Looking for a great reference book on the JFK assassination? Tired of searching the bookstores? This book takes care of that. William Scott has written the most complete reference manual I have ever seen.

The book is broken down into two parts. Part One is people and places. From A to Z you find out a small snippet of information about everyone associated with JFK or the assassination.

Part 2 has 18 sections of reference information. From books to singed articles to unsigned articles you won't be able to find a more complete listing than right here. The amount of information is amazing.

This book is not a novel or a research project, rather it is a handy reference book that everyone, from novice to expert researcher should have with them at all times.

Sorting through all the extravagant theories of who killed JFK can become highly frustrating for the Kennedy enthusiast. So many wild ideas have circulated through our modern culture, most evident in Oliver Stone's JFK, that it has become increasingly difficult to distinguish between possible truth and well conceived fiction. William Scott's new Reference Guide does just this for both the serious researcher and the interested hobbyist. Only the most reliable and historically accurate sources have been included in this research guide, so no longer does the JFK assassination enthusiast have to sort through the wild theories to discover the respectable facts. A must have for anyone serious about their research.

Written at the family's request between 1964-68, this is one of the most detailed accounts of the JFK case, Although embracing the official perspective - L.H. Oswald the lone killer / no conspiracy - the book is a detailed story of the last days of President Kennedy's life and the next days until the funeral, the deeds of lots of White House staff, the president's family, Dallas people and the touching reaction of American people - the ones which shoudn't have asked what America can do for them, but what THEY can do for America. William Manchester is one of the great non-fiction writers which makes written history as vivid as real life. "The death of a president" is one of his masterpieces - famous enough to be translated into romanian, the language in which I first read it, since it is my mother tongue.

Like all Manchester books, he brings to life a time that was filled with far more intrigue than whether or not Oswald was the lone gunman. On that, he convincingly explains that he was, and rivets the reader with surprisingly interesting minutae on who rode in the motorcade with whom, along with the historical debate of when LBJ became President and whether he should have taken the President's plane back to Washington.

What strikes me as irresponsible is/was Manchester's characterization of Dallas, and seemingly blaming it for the President's assasination. Throughout we have to read of how "radical" right Dallas was, how it was chock full of "John Birchers", and that the city itself was hospitable to right wing murderers. This strikes the reader as a foolish waste when you consider that the killer was the exact opposite, such a communist sympathizer that he lived in the Soviet Union, and tried to seek asylum in Cuba.

For that, the book pales in comparison to other Manchester works in that it's harder to take his historical views seriously given his self-interested, and seemingly paranoid, efforts to discredit the big bad right wing.

William Manchester provides a fascinating account "from the eye of the storm." For the younger generation, for whom Kennedy's assassination is an historic fact rather than a horrible memory, "The Death of a President" invokes the feelings of the time--the promise of the Kennedy presidency, the unthinkability of his untimely death, and the chaos that ensued before order was restored.

Manchester begins by describing the political in-fighting within the Texas Democratic party that prompted the Kennedy-Johnson trip in the first place. Some of the funniest moments in the book (yes, despite the subject, it does evoke a smile now and then) are the efforts that Kennedy aides made to get a reluctant Senator Yarborough to ride with LBJ in the motorcades. The many seemingly inconsequential decisions that ultimately led to the slow-moving motorcade through Dealey Plaza make the reader want to cry out, "No! Put the bubble top! Speak at a different site!" As the book nears the fateful hour, the reader is left with a sense that there's still a chance to avoid this tragedy.

The hours and days immediately after the assassination are equally fascinating. Jackie's wait at Parkland Hospital and her trip home on Air Force One are told with heart-breaking detail. (Lest this aspect seem overly invasive, the reader should note that the book was written with her blessing and cooperation.) The story of how the memorable funeral and Arlington burial came about are fascinating. The tensions between the Kennedy and Johnson aides provide a good lesson in how NOT to act after a tragedy.

If you're only interested in the conspiracy theories, however, this is not the book for you. Manchester wholeheartedly backs the lone gunman hypothesis, and his descriptions of Oswald's movements at this time are hard to swallow in light of the details that have emerged in the decades since the assassination. Since most of the book focuses on the Kennedy family, the Kennedy and Johnson aides, and other political figures, however, this one drawback does not significantly detract from the book.

This book was the first one to explore Kennedy's role as Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces. It also described how foreign events such as the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the conflict in Vietnam were viewed by the Kremlin and the Pentagon. The book also talks about Kennedy's frequent disagreements with the Joint Chiefs of Staff on military issues and how these problems were handled and resolved. I think that this book is very interesting and worth reading.

Being so close to Pres. Kennedy, Pierre Salinger is well qualified to share his knowledge and experiences during his tenure as Press Secretary. I also found the photos very interesting and inviting; I enjoyed reading this book very much; enlightening to learn of JFK's harrowing experiences during WW2 and the suffering he experienced during that time. He certainly was a hero in the true sense of the word. It's sad that these years of his life were not more highlighted, rather than focusing on all his personal escapades. He truly, in my opinion, was a great President; it's tragic he wasn't with us longer. Thank you, Pierre, for a great job!

Make no mistake, William Manchester (1922-), who knew John F. Kennedy personally, can be a great writer at times. His two-volume biography of Winston Churchill (sadly, never to be completed now that Manchester is aging and ill) is superb, and so is "The Glory and the Dream", his history of the GI generation from 1932-1972. But when it comes to the Kennedys, Manchester's objectivity and tendency to hero-worship simply fails him, and has led to plenty of criticism and controversy over the years. In my opinion, "One Brief Shining Moment" is easily one of the worst books ever written about President Kennedy, and is an embarrassment to Manchester's otherwise brilliant career. Manchester doesn't just praise JFK in this book, he almost fawns over him, and it's obvious that he sees JFK as a modern King Arthur presiding over a (White House) Camelot. His chapter titles for this book tell it all - "There thou layest" is his final chapter in which he specifically links Kennedy to the Arthurian legends, and indulges in plenty of purple prose. As in his other Kennedy books, Manchester loathes Lyndon Johnson, and in this work he more clearly links LBJ with Mordred - Arthur's (JFK's) great enemy and the villain of the Camelot (Kennedy) legend - than in his previous Kennedy books. In Manchester's prose, LBJ is little more than a redneck boor, a country hick whose crude habits, such as deer hunting, "horrified" the urbane, elegant, and intellectual JFK. In Manchester's view Lyndon Johnson was the "anti-Kennedy" - this despite the view held by many modern (and far more objective) historians that it was Johnson, and not JFK, who was the critical force behind the great Civil Rights and anti-poverty legislation passed in the mid-sixties. This book repeats virtually every legend and myth about JFK as fact - that the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 wasn't really JFK's fault, but the CIA's, President Eisenhower's, etc. Kennedy's womanizing wasn't anything that his predecessors (and successors) haven't done, so what's the big deal? And, of course, if JFK had only lived none of the massive problems of the later sixties would have happened. According to Manchester, Kennedy would "definitely" have pulled out of Vietnam - hence no Vietnam War, no dead American soldiers or riots on college campuses, etc. If JFK had only lived the civil rights mess - such as the race riots in the mid-to-late sixties - would never have happened, as blacks somehow "trusted" JFK more than they did Lyndon Johnson, and would therefore have listened to JFK's urgings not to riot in the streets. Of course, Manchester offers virtually no evidence to support these claims - he simply writes them as if they were "facts" accepted by everyone. In Manchester's rosy view, Kennedy is simply perfect, with almost no flaws or warts (and those few that exist only "prove his humanity"). If you still believe the Camelot legends of John F. Kennedy's Presidency and still have a romantic view of the man, then you'll LOVE this book, as it takes the Camelot myth and runs wild with it. But if you're looking for a more balanced and fair-minded work about JFK, then this is probably the LAST book you'll want to read. I've read many books about the Kennedys - some favorable and some critical - but this book is easily the least objective and balanced pro-Kennedy account that I've ever read. If you do choose to read this book, I would suggest you then read several other, more balanced Kennedy books. Richard Reeve's "President Kennedy: Profile of Power" is excellent, as is Herbert Parmet's "Jack: The Struggles of John F. Kennedy".

A portrait of one of the United States' greatest presidents is not only a study of the politics of his administration, but the human himself. This book goes on about his qualities and how he acts. The book outlines a lot about some of the events that took place while he was in office. And I, having not been alive during his rule, found it very boring. I have no idea about half the things they talk about in the book. That is why my opinion may be debatable as others may have more of a background concerning these events. This book was written before he was assassinated. "Portrait of a President" really outlines Kennedy and what he was like, every single detail. If you want to read up about past events, read this book. If you want to read about who he truly was, read this book. If you want to take a nap, read this book.