subtitle called: "An intellectual exercise in counterfactual history".
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Thank you for your feedback.
Report abuse | Permalink
Comment Comment

[Jim Hackett II]

Amazon DOES NOT SUPPORT THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION.
No more effective censor than the seller, eh?
Break the logistics chain and censors are not required.
Nothing new, examine the depublishing of Fletcher Prouty's "Secret Team", long before Amazon's games of lies about literacy promotion.

Do I buy from Amazon, Yes.
BUT I have begun to search locally for NON_CHAIN BookStores to support.

1. Better prices by 20%
2. I get to meet other humans and talk about this good book or that rotten piece of Toilet paper with a binding.
3. No waiting for your purchase.
4. You don't have to pay for anything before holding the item in your hand.
5. No inaccurate description of the items possible.

I for one would rather spend my money with Book dealers like Andy W.'s Last Hurrah Bookstore
(I can't begin to spell the man's name without looking it up).
and the like private unfranchised bookstores.

I limit Amazon purchases to things I cannot find ANYWHERE else.
I hope they noticed but I doubt they even give a shit.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

This book must be reviewed FAST on amazon with product links to real books AND links to DPF , CTKA etc. http://www.amazon.com/End-Days-Assassina...pd_sim_b_4

THE SAME INSTANT 15 REAL REVIEWS RESPONSE IS NEEDED FOR THE NEW DALLEK BOOK WHICH IS ALMOST OUT NOW. The Dallek book is dangerous because it looks like it will take the same approach as Team of Rivals. That is the most dangerous propaganda trick of all, because it leaves the real rival, the National Security State, out of the narrative entirely. What a twisted mind-fucked, and ahistorical trope. I hope I am saying trope right.

It will be instant #1 because of Manhunt audience.

I am skeptical because I do not think our glorious free market culture will allow any book with truth in it about Dallas to go #1. Does that sound like a rush to judgement? This ain't 1966, there is no media freedom at all which is why we need to broadcast not narrowcast etc. etc...

Jim if you are doing an Amazon review of the Clarke Book please include lots of CTKA references and also product links to great books. With your own book it might be better if you just but like 3 long block quotes so readers can see how unique it is especially re THE MEDIA.

ANY MEDIA ASPECT OF THE ASSASSINATION IS OUR FRIEND. IT IS THE MEDIATION OF THIS HISTORY THAT SHOWS MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE ARE LIVING IN USSR-CUBED. That is the aspect of "Why does it matter for today" that I always try to lead with. This is because the assassination puts the entire legitimacy of the US media at issue. This is because the assassination puts the entire legitimacy of the US media at issue. This is be..

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

This book is being DANGEROUSLY OVERRATED ON amazon reviews. Too many people know nothing. Can some people please set them straight???http://www.amazon.com/JFKs-Last-Hundred-...ewpoints=0