Two JFK books on Amazon best-seller list

Two JFK books published by The Future of Freedom Foundation are doing well on Amazon, indicative of the persistent demand for a credible explanation of the Dallas tragedy.

As of January 5, 2015, The JFK Autopsy by Jacob Hornberger has sold 2,525 copies and is ranked #15 on Amazon’s “Top 100 Best Selling Books in 20th-Century American History.”

JFK’s War with the National-Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne has sold 1,749 copies and is ranked #39 in Amazon’s “Top 100 Best Selling Books in 20th-Century American History.”

 

16 comments

  1. Those look like interesting books. I wonder if The JFK Autopsy will include the story of the 2 caskets that showed up in Bethesda(the Naval Hospital).

      • Thank you Jacob….looking forward to reading it.

      • BrotherBruce says:

        Jacob,
        Quite nice to have a best selling history book. Congratulations! How long would you estimate the process took; from idea to publication?
        For the killers of our President to have been able to reach into Bethesda and manipulate the autopsy results indicates the extreme level of power and influence these people had. Our intelligence agencies and the men who led proves them indicates that they were quite powerful and influential. However, it seems unlikely that any one group or combination would have dared to take on such a high profile murder unless they were assured of full complicity by the man at the very top of the food chain. Which is exactly what Jack Ruby confided to reporters when Ford and Warren went to Dallas to interview him.
        Again, thank you for all the marvelous research and sweat equity you’ve invested into helping us all better understand a very enigmatic part of JFK’s assassination. BrotherBruce

  2. kennedy63 says:

    Mr. Hornberger, there are assertions that a pre-autopsy was performed on JFK prior to the actual start of the “official” autopsy. If so, did this initial inspection remove bullets (or fragmented parts of missiles)? I’ve tried to reconcile Agents Sibert and O’Neill’s report stating they were given “a missile” at the autopsy. Later, I saw a U-tube video where this was explained away by one of the agents as “fragments.” Such misnomers don’t make much sense; there have been too many exotic theory which attempt to reconcile disparate parts (and there are many) of the autopsy, let alone the whole of the assassination sequencing. What is your take on this important pre-autopsy matter?

    • I have to recommend Doug Horne’s 5-volume book Inside the Assassination Records Review Board, which provides the very best analysis of that issue and all others relating to the autopsy. As you may know, Doug served on the staff of the ARRB. My e-book is a synopsis of his 5-volume work. Also see Doug’s excellent 6 1/2 hour video presentation about the autopsy entitled “Altered History” that is on FFF’s website–www.fff.org.

  3. Cary Jennings says:

    Doug Horne’s 5-part video presentation on the medical evidence, entitled “Altered History,” is also available for viewing at the fff.org website and is very informative.

  4. kennedy63 says:

    Thanks Jacob and Carey for the info. I definitely will watch and submit a response.

  5. The problem I have with the investigative and information analysis skills of both Mr. Horneberger and Mr. Horne is that they reviewed Peter Janney’s book, Mary’s Mosaic with lavish praise. Neither, to my knowledge, has edited either of their high profile reviews of that book, despite the fact that a core premise of that book, Janney’s accusation that Crump trial prosecution witness William L Mitchell vanished after his trial testimony and was actually the CIA sponsored assassin of Mary Meyer.
    http://www.amazon.com/Marys-Mosaic-Conspiracy-Kennedy-Pinchot/product-reviews/1626361274/ref=cm_cr_pr_top_helpful?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=byRankDescending

    There two researchers and book reviewers show no tendency to admit when they are mistaken in judgment of what is indeed, fact. These observations influence me to take the extraodinary claims of either of these authors with a grain of salt.

    • roy quist says:

      Tom, are you saying that the pseudonymous W L Mitchell either 1)did not vanish or 2)was not MPM’s assassin? One, he surely made himself scarce. Two, whether it was he or some other work-allergic spook-asset, it doesn’t make a lot of difference to the point that the connected, knowledgable MPM was slaughtered (and then robbed of her personal effects after her murder!) so she would stop running her mouth. Cord Meyer knew what was behind his ex-wife’s vicious demise; at her funeral, he had a complete breakdown when the enormity hit him. And he knew that the vampires that run our polity waited until he was out of town, in New York, to soften the blow and make sure he couldn’t be suspected. Cord Meyer and Mary’s surviving children didn’t care if the gun-coward was going by the name of William L. Mitchell or William F. Buckley, Jr.
      The only weakness in the judgment of Horne, Hornberger, and Janney is their naivity believing the Boy Scout PR of this nation that was born of slavery and Judas-like treachery, and nurtured ever since by laziness, gun-worship/fear, and criminal idiocy.

      • Roy, Crump trial witness Mitchell did not make himself scarce, I’ve proven that he routinely went on with his life. Almost none of the assumptions you’ve posted are supported by evidence not single sourced (Leary or James Truitt). I addressed Mr. Hornberger directly a year ago.:
        http://www.amazon.com/review/R1WXKR5VBLIHZ3/ref=cm_aya_cmt?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B00BY5QX1K#wasThisHelpful
        At the link above, I excerpted the portions of Janney’s book described in Hornberger’s review that i had provern to be false. He has the ability to edit his prominent review, and so does Mr. Horne.: (Voted as the two most “helpful reviews, they contain numerous inaccuracies.)
        http://www.amazon.com/Marys-Mosaic-Conspiracy-Kennedy-Pinchot/product-reviews/1626361274/ref=cm_rdp_hist_hdr_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

        Hornberger duplicates an identical inaccurate review of Janney’s book, here:
        http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/the-murder-of-mary-pinchot-meyer/

        Douglas Horne’s troubling reaction to the evidence that “asssassin” Mitchell was not missing or mysterious.:
        http://www.amazon.com/review/RWKKPDXQXFKPD/ref=cm_cr_rev_detmd_pl?ie=UTF8&asin=1616087080&cdForum=Fx2Q8BKW5DGAUQN&cdMsgID=Mx1COL7D3TK6WFD&cdMsgNo=7&cdPage=1&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=Tx14ZEHFT1CILJ7&store=books#Mx1COL7D3TK6WFD

        Author Janney, 24 months after I proved this, now admits:
        http://memoryholeblog.com/2014/09/05/the-murder-of-mary-pinchot-meyer/
        “….may point to the fact that [William] Mitchell had a specific role in this event on October 12, 1964. But I do want to make clear that I no longer believe that he was the actual assassin.”

        Crump’s attorney, Roundtree has told four contradictory versions of alibi witness, Vivian’s status. Janney published only the version supporting his now disproven scenario.
        http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,11770.msg359646.html#msg359646

        • roy quist says:

          Thanks, Tom, for your reply/input and those sources/links. You’re right–Peter Janney no longer thinks it was the trial witness going by the moniker ‘william l mitchell’ who put a bullet in Mary’s head and then put a bullet through her heart cia/gangster style. PJ now thinks that WLM was ‘only’ a spotter/lookout/perjurer in the assass.
          Whoever testified at Ray Crump’s trial, named “jogger” by Nina Burleigh, was hard to find for many years by many researchers, including Crump attorney Dovey Roundtree.
          And there were other jogger/spotters around that day, notably the young couple hanging around the bridge, not doing much moving, let alone any jogging.
          There are two likely candidates for the guy who actually put the hand-cannon to Mary’s face and ribs. Ex-Cuban looking rats with ex-Cuban sounding names, the type of mobsters that Uncle Fidel rid Cuba of, lo these five-plus decades ago (only to have them infest South Florida).
          The issue is that the stalking and slaying of Mother Mary (out in Mama Nature, no less) was another fairly massive and obvious collusion (though nothing like those against our boys John and Martin and Robert), carried out right under the noses of our constitutional (ha!) government.
          Funny thing about the big picture-puzzle being right, with a few details being wrong, but real close. It reminds me of the great Webermann and Canfield in Coup d’Etat in America, their idea about the identities of The Three (Hollywood, well-fed, phony, dress-up) Tramps. Yes, C and W were wrong that they are Howard Hunt, Sturgis/Fiorini, ‘Maurice Bishop’. Turns out they’re credential-forger Chauncey Holt, much-practiced assassin-for-hire Charles Harrelson, and the especially nasty Charles Rogers, military “intell”, who did a Jeffry Dahmer on his elderly parents as his ticket to the bigleagues of fascism enforcement and preservation in Amerrycaca.
          But ol’spook Howie Hunt mysteriously dropped his lawsuit, after making much noise and lamentation about the damage done to his good name. He was loath to be deposed in ANY sort of trial. Because, as EHH later said many times, he was ‘only’ a ‘bench-warmer’ for ‘The Big Event’, not a get-hands-dirty-with-nitrates ‘player’.
          I have a feeling that the William L. Mitchell who was at the crime-scene and in the courtroom is similarly squeamish about cross-examination and such. If HE is still alive, would be mid-70s now. And if the SAME wlm can be located, let’s see what he has to show and tell.

    • Tom Scully states that he has issues with Mr. Horneberger and Mr. Horne.
      As I am not so familiar with Horneberger’s work I won’t comment to that. However I have become intimately familiar with Mr. Hornes work over the pas two years and have many issues with it. Horne’s hypothesis on the alteration of the Zapruder film reach to the point of absurdity.

      As a special effects artist in film for most of my professional career as an artist, I find Mr. Horne to be almost completely ignorant of the field.
      My own analysis which is in the main influenced by the work of Rolland Zavata and my own grasp of special effects cinematography, comes to the firm conclusion that the Zapruder film is indeed authentic.
      I have posted this URL to several of the threads on this blog, but for your convenience Mr. Scully, I will add it here as well:
      https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2014/12/12/the-zapruder-film/

      ~Willy Whitten, special effects artist (retired)
      \\][//

  6. kennedy63 says:

    I think the “Rush to Profits” has taken root among many “conspiracy theorists” and I wish not to be muddled together with people of this ilk; rather than be called “conspiracy theorists” I think people sincerely striving to better understand 11/22/63 and the US National Security apparatus, which produced the aftermath of Dallas, should adopt the moniker of “Citizen Overseer”; after all, “public servants” by default, are answerable to “the public” from which they derive their just powers and largess.

  7. roy,

    I do not see a basis for any of your assumptions, especially your continued suspicions related to Crump trial witness, William L. Mitchell. CIA spotters? Atty Round tree claimed she could not find details of the background of Mary Meyer’s ex husband, but newspapers reporting Mary’s murder printed that Cord Meyer was employed by CIA.
    Ms. Roundtree told four conflicting versions of locating or failing to locate Crump’s alleged alibi witness, Vivian. Are not the actual facts that it is not certain Crump had an alibi witness, Mary was acquainted with Timothy Leary, witness Mitchell resumed his life after the Crump trial, living openly as a seemingly normal academic in California, James Truitt was suffering from mental illness when he sold his accusations to the National Inquirer in 1976, and Ben Bradlee gave conflicting versions of the Mary’s diary story and of Angleton’s involvement? In hindsight, who has published a more reliable account, Nina Burleigh, or Peter Janney? If you have criticisms of Burleigh’s account, what are they, and what supports them?
    I located witness Mitchell’s academic and career track because I resisted making assumptions. This indicates my approach works. What, aside from Janney’s imagination, actually supports any of the assumptions in your post? You do not seem to require stronger evidence than the Warren Commission required. Why not?

    • roy quist says:

      tom,

      Are not the actual facts:
      1. Not too long ago, when Janney and other researchers knocked on the same WLM’s door in N Cal, they were met with angry refusals.
      2. During the trial when it mattered, Dovey Roundtree tried several times to reach WLM, with no success.
      3. Every day that DR walked the crime scene back then, she received late, late-night phone calls from anonymous, non-speaking, heavy-breathing caller(s), obvious attempts to scare her off.
      4. That it doesn’t matter: a.) whether MPM knew Timothy Leary (what, does that mean Mary had it coming because she knew an establishment boogyman?), or b.) whether James Truitt had mental illness (what in the world?! because he was ‘suicided’ or committed suicide?! though his papers, like Mary’s, were stolen by Angleton types, so I guess there may be some relevance with that red herring/canard), or c.) whether Ben Bradlee gave ‘conflicting versions’ RE Mary’s diary (twould be remarkable if spookmobbed-up BB did NOT “give conflicting versions” RE anything)
      5. The intimidation, stalking and assassination of Mary Pinchot Meyer, and the subsequent despoiling of her effects as a Random Act of Violence is as phony as a $3 bill.

      Since you, tom, have located the actual WLM, will you please, please ask him if he will have a public conversation with PJ?
      From now on, I will only respond to news about that. Please, please, tom, use your “approach” that “works” to line up a confab with PJ and WLM. And if you could get Nina Burleigh in there too, I and so many others would be eternally grateful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more