Customer Reviews

The Radical Right and the Murder of John F. Kennedy: Stunning Evidence in the Assassination of the President

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Harry Livingstone is a true enigma, a paradox of sorts---an old Beatnik with a sincere, dedicated passion for the truth in John Kennedy's murder and in JFK the man himself. Harry's books are fascinating and compelling...and quite unique: for every brilliantly written passage, there is another that makes you wince. Typos, run-on sentences, and grammar are potholes in the road from time to time. Alot of repetition, as well.
So, WHY am I giving this book 5 stars? Because it may be Livingstone's crowning achievement, with a close second being his best-selling "High Treason 2." There is so much great, important information contained herein that to give this book a 4 star (or less) rating would be heresy, even in spite of the spelling, grammar, and repetitive 'problems.' Harry shoots from the hip at times...and, warts and all, he often hits the target. Although I have every other book in Livingstone's impressive catalogue, I bought this one begrudgingly, thinking to myself "Why ANOTHER book, Harry? Haven't you said it all before?" I was WRONG...flawed, erratic, but indispensable. It is well worth it for the gems aplenty, the passionate writing, and the occasional brilliant passages. Buy this a.s.a.p.!!!:)

Harry has always been a true believer. His chapter updating the latest on the autopsy is reason enough to get this book. The newest information will
spin the heads around of the Posnerites. This work is not for the novice, but it will more than sustain the experienced JFK reader.

One of the very few researcher/writers who pulls no punches. Meticulously documented and footnoted, Livingstone names names and compiles events in Dallas as they most probably occured. A great addition to his previous works has a little repetition and although he discusses the Tippet murder may have several reasons, I believe Henry Hurt's to be the most plausible. This book is a must read for anyone with serious interest in the case. Great job, Harry, Sincerely, Chris Petit

Livingstone makes a very good case for the known fact that the assassination was a conspiracy, carried out and covered up with the assistance of the highest of government officials.

However, there were aspects of this book which I found quite disconcerting. Livingstone makes some bold statements, most of which I happen to believe, but only because I've researched this subject for the last 30 years, and consider myself somewhat of an expert. But perhaps the most disconcerting element is the fact that he spelled Lyndon Baines Johnson wrong. Yes wrong, and this places into jeopardy the credibilty of his further statements. In the book, Baines, the correct spelling, was spelled Baynes.

Before reading this book, I suggest, if unfamiliar with the case and its players that one read either "JFK The Second Plot" or "Crossfire" or another book on the subject. You need to be familiar with the people involved because this book will not help you to decipher who they are or their backgrounds. Further, unfortunately, Livingstone skips all over the place inserting non topical information into a chapter which is devoted to a particular topic. It is stream of conscious writing and this makes it difficult to follow unless very well versed on the case.

I have read all of Livingstone's other books on this subject. He is perhaps the foremost authority, which by its very nature makes this a book worth purchasing and reading. But be ready to try following a "Superball" in a closet because it is that frustrating. If he did not have a ghost writer, he should have, and if he did they did an awful job.

As Mr. Livingstone has stated elsewhere, the entire establishment is a conspiracy. Well put!

This whole JFK case has been subverted (or "faked" if you will) to cover up the involvement of those reaching into the very top of the US government.

It's very important to remember nearly 50 years later that ANYTHING less would have been "Old News" by now, pronto.

As Jim Garrison once said, it's not a question of whether Oswald's (US intelligence and/or military) handlers were or were not responsible for the assassination -- they WERE responsible.

But you won't hear about any of this from the Executive Branch, the Congress or the Mainstream Media because this story still has the potential to undermine the whole US political system, one that serves these folks quite nicely just like it is.

While some good facts are in the book, I think it could have been better organized. The author goes on and on about wounds whose locations were changed so the "official version" of the assassination made sense to the American people. After awhile, there is too much repeating of the same thing. He covers the wounds in so many different sections, that after awhile he is really not stating anything new. Plus he throws in so many names of people at times that it is hard to figure out who is who and how they fit in. I've read better books regarding the assassination.

Although I waited anxiously for this book, I must admit that as one who read Livingstone's other JFK assassination books, overall I was a bit disappointed in this production. Much of it is a rehash of his other books and borrows the new big picture framework from others, like Peter Dale Scott's Deep Politics and the Assassination of JFK. [Still, along with Michael Collins Piper's Final Judgment, is one of the best books on the JFK assassination.]

On the positive side, I was pleasantly surprised and happy to see that the author finally got religion and joined the ranks of those JFK researchers who see the importance and value of focusing more on the big picture, than groveling continuously in the dirty details without ever coming up for air. In this regard, Livingstone's previous work on the medical evidence is first-rate and seeing most of it repeated here did the book no harm.

Also, his investigative reporting on the pre-assassination party held at Texas oil magnate Clint Murchinson's home on the eve of the assassination is also first rate -- as was the way he connected the dots between the players in attendance there. Previously, the idea that such a party actually took place, remained in the realm of hear-say.

Unfortunately for me this was the high point of the book. It was all downhill from there.

The rest, including the much-touted "new revelations on the J.D. Tippit murder," left me cold. Facts, fiction, hearsay, rumors, "factions" and "factoids," seemed to have been all been given equal weight. The author provided no context, guidance, or analysis to wade through and out of this quagmire of "new information." As a result, one would be insane to try to draw any conclusions based on what amounts to random facts and "near facts" tossed at the reader, with the hope that something would stick. So far, for me none has.

This is especially unfortunate for a researcher of Livingstone's caliber, as now he will surely be cast down into purgatory with another run-of-the-mill researchers as just another "assassination conspiracy kook." This is especially unfortunate for this author, since his previous work has been of such high standards and generally held in high regard.

Despite this, I gave the book three stars.

I dont currently have this copy but I recently read 'High Treason' and now Iam on role of doing research from the same books that the authors had from that book.
They point to everyone but Oswald. CIA, FBI and various politicians all knew that this was going to happen and they all failed to notify the authorities. George Bush Sr. is reported to one of those people. He worked at the CIA at that time.

1. Oswald didnt get hired at the TSBD until two weeks before the assassination. Obviously his fingerprints are going to be found somewhere. They weren't found on the gun that was considered to be the snipers rifle.

2. The CIA changed the motorcade route just previous to the president arriving in Dallas.

3. Jack Ruby was reported to be seen near the grassy knoll just prior to the assassination. Why would he be in that exact spot had he not known something was about happen?? Coincidence yeah its possible.

4. Just after the shooting a report goes out on the radio saying that the police suspect a lone gunman. How do they know to put a report out saying this when the shooting had just barely taken place.

5. Allen Dulles (CIA)was head of the Warren Commission and was going to be fired by JFK at some point. The CIA didnt like that. JFK stated he was going to 'tear up the CIA into a million pieces' and fling them into the air.

6. JFK pulled out of Vietnam and the CIA didnt like that. They had recently bought Bell helicopters and if there wasn't going to be war then they wouldnt have a way to fund other secretive operations.

7. In High Treason you are able to see that there clearly two shots from the front. On in the right side of the forehead and another to the throat.

8. The doctors in Dallas testified in court that two shots came from the front. Once JFK got to Maryland those doctors said something entirely different from the earlier findings.

9. Was Oswald involved?? Yeah I think he was but possibly as a CIA operative. Who was the 2nd Oswald we may never know. He clearly didnt act alone. He was spending way over what he was earning so clearly the funds were coming from somewhere.

Read High Treason and/or watch the Zapruder film and that will change your view on this subject.
Other involvments could be LBJ and or Nixon. Theres a theory out there that Watergate and Assassination of JFK are connected.

You simply must run, not walk, to purchase this masterful tome by Harry Livingstone. There is nothing more to say.

He's on the right track here.He didn't write about Nixon pardoning Jack Ruebenstein ,from testifying to the HUAC ,in 1947.These men were socially and ideologically ,polar opposites.Yet,they both had a common link,the freemasons.Nixon was more than likey a big-wig in the masonic Scottish Rites and Jack Ruby a big price in the masonic jewish B'nai B'rth. How could a strip-tease nightclub owner escape the Cold War inquisition ,if he provided politicians with escourt girls? Well,very easily. Nixon may have cut a deal with Jack Ruby.If Ruby shot Oswald,Nixon would pardon him ,once he reclaimed the White-House throne,in 1964.Nixon knew if Ruby tried to explain publically the conspiracy-plot,the butterfly nets would swoop him up.So,Ruby followed along. In 1959,Nixon was the heir-apparent.Yet,America wanted something fresh and glamorous,not clammy and shifty.Nixon's quest to break the law ,in order to maintain his control over American politics,is well-known with the Watergate scandal. So, anyone who thinks that L.B.Johnson was the main-schemer in the asssassination plot,take a look at the far-right wing side. Good book !