5 comments about Deadly Secrets: The Cia-Mafia War Against Castro and the Assassination of J.F.K..

1. Really interesting stuff here. Digs deep behind the scenes of the whole affair & leaves one wondering what really happened. Very detailed & well-researched.



2. Although the original message was the CIA-Mafia complicity in President Kennedy's death, there is a more important message for 2005. Namely, Bush, far from being against terrorism, loves terrorists if they're anti-Castro Cubans. Our current president's father is the real villain, but our current Bush has done nothing to put the Miami Mafia terrorists in their place and bring them to justice. (...)



3. In addition to what was written above, I'd like to add that this book would almost be funny if it weren't so depressing. When I say funny I mean this only for those who might find James Ellroy or Chandler's bleak wit funny. A bitter sarcasm tinges the language that fleshes out this strange corner of WW3. Unlike many history/expose books, Deadly Secrets is written with attitude, with a sharp perspective that is illuminating (Hinckle and Turner have clearly spent some time with many of the players).
   
   The oblique cold warriors (mafia, arms dealers, mercenaries, displaced patriots, displaced murderers, gamblers, right wingnuts, oil barons, cia officers, bad bankers,international corporations, drug traffickers and all those other types of people we don't like to think of as soldiers on the front lines of the cold war) aren't so oblique after reading this...Its a wonder we won the cold war because with friends like these who needs Soviets. Your taxpayer dollars have gone to interesting 'causes,' (schemes) and its not hard to imagine that these secret wars are no different today.
   
   If you are interested in the Cold War and how it bleeds into to "War on Terror" you should check this out. Also helpful for those interested in the continuity of the careers of those who pass through, in, and around 'Dallas,' Watergate, and the Iran/Contra affair.
   
   If you're hungry for more afterwards, other authors to look for are Jonathan Kwitny, Peter Dale Scott, Jonathan Marshall,Alan Block, Pete Brewton, whose bibliographies give up a bunch of great sources.



4. While this book doesn't identify the actual shooters in the assassination of John Kennedy,it offers up an immense volume of information about the C.I.A.-mafia partnership regarding assassination attempts directed at Fidel Castro.
   
   The planning,execution,and failure of the Bay of Pigs operation are detailed.
   
   The book really focuses on the C.I.A.'s activities and participants,especially in the Caribbean. Air America and the Corsican mafia are also discussed. Various agency business connections and financial ties are detailed.
   
   You will read about characters such as Robert Maheu,Howard Hughes,E.Howard Hunt,Mitchell WerBell III,Frank Sturgis,"Maurice Bishop", and a myriad of other interesting people that were in some instances heavily involved in the intelligence community. In addition to that aspect, the authors investigate the mafia activities in Cuba and Haiti and how they particpated in projects with the Agency, sometimes without Kennedys knowing about it.
   
   The authors documented this book well.
   On the subject of the JFK assassination,this is one of the better books available. The details in the book make it an even better book on the subject of secret wars and how participants re-surfaced in the Watergate scandal and even later in politics.



5. Authors Warren Hinckle and William Turner are "in the know". Learn what they know and you will be a wiser person. In "Deadly Secrets", these thorough investigators reach out to the American people in an attempt to educate them about how the American government really works. They did a superb job, from detailing George H.W. Bush's involvement in the JFK assassinaiton, Iran-Contra, and CIA drug smuggling to Nixon's hiring of the same CIA thugs for his personal and sinister use. Who would have known? This is a great chronicle of the events leading up to and surrounding all these secret events. The most interesting part is the chapter on Bush. I did not realize he had so many connections to the murder of a president. But now, writing in the year 2008, it looks like such pathological killing runs in the family. America is lost forever.

5 comments about The Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy.

1. The murder of Robert Kennedy has never gotten the attention lavished on the death of his brother, for a variety of reasons. RFK was, after all, not the President, but a Senator and a potential candidate for the Presidency. In addition, his murder appeared, on first glance, to be far more of an open-and-shut case. After all, his alleged assailant, Sirhan Sirhan, stepped forward in a small kitchen pantry and opened fire with some 77 eyewitnesses standing there in the room. You didn't need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure this one out, it would seem...and yet...
   
   Bill Turner and Jonn Christian do an admirable job of bringing out some of the questions that remain about the killing of RFK. I myself would have preferred a somewhat farther-reaching and more distanced view of the events, as opposed to this narrative, which closely follows the actual doings of Turner and Christian as they wade through the increasingly bizarre cast of characters that seemed to be involved in the events that culminated in the Ambassador Hotel. Where is Jim Marrs when you need him?
   
   That being said, there are few books available on the RFK case, so this one gets high marks for effort, if it is not always perfect or even convincing in its execution.



2. This is a history of the strangest assassination that you could imagine. It looked like an open and shut case. The LAPD made darn sure that those looks stayed that way. In spite of the objectivity, it becomes clear that there is more to this assassination, and cover up, than meets the eye.
   
   The case seems quite strong that there were more bullets fired than Sirhans gun could hold. All of the shots into Kennedy were identified as entering from the rear. Sirhan was in front of Kennedy. The fatal shot was placed within inches of Kennedy's head. The LAPD ripped the pantry apart and destroyed the evidence while doing so. A photographers camera was seized at gun point, actually six LAPD cops at gun point. All of the photos from inside the pantry were not returned.
   
   There is a shady hypnotist with a proclaimed CIA past and an even shadier preacher man who went to the LAPD on the following day and claimed to have met Sirhan strictly via picking him up as a hitch hiker on the day of the assassination. The preacher has a law record as long as your forearm and it is proved that he had known Sirhan for a considerable amount of time. The allegation that he had previously bought clothes for Sirhan will make you rub your eyes. The biggest story is that he suddenly had a nice Lincoln and was flashing up to thirty $1000 bills about the time of the assassination. This in spite of constantly being broke before the event.
   
   There are LAPD members with CIA connections who squeezed in some side work in Latin America. One may wonder if their "other" employment was that of "jackals" (hitmen).
   
   Then you have the well built lady with the funny nose and the polka dot dress, and her partner, that is reputed to have ran from the scene yelling that they had just shot Kennnedy. They had recently entered the building via the fire escape stair case that is attached to the rear of multi-level buildings.
   
   Sirhan had also been warned by a friend to quit placing himself under hypnosis so much.
   
   If you think this all seems pretty strange, get ready for more. Then consider that the books were ordered destroyed by fire shortly after publication.
   
   This assassination deserved a lot more investigation. At least we got a serious effort from the authors.



3. I bought this book a while back at a local book store and I was blown away by how well researched this book was. I highly recommend this book to anyone researching the death of RFK. Just fasten your seatbelt first.



4. This book is--far and away-- STILL the best book on the RFK hit. It is also a masterpiece of writing in any genre and in some ways creates a new one. This is the type of book whose subject matter made "gonzo" necessary but whose writing style makes gonzo seem worse than immature: a lie.
   
   The breadth of investigation is stunning and only matched by the solid research and professional restraint in writing and analysis.
   
   This also happens to be the single wildest narrative I have ever read in my life. You will not be able to believe the characters you meet in this book, yet in the end they are enlivened not by fictive writing but by the charge of a turning point in American history, documented to by a former FBI agent and a former corresponedent for ABC TV in San Franciso. This work is still respected in the field and Turner was featured in the 2007 Times Discovery channel.
   
   At times this book reads like The Crying of Lot 49 but written by Hemmingway.
   
   Also PLEASE PLEASE LOOK UP THE ARTICLE ON THE PUBLICATION HISTORY OF THIS BOOK! THE BOOK SUFFERED AN ATTEMPTED MURDER WHEN SI NEWHOUSE BOUGHT RANDOM HOUSE IN 1978. Jim Di Eugenio is the author of the review and it is must reading!
   http://www.ctka.net/turner-christian.html
   
   
   This book is not simply a who dun it. It is full of deep structural connections that show the direction the bullet was taking us as a nation.



5. This is the fourth book I have read on the RFK assassination. It is still the best. These authors are carefull, and earn the trust of even the most careful treaders through the 'wilderness of mirrors'. You will not believe what they discover! One ends up thinking that maybe surealism started in Los Angeles and not Europe. Its the kind of non-fiction that makes fiction authors electric with envy.
   
   An excellent companion volume is the book on trial of RFK by Professor Phillip Melanson and a guy named Klabor. These books make such great companions, because they are not at all redundant: the Melanson Klaber book shows that what happen during the trial is 80% as downright strange as what happened with the murder and its invesitgation. And nothing is stanger -- or in this case-- better documented and cautiously explicated -- that that.Shadow Play: The Untold Story of the Robert F. Kennedy Assassination

2 comments about Angel of Vengeance: The "Girl Assassin," the Governor of St. Petersburg, and Russia's Revolutionary World.

1. Ana Siljak's "Angel of Vengeance" is proof positive that every once in awhile, an extraordinarily talented academic historian can breathe life into a long-dead era and make it accessible to an audience far broader than his or her professional peers. This book is an absolute gem, impeccably researched, engagingly written with a narrative style that reflects the tensions and drama of her subject matter. The book chronicles the first act in the "Age of Assassinations," when an aristocratic woman with revolutionary sentiments killed the governor of St. Petersburg with a revolver she'd concealed under her clothing. Her subsequent trial became a spectacle, the pre-revolutionary Russian equivalent of the Lindberg trial of the 1930's. The assassination and trial became one of the keystone moments that fueled the revolutionary fever which ultimately toppled the Tzar's regime a few decades later.
   
   Siljak has done an outstanding job of blending craft and research into a highly readable, fascinating snapshot of late-nineteenth century Russia. I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
   
   [...]



2. I recently finished reading Angel of Vengeance by Ana Siljak. The story was rich with vivid descriptions of the life of the Russian people, those oppressed, the privileged, and those who endeavored to change the status quo. In light of events in the world today, I was intrigued with the background given on the various radical groups that attempted to engage the peasants to overthrow the government. Intertwined with all of this is the fascinating personal story of a young woman. The journey documented in the book of Vera Zasulich's internal outrage toward public officials, the validation of her feelings gleaned from her veracious readings of radical publications and her interactions with infamous terrorists, to her decision to act on her own and assassinate the governor is a winning combination. The unintended consequences of her actions extend the story to show us the impact she had on the world and individuals already familiar to us such as Oscar Wilde. This book is educational, thought provoking and very entertaining.

5 comments about Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza.

1. This book is a sniper's look at the assassination and the scene.
   Mr.Roberts theory of "crossfire" or "triangulation of fire" is excellent,especially considering his military experience.
   I think he may be correct about the location of the hit teams.
   Were the hit teams made up of a Corsican assassin and a member of ZR/Rifle? The author isn't the only writer that has offered that theory.
   Craig Roberts theory about what happened to the President's body aboard Air Force 1 is intriguing! His investigation into the aircraft and strange activity related to the flight was good also.
   
   What is debatable is the identity of those responsible for the murder.
   It seems most likely that the mafia was working with the CIA to committ the crime with J.Edgar Hoover working for the mafia to cover it up.
   
   This book is worth reading for the insight offered by the author considering his experience and knowledge.



2. This book is definitely for the Kennedy addict. It is riveting and spellbinding. I could not put it down. Craig Roberts gives a historical background that expands more than 230 years. His explanations are clear, concise and very believable. He spells out exactly who orchestrated John Kennedy's assassination and the reasons behind it, both of which most people have never heard before. Every American should read this book because the entity responsible for Kennedy's death is alive and well and still operating without impunity within the U.S. government. You will not be disappointed.



3. I have been researching the JFK assassination since it happened and I have to tell you that if I were to compile a book of information pertaining to the assassination this would have been the book I would have written.
   It is absolutely packed with info that we basically knew and then some that we really didn't know.
   It is very well written and answers a multitude of questions that needed to be answered, no wonder the world will never know the truth about this and other things in world history that for the most part just gets brushed aside.
   If you really want or need to know the truth then this is the book for you!



4. I will just quote from the book itself:
   ""How in the world could anyone look at that {Zapruder} film and say that the fatal head strike had come from the rear? The so-called experts who stated that the rearward jerk of Kennedy's head was due to 'muscle reaction,' 'jet force from an erupting bullet' or some other violation of the laws of physics, had obviously never served in combat, where witnessing high-velocity bullet strikes was commonplace..."
   
   "Some of the supporters of the Warren Commission...stated that the bullet came from the rear because the eruption of brain matter and blood came out of the front of the president's skull. I saw something else. In a head shot, the exit wound, due to the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, explodes in a conical formation in the down-range direction of the bullet. Yet in the Zapruder film, I could plainly see that the eruption was not a conical shape to the front of the limo, but instead was an explosion that cast fragments both up and down in a vertical plane, and side to side in a horizontal plane. There was only one explanation for this: an exploding or 'frangible' bullet. Such a round explodes on impact--in exactly the manner depicted in the film."
   
   A seasoned veteran (sniper) of the Vietnam war stood at the `snipers-nest' and released it was all a lie; nuff said.



5. Immediately upon reading this book I knew in my heart that the author had hit upon a highly probable answer to the question that has been lurking in the minds of millions since that dreadful day in Dallas. Now I am not going to go into specifics in this review, rather I am going to relate in my own way why I think the author is right and I would encourage you to get a copy of this book and read it and form your own opinion.
   
   If you look at a magician, his primary purpose is not to entertain you with feats of magic, but more along the lines of deceiving you into believing that which he (the magician) presents to you as the truth and in doing so, makes you believe that which he wants you to believe. Actually I guess a better way of saying it is that the magician presents his deception to you in such a way that your subconscious convinces your consciousness to believe wholeheartedly in that which was presented to you by the magician. Now I know that this seems to be way of course with the subject matter of this review, but trust me, it is actually dead on.
   
   Now we all know that a certain group, or collection, of individuals was responsible for the death of Kennedy. Now do we know for certain who they were and their names? No, but we do know that they did exist and I am sure that some of them may still be alive to this day, although the longer that time passes the greater the probability that they will expire from old age without every being tried for their crimes, at least as we know it.
   
   Now if your ultimate goal is the eradication of a certain person, it really doesn't matter to you how that eradication takes place, or who does it, as long as the goal is accomplished. Of course you wouldn't want any of it traced back to you, which is why you want to have someone else do it. Or better yet, have someone else do it with a motive so far removed from your own that the odds of anyone even remotely suspecting you would be likened to the proverbial needle in a haystack and someone that will kill the person for you without even knowing that they did. All the time thinking that they were killing that person for their own reasons. Now to better enhance your chances of never being suspected, let's multiply that by several times and you now have a smokescreen of epic proportions with the finger pointing at several different organizations or persons with each one having a slightly different motive. None of which are even close to your own. See the beauty of it already?
   
   In law enforcement there is an old saying that goes something like this, "If you want to find out who did it, follow the money." And that is exactly what the author does.
   
   Let's look at the most common theories on who was responsible for killing Kennedy. Please take note that I did not say who killed Kennedy, but who was responsible for killing Kennedy. Remember what I said earlier about getting someone else to do it for you.
   
   1. Lee Harvey Oswald - acting alone RIDICULOUS
   2. The Mafia - NOPE
   3. The CIA - NOPE
   4. The Cubans - NOPE
   5. The Russians - NOPE
   6. Aliens from outer space - I KNOW REALLY RIDICULOUS, BUT AREN'T THE OTHERS JUST AS BAD!
   
   Now I am not implying that some of these didn't have a role in it, I am just saying that they are not responsible for it. Who is? Well purchase this book and read it. I believe that if you do that, this book will more than answer that question.
   
   All of those people and/or groups listed are merely the smoke, and you all know that where there's smoke there's fire, and this book shows you the fire.

2 comments about Assassination of Jesse James.

1. Okay, the story has been told better, but having studied this, I can assure that Hansen has captured the dialog perfectly. I am reviewing this obscure work because few books have captured period dialog better. Enjoy.



2. An old university friend who taught creative writing told me about this book several years ago. I'd never heard of Hansen, but once I started this I couldn't put it down, and I've made a point of finding and reading every new thing he writes. Every one of Hansen's books is different, he doesn't stick with a particular "type" when it comes to his fiction.

   I told friends about this book, and those who read it were blown away with the way this story is told. I was never so glad that a book was reprinted as when this one came out. I bought several copies and sent them to friends.

5 comments about Programmed to Kill: Lee Harvey Oswald, the Soviet KGB, and the Kennedy Assassination.

1. Not only does Gen. Pacepa claim that Lee Oswald was a pawn of Soviet foreign intelligence, but that Carousel Club owner Jack Ruby was working as an intelligence agent for the Cuban DGI.
   Believe what you will (and many hold weirder beliefs about the JFK than Pacepa's i.e. that a Secret Service agent mistaken blew off Kennedy's head with an errant shot from a machine gun, or that limo driver Bill Greer turned around and dispatched his boss with a .45), but a growing and convincing body of research shows that Oswald was, as he said, "a patsy" while Ruby was, as widely believed in Europe, assigned to silence Oswald.
   Since 1959, the patsy had been entwined in international intrigues from Russia to New Orleans to Mexico. His most recent focus had been on the Cuban crisis and he may have been privy to the government's super-secret plans to invade the island and/or assassinate Castro (see Lamar Waldron's book, "Ultimate Sacrifice" and or David Talbot's "Brothers").
   In any case, Oswald had to go.
   KGB officers have come forward to attest to their close scrutiny of Oswald while he lived in Minsk and their confusion over his purpose or possible value to Soviet goals. They didn't want to touch him with a ten-foot-pole much less train him to knock off a U.S. president.
   This book appears to be intentionally misleading. Readers must wonder who Gen. Pacepa is taking orders from these days.



2. Ion Mihai Pacepa has yet to convince me that the former Soviet Union was directly behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy on this very date, forty-four years ago. I do, however, take him seriously and will do further research on the matter. It is plausible, but would the Russians take such a risk? How might they possibly know for sure the American Left would eagerly contend that right-wing American fanatics were somehow behind the murder? But the author is probably right on target in saying the following:
   
   "With respect to the assassination, the interests of Lyndon Johnson, the new president, happened to coincide with Khrushchev's. President Johnson faced elections in less than a year, and any conclusion implicating the Soviet Union would have forced him to take unwanted political and even military action." It is indeed quite safe to assume that Johnson, on a gut level, would prefer to run from reality. The man already had enough on his plate with our growing Vietnam involvement. Also, the leftists within his own political party were sure to throw constant roadblocks in his way. There is another book that readily compliments Pacepa's work. It is James Piereson's Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism.



3. Pacepa's proofs that Lee Harvey Oswald was a Soviet agent, along with the standard KGB ploy of providing their nerdy recruits with a sexual-cookie wife, are irrefutable. Pacepa's speculation that the evil Khrushchev, Stalin's lickspittle, who hated the young and suave Kennedy, assisted the assassination plans by sponsoring Oswald's return to the US after rifle and spy training are also credible.
   
   What is curious is Pacepa's exculpation of Yuriy Nosenko from having been sent deliberately by the USSR, after Kennedy's assassination, to defect with misinformation about the Soviet Union's involvement. Pacepa alleges that Nosenko, who was not in the KGB but the VGU, did not know Oswald's task because the VGU's files did not have all the pertinent information on Oswald. Nosenko however was the major reason that the US accepted the lie that the KGB was not involved in Oswald's plot. Is Pacepa making an honest mistake about Nosenko's phony defection? or is Pacepa creating what amounts to a legal brief for Nosenko's innocence? And if he is, why?
   
   Welcome to the House of Mirrors that is spyworld. In most cases, only the very inside "players" ever get to know the whole truth. For more information on the circumstances surrounding Nosenko's highly suspicious defection and exculpation of the Soviet Union, read the book, "Spy Wars," by retired CIA agent, Tennent Bagley.



4. I have read a great deal about the Kenendy assassination, but I have never seen anything with such a unique perspective about Oswald's motives. No one has bothered to look at the situation from his viewpoint, which is odd, considering that Oswald is the only one to date who has been formally accused of the crime.
   
   Of course it is based on existing evidence, but Pacepa's position inside the Soviet intelligence machine gives him far more credibility than your average conspiracy researcher. This book does not end the debate, of course, but it competently addresses the most seldom-investigated theory in the canon -- that of Soviet involvement.
   
   The CIA is the organization everyone loves to hate in this conspiracy, but isn't it possible that this was deliberate disinformation fueled by the KGB, as found in the Mitrokhin archive?



5. Although this book pulls in some unrelated items and stretches to maintain its thesis, it is at least worthy of as much consideration as ANY of the "The CIA did it" tomes. There are five points that stand out in this book & its surounding issues:
   
   1) All assassinations in history have either been committed by a dedicated, suicidal assassin, or were the product of dumb luck. For example, no writer could have come up with a more improbable story than the murder of Archduke Francis Ferdinand and his wife.
   
   2) There is no worse organization to achieve an assassination than a large, fractured governmental bureaucracy, constantly fighting turf wars and concerned with betrayal and oversight from exogenous personnel. The KGB did not qualify at the time as such an organization but the CIA did (and does today to an even greater extent.)
   
   3) Only the PP department in the Agency (& only a few individuals within it) were severely impacted by the Bay of Pigs. Most of the ill-feelings in the Agency during the remainder of Kennedy's time as President were directed at Robert Kennedy, the inexperienced loose cannon bent on murdering Castro and who was micro-managing Agency operations to that effect.
   
   4) The Cuban Missile Crisis eventually brought about Khruschev's fall, and as he was losing power, could readily have sought to assassinate the individual he blamed for his decline. Whether he did so and how, is central to this book.
   
   5) For the benefit of other reviewers, it should be noted that the firing of the three shots have been reliably replicated, including the "magic bullet" shot. There remains no technical question as of this writing that those shots, although lucky, could have been made by Oswald from his putative firing point.
   
   This books adds a valid point of discussion to the ever-lasting analysis of the Kennedy assassination. Like all such books, one must read it carefully and critically. Obviously, the criticisms are many and highly charged, and I leave them to the reader as affected by his own political viewpoint.

5 comments about Regicide: The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy.

1. Regicide provides a good overview of the the facts surrounding the JFK assassination, and offers what it claims to be documentation that the plot originated in the CIA. Regicide relies heavily on a DIA reports which summarizes Soviet intelligence investigation into the assassination, and what it claims to be the original documents of something called OPERATION ZIPPER; the removal of President John F Kennedy. The DIA documentation is believable because, it basically summarizes that physical evidence and provides background information on Oswald and Jack Ruby which is pretty much known fact at this point. As for the OPERATION ZIPPER documents, I suspect they're antoher case of planted disinformation. The facts show that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK, however, I'm yet to see any credible evidence that that the CIA authorized the plot. CIA Director John McCone was Kennedy's appointed man, it doesn't make sense that he'd authorize a plot to kill JFK. Overall, Regicide is a very quick read for background information on the JFK assassination, but far from the final word on the topic.



2. Mr. Douglas purports to be in possession of "secret files" furnished to him by Robert Crowley.
   
   In fact Gregory Douglas never met Robert Crowley.
   
   Robert Crowley regarded Douglas as a harmless eccentric.
   
   I know this to be a fact because I am Robert Crowley's son.
   
   Legal action was considered pointless since Douglas has no assets and a trial would only produce publicity for Douglas's book.



3. Good, but ULTIMATE SACRIFICE the best book ever
   While I thought this book was worthwhile in many respects, ULTIMATE SACRIFICE is simply the best book ever on the JFK assassination.Still, worth your time.
   
   Vince Palamara-JFK/ Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of two books, in over 30 other author's books, etc.)
   Pittsburgh, PA



4. Interesting how the detail of the DIA report confirms data that is already available from various other sources and books. Particularly interesting that the DIA report states that the final, frontal, head-shot bullet was mercury filled so as to explode and fragment. This is exactly what James Files claims in his confession to being the grassy knoll assassin. [...]
   
   Of course, everything depends upon the DIA report being genuine, but there is nothing in this report that stands out as being incorrect.



5. I tried to contact both, but it was fruitless. Like one fellow said, there may may a number of facts here, even those which are accidentally correct.
   
   I'd still like to be able to submit a question to the author or publisher....

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

1. 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.



2. 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 !



3. 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.



4. 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.



5. 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.

5 comments about THE LAST TSAR: THE LIFE AND DEATH OF NICHOLAS II.

1. This was a great book written during the time that the Romanov bones had been uncovered. It gives an interesting portrayl of Nicholas and Alexandra. Most interesting of all is the love story between Nicholas and his former mistress, Mathilde Kschessinka, who years later would meet a woman claiming to be the daughter of the Tsar (Anna Anderson) and she would recognize her as his daughter because of the 'Emperor's look'.
   
   It is somewhat dated however. Since this book has been published, Russian and American scientists have argued passionately amonst themselves as to whether the remains of Grand Duchess Marie or Anastasia are missing. Then the bones were tested for DNA and proved a match and then they were compared with the tissue of Anna Anderson 'proving' she was not a Romanov. However, these tests are not as valid today as they were then. For more on that, visit my website: http://www.geocities.com/anastasiagrandduchess/
   In 1998, the bones were interred in the Cathedral of Saint Paul, although the Russian Orthodox Church rejected the authenticity of the remains.



2. With Radzinsky the art comes before the history and that's why this is my favourite addition to the "Romanov canon". This is not to overlook how thrilling in terms of new material "The Last Tsar" was when it was first translated and published (the "Yurovsky Note" comes to mind), and all those lovely until then unknown archive sources. These opened up new avenues of thought and allowed Radzinsky to theorise in a way I found compelling. Except, how much of it could be trusted?
   
   This is the problem with this subject in total. It's an epoch in recent history in the process of being re-constructed, after 70 years of communism in effect shut Russian imperial history down. A detailed picture of imperial Russia at the end of empire is in the process of being written. But in Radzinsky's account I caught the flavour of the times and that's more important to me than measuring his facts, weighing his sources. Most serious readers on this subject know enough in 2006 to discount the more imaginative flights in this book, and for everyone else it's a glorious, rackety, heart-rending read.



3. The history is all there in detail. Very interesting, particuarly if you are into tzar history like I am. However, the book is really hard to read. It usually takes me no longer than a week to read a book, but this one actually took me almost 2 months.



4. I absolutely loved this book. Once I started reading, I couldn't put the book down. This was the first biography about Tsar Nicholas II that I had ever read. It gives excellent background information about the country, its history and the politics, so even if you're not at all familiar with Russian history/politics, you can still follow. Excellent purchase!!



5. A man is sitting at a book-covered table in the Central State Archive of the October (1917) Revolution in Moscow. The surviving diaries of the last imperial family of Russia are there, unclassified at last. Reading them, his thoughts carrying him back and forth in time, the man is moved when he finds pressed flowers in the journals of the tsar's daughters: "Souvenirs of a destroyed life".
   
   Edvard Radzinsky is that haunted man, sitting at a table strewn with memories of a broken dynasty. "The Last Tsar" is the product of his research and his sadness. A playwright, Raszinsky is well-qualified to explore the human depths of the lives of Tsar Nicholas II, his family, and the others who were part of their doomed world.
   
   The book gained a great deal of publicity when it was first released here for its sensational assertion that two of the family may have escaped execution on that terrible night in 1918. And this work of popular history merits the attention. This book is likely to become the definitive work on the last years of Tsar Nicholas II and his family.
   
   Rarely is a work of history so beautifully written, so thoroughly researched, and so permeated with emotion and insight. A great debt is owed to the translator for her lyrical and poetic voice while retaining a sense of historical authority.
   
   Radzinsky's attitudes and feelings are juxtaposed with those of the two main characters of the story-- Tsar Nicholas and his queen, Alexandra. The inclusion of the author's feelings is unorthodox in a historical work however, in this case, it's a success and it offers a perspective that is both personal and realistic.
   
   The tone of the book is conversational rather than scholarly. It is not difficult to imagine Radzinsky weeping as he sits at the table covered with diaries, though he does not say he did. Certainly, the depth and honesty of his feelings are so evident that we find it difficult to hold back tears ourselves as the tragedy of the Romanov family unfolds.
   
   Radzinsky has a deep respect for the dead Tsar and his wife, but he clearly loves those children. They are the classic innocence, doomed by the destruction of their grand and insulated world.
   
   In the early 90s, exhumation of what is assumed to be the family's grave revealed only nine skeletons. Although the accepted number of victims has always been put at eleven. Even more recently, two bodies were found nearby to the execution site and burial site that some experts believe to be the missing bodies.
   
   The book and the forensic examination raise again the persistant belief that not only the Princess Anastasia, but also the Tsar Evitch Alexi, heir to the Russian throne may have survived the execution. However, these most recent exhumations near the main burial pit appear to show that neither Alexi nor Anastasia survived.
   
   One of the participants in the execution later wrote that Alexi and his four sisters remained alive after the shooting had stopped.
   
   "This had amazed the Commandant", he wrote, "since we had aimed straight for the heart. It was also surprising that the bullets from the revolvers bounced off for some reason and ricocheted, jumping around the room like hail."
   
   That night, the children were wearing clothing into which the family diamonds had been sewn. Seeing that the bullets had not done its jobs, the killers decided to finish off the children with bayonets. A strong, although essentially circumstantial case, is presented that Alexi and Anastasia may, in fact, have survived.
   
   This conclusion appears to have been recently overturned by the finding of the two bodies near the main burial site.
   
   "The Last Tsar" was written as the Soviet Union, the author's homeland itself, was collapsing. The two Russian Revolutions, those of 1917 and 1989, are often intertwined in the book. In the lonely archives and libraries of a dying country, Radzinsky fell into a no-man's land of historical whirlwinds where huge and incomprehensible became understandable. He offers insights into the character of Russian history where, ". . . great and terrible events. . . are usually due to someone's stupidity or laziness," and to the apparently cyclical nature of history.
   
   "Oh, our bitter, bitter revolution," he writes.
   
   This is a book about processes. The tragedy of a family, the drama of a world turned upside down and the mechanics of research and writing are among the subjects.
   
   Radzinsky's superb use of diaries and letters, his simple straightforward arguments and his penetrating thought-provoking style combined to make a very entertaining and convincing book.

5 comments about The Skewed Throne.

1. I was so totally hooked on this book from page one. Fantasy novels are one of my favorites and Joshua has an awesome imagination. Varis is an extremely fun character to follow and it is interesting to see what will happen to her every time you turn the page. She has a very exciting and interesting life. Very, very good and can't wait for the second one.



2. I'm very happy to have discovered Joshua Palmatier. His books are page-turners-- I read the first two in one absorbed afternoon, and then promptly ordered the third. The characters are vivid and real, and grow convincingly through the trilogy. While he uses classic themes, the books are not formulaic, and I can't wait to see what he comes up with next. Some of my other favorite authors are Roger Zelazny, Robin McKinley, any Wollheim anthology, Theodore Sturgeon, Delia Marshall Turner, and Patricia McKillip. It's great to add a new writer to this pantheon.



3. This book is awesome. The characters are portrayed in such a way that they come to life. You get sucked in to the plot and don't mind that it has a couple of slow chapters. I love how Varis is written and how the author let her stay true to her personality as the book goes along. I have found a new author to enjoy and am truly glad that I bought all three books in the series at once. I was hesitant to try a new author, but I am glad that I did.



4. "The Skewed Throne" follows an orphaned girl (V--) in a fantasy city. Surviving by stealing food, V-- meets a cop and starts earning food (no money, just food) as a spy, locating criminals. V-- has a fascinating magical power, that enlivens this novel. Expect the poor part of town, dagger fights, and great character motivation.
   
   The ending is forecast way too strongly, the length a bit long, and the fights entirely rediculous. Reminiscent of old Westerns, the least wound kills instantly, but V-- can receive any wound without consequence. V--'s motivations are well presented and consistent, and I liked that she stays desperately poor for most of the book. Overall, an entertaining and fun read, worth the purchase.
   
   This book will appeal to readers who enjoyed Devlin's Luck (Sword of Change, Book 1) or Forged Without Fire: A Champion for Catlover or Cast in Shadow (The Chronicles of Elantra, Book 1).



5. This first book in a series of three leaves me at the edge of my seat for more. With a dark start, this book begins by catapulting you into the shoes of parent-less teenager who needs to do whatever it takes to survive including steal and kill. Though stealing and killing would usually not keep me compelled, the vivid descriptions of all of senses from the main character's point of view; a strong story line culminating in twists, turns, and surprises; and a slow methodical journey into a girl's development of sense of self and ultimate revelation of fate kept me turning the pages.
   
   I've now read the second book of this series, and am thoroughly impressed.