Aside from Shane O'Sullivan's mostly worthwhile Killing Oswald, there has been very little of note that has even attempted to counter the MSM's seemingly endless deluge of propaganda with reliable evidence and solid reasoning. A Coup in Camelot clearly aims to fill that void. Unfortunately, however, it falls considerably short of the mark, writes Martin Hay.
We here publish two letters written by Gary Aguilar and Cyril Wecht to the editors of the the journal of the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners concerning the ludicrous claims made by PBS' program on the JFK assassination.
Milicent Cranor debunks the "Thorburn" position invoked by Lattimer to explain JFK's movement at Z313.
Author Pat Speer discusses the misaligned medical evidence in the JFK assassination and the claim made by Howard Willens that Robert Kennedy obstructed the Warren Commission's access to the autopsy materials.
About the first fifty pages of Undeniable Truths is pretty much undeniable. The next fifty pages are a decided mixture of truth and question marks. Most of the last 200 pages do not at all merit the title. In fact, that part is, in large measure, nothing more than conjecture. And much of that conjecture is ill-founded, concludes Jim DiEugenio.
Martin Hay reviews an article published by Haag in AFTE, about which he concludes: "It is little wonder ... that Lucien Haag limited his defense of the 'Magic' Bullet Theory to a (misleading) discussion of Governor Connally's wounds. After all, no matter how impressive his credentials and extensive his experience, there are some problems that no man can make disappear."
The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: Revisiting the Medical Data
by Mantik, David W. M.D., Ph.D., At: Journal of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery
This book is really an entry level book for the novice, an overview of the assassination that tries to touch all of its aspects. ... Its major themes, like the shooting sequence and the identification of the conspirators are not well constructed and some of his conclusions are not supported by the latest findings. And his criticism of Jim Garrison was unfortunate and unjustifiable. After finishing the book you are left with the impression that it was probably written in the 90s and not in 2013, writes Vasilios Vazakas.