What are your top 5 JFK assassination books?

[Pat Speer]

Here's some good ones...

1, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher (a smart lady looks at the facts)
2. Six Seconds in Dallas by Josiah Thompson (a brilliant philosophy professor re-examines the forensic evidence. Note while I disagree with many of my friend Tink's findings, there's no disputing he set a high bar.)
3. Post Mortem by Harold Weisberg (an almost Fellini-esque character study/rant revolving around a crotchety old man's efforts to make his government transparent and accountable.)
4. The Last Investigation by Gaeton Fonzi (a gripping detective story in which a journalist tries to get to the bottom of the murder of the century)
5. Someone Would Have Talked by Larry Hancock (the culmination of a hard-working man's efforts to separate the facts from the fiction, to see what remains).

There are, of course, a number of others which have something to offer.

I wish there was a good Oswald-did-it book which I could recommend. The problem, for me, is that almost all of them embrace the single-bullet theory as a fact, which, to me, is absolute rubbish. So I could no more recommend a book pushing this rubbish than I could a book pushing that Onassis did it so he could hook up with Jackie, or one in which a teenage hit man fired the fatal shot.

It is with high hopes then that I look to Robert Wagner's next book.

[Thomas Graves]

Here's some good ones...

1, Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher (a smart lady looks at the facts)
2. Six Seconds in Dallas by Josiah Thompson (a brilliant philosophy professor re-examines the forensic evidence. Note while I disagree with many of my friend Tink's findings, there's no disputing he set a high bar.)
3. Post Mortem by Harold Weisberg (an almost Fellini-esque character study/rant revolving around a crotchety old man's efforts to make his government transparent and accountable.)
4. The Last Investigation by Gaeton Fonzi (a gripping detective story in which a journalist tries to get to the bottom of the murder of the century)
5. Someone Would Have Talked by Larry Hancock (the culmination of a hard-working man's efforts to separate the facts from the fiction, to see what remains).

There are, of course, a number of others which have something to offer.

I wish there was a good Oswald-did-it book which I could recommend. The problem, for me, is that almost all of them embrace the single-bullet theory as a fact, which, to me, is absolute rubbish. So I could no more recommend a book pushing this rubbish than I could a book pushing that Onassis did it so he could hook up with Jackie, or one in which a teenage hit man fired the fatal shot.

It is with high hopes then that I look to Robert Wagner's next book.

"Wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish ..."

Regarding "The Impossible To Believe Single Bullet Theory," perhaps you should watch this (and the PBS Nova special from which it was excerpted).

--  MWT   

[Tim Nickerson]

I wish there was a good Oswald-did-it book which I could recommend. The problem, for me, is that almost all of them embrace the single-bullet theory as a fact, which, to me, is absolute rubbish.

The single bullet theory really is fact though. When you examine all of the available evidence, there really is no other plausible scenario. For you to say that the SBT is absolute rubbish makes me doubt that you are the real Pat Speer. Pat Speer is not a stupid guy and he has examined all of the available evidence. He doesn't embrace the SBT but he doesn't dismiss it outright either. Unless he's had some sort of head injury recently.

[Jerry Freeman]

I wish there was a good Oswald-did-it book which I could recommend.

If there isn't... [and I haven't run across one] --It's too late now.

The problem, for me, is that almost all of them embrace the single-bullet theory as a fact, which, to me, is absolute rubbish.

That is what a guy that was shot that day said [sort of]. 

that almost all of them embrace

Which lone gunman book does not endorse the SBT?

[Jerry Freeman]

"Wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish ..." Regarding "The Impossible To Believe Single Bullet Theory," perhaps you should watch this (and the PBS Nova special from which it was excerpted).

Well thanks Tommy-- that cartoon made even more impossible to believe the SBT. I mean just draw a perfectly straight line through everyone and Vwa-Lah! We know there was no wound directly in the back of the neck but let's just believe it anyway  

[Thomas Graves]

Well thanks Tommy-- that cartoon made even more impossible to believe the SBT. I mean just draw a perfectly straight line through everyone and Vwa-Lah! We know there was no wound directly in the back of the neck but let's just believe it anyway

Jer-wee, Jer-wee, Jer-wee

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Put your comic books down and watch the PBS Nova special: "Cold Case: JFK"

--  MWT

[John Iacoletti]

We're probably five years away from a super-precise model that duplicates the posture, clothing and skeleton. And then it'll be rejected by the CTs. So what's the use?

That’s because the exact locations of the wounds and the precise bullet paths will always be in question.

[Pat Speer]

If there isn't... [and I haven't run across one] --It's too late now.That is what a guy that was shot that day said [sort of].  Which lone gunman book does not endorse the SBT?

I didn't mean to derail this thread into a thread on the SBT. But, to answer your question, I have two single-assassin theorist books in my possession which devote a considerable amount of space to de-bunking the SBT. One is A Simple Act of Murder, by Mark Fuhrman, and the other is The Assassination of JFK by Robert Wagner. These writers found the SBT unbelievable, but concluded there was enough evidence to support Oswald's sole guilt without the SBT.