Rating: 
Summary: Orwellian Parody
Review: One hundred years from now when the US can look moreobjectively at the sordid affair that was the Kennedy assasination,Case Closed will be seen as a brilliant Orwellian parody of the Government and the Warren Commission's lies put forth on the American people. Yes, Posner defends the Warren Commission findings, but if you read between the lines, this book is more damning to lone nut theory than any conspiracy book. There are some throwaway lines in this book, eg.: "The FBI, axious to downplay its contacts with Oswald, witheld information from the Warren Commission...the CIA witheld information as well, most critically that the Agency and the Mafia had embarked on a joint effort to kill Fidel Castro." "Few of the witnesses who contradicted the official version of events testified before the commission...despite it shortcomings, early reviews in the United States generally lavished praise on the Warren report. In Europe, however, where political conspiracies and government changeovers are an integral part of much longer histories, the Commissions work was viewed as the official, sanitized version." How does Posner defend the magic bullet theory? Well it was proven by a government consulting firm in a particle physics laboratory. Case Closed. Posner has written about Nazis, and he understands how government propaganda works. One of the standard tools of the propagandist is two ridicule anyone who questions the official version of events as a "nut", "quack", or "conspiracy theorist", which he does plenty of in his book.
Rating: 
Summary: Reality triumph over conspiracy fantasies
Review: The book is well written and well organized. It begins by describing the real Oswald and after that you have difficulties in believing him part of some conspiracies or on the contrary a pawn. The author dissects all the facts with the help of evicence and good sense, that in this case means trying to establish the credibility of all the witnesses of the case, before building up theories upon their testimony ; this in case, of course, you are interested in the truth, otherwise it is very easy to take into account the least probable testimony and begin to fly higher and higher with the obvious ending of a government- secret services conspiracy. Posner has done a very useful work and rendered a good service to his country by establishing firm points in the sad and tragic event of the Kennedy assassination, so that the wildest speculations may be expected to be turned down.
Rating: 
Summary: Another Untenable Defense of the Warren Commission
Review: The New York Times Book Review, The Boston Sunday Globe, and the Chicago Tribune have all praised Posner's "Case Closed" as "The most convincing explanation of the assassination" and "Case closed, indeed" With all the praise surrounding the book, the average reader might come to believe that Posner has indeed solved the case. But unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. The most that can be said about Posner is that he has destroyed some untrue conspiracy arguments that have been around for too long. But on such issues as the single bullet, the medical evidence, Lee Oswald's role, etc., Posner stumbles and offers strained and doubtful theories.
First of all, Posner's book is extremely arrogant. He often uses the disrespectful term of "conspiracy buff" to designate anyone who disagrees with his opinions. He holds all other views points with great disdain.
Secondly, Case Closed contains many factual errors. Here are just a few of them: *Pontchartrain is not a river but a lake *James Tague stood twenty feet east of the triple underpass, not beneath it *The testing he refers to was done by the Army, not the FBI *The Warren Commission had no investigators *Leftists are not the only critics of the Warren Report; there are evangical Christians who reject the single bullet theory and Earl Warren was a die-hard liberal
Unfortunately, the list goes on and on.
Also, all the evidence that Posner presents is taken out of context, corrupted, nonsourced, or is the opposite of what the sources actually say. As with the case of Linnie Mae Randle, who swore the package that Oswald carried was 28 inches long, too short for the package to have carried the rifle. Randle swore that Oswald held the end of the package in his hand and let it almost touch the ground. Posner converts this into "tucked under his armpit, and the other end did not quite touch the ground"
Posner also offers some very bizarre theories about the James Tague wounding. Posner asserts that the first shot hit a branch of a tree and its lead core instantly separated from the metal jacketing and traveled in a straight line from the TSBD to the curb over 400 feet away, somehow landing with enough force to send concrete fragments streaking toward Tague. How is this possible?
Rating: 
Summary: A One-Sided and Biased Book
Review: This book should not be read as a sole source, or an introduction to the topic of the assassination. The 'Preface' states that two-thirds of the public doubted that Oswald acted alone just after Oswald was killed while in police custody (p.ix). THAT is the common sense attitude. Posner doesn't mention the events of the first eleven days that made people skeptical of the Official Explanation. The public knows "that politicians lie and cover up misdeeds while intelligence and military officials plot against the nation they are supposed to protect" (p.x). So what is Posner's problem? Posner's swallowing of the Warren Report is just as foolish as any other outrageous statement of sensational claims. The 'Acknowledgments' thank those who helped Posner, but does not state who advanced the money, and their purposes. Saying Random House "did not care" what the book would conclude doesn't ring true for me.
The 'Bibliography' lacks George O'Toole's "The Assassination Tapes" and Mark North's "Act of Treason". O'Toole's 1975 book presented the first physical evidence that Oswald was not an assassin, and was followed by the Select Congressional Committee that reopened the investigation. A new generation of books followed. North's book presents the best solution to the assassination, but can't answer questions about the powers behind President Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover. Read them for yourself. David Wrone's "The Zapruder Film" presents the best evidence for Oswald's innocence. The picture taken after the first shot does show Oswald in the doorway (that look-alike co-worker was wearing a different shirt - see the picture). The mail-order rifle was wiped clean of fingerprints, wrapped in paper, and hidden among a pile of boxes. There was no gunshot residue on either Oswald's face or hands. Home movies take of the front of the building show neither Oswald or anyone else at the sixth-floor window.
Appendix A says the ammunition was "full metal-jacketed bullets". The bullet that hit JFK's head exploded into metal grains, according to the X-rays. This bullet could not have been a military "full metal-jacketed bullet" like the only known ammunition for that rifle (CE 399). Posner's "first shot" is a fantasy that assumes a shot was fired THROUGH tree branches! The experienced trauma surgeons at Parkland said the throat wound was an entry wound, and never changed their story. Eyewitness Gov. John Connally always said he was struck by a second shot. Page 482 shows how a faked bullet was created to try to prove the single-bullet theory. Have they no shame?
Appendix B lists many names. After Dorothy Kilgallen died of an "accidental overdose" newspapers said this Hearst reporter had interviewed Ruby in his jail cell and was boasting about breaking this case wide open. Posner offers no proof that she "drank herself to death" (p.494). A few days later her best friend and confidante, Mrs. Earl Smith, was found dead by the same method (p.486). Was this only a coincidence? Note how Posner separated the two events! The story of Albert Bogard shows why an uncorroborated eyewitness could be mistaken (or lying?) about an event. This applies to James Worrell as well; home movies taken at the time do not show this. The link between David Ferrie and Oswald was based on the library card of the former reportedly found in the wallet of the latter. How often does that happen in real life? The 1977 death of George de Mohrenschildt occurred after he was summoned to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. So too the death of William Sullivan. Was this only a coincidence? The above suggests Posner is no better than the other authors he criticizes.
Rating:
Summary: As good as advertised
Review: When Kennedy was assassinated, I found it easy to believe that Oswald had done it alone. But after the Warren Commission report came out, even I had a couple of doubts.
First, the photos from the Zapruder film showed that the fatal shot came from in front of Kennedy, not from behind. That puzzled me. Second, the spacing between the three shots seemed awfully tight. So tight that I had to doubt the timing.
What I needed was something less garbled than the Warren report. And this book supplied it. It showed that the first bullet clearly struck both Kennedy and Connolly. And that the bullet was fired from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. It also cleared up my problem with the fatal shot. The Commission had idiotically switched the order of two key photos from the Zapruder film, making it appear that Kennedy was shot from in front (obviously stupidity by the Commission, not malice). Posner is to be thanked for proving that and sharing it with us.
Finally, Posner showed that the first hit and the fatal one were probably consecutive shots, solving the timing issue.
The rest of the book is excellent as well. I can see from reading some of the other posts that there are indeed some "conspiracy theorists." But there are also quite a few people who simply wanted to know what was going on, given that the evidence as stated simply didn't make sense. Now we have something that truly puts this case to bed.
| 
