5 comments about Conspiracy in Camelot: The Complete History of the Assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

1. Jerry Kroth's Conspiracy in Camelot, may be the most significant contribution to date towards understanding the underlying dynamics of the Kennedy assassination. His artfully written synthesis of well developed academic research and psychological insights, yield a fascinating, certain classic.

   Kroth is the first author to delineate the role of John F. Kennedy's mental instability, and its manifestation as sexual addiction, as key role in his untimely death. Many of John F Kennedy's behavioral patterns, are modeled after his father, Joseph Kennedy. As a result of sexual and economic acting out, both father and son were subsequently brought into close contact with mafia and other underworld connections. These dark linkages played a prominent role in Kennedy's untimely murder, and the deaths of scores of others with Kennedy connections.

   Conspiracy in Camelot rivets the reader like the finest detective novel. But the substantive new insights and statistical data that Kroth provides, will influence the historical perspective on America's most romantic and admired president.

   Bette U. Kiernan
   Palo Alto, California




2. Dr. Kroth again confronts cultural icons with psychological spelunking. This time it is Kennedy's sexual addiction which places him in contact with dangerous characters acting behind the scenes in shady government and greedy, gangland business. No thinking person in America can accept that Kennedy was killed by a single, lucky loner. Written with grace and style Kroth peals the layers of the onion to the sweet center and leaves no doubt that this is not the America you thought it was. Our president was taken from us for all too tawdry reasons. There is no clear hero in this story and no clear victim but there is insight which will keep you thinking long after you have finished this book. Bang for the buck, I give it a hearty five stars.



3. Dr. Kroth uses his well-tuned research skills to bundle up the plethora of evidence in a scholarly package of text that is easy to understand and absorb. Join Dr. Jerry Kroth on a psychohistorical quest to excavate, illuminate, and evaluate forty years of JFK assassination evidence in his newest work, Conspiracy in Camelot: The Complete History of the Assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. If you are a JFK assassination aficionado, then here's a book that will reinforce your passion and satisfy your desire for new information. If you're not a JFK assassination aficionado but have thought about being one only to fear being over taken by the over 700 sources of information on the subject before you come to terms with who killed JFK and why, then you must read this book! As Dr. Kroth attempts to base all conjecture and speculation on evidence gleaned from one source or another, he respects his readers' rights to formulate their own evaluations and conclusions. I especially enjoy the skill with which Dr. Kroth organizes the facts, posits the possibilities, profiles the players, and scopes out the pros and cons of each assassination theory associated with the greatest murder mystery of the 20th century. Quotes by those who walked and talked in the Kingdom of JFK's Camelot permeate the text and add a pinch of intrigue. Anyone fascinated with the study of collective psychology will be mesmerized with Dr. Kroth's discussion of the symbolic meaning of the psychological implications of the JFK assassination on the American consciousness - then and now. For those of us who delight in reading books by authors who aren't afraid to say what they think in a creative and thought-provoking manner, Conspiracy in Camelot does not disappoint. I give this book 5 stars!



4. "Conspiracy In Camelot" could probably also go by the alternate title of: "The More JFK Assassination Theories, The Better".
   
   Despite the fact that all of the physical evidence points toward Lee Harvey Oswald as President John F. Kennedy's lone murderer on November 22, 1963, books like this still get published year after year. I've yet to completely figure out why this continuously occurs.
   
   Some thoughts re. the JFK case (with a healthy dose of common sense attached)........
   
   THE "SINGLE-BULLET THEORY":
   
   Virtually every last scrap of physical evidence surrounding the double-man wounding of President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John Connally on 11/22/63 "fits" to a tee within a pro-"SBT" solution/context. Common sense also supports a pro-SBT conclusion as well.
   
   Most conspiracy believers think that "common sense" re. this topic supports the anti-SBT side. When, in actuality, it's precisely the opposite. The anti-SBT scenario is a billion times more silly-sounding and undoable than is the SBT. (Not that we've ever been treated to a full-fledged "version" of what that pro-CT, anti-SBT scenario might entail -- since virtually no CTer ever wants to look foolish enough to actually cough up the shot-by-shot scenario.)
   
   But any conspiracy theorist must surely realize the craziness and unbelievable string of "coincidences" that they must believe in if they don't want to accept the Single-Bullet Theory as a fact....don't they? I truly wonder if they do realize this. But just saying "the silly SBT is impossible" is not nearly good enough to discredit its viability.
   
   By simply watching the very good cable-TV documentary "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet" (aired in late 2004 on The Discovery Channel), a lot of the "mystery" surrounding the plausibility of the "magic" bullet and the SBT in general should be wiped from a person's mind. Because that "re-creation" test of the SBT bullet path mimicked the real deal of bullet CE399 very closely.
   
   The test didn't perfectly re-create everything right to the letter, true -- but no such test will ever be able to simulate TO THE INCH everything CE399 did, because JFK's and John Connally's bodies, naturally, weren't available to utilize in such a simulated SBT test.
   
   But just watch that Discovery Channel program, and after doing so ask yourself this question -- If the SBT is truly a piece-of-junk theory, could those guys associated with that cable-TV documentary have REALLY re-created the same basic damage path and trajectory that the real CE399 bullet is said to have taken, and then also have that test bullet emerge in one piece, without any fragmentation to the test bullet at all?
   
   The test bullet was flattened more than the real CE399, yes -- but the test missile remained completely INTACT following the SBT re-creation, just exactly like 399. The test bullet didn't break up into pieces, even after having travelled the same basic path that the real #399 travelled, and also having caused an approximate amount of damage in the two surrogate bodies.
   
   It was a pretty impressive "re-creation" of the SBT and CE399's capabilities if you ask me. Not 100% perfect. But that's never gonna happen in a million years. And here's another thing that couldn't have happened in a million years either -- i.e., 3 gunmen fire 3 separate bullets into 2 men (as many conspiracy theorists actually believe did happen in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63), and then, afterwards, somehow these three seemingly-associated (but supposedly, per CTers, separately-created) wound paths, trajectories, and actual wounds inside the two victims so closely appear (falsely) as if all of this stuff COULD have occurred with just a single shot and a single bullet labelled Commission Exhibit #399 that the Warren Commission and follow-up investigations actually propose that this THREE-BULLET MIRACLE SHOOTING was, indeed, just a ONE-BULLET occurrence.
   
   Another excellent source to seek out to establish the workability of the SBT is computer animator Dale K. Myers, who worked for about a decade on an animation project that simulates the inner workings of the SBT and the entire assassination shooting sequence (based primarily on the Abraham Zapruder Film).
   
   Almost all of Mr. Myers' computer model stems from "Key Framing" his animated model to the actual Zapruder Film itself. To quote from Myers' own website:
   
   "In essence, the key frame process had created a motion file of Zapruder's camera in 3D space."
   
   Mr. Myers' work is incredibly detailed and thorough...and IMO should be looked upon as a breakthrough with respect to solving the long-asked question of whether the SBT was a "doable" deed from the Book Depository's Sniper's Perch or not. And the answer to that question, thanks to Mr. Myers' efforts (and others as well) is a resounding and undeniable "Yes".
   
   I've heard it said by some CTers that Mr. Myers has intentionally skewed data in order to make his computer animation more "SBT friendly". But, seeing as how Mr. Myers was a believer in a JFK conspiracy up until about 1994 or so (pre-dating his work on his animation), if he were to have had any desire to "fudge" the results of his work, he almost certainly (at that time in the mid-90s) would have wanted to fudge it to lead toward CONSPIRACY (and an anti-SBT conclusion), rather than a pro-SBT stance.
   
   Who amongst us wants to potentially look like a fool to others by changing our position 180 degrees on a given subject that we've studied for years? But Dale Myers did just that by going from a conspiracy believer to an LNer in the 1990s. And if he were going falsify any data when he began his animation project in the mid-90s (at a time when he was still a CTer), does anybody think he'd want his data to show a result in favor of the SBT (a position he opposed for years)? That's just kooky.
   
   But Mr. Myers was big enough to swallow any pro-CT pride he might have had and simply followed the evidence to where it ultimately led him -- to the Sniper's Nest in the Texas School Book Depository, and to Lee Harvey Oswald .... as well as to the SBT being a concrete scientific FACT.
   
   With the Single-Bullet Theory in place, here's what exists:
   
   1.) One bullet (CE399).
   
   2.) Zero "missing" bullets to account for.
   
   3.) Zapruder Film evidence which validates the SBT (victims reacting at precisely the same point in time).
   
   4.) A wound path from JFK to JBC which validates the SBT, whether any conspiracist wants to admit it or not.
   
   5.) No bullets or large bullet fragments found inside the neck or back regions of JFK's body; plus no major neck damage whatsoever in JFK (validating the undeniable fact that a bullet went completely through him).
   
   6.) No vehicle damage to the back-seat or jump-seat areas of the X-100 limousine, validating the fact that the one bullet that undeniably exited JFK's throat went somewhere else other than into the limousine seats...with that one place, without doubt, being John Connally's back (which was the only possible place for the bullet to go if it did not hit other victims or the vehicle in flight).
   
   7.) An elongated entry wound on Connally's back, validating the SBT's flight path...i.e., a bullet which was tumbling upon entering Governor Connally's body.
   
   8.) An amount of damage to John Connally's wrist which also validates the probability of the SBT; i.e., if that bullet that crashed into Connally's wrist had NOT gone through JFK first, it was determined that JBC's wrist would have been more severely damaged.
   
   9.) Bullet fragments from Connally's wrist wound are consistent with bullet CE399 (with a very good degree of probability, those fragments came from that one exact bullet, "to the exclusion"; not 100% probability, true...but there's a high pct. of certainty that CE399 was inside JBC's body on 11/22/63).
   
   10.) The incredible "coincidence" would exist -- if the SBT is wrong -- of having John Connally being hit in the back (by a turning-sideways bullet) at just precisely (or very close at any rate) the exact point on his far right back where he would have also been struck had a bullet coming out of JFK's neck at a downward trajectory of approximately 17 degrees continued on to strike Governor Connally. What do you suppose the odds are of this occurring via a separate non-SBT shot? Must be pretty remote (at best).
   
   11.) And #10 probably had no way of happening in the first place...because JFK was in the gunman's line of fire when Connally was hit by the bullet that struck him in the back.
   
   12.) And the amazing "coincidence" of THREE separate gunmen being able to pelt the two victims with bullet holes (from THREE different rifles, per any conspiracy-flavored account of the event) in such a perfect arrangement on the two men to make a "SBT" even remotely feasible or plausible in the first place. Such a perfect connect-the-wounds feat would be more appropriate within a Warner Brothers' Saturday-morning cartoon. (And yet CTers laugh at the SBT?? Get real.)
   
   13.) And one of the biggest questions that shall never go away via any anti-SBT scenario --- WHERE ARE THE BULLETS that must "replace" the Single-Bullet Theory's CE399 bullet? Show the world just ONE. Please. (Of course, CTers really need three bullets to replace the SBT, if 399 is a "plant", as all CTers believe is the case -- but I would settle for just ONE measly non-399 bullet. I'd love to see it. But, alas, we never shall; because those anti-SBT bullets never existed in the first place.)
   
   In short....the Single-Bullet Theory is a rock-solid fact, and has been since 11/22/63. Every scrap of evidence supports the SBT being the way the shooting occurred (CTer scorn notwithstanding). And, frankly, such CTer scorn and scoffing at the SBT is meaningless and unimportant in the grand scheme of things. Because there hasn't been a single anti-SBT theory that has stood up to the overwhelming support and evidence that favors the SBT being true. And there never will be, IMO.
   
   But it would be nice if the "Anti-SBT" crowd could at least make an attempt at putting forth a detailed analysis of the way the shooting supposedly happened by coming up with something that makes MORE sense than the SBT (if possible)....and something that PROVES the SBT is a wild dream concocted out of thin air by Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission....and PROVE that an anti-SBT theory can hold up to critical scrutiny when weighing it against the EVIDENCE in the case. (And blindly proclaiming "All the evidence is faked" just isn't good enough, in my view.)
   
   I'm still awaiting that proof of the SBT being dead-wrong. And I think I'll be waiting for a long time to come.
   
   ---------------------------------------------------
   
   THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND WHERE IT LEADS:
   
   Anyone who bothers to study the documented PHYSICAL EVIDENCE in the two 11/22/63 murders (JFK's assassination plus policeman J.D. Tippit's killing, which many CTers, incredibly, feel was also not committed by Oswald) can easily see an "Oswald's Guilty As Sin" pattern emerging pretty quickly.
   
   By "physical evidence", I'm talking about bullets, fragments, fingerprints, fibers, guns, and bullet shells. And where does all of that kind of stuff lead? -- Answer: To Lee H. Oswald and ZERO other people. Could ALL of this evidence have really been "faked" in order to frame lovely lil' Lee? If anyone thinks that is the case, I'd suggest re-thinking that mindset. (And then read Page #246 of Larry Sturdivan's excellent book "The JFK Myths", to see what that ballistics expert has to say on that subject of mass evidence fakery.)
   
   Then study the eyewitness testimony of the 200+ Dealey Plaza witnesses. You'll easily find that the majority of witnesses did NOT think there were multiple shooters firing guns in the Plaza on 11/22/63. In fact, an incredibly-small percentile of less than 5% thought gunshots came from MULTIPLE directions. And a huge percentage of witnesses heard exactly three gunshots (including, to my knowledge, every single one of the news-gathering people in the media who were in a position to relay the immediate news of the shooting to the world via electronic means....radio, newswires, and television).
   
   The Zapruder Film shows JFK's head moving forward at the MOMENT OF IMPACT AT Z313, proving that the shot struck from the rear. Plus, there's no visible "spray" at the REAR of the head, which is not at all possible if Mr. Kennedy had the BACK of his head blown open.
   
   Has the Zapruder Film been faked too? Sorry, but that pro-conspiracy argument is almost as silly as the "Let's Use Several Different Riflemen To Frame Just One Patsy In The Book Depository" hunk of craziness that many theorists believe in (without noticing how utterly stupid such a "Patsy" plot is from every vantage point).
   
   To anybody who doesn't have a tendency to scream "Cover-Up!" and "All This Evidence Is Fake!" at the drop of a hat, the evidence surrounding the JFK assassination is telling the world who it was who killed President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit -- and that "who" was obviously Lee Harvey Oswald.
   
   To believe otherwise is to place your faith in a vast conspiracy involving God knows how many total individuals -- including (no doubt) many members of the Dallas Police force -- a DPD which just had one of "their own" killed like a dog in the street and who, per many CTers, didn't hesitate for one moment as they forged ahead with the framing of an innocent man for Tippit's death; and thusly the DPD evidently couldn't have cared less about allowing the "real killer(s)" to walk away scot-free.
   
   Doesn't that type of conspiracy-oriented mindset seem just a tad unrealistic when you think about it for a moment or two? A "CT" mindset, that is, which has the DPD willingly allowing the murderer(s) of a FELLOW OFFICER (AND FRIEND) to just waltz away with a "Free Murder" card?? That's just...insane.
   
   But many CTers believe that to be the case re. the Tippit crime. And common sense ALONE tells me that kind of unsupported CT talk concerning Tippit and the Dallas Police is full of holes. Which, in turn, taints a CTer's whole conspiracy case swirling around the John F. Kennedy assassination, in my opinion.
   
   ---------------------
   
   Was there a "Conspiracy In Camelot"? Sure there was -- there was a conspiracy among some individuals to keep President Kennedy's health issues a secret; and another conspiracy to keep JFK's constant womanizing a secret as well.
   
   But there was no multi-gun "conspiracy" with respect to his assassination. The physical evidence which connects only Lee Harvey Oswald to the President's murder verifies that fact quite clearly -- and always has.



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

5 comments about Bloody Treason: On Solving History's Greatest Murder Mystery : The Assassination of John F. Kennedy.

1. Great book , I have read many books on the JFK case and this book is one of the better ones available.



2. Mr. Twyman - It has been about three years since you attended a private meeting back East with several fellow JFK assassination
   researchers and historians. You were shown evidence that proved your published conclusions regarding alleged tampering of the
   Zapruder film to be incorrect. And you admitted to the group that the conclusions published in your book, Bloody Treason, were, indeed, incorrect.

   When will you be telling us your true beliefs regarding alleged tampering of the Zapruder film?

   Clint Bradford




3. I'm now in my 4th year of ongoing research into the lives/assassinations of JFK/RFK, which will soon culminate in the writing of a historical fiction volume(s). I have over 1,000 typed pages of notes in my laptop. I own 3-4 dozen books on the subjects, as well as numerous newspapers, magazines, and rolls of microfilm - to say nothing of the materials I have researched without buying them. I have been to Dealey Plaza, and I have reserched at the National Archives.
   The fascinating aspects of Noel Twyman's work lie not in his conclusions. His conclusions are, in fact, quite questionable. But the meticulous investigative approach he uses, and the myriad of information revealed is what makes this book worth its weight. He works backwards from the murder, outlining what needed to happen in order for the assassination to occur as it did, then working on what forces had the means/motive/opportunity to achieve each, and whitling down his list of suspects from there. It's an incredibly objective and revealing account of a great many things. I have told people before about how Oliver Stone's "JFK" is worth watching not because of what he thinks happened, but for all the information that is revealed along the way. This book mirrors that opinion and then some.



4. I guarantee if you read this book & you are the average person that is curious, you will know more about the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy than anyone in the media. The Z Film arguments of alteration are beyond my scope to know if the film was actually altered, rather than the known editing of missing frames, anyway forget about that-600 of the 900 pages are on suspects..it's all extremely interesting and well written. There are several people hooked up with Intell and the secret war against Cuba who spill the beans. It all comes together in that aspect, though latter chapters on Hoover and LBJ show their poor character, they aren't as powerful as the thrust of the book. The 40 pages or so on David Lifton's investigation tracing the different caskets, the different wrappings on the body from parkland hospital to Bethesda is well documented wth outstanding graphics, timeline chronology so forth. The chapters on the medical evidence are fantastic, the one on the X-Rays is extremely technical, but very important to the case. Also, the many, many photographs mainly of suspects( including Autopsy) are excellently reproduced, and several are very rare. Well worth the steep price..



5. 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
   
   BEST JFK ASSASSINATION BOOK: ULTIMATE SACRIFICE
   BEST JFK SECRET SERVICE BOOK: SURVIVOR'S GUILT BY YOURS TRULY :)

5 comments about Lincoln and Booth: More Light on the Conspiracy.

1. Lincoln And Booth: More Light On The Conspiracy is a close and revealing study of President Abraham Lincoln's assassination. Journalist, historian, and political scientist H. Donald Winkler sheds new light on the possible conspiracies and motives that may have been a factor in Lincoln's assassination. Black and white photographs combined with deftly researched and presented evidence make for an insightful and highly commended study of a terrible political murder that was to serve as a grim and symbolic epilogue to the American Civil War. Lincoln And Booth is an invaluable contribution to Civil War Studies reference collections and Lincoln Studies reading lists.



2. While not always an exciting read, LINCOLN AND BOOTH will give the reader lots to ponder regarding the various characters surrounding the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Author H. Donald Winkler has done extensive research and provides lots of insight into the major and minor players in the assassination of President Lincoln and the subsequent investigation. Winkler is obviously passionately interested in his subjects and some of his revelations are shocking. Were certain officials in the US Government actually Confederate sympathizers? Was Lincoln's Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton, part of the conspiracy? Stanton rushed to prosecute and execute 4 conspirators while ignoring others who played important roles in the conspiracy. Did he refuse clemency to the first female executed by the US government knowing she may have only been a minor player in the conspiracy? Did the assassination involve more than a handful of conspirators or does the path lead back to the White House and even the Confederate government? His research is extensive and there is plenty of fuel for thought but no conclusive answers the mystery of the conspiracy. Stories of missing documents and diaries fuel the conjecture. The suggestion that there was a much larger conspiracy is overwhelmingly strong. LINCOLN AND BOOTH is well worth a read for anyone interested in this fascinating period of history.



3. I've always been intrigued by the poor security given to the President during, literally, a time of civil war. "Lincoln and Booth" spent a good time on the characters and situations involved with this matter. What was also excellent was the questions posed by Winkler regarding the guard who accompanied Lincoln to Ford's theater, both prior to and after the assassination. It adds to the notion of conspiracy surrounding Lincoln's killing.



4. A Deluded Southern Sympathizer:
   
   He sprang from a great family of actors; his brother Edwin was an accomplished stage actor. J. W. did his deed so as to be famous in his own right. Many books have been written about John Wilkes Booth's participation in the Lincoln death. It is sad that so much blame was put on his shoulders.
   
   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 whose daughter married Zachary Taylor. I don't believe old Zach was a Rebel.
   
   "Killing Lincoln' as a one-man theatrical presentation, written by Amy Russell, was 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) was one of the most promising young Shakespearean actors of his day. Booth considered Lincoln an "American Caesar." Booth has been called "American Brutus." His father was named Brutus for sure.
   
   He was a very 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 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. Terry Weber played the dual role in the Knoxville production of "Killing Lincoln," and had both Lincoln and Booth down pat. I have read many books about Abraham Lincoln but not so many about John Wilkes Booth -- but am working on it.



5. I had just finished "American Brutus" by Kauffman when I picked this book up. In contrast to Kauffman's thesis that Booth was a singular mastermind who manipulated his friends and co-conspirators (and deliberately left a trail that would look like a vast conspiracy), this book takes the view that Booth was more of a cog in the larger Confederate plan late in the war. It is well worth reading the two books in sequence, as they view the same information so differently.
   
   As another reviewer has touched upon, I also was fascinated to learn about the problems/mysteries surrounding Lincoln's security detail on the night of the assassination. It was hard not to see a larger conspiracy as Winkler describes the Montreal-Confederate connections, the curious behavior of Edwin Stanton, and the backgrounds of several Booth accomplices (particularly Powell and Surratt).
   
   The book is accessible, though probably not as a way to first become familiarized with the subject matter. The story is less 'exciting' to read than Swanson's "Manhunt" (this by NO means detracted from my enjoyment - I much prefer the more 'scholarly' approach here); the information presented, and the detail with which the thesis is developed make this a valuable addition to any collection.

5 comments about The Night Attila Died: Solving the Murder of Attila the Hun.

1. First off, I'll disagree with this author and say that philology is in most ways an art, not a concrete science. His suggestion that by somehow reading into the subtext of existing and later documentary evidence regarding Attila's demise we can prove a 1,600-year-old act of murder is at best too optimistic and at worst absurdity itself, since from the start, rumor, hearsay and misinformation have been prevalent regarding the end of the great Hunnish king. I felt this book deserved four stars instead of the three I nearly gave it because Michael Babcock was obviously well-versed on his subject matter's life and the period in which he existed, but I cannot see clear to rating this book higher simply because it fails to achieve the lofty goal its author set for himself and promised in the title. Had this been a straightforward biography of Attila, I'd have been more impressed, since the life and times of this figure were indeed nicely-covered. Babcock also delves into the psychological effect the Hunnish invasions had on the populace of Europe, and I was impressed when at the start of chapter seven there was a discussion the discovery in modern times of a number of children's skeletons in and around Lugnano, Italy, dating to the time of Attila. Though victims of a malaria outbreak, it is the fact that these young people of a supposedly Christian era were interred via burial practices that harkened back to customs of pagan Rome that proves telling. Babcock and others feel that so terrifying to the Italians was the concept that Attila was coming, that they abandoned for a time the Christianity of their age in favor of a return to the earlier religion of a more glorious Rome. Fascinating stuff! Attila may very well have been murdered, since the means and motive were there, but I do not feel Babcock proved that a murder took place, and I don't think that after so long a time it is likely a smoking gun will ever come to light. The "Exhibits" Babcock uses to conclude the book were the most unimpressive pieces to his story. Instead of presenting conclusive evidence, Babcock tosses in everything but the proverbial kitchen sink, and offers nothing but circumstantial evidence that we already knew about. While a good read and a sound investigation of the age of Attila the Hun, this book does not prove he was murdered, only re-hashes the long-speculated fact that he might have been.



2. I waited with much anticipation for Babcock's book because I love historical mysteries. Sadly I have to say that I was disappointed in his effort. I definately feel that it could have benefitted from firmer editing. Babcock has a tendency to go off on tangents that make following his narrative more challenging than it should be. For example he spends a great deal of time arguing that one should take any historic account with a grain of salt because people back then were just as prone, as folks are now, to skew their accounts to a particular point of view. I have no argument with this and Babcock is right to make it, but he keeps bringing up this thought again and again to the point where I wanted to shout, "Okay, Okay, I get it!" As for his contention that Attila was murdered Babcock makes a good circumstantial case as to why this was done and who may have been behind it, but doesn't offer much in the way of particulars. For me this was a bit of a let down.
   
   I must say in the book's favor that Babcock's enthusiasm for his subject matter is quite infectious. It's obvious that he cares about this subject and whatever else one can say about the book it is not boring. He more than succeeded in getting me interested in late Roman history, something that I did not know a great deal about.
   
   So if you read the book just be ready to separate the wheat from the chaff.



3. Dr. Michael Babcock makes a compelling case that Attila the Hun did not die of natural causes - a nosebleed - but instead was murdered. Given the lifestyle Attila led, the liklihood of murder is a much higher probability in any case, than natural causes ... Like a modern detective the author examines the key players who had something to gain by Attila's death. He discovers the clues obtained from historical documents, some of which were altered in an attempt to mislead anyone who was looking for evidence, but just enough detail is left that points to an assasination plot which succeeded.
   
   The author suspected something was amiss in the generally accepted explanations for Attila's death when he was a student of philology (the study of reconstructing the past from words, taking into consideratin culture, history, phonetics and graphics). The author read the detailed account of Attila's death initially in the book "Gothic History" by Jordanes which included a tightly constructed explanation filled with precise details ... however the account was written a hundred years after Attila's death. It was written based on a historical document left by Priscus, a Fifth Century historian and diplomat. Priscus had attended Attila's court in 449 A.D. and a detailed description of this event survived in his autobiography. Unfortunately, Priscus's account of Attila's death did not survive, the only thing which remained was the second hand version written by Jordanes ...
   
   The most fascinating information contained within this book is how the politics of the past are revealed. At the time, the Roman Empire was separated into East and West: Marcinion was Emperor in the East and Valintinian III ruled as Emperor of Rome. Rome was losing some of its provinces as new nations in Europe were born from their ashes. Each of the two Empires had reasons to see Attila dead ... The book captures the imagination of the reader taking one back to ancient times. The reader's eyes are openedas to how different factions influenced and swayed each Empire and how power was wielded behind the scenes by those who could manipulate events to their own advantage. Whether or not the author is correct can not be factually proven but he provides enough information to make a great case for his side. Erika Borsos [pepper flower]



4. Other reviewers give you the whole book. I prefer to read it myself. And, this book provided new information (at least for me), an intelligent and logical progression of actions and reactions, and an interesting murder plot. I was particularly intrigued by how the author teased out his conclusions from fragments of the past and the use of language.
   A worthwhile book which should appeal to a wide variety of readers.



5. I must preface my review by stating that, before reading this book, I knew little about Attila other than his name. Overall, I found it to be a surprisingly fascinating and involving tale, and the "murder" thesis quite plausible. (The "died-of-a-nosebleed-while-in-a-drunken-stupor-on-his-wedding-night" yarn does indisputably sound like the setup for a really, really bad Monty Python sketch.) Unfortunately, the fact that no original, uncorrupted accounts of his death survive make it impossible to tell for certain what the first "official" account of Attila's death even really was. (If he was murdered, I'd like to think that even a bunch of Barbarians could cook up a better cover story than that.) However, I wish the author had shown a little modesty in pushing his theory. When your one source for a death is what one author said one earlier author said about one even earlier author's account, which itself was probably based on hearsay and propaganda...well, it's hard to be too sure of anything much. Babcock would perhaps have been better off just spelling out what little information we have, and let that speak for itself.
   
   That said, I'm still giving the book five stars, simply because, aside from being quite a lively read, it's inspired me to find out more about Attila and his decidedly strange times. I have to thank Babcock for that.
   
   By the way, am I the only one who would like to know, more than anything else involving this story, whatever became of Ildico?

No comments about The Warren Report: The Official Report on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

No comments about On Being Mad or Merely Angry: John W. Hinckley, Jr., and Other Dangerous People.

1 comments about The Assassination: Death of the President (Civil War).

1. This book, a volume in the Time-Life Civil War collection, is a good basic history of Lincoln's Assassination. As with the other volumes in the Time-Life series, this book has wonderful photographs and images from the Civil War period. I would recommend this book to people with little or no previous reading on Lincoln's assassination.

3 comments about History's Greatest Conspiracies: One Hundred Plots, Real and Suspected, That have Shocked, Fascinated, and Sometimes Changed the World.

1. Mr. Jeffers has written a fascinating book that captures 100 conspiracies stretching from the beginning of time (Adam & Eve) all the way up to more recent ones (Enron, the snipers in DC, etc.) Each encapsulated vignette is highly readable and gives details of the background of each conspiracy, not too much, but enough to whet your appetite to investigate the story further.
   
   Although Jeffers political viewpoint edges his way into the mix (he's obviously a conservative, given his preclusion to disparage Communists, but to either tone down or even dismiss anything that might reflect badly on conservatives and Repubicans), but this does not generally detract from the overall stories much.
   
   It doesn't cover every thing, of course, or the volume would most likely be unmanageable to even pick up, much less read. The author doesn't spend much time with the more esoteric theories that abound among the counterculture (only one piece deals with aliens ["Aliens Among Us"]). given this, its probably not the ideal book for the conspiracy theorists, but for just general knowledge it is worth the price.



2. Because I have an academic background in history, and because I worked in a library in Dallas during all the years following the Kennedy assassination when authors came to us to research their books about it, I have a longstanding interest in "conspiracy history." I'm not necessarily a "believer" in any sense, but I'm fascinated by the ins and outs of conspiracy theory and people's attitudes toward it. I picked up this survey volume (a hundred conspiracies in 314 pages, beginning with Adam and Eve) out of curiosity, but was considerably disappointed at what the author has done with his material. First, he includes a great many events and incidents which are "conspiracies" only by the narrowest legal definition (and a modern U.S. definition at that). This includes famous murders (Leopold and Loeb, the Manson family, the Menendez brothers) and broad political movements (including, believe it or not, the entire history of communism). Second, though claiming to give equal coverage to all those involved, like the good journalist he purports to be, he makes it clear that, for instance, anyone who has ever spied on the U.S. on behalf of another country (beginning with Major Andre) is evil, while the entire OSS and CIA are heroic. The overthrow and murder by the CIA of Prime Minister Mossadegh of Iran -- which led directly to the Shah's repressive policies and the formation of the Islamic state -- was completely justified. The Watergate conspiracy was overblown. Oliver North was justified in breaking the law and lying to Congress in the Iran-Contra affair because he was anti-communist. Cuba was better off under Bastista. And on and on, including the clear presumption that Christians are superior to adherents of any other religion. The author also indulges in ludicrous statements, such as assuring the reader that Saddam really did have weapons of mass destruction. Finally, he omits a number of real conspiracies that obviously should have been included, such as the great water scam in L.A. during the 1930s, secret U.S. government experimentation on members of the military, Hoover's attempts to smear Martin Luther King, CIA efforts to assassinate Castro (mentioned offhandedly and with approval in a single sentence), and the entire unconstitutional COINTELPRO operation. This book is so slanted, you'll have trouble getting it to stand upright on the shelf.



3. I found out upon receiving this book that it was 100 conspiracies summarized in around 314 pages. How can one explain 100 conspiracies in 314 pages? Poorly.
   
   There are several glaring problems with this book. First, the conspiracies are ranked in order of magnitude and boldness. Jeffers opens the book with the conspiracy to drive man out of the Garden of Eden and the second chapter is the conspiracy to kill Christ. In the second chapter I was uncertain if he was arguing about those who conspired against Christ or the allegations that the crucifixion was staged by somebody claiming to be the Son of God. The rest of the book looked like he just threw a bunch of conspiracies in a jar and picked them at random.
   
   Second, I would hardly classify many of the conspiracies as true conspiracies. It is true that Lenin did not operate alone in making the Bolshevic Revolution happen but I would hardly call that event a conspiracy even if it did do harm to many people. If that was a conspiracy then would not the Nazi rise to power also be a conspiracy? The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was the result of very sound military planning -- not a bunch of Japanese war lords conspiring to attach the US. If that was a conspiracy then would not Allied plans for D-Day have been a conspiracy as well? Or the dropping of the Atomic Bomb?
   
   Third, these short summaries read like short book reports. Looking at the references Jeffers used one source per conspiracy. Somehow I would think there may be many more sources than one to detail these conspiracies.
   
   Finally, as a amateur history buff I know enough about some of these "conspiracies" to know that his info was not only incomplete but also incorrect. For example, the Nazis were guilty of many crimes. However, he treated the burning of the Reichstag in 1933 as a definite Nazi act. To my knowledge, this was never proven and most historians believe it was the act of a Communist. The Nazis certainly took advantage of this act of arson to tighten their grip on Germany but it is speculative to treat his position as fact. This and other instances in the book that I know were incorrect makes me doubt the correctness of many of the "conspiracies" of which I know little or nothing.
   
   I feel like a victim of a conspiracy. Jeffers, the editors, publishers, vendors, and whoever else was responsible for putting this book out conspired to make a quick buck.

No comments about The Insanity Defense and the Trial of John W. Hinckley, Jr..

No comments about EL SALVADOR'S DECADE OF TERROR Human Rights Since the Assassination of Archbishop Romero.