The main reason why I am recommending this book is because it’s out there … I would much rather [regular, everyday people] bought a book like this one, than, say, one by Bill O’Reilly—or whoever the “other side’s” designated shill happens to be this week, observes Frank Cassano.
In response to a scene in John Barbour's recent film, Jim DiEugenio once again drives home the contradictions, lack of attention to scholarly standards of historical analysis, and dishonesty in the position adopted by Noam Chomsky on both JFK's presidency and the facts and circumstances of his assassination.
By Jim Schutze, At: The Dallas Observer
By Jim Schutze, At: The Dallas Observer


By Mark Shaw, At: NY Daily News
by Kevin Fagin, At: SFGate
A complaint, addressed to the American Historical Association by professor Paul Bleau, accusing historians of actually violating their own code of conduct in their treatment of the JFK assassination.
Part two of the study, in which professor Bleau focuses on what interested historians could easily learn from the official investigations and the opinions and statements from the actual investigators, lawyers, and staff members who were involved in six investigations that were mostly government initiated and managed, if they weren't so predisposed to accept blindly the conclusions of the Warren Commission.
Copyright 2016-2022 by kennedysandking.com • All Rights Reserved