Best JFK books of the last 2 years?

[Tracy Riddle]

I don't think I've bought a JFK assassination book since late 2015. Frankly, I'm overwhelmed at Amazon with the flood of new JFK books, mostly self-published and looking like rehashes of the same old stuff. I'm not going to buy a new book unless it contains something new and real (not somebody's fictional personal story). Any recommendations out there?

[Jim DiEugenio]

Tracy:

Nice to hear from you again.

Concerning your question, that is really a pertinent problem which I have mentioned before.

It used to be that a writer, or his agent, had to convince a publisher to release a book; then a contract had to be agreed to and an advance arranged and a royalty rate.

But with the rise of things like Create Space, that is not necessary any more. Almost anyone who thinks he has something to say about the JFK case can now publish a book. The frequency of these efforts is so rapid that I don't think anyone can keep up with it. And if you read the descriptions, or the sample pages, just about none of them are based on the new files, or do they offer the fruits of a real private investigation. There are some exceptions of course, like John Newman's, but the overwhelming majority fit that bill.

Therefore, the prospective buyer who is new to the field has a real quandary as to what to buy, or to buy anything at all. But beyond that, there is the question of confusion, I mean how many stories are really out there?

Its kind of discouraging I think. In a serious way.

[Tracy Riddle]

Jim, I still think your Probe collection The Assassinations is one of the best. I would recommend it to any newbie, and it would be great to see a Volume 2 sometime.

[James Lateer]

There is one book that has the only organizational chart of the JFK plot ever published, but not everybody really wants to know all the facts. Many focus on a particular tree, but what about the forest? Maybe sometime down the road...by the way, did the Vatican really assassinate Abraham Lincoln?

James Lateer

[Jim DiEugenio]

Thanks Tracy.

That Probe CD has some of the best contributors ever to JFK, MLK, and RFK. We were fortunate in that the ARRB was going, and also the trial in Memphis on the King case, and the Scott Enyart trial in Los Angeles.

Incredibly, Probe was the only publication that had a reporter who sat each day in both the King vs Jowers case, and the Enyart vs LAPD case. Can you imagine such a thing? But that shows you how biased the MSM is when it comes to these cases. Court TV pulled out a few days before and the Memphis Commercial Appeal ordered its reporter on the case not to go inside during the trial. Their guy would wait each day for our reporter, Jim Douglass, to come out to give him the lowdown. I mean, was it just a coincidence that in both cases, our side won?

But in addition to that we had so many excellent writers contributing on many topics. Even some who have retired from the field now, like Carol Hewett, the Florida attorney who cracked open the Paines, along with Steve Jones and Barbara LaMonica.

So yes, that is a really good investment for someone who wants to understand the three cases. A great wealth of good information.

[James Lateer]

When looking through the newly posted lists of recently published JFK books, I just don't see why it is very difficult for an experienced JFK (or Deep State) researcher to spot the ones that are worthwhile.

There seems to me to be only two criteria in which any experienced reader should be interested:

(1) Does the author claim to have any information which is new and about which there is little or no currently available information?

(2) Does the author claim to have identified exactly who planned and/or backed the assassination and which is a theory that has not already been discredited?

The only book which is on the drawing boards which meets the above criteria is the book by H P Albarelli about QJ WIN and Otto Skorzeny. Another one could be "The Men Who Don't Fit In" by Richard Hooke.

Even some books which look to be very impressive, like the recent book by Flip De Mey, "The Lee Harvey Oswald Files" (which I purchased and perused) doesn't seem to have any new information or analysis.

Other than the search for the perpetrators and the search for new and probative evidence, how can one justify buying and reading any new JFK books?

Ostensibly, the reason many people would eagerly support the release of all the remaining JFK classified files is so that we can finally learn who murdered JFK. There are apparently very few authors who understand what is involved it this. Peter Dale Scott, Joan Mellen, Dr. Jeffrey Caufield and Dick Russell are basically the entire list. Some would include Judyth Vary Baker who has also recently published, but many think her work is a scam. I now own her most recent book "The Big Picture" and have perused it and will read it. At least it seems like a genuine effort.

Ironically, the only book published which hits the mark regarding the assassination is "Treason For My Daily Bread" by Lebedev. This book is fictionalized and on the internet it is usually described as a hoax and a scam. BUT (FICTIONALIZED OR NOT), IT HITS THE MARK! It's the only book (excepting one) that identifies ex-Nazis partnering with segregationists.

Since the upcoming Hank Albarelli book blames Otto Skorzeny, that makes it authentic. There is very little doubt that the worldwide network of ex-Nazis like Skorzeny were mainly responsible, in cooperation with persons in the West German government and a few Southern segregationist fellow travelers like James O Eastland and Leander Perez.

Sadly, many apparently believe in "the democracy of JFK authors." That is, they are all considered as equals, whether they solve the crime or they focus on Oswald's belly-button. Maybe there will be some who read this and who take the time necessary to read and get the word out on the real perpetrators of the JFK assassination.

The best place to hide information is (sadly) in a library.

James Lateer

[Anthony Thorne]

Other than the search for the perpetrators and the search for new and probative evidence, how can one justify buying and reading any new JFK books?

I still buy new books on Orson Welles if they're well-written and illuminating, and I don't always expect those volumes to put new facts on the table. I just find it worthwhile to hear new perspectives on the man and his work. With JFK, some volumes retain the same evidence but put things in a clearer, more digestible manner or bring home some viewpoints that were obvious in retrospect but had been overlooked. I think James DiEugenio mentioned onetime that A FAREWELL TO JUSTICE summarised the Nagel evidence in a more comprehensive manner than Dick Russell's original book. Likewise, Alex Cox's volume on the JFK case benefited from a UK writer's perspective. That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are dozens of other reasons one would read a good new book on the JFK case. Your question is a provocative one, but - no offence intended - also slightly insulting I think, both to new writers on the case, and ongoing readers.

Buying a Kindle and reading new volumes in ebook form is a good method of keeping costs down when checking out new volumes on the case.

[Tracy Riddle]

Ostensibly, the reason many people would eagerly support the release of all the remaining JFK classified files is so that we can finally learn who murdered JFK.

Except that nothing really damning was likely ever written down and put in the National Archives or kept in a CIA file. J. Edgar Hoover probably kept a lot of interesting stuff in the files at his house, which were ransacked right after his death.

[James Lateer]

Mr. Thorne and Tracy--Please know that I have not in any way intended to insult anyone regarding the JFK evidence. If an American has read even one book on the assassination, that alone merits real respect just by itself. And the authors on this site apparently have decades upon decades of experience in dissecting the JFK case and I personally can't hold a candle to any of that expertise.

I also don't want to insult anyone here because I know how it feels to be insulted. Recently, after sending a review copy to a well-known professor/author/biographer, he replied by calling me (1) a "hare-brain", (2) a "fabulist" (i.e. a liar) and (3) a "sloppy researcher". Ouch. Now that is a professional insult, I'm sure.

I have to admit that I read six books on Operation Paperclip and each provided some subtle differences of information and approach. In my research, I read 150 books but came up with only 75 hard items of circumstantial evidence which, to me, convict the perpetrators. But that's only 1/2 item per book. You never know where or when you will stumble across a new lead. So every book doesn't have to be earthshaking. Author Ron Chernow has recently published a new book on General Ulysses S. Grant. Knowing the work of Chernow, it know it will be well worth reading despite the multitude of books already available about Grant.

Theoretically, the reader could find new and astounding evidence by reading a book about Oswald's two wallets, Oswald's rifle, the backyard photos, the Zapruder film, etc. etc. I think the biggest "micro-topic" regarding the assassination which needs more work is the psychiatric situation of Oswald which should be researched by a real psychiatrist. I think Oswald possibly suffered from PTSD from being raised as a homeless child and also a multiple personality disorder due to childhood sexual abuse possibly at the hands of David W. Ferrie. But that's a digression.

But mostly, I would like to ask both of you point-blank. Do you think that anyone does a good service to the country by enabling the cover-up in any way? I recently noted that my alma mater has named the University Law Library the Albert Jenner Library. Of course, Jenner was the counsel to the Warren Commission. I'm sorry, that offends me.

If someone if fascinated by Oswald's weapons, the question of whether Oswald had a drivers' license, how the fake "backyard photos" were created, it's hard to criticize that. Any maybe not everybody is motivated to plow their way through Dr. Jeffry Caufield's 800 page book "General Walker."

But I do sincerely feel you get back only in relation to what effort you put in. I can tell you that there is a thrill which came to me when I discovered that Torbitt suspect General Julius Klein was also the West German "shadow ambassador." Ditto when I discovered that Hitler's former General Staff Commander General Adolf Heusinger was in command of 400 employees at the Pentagon on 11-22-63. Ditto when I found out that the Otepka biographer William J. Gill was married to a female Nazi spy who was involved in trying to assassinate Hitler on 7-20-1944. (So when the recent JFK papers were released, why did the documents include the alleged identity of Hitler who allegedly lived on in Ecuador after the War?) Did Hitler order the JFK assassination? That sounds absurd, but it's not by any means impossible.

The book Dallas 1963 by Bill Minutaglio and others was in many bookstores. The problem is that it maintained the lone gunman theory and claimed that after shooting at General Walker, Oswald buried his rifle in the woods without having a shovel. Nice trick. To me books like that deserve to be strongly criticized. I don't mean to insult anyone, but rather to encourage any potential reader to pick a more difficult book rather than a candy-coated rehash of old evidence. Not that such books have no value. But it's called "opportunity cost." In reading a rehash, you are losing the time you could devote to ACTUALLY FINDING OUT WHO MURDERED JFK! It's now possible, at least in the major part.

The information is now available. And there's even better stuff on the drawing-board (like the Albarelli book on QJ WIN).

Lastly, Tracy, if there were no important facts or issues still in the archives, then all the documents would have been released last October. That seems to be an open-and-shut obvious conclusion. I'm not sure how that could work any other way. But, like in any of the above issues, I sure could be wrong and my mind is open to any explanation of that or any other JFK issues.

James Lateer

[Tracy Riddle]

Mr. Thorne and Tracy--Please know that I have not in any way intended to insult anyone regarding the JFK evidence. If an American has read even one book on the assassination, that alone merits real respect just by itself. And the authors on this site apparently have decades upon decades of experience in dissecting the JFK case and I personally can't hold a candle to any of that expertise.

I also don't want to insult anyone here because I know how it feels to be insulted. Recently, after sending a review copy to a well-known professor/author/biographer, he replied by calling me (1) a "hare-brain", (2) a "fabulist" (i.e. a liar) and (3) a "sloppy researcher". Ouch. Now that is a professional insult, I'm sure.

I have to admit that I read six books on Operation Paperclip and each provided some subtle differences of information and approach. In my research, I read 150 books but came up with only 75 hard items of circumstantial evidence which, to me, convict the perpetrators. But that's only 1/2 item per book. You never know where or when you will stumble across a new lead. So every book doesn't have to be earthshaking. Author Ron Chernow has recently published a new book on General Ulysses S. Grant. Knowing the work of Chernow, it know it will be well worth reading despite the multitude of books already available about Grant.

Theoretically, the reader could find new and astounding evidence by reading a book about Oswald's two wallets, Oswald's rifle, the backyard photos, the Zapruder film, etc. etc. I think the biggest "micro-topic" regarding the assassination which needs more work is the psychiatric situation of Oswald which should be researched by a real psychiatrist. I think Oswald possibly suffered from PTSD from being raised as a homeless child and also a multiple personality disorder due to childhood sexual abuse possibly at the hands of David W. Ferrie. But that's a digression.

But mostly, I would like to ask both of you point-blank. Do you think that anyone does a good service to the country by enabling the cover-up in any way? I recently noted that my alma mater has named the University Law Library the Albert Jenner Library. Of course, Jenner was the counsel to the Warren Commission. I'm sorry, that offends me.

If someone if fascinated by Oswald's weapons, the question of whether Oswald had a drivers' license, how the fake "backyard photos" were created, it's hard to criticize that. Any maybe not everybody is motivated to plow their way through Dr. Jeffry Caufield's 800 page book "General Walker."

But I do sincerely feel you get back only in relation to what effort you put in. I can tell you that there is a thrill which came to me when I discovered that Torbitt suspect General Julius Klein was also the West German "shadow ambassador." Ditto when I discovered that Hitler's former General Staff Commander General Adolf Heusinger was in command of 400 employees at the Pentagon on 11-22-63. Ditto when I found out that the Otepka biographer William J. Gill was married to a female Nazi spy who was involved in trying to assassinate Hitler on 7-20-1944. (So when the recent JFK papers were released, why did the documents include the alleged identity of Hitler who allegedly lived on in Ecuador after the War?) Did Hitler order the JFK assassination? That sounds absurd, but it's not by any means impossible.

The book Dallas 1963 by Bill Minutaglio and others was in many bookstores. The problem is that it maintained the lone gunman theory and claimed that after shooting at General Walker, Oswald buried his rifle in the woods without having a shovel. Nice trick. To me books like that deserve to be strongly criticized. I don't mean to insult anyone, but rather to encourage any potential reader to pick a more difficult book rather than a candy-coated rehash of old evidence. Not that such books have no value. But it's called "opportunity cost." In reading a rehash, you are losing the time you could devote to ACTUALLY FINDING OUT WHO MURDERED JFK! It's now possible, at least in the major part.

The information is now available. And there's even better stuff on the drawing-board (like the Albarelli book on QJ WIN).

Lastly, Tracy, if there were no important facts or issues still in the archives, then all the documents would have been released last October. That seems to be an open-and-shut obvious conclusion. I'm not sure how that could work any other way. But, like in any of the above issues, I sure could be wrong and my mind is open to any explanation of that or any other JFK issues.

James Lateer

James, no offense was taken. Some unreleased docs might reveal that LHO was a US intelligence employee/informant, that his defection was faked, etc. But they won't tell us who killed JFK and why.

Why do people across the political spectrum continue to defend the official story? They have a lot invested in it after 50+ years; it's become part of our national mythology, and it's politically very useful to many people and institutions. Much more so than revealing that JFK & MLK (and probably RFK, though that one is a little more complicated) were killed by "super patriots" in the military and intelligence community because they thought those men were soft on communism and threats to the national security.