This was surely the first book out on the case...

Haven't had a chance to read it more than a page or so, but should be interesting...
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=96226&relPageId=4

It was a short but very interesting book. I was especially taken by the lengthy quotes from Gen. Walker's rant. The guy seems to have definitely had a screw (or two) loose.

I think the author had most of the issues covered well - same as most the ones I see people discussing today - but he also included a new one... at least one I have not seen mentioned in the Kennedy context: the Native Americans.

All in all, a short but very insightful monograph. Thanks for the link!

Haven't had a chance to read the book yet. I will have to try and find the time to do just that.

It is a terrific overview and actually cites Ike's warning about the Military Industrial Complex.

Among other things, it also goes into

Kennedy taking power away from the CIA, his attempts at rapprochement with the Soviets, and a host of other known and not so well known pieces of data. 

Though it is short, I admit I still haven't finished reading it myself. At anyone one time I have a hundred things part done.   

What I have read so far however, is hard to criticize. I'd recommend it to all.

greg parker wrote:It is a terrific overview and actually cites Ike's warning about the Military Industrial Complex.

Among other things, it also goes into

Kennedy taking power away from the CIA, his attempts at rapprochement with the Soviets, and a host of other known and not so well known pieces of data. 

Though it is short, I admit I still haven't finished reading it myself. At anyone one time I have a hundred things part done.   

What I have read so far however, is hard to criticize. I'd recommend it to all.

Still haven't signed up.  So I'm condemned to reading a single page at a time in the browser.  I guess I need to become a member.

Albert, you shouldn't need to sign up. Not being a member (as far as I'm aware) merely limits you to 5 site searches per day. I'm not a member and have no trouble.

I'm only on p. 3, but this is pretty amazing stuff for 1963.  No wonder Helms and the W Commission were yammering for a translation to be done quickly.

A strange statement on p. 8 (p. 11):

"The President-elect is not aware of the growing importance of the Afro-Asian countries in the world community."

Is this a mis-translation ('aware' for 'unaware')?

Albert Rossi wrote:A strange statement on p. 8 (p. 11):

"The President-elect is not aware of the growing importance of the Afro-Asian countries in the world community."

Is this a mis-translation ('aware' for 'unaware')?

Albert, in context, I'd have to say it makes more sense read as "aware".

Greg, I don't follow then. The point seems to be that JFK has put one African American on the press staff (internal) and now wants Bunch to be liaison to UN (external).  How does this indicate he is unaware of the importance of Afro-Asian communities? ("is NOT ...").  I think it makes more sense to read it as litotes:  NOT UNAWARE = VERY AWARE. 

In any event, NOT AWARE would mean the journalist knows nothing about JFK's view of Africa.

Albert Rossi wrote:Greg, I don't follow then. The point seems to be that JFK has put one African American on the press staff (internal) and now wants Bunch to be liaison to UN (external).  How does this indicate he is unaware of the importance of Afro-Asian communities? ("is NOT ...").  I think it makes more sense to read it as litotes:  NOT UNAWARE = VERY AWARE. 

In any event, NOT AWARE would mean the journalist knows nothing about JFK's view of Africa.

Albert, all I meant was that in context it makes better sense that he was aware - now whether that means it should have been translated as "he is aware" or he "is not unaware" I don't know. Either way, it works better in the context of the surrounding text (which you have correctly honed in on) than what it actually says.

Oh, OK, I read you too quickly.  Yes, we agree.