|
|
44 of 47 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Good Compendium of Conspiracy Thought, October 17, 1999
According to an old maxim, good things come in small packages and such is the case with Stewart Galanor's 184-page volume Cover-up (Kestrel Books, 1998-ISBN 0-9662772-0-1). It is unfortunate that Galanor's book wasn't available at the time Oliver Stone produced his docudrama JFK. If Stone had optioned Cover-up as the basis for his script instead of Jim Marrs' Crossfire, he might have made a more accurate film. In Cover-up, you won't find reference to the Umbrella Man, Three Tramps, Storm Drain Shooters, Mystery Deaths List, or other canards employed by some theorists. Galanor's book can be thought of as the antithesis of Jim Moore's Conspiracy of One with brevity being their only similitude.First Impressions Galanor's book is a well-written volume that is easy to read and beautiful to look at. It features an excellent 13-page photo section at the front of the book that outlines the story of the assassination up to the publication of the Warren Report. At the end of the main text is an extended document section followed by the Zapruder frames and Galanor's analysis of where 216 Dealey Plaza witnesses thought the shots originated. The document section, which includes photographs taken by Galanor, is beautifully reproduced. I had never seen some of these items in such detail and clarity before. Galanor, a multimedia consultant and technical writer based in New York, has studied the assassination since 1964. His book purports to show evidence that a conspiracy existed to assassinate the 35th President. It is essentially a compendium of criticism of the "official version" of the assassination as presented by the Warren Commission (WC), House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), and the major news media. Grassy Knoll Witnesses One of the major contributions Galanor obviously hopes to make with Cover-up is his analysis of those witnesses who reported shots originating from the grassy knoll. In 1978, the HSCA had Dr David Green, chairman of the Psychology department at Harvard, analyze accounts of witnesses from the 26 WC volumes and FBI reports. Dr. Green and the HSCA concluded that, out of 178 witnesses analyzed, 11% thought the shots came from the grassy knoll, 27% thought they came from the TSBD, 44% were unsure, and 17% named another source. According to Green, the size of the sample (178 out of approximately 600 people believed to have been there) "makes it difficult to believe that a sizeable selection bias was present". Galanor argues that a significant number of these witnesses were, "government agents who tend to identify with the government's case. Hence the Committee's selection process did not come close to producing a random sample". Galanor concludes, "Therefore, Dr. Green's claim that an accurate statistical analysis could be performed is false". Additionally, Galanor offers a detailed look at four issues pertaining to the knoll witnesses that he maintains were not considered by Dr. Green and the HSCA. 1. Accommodating Witnesses Galanor maintains that, "One delicate issue to confront is the truthfulness of some of the witnesses". He then goes on to explain how Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry, JFK aide Kenneth O'Donnell, and AP Photographer James Altgens originally expressed the view that the shots came from the knoll but later changed their story to match the "official version". 2. Deficient Interrogations On this subject, Galanor writes, "A second issue to consider is: How diligent was the Warren Commission in obtaining the Witnesses' accounts?". He goes on to cite three witnesses who were never asked their opinion as to the direction of the shots and who fingered the grassy knoll area. 3. Erroneous Reports Most of the discussion in this section is reserved for the notes made by Secret Service agent Glen Bennett. In his notes reported to have been made around 5:30 p.m. (before the autopsy), Bennett said he saw one shot strike JFK "four inches down from the right shoulder" and subsequently saw the fatal head shot hit "the right rear high". The WC mentioned Bennett in their report, giving substantial weight to his observations. According to Galanor, "A more demanding Commission would have examined photographs of the assassination to see if Bennett was at least looking at the President when the shots were fired. Alas, photographs taken by witnesses show Bennett looking off to his right toward the knoll long after he claimed to have turned to look toward the President". 4. Witnesses Not Called Galanor maintains that the government never interviewed several reporters who witnessed the assassination and the HSCA analysis is therefore incomplete. Galanor's own analysis of the 216 grassy knoll witnesses shows the following: 32% were not asked where the shots came from. 37% thought the shots came from the grassy knoll. 32% thought the shots came from the TSBD. 24% could not tell where the shots came from. 4% thought the shots came from both the knoll and the TSBD. 3% named a location other than the knoll or TSBD. Conclusion With Cover-up, Galanor offers a concise treatment of the undeniable discrepancies that exist in the JFK case today. Lone assassin theorists will no doubt find many areas in the book to challenge and may point out that some of the anomalies in the evidence are probably benign in nature. The major contribution of Cover-up is likely to be Galanor's own analysis of the 216 grassy knoll witnesses. To his credit, Galanor has omitted many discredited theories and misrepresentations of fact that weaken similar volumes. He is also to be credited for presenting a substantive discussion of the medical evidence without using some of the more graphic autopsy materials. In this regard, Cover-up would be an excellent tool for even younger students wishing to familiarize themselves with the issues that may suggest conspiracy. On the down side, he asks many questions, only some of which he attempts to answer. Ultimately, it will be up to each reader to decide if the puzzles of the JFK assassination are the evidence of a conspiracy or the result of an inadequate autopsy, mistaken eyewitness observations, and various other innocuous slip-ups. On that score, Galanor leaves the reader with no doubt as to where he stands.
|