I started out REALLY liking this book, as the author has done a good job talking about Kilgallen, an exceptional investigative reporter and entertainer during the 1930s, 40s and 50s. However, with the assassination of President Kennedy she decided that the Warren Commission and the justice system were doing their jobs. She was, as I said, an accomplished journalist and perhaps she did have a file that she took with her to the set of What's My Line (where was it when she was on-camera?") but how is it that Kilgallen was right and everybody else was wrong? Where was the proof? Her columns dealing with the death of president were more along the lines of editorials than proof of anything nefarious. And her own death (which we know is coming because of the helpful countdown) just "proves" she was on the right track and "had to be eliminated." I was still going to give this book a chance but it just droned on and on and on about toxicology reports and hearsay evidence and so on and so on as a tool used by conspiracy nutjobs to "prove" things they.ve got no physical proof of. By the way, if Kilgallen was such a great reporter why didn't she discuss Oswald's attempted assassination of General Walker a few days before the JFK assassination? For the same reason NO conspiracy nutjobbers talk about it: because it contradicts the "Oswald was an innocent patsy" theory.
I found that I had to move on. I recommend the author do the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment