In the early days after the Rolling Stone article appeared, it appears that [Saint John] and his brother actually had a good deal of skepticism towards what their father had told him about the mechanics of the assassination. What happened to that skepticism? ... Hunt's personal story, with some good supplementary research about his father and mother, could have been politically interesting and personally compelling. But it didn't come out that way, concludes Seamus Coogan.
By any standards, Lane's resume is impressive, and I have a great deal of respect for the man. So it is with heavy heart that I must say his latest and most likely his last book on the murder of JFK is—for me at least—a little disappointing, writes Martin Hay.
An interesting and worthwhile work. ... it has a unique approach to it, and Hancock’s analysis of the crime has sophistication, intelligence and nuance to it, writes Jim DiEugenio.
Jim DiEugenio on the announcement that George and Leonardo DiCaprio intend to make a film based Legacy of Secrecy.
An article by Jefferson Morley which presents some of the material on Winston Scott which reappeared in his book.
Rosenbaum represents all that is wrong with the MSM on both Jim Angleton and the JFK case, writes Jim DiEugenio.
El Exigente does the same thing with Angleton as he does with the critics. Except in reverse. He hides the worst aspects, softens the weak spots, and covers up the man's disasters. And, most necessary of all, he completely censors Angleton's associations with Oswald, writes Jim DiEugenio.
At the end of his review of JFK and the Unspeakable, DiEugenio wrote that Jim Douglass’ book was the best in the field since Gerald McKnight’s. The author’s own book has a dual distinction. It is the best book on Garrison yet written, and it is the best work on the JFK case since the Douglass book, writes Albert Rossi.