Over confident and overbearing

I am not a conspiracy theorist and I do not believe in 99% of conspiracy theories, but the JFK assassination is different. It is the one historic traumatic event or rather 'the big event' which has attracted more claims for conspiracy than any other and there is a reason for this... It could quite feasibly be true. It is simply not an outlandish idea. I have read and watched almost everything that matters about the JFK assassination over 30 years both for conspiracy and against, but somehow this 'legendary' anti conspiracy book had escaped my attention, so I was keen to hear what Bugliosi the great prosecutor of Manson had to say. I thought it might swing me to a pro Oswald lone gunman position and finally bring my frustrating see-sawing to an end, but by the end I was exhausted by the author's style and brazenly selective treatment and felt let down. I have never read a book so inexplicably ingratiating to men of power and so turgid in parts, veering off into over detailed long winded accounts which had no bearing whatsoever on the case in point. I was also irritated by the constant sniping at 'buffs' and conspiracy theorists as if they were somehow all deluded madmen or egomaniacs, and the words 'zany', 'wacko' thrown about ad nauseam etc did not serve Bugliosi's cause well. One of the most impressive parts concerned Oswald and his arrest which was compelling and well written, but then later this fine section was followed by the unbearably protracted lead up to the murder scene in the basement garage to the extent that I just wanted Oswald shot by Ruby to get it over. I could not help thinking that Bugliosi should have just written a biography of Oswald. As is always the case whether pro Oswald lone gunman or anti conspiracy, every author however well intentioned, however scrupulously he or she conducts research, however passionate, however skilful, always seem to make the same error, which is they think to see and believe whatever will suit and dovetail with their mission, whatever fits into and upholds their framework. Bugliosi is no exception, since he only focuses on elements he can prove or thinks he can prove to overturn the conspiracy alternative. In this sense he does not focus on the legions of witnesses who the Warren Commission systematically ignored, such as the railroad workers on the underpass who clearly saw gun smoke coming from the grassy knoll or Lee Bowers who saw men acting strangely by the fence at the same time... these are but two of many witnesses who believed a shot came from the knoll, but Bugliosi avoids all this and has the gall to suggest the Warren commission and the FBI were exemplary inn their treatment of witnesses and that people like Alan Dulles were above reproach. Yet we know that witnesses with alternative experiences were airbrushed out. Bugliosi's claims of a whiter than white Warren Commission constitute the height of absurdity and are almost criminal in their delusion, the same goes for the oil men and especially Lyndon Johnson who again is neatly skipped over... in fact all the potential plotters and killers were pretty much left alone. In fact I began to wonder if Bugliosi himself were insane. To try and pretend that the CIA was not interested in removing Kennedy, that the FBI, Oil tycoons and Mafia figures could not possibly come together to form a loosely connecting group who would benefit from Kennedy's absence, let alone Johnson who was about to be prosecuted for fraud is breathtaking in its naivety, wilful obstruction of a plausible truth. Bugliosi never explains why such an idea is a fantasy, why it is the sick dream of conspiracy obsessed madmen? His only answer is that such a thing could not happen, that the men involved are above reproach as public figures and would never countenance such action, but on what evidence does he base this opinion? The fact is that all these people had a lot to gain from Kennedy's death and Oswald had nothing to gain whatsoever. Also Bugliosi fails to discuss properly Oswald's CIA connections which have been registered by many different people, but Bugliosi only mentions two of them and says they were unreliable. He seems to have conveniently ignored the presence of other gunmen in the Texas School book depository, seen by observers in other windows, nor the incontrevertible fingerprint left by hitman Malcom Wallace, focusing only on witnesses who saw Oswald or someone in the sniper's nest who might have been Oswald. He also says nothing about the underworld figures and international parade of hitmen who appeared just by chance to be in Dealey Plaza that day, the three tramps ... I could go on giving such examples, but it would be rather boring. Before this I read a book which forcefully put forward the idea that LBJ was the mastermind of the assassination. The research was equally scrupulous and the story equally detailed. Each of these books could be entirely believable and be the final pronouncement, the truth at last, if one did not despite their seeming reasonableness in relation to their objective, question the authors claims. They each appear to offer a watertight case. That's all folks! Yet the fact is we may never know, where the bullet which tore Kennedy's head apart and destroyed respect for and faith in the governing body, came from, the incontrovertible proof is likely never to surface.

5 people found this helpful

A comprehensive smack-down of every JFK conspiracy

Any additional comments?

A US President being shot by elements of the MI complex, while risky and insane for the plotters, was possible in my mind I was convinced there could be a conspiracy. Like many, I bought the nonsense about the magic bullet etc. A conspiracy is not by definition crazy, they happen all the time. One only has to look at what the CIA has done in the past, they interfere with democracy abroad, why not at home? However Reclaiming History will, step by step, lay out why even though it might not be too shocking that this could happen, that it DID NOT, in fact happen. Given that is it now almost assumed that a conspiracy did take place, this should be required reading in social/political studies classes.

There are two types of readers here:

1. The theorists themselves (whom the author calls the ''buffs'') who, no matter what, will never think anything but the conspiracy happened. They have that 'conclusion before evidence' mindset and this will not change the mind of someone like that. As the author says it's like trying to change a religion for someone, their conclusion has risen to the level of faith not belief.
2. The ordinary public who watches movies like JFK and thinks that something more went on.

This book WILL convince the second group and if nothing else is at least worth a read for balance sake

6 people found this helpful

Thorough but not convincing

I started as a firm believer in the conspiracy theory and have studied a great deal of books and films on the subject. I have been to Dealey Palaza and the 6th floor museum, and even to Kennedys grave at Arlington. I wanted to give the Oswald acting alone theory a chance to ensure I was looking at all evidence and not solely what I firmly believed. Although incredibly well researched and Mr Bugliosi has clearly dedicated a substantial part of his life to this cause and is passionate and resolute, he hasn't done anything to change my mind. Some of his theories are baffling in the extreme and at times he devotes huge amounts of time and effort to events that are clearly ludicrous whilst ignoring entirely key factors of the assassination. I have read a review which describes Mr Buglioi's style as arrogant condescension towards readers who may not share his views, and I would concur with this. At times I found myself arguing with the author whilst listening on my ipod, as I was so incensed by the patronising and sarcastic way in which he treats readers/listeners who believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone. I wanted to give it a fair go, and in listening to the 17 hours of narration I really did have to endure it. I was relieved when it came to an end. Good narrator though, great voice.

12 people found this helpful

Insightful Listen/Read

As comprehensive a read on the JFK assassination you will find. What stands this book out is Bugliosi’s in-depth analysis of all the major conspiracy theories, breaking them down using the proven evidence of the case pointing to only one conclusion… an assassination by a lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald from the Texas Schoolbook Depository.

I was for many years a believer in a conspiracy, no more.

Comprehensive

This book is a thorough and exhaustive analysis of the assassination of JFK. Any person who listens to this book will come to the same conclusion as the author. Easy to listen to and written for the understanding of all. Highly recommended.

Puting to rest insane conspiracy theories

Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK, on his own, and was in turn shot by the incensed and equally disturbed Jack Ruby, on his own. The CIA were not involved, the FBI were not involved andthe mob were not involved. These are obvious conclusions for anyone that uses evidence in their decision making process.

In 'Reclaiming History' Vincent Bugliosi sets out the evidence and dispels the conspiracy theories with a lot of common sense and a healthy wit. Highly reccommended.

8 people found this helpful

Seems (mostly) conclusive

I think Bugliosi has clearly demonstrated that JFK was killed by a lone gunman, and that gunman was Lee Harvey Oswald. He also establishes beyond most doubt that there was not a 'high up' conspiracy, whether that be CIA, FBI, the Russians, or the Mafia. (Listen to his countdown list of killer points right at the end, more than 30, many of which are enough ON THEIR OWN to dispose of other theories).

However, I believe there is one area where he has not satisfactorily given enough evidence, and that is the Cuban connection. It is still faintly possible that a small group of either pro- or anti-Castro people set Oswald up - there is the 'false Oswald' event when someone in his name attempted to get a visa for Mexico. Even if that runs cold however, one fact is indisputable : the world came the closest it ever has to nuclear war in the Cuban Missile Crisis only the year before. It was in no-one's interest for Cuba to be the centre of attention again. If that meant Oswald being viewed on all sides as a lone madman, then that's what would have been enabled.

The narrator is a bit monotonous for the material.

The Kennedy Assassination Bible

Vincent Bugliosi took over 20 years to compile this after taking part in a mock court drama on the prosecution of Lee Harvey Oswald back in the 1980's, even after proving Oswald's guilt back then he decided to look closer into the case, why? The fact is there have been so many theories and untruths that have coloured the waters of this case that it needed somebody of Bugliosi's intellect to clear it up.
The book deals with everything, the facts as they have always been and never changes, the fiction or as it is called by those who believe untruth call it theory, and the plain downright liars who are intent on getting their named linked with the case.
Bugliosi demolishes the fiction with fact alone, the theories all fall apart when the facts prove these theories to be impossible, remember facts are what they are by nature facts!!!!!
The movie JFK is the theorist back up, anybody seeing this film all come up with the conclusion that I did back on its release, there was a cover up. I though looked closer both at the theorist books and the facts through the web sites of the time, I really wanted there to be a massive cover up, I was so disappointed in what I did find, the truth being what Bugliosi proved all those years ago.

Lee Harvey Oswald Assassinated President John F. Kennedy, no Mafia involvement, no KGB involvement, no FBI or CIA involvement in fact nobody else had any idea that Oswald was to do this!!!!!!!!!!!!!