Rating: 
Summary: Review in Duluth Mn. Reader Weekly, Thursday, May 10, 2001
Review: I feel about this book a bit like an atheist must feel when he comes face to face with some remarkable teleological evidence of God like Duluth's own Lake Superior: he recognizes it as a magnificent piece of work, and as an argument for the existence of a divine being it is irrefutable by any argument he might have, but he still can't believe in a God! Well, I am equally impressed with Murder In Dealey Plaza, and I wouldn't presume to argue the facts of the Kennedy assassination with any of the authors in this book who have obviously spent much of their lives researching the matter. But I still don't believe that John F. Kennedy was the victim of a government conspiracy. As to whether that shows a weakness on the part of the book or this reviewer's mind, that decision is best left to the reader. Because the book is hard to put down. It's a polemic, but a rational one and only occasionally do you notice a lack of balance that spoils the argument. The editor prides himself on his command of what he terms "critical thinking." His prologue to Murder In Dealey Plaza demonstrates his logical approach by slowly and precisely laying out what he considers the "Smoking Guns" in the Kennedy assassination which would lead one to believe in a government conspiracy. Then, with the help of the other contributors to the book and his own incisive editorial comments, each "Smoking Gun" is taken apart and reassembled with considerable attention to detail. Perhaps the most interesting and controversial "Smoking Gun"-at least to this reviewer's mind-was Smoking Gun #8: Diagrams and photos of a brain in the national archives are of the brain of someone other than JFK. For real? You ask. Yes! At least according to the exhaustive writings of two M.D.s I've never heard of... That last comment was not meant to discount the professor's contributing experts. I haven't thought seriously about JFK's assassination since the funeral (which, by the way, I watched most avidly and tearfully even though I'd campaigned for Nixon as a teenager), and M.D.s Livingston and Aguilar may indeed be world authorities on the matter. But all I know about the assassination came from Murder In Dealey Plaza and perhaps I'm simply trying to keep my own critical processes from being overwhelmed by the volumes of evidence produced by this book. Paradoxically in fact, the one expert in the book whom I had heard of, the justifiably famous British mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell, is the one name to which I am least likely to give credence. However great the mind of the younger Bertrand Russell, by the time of the assassination he was into his tenth decade and the once "keen mind" amounted to little more than a prop dragged across Europe to lend credence to the anti-American dog and pony shows put on by the far left. I doubt at the time he could have done the critical thinking-much less the writing-of the piece now included in Murder In Dealey Plaza. Putting the epilogue aside, the book piles fact upon fact and argument upon argument until the bewildered reader's mind threatens to collapse under the load-and you still keep on reading. It's not just a polemic, it's a history at a raw (there are some gruesome pictures of Kennedy from the hospital and morgue) and personal level with details of lives and incidents that flesh out little-known but important individuals like J.D. Tippit, the policeman killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. Apparently patrolman Tippit had been having an affair with a waitress at a Dallas drive-in and the morning of his death had asked his wife for a divorce. Alive patrolman Tippit was nobody; dead, he's immortal and forever part of what could be seen as a 1960's morality play. And how about the Secret Service agents still drinking in a Dallas bar at two pm in the morning before their boss is killed by a sniper? Between their own guilt and the never ending scrutiny of researchers like Vincent Palamara, one of the contributors to Murder In Dealey Plaza who details their careers and lives, those lives must have become pure hell. The major players like Kennedy, Johnson and Connally have always had their stories told, this book seems to tell everyone's story, the high as well as the low, and brings back the tenor of the times about as well as any book I've ever read. The last section of Murder In Dealey Plaza (just before the lamentable epilogue by Bertrand Russell) discusses "The Silence of the Historians." Editor Fetzer describes the article by David W. Mantik as a reflection "upon the apparent incapacity, unwillingness, or even cowardice of professional historians to come to grips" with the assassination. While this reviewer has certainly made no study of the question, it strikes me that the professor's pessimism might be unwarranted. Reading this review before publication, my own daughter chided me for my failure to agree with the book's hypothesis. She informed me that one of her favorite tenth-grade history teachers had taught the conspiracy thesis, and that her own close study of the X-Files had convinced her that Lee Harvey Oswald was a government patsy executed by another government patsy, Jack Ruby. To return to the slightly strained analogy concerning the atheist and myself that began this review, let me now compare my feelings on this book to what an atheist might feel about the bible: he can appreciate it as a work of literature without believing in it as divine writ; just so do I appreciate Murder In Dealey Plaza as a great vehicle for returning to a focal point in history that the old '50s Walter Cronkite show And You Were There might have described as a moment that "altered and illuminated our time." Buy it. You don't have to believe in it to enjoy it!
Rating: 
Summary: Best book ever on this subject!!!!!!!:)
Review: Fetzer's "Murder in Dealey Plaza" is just an amazing book---well-written, researched, documented, and exciting. I have read mnay, many books on this important subject and this one is THE best ever...get it! In particular, the medical evidence chapters are outstanding and thought-provoking. Well done!
Rating: 
Summary: Outstanding Contribution to the Perpetuation of Paranoia
Review: This is a book for those with too much free conspiratorial time on their hands.
Rating:
Summary: Ignore the few "bad" reviews and believe the majority:)
Review: This is THE best book I ever read on the assassination of JFK. Vince Palamara and Gary Aguilar, in particular, should be commended for their outstanding research. Highly recommended!!!!
Rating:
Summary: short on verifiable facts
Review: Poorly written, fragmented and unverifiable. Full of wild speculation. Such a conspiracy would have had to involve hundreds, if not thousands of people--none of whom have come forward to claim the big prize of fortune and fame. Put it down, take a step back and really think hard about this. It could not have happened like this.
Rating:
Summary: Unbelievable and Incomprehensible
Review: This poorly written collection of fragmented essays offers the curious reader nothing more than speculation, innuendo and, at times, bizarre theory based on a big stretch of imagination. One example would be the "discovery" of the 7 foot tall girl leading to the "fact" that all the photos of the event were tampered with and the entire Zapruder films were faked or falsified. The book posits the stolen/two brain theory with no compelling proof and speculates that the x-rays were altered or stolen. As a physician, I could not follow the medical chapters and when I could, the "facts" were so unbelievable as to not warrant further thought. It should also be noted that for this murder to be pulled off as is suggested, with all the theories listed above and others too numerous to list here, hundreds, if not thousands of people would have to be involved in a fluid, seamless and huge conspiracy. Yet not a single one of these conspirators has come forward to claim fame and reap the benefits of a huge book contract even after all these years. We may never know for sure what happened on November 22, 1963, but you won't find any answers in this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Ricky79
Review: HARPER FRAGMENT Dr. Fetzer has done excellent work on the autopsy x-rays however, Murder in Dealey Plaza p 279-282, 226 Figure 2A, incorrectly identifies the Harper fragment as being three bones, left and right parietal and occipital. If the Harper fragment were three bones it would mean that the Lambda, the junction of the two lambdoid sutures and the saggital suture, is present on the Harper fragment. The Lambda is such a major landmark that it is doubtful that the Dallas Drs. would have omitted it from their news media discussions as to its possible orgin. The fact is that the Harper fragment is one and only one bone because it contains no suture lines. I have examined the photos and no suture lines are present within the Harper fragment. The color photos of the Harper fragment show area "F" Fig. 2A p 226, as bright white indicating freshly fractured bone. The dividing line between area F and GE is a split-thickness fracture line of outward beveling thus the fracture is not seen on the inner surface. Area F is a few mm lower than the other areas due to the sloping beveling fracture. A side view would clearly show this slope starting at the dark periosteum edge and ending at the outer edge of the internal surface. Optical density in an x-ray would also show this in addition to any bullet metal fragments or lead marks but no x-rays were taken of the Harper fragment. Live bone is covered with a membrane called the periosteum and it is seen as dry "blood" in areas E and G but not F. Haversian canals occur in bone surrounding nerves and blood vessels and they are exposed only when the bone is fractured. Area F shows exposed round openings to the canals not seen in areas E and G. The dividing line between E and G is not discernable in the photos. Area E is darker than G but no suture line is present and this is due to different levels of dry blood on the periosteum. Fact: Suture lines if present on the outer surface would also be present on the inner surface. No suture lines are seen on the inner surface in 2B. Photo F8, as I orient it, shows the occipital bone almost fully intact thus the Harper fragment is not occipital and it could not be located as depicted by Dr. Fetzer. Given the amount of missing right parietal bone from the x-rays the Harper fragment is most probably right parietal bone. The Harper fragment appears flat without any of the expected cupping and curvature of inner occipital bone thus it is probably parietal. The Dallas Drs.' positioning of it may have been influenced more by reports of the shooting than by anatomy. Dr. Fetzer's experiments with medically prepared skulls and simulated brain tissue transmitting dye are interesting. Medically prepared skulls have been boiled in water for hours thus removing the periosteum and all soft tissues including most connective tissues between the suture lines. A comparison between dye transference along suture lines in medically prepared skulls and unprepared skulls cannot be valid. I respect Dr. Fetzer's hypothetical thinking here but I would insist upon a study using blood and unprepared skulls with the periosteum and soft tissues intact before drawing any conclusions as to dye or blood transference along suture lines. Live bone is 100% saturated with fluids. Osmotic pressure thus would not readily transmit blood fluids from one side to the other as would dry bone. Red blood cells are probably too large to pass across a suture line even in prepared skulls. The periosteum would prevent blood cells from passing in live skulls. The Harper fragment was blown clear of JFK with only a thin coat of blood on periosteum which immediately began to clot and dry. The blood would clot and dry in about 5 minutes thus no transference could occur. Dr. Fetzer has incorrectly oriented photo F8 and has failed to locate the occipital protuberance, page 293, Murder in Dealey Plaza. Point "A" is almost correctly located over the nose but point "B" [under the Dr's fingers] is incorrectly located at about the right mastoid process behind the ear. This is a distance of about 3 inches from the occipital protuberance. Using his line AB about a 20ยบ angle downward from point "A" will intersect the occipital protuberance correcting the error. This error occurred because all the Drs. have overlooked the neck rest supporting the head because it is in dark shadow. The neck rest is very difficult to identify without multiple contrasting photos printed light and dark. The base of the skull is then outlined as it overhangs the neck rest. The glass object on the left is the ceiling light fixture. [If the glass were a specimen jar then it has no means of support from the force of gravity where as a light fixture mounted to the ceiling does.] What Dr. Fetzer labels as bone fragments C and D in F8, p 292, is actually scalp tissue with hair. This is part of the skin flap that turns the right temple semicircle in F1 into a complete circle of white light in F8. Follow the skin edge from the ruler to points C and D. Perhaps he is referring to an approximate location of the bone fragments given his interpretation of the photo. The bone fragments are not present in this photo F8. If they were bone fragments they have no visible support from the force of gravity unless attached to the skin, which is very doubtful. The x-rays were taken before the autopsy while F8 was taken during the autopsy thus they represent different body positions. Dr. Fetzer has failed to discuss the ballistic wounds depicted in F8. Specifically: the right temple white circle and the skin tear and bone semicircle with outward beveling and the dried blood on the bone and the skin bruising and the concentric circles of the .45 cal wound near the ruler and of course the low occipital Parkland wound which is very difficult to see. Dr. Fetzer has failed to correlate these wounds with the corresponding wounds in the other autopsy photos. Read this book with care because disinformation is within it.
Rating:
Summary: Basically a Rip-Off and an Hilarious One at That
Review: I can't believe I got suckered into buying this book! I enjoy speculation about the assassination as much as the next guy and admit I stopped reading it after reading Posner's excellent Case Closed. Then I started reading so much criticism about his book that I thought I should reopen my mind. Well I closed it again, and this book was the cause. If you read this book, you're expected to believe the Zapruder film was faked (an especially hilarious chapter), there are brains being stolen and substituted left and right, xrays being doctored, etcetera ad nauseum. The government is incompetent at best but we're expected to believe that a conspiracy that would have to have involved dozens if not hundreds of people has been successfully kept quiet for 40 years! Yeah right! Maybe there is more to this story than Oswald being a lone nut gunman but wild card books like these don't help.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding Contribution to the Truth
Review: This is the best book ever written about the assassination of President Kennedy. And that is saying a lot since there have been some very good ones lately such as Bill Davy's new book on the Garrison case. Once I started reading MIDP I couldn't put it down. The reason this is the best book ever written is because there is absolutely no speculation here. The book is about what we now know about the hard physical evidence of the case. And what we now know is that much of the hard evidence such as the autopsy photographs and x-rays have been tampered with to give the false impression that Kennedy was killed by a lone gunman. The medical evidence is presented in a clear,concise and easy to understand manner for a non-medical person like myself. I found parts of a previous work edited by Dr. Fetzer, Assassiantion Science, to be a bit too technical. But this new book is more accesible for people like myself, which I believe should be a big plus for the general population. A big strength of the book was coming right out at the beginning and listing in a very direct point by point manner the "smoking guns" of the assassination. This proves to the reader right off the bat that there was a conspiracy. No ifs ands or buts. No room to put a spin on the fact of conspiracy no matter how hard one may try. This whets the appetite of the reader to continue further. Next comes a lengthy assassination chronology that helps the reader see what was really happening hour by hour on that fateful November day. Sort of like what Jim Bishop did in his book "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" only much more historically factual. There is a lengthy section giving evidence that the Zapruder film was tampered with. This adds a whole new dimension to the case. Perhaps the most interesting(for me)part of the book was Doug Weldon's excellent chapter on the limo that was used in the motorcade. When you think of it, it is amazing that it took so long for someone to trace the history of this very important piece of physical evidence. Weldon, an attorney, needs to be congratulated on an excellent job. The book concludes with Dr. David Mantik's justifiably scathing citicism of professional historians. Mantik explains why taking the assassination seriously has been politically incorrect in academia. With so much overwhelming evidence proving both a conspiracy and a high-level U.S. government cover-up, future historians will no longer be able to hide from the truth. I'll make sure that my son-in-law, who is working on his doctorate in history, reads this. The sequential order of the chapters is very well thought out going from intro, to the meat of the evidence, to what does this all mean. All in all, this is an outstanding contribution to our nation's true history.
Rating:
Summary: Cornucopia of Information
Review: Dr. Fetzer and his contributing authors have done it again with this outstanding compilation of evidence, historical analysis and fresh insights. For those who may wonder why a political coup in the USA would be treated so frivolously and shamefully inadequate by mainstream historians and journalist, it is a must to read Dr. David Mantik's chapter, The Silence of the Historians. Dr.Mantik's chapter -by itself- makes the book a compelling and insightful read. Not enough praise can be accorded to Dr. Fetzer and his contributing authors.
|
