This follow-up to an earlier article is a deep and disturbing dive into the source material of Jean Stafford's 1966 profile of Marguerite Oswald, A Mother In History. As John Kelin discovered, the book is false and misleading, almost start-to-finish.

Reader James Finn has clipped two valuable stories from the MSM that illustrate the point Fletcher Prouty was making about Kennedy’s withdrawal plan already impacting the war economy and that fact that JFK’s death turned that deceleration around in a hurry. As an intro, Jim DiEugenio reviews Prouty’s position and Edward Epstein’s attack on it.

In part 2 of this article, Dr. David W. Mantik continues his point-by-point responses to Michel Jacques Gagné’s analysis in the new book Thinking Critically about the Kennedy Assassination (2022) using the documented evidence in the case and, in the process, fully demonstrates that Gagné’s “critical thinking” is anything but.

David W. Mantik responds to one of the newest books defending the Warren Commission, Thinking Critically about the Kennedy Assassination (2022) by Michel Jacques Gagné, with a genuine demonstration of critical thinking and its application to the evidence related to the assassination and its investigation. In part one of this two-part article, Dr. Mantik addresses Gagné’s analysis point-by-point.

Jim DiEugenio dips into the mire and provides a mercifully brief and even somewhat generous review of Michel Jacques Gagne ironically named book, Thinking Critically about the Kennedy Assassination, which might be one of the worst written tomes in the last few years.

Milicent Cranor reexamines some of the historical research using neurology and jiggle analysis to assess the blurred images in the Zapruder film and discusses the complexities of the auditory startle reflex. [Note: This article, posted long ago on a defunct website, is still relevant.]

Gerald Posner recently emerged from obscurity to try to counter Oliver Stone’s JFK Revisited documentary by hawking digital copies of his 1993 book Cased Closed, so Jim DiEugenio yet again demonstrates to Stone’s detractors how the documentary uses evidence released by the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB), which cannot be refuted by a dated Warren Commission apologia based on an obsolete evidentiary record.

In this latest installment of what is now a multi-part series answering the disinformation and lies of the Warren Commission apologists reviewing Oliver Stone’s new film JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, Jim DiEugenio responds to Washington Post columnist Max Boot’s recent piece, which is devoid of any genuine criticism and full of non-analytic smears.

Jim DiEugenio responds to Alecia Long’s latest foray into JFK assassination disinformation by correcting her obvious mistakes and oversights and exposing her brazen attempts at misdirection in reviewing Olive Stone’s new documentary JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass.

Soon after this story was published, I got a call from a physicist at Cal Tech. He said my find was “astonishing—it was right under our nose—and yet had gone unnoticed.” The story was first published in The Fourth Decade, January, 1996. It shows exactly how low an esteemed scientist will go to sell the government approved version of the Kennedy assassination. This latest version contains a little more, and a little less than the original.