What do you think?
Rate this book
Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot
Goodreads Choice Award
Nominee for Readers' Favorite History & Biography (2012)A riveting historical narrative of the shocking events surrounding the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and the follow-up to mega-bestselling author Bill O'Reilly's Killing Lincoln.More than a million readers have thrilled to Bill O'Reilly's Killing Lincoln, the page-turning work of nonfiction about the shocking assassination that changed the course of American history. Now the anchor of The O'Reilly Factor recounts in gripping detail the brutal murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy—and how a sequence of gunshots on a Dallas afternoon not only killed a beloved president but also sent the nation into the cataclysmic division of the Vietnam War and its culture-changing aftermath.
In January 1961, as the Cold War escalates, John F. Kennedy struggles to contain the growth of Communism while he learns the hardships, solitude, and temptations of what it means to be president of the United States. Along the way he acquires a number of formidable enemies, among them Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev, Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, and Allen Dulles, director of the Central Intelligence Agency. In addition, powerful elements of organized crime have begun to talk about targeting the president and his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy.
In the midst of a 1963 campaign trip to Texas, Kennedy is gunned down by an erratic young drifter named Lee Harvey Oswald. The former Marine Corps sharpshooter escapes the scene, only to be caught and shot dead while in police custody.
The events leading up to the most notorious crime of the twentieth century are almost as shocking as the assassination itself. Killing Kennedy chronicles both the heroism and deceit of Camelot, bringing history to life in ways that will profoundly move the reader. This may well be the most talked about book of the year.
Audible Audio
First published January 1, 2012
3219 people are currently reading
41470 people want to read
About the author
Bill O'Reilly
59 books3,426 followersBill O'Reilly's success in broadcasting and publishing is unmatched. The iconic anchor of The O'Reilly Factor led the program to the status of the highest rated cable news broadcast in the nation for sixteen consecutive years. His website BillOReilly.com is followed by millions all over the world.
In addition, he has authored an astonishing 12 number one ranked non-fiction books including the historical "Killing" series. Mr. O'Reilly currently has 17 million books in print.
Bill O'Reilly has been a broadcaster for 42 years. He has been awarded three Emmys and a number of other journalism accolades. He was a national correspondent for CBS News and ABC News as well as a reporter-anchor for WCBS-TV in New York City, among other high-profile jobs.
Mr. O'Reilly received two other Emmy nominations for the movies "Killing Kennedy" and "Killing Jesus."
He holds a history degree from Marist College, a master’s degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University, and another master’s degree from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Bill O'Reilly lives on Long Island where he was raised. His philanthropic enterprises have raised tens of millions for people in need and wounded American veterans.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/billor...
In addition, he has authored an astonishing 12 number one ranked non-fiction books including the historical "Killing" series. Mr. O'Reilly currently has 17 million books in print.
Bill O'Reilly has been a broadcaster for 42 years. He has been awarded three Emmys and a number of other journalism accolades. He was a national correspondent for CBS News and ABC News as well as a reporter-anchor for WCBS-TV in New York City, among other high-profile jobs.
Mr. O'Reilly received two other Emmy nominations for the movies "Killing Kennedy" and "Killing Jesus."
He holds a history degree from Marist College, a master’s degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University, and another master’s degree from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Bill O'Reilly lives on Long Island where he was raised. His philanthropic enterprises have raised tens of millions for people in need and wounded American veterans.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/billor...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,951 reviews
August 1, 2025
I see that many people have rated this book as high (or higher than the Lincoln book) but my viewpoint is that there is nothing new here...NOTHING.
One hundred pages in, there is a total of 2 pages on the assassin and the rest on Kennedy's lifestyle. Who cares? So what that Kennedy was the Elvis of presidents? So what the he cheated on his wife? This is new?
I enjoyed the book on Lincoln as I felt that it moved quickly with a new insight to how and why Lincoln was assassinated. Yet the Kennedy book is basically written by a Catholic who pretends that Kennedy was very uncatholic. Please...Catholic priests in recent years have been revealed to have done MUCH worse than Kennedy when it came to sexual behavior. Hiding behind the "who would dare cheat on Jackie?" idea is just beyond the gossiping about the Kardashians.
However, sequels have a tendency to be let downs.
There are only four main characters in the real-life Kennedy assassination story...JFK, Oswald, Ruby, and LBJ. After that, its just the usual gossip about Marilyn Monroe, Jackie, Bobby, Hoover, the Mafia, Castro, etc.
Nothing new here.
In my original review (written after the 1st 100 pages, I found the book to be one long gossip column that Ann Coulter could have written). However after finishing the book, my view has changed somewhat in that O'Rielly never got to the heart of the subject. He basically leaves the reader hanging by throwing out names he doesn't bother to investigate any further such Goerge de Morhrenshildt (who according to the book has some CIA connections plus a connection to Jackie Kennedy along with Lee Harvey Oswald). He admits that he attempts to interview this man who upon being accosted by O'Reilly shoots himself in the head rather than partake in an any investigative reporting. Therefore, O'Reilly leaves a gaping hole in what that was all about by summing it up as "we'll never the nature of the relationship".
Also he goes on to mention how Jack Ruby had no business being near Oswald at the time he was being removed from the Dallas County Jail...but doesn't bother to follow on why he was there at all. This event led to Oswald's murder.
This book actually adds to conspiracy theories because O'Rielly offers nothing of substance to explain why Oswald shot the president beyond the fact he wanted to be famous. However, in the history of assassinations...almost every one of them was the result of the hunter tracking down the hunted...MLK, RFK, Lincoln, Wallace, McKinley, etc. Only JFK walks into the path of a man who wants to kill someone. This book clearly states that Oswald had no real interest in killing Kennedy beyond becoming famous. So he was either the luckiest guy in the world to have his victim presented right in the middle of his scope....or someone one knew Kennedy was going to be there and made sure Oswald was there too.
And of course, the Oswald killing only adds to the suspicions that Ruby the owner of a strip club has now decided here is the big moment for him to become famous by killing the man who killed the president. And this was another case of one man stalking another.
For me to believe that Oswald just happened to land a job which would place him in a perfect position 30 days prior to Kennedy's arrival in Dallas...not to mention his arrival mere yards from him sounds like he was the luckiest assassin in history, or it was a set-up
After all, like the Oklahoma City Bombing, there were 2 men involved in that terrorist attack and by legal definition that makes it a conspiracy. I don't think it's a stretch to think the Oswald had a few cohorts....forget Castro, the Mafia, the Cia, and other presidential enemies...Kennedy's assassination is completely glossed over in this book as if to say one man who failed at many things, who was disturbed, who was lost and lonely was able to put a plan together (all by himself without a mere whisper of it to anyone) to kill the president as he drove right by his job site.
In the end all Oswald had to was wait for his victim to come to him. I find it hard to believe the secret service was that dumb.
One hundred pages in, there is a total of 2 pages on the assassin and the rest on Kennedy's lifestyle. Who cares? So what that Kennedy was the Elvis of presidents? So what the he cheated on his wife? This is new?
I enjoyed the book on Lincoln as I felt that it moved quickly with a new insight to how and why Lincoln was assassinated. Yet the Kennedy book is basically written by a Catholic who pretends that Kennedy was very uncatholic. Please...Catholic priests in recent years have been revealed to have done MUCH worse than Kennedy when it came to sexual behavior. Hiding behind the "who would dare cheat on Jackie?" idea is just beyond the gossiping about the Kardashians.
However, sequels have a tendency to be let downs.
There are only four main characters in the real-life Kennedy assassination story...JFK, Oswald, Ruby, and LBJ. After that, its just the usual gossip about Marilyn Monroe, Jackie, Bobby, Hoover, the Mafia, Castro, etc.
Nothing new here.
In my original review (written after the 1st 100 pages, I found the book to be one long gossip column that Ann Coulter could have written). However after finishing the book, my view has changed somewhat in that O'Rielly never got to the heart of the subject. He basically leaves the reader hanging by throwing out names he doesn't bother to investigate any further such Goerge de Morhrenshildt (who according to the book has some CIA connections plus a connection to Jackie Kennedy along with Lee Harvey Oswald). He admits that he attempts to interview this man who upon being accosted by O'Reilly shoots himself in the head rather than partake in an any investigative reporting. Therefore, O'Reilly leaves a gaping hole in what that was all about by summing it up as "we'll never the nature of the relationship".
Also he goes on to mention how Jack Ruby had no business being near Oswald at the time he was being removed from the Dallas County Jail...but doesn't bother to follow on why he was there at all. This event led to Oswald's murder.
This book actually adds to conspiracy theories because O'Rielly offers nothing of substance to explain why Oswald shot the president beyond the fact he wanted to be famous. However, in the history of assassinations...almost every one of them was the result of the hunter tracking down the hunted...MLK, RFK, Lincoln, Wallace, McKinley, etc. Only JFK walks into the path of a man who wants to kill someone. This book clearly states that Oswald had no real interest in killing Kennedy beyond becoming famous. So he was either the luckiest guy in the world to have his victim presented right in the middle of his scope....or someone one knew Kennedy was going to be there and made sure Oswald was there too.
And of course, the Oswald killing only adds to the suspicions that Ruby the owner of a strip club has now decided here is the big moment for him to become famous by killing the man who killed the president. And this was another case of one man stalking another.
For me to believe that Oswald just happened to land a job which would place him in a perfect position 30 days prior to Kennedy's arrival in Dallas...not to mention his arrival mere yards from him sounds like he was the luckiest assassin in history, or it was a set-up
After all, like the Oklahoma City Bombing, there were 2 men involved in that terrorist attack and by legal definition that makes it a conspiracy. I don't think it's a stretch to think the Oswald had a few cohorts....forget Castro, the Mafia, the Cia, and other presidential enemies...Kennedy's assassination is completely glossed over in this book as if to say one man who failed at many things, who was disturbed, who was lost and lonely was able to put a plan together (all by himself without a mere whisper of it to anyone) to kill the president as he drove right by his job site.
In the end all Oswald had to was wait for his victim to come to him. I find it hard to believe the secret service was that dumb.
April 25, 2016
"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."
I remember......... like so many Americans who were of age during the time of the Kennedy assassination exactly where I was, what I was doing and what was happening all around me.
I remember........ the announcement in school, the early dismissal, tears, shock, disbelief and then silence.......so much silence.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, sadly, had less than three years left to live when he took office in 1961 at the young age of 43. O'Reilly's account of Kennedy's life covers the PT 109 incident, the failed Bay of Pigs invasion and the 13 long scary days of the Cuban missile crisis......and it was indeed a scary time. KILLING KENNEDY also touches on the war in Vietnam, MLK's dream for racial equality, and his and JFK's numerous indiscretions. (the latter is not descriptive as in Follett's Edge of Eternity)
The actual data on the murder of the well-loved President Kennedy divulged nothing new that I can ascertain other than perhaps tidbits of dialogue that occurred inside the vehicle after the fatal shots.
If you enjoy reading about presidential history though and the personal life of JFK, his wins and losses, his troubled health; and Jackie, her popularity with the public and her mythical American Camelot, this work of non-fiction is a fast, easy way to get the overall picture. For me, it turned out to be another learning experience, in some respects, and definitely a remembrance of a horrific time in American history. (O'Reilly's recommended newsreels were definitely worth the time)
September 30, 2017
دوستانِ گرانقدر، همانطور که از عنوانِ کتاب پیداست، موضوع آن در موردِ ترورِ 35امین رئیس جمهور ایالت متحدهٔ آمریکا <جان اف کندی> میباشد
عنصرِ اصلی کتاب، موجودی بیمار و روانی به نامِ <لی ازوالد> است.. موجودی پست و عقده ای که جان اف کندی را به قتل رساند
لی ازوالد، تکاور نیروی دریایی آمریکا بود، با آنکه هیچگونه سواد مطالعاتی نداشت، امّا در اوهام و توهماتش اینگونه تصور میکرد که یک مارکسیست است. از همین رو، به روسیه رفت تا به آنجا پناهنده شود.. امّا پس از مدتی با او همچون دستمالِ توالت برخورد کردند و دست از پا درازتر به آمریکا بازگشت... امّا اینبار تنها نبود، بلکه در روسیه با دختری بیچاره به نامِ <ماریانا> آشنا شده بود. با او ازدواج کرد و او را نیز با خود به آمریکا آورد..حتی از او یک نوزادِ دختر داشت.. این موجود روانی، زندگی ماریانا را به گند کشیده بود و آسایش را از زندگیِ وی ربوده بود... پس از مدت ها بیکاری در شهرِ دالاس در یک چاپخانه و انتشاراتی، مشغول به کار شد... او هیچ دوست و رفیقی نداشت و از آنجایی که خود را کمونیست میدانست، لذا در راهپیمایی ها و تظاهرات شرکت میکرد و تصور میکرد که برای آزادی کوبا میجنگد و سربازِ دیکتاتوری به نامِ <فیدل کاسترو> است.. در صورتیکه کسی ارزشی برای او و حرفهایش قائل نبود و همه او را مسخره میکردند.. حتی همسایگان روس و کوبایی، به او میخندیدند و او را دست می انداختند
این موجودِ وحشی و عقده ای، برایِ آنکه وجودش را به کمونیست های روسی و کوبایی ثابت کند، <ژنرال ادوین واکر> را که مخالفِ کمونیست ها بود را ترور کرد.. امّا ترور ناموفق بود
در روز 22 نوامبر سال 1963 کندی همراه با همسرش، به شهر دالاس در ایالت تگزاس، سفر کردند... از آنجایی که محلِ عبورِ خودرویِ کندی، از روبرویِ محلِ کارِ لی ازوالد، گذر میکرد.. ازوالد تصمیم گرفت از همان ساختمان، کندی را ترور کند
سرانجام.. این موجودِ حرامی و بیمار، رئیس جمهور کندی را ترور کرد و پا به فرار گذاشت.. در راه، افسر پلیس به او شک کرد و او افسر پلیس را نیز به قتل رساند و دستگیر شد... زمانی که اف بی آی از او بازجویی کرد، او همه چیز را انکار کرد و زیرِ بار نرفت، در صورتیکه تمامِ مدارک و حتی اسلحهٔ او و گفته هایِ همسرش، وی را محکوم کرده بود... در روزِ دادگاهی، شخصی به نامِ <جک روبی> که مدیر کلوپِ شبانه ای در دالاس بود و به قولِ خودش عاشق و هوادارِ کندی بود، هنگامی که لی ازوالد قصدِ رفتن به دادگاه را داشت و در میانِ مأمورین و خبرنگارها بود، او را به هلاکت رساند و با یک تیر، وی را به قتل رساند
روز خاکسپاری جان اف کندی، شهر واشنگتن و تمامی آمریکا در غم و اندوه بود و یکی از بزرگترین مراسمِ خاکسپاری تاریخ انجام شد.. امّا همزمان در شهرِ فرت ورث، زمانی که قرار بود لی ازوالد را به گور بیاندازند، هیچ کس نبود تا تابوتِ این موجودِ نفرت انگیز و پست فطرت را به چاله بیاندازد و خاکش کند... او در سن 24 سالگی مردم یک سرزمین را داغ دار کرد و وجودِ کثیفش به درونِ گور رفت
------------------------------------------
امیدوارم این ریویو برایِ شما دوستانِ خردگرا، مفید بوده باشه
<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>
عنصرِ اصلی کتاب، موجودی بیمار و روانی به نامِ <لی ازوالد> است.. موجودی پست و عقده ای که جان اف کندی را به قتل رساند
لی ازوالد، تکاور نیروی دریایی آمریکا بود، با آنکه هیچگونه سواد مطالعاتی نداشت، امّا در اوهام و توهماتش اینگونه تصور میکرد که یک مارکسیست است. از همین رو، به روسیه رفت تا به آنجا پناهنده شود.. امّا پس از مدتی با او همچون دستمالِ توالت برخورد کردند و دست از پا درازتر به آمریکا بازگشت... امّا اینبار تنها نبود، بلکه در روسیه با دختری بیچاره به نامِ <ماریانا> آشنا شده بود. با او ازدواج کرد و او را نیز با خود به آمریکا آورد..حتی از او یک نوزادِ دختر داشت.. این موجود روانی، زندگی ماریانا را به گند کشیده بود و آسایش را از زندگیِ وی ربوده بود... پس از مدت ها بیکاری در شهرِ دالاس در یک چاپخانه و انتشاراتی، مشغول به کار شد... او هیچ دوست و رفیقی نداشت و از آنجایی که خود را کمونیست میدانست، لذا در راهپیمایی ها و تظاهرات شرکت میکرد و تصور میکرد که برای آزادی کوبا میجنگد و سربازِ دیکتاتوری به نامِ <فیدل کاسترو> است.. در صورتیکه کسی ارزشی برای او و حرفهایش قائل نبود و همه او را مسخره میکردند.. حتی همسایگان روس و کوبایی، به او میخندیدند و او را دست می انداختند
این موجودِ وحشی و عقده ای، برایِ آنکه وجودش را به کمونیست های روسی و کوبایی ثابت کند، <ژنرال ادوین واکر> را که مخالفِ کمونیست ها بود را ترور کرد.. امّا ترور ناموفق بود
در روز 22 نوامبر سال 1963 کندی همراه با همسرش، به شهر دالاس در ایالت تگزاس، سفر کردند... از آنجایی که محلِ عبورِ خودرویِ کندی، از روبرویِ محلِ کارِ لی ازوالد، گذر میکرد.. ازوالد تصمیم گرفت از همان ساختمان، کندی را ترور کند
سرانجام.. این موجودِ حرامی و بیمار، رئیس جمهور کندی را ترور کرد و پا به فرار گذاشت.. در راه، افسر پلیس به او شک کرد و او افسر پلیس را نیز به قتل رساند و دستگیر شد... زمانی که اف بی آی از او بازجویی کرد، او همه چیز را انکار کرد و زیرِ بار نرفت، در صورتیکه تمامِ مدارک و حتی اسلحهٔ او و گفته هایِ همسرش، وی را محکوم کرده بود... در روزِ دادگاهی، شخصی به نامِ <جک روبی> که مدیر کلوپِ شبانه ای در دالاس بود و به قولِ خودش عاشق و هوادارِ کندی بود، هنگامی که لی ازوالد قصدِ رفتن به دادگاه را داشت و در میانِ مأمورین و خبرنگارها بود، او را به هلاکت رساند و با یک تیر، وی را به قتل رساند
روز خاکسپاری جان اف کندی، شهر واشنگتن و تمامی آمریکا در غم و اندوه بود و یکی از بزرگترین مراسمِ خاکسپاری تاریخ انجام شد.. امّا همزمان در شهرِ فرت ورث، زمانی که قرار بود لی ازوالد را به گور بیاندازند، هیچ کس نبود تا تابوتِ این موجودِ نفرت انگیز و پست فطرت را به چاله بیاندازد و خاکش کند... او در سن 24 سالگی مردم یک سرزمین را داغ دار کرد و وجودِ کثیفش به درونِ گور رفت
------------------------------------------
امیدوارم این ریویو برایِ شما دوستانِ خردگرا، مفید بوده باشه
<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>
March 6, 2017
Written in a juvenile fashion, this book gave me nothing new. In fact, I knew more than the book was presenting. It begins with JFK's inauguration and goes until the assassination, and that section doesn't include anything about any of the conspiracy theories. Disappointed, because Killing Lincoln was so good.
October 11, 2012
Killing Kennedy? It was Lyndon Johnson, Texas oil executives & their friends in U.S. military intelligence who did it.
Is it worth your $20 and, more importantly, your precious time to read this book? No, because the author feels that he can just ignore 49 years of very fine research into the JFK assassination pretend this massive amount of quality research just does not exist.
The Warren Report farce has not just been machine gun riddled, shot up like Swiss Cheese. It has been put into a blender and sliced up into a fine puree, distilled & possibly approaching pure methane at the molecular level.
Who killed John Kennedy? It was It was Lyndon Johnson, Texas oil executives (allied with LBJ) & their friends in U.S. military intelligence who did it for a variety of reasons both personal & ideological. LBJ, Hoover, Allen Dulles, H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison Sr, D. H. Byrd, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush are all very likely inner circle plotters to murder John Kennedy. You can add to that Gen. Curtis LeMay and most especially Gen. Edward Lansdale who was identified at Dealey Plaza by 2 of his peers: Col. Fletcher Prouty and Gen. Victor Krulak.
Lansdale ran Operation Mongoose for the Kennedys and later said it was one of the most frustrating experiences he ever had. U.S. military intelligence used anti-Castro Cubans and their affiliated CIA operatives to murder JFK. Anger and rage over Cuba policy was a very big reason for the JFK assassination.
As was the fact that the Kennedys were within days of the political execution and personal destruction of VP Lyndon Johnson who they despised & who had blackmailed his way onto the 1960 Democratic ticket (see Evelyn Lincoln, Hy Raskin, Clark Clifford & Pierre Salinger for that).
What this book proves is that it is still not socially or politically acceptable to tell the truth about the JFK assassination 49 years after that assassination of democracy in America. The reason for that is the truth discredits US political leadership of both major parties for the past 49 years. The reputations of Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, George Herbert Walker Bush, Richard Nixon would all be fatally tarnished by frank and honest discussion of what happened in Dallas on 11/22/63 and who helped to cover it (Ford, Nixon) and why.
JFK assassination truth discredits the leadership at the highest levels of the Democratic & Republican party, the government, the CIA controlled media, the FBI, the CIA, the US military, every single newspaper in America and their editorial boards and every history and political science department of every major university.
JFK assassination truth also discredits the NYT, Wash Post, WSJ, USA Today, LIFE, ABC News, CBS, NBC and CNN.
JFK assassination truth also discredits the heavily CIA-influenced Council on Foreign Relations and many of the political and historical commentators you see on TV and in the marquee spots in newspapers.
On June 30, 2009, President Obama had a private dinner with 9 top presidential historians: Michael Beschloss (CFR), H. W. Brands, Douglas Brinkley (CFR), Robert Caro, Robert Dallek, Doris Kearns Goodwin, David Kennedy, Kenneth Mack, and Garry Wills. As with Bill O'Reilly, I have never heard any of these reputable scholars say anything credible about the JFK assassination. In the case of Doris, it might be because she used to hop in bed with Lyndon Johnson who once asked to marry her. I don't know what Lady Bird would have done. Throw rice at the wedding of LBJ and Doris? Read Sally Quinn's blockbuster article on Doris in the Wash Post (8/24/75) entitled "A Tale of Hearts and Minds."
Ditto Larry Sabato, Chuck Todd of NBC & Michael Barone - those men all feed disinformation on the JFK assassination.
It is all about the power of tyranny to make black seem white, white seem black, up seem down and down seem up.
O'Reilly's treatment of US intelligence agent Oswald is truly pathetic. Oswald was a fake defector to Russia and when he came back he assumed a phony persona of a pro-Castro Marxist as he worked for intelligence operatives & rightwingers such as David Atlee Phillips and the ultra-rightist Guy Bannister in New Orleans.
In order to understand how and why O'Reilly puts out such junk - still covering for the murderers of John Kennedy - one has to understand the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. That is the one where the young kid points out the Emperor is butt naked while all the finest townspeople (doctors, lawyers, businessmen, FOX News personalities) are busy praising the Emperor's phantom clothes.
O'Reilly works for Roger Ailes at FOX. Roger Ailes is very close friends with George Herbert Walker Bush, who I think is one of the inner circle perps in the JFK assassination. GHW Bush is one record as saying he can't remember where he was on the day of the JFK assassination - somewhere down he Texas he thinks. That is absurb; it's like Rudy Guiliani saying he can't remember where he was on 9/11. GHW Bush was staying in the old Dallas Sheraton Hotel - we know that for a fact.
GHW Bush is also very close to the anti-Castro Cuban radicals and he even pardoned one of their top anti-Castro terrorists Orlando Bosch. Actually Bush commuted his sentence, a de facto pardon and he let Bosch out of jail.
So O'Reilly may very well be one person removed from a murderer of JFK. I think so. The political and social pressure for O'Reilly is to remain stupid about the JFK assassination.
If JFK truth were told you would not have had GWB as president for 2 terms, not have GWB and Jeb as governors of Texas & Florida respectively, not have Jeb on the presidential stage in 2016, not have his son George P. Bush trying to launch a career in Texas politics.
The other book to read in order to understand why Bill O'Reilly and the rest of the media treat the JFK assassination such a patently dishonest, absurd fashion is "Obedience to Authority" by Stanley Milgram. That is the man who did experiments getting subjects to electrically shock victims because authority figures told them to do so.
That is key to understanding the JFK assassination and why the cover up endures 49 years later. http://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Autho...
Historians & journalists, including the play acting dumb Bill O'Reilly - at the risks of some hoots from a discredited establishment - need to start assimilating into their books and narratives the very fine body of research that now exists on the JFK assassination from authors and researchers such as Phillip Nelson, Walt Brown, Ed Tatro, Joachim Joesten, Craig Zirbel, Noel Twyman, Doug Horne, David Lifton, Joan Mellon, Harry Livingstone, Barr McClellan, Madeleine Duncan Brown, Billie Sol Estes, James Tague, Connie Kritzberg, Thomas Buchanan, Anthony Summers, Vincent Salandria, Martin Schotz, Michael Morrisey, John Newman, Jerry Policoff, Gaeton Fonzi, Dick Russell, Russ Baker, Bruce Campbell Adamson, Wim Dankbaar, Rodney Stich, Judyth Vary Baker, Mark Lane, James Douglass, Casey Quinlan, Fletcher Prouty, Jim Garrison, Larry Hancock, Fabian Escalante, Robert Groden, Charles Crenshaw, Oliver Stone, Ed Haslam, Harry Yardum, Robert Gaylon Ross, Jim Marrs, George Michael Evica, Gary Shaw, Craig Ciccone, James Fetzer, Vince Palamara, William Turner, Penn Jones, William Turner, and John Judge.
Jim DiEugenio needs to be read on JFK's very dovish foreign policy and the possible role of Allen Dulles in helping to orchestrate the JFK assassination.
You can read legendary JFK researcher Bruce Campbell Adamson, Russ Baker, Wim Dankbaar and Paul Kangas on the likely role of CIA George Herbert Walker Bush in the JFK assassination.
"Years later, when he was running for President, George [Herbert Walker Bush] would claim that he never made the call. Documents were then produced that refreshed his memory. He also claimed that he did not remember where he was the day John F. Kennedy was killed- "somewhere in Texas," he said. George Bush is possibly the only person on the planet who did not recall his whereabouts that day ..." [Kitty Kelley, "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty," pp. 212-213]
As for Oswald being U.S. intelligence - a critical point that is completely missed by O'Reilly/Dugard, read:
1) "Oswald and the CIA" book by John Newman
2) "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and US Intelligence" book by Philip Melanson
3) "History Will Not Absolve Us" by Martin Schotz (Chapter 5 "Oswald and U.S. Intelligence" by Christopher Sharrett)
4) "Me and Lee" book by Judyth Vary Baker (Oswald's mistress in New Orleans, summer 1963)
5) "A Certain Arrogance: U.S. Intelligence's Manipulation of Religious Groups and Individuals in Two World Wars and the Cold War - and the Sacrificing of Lee Harvey Oswald" book by George Michael Evica
6) "Accessories After the Fact" by Sylvia Meagher, Chapter 19 "Oswald and the State Department'"
7) "Coup D'Etat in America: The CIA and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy" by Alan Weberman & Michael Canfield, Chapter 3 "Was Oswald a CIA Agent?"
8) "Oswald in New Orleans: Case for Conspiracy with the CIA" by Harold Weisberg
9) Chapter 9 "Fingerprints of Intelligence" in "Reasonable Doubt" by Henry Hurt
10) Chapter 14 "Oswald and the CIA" in "Oswald: Assassin or Fall Guy" by Joachim Joesten
11) Google “Lee Harvey Oswald’s reading habits summer 1963” by Judyth Vary Baker
Well, by this time, you may have noticed that I haven't talked much about Bill O'Reilly's book. That is because O'Reilly writes a book of 325 pages and he does not talk much about "Killing Kennedy:" how or why it happened.
Someone needs to.
Is it worth your $20 and, more importantly, your precious time to read this book? No, because the author feels that he can just ignore 49 years of very fine research into the JFK assassination pretend this massive amount of quality research just does not exist.
The Warren Report farce has not just been machine gun riddled, shot up like Swiss Cheese. It has been put into a blender and sliced up into a fine puree, distilled & possibly approaching pure methane at the molecular level.
Who killed John Kennedy? It was It was Lyndon Johnson, Texas oil executives (allied with LBJ) & their friends in U.S. military intelligence who did it for a variety of reasons both personal & ideological. LBJ, Hoover, Allen Dulles, H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison Sr, D. H. Byrd, Nelson Rockefeller and George Herbert Walker Bush are all very likely inner circle plotters to murder John Kennedy. You can add to that Gen. Curtis LeMay and most especially Gen. Edward Lansdale who was identified at Dealey Plaza by 2 of his peers: Col. Fletcher Prouty and Gen. Victor Krulak.
Lansdale ran Operation Mongoose for the Kennedys and later said it was one of the most frustrating experiences he ever had. U.S. military intelligence used anti-Castro Cubans and their affiliated CIA operatives to murder JFK. Anger and rage over Cuba policy was a very big reason for the JFK assassination.
As was the fact that the Kennedys were within days of the political execution and personal destruction of VP Lyndon Johnson who they despised & who had blackmailed his way onto the 1960 Democratic ticket (see Evelyn Lincoln, Hy Raskin, Clark Clifford & Pierre Salinger for that).
What this book proves is that it is still not socially or politically acceptable to tell the truth about the JFK assassination 49 years after that assassination of democracy in America. The reason for that is the truth discredits US political leadership of both major parties for the past 49 years. The reputations of Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, George Herbert Walker Bush, Richard Nixon would all be fatally tarnished by frank and honest discussion of what happened in Dallas on 11/22/63 and who helped to cover it (Ford, Nixon) and why.
JFK assassination truth discredits the leadership at the highest levels of the Democratic & Republican party, the government, the CIA controlled media, the FBI, the CIA, the US military, every single newspaper in America and their editorial boards and every history and political science department of every major university.
JFK assassination truth also discredits the NYT, Wash Post, WSJ, USA Today, LIFE, ABC News, CBS, NBC and CNN.
JFK assassination truth also discredits the heavily CIA-influenced Council on Foreign Relations and many of the political and historical commentators you see on TV and in the marquee spots in newspapers.
On June 30, 2009, President Obama had a private dinner with 9 top presidential historians: Michael Beschloss (CFR), H. W. Brands, Douglas Brinkley (CFR), Robert Caro, Robert Dallek, Doris Kearns Goodwin, David Kennedy, Kenneth Mack, and Garry Wills. As with Bill O'Reilly, I have never heard any of these reputable scholars say anything credible about the JFK assassination. In the case of Doris, it might be because she used to hop in bed with Lyndon Johnson who once asked to marry her. I don't know what Lady Bird would have done. Throw rice at the wedding of LBJ and Doris? Read Sally Quinn's blockbuster article on Doris in the Wash Post (8/24/75) entitled "A Tale of Hearts and Minds."
Ditto Larry Sabato, Chuck Todd of NBC & Michael Barone - those men all feed disinformation on the JFK assassination.
It is all about the power of tyranny to make black seem white, white seem black, up seem down and down seem up.
O'Reilly's treatment of US intelligence agent Oswald is truly pathetic. Oswald was a fake defector to Russia and when he came back he assumed a phony persona of a pro-Castro Marxist as he worked for intelligence operatives & rightwingers such as David Atlee Phillips and the ultra-rightist Guy Bannister in New Orleans.
In order to understand how and why O'Reilly puts out such junk - still covering for the murderers of John Kennedy - one has to understand the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. That is the one where the young kid points out the Emperor is butt naked while all the finest townspeople (doctors, lawyers, businessmen, FOX News personalities) are busy praising the Emperor's phantom clothes.
O'Reilly works for Roger Ailes at FOX. Roger Ailes is very close friends with George Herbert Walker Bush, who I think is one of the inner circle perps in the JFK assassination. GHW Bush is one record as saying he can't remember where he was on the day of the JFK assassination - somewhere down he Texas he thinks. That is absurb; it's like Rudy Guiliani saying he can't remember where he was on 9/11. GHW Bush was staying in the old Dallas Sheraton Hotel - we know that for a fact.
GHW Bush is also very close to the anti-Castro Cuban radicals and he even pardoned one of their top anti-Castro terrorists Orlando Bosch. Actually Bush commuted his sentence, a de facto pardon and he let Bosch out of jail.
So O'Reilly may very well be one person removed from a murderer of JFK. I think so. The political and social pressure for O'Reilly is to remain stupid about the JFK assassination.
If JFK truth were told you would not have had GWB as president for 2 terms, not have GWB and Jeb as governors of Texas & Florida respectively, not have Jeb on the presidential stage in 2016, not have his son George P. Bush trying to launch a career in Texas politics.
The other book to read in order to understand why Bill O'Reilly and the rest of the media treat the JFK assassination such a patently dishonest, absurd fashion is "Obedience to Authority" by Stanley Milgram. That is the man who did experiments getting subjects to electrically shock victims because authority figures told them to do so.
That is key to understanding the JFK assassination and why the cover up endures 49 years later. http://www.amazon.com/Obedience-Autho...
Historians & journalists, including the play acting dumb Bill O'Reilly - at the risks of some hoots from a discredited establishment - need to start assimilating into their books and narratives the very fine body of research that now exists on the JFK assassination from authors and researchers such as Phillip Nelson, Walt Brown, Ed Tatro, Joachim Joesten, Craig Zirbel, Noel Twyman, Doug Horne, David Lifton, Joan Mellon, Harry Livingstone, Barr McClellan, Madeleine Duncan Brown, Billie Sol Estes, James Tague, Connie Kritzberg, Thomas Buchanan, Anthony Summers, Vincent Salandria, Martin Schotz, Michael Morrisey, John Newman, Jerry Policoff, Gaeton Fonzi, Dick Russell, Russ Baker, Bruce Campbell Adamson, Wim Dankbaar, Rodney Stich, Judyth Vary Baker, Mark Lane, James Douglass, Casey Quinlan, Fletcher Prouty, Jim Garrison, Larry Hancock, Fabian Escalante, Robert Groden, Charles Crenshaw, Oliver Stone, Ed Haslam, Harry Yardum, Robert Gaylon Ross, Jim Marrs, George Michael Evica, Gary Shaw, Craig Ciccone, James Fetzer, Vince Palamara, William Turner, Penn Jones, William Turner, and John Judge.
Jim DiEugenio needs to be read on JFK's very dovish foreign policy and the possible role of Allen Dulles in helping to orchestrate the JFK assassination.
You can read legendary JFK researcher Bruce Campbell Adamson, Russ Baker, Wim Dankbaar and Paul Kangas on the likely role of CIA George Herbert Walker Bush in the JFK assassination.
"Years later, when he was running for President, George [Herbert Walker Bush] would claim that he never made the call. Documents were then produced that refreshed his memory. He also claimed that he did not remember where he was the day John F. Kennedy was killed- "somewhere in Texas," he said. George Bush is possibly the only person on the planet who did not recall his whereabouts that day ..." [Kitty Kelley, "The Family: The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty," pp. 212-213]
As for Oswald being U.S. intelligence - a critical point that is completely missed by O'Reilly/Dugard, read:
1) "Oswald and the CIA" book by John Newman
2) "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and US Intelligence" book by Philip Melanson
3) "History Will Not Absolve Us" by Martin Schotz (Chapter 5 "Oswald and U.S. Intelligence" by Christopher Sharrett)
4) "Me and Lee" book by Judyth Vary Baker (Oswald's mistress in New Orleans, summer 1963)
5) "A Certain Arrogance: U.S. Intelligence's Manipulation of Religious Groups and Individuals in Two World Wars and the Cold War - and the Sacrificing of Lee Harvey Oswald" book by George Michael Evica
6) "Accessories After the Fact" by Sylvia Meagher, Chapter 19 "Oswald and the State Department'"
7) "Coup D'Etat in America: The CIA and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy" by Alan Weberman & Michael Canfield, Chapter 3 "Was Oswald a CIA Agent?"
8) "Oswald in New Orleans: Case for Conspiracy with the CIA" by Harold Weisberg
9) Chapter 9 "Fingerprints of Intelligence" in "Reasonable Doubt" by Henry Hurt
10) Chapter 14 "Oswald and the CIA" in "Oswald: Assassin or Fall Guy" by Joachim Joesten
11) Google “Lee Harvey Oswald’s reading habits summer 1963” by Judyth Vary Baker
Well, by this time, you may have noticed that I haven't talked much about Bill O'Reilly's book. That is because O'Reilly writes a book of 325 pages and he does not talk much about "Killing Kennedy:" how or why it happened.
Someone needs to.
June 2, 2013
As he demonstrates on FOX News, Mr O'Reilly has trouble separating historical fact from hearsay, history from his own prejudices. I read his previous book, Killing Lincoln, a year or so ago and while it did not contain much in the way of new information as it claimed, the book was actually well written and held my interest. Killing Kennedy did neither. In the introduction, Mr O'Reilly claims he will "cut through the fog and bring you the facts". Facts, to Mr O'Reilly are whatever he chooses to believe, and the rest of the book is a fog machine. He has an annoying repetitive quirk of continually attempting to tantalize us with "little did they know, but this would be JFK's last birthday" "little did they know but JFK only had 9 months to live" "little did they know, but this would be the last tie JFK ever bought" . He doesn't ever stop! He ends each chapter with this cheap device that just doesn't work. You want to toss the book out the window. Perhaps most annoying of all is Mr O'Reilly is obsessed with JFK's sex life. This is totally irrelevant to "Killing Kennedy" unless Mr O'Reilly is trying to claim that good old JFK screwed himself to death!
I thought Mr O'Reilly was a blowhard commentator but a good writer. I was only half right.
I thought Mr O'Reilly was a blowhard commentator but a good writer. I was only half right.
November 13, 2012
My experience this book is so intertwined with my experience of 11/22/63 that I can't mention one without the other. I'm cross-posting this review to King's book.
I recently was given Bill O'Reilly's Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot as a birthday gift. I probably would not have bought it although I like his television news show because, being a lawyer, I read enough nonfiction and like to escape to fiction to relax. But it was eminently readable and certainly took me back to that dark day in November 1963. And yes, I still remember where I was when we got the word of the assassination (an art class at the University of Cincinnati, where I was enrolled in the Advertising Design Program). When an author can make history as readable and entertaining as a good novel, it has to be a good thing, and I would give the book five out of five stars. But reading it made me go back and finish Stephen King’s 11/22/63, which is a novel about a man that goes back in time to assassinate Lee Harvey Oswald to prevent President Kennedy’s assassination. I had started reading the book many months ago, but had given up, though not because it wasn’t good. It was the book that I had in my bedroom that I would read as part of my getting ready to sleep routine. It was very readable, but it was so long (more than 800 pages) that in the 20 minutes or so that I had to read before falling asleep, I felt that I wasn’t making any progress. So without any conscious decision, I just stopped reading it, intending to come back to it at some point. O’Reilly’s book energized me to pick King’s book back up, and I finished more than 500 pages in two days. The thing that has always amazed me about King’s writing is his sense of place and time. I thought that his Salem’s Lot was the best contemporary vampire novel because he made the characters so every day and believable. I also particularly liked his Christine, The Green Mile, Needful Things, and Shawshank Redemption. I have not read any of his fantasy, such as the Dark Tower series, because I am not into fantasy other than Poul Anderson’s Three Hearts and Three Lions and Robert A. Heinlein’s Glory Road. But am I glad that I went back to 11/22/63, and I mean went back to because the author takes you back to that time. The novel is a science fiction book, a thriller, a romance, and a little bit of a horror story all rolled into a seamless whole. As an aspiring novelist myself, I certainly wish that I could write like he does, especially at setting the scene and developing the characters by their actions and what they say rather than by too much internal dialog. An easy five of five stars.
I recently was given Bill O'Reilly's Killing Kennedy: The End of Camelot as a birthday gift. I probably would not have bought it although I like his television news show because, being a lawyer, I read enough nonfiction and like to escape to fiction to relax. But it was eminently readable and certainly took me back to that dark day in November 1963. And yes, I still remember where I was when we got the word of the assassination (an art class at the University of Cincinnati, where I was enrolled in the Advertising Design Program). When an author can make history as readable and entertaining as a good novel, it has to be a good thing, and I would give the book five out of five stars. But reading it made me go back and finish Stephen King’s 11/22/63, which is a novel about a man that goes back in time to assassinate Lee Harvey Oswald to prevent President Kennedy’s assassination. I had started reading the book many months ago, but had given up, though not because it wasn’t good. It was the book that I had in my bedroom that I would read as part of my getting ready to sleep routine. It was very readable, but it was so long (more than 800 pages) that in the 20 minutes or so that I had to read before falling asleep, I felt that I wasn’t making any progress. So without any conscious decision, I just stopped reading it, intending to come back to it at some point. O’Reilly’s book energized me to pick King’s book back up, and I finished more than 500 pages in two days. The thing that has always amazed me about King’s writing is his sense of place and time. I thought that his Salem’s Lot was the best contemporary vampire novel because he made the characters so every day and believable. I also particularly liked his Christine, The Green Mile, Needful Things, and Shawshank Redemption. I have not read any of his fantasy, such as the Dark Tower series, because I am not into fantasy other than Poul Anderson’s Three Hearts and Three Lions and Robert A. Heinlein’s Glory Road. But am I glad that I went back to 11/22/63, and I mean went back to because the author takes you back to that time. The novel is a science fiction book, a thriller, a romance, and a little bit of a horror story all rolled into a seamless whole. As an aspiring novelist myself, I certainly wish that I could write like he does, especially at setting the scene and developing the characters by their actions and what they say rather than by too much internal dialog. An easy five of five stars.
January 29, 2015
I read Killing Patton: The Strange Death of World War II's Most Audacious General and thought it a good and thought provoking book. Could I, I would give this book maybe a half star less, but that could be subjective.
Mr. O'Reilly tells us that there's nothing new here as he opens...he's right. So let me say this, if you were born too late to actually remember the events recounted in this book it will be far more valuable than it will to those of us who remember them.
There are events in history that burn themselves into the brain and forever after you will remember where you were when you learned of them. For my parents it was Perl Harbor. For the current generation it's 9/11. For "us" it's the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
I was on the stairs of my school when someone rushed up to me and told me the president had been killed.
Mr. O'Reilly and Mr. Dugard lead us through the events of the three years of JFK's administration, some of the background and life of Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby and others whose lives intersect with these events.
There are of course large numbers of conspiracy theories surrounding the president's death. Mr. O'Reilly gives a bare nod to these but on the whole they are simply discounted and the story we get is the one history has recorded. There may be a few times when some of Mr. O'Reilly's bias peaks through...but not often.
So, if your knowledge of these events is skimpy then read this one. It's a good complete account concerning the facts of the events.
Mr. O'Reilly tells us that there's nothing new here as he opens...he's right. So let me say this, if you were born too late to actually remember the events recounted in this book it will be far more valuable than it will to those of us who remember them.
There are events in history that burn themselves into the brain and forever after you will remember where you were when you learned of them. For my parents it was Perl Harbor. For the current generation it's 9/11. For "us" it's the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
I was on the stairs of my school when someone rushed up to me and told me the president had been killed.
Mr. O'Reilly and Mr. Dugard lead us through the events of the three years of JFK's administration, some of the background and life of Lee Harvey Oswald, Jack Ruby and others whose lives intersect with these events.
There are of course large numbers of conspiracy theories surrounding the president's death. Mr. O'Reilly gives a bare nod to these but on the whole they are simply discounted and the story we get is the one history has recorded. There may be a few times when some of Mr. O'Reilly's bias peaks through...but not often.
So, if your knowledge of these events is skimpy then read this one. It's a good complete account concerning the facts of the events.
May 18, 2023
I love the Killing series and this is a gem. This made me realize how little I knew about JFK besides Marilyn Monroe and the assassination details. This is a great book for a glimpse into the politics of the Cold War and pre-Vietnam War America. With this year finally declassifing documents pointing at CIA involvement, it made this an even more interesting read. Factor in O'Reilly's suspicions back then and the deaths of other Kennedys that followed JFK's. This left a very eerie feeling.
Added bonus: a take on Dr Martin Luther King Jr. that is not as popular as what is portrayed in school history books.
Added bonus: a take on Dr Martin Luther King Jr. that is not as popular as what is portrayed in school history books.
April 5, 2020
As expected, didn’t learn anything new, but a quick, entertaining read.
January 15, 2017
Fascinating fact-based account of JFK's White House years highlighting the controversies leading up to his assassination. Picked up a few interesting details of the behind the scene lives of JFK and MLK, Jr.
March 24, 2017
The man is a bonafide douchecanoe but he can write compelling accounts of world events. This was really fascinating.
March 28, 2016
Great non-fiction (that felt like a novel) about JFK and his assassination. There might not be a lot of "new" material, but it was a great refresher. Actually I did learn several things I didn't know and made me want to learn even more. My parents were teens/young adults when he was killed and could tell me exactly where they were when they heard the news. Highly recommend to anyone wanting an entertaining/short version on the details of the JFK murder.
December 22, 2012
O'Reilly's "Killing Kennedy" is a major disappointment for anyone seeking new theories or information on the assassination. This book largely follows the inept findings of the Warren Commission despite O'Reilly claiming that he would "offer different scenarios for the reader to come to their own conclusions". In the end, however the reader is left with the same cliches and speculation that we have all known for years, ultimately right back to the original investigation.
I have a problem with an author who is writing a so called "non fiction" account of history who portrays characters as if he were present with the participants at that time in history. How is it, Mr. O'Reilly that you knew what Lee Harvey Oswald was thinking when he was allegedly plotting to kill the president? There is very little evidence revealed by the author other than his own views and opinions. This is a constant theme throughout the book which lends it to more "fairly tales" than supported evidence.
Those seeking a more scholarly investigation of this case need to put this book back on the shelf. There are much better choices out there.
I have a problem with an author who is writing a so called "non fiction" account of history who portrays characters as if he were present with the participants at that time in history. How is it, Mr. O'Reilly that you knew what Lee Harvey Oswald was thinking when he was allegedly plotting to kill the president? There is very little evidence revealed by the author other than his own views and opinions. This is a constant theme throughout the book which lends it to more "fairly tales" than supported evidence.
Those seeking a more scholarly investigation of this case need to put this book back on the shelf. There are much better choices out there.
July 2, 2019
“Don’t let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment, that was known as Camelot.”
Loved this book. OK, so for those who've read their share of "Kennedy" books, there may not be any real surprises here to speak of. And it certainly is not intended to delve into exhaustive details. But the writing style of the O'Reilly/Dugard duo is so incredibly entertaining. Reading like novels, describing the sights, sounds and context of the moments which shape history, the "Killing" books are hard to put down. Killing Kennedy is no exception. It covers much more than the particulars of the president's assassination. Rather, the book vividly brings to life the major events of the Kennedys (of Camelot), starting with the legend of PT109, the moon challenge, Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK philandering, the struggle for civil rights, and other matters which occurred during this era. Killing Kennedy is being added to my "best of" collection.
Loved this book. OK, so for those who've read their share of "Kennedy" books, there may not be any real surprises here to speak of. And it certainly is not intended to delve into exhaustive details. But the writing style of the O'Reilly/Dugard duo is so incredibly entertaining. Reading like novels, describing the sights, sounds and context of the moments which shape history, the "Killing" books are hard to put down. Killing Kennedy is no exception. It covers much more than the particulars of the president's assassination. Rather, the book vividly brings to life the major events of the Kennedys (of Camelot), starting with the legend of PT109, the moon challenge, Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK philandering, the struggle for civil rights, and other matters which occurred during this era. Killing Kennedy is being added to my "best of" collection.
April 20, 2013
This book was fascinating in a weird tabloid sort of way.
I was only 4 when JFK was elected, but at a young age I was happy to know that a Catholic like me was president of the United States. I knew that it was controversial that Kennedy was a Catholic; but I doubt that word was in my vocab at the time.
This is how I have always pictured JFK:
He even had children like me:
Although people would probably hate him today because he was such a rich guy (wink wink), no one cared back then:
As I grew older and took the required classes in American History, I learned about the Bay of Pigs and other bad times for JFK. I didn't think much about it, or the many JFK links to women other than his wife.
Then I listened to this audiobook, and I thought this guy is almost as bad as Tiger Woods. What an idiot! And Jackie knew, but put up with it! What an idiot!
All of the people surrounding JFK knew of his addiction to women, but they protected him, which is why there are so few photos like this one:
This book does not go into the nitty gritty details of JFK's affairs, just the generalities along with some of the names. The book covers far more important topics, but this was one of the most shocking.
As O'Reilly recounts the important events occurring in the United States and around the world, I was drawn into the story. This book may give you a better understanding of the events of the day.
At this point I would like to comment on O'Reilly's vagueness concerning his sources, especially concerning what people were actually thinking. How O'Reilly knew details about what Jackie told her personal doctor is beyond me. I am sure he got the big facts right, but not so sure about some of the other stuff. Take it for what it was worth.
As this book is supposed to deal with the death of JFK and what lead to it, and whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone or with others, O'Reilly sets the scene with information that shows many people would have liked JFK out of the picture.
Nikita Khrushchev, organized crime, Cuba, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, VP LBJ, AG Bobby Kennedy, and Oswald all play interesting roles in this story that show a possibility for conspiracy.
**SPOILER ALERT** SPOILER BELOW:
Then as the assignation nears:
And happens:
Jackie retrieving part of her husband:
Was Oswald that smart? His plan worked perfectly:
Then Oswald is quickly murdered by Ruby:
O'Reilly briefly discusses the Warren Commission and says they were right, there was no conspiracy. Wait...the set up, the assassination, the assassin silenced, and now you are telling us to go home because there is nothing to see?
I really don't know about the conspiracy, but the more I know about men and big government, the less I trust them. So I will leave it there.
I was only 4 when JFK was elected, but at a young age I was happy to know that a Catholic like me was president of the United States. I knew that it was controversial that Kennedy was a Catholic; but I doubt that word was in my vocab at the time.
This is how I have always pictured JFK:
He even had children like me:
Although people would probably hate him today because he was such a rich guy (wink wink), no one cared back then:
As I grew older and took the required classes in American History, I learned about the Bay of Pigs and other bad times for JFK. I didn't think much about it, or the many JFK links to women other than his wife.
Then I listened to this audiobook, and I thought this guy is almost as bad as Tiger Woods. What an idiot! And Jackie knew, but put up with it! What an idiot!
All of the people surrounding JFK knew of his addiction to women, but they protected him, which is why there are so few photos like this one:
This book does not go into the nitty gritty details of JFK's affairs, just the generalities along with some of the names. The book covers far more important topics, but this was one of the most shocking.
As O'Reilly recounts the important events occurring in the United States and around the world, I was drawn into the story. This book may give you a better understanding of the events of the day.
At this point I would like to comment on O'Reilly's vagueness concerning his sources, especially concerning what people were actually thinking. How O'Reilly knew details about what Jackie told her personal doctor is beyond me. I am sure he got the big facts right, but not so sure about some of the other stuff. Take it for what it was worth.
As this book is supposed to deal with the death of JFK and what lead to it, and whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone or with others, O'Reilly sets the scene with information that shows many people would have liked JFK out of the picture.
Nikita Khrushchev, organized crime, Cuba, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, VP LBJ, AG Bobby Kennedy, and Oswald all play interesting roles in this story that show a possibility for conspiracy.
**SPOILER ALERT** SPOILER BELOW:
Then as the assignation nears:
And happens:
Jackie retrieving part of her husband:
Was Oswald that smart? His plan worked perfectly:
Then Oswald is quickly murdered by Ruby:
O'Reilly briefly discusses the Warren Commission and says they were right, there was no conspiracy. Wait...the set up, the assassination, the assassin silenced, and now you are telling us to go home because there is nothing to see?
I really don't know about the conspiracy, but the more I know about men and big government, the less I trust them. So I will leave it there.
November 14, 2012
A very easy read written in a style of short vignettes that follow the various lives that converge in the killing of President Kennedy. The book includes a few interesting insights, altho not many.
It is an embellished essay about this epic tragedy.
If one wants a simple, easy to read, summary of what happened, this is a fair candidate. Were O'Reilly's name not on the cover, this would likely be lost in the dusty shelves and lists of nice books of little or no import in the world of literacy and the voluminous undistinguished mountain of writings about Kennedy. However, because it is getting pitched to a huge and mostly adoring audience of millions night after night? Well, it is a "best seller" for that reason and none others.
Not a recommended book for anyone really wanting to know specifics, details, and in-depth investigation of the assassination. Nice cover though.
btw, some self-proclaimed officianados have determined that O'Reilly's write fails to come to correct conclusions. Frankly, while I'm disinclined to think it does not, I'm not sufficiently intriqued to have read enough to have an informed position about the Warren Commission's conclusion. For now, I believe those conclusions, having read and watched "enough." So until there is a clarion call proclaiming a new "truth" that might vindicate the conspiracy theorists' ideas, I think they are well-meaning, wannabe CSIers.
For now, I think this summarizes the true story, simply and succinctly.
btw, the manner in which the authors portray the Kennedys is sickening-sweet, dreamy-eyed and almost childish. Guess they had to work to get the book's content to play into the book's title that included the vision of Camelot. Not! Never was, and they do a mass disservice to anyone wanting to really know, imo. In the end, the only thing that links O'Reilly and this story is his contention that he "heard" one of the ancillary characters blowing his head off, as O'Reilly was "hot on the trail of truth." Yea, right. O'Reilly. Mr. No-Spin Spinster!
It is an embellished essay about this epic tragedy.
If one wants a simple, easy to read, summary of what happened, this is a fair candidate. Were O'Reilly's name not on the cover, this would likely be lost in the dusty shelves and lists of nice books of little or no import in the world of literacy and the voluminous undistinguished mountain of writings about Kennedy. However, because it is getting pitched to a huge and mostly adoring audience of millions night after night? Well, it is a "best seller" for that reason and none others.
Not a recommended book for anyone really wanting to know specifics, details, and in-depth investigation of the assassination. Nice cover though.
btw, some self-proclaimed officianados have determined that O'Reilly's write fails to come to correct conclusions. Frankly, while I'm disinclined to think it does not, I'm not sufficiently intriqued to have read enough to have an informed position about the Warren Commission's conclusion. For now, I believe those conclusions, having read and watched "enough." So until there is a clarion call proclaiming a new "truth" that might vindicate the conspiracy theorists' ideas, I think they are well-meaning, wannabe CSIers.
For now, I think this summarizes the true story, simply and succinctly.
btw, the manner in which the authors portray the Kennedys is sickening-sweet, dreamy-eyed and almost childish. Guess they had to work to get the book's content to play into the book's title that included the vision of Camelot. Not! Never was, and they do a mass disservice to anyone wanting to really know, imo. In the end, the only thing that links O'Reilly and this story is his contention that he "heard" one of the ancillary characters blowing his head off, as O'Reilly was "hot on the trail of truth." Yea, right. O'Reilly. Mr. No-Spin Spinster!
July 3, 2013
The ascension, administration, and assassination of President Kennedy is truly a riveting topic, but this text is poorly written and, furthermore, written to such a low reading level that the grammatical errors and simplistic style are entirely distracting -- perhaps that is based on the audience to which O'Reilly wishes to appeal. For example, "kids" should be "children" for heaven sake, unless you're writing to an elementary reading level, and the verb tense should be consistent and should NOT be present tense. Also, where are the annotated footnotes for readers to delve into more information from the primary sources historians rely upon to provide objective information? Without these sources, it appears the authors have imagined or invented the motivations and emotions they attribute to the people involved in years leading up to the assassination. The book comes off as highly subjective, Republican, ultraconservative, gossipy, rolling about in the gutter of propaganda and innuendo, the worst fluff. Polish it up, tighten it up, class it up. I shouldn't have expected anything better, though. Glad I didn't buy it. Sorry I'm compelled to read it for my book club.
June 5, 2016
Listening to this book in the audible format was a very emotional experience for me. I was a teenager when Kennedy was assassinated in the 1960s were a very significant decade for me. Listening to the story of Camelot was also very emotional for me because I am in the midst of what may be the end of my father's life. My father is just recently in a nursing home as he approaches is 96 birthday following a fall that resulted in some serious head injuries. My emotions from that experience our gushing out in tears as I listen to the end of the life of JFK. There is a good deal of personal information about the life of the Kennedys in this book. There are many conspiracy theories about this time. And I think they are reasonably well handled in the book, being mentioned without being given significant credibility.
October 12, 2012
Very disappointing, exploitative book. Nothing new or enlightening on the murder of a sitting President. Robert Caro's book offers more on the assassination of President Kennedy then did O'Reilly. When all is said and done, Killing Kennedy was all about making a fast buck for O'Reilly. Skip it...you're missing nothing at all.
February 22, 2024
Another great read in O'Reilly's killing series. Very well researched and written. Recommended
February 6, 2013
I was 10 years old when JFK was killed. This book, which I listened to as opposed to reading it (read by Bill O'Reilly) was very helpful to me. It allowed me to know the whole story as an adult, in order, written as a story but factual (as far as we have the facts today). The "facts" have been available for years, but to have it all at once and delivered well gave me a better understanding of world affairs, the Kennedys and other politicians as flawed people; an ego driven villain in Oswald and the complexities of threats to our safety and the stress put upon a leader such as our president during tough times. Seems to me JFK's heart was into the role as leader and obstacles and challenges were many and serious
.
No matter what one thinks of the Kennedys, even my 10 y/o sensibilities knew it was wrong beyond wrong to kill him and this book helped me to put it into proper adult perspective once and for all.
I liked it better than Killing Lincoln only because Lincoln's story had so many details about war battles that made little sense to me most of the time; I don't follow war strategy, etc. But as my favorite president, I was glad to read about him and his last days.
.
No matter what one thinks of the Kennedys, even my 10 y/o sensibilities knew it was wrong beyond wrong to kill him and this book helped me to put it into proper adult perspective once and for all.
I liked it better than Killing Lincoln only because Lincoln's story had so many details about war battles that made little sense to me most of the time; I don't follow war strategy, etc. But as my favorite president, I was glad to read about him and his last days.
November 18, 2016
I think the tour of the White House by the First Lady to be shown on television should be reenacted. That's a great idea!
What a tragic time in our country's history. My heart broke for Jackie. What is amazing is that even though the author strayed from blaming Kennedy's death on any one conspiracy theory, his life still swarmed with conspiracies, so it's not a stretch to think.
What a tragic time in our country's history. My heart broke for Jackie. What is amazing is that even though the author strayed from blaming Kennedy's death on any one conspiracy theory, his life still swarmed with conspiracies, so it's not a stretch to think.
November 30, 2012
I give this book two stars because it was certainly entertaining. However, it will never get a Pulitzer Prize for history. Good historians lay the facts before their readers, and allow the readers to come to their own conclusions based on facts. That doesn't happen with this book. Bill just can't help inserting his own spin into the story. I loved how he tried to pin the Vietnam War on Kennedy rather than Eisenhower. I also was amused at his supposed inside knowledge of how people were thinking. My favorite was when he stated that Oswald beat his wife, but she was okay with that because she preferred being beaten to being ignored. Right. Thought no woman. Ever. He also stated that Oswald admired Kennedy, but he shot him because his wife broke up with him. Really? How do you know that Bill? That makes no sense at all. This book does have some interesting pictures and maps, though, and it's a good reminder that bad history is still being pumped out.
February 2, 2020
Bill O'Reilly's Killing Kennedy includes many details about the Kennedy assassination that I was already familiar with. I personally enjoyed the behind-the-scenes look at the life of the president and his family even though it seems that JFK and Jackie's life was on full view for the public at the time. The tragedy was still heartbreaking even though I knew exactly what was coming and when in the book. Like O'Reilly's other books, he details the life of Oswald before the assassination which was information that I was not fully aware of. This was appreciated to understand somewhat who is was and maybe what motive he had for his actions. In addition to the details about Oswald, the conflicts and animosity among the leaders of the times are interesting to read about as I don't think those details are typically included in school textbooks.
September 20, 2022
This was my third book by Bill O'Reilly and I'm fast becoming a fan. I've watched his show on Fox News occasionally and have been frustrated by how, as an interviewer, he tends to interrupt and talk over his guests. However, in his books he doesn't have that problem. They are all well researched and factual and while he does mention some things that are unproven he clearly identifies them as such. I learned much new material about JFK from PT-109 to infidelities to Bay of Pigs and more that I knew of but not in detail. Recommend for anyone who likes history and Americana.
February 20, 2019
A sad and controversial time in American history. However, it's politics. Intrigue, back room deals, power trips, women and affairs, the list goes on.
What was reinforced was what a sex addict JFK was, his physical ailments, and the set up for political dynasty of their family. Then you look at all the major world and military trials he had to deal with.
Not a lot of juicy conspiracy theories.
What was reinforced was what a sex addict JFK was, his physical ailments, and the set up for political dynasty of their family. Then you look at all the major world and military trials he had to deal with.
Not a lot of juicy conspiracy theories.
January 3, 2013
The story reads like a movie. The way O'Reilly switches back and forth from the glorious Kennedy to the pathetic Oswald with objectivity makes Killing Kennedy seem like as accurate an account as we who were not born at the time can hope to have - devoid of the hero-worship spin put on Kennedy by other so-called reporters who come off as little more than fans rather than as historians. In this book, Kennedy was at once flawed and impressive - in other words, he was human. And the troubled Oswald is not unlike these troubled adults who shoot children in Connecticut schools nowadays. If only we learned something from him and others since him... I was already familiar with the facts surrounding Kennedy's horrendous murder, but I must say that I FELT it for the first time reading this book. I have no idea how Mrs. Kennedy ever slept another night in her life after experiencing what she experienced that day in Dallas with the love of her life. One point of criticism - the first person, present tense was sometimes awkward since this was not an autobiography, but overall very good read.
September 25, 2013
WOW!!!! This was a good book, had trouble putting it down!!!! Of I am sure that everyone thinks read one book about President Kennedy you have read them all. I did not feel that that was the case for me with this book. I learned a lot about Kennedy and the beautiful Jackie. Of course in history class we learned about Kennedy and the day his life was taken, but we didn't learn so much about Oswald. This book had great insight into him and the way he thought all those years ago.
My LOVE for Kennedy stems from seeing the famous quote from his inaugural address on the wall of the history room for my four high school years. . . "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." I was also very lucky to go see his grave and Jackie's when I was a senior in high school. Seeing his grave and the Eternal flame was what made me realize that history is being made every day even if we aren't ready for it.
My LOVE for Kennedy stems from seeing the famous quote from his inaugural address on the wall of the history room for my four high school years. . . "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." I was also very lucky to go see his grave and Jackie's when I was a senior in high school. Seeing his grave and the Eternal flame was what made me realize that history is being made every day even if we aren't ready for it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,951 reviews