I found this book to be refreshing and quite different from any other biography of Jane Austen which I have read (and I have read many!). Mr. Tucker comes up with a great number of surprising facts that other biographers seem to have missed. The book is also very well-written. It was a disappointment to me to turn the last page and find there was no more. I highly recommend it.

Oswald's Closest Friend: The George De Mohrenschildt Story

In the last couple of years under the JFK Assassination Records Review Board Act our government has spent millions of dollars into the research of the assassination of our 35th President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. As a former Federal employee, on several occasions I have offered all of my research under the Whistleblowing Act to the Clinton administration without receiving replies. President Clinton's former Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta, in the past (1992), had supported this author's research as a former Congressman for the County of Santa Cruz. This author believes that it was certainly unethical and boardering upon fraud when President George Bush signed into law The JFK Assassination Records Review Board Act and did not disclose that he knew George de Mohrenschildt since 1942. In order to understand the conflict of interest George Bush played in the JFK assassination investigation in 1963 and in 1976, one needs to look at his entire career with the CIA and Zapata Oil industry.

TRACKING THE JFK ASSASSINATION

Santa Monica College Corsair - November 17,1997, by Donna Lynn

As the 34th anniversary of John Fitzgerald Kennedy's assassination approaches, Bruce Campbell Adamson, a self-taught genealogist, historian, author and Santa Monica College graduate says that he is close to solving "the crime of the century." When his father died in 1980, Adamson applied for a job at the Santa Monica Post Office. He says he "wanted to work outdoors" because it seemed to be a "healthy" job with few problems. "It took me five years to get hired," he says "And I retired in five years." Adamson ended up filing a federal lawsuit against the Post Office in a worker's compensation claim. He was the case in 1991 and has used the money to research the JFK assassination. "I started researching it (JFK) because I was tired of the subject, said Adamson. When I began my research Oliver Stone's movie, JFK, had just been released and I was sick and tired of all of the theories generated by the tabloid news agencies." This motivated him to write and publish The JFK Assassination Timeline Chart, and eight volumes (now ten) of Oswald's Closest Friend; The George de Mohrenschildt Story. Each bit of information led to another, and Adamson soon discovered that some of his own family members were coincidentally associated with persons connected to George de Mohrenschildt in one way or another. In the past 14 years, Adamson's research has taken him through the government and the Central Intelligence Agency...In a trail that leads from oil fields to Wall Street to the sales of helicopters used in the Vietnam War, Adamson claims that he exposes evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone. Everything that we are today exists today because of the past, he said "If historians don't get the story right, then our lives today are based upon lies." He also link's "alleged lone assassin" Oswald to de Mohrenschildt, an aristocrat who had ties to the rich and famous. Adamson asserts that these elites may have benefited financially from JFK's death. The wealthy "were also retaliating for their political as well as other motives," said Adamson. "Wealthy individuals having prior knowledge of the plans to kill JFK could sell short on the New York Stock Exchange and buy their company back for half the price after the assassination," Adamson aid. On the day of the assassination, the stock market lost 11 billion in paper." Adamson's main theory focuses on a U.S. oil depletion allowance, which grants oilmen a 27.5 percent tax break when reinvesting in their other corporation. Adamson says that Texas oilmen plotted the assassination of JFK to gain more power, and that the Warren Commission found Oswald guilty without a fair trial. He places de Mohrenschildt with a group of friends -- one of whose grandfather's chartered the oil depletion allowance in the 1920s."... De Mohrenschildt died on March 29, 1977, of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. Adamson, however, says de Mohrenschildt could have been murdered, since the CIA was on his back about his knowledge of the assassination. Adamson asserts that de Mohrenschildt, prior to his death, told a close friend that a number of oilmen, FBI and CIA agents were behind the JFK assassination. "De Mohrenschildt had complained to his friend, CIA Director George Bush in September of 1976 about being harassed," Adamson wrote. "Shortly thereafter, Bush contacted the FBI Director and it was not long after that de Mohrenschildt would find himself in Parkland Hospital receiving nine shock treatments." Were the shock treatments CIA-sponsored, Adamson asks? While Bush was CIA Director, more than 200 Top Secret documents came up missing, including the letters between de Mohrenschildt and Bush, says Adamson. Like Oswald, de Mohrenschildt went to his grave insisting that Oswald was "just a patsy," and that Oswald was not the assassin, according to Adamson. "That's a dying declaration," Adamson insists. "When someone makes a statement on their deathbed, they're likely telling the truth." Is finding the truth about JFK's murder Bruce Campbell Adamson's destiny? Is Adamson possessed by the genetics of his own distinguished American heritage, driving him to correct an error made in history? Is he driven by Hustler magazine's bounty of $1 million to whoever determines the murderer? "Circumstantial evidence does not lie," says Adamson. "And people should not be afraid to focus and speak of these associations in our society, which allows free speech, nor should they fear retaliation for alienating the rich and famous." "Adamson's fascinating bloodline hasn't gone to his head. He maintains that he's just "a simple guy. I'm nothing special," he says, but "here I am trying to solve the 'crime of the century,'" for which "there is no statute of limitations on murder."

...

This book provided especially good insights into the life and times of John Jay. I especially enjoyed the introduction by Richard B. Morris.

This book is a very good book for a beginning medical student. I bought it as a reference book for my medical transcription work because of the color plates (I hope Amazon prints a sample of one of the colored pages so buyers can appreciate how good the book is; they did print a list of the color plates). The illustrations are very good and very detailed, showing exactly where everything is inside the human body. What's more, the illustrations are meticulously and completely labelled in detail! This is what made me buy the book. It helps me visualize where the anatomical part is positioned while transcribing, which gives me a good idea of what to expect when a physician dictates a particular procedure on that part. There are write-ups by doctors prior to each illustration, so you can refer back to it every so often to understand how things work and tie up together. A sample of pictures are: the complete illustration of the anatomical man, fetal circulation (with amazing close-up details of the placenta), the skeletal system, muscular system (with muscles, ligaments, fasciae, tendons, bursae), shoulder and hip joints, inguinal regions, hernias, development of blood cells, lymphatics, a really big picture of the anatomical ear, mechanics of vision, and a composite anatomy of the vascular system based upon arteriograms and venograms.

This is by no means a definitive anatomy book (it is only 166 pages). For advanced med students this is not recommended. But for those without a medical background but who work in the associated fields of the medical profession (nurses and transcriptionists among others), this is a good summary-of-the-anatomy book.

This is the first person account of the founder of the Quakers (Society of Friends), George Fox, and it is the best resource for the life and testimonies of Quakers. It is an exciting read full of action, truth and common sense living.

Gervaise's father wishes that his son will grow up to be a Knight of the White Cross, and so Gervaise leaves his dying mother and travels to Rhodes. When he arrives at Rhodes he never dreams of all the adventures he will be undertaking, and the excitement he will be involved in. First comes the rescuing of Ricord and Santoval, after which the Grand Prior knights Gervaise and his comrade, Ralph, which is a great privilege for the boys. Some time later, after visiting the house of Signor Vsados, Gervaise mentions to Ralph that he did not like the looks of the Greek who had also been at the Vsados household. Ralph laughs at him, but Gervaise's suspicions are aroused even more when he sees the man talking to a slave of the Order. After reporting to Sir John Kendall Gervaise suggests he disguise himself and go among the slaves, to try to find out if a plot is being arranged. What will he find? Gervaise has many more adventures, and also a little romance, for Claudia De Forli bestows her colours on him. Gervaise also sets an example by the boy-galley that he was put in command of. It is the only galley ever to have only young knights appointed to it. In the end Gervaise takes part in the Siege of Rhodes, which was a bloody affair. Don't miss reading this story of a gallant Knight of the White Cross!

Here was an old time outlaw that didn't cotton to spending time in jail, fumbling robberies, or getting perforated by Banana Republic Keystone Cops. He was in the mold of O. Henry's bad guys in Cabbages and Kings. Further, he died a happy, affluent rascal, just as he lived - and get this - in 1947. Plenty living still remember this outlaw and to John Tanner who wrote the book with his wife, Karen (Doc Holliday, A Family Portrait: she is Doc's closest living blood relative) George Musgrave was more of an in-law than an outlaw. John is related to him so many ways it's hard to keep them straight, but John can, and does.

Karen tells a great story about her husband when they were at a Texas shindig, among Musgrave's relatives, (i.e. like John that's almost everyone is south Texas) where some disgruntled local accosted her and said: "All of these people think they're related to each other." Karen said without hesitation and with not the foggiest idea who this fellow was: "I'll bet you a bunch my husband is related to you and can prove it." She brought John over and they did prove it. The fellow simply scratched his head.

John is not only related to all the participants on the Taylor side of the bloody Sutton/Taylor feud (but I'd bet he's related to some on the other side). Moreover he's related to half the people down here in my neck of the woods, and most of them were related to George Musgrave. Take Howard Lindsay who ran the Boot Hill Museum in Tombstone for years. He's a second something or other to both George and John. So, if you think John doesn't know what he's writing about here, blame it on the relatives who were there and told him - and showed him the pictures, by gum, and a lot of them are in this book, and talk about damned interesting faces.

George was no joke, however. He rode up to an ex-Texas Ranger who was a foreman on the famed Diamond A Ranch out here in my neck of the woods, recognized him as the SOB who had killed one of his relatives, and burned him down without hesitation. George must have been all of nineteen at the time. His horse must have been a lot younger than that because when he split the breeze no one caught him.

Ever hear of the High Five Gang? George was a stalwart. This was an outfit that didn't shoot itself in the foot blowing up a RR car and leaving the pieces all over the landscape. They got the loot. And they evaded such legendary lawmen as George Scarborough, Jeff Milton, John Slaughter, Billy Breakenride (who finally became a lawman after leaving Tombstone and his Sweetie, Curly Bill and hero John Ringo, "the gunfighter who never was") and others.

Emil Franzi, fabled Tucson radio personality (when the mood strikes him to air his show) phoned here the other day and had just finished the book and was raving: "Forget those other phonies, like Butch and Sundance! This SOB is the real McCoy!" Besides that he could read, brushed his teeth, washed his feet regularly and knew how to order in French from a menu. Honest Injun.

My advice it the read this mother and find out for yourself. If Hollywood doesn't discover that it's been barking up the wrong trees for years and zero in on this badman, I miss my guess. Probably years too late and after being dragged to the party, but I predict this one will burn down the barn when they finally film it.

And it's just plain fun reading. It's full of peripheral characters like John's uncle who periodically phones him - usually on a dead Sunday - and says John, "Let's go shoot us a Sutton." This is, as I recall, the same uncle who wires buzzard wings on dead armadillos and puts them in the road for some dumb tourist to stop and gawk at, whereupon he comes out with a shotgun and cusses them out for "killin' the last danged winged armadillo in Texas."

Come to think about it the authors here, and the characters they know that are still around kicking, are as interesting as their protagonist.

This is the only Washington biography written by a contemporary who knew him and served with him in the Army. Certainly the longest Presidential biography I know of written by a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. According to Senator Beveridge's later biography of John Marshall, Marshall wrote it in installments, and sold it through the U.S. Post Offic distribution network, to make enough money to pay off his massive Virginia land purchsse which in turn enabled Marshall's children to live out their lives free of the need to write books or make land deals. And it worked that way. But that's not all this is.

The first entire volume says little about Washington, because Marshall felt he needed to set the stage with a condensed history of the colonies prior to Washington. Few of Washington's later biographers went to such subsequent introductory lengths, but then Marshall's law practice ended up acquainting him with the early pre-history of the deeds and conveyances of Virginia, the further elaboration of which can be interpreted as enveloping the rest of the colonies.

This is also a history of the U.S. Army, and how it fought and starved in successive cycles which are described in minute detail exceeding most other accounts. Some of this covers organized military campaigns preceding the declaration of independence, the scope of which I had not heretofore realized by undergoing annual waves of pilgrim-study in "My Early Education."

Leading and embodying this story of land and armies, and ideas, Marshall gives us Washington, illuminated most clearly by excerpts from Washington's own letters. Marshall also gives us Marshall, distilling out of military examples and instances of weak government preceding 1789, potent arguments for increased federal power to do the things our federal government has since done quite well: raise armies, raise taxes, subdue the Indians, kick out the European powers, build a strong navy, and take no back talk from smallish tyrants resentful of centralized governmental power directly and simultaneously exercised on each citizen, and on each state.

When Hamilton wrote that we need "energy in the Executive" he had to have been thinking of Washington, and Marshall catalogs this energy with meticulous documentation of each British officer leading campaigns against us, each subordinate officer on our side under Washinton's command, and how the constant maneuver of armies up and down the length of our seaboard was accomplished--usually without many shoes and without much dry powder.

So Marshall knowing Washington probably insulated him from too much disconnected iconography, and his writing is free of modern fixations on negative or unseemly personal or pychographic tidbits of trivia. Modern readers are left to cling to factual reporting of how Washington handled this British Lord or that recalcitrant congress.

There's a lot here in all five volumes, and the flow of the over-written parts isn't that bad once you get used to it. When one man had such a central role in all of the key events of our country's founding, and rode out the formation into its institutional phase, thereafter to die in bed at home, Marshall may not have been able to write it any other way than to go over all of the events, to catch the essence of the man.

Neat discovery: LaFayette was only 24 years old while commanding the French at the battle of Yorktown. Marshall quotes from the letters of Cornwallis (or maybe it was Sir Henry Clinton) who refers to LaFayette as "the boy." This is the same boy who later presented Washington with the key to the Bastille, which today hangs on the wall of the stairway of Mount Vernon going up to the second floor.

This book is a must-buy, or at least a must-have. If you like logic, you must have this book -- for it'll give you what you like. If you don't like logic, you must have this book -- for it'll snap you out of your (misplaced) dislike. You either like logic or you don't. You figure it out!

Truly, this book is a wonderful collection suited for anyone competent in classical first-order logic. Indeed, it serves as a rather nice second step into the world of logic beyond classical first-order. At the very least the book offers the best (informal) introductions to Goedel's celebrated theorem, which is worth a lot.

Anyone familiar with Boolos' work will know that this book is a treat. Anyone not familiar with Boolos' work must learn; and ~Logic, Logic, and Logic~ is a great place to start.