3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Warren Commission Report: The Worst of existing Conspiracy Theories., July 24, 2007
The book is divided into two distinct non-overlapping parts. The first part is a series of tightly woven summaries of some (but not all) of the
Most popular theories of the JFK assassination. The second is a psychological analysis of some (but again not all) of the key players. Although the author provided his own rationale for the selections in each part, given what exists today in the JFK assassination literature, the author's choices seem somewhat arbitrary and certainly incomplete. For instance, neither Jim Garrison's investigation, nor Michael Collins Piper's monumental work "Final Judgment" seem to have warranted status as full-blown separate theories. This was especially irritating since Garrison's work was referenced and used throughout many of the analyses. Piper's work, perhaps because it was too new in 2002 when this manuscript went to press, or too volatile, was not mentioned at all. The angle dealing with JFK's problem with Israeli nukes is missing altogether but is obviously a fertile area, especially since LBJ, as he did in the case of Vietnam, quickly reversed U.S. policy on this issue.
I also had problems with the way the parts were arranged in the text. Surely the best of all worlds would have been to display the two parts and then somehow add a third section that juxtaposed or integrated the earlier two. I was surprised to discover that the parts were treated more or less as separate stand-alone almost self-contained and distinct parts, with the trailing psychological analysis being more or less an epilogue or afterthought to the very solid summaries.
This arrangement struck me as being exactly the opposite of what could have proven maximally effective. Arguably, it would have been much better to have provided the psychological analysis up front, first as foreground, or prologue, rather than as an afterthought or epilogue -- especially since it served a primarily contextual or background setting function. And then the author should have used it later as a marker guiding and integrating the various aspects of the respective theories and summary analyses.
The best example of how this approach could have worked effectively is with respect to ex-Director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover's homosexuality. Obviously his closeted homosexuality played a central, if not a decisive role, in the staging of and shaping of the conditions that led to the plot that killed JFK's: in corrupting the FBI, giving illicit power over to the mob and to the CIA, becoming a willing tool of LBJ -- all in a rather desperate effort to conceal his personal secret -- and then in making it all but inevitable that he (Hoover) would be an involuntary part of the cover up of the assassination plot. As foreground, and by setting the context, Hoover's homosexuality explains a lot; as epilogue, it is a mere salacious detail, an afterthought that serves little or no purpose. [Also in this regard, it is worthwhile to point out that at least one analysis focuses on the homosexuality of some of the key players (like in addition to Hoover, Clint Murchinson, David Ferrie, General Edwin Walker, et. al.) as a sub-assassination theory of its own.] The same can be said for JFK's philandering and his close ties to the mob, as well as his father's long-term debits to the mob. Not only were these private moral indiscretions examples of recklessness difficult to explain, but were central spokes in the background that made the wheels of several of the assassination plots turn. To relegate them to what amounted to a large appendix was at the very least, inefficient.
These comments aside, the analysis within the summaries was of a very high quality indeed. And certainly one of the unintended high points of the book was the way in which it systematically and completely demolished Gerald Posner's "Case Closed."
Four points in particular seem to have done the job: (1) the recently discovered photograph showing Oswald and Ferrie as part of the same New Orleans Civil Air Patrol unit, destroys Posner's unfounded contention that Oswald and Ferrie did not know each other prior to the assassination. (2) The fact that Parkland doctors confirmed that more than 40 bullet fragments were found in the president's skull proved that both frangible and non-frangible bullets were used and thus could not both have come from the same Mannlicher-Carcano that Oswald used -- guaranteeing that there had to be at least two shooters and thus a conspiracy; (3) Brain matter, skull bone, blood and tissue sprayed the patrolman at the left rear of the motorcade, invalidating Posner's cockamamie notion that an involuntary motion caused JFK's head to go backwards (in the same direction from which the shots were fired), defying Newton's second law of motion; and (4) the vector from the bullet that hit bystander Teague, a block away, when traced back to its origin, points to a shooter in the Dallas-Tex building, not to the Book Depository, also guaranteeing at least two shooters.
Given that most of the key players are now dead, and the likelihood that the court certifiable standard of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" will henceforth never be forthcoming, one would think that the criteria for testing the validity of a given JFK theory would now be relaxed. And although this is what the author does in practice, it seems that in order to avoid being labeled a "conspiracy nut" he, like many others, nevertheless goes overboard in sticking to this impossibly high standard of proof. One would hope that a more relaxed standard such as "a preponderance of cross-confirming evidence by reliable witnesses and participants," would become the new standard of proof for JFK investigation research. As well, prior independent knowledge of the assassination itself and lying by key figures about their whereabouts on the day of the assassination should be given more solid weight in determining whether or not a conspiracy occurred. In such cases, it is easy enough to assign a quality value -- from "poor to totally convincing" -- to the reports and interviews of what actually happened. Also, logical consistency and common sense should be allowed to play a much weightier role in assessing the value and validity of information - especially with regard to secondary sources. Certainly the author did a great deal of this but he did so rather self-consciously and timidly.
Finally, the gestalt that is the JFK assassination phenomenon itself has its own validity and resonance. Even though we may never be able to prove it in a court of law, we all know in our bones the truth when we see and hear it. Thus among other things, this book establishes that the real "conspiracy nuts" are those who still hold on, in their collective delusional state, to the idea that the Warren Commission's Report (a true state sanctioned conspiracy theory) represents even a facsimile of the truth.
Five stars
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
