1 comments about Felaheen.

1. The assassination attempt using a poisonous snake could have come from anyone who had access to Emir Moncef. The viper bites his calf, but he survives because his twelve year old son witnessed the incident and screamed for help. His wife and his heir believe the obvious culprit is either a family member, an un-loyal servant, or another member of the inner retinue. However, an unrecognized son by a different woman Kashif Pasha believes the NR is behind the assault.
   
   To protect the Emir and to uncover the assassin, former cop turned private investigator Ashraf Bey, who may be another unacknowledged offspring of the prolific Emir is hired. The genetically altered Ashraf struggles to uncover who wants the Emir dead; he leans towards the North African rebellion as the source so he goes undercover as a laborer in the lair of the enemy the metropolis of El Iskandryia while his maybe ten years old niece Hana al-Mansour better known as Hani decides to become Uncle Raf's "apprentice".
   
   The Third Arabesk alternate history Ottoman Empire Noir (see PASHAZADE AND EFFENDI) is a terrific who-done-it starring a fabulous hard boiled sleuth who is softened by his niece. The story paints quite a vivid picture of a world in which the Ottoman Empire still exists in the twenty-first century. The complex sty line takes the audience all over from Manhattan to the Ifriqiy Desert to El Iskandryia and elsewhere without missing a beat so that the reader knows this is the real stuff. Reading the previous novels would be worth the effort as they are amongst the best in the sub-genre, Jon Courtenay Grimwood cleverly intertwines the key elements into this excellent entry. FELAHEEN makes three winners in a row.
   
   Harriet Klausner

5 comments about Day Lincoln Was Shot.

1. "The Day Lincoln Was Shot" takes the reader through an minute by minute account of the events involving the principal characters involved in the Lincoln assassination. The story actually starts weeks before the assassination and traces the Booth conspiracy, first to kidnap, and then to murder Lincoln as well as Lincoln's activities amid the rumors of conspiracy and murder. The roles of others, prominently Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton, are artfully woven into the book. Author Jim Bishop skillfully switches between Lincoln and the conspirators while relating the events. Although I have long studied Lincoln Lore, I learned new things about the tragedy, and was reminded of other things which I had known. Never did my attention drift from the story. This is first class, minute by minute history, at its finest.



2. The Day Lincoln Was Shot is, in fact, about the entire day of Lincoln's death. If you decide to pick up this book make sure you set aside a lot of time and anything else you could be doing. This book is a very detailed hour by hour account of the day Lincoln was murdered. I do give the author credit for being historically accurate. Although it was accurate, this book did not have the ability to capture and hold on to my attention. The plot was pretty straight forward and I felt as though i was reading something straight out of a history book plus what's inbetween the lines. Mr.Bishop did make a good effort and put alot of time into this book judging by how detailed it is. The level of detail however, was my biggest problem with this book. I understand that Lincoln got shot and it was tragic but I don't need to know his murderer's every action throughout the day to get to where he was when he shot Lincoln.
   In conclusion, reading this book was comparable only to cruel and unusual punishment and I can only hope to never read anything this horrible ever again.



3. All history books should be written by Jim Bishop. He is able to bring the past to life with wonderful story telling that doesn't lose any details. This book taught me more about Lincoln than I have ever gotten out of classes and lessons. I had no clue that he disliked his wife and that John W Booth had failed so many times in his attempts. The deep research involved in such a writing must make it almost impossible to create history books in its image. Yet, we could do with less encyclopedia-like accounts of our past so that we keep our heritage instead of trying to wade through it. I will make sure to add Bishop's other masterpieces to my collection as soon as possible.



4. Strange that this book is still in print while Bishop's other book about the murder of a President, "The Day Kennedy Was Shot," is out of print. That book similiarly examines the day Kennedy died as this one examines the day Lincoln died, and both are stellar examples of the researcher's craft and the storyteller's art. Oddly, another book which minutely examines the day of Kennedy's murder, William Manchester's "Death Of A President," is ALSO out of print. Conspiracy? At this point, who knows? Who even cares anymore?
   
   JFK asked Bishop to write an article about him on the basis of having read this book about Lincoln; the original article was titled "A Day In The Life of a President." Kennedy suggested Bishop expand the article into a full book, which Bishop was in the process of doing when JFK was killed, and so the book turned into a sequel of sorts to this one about Lincoln that the murdered President loved. In the words of William Shatner, "Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes."
   
   I have no idea why the Kennedy book is no longer in print. The Lincoln book is still out there, but "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" has apparently fallen out of favor. Strange.
   
   So why a minute-by-minute examination of a single day, even a day as momentous as this one? That's not necessarily an easy question to answer; it is a kind of subset history genre, the close examination of Kennedy's death, or Lincoln's, or Christ's, or 9/11, or D-Day, or Hiroshima, etc. On first blush it might seem of value only to the researcher writing from a larger historical perspective, but in fact a work of history with this kind of focus can be far more interesting than any other approach to the subject. In the case of JFK, for instance, the incredible tension that builds naturally from a chronicle of the day he was killed makes for a more thrilling story than a novel on the same subject could ever hope to achieve.
   
   The book follows not only Kennedy but all the players, Jackie, Oswald, his mother & his wife, LBJ, RFK, J.D. Tippett, and so on. At times these separate strands converge, but mostly they're followed separately and Bishop does a masterful job of keeping all the threads tight. It's hard to imagine the amount of research and organization that went into telling this story so cleanly, because it is certainly one of the most confusing, contradictory days in world history, but Bishop makes it look easy. He is a brilliant storyteller, and anyone will tell you that is what a great reporter has to be. It's not just the facts, ma'am, it's the narrative drive, and this one moves like a supercharged Hummer.
   
   So why has it fallen out of print? And why has another book on the same topic, William Manchester's "Death of a President," also fallen out of print? I'm not much on conspiracy theories; there's nothing in either book that the "military-industrial complex" would find terribly distressing. Bishop does mention several eyewitnesses who saw or heard shots coming from the famous grassy knoll---as, incidentally, do the live news accounts of November 22---but by far most of the evidence Bishop (and Manchester) collects points squarely at Lee Harvey Oswald. I think this excellent book is out of print now because people just don't care who killed Kennedy anymore, and they certainly aren't interested in a blow-by-blow account of the assassination.
   
   To say this is "too bad" would be an understatement of biblical proportions. Every day, every hour, we are losing our sense of wonder and curiosity about our world, and we are most particularly forgetting the lessons the Sixties taught us: don't trust the official story. They may be right (in this case, I think they actually are: I believe Oswald did act alone and the "coverup" all these years has been the CIA, FBI, Dallas police dept., etc. covering up how incompetent and ineffectual they were protecting Kennedy that day), but you should ALWAYS look into the story for yourself. Books like "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" (and Oliver Stone's masterwork film "JFK") help us do that, by marshalling all the available information into a powerful narrative thrust. If we forget, or more importantly if we simply cease to care, then the ones who want us to sleep our lives away have won before we're even out of the starting gate.
   
   Read this book, not just because it is about one of the most important days in American history, and not just because it is a remarkably well-written thriller, but also because it is important, SO important, that we never forget this man and how he died and the lessons his death taught us.



5. This is a very entertaining book. Bishop draws the reader into this familiar story from the start and holds our interest. It is by no means the definitive account of what happened (for example, there are those historians who believe Mrs. Surratt was quite aware and involved with the doings of her boarding house) but it's a good read and it brings an important chapter of American history to life.

2 comments about Interview with History: The JFK Assassination.

1. These opinions and words are not mine... I am nearly transcribing a paragraph of text for an associate and those words are a Quote and Un-Quote from the person that has asked for their name to be withheld.
   
   Quote
   
   "One of the latest JFK books to hit the market by Pamela Ray and James Files, Interview With History, conjures up memories from old conversations. With me being from a law enforcement family and following in their foot steps, and hearing first hand about mob hits and all the rumors that go with them, often spoke of in my circle, I found the book to be an entertaining read and it not only confirms, but also ties things together nicely and this is what Mafia folklore is made of." "I have known James Files for many many years."
   
   Name withheld by request...
   
   Un-Quote



2. I wrote a very negative review of this so called work of non-fiction but it as yet to appear. One would assume that you choose your reviews based on some unknown agenda

1 comments about The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln (Graphic History).

1. I like these books a lot. They are interesting for me to read and I learn something. They can be a godsend for my ESOL students who must learn to read English and take American History at the same time. This book is on the assassination of President Lincoln. It covers the evening when husband and wife went to the theatre and Lincoln was shot. It follows the search for the murderer and the sentences carried out for the conspirators.

5 comments about Best Evidence (Signet).

1. We all know what was supposed to have happened. Kennedy's body was taken to Love Field and flown to Andrews AFB accompanied by the widow. At Andrews, there was the sad scene where the body was put into an ambulance and driven to Bethesda Naval Hospital still accompanied by the grieving widow. How could anything have possibly happened to the body on that sad trip in 1963? Well, Lifton does a very thorough job of reseach and shows exactly what and how and who.
   
   Lifton became interested in the Kennedy autopsy after noticing that the two FBI agents present at the autopsy had referred to pre-existing 'surgery of the head area' in their official report published with the Warren Commission report. What could they have been referring to? First, Lifton did a very thorough job of tracking down and interviewing many of the people who were present when the body was transported to Bethesda and autopsied. Then he visits the locations where events occurred to see what was possible and what was not. Then he puts everything together and shows exactly how Kennedy's body was moved around to give the conspirator's time before the official autopsy to remove bullets from the body and doctor up the wounds to incorrectly show that bullets struck Kennedy in the head from behind.
   
   Some of the things that Lifton proved: Kennedy's wife escorted an empty casket. Kennedy's body arrived at Bethesda the first time in a military shipping casket and zipped up in a body bag. Kennedy's brain was missing when the body arrived. The military team escorting the casket chased after an ambulance containing an empty casket across the Bethesda grounds before losing it and returning to the hospital in their pickup truck to find another ambulance and another casket at the back door.
   
   People often say things like 'how could anyone have done anything to the body with everyone watching?' Lifton shows exactly how. Lifton shows that everything happened at Bethesda and that everything there was observed by disinterested bystanders but they simply didn't know what they were seeing. Lifton gathers all of their stories, reviews all of the official documents and timelines, researchs the news reports, television broadcasts, and other accounts, and puts everything together to show what really happened. If it wasn't an assassination of the President of the United States, the final story that Lifton unearths would be hilarious and is certainly worthy of a movie.
   
   The Warren Commission report is based on the medical evidence established at the autopsy. Lifton shows that the autopsy 'evidence' cannot be used to determine the nature of Kennedy's wounds because it is false. The only reliable evidence left to use then about the nature of Kennedy's wounds is the statements of the doctors who were present in the room when Kennedy arrived at Parkland Hospital in Dallas. That evidence shows that Kennedy had one entrance wound in the front of his neck and one exit wound in the back of his head. Period.



2. I agree with the writer who suggests reading the book first. I think you have to have an open mind and not simply ingest everything the government tells you. I can tell you that unless you have seen the "head snap" that the author refers to in this book which is clearly evident in the videotape obtained by Abraham Zapruder, your comment might as well be as full of agitation as the longwinded one by David V.P. I witnessed this clip out of the videotape and I am convinced- as in CONVINCED, that at least one (1) shot came from the front. Well, how can that be? The TX book depository was way in back. Just follow the motorcade route and simply "Look at it". Open your mind and free your mind enough to be able to ask a logical question. Don't just eat up everything the government gives you. P. in NY



3. .....of JFK assassination books. One of my troops told me about this book in the early 80's. Since then, I've worn out two hardbacks, given away a bunch of paperbacks to people who probably won't read them, and, over 20 years ago had one long phone conversation with the author. Since that conversation several key players have died, but nothing has come out to shake my belief that Mr. Lifton got it right.
   
   Up front, I will say that reading this book will NOT tell you who killed President Kennedy, or why. It WILL tell you how the killers [plural] got away with it.
   
   Everyone over a certain age can tell you where they were on November 22, 1963 [I was in Chemistry class]. Early on, many of us realized that the "Oswald did it" solution was just too simple. My Dad was a firearms expert who said that the [alleged] sixth floor shots would have been easy, UNTIL he saw Olwald's rifle; then he said that they would have been impossible. [Of course, "easy" for Daddy doesn't mean "easy", but hundreds of Military and Police shooters could make those shots WITH A DECENT RIFLE].
   
   The gist of this book is that JFK's body as autopsied at Bethesda was in much different condition than it was when it left Parkland. Dr. Humes was not a liar; he was lied to. By all accounts, J.J. Humes was a fine man. Despite a 25 year career in Navy Medicine [the first years in Laboratory Medicine], I never met him. Several people I knew respected him greatly. Dr. Humes was presented, in the presence of numerous superior officers, with an altered body, and told to perform an autopsy. An impossible position.
   
   When President Kennedy went to Dallas, the plot was in place. Had it worked as planned, much of the controversy of the past 44 years would have never come to light, but two things went wrong: [1] JFK arrived at Parkland still [barely] alive, and [2] John Connally got shot. The Parkland ER was to receive one victim, DOA. Instead, they got two live ones, one of whom could be saved. The doctors at Parkland included "sheep" and "goats", but they got hopelessly mixed up during the half hour attempt to save the President. They body had to be altered after leaving Parkland [somewhere], but mistakes got made, witness saw [parts of] things, and an eternity of controversy started.
   
   The wound descriptions given by the Parkland doctors are totally different from those given by Dr. Humes in the autopsy protocol. Do I remember every detail of every patient I've ever treated in an ER? Preposterous. But some, I can never forget; I would absolutely remember every slightest detail of treating a President. Anyone would. In the end, there's simply too much evidence for the Grassy Knoll, and an altered body.
   
   I disagree with Mr. Lifton about 1 or 2 minor points. He considers Oswald an innocent victim; I'm not so sure, though I agree that he fired no shots.
   
   If I have to criticize this profoundly great book about anything, it's Mr. Lifton's assumption that the average reader possesses a level of medical knowledge that they really don't. [I made the very same critique of Cooper's biography of Jeff Davis, another President whose term was unjustly shortened by tragedy].
   
   President Kennedy is dead. God rest his soul. I don't know who killed him, and David Lifton doesn't, either. Something of ALL of us died with him. That's true be you liberal Democrat, conservative Republican, or those like me who still use present tense in speaking of Jeff Davis. ALL of us are Americans who had our innocence stolen from us. Read this book. Make your OWN descisions, but be informed when you make them.



4. This is one of the more interesting books on this subject, and I have read most of them. Mr. Lifton does at times belabor the point, and indeed there are small sections of the book that become so redundant I found one could skip ahead several pages and miss nothing. It is at times as though Mr. Lifton is afraid his reader won't "get" some new piece of evidence when in fact it was quite clear. The theme of the book, however, is unique, credible, and a must read for assassination researchers.
   
   Mr. Lifton is asking us to think outside of the box (please excuse the trite and overworked phrase, it does apply here). Given the lack of progress that has been made in this particular murder case over the past 45 years, I think this is perhaps a more valid request to make of the reader today than when originally published. I purchased a first run hardback of this book from an antique bookseller, and it does not contain the 32 pages of "shocking" photographs. This is just as well, Mr. Lifton's thesis does not require these gory photographs to be convincing and I am of the opinion they probably do more to discredit more recent editions of this book than they could possibly add to it.
   
   The central theme of the book is the concept that if the body of the slain president was altered before it arrived at Bethesda Naval Hospital for the autopsy, then it is not necessary that Dr. Humes or the Warren Commission themselves were willful participants in a deliberate cover-up. Certainly the behavior of these men in the years that have passed would indicate they are, at the very least, unwilling to review their work with an open mind and accept the fact that they may well have been deceived, but ignorant and ugly mulishness is a far cry from deliberate complicity. Mr. Lifton provides ample evidence, all of which is to be found in the Warren Commission and the National Archives own files, that there was not only opportunity for such pre-autopsy surgical alteration of the body to have occurred, but also evidence that people did observe and note clues that it had.
   
   Many of the books' critics, easily found right here on Amazon, dismiss the book out-of-hand in such a manner as to indicate the entire theme of the book was lost on them. They cannot or will not "think outside the box". One critic dismisses the entire book, for example, because Dave Powers stated he never left the casket while it was onboard Air Force One. But we know as a matter of record who the medical personnel were at Parkland Hospital who put the body in the casket, and Mr. Powers was not one of them. None of these medical personnel traveled with the body all the way to Bethesda. Mr. Powers may well be entirely truthful when he states that he never left the casket; he is only assuming, however, that the casket contained the remains of the president. It is unlikely he would engage in such ghoulish behavior as would be required to verify this for himself onboard Air Force One in the presence of the late president's widow.
   
   And indeed, if you look at the reviews posted here about any Kennedy assassination book, you will find the same basic phenomena. It takes a particular type of individual to hate dissent, to tow the party line at all costs and view life with such a closed mind as to hate others who do not. You will note, not 100% of the time but in the overwhelming majority of cases, that those who discount a pro-Warren Commission book generally do so by sighting specific evidence that was overlooked, misinterpreted, or ignored. Those who discount a pro-Conspiracy book tend to do so by merely insulting the author, his readers, even witnesses who gave contrary testimony that does not align with their preconceived notion of events. Supporters of "Case Closed" and "Reclaiming History" will say "this book is full of FACTS", never seeming to realize that just because they agree with a particular statement does not in and of itself make that statement a "fact". I can respect a differing opinion from someone who gives me an informed argument; I do not respect a differing opinion from someone armed only with the juvenile weapons of name-calling and character assassination, and among the community of assassination readers, such persons have done a great deal more to harm the pro-Warren Commission side than they will ever do to help it.



5. Lifton's research is impeccable, and his conclusions both startling and obvious. He, and he alone, put the medical evidence together in a way that demonstrates beyond any doubt that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy by factions within the U.S. Government. Don't believe me. Read it yourself.
   
   But be forewarned that the first 150-175 pages are a little dull, because he wrote the text chronologically, taking the reader with him as he struggles to reconcile the movement of JFK's body with the official report.
   
   However, you should also be forewarned that after that point, the book reads like thriller fiction...except that it isn't. David Lifton has done primary research and has opened up a whole area of the assassination to the light of day.
   
   I wish I could give it ten stars.

5 comments about The Pelican Brief.

1. Washington wakes up to the gruesome news that two members of the Supreme Court have been murdered overnight. The shocking part was in their diversity. The old, should have retired years ago, Democrat Justice Rosenberg and the younger Republican Justice Jensen. The fact that they were almost always on opposite sides of any issue left law enforcement with no clear political motive. The only clues left behind seemed to be ones of the killer's choosing. A nylon cord used to garrote Jensen as he sat in a movie house watching a porno film. The Rosenberg affair was messy - three people dead, three 22-caliber bullets to the head of each victim Rosenberg, a guard and an aid.
   Down in bayou country Tulane University law professor Thomas Callahan on hearing the news got roaring drunk to ease the pain. Rosenberg was one of his idols and he couldn't believe the end had come.
   While the whole country pondered the reason behind the killings Darby Shaw, a bright law student and bed partner of professor Callahan turns sleuth. Ms. Shaw pores over the current Supreme Court docket and eventually comes up with a promising case. And for the next four days she shuffles through pages of affidavits detailing lies and abuses by lawyers and their clients.
   In the end Darby Shaw writes an eight-page draft of what will later be called the Pelican Brief. Shaw is only half convinced that she is on to something, however, in spite of her skepticism she turns the pages over to Callahan.
   Callahan attends the Rosenberg funeral in Washington and passes the brief along to a colleague. And once copies of those pages get into the wrong hands Darby Shaw becomes the hunted.
   John Grisham takes us through a fast paced cat and mouse investigation, and in the end solves the puzzle to everyone's satisfaction.
   
   Tom Barnes author of:
   `The Goring Collection'
   `The Hurricane Hunters and Lost in the Bermuda Triangle'
   `Doc Holliday's Road to Tombstone'
   The Goring Collection
   The Hurricane Hunters And Lost in the Bermuda Triangle
   Doc Holliday's Road to Tombstone: The Life and Times of John Henry Holliday



2. Rather shocked to see any negative reviews. This book is a wonderful page turner. I was lost in the world of small intelligent law student, fighting for her life inside the world of DC powerhouses and the elite rich. Gripping. I still think about the book often, and I read it about 6 years ago. Great read.



3. If you are thinking about going to law school, this wouldn't be a bad novel to read to get a sense of what the profession is all about before you commit yourself to three expensive (and potentially boring) years of education. I don't recall a book that displays so many of the corrupt sides of legal practice and education in a single fictional tale. If that weren't enough, the book also delves deeply into the international assassination genre and creates a modern-day fictional version of investigating a government cover-up at the highest levels, a la Watergate.
   
   But a pure heart among all the jaded ones can make a difference . . . that's the morale of this story as beautiful, dedicated, and brilliant law student Darby Shaw speculates on what motive might tie the assassination of two Supreme Court justices back to a pending legal case. Improbably (the weakest part of the story), she sniffs out the potential that no one else does -- that this is an attempt to fix an appeal.
   
   The Pelican Brief as a title is a misnomer. Darby writes her thoughts (a crude essay, not a brief) about what might be going on and shares them with her professor lover who passes them along to a counsel for the FBI. Pretty soon someone is taking her ideas seriously, and the pages will fly through your fingers as fast as you can read until you get to the end.
   
   John Grisham doesn't quite have his genres down in this book, and apparently the success of The Firm meant that his editors were more interested in getting The Pelican Brief published than making it better. You could fix this novel into a five-star effort with about two hours of editing to reduce the improbabilities and speed up the slow parts.
   
   But if you don't mind having unlikely events pull a riveting story together, you'll have a lot of fun with The Pelican Brief. I listened to the reading by Alexander Adams and felt that the story worked better listened to than it would be if read silently.
   
   I admire John Grisham for the imagination to conceive of such a wild story. He kept surprising me with his plot developments, and the trip was almost all fun.



4. Grisham is a great writer and started great with his first three novels with this being his third. I give a five star rating when I can't stop turning the pages and do not want to put the book down. The story has backgrounds in New Orleans. Washington, D.C., and New York City.
   
   This story was non-stop action and suspense with rivetting excitment. It has a heroine, Darby Shaw, who is beautiful and smart. She is a law student who does a Brief on the murder of two Supreme Court Justices. This causes a lot of people to be murdered and puts Darby on a run for her life. This all started with an injunction to stop oil drilling in the marshes of Louisiana and try to save the home of the Brown Pelicans.



5. I like John Grisham about every 4th or 5th book. His Rainmaker was terrific, and The Firm was rather sweet too. This novel, his third after The Firm and A Time to Kill, was crap--serious diarrhea. Grisham has stated in interviews he writes a book every six months. Reading the prose of this novel, I'm surprised he didn't do it in six weeks or even six days.
   
   Where do I start in listing all the horrible aspects of this novel? I don't know but here goes:
   
   - The flat, flat characters. None of the characters have any personalities to speak of--no distinguishing traits, no quirks, no hobbies, nothing. They simply exist to move the plot along.
   
   - The boilerplate, cliched dialog. This is the novel where characters say stuff like "Let's go for a walk," followed up, "Wow, this is a nice walk." It's THAT bad. And when people get mad, they say stuff like, "I'll sue you for a million bucks if you touch me." Ohh, God, reading the dialog must've lowered my IQ to Forrest Gump levels.
   
   - The dead prose. Buildings are either "small" or "big." And people, when mad, "snort" and "sneer." Of course, some people might say, "Well, Grisham's going for a minimalist approach." Well, there's good minimalist prose and there's crap minimalist prose--Grisham's the latter. If you want GREAT, unique minimalist prose, read James Ellroy. If you want to read prose apparently written by a high-schooler, read Grisham here.
   
   - The plot. This story is essentially one entire chase sequence, and not a very interesting one at that. I won't dis the totally unrealistic nature of this story--it goes with the thriller territory--but I don't want to spend how many hours reading about flat characters hiding in hotels and saying stupid, kindergarten stuff that are in really bad B-list movies.
   
   So . . . in conclusion, this is a really terrible, terrible novel. It's not as terrible as, say, a James Patterson novel, but it's close. If you haven't read Grisham before, stay away from this novel and read The Rainmaker instead. And The Firm and The Innocent Man. Everything else you can pretty much ignore. And if you're a masochist, well, why don't skip Grisham altogether and read James Patterson or Clive Cussler or Allan Folsom.

5 comments about Oswald's Tale: An American Mystery.

1. Norman Mailer's book does not resolve the question of the existence of a conspiracy in JFK's assassination (for that see The Man Who Knew Too Much by Dick Russell), but it does provide critical pieces of information about Oswald's psyche that help us assess the liklihood that Oswald was involved in the assassination. For that reason I highly recommend this book.
   
   Mailer provides interesting and frequently relevant detail about Oswald's life with Marina in Russia and their lives back in the US after they moved from Russia. The portrait that emerges of Oswald is one that is crucial to understanding what happened to JFK. Mailer provides convincing evidence that Oswald's activities were largely, if not completely, based on his own agenda and psychological makeup. It is highly unlikely that he was anyone's agent while living in Russia.
   
   Most important is the information about Oswald's desire to live in Cuba after his return to the US from Russia--this was his personal agenda in mid-1963. Mailer takes us that far. Dick Russell's The Man Who Knew Too Much fills in the missing pieces. Russell's book shows that this agenda of Oswald made him vulnerable to a ploy to enlist him in the conspiracy.
   
   Mailer's book on the psychological makeup of Oswald combined with Russell's book on how that makeup was manipulated solves the case.



2. Although an earlier reviewer gave OSWALD'S TALE a withering assessment, I couldn't possibly be quite that uncivil myself, as aggravated as I am. For, the book does serve history by providing much new background information on Lee Harvey Oswald. But I must agree with that reviewer in principal. I have not seen a book that more personifies the classic "2 plus 2 equals 7" logic warp. OSWALD'S TALE seems to set forth most of the facts, repeatedly flirt with and caress the truth, then suddenly to disregard it in favor of twaddle. A good example is Mr. Mailer's omission of the dictation belt discovered in the 1970s in Dallas. The belt contained a sound recording of the assassination recorded over the air as a result of a jammed "transmit" button on a police motorcycle radio. Analysis of the recording by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978-9 revealed that two shots were fired almost simultaneously. An obvious impossibility with a bolt action rifle, this shattered forever the fairytale of a lone assassin. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle coined a phrase many years ago, "profound and ineffable twaddle", which well sums up the illogic of OSWALD'S TALE. Brimming with massive and impressive information, but arriving at conclusions that are an utter nonsequitor, OSWALD'S TALE is very reminiscent of the original Warren Commission Report. Unfortunately for Mr. Mailer, the Warren Commission's thesis has long been discredited and relegated to the category of claptrap. Amazingly, so many reviewers have been overwhelmed by the quantity of information in OSWALD'S TALE, but are oblivious to the book's total failure to make anything of the information. It looks very much as if Mr. Mailer is either daft or has quixotically written yet another book to try to prop up the long-collapsed thesis of the Warren Commission, and in the process comes across as having compromised himself totally. Such a book seems particularly strange coming from someone who used to seem like such a radical and champion of the truth in the 60s. Mr. Mailer remarked in the book that "Jack Ruby buggers reasonable comprehension". However in the end, OSWALD'S TALE itself buggers the truth...



3. Long as it was I regretted reaching the end of this book. Oswald's Tale purports to be a work of fiction. In fact, it impossible not to appreciate the wealth of research and analysis that informs the pages of this dense text. It becomes increasingly clear that Oswald very likely acted alone. Indeed, this is only a question because of the tributaries of zealots that seemed to work on the fringes of formal organizations, including the FBI and the MAFIA and so on. Yet, Oswald very likely acted independently; it would have been practically impossible for any one organization to control him. The novel Libra had it very nearly correct with its assessment that, had Oswald be chosen, it would very likely have been because he could have been depended upon to miss his target, or otherwise bungle the job. No one but Oswald propeled himself onto to the stage of Cold War history. In Oswald's world, his sense of destiny was confirmed by the chance occurrence of being employed in the Texas Book Depository in Dallas, stationed along the very route that President Kennedy's motorcade took that day in November. In addition to the quality of the writing and analysis, the book is to be commended for focusing so intently on Oswald's marriage to Marina, and the relationship he had with his mother, Margueritte. Like so many tragedies, one is all too easily reminded of Shakespeare's Richard, "my kingdom for a horse." Had Cuba provided Oswad a visa enabling him, ultimately to return to the Soviet Union he had already abandoned, history might well have taken a different course. Instead, Oswald's dyslexia, his sense of greatness, his determination and his lack of abilities in so many areas coupled with his gifts in others: all conspired, with chance playing its part, to place Oswald in the book depository from which he assasinated President Kennedy and subsequently murdered Dallas PD Officer Tippit.



4. At almost 800 pages, Tale is weighed down with endless detail. Still much of the detail is fascinating in itself, such as the KGB's procedure in following Oswald in Russia. Mailer actually got the reports of KGB agents following Oswald. Mailer put incredible effort into retracing Oswald's travels in Russia, New Orleans, Mexico and Texas and speaking to dozens of people who had contact with him. Mailer quotes numerous other writers. Only the last hundred pages got down to the action. His account of whodunit and why is necessarily speculative, but I don't know of a more credible one.



5. I stopped reading Norman Mailer's Oswald's Tale after 150 pages. Frankly, I was bored. Mailer opens his examination of Lee Harvey Oswald with an exhaustive, numbing biography of his wife Marina's ancestors and Oswald's adolescence in Russia. I did not care to know so much about Marina's cousins or Oswald's Russian girlfriends. Furthermore, Mailer writes these chapters in a simple, almost oral way, so they do not benefit from his wry, spirited voice and style. It is possible that the book improves once Mailer digs into the meat of the assassination and Oswald's potential motives, however I will never know for sure. Maybe Mailer should have started the novel at that point instead--then I might have read until the end. After reading and enjoying The Naked and the Dead, The Fight, and especially Harlot's Ghost, I found Oswald's Tale to be a disappointment.

3 comments about American Gothic: The Story of America's Legendary Theatrical Family-Junius, Edwin, and John Wilkes Booth.

1. The older Booth brothers were a hard act to follow, being classical and Shakespearean actors of the highest degree. Edwin played Hamlet upteen times on stage. John felt second best and left out of the major plays and had to seek his fame in another way. He is now called American Brutus, but I beg to differ: Booth was in Harper's Ferry, Virginia, (now West Virginia) in 1863 and fell in love with the surroundings. I have seen this special place in a few movies since my boys and I were there. It is a distinctly different place from any other. Once you've been there, you will never forget every little detail. It is that historical and meaninful in this country's war zone. I have been interested in Lincoln's assassination for over twenty years, mainly because they hanged Mary Surrat, the first woman to be officially killed in this manner. It was at her boardinghouse where the conspirators met to discuss and plan killing Lincoln and others in his Cabinet.
   
   John Wilkes Booth, from a prominent acting family, was a Confederacy sympathizer. But that in itself does not make him guilty. He was denied his right to a trial. Most of the South were more than a little upset when Lincoln was inaugurated for the second time. They refused to accept him as "our" President. We had Jefferson Davis who married Zachary Taylor's daughter. I don't believe old Zach was a Rebel. "Killing Lincoln' as a one-man theatrical presentation, written by Amy Russell, originally premiered in Toronto, Canada. I emphatized with the young actor (who I thought was an old man, as he is such a good actor) who said, "I enjoyed playing off you." I told him the reason he held my complete attention was due to the fact that I had read so much about Lincoln and also sympathized with Booth's reasoning.
   
   Lincoln as it so happens was a Shakespeare fan and enjoyed going to Ford's Theatre. John Wilkes Booth (Brutus) as one of the most promising young Shakespearean actors of his day. Booth considered Lincoln an "American Caesar." He is sometimes called Booth "American Brutus," the title of another Booth book I have reviewed. He was an extremely handsome man and, even though he broke his leg in the leap to the stage (instead of running down the back stairs), he eluded capture with the help of a Dr. Mudd for twelve days. He was not given a chance to tell his side and the complex, misleading reasons he did what he did. That took fortitude! He did not act alone! That's a major issue. He was cornered in that barn like an animal and burned (at the stake) by the vigilante cowards. He was never close to Lincoln as Brutus was to Jesus so the title is deceiving. He was merely a misinformed player who ended up "on his own" after the dasdardly deed. He deserves better than to be called a devil. To some, he was an avenging angel. He achieved fame in his own way, though there have been romors thathe did not die in the fire but survied to live another day and another life. That has not been confirmed, but Eric will delve through the history and tell us what really happened. And why.



2. I find this book to be very helpful in my investigations of understanding the Booth family. Those whom are interested should know it's like a Shakespeare tradgedy. I recommend this book to anyone studying John Wilkes Booth.



3. As the two reviews below demonstrate, many people might read this book just to find out more about Lincoln's assassin. From the post-Civil War era to this day, "assassin" is the only translation of the name "Booth" that most people understand.
   
   But Gene Smith gives us the rest of the story of a theatrical "dynasty", and the depth of his research is amazing, at least in my opinion. Yes, there were other Booths besides John Wilkes, and other reasons for memorializing this family besides Presidential death. No one today remembers the father, Junius Brutus Booth, a wonderfully boisterous, crazy old drunk and ground-breaking actor who was adulated like a rock star in his time. Edwin and John, two out of the nine or ten (legitimate and illegitimate) progeny of JBB, surpassed their father, and Edwin has been called the greatest American tragedian who ever lived.
   
   Like any biographer, Mr. Smith puts flesh on these characters, with a particular eye toward trying to rehabilitate John. It is a lyrical, touching, sympathetic story full of little-known details: John's body finally being released to his mother from its secret basement hole for reburial in the family plot; Edwin burning his brother's theatrical trunk and every costume and prop in it, under the rueful eyes of a long-time servant; the spontaneous, disastrous collapse of the original Ford's Theater building, seemingly at the moment of the death of Edwin; a certain hummock in the median strip of a Virginia freeway, the site of the house on whose porch the "unfortunate" Johnny sucked his life away.
   
   But Mr. Smith doesn't really answer the question of why Johnny did it. His (purported) fiancee, Lucy Hale, was a Yankee. John's animus seemed to be directed at Lincoln himself rather than the U.S. Republic. Maybe it was partly theatrics and partly the family tendency toward insanity.

1 comments about Wolves, Jackals, and Foxes: The Assassins Who Changed History.

1. I bought this book thinking it would be an objective piece about the subject matter.
   
   What I got was something ridiculously laced with a liberal slant. The author relishes all things left of center, including celebrating gun control, and admonishes all thing right of center.
   
   This COULD have been a great book, if the author had simply objectively stuck to the subject matter without injecting his political views into so much of the content.
   
   I am very disappointed. It was truly wasted potential.

5 comments about Will's War: A Novel.

1. If you think you've read the quintessential courtroom novel, or learned more than you can possibly learn bout contemporary history, think again. this book has it all. Janice Woods /windle has an uncanny knack for making real people come to life on a page and they soon feel like old friends or family members. Here's a book that tells you things about Texas you never knew, gives you an entirely different slant on how this country handled the era around WWI, and shows you with almost painful clarity how people's passions and prejudices shape history and lives.

   From the first page where you meet Will Bergfeld until the conclusion of an emotional trial, this is a book you can't put down. As much as this book resembles True Women and Hill Country in creating a mood and drawing the history of Texas, it is again totally different, and could just as easily have taken place today. For those who think racial profiling is a new facet of our lives, think again. Pick up this book and you won;t be able to put it down until you've read the last word.




2. I learned so much by reading this third book of Janice Woods Windle. I was amazed at the intolerance and fear that Americans, Texans in particular, had of their fellow citizens who were of German extract during WWI. What a phenomena fear is! And war brings out the worst of fears, even today. To read of Will, Janice's ancestor and his trial related to supposed treason against the U. S. is an amazing read, as it is based on the truth of the trial of Woods Windle's kin.

   I was also fascinated by Will's involvement with the labor movement in Colorado and the Wobblies, and how that branded his reputation, threatened his livelihood as a mailman and upright citizen who saw a need for change and put his life on the line.

   I am a devout fan of Janice Woods Windle's three books. Actually "True Women" convinced me that she was a writer to watch. "Hill Country" was okay, but "Will's War" is right up there with "True Women." This is a must read in historical fiction of Texas, circa WWI and its surrounding years.

   Highly recommend!




3. For those of us who loved "Hill Country" and "True Women", Woods doesn't disappoint. Here is more of the story of her family, and the evolution of life in Texas. The characters, based on her ancestors, are real, and carry us through what was a very difficult time - a time of persecution of those who had the courage to risk life and limb to find a home in our promised land - and who, for the most part, were loyal, patriotic citizens. Again, we are aware of the resiliency and courage of those pioneer spirits who created the Texas of today. This is a great read, particulaly if you are interested in the human side of Texas history - warts and all.



4. 
   Mrs. Windle has written another fascinating, engrossing work. She seems to write, not only from excellent research, but from diligent research. Her descriptions of the occasions help us relive the history of her story as they keep us in touch with the characters and what they must have felt and the way they likely have behaved in this terrible time of our history.



5. Will's War represents the lenghts our govenment will go to, to silence those who don't agree with them (like our current administration), and how they bend the laws to get what they want. History repeats itself. Will the subject of this tome was framed by the government because like most German's of the WWI era they were against consription (the draft), he was also involved in both Farmers and Labor unions, two more reasons why the government went after him.
   
   Ms. Windle opens up her grandfather's struggles and the struggles of the German people who were subjected too the governments Mischarges of Justice. The courtroom drama was outstanding and fans of Perry Mason Mysteries will enjoy it. Although Paul Drake becomes Will's sister who is instrumental in turning the government's case around.
   
   Kudos and Bravo Ms. Windle
   
   Ms. Windle and I share the same surname "Windle" and we are probably related but the relationship link occurs over in Germany in the 1600's. My great, great, great, grandfather (John A Windle) did settle in Texas when it was a Republic in 1837 in Rusk Co. TX, but he was born in Virginia in 1804 and lived in AL and TN before finally settling in Texas long before WWI.