5 comments about Churchill.

1. This was a fine biography on Churchill. At its heart, this book is a comprehensive political summary of one of the world's best politicians. Jenkins does a great job of surrounding the moment with context and analysis. His mastery of British politics is unreal.
   
   With all that said, the book did have a few flaws. First, it was hard to grasp the ins and outs of the British political process which Jenkins discusses at great lengths (this could be my fault as I am an American). Second, there was not enough character development. Jenkins references countless people, but does not take the time to highlight, or bring about, who ultimately has a major role. To this end, I feel there was a certain extent of "name-dropping" in the tome. At times, this made the book harder to navigate through with ease. Finally, I don't know French or Afrikaans, or Latin. So those phrases in foreign languages fell upon deaf ears (or perhaps blind eyes is the more appropriate description).
   
   Overall, a great book. I enjoyed Jenkins mastery of the subject matter, and his writing is fantastic. I have not read other Churchill bios before, but would certainly recommend this to a history buff.



2. Think Robert Kosowsky's review is pretty much on the mark.
   
   Historical events are not presented except in relation to timing and political positioning by Churchill and others. For example, if you don't know about the Dardenelles operation of WW1, this book will not help you. Despite the final line of the book, this is not uncritical of Churchill and at times makes him appear to be motivated by politics as much as anything else (the author was a MP and in the Cabinet so was a political animal too). This does not ring entirely false as it makes it easier to understand his switching of political parties. And this makes it a good counter to Churchill's own books which are at times clearly self-serving.



3. For several years I have wanted to read a biography on Churchill. This past summer I finally broke down and purchased the 900+ page book written by Roy Jenkins.
   
   It has only taken six months to finish it. True, I had a dissertation to write and exams to study for. But regardless the book was slow going.
   
   The author is a politician and a writer - much like Churchill. Consequently, Jenkins focuses the book on the intricacies of Churchill's political and journalistic careers. Fair enough.
   
   Churchill's political life and to a lesser extent his various literary endeavors are key to understanding Britain's greatest prime minister. But the details, though interesting, slowly wear down the resolve of the reader.
   
   For example, the beginning and ending of the book flows well as Churchill's family heritage and retirement are explored; in other words, the parts of Churchill's life which are the least political and literary.
   
   Yet by the time we reach his parliamentary career and the two world wars the book descends into minute detail. Minute details about his toast filled summits with Stalin - interesting. Minute details about his administration of the Admiralty - not so much.
   
   Further, he dedicates a surprisingly small amount of space to some very important events - such as the Battle of Britain.
   
   Yet, to be fair, Jenkins provides an excellent overview of Churchill's life. It is also inevitable that certain areas of interest to the reader will not coincide with that of the author.
   
   Indeed, the biographer's experience in British politics provides rare insights: the great PM's great ambition was getting power, using power and retaining power. So, the way Jenkins skillfully dissects and interprets Churchill's various power struggles makes the book worth reading.
   
   Summary: The book is a great introduction to Churchill, with a special focus on his political and literary careers. Yet the combination of the books length and the author's devotion to great detail could prove fatal to the unmotivated.
   
   I would recommend the book to anyone interested in 20th century history, modern British history and of course Churchill. But I would recommend that the reader take long breaks between each of the six sections.



4. This is too long - all biographers should read and learn from Lytton Strachey.
   
   But Churchill's life was so over the top that its nevertheless an enjoyable read; more so with two provisos:
   
   1. You have to be at least constructively disposed to Winston. Better still if you downright adore him, as Roy plainly does.
   
   2. The most lovingly recounted incidents are those that took place in and around parliamentary life, the life that Roy Jenkins himself knew best. Its very, very well told, but if you didn't happen to be an MP yourself you might find it a little too detailed, in the sense that what others might consider to be the main story seems to be lost sight of, sometimes.



5. I didn't finish this book. Jenkins just throws his note cards at the hapless reader. The editor was awol. Stick with Gilbert. Alternatively, start with Manchester's unfinished bio (to 1940) & then switch to Churchill's memoirs.

5 comments about Churchill: A Study in Greatness.

1. A compact biography (384 pages) by Oxford Historian Geoffrey Best is far and away the best I have read on Churchill. The many facets of Churchill's life are covered in a series of essays from the author. Best summarizes Churchill's life with clarity and high degree of accuracy.
   
   If you're looking for a comprehensive study on Churchill, this isn't it. You won't find page after page of stilted verbiage here, but you will find a well written presentation of this fascinating man, perhaps the savior of England. If it is possible to write a detailed account of such a varied figure within the brevity of such a small volume, the author has done so admirably.
   
   Though the author clearly admires the subject, this isn't just another "I love Churchill" book. Best gives a fair and balanced account of many areas where Churchill may have erred, such as Gallipolli. The book is fair, and it is no-nonsense, to the point, without a lot of ambivalent inflection.
   
   I have a number of volumes on the life and times of Churchill. I may go to other volumes for research purposes, but this is probably the most enjoyable read I have encountered on the man.
   
   Monty Rainey
   www.juntosociety.com



2. Not a true biography but more than just a compilation of essays concerning Churchill's life and times, the author provides us with a 300+ page synopsis/chronology with a sprinkling of his thoughts, insights and conclusions. I found nothing new or "earth-shattering" here. On the other hand it makes a nice supplement, (i.e. much like Meachem's book on FDR and Churchill), to biographys/books I have read. If you are looking for a full-fledged bio start elsewhere, (Manchester or Gilbert), and if your interest is piqued as mine was, come back to this one.



3. A very readable book that provides balanced and insightful coverage of the whole of Churchill's life. I would highly recommend this book either to those who have not previously read much about Churchill or equally to those who have read other Churchill biographies or war histories and wish to take a fresh look. Of particular value is the way that the author take the occasional opportunity to dispel certain myths and revisionist ideas about Churchill.



4. Best nos presenta una panorámica de la vida de Churchill. Algunos capítulos están mas inspiradoa que otros. Trata de mostrar una perspectiva imparcial del personaje aunque claramente se comprueba que le admira grandemente, pero no tanto como a su esposa Clementine. La extensión de la parte que corresponde a la segunda guerra mundial es mucho mas amplia (quizás la mitad del libro). Casi no responde las preguntas o dudas sobre asuntos controversiales que existen sobre la vida de este personaje.
   
   Como se comprende, al escribir sobre Churchill es necesario mostrar una parte de la hisoria de GB y del mundo pero esta se queda corta a veces para ayudar a comprender a cabalidad la circunstancias que rodearon a los hechos.
   
   En general el texto es bueno, muy bien redactado, fácilmente comprensible. Algunos artículos mas inspirados que otros pero todos interesantes.



5. this book by geoffrey best will rank as one of the greatest book ever written about churchill full of wise summations and not too long thi work is recommended by the churchill society . for sure one of the very best one volume work

No comments about Desmond Tutu: Rabble-Rouser for Peace: The Authorized Biography.

4 comments about A Look Over My Shoulder: A Life in the Central Intelligence Agency.

1. 
   
   Richard Helms is, after Allen Dulles, arguably the most significant US spymaster and intelligence manager in history. It is a fortunate circumstance that he overcame his reluctance to publish anything at all, and worked with the trusted William Hood, whose own books are remarkable, to put before the public a most useful memoire.
   
   Below are a few of the gems that I find worth noting, and for which I recommend the book as a unique record:
   
   1) Puts forward elegant argument for permissive & necessary secrecy in the best interests of the public
   2) Defends the CIA culture as highly disciplined--he is persuasive in stating that only Presidents can order covert actions, and that CIA does only the President's direct bidding.
   3) Makes it clear in passing, not intentionally, that his experience as both a journalist and businessman were essential to his ultimate success as a spymaster and manager of complex intelligence endeavors--this suggests that one reason there is "no bench" at CIA today is because all the senior managers have been raised as cattle destined to be veal: as young entry on duty people, brought up within the bureaucracy, not knowing how to scrounge sources or meet payroll...
   4) Compellingly discusses the fact that intelligence without counterintelligence is almost irrelevant if not counterproductive, but then glosses over some of the most glaring counterintelligence failures in the history of the CIA--interestingly, he defends James Angleton and places the blame for mistreating Nosenko squarterly on the Soviet Division leadership in the Directorate of Operations.
   5) Points out that it was Human Intelligence (HUMINT), not Imagery Intelligence (IMINT), that first found the Soviet missiles in Cuba.
   6) He confirms the Directorate of Intelligence and the analysis it does, as the "essence" of intelligence, relegating clandestine and technical intelligence to support functions rather than driving functions. This is most important, in that neither clandestine nor technical collectors are truly responsive to the needs of all-source analysts, in part because systems are designed, and agents are recruited, without regard to what is actually needed.
   7) He tells a great story on Laos, essentially noting that 200 CIA paramilitary officers, and money, and the indigenous population, where able to keep 5 North Vietnamese divisions bogged down, and kept Laos more or less free for a decade
   8) In the same story on Laos, he explains U.S. Department of Defense incapacity in unconventional or behind the lines war by noting that their officers kept arriving "with knapsacks full of doctrine".
   9) In recounting some of CIA's technical successes, he notes casually that persistence is a virtue--there were *thirteen* satellite failures before the 14th CORONA effort finally achieved its objectives.
   10) He gives Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) much higher marks at a user and leader of intelligence, such that we wondered why Christopher Andrew, the noted author on US Presidents and intelligence, did not include LBJ is his "four who got it" (Washington, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Bush Senior).
   11) He confirms, carefully and directly, that the Israeli attacks on the USS Liberty were deliberate and with fore-knowledge that the USS Liberty was a US vessel flying the US flag on US official business.
   12) He expresses concern, in recounting the mistakes in Chile, over the lack of understanding by President Nixon and Henry Kissinger (who writes the Foreword to this book) of the time lags involved in clandestine operations and covert actions.
   13) In summary, he ends with pride, noting that all that CIA did not only reduced fear, it saved tens of billions of dollars in defense expenditures that would have been either defeated by the Soviets, or were unnecessary. There can be no question, in light of this account, but that CIA has more than "paid the rent", and for all its trials and tribulations, provides the US taxpayer with a better return on investment than they get from any other part of the US Government, and certainly vastly more bang for the buck that they get from the US Department of Defense.
   
   Richard Helms is a one-of-a-kind, and this memoire should be read by every intellience professional, and anyone who wishes to understand how honorable men can thrive in the black world of clandestine and covert operations. RIP.



2. This is a biography we have been waiting for a long time. In fact, few even thought Richard Helms would even write his memoirs when one considers he spent his life working within the world of secrets, assassinations, political underdealings. Indeed, this can be a fascinating book for a realistic view of the world stuff like the Bond movies paint in more cartoonish terms. Helms takes us on a historical journey through World War 2 and his meeting with Hitler (where he describes the power of the Hitler aura upon the German people), he goes on into the years of Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon during which he was director of the CIA. But...should we take Helms' version of history as official? Probably not. Consider he makes an attempt to bash any theory that tries to show uptight men like him as anything other than squeaky clean. He especially tries to brush off the idea that the CIA might have been involved in the JFK assassination. He goes out of his way to especially criticise New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison who first brought the assassination conspiracy theories to the public and the Oliver Stone film based on the investigation and evidence of conspiracy, "JFK." He calls the idea of a conspiracy hogwash and tries to support the idea of Oswald acting alone with evidence that has already been shredded apart by investigators. Helms even tries to defend the image of FBI head J.Edgar Hoover, he confirms that Hoover kept certain files on people, but he attempts to deny the idea brought about by overwhelming evidence and testimony that Hoover lived a homosexual lifestyle. Helms presents a good story but also tries too hard to clean-up the image of a government that runs wild in some areas, something that has been long ago proven. It is a good read, well-written and detailed, but like any open-minded reader, read but carefully tread the waters because are we to believe Helms would honestly reveal secrets that even today would awaken rage from the general populace? Helms tells a good story, how much of it is true we will never know.



3. Pages 300/301 of the Helms book:

   One of the most disturbing incidents in the six days [war between Israel and
   the surrounding Arab states] came on the morning of June 8[, 1967] when the
   Pentagon flashed(urgent top-priority precedence) a message that the U.S.S.
   Liberty, an unarmed U.S. Navy communications(spy) ship, was under attack in
   the Mediterranean, and that American fighters had been scrambled to defend
   the ship....

   .... The following urgent reports showed that Israeli jet fighters and
   torpedo boats had launched the attack. The seriously damaged Liberty
   remained afloat, with thirty-four dead and more than a hundred wounded
   members of the crew.

   Israeli authorities subsequently apologized for the accident, but few in
   Washington could believe that the ship had not been identified as an
   American naval vessel. Later, an interim intelligence memorandum concluded
   that the attack was a mistake and "not made in malice against the U.S."....

   .... When additional evidence was available, more doubt was raised. This prompted my
   [D]eputy [Director of Central Intelligence], Admiral Rufus Taylor, to write
   me his view of the incident. "To me, the picture thus far presents the
   distinct possibility that the Israelis knew that the Liberty might be their
   target and attacked anyway, either through confusion in Command and Control
   or through deliberate disregard of instructions on the part of
   subordinates."

   The day after the attack, President Johnson, bristling with irritation, said
   to me, "The New York Times" put that attack on the Liberty on an inside
   page. It should have been on the front page!"

   I had no role in the board of inquiry that followed, or the board's finding
   that there could be no doubt that the Israeli's knew exactly what they were
   doing in attacking the Liberty. I have yet to understand why it was felt
   necessary to attack this ship or who ordered the attack.

   (299 words in a 452 page book)

   Murder... they KNEW they were murdering defenseless American kids barely in their twenties so that they could complete WHAT two Israeli Prime Ministers(Menachim Begin and Moshe Dayan) have since admitted was a "land grab"....

   ...to get more land, ....more land than they had already grabbed by the fourth day of the Six-Day War-they left 34 American families without their sons, brothers, dads... and sent a good subset of the 171 injured home to THEIR families in the US maimed for life.

   and the kids burned and maimed for life who are standing up for their 34 fallen comrades unable to rise from the dead to defend their own memories and blameless conduct... now the Israelis call them "liars" and "anti-Semites"...

   ...except a couple of the crew members of the USS Liberty were Jewish themselves... so they're not called "liars" and "anti-semites"... no, the Israeli attackers and Government of Israel call them "liars" and "self-hating jews"...

   THE OFFICIAL POSITION OF THE CIA IS THAT THIS WAS A "TRAGIC MISTAKE".... BUT HERE IS WHAT THE OFFICIALS AT THE NSA HAD TO SAY TO UNITED STATES NAVAL INSTITUTE'S, DAVID C WALSH:Former NSA Officials Agree
   David C. Walsh
   The jamming of unique U.S. frequencies during the Liberty incident seems to establish deliberate intent. And in exclusive interviews with this author, several former high-level National Security Agency (NSA) officials agree.

   On 14 February 2003, the "godfather" of the NSA's Auxiliary General Technical Research program, Oliver Kirby, noted that the Liberty was "my baby." Within weeks of the calamity, Kirby, deputy director for operations/production, read U.S. signals intelligence (SigInt)-generated transcripts and "staff reports" at NSA's Fort Meade, Maryland, headquarters. They were of Israeli pilots' conversations, recorded during the attack. The intercepts made it "absolutely certain" they knew it was a U.S. ship, he said. Kirby's is the first public disclosure by a top-level NSA senior of deliberate intent based on personal analyses of SigInt material.

   In an interview on 24 February 2003, retired Air Force Major General John Morrison, the agency's then-second-in-command (and Kirby's successor), said he had been informed at the time of Kirby's findings and endorsed them. Former NSA Director retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom said on 3 March 2003 said that, on the strength of such data, the attack's deliberateness "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the agency. On 5 March 2003, retired Navy Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, NSA director from 1977-1981, said he "flatly rejected" the Cristol/Israeli thesis. "It is just exceedingly difficult to believe that [the Liberty] was not correctly identified." He said this was based on his talks with NSA seniors at the time having direct knowledge. All four were unaware of any agency official at that time or later who dissented from the "deliberate" conclusion.




4. This book is not afraid to look at fundamental problems in the area of intelligence, which America today is finding amazingly similar to the problems that Richard Helms observed in Germany immediately after World War Two. Helms was uniquely qualified to see the big picture, having been a newspaper reporter who had lunch with Adolf Hitler (Chapter 2 is called `Lunch with Adolf') the day of a big rally in Nuremberg in 1936, a privilege that Americans willing to spend a thousand dollars a plate to attend a fundraiser with American presidents more recently might be jealous of, if being a millionaire is not enough to make them happy. Henry Kissinger was happy to report in the Foreword that Helms was even invited to lunch with President Nixon after an early NSC meeting. (p. xi). There is even a picture of the famous Tuesday lunch group with LBJ, Rusk, Clark Clifford, General Wheeler, Walt Rostow, George Cushman and Walt Johnson. There is even a picture of a lunch with Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush with the caption, "At lunch in the Vice President's office. Aside from George Washington, the elder George Bush is the only President who had firsthand knowledge of the intelligence world."

   The Preface reports that February 2, 1973, was the day James Schlesinger was sworn in as head of CIA and Richard Helms lost the position which was his main claim to fame. Richard Nixon had something to do with it, and Chapter 1, `A Smoking Gun' reports enough about the Watergate break-in to give the CIA perspective from the top, and ends with "Five months later, and a few days after his reelection, President Nixon called me to Camp David. It was the last time we spoke while he was in office." (p. 13). The Preface even claims "President Nixon had ended my intelligence career with a handshake at Camp David." (p. vi). If Helms is right about that, there was no personal contact between the Director of the CIA and the President of the United States in December 1972 and January 1973, when the Vietnam ceasefire was being hammered into place and a record number of B-52 bombers were being shot down by North Vietnamese anti-aircraft guns and SAMs. That figures.

   The German spies are most fascinating in the beginning of the book. Helms calls Martha Dodd an American, as she was the daughter of the American ambassador to Germany from 1933 to 1938, but she was also girlfriend of Boris Vinogradov, the press secretary at the Soviet embassy in Berlin. After being charged with spying in 1957, she fled to Czechoslovakia. "Martha was seventy when she died in Prague in 1990." (p. 20). Spies and Richard Nixon have an acute sense of which side someone is on, and Helms seems to be particularly sensitive to the issues that Nixon would be prone to notice. Other major personalities are easy to locate in the index: Allen Dulles, James Angleton, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Henry Kissinger, Yuri Ivanovich Nosenko, and Frank Wisner.

   Chapter 8, "The Gehlen Organization," deals with the group most responsible for allowing German intelligence after World War Two to maintain some continuity with the information that had been accumulating while Hitler was in power. As the only employer in West Germany that was not averse to employing the upper echelons of the previous regime, it had no trouble recruiting four thousand former Nazis, but Helms did not find them reliable. " . . . the American officers working with Gehlen in Washington neglected to insist upon being given the names of and biographical data on the RUSTY staff personnel. . . . Even in the confusion of the immediate post-war intelligence picture, this oversight violated one of the fundamental rules of secret intelligence, and helped to set the stage for the security disasters that in time all but destroyed the entire effort." (p. 86). A lot of people have been jumping to this conclusion without having the kind of in-depth knowledge of the situation which Helms observed.

   On "fundamental rules of secret intelligence," (p. 86), Helms seems most upset that he received a felony conviction for denying something in testimony to Congress that he felt compelled to deny. Helms was bitter that in his confirmation hearings to be appointed ambassador to Iran, he was asked questions by people who knew that the answer was officially secret, so he was being forced to lie to maintain a cover story that was maintaining dubious deniability. This is the area of books on intelligence that I find most interesting. Nosenko was not allowed to participate in a free debate in America over the nature of KGB activities regarding Lee Harvey Oswald because the entire nature of the KGB was a matter of exclusive CIA jurisdiction within the American system, and holding Nosenko a prisoner for years was the perfect symbol of the amount of control that the CIA believed it was entitled to maintain over such information. Convicting Helms of a felony for lying to Congress was a matter of attempting to establish the principle that laws have a higher function than rules, and any individual within the American system is subject to the possibility of being hauled into court to be a patsy for whatever law the administration of justice intends to glorify in its present incarnation.

   Helms doesn't exactly vilify Richard M. Nixon in this book, but just honestly stating "It has long been clear to me that President Nixon himself called the shots in the Watergate cover-up," (p. 13) is damn close. On our most recent impeachment, I think the movie "Candy" (1969, DVD 2001) with Enrico Maria Salerno as Jonathan J. John provides a better joke, when the police ask, "Did you see what happened to the girl in the blue dress?" Film buff J.J.J. responded, "I don't know. Who directed it?" That is the way most Presidents feel about the CIA.

5 comments about An American Life.

1. Apart from the first few chapters about his own path to success, the book's an introductory history lesson on the u.s. and international political scene of the 80's. Easy to understand. Reagan explained very clearly on his ratinales behind the things he did. It was like listening to a wise old man telling his story. His international policies, as indicated in the book, made far reaching impacts on the development of world events then and afterwards. A great read. The book lets me understand this great man more and made me remember him more.



2. A very good book. Contains much history which either wasn't or couldn't be reported at the time it was happening. Although it is over 700 pages, it was a good and enjoyable book.



3. My first vote in a presidential election was for Ronald Wilson Reagan. I was a freshman in college and quickly coming to grips with my political philosophy and world view, when this idealistic, bright ray of sunshine declared it was "morning in America." Having remembered all to well the horrors of Watergate, the tepid Ford presidency, and the...well...you fill in your own perjorative for Jimmy Carter's presidency, Mr. Reagan, for me at least, was a breath of fresh air.
   
   If you are looking for pure history of the Reagan years, the works of Lou Cannon and Richard Reeves will provide more objective views; i.e. the type of stuff political junkies like myself love to chew on. However, if you are looking for a first person account of a uniquely American story, this memoir will both uplift and inspire.
   
   This book is quintessential Reagan. Missing is the self-adulatory, self-promoting tripe you read in autobiographies. Also, although he was bitterly opposed by "The Establishment," the literati, Hollywood, socialists, communists and the like, there is not an ounce of rancor to be found.
   
   An American Life, despite the fact that it is 700+ pages, is a quick and fairly easy read. In order to obtain a full view of his presidency, I not only recommend this work, and the aforementioned volumes, but also the book that is the compilation of his letters. Far from being the "amiable dunce," you'll discover that "Dutch" was a unique and complex man and we are a better country for having him a part of the body politic for as long as we did.



4. This is one of the best bigraphies I have ever read on anyone. It was excellent from beginning to end. It spoke alot of his Christian character and upbringing and it covered politics but it was never boring. The author never goes on and on.
   
   Ronald Reagans Christian upbringing and morality is so encouraging.



5. Reagan's autobiography presents a dual account into the mind of one of the most charismatic leaders of the 20th century as well as a deep view into the extraordinary political events that shaped the world in the 1980s.
   
   Regardless of where your political views lie, if you have a sincere interest in events and decisions shaping both fiscal and foreign policy, An American Life will deliver. From his near fatal shooting, his correspondence with Gorbachev, to events leading to the Iran Contra scandal, Reagan lays it all on the line. The basis of his positions via his own words provides you the full scope of his reasoning, which is fascinating insight no matter what your persuasion.
   
   A historical account written straight from a man in one of the worlds most prominent positions should be of interest to anyone with an attraction to historical accounts. Having it come from one of our most enigmatic presidents only raises the bar.

4 comments about Eugene V. Debs: Citizen and Socialist (The Working Class in American History).

1. PG 203 & 208 reference Governor Davis H. Waite. The author mis-spells Davis as David, a very common mistake for researchers and historians.

   Otherwise good information here on most Debs topics. Read more on Debs & Waite in my future book. Frank S. Waite




2. The book was clearly not written by an author, but by a researcher. The book has lots of info, but sometimes tends to get off subject, and is sometimes a bit hard to follow. A good read none the less. A very interesting man and that translates into a good book.



3. He was dubbed an undesirable citizen by so-called progressive Teddy Roosevelt. The best biography of Debs to date. It shows his working class background and radical roots in his family. You can see his evolution from democrat and trade unionist to socialist and industrial unionist. His frustration with mainstream politics leads to his trade union agitation. The failure of the AFL railroad brotherhoods to work together spurs him on to create an industrial union of all railroad workers called the American Railway Union. While in jailed in Illinois after the Pullman Strike of 1894 is crushed he becomes a socialist. He helps unites the various factions into the Socialist Party of America in 1901. That same year he merges the broken ARU with the Western Federation of Miners to form the American Labor Union, which adopts socialism. He helps form the Industrial Workers of the World in 1905 which seeks to organize all workers into One Big Union. He leaves the IWW when in rejects politics. During WWI while other socialists give in to nationalism he remains militantly anti-war. In 1917 he refuses to support America's enterance into the war and remains undecided on the Russian Revolution. While in prison for trying to subvert the war effort he recieves over a million votes for president. His party disintegrates in dispute between Hawks and Doves, and reformers and revolutionaries. A fascinating story.



4. Here you will learn about Debbs the union activist and organizer, Debbs the socialist party organizer and Debbs the husband, brother, friend and lover. And you might get the impression that the advocacy and political activity of Debbs must be measured almost exclusively by the impact it had on the unions, the socialist party and his intimates. I had hoped to read more about Debbs' impact beyond these circles. How did the nation look on Debbs, especially during his presidential campaigns? What did the other major and minor party candidates make of him? These questions remain largely unanswered by the books end.

   At times, the book treats Debbs' presidential campaigns almost in passing. The campaigns are not treated as events interesting primarily because of the impact they had on the nation. If the US thought Debbs dangerous enough to incarcerate him during WW1, it is difficult to imagine why a history depicting Debbs' larger political and cultural influence would be difficult to produce.

   The book describes well how Debbs framed his leftism in an American voice: how he found within the discourse of individualism a foundation for socialism. But, of course, that direction was all but forgotten after the benighted enthusiasm for the Bolsheviks.

5 comments about John Quincy Adams: A Public Life, a Private Life.

1. After noting the ratings and browsing the titles of other reviewers, I realize I am in the minority in the low review I have given this book. I find it even more peculiar given my disposition to normally be quite favorable in my reviews. I will not flinch, however, in my belief that this biography is ill conceived, inadequately researched, and poorly written.
   
   First, I will tackle why this book is ill conceived. Nagel makes the assertion that he will be able to add knew insight into the inner workings of John Quincy Adams, a task he points out that no previous biographer has been fully successful, by writing a biography utilizing JQA's diary. This certainly seems like an acceptable approach but in practice Nagel simply uses it as an excuse to write a biography without doing any real research. In fact, you will not find a single footnote in this entire volume, simply an explanation basically telling you that his primary research was JQA's diary with the gaps filled in by other biographers work. Even more inexplicable, beyond a couple of lines of poetry, Nagel never quotes directly from JQAs diary except for short sentences or phrases trapped within his mechanical prose. The dumbfounding outcome of this is a book that purports to tell JQAs story utilizing his diary, yet never gives the reader any sense of what JQAs diary was actually like.
   
   The preceding criticism might be overlooked had Nagel actually written an enjoyable biography. Unfortunately, Nagel's writing is as lazy and thoughtless as his research. Nagel makes no effort to craft his work in a way that would be appropriate to his subject matter or complement his desire to use JQAs diary as the basis for the book. I would encourage anyone thinking of buying this book to read the excerpts available through the "Look Inside" feature. Nagel continues the exact same paragraph structure throughout the entire book. The book is strictly chronological, basically following a "then this happened, then this happened, and then this happened..." approach that is about as compelling as a high school level history assignment. Nagel treats events big and small with the same level of detail (not much) and never elaborates on events that seem to provide an opportunity for adding interest or bringing the reader to a better understanding of John Quincy Adams and his place in history. I would call this a "feather duster" biography - it glides along the surface without ever taking the time to go into any depth.
   
   Those interested in learning about JQAs presidency will be the most disappointed. Nagel explains that he only devotes a chapter to JQAs presidency because JQA himself did not think his presidency was very important. This is an absurd defense and a smokescreen for the fact that he did not do the necessary research. In fact, the chapter devoted to JQAs presidency is mostly about events that happened to JQA during his presidency unrelated to his presidency.
   
   In conclusion, I will call this book exactly what it is - an abridgement and paraphrased version of JQAs diary and a very poor one at that. I am still perplexed at how so many others found this book satisfactory, but I found it to be the worst biography that I have ever read.



2. It was obvious from tne start that John Quincy Adams was going to be a great man,like it or not. His father,John, second in his class at Harvard, immediately began bombarding the youth with Greek, Latin, English and history. His mother, Abigail Smith of Mayflower descent, simultaneously joined the festivities, instilling a religious morality that might have frightened Calvin himself.Trips abroad with Quincy's father were to be educative,with little time to be "wasted".Little wonder that J.Q. would also graduate second in his Harvard stint. The real surprise to this reviewer is that the future 6th president ever married since he seemingly knew nothing about intimacy, only work and duty.His beratings and impudence towards his wife are carefully preserved, perhaps sadly. Certainly no family wrote or retained more for future historians.That he was a competent diplomat, an historic Secretary of State under Monroe, and a highly respected Representative for Massachusetts until his death in 1848 (stricken on the floor of The House) is almost completely forgotten.It's simply that his presidency was a complete bust,due mostly to the infamous alleged "corrupt deal" with Henry Clay in the election of 1824. No president was better trained for the office, few presidents were treated more callously by Congress.(Which came first,the chicken or the egg)? Paul Nagel writes an anecdotal, not too heavy biography of a difficult man. The results are generally favorable to the reader, even if the subject himself tends not to be, Is there a psycho-historian in the house?



3. I'm nearly at the halfway point of my mission to read a biography of each President. I would put this bio in the top third of those I've read for a variety of reasons.
   
   First, it was the perfect length. JQA was an important President but was he TJ, Roosevelt, Truman, Nixon, Lincoln... no. Nothing that important happened when he was President at least in a very broad, international sense. I'm very glad the author didn't lengthen the biography and make it detailed to a fault just to make it look like he did more research or overvalued the importance of JQA.
   
   JQA was quite a character. Clearly he was an intelligent man. I loved the way the author talked about what JQA read. In fact, I might even read some of those books myself because as with nearly every President, they gathered most of their intelligence from reading on their own. I liked the fact that the author included all the info about JQA's literary, research and professorship.
   
   I didn't get the point of how the author pointed out JQA's schedule so often, when he got up, what he did all day, that got a bit old.
   
   Other than that, it was really a great biography that shed a lot of light on this man.
   
   A few things I found interesting about JQA that the author did a good job detailing.
   
   1. Abigail and John Adams really put a lot of pressure on their son. That was very apparent and made JQA a sympathetic person at times.
   
   2. JQA was a stick in the mud a lot of times so it is easy to see why a lot of people didn't like him. It also explains why his presidency isn't held in such high regard. I thought it very telling that on Andrew Jackson's deathbed JQA was very uncomplementary. I would've hated to cross him.
   
   3. And perhaps this is the most interesting. JQA couldn't rise above the pressure that was put on him by his parents. He passed that pressure on to his kids, causing one to kill himself. Of course, I do think he mellowed as he got older which the author detailed allowing him to become a sympathetic figure again.
   
   Lastly, how about the fact that JQA died pretty much in congress. Wow, what dedication.
   
   Good bio that I would recommend.



4. A fine biography about America's most important second generation citizen. Nagel manages the tricky balancing act of covering the relevant topic without overstaying his welcome with everything and the kitchen sink. Nagel also earns due credit for resisting, for the most part, the urge to apply today's psychological interpretations to the mind and motives of a man who lived two hundred years ago. Discussion is important but speculation is just that. It also helps Nagel's cause that JQA led a pretty uncontroversial life.
   
   A great legislator and a (by his own admission) below average President, JQA proved his mettle as a Secretary of State and congressman. The only President to return to congress, he fought vehemently for abolition and civil liberties. He even died on the job. How's that for service to the nation.
   
   If the personal aspect of the biography seems underwhelming, perhaps that is due to the subject's relative colorlessness. A staid, serious individual who may have even suffered from mild depression, JQA lived his entire life as his father's son. Hard to live up to a man revered around the world as a living or recently deceased god. JQA lived a very quiet, serious life for a public figure.



5. A great biography on John Quincy Adams. The author thoroughly went through everything from childhood to death. He was able to describe him very well. I liked hearing about his various government jobs and living in Europe. I only have a minor nitpick the author should have sticked with refering to him as JQA instead of rotating from JQA, John and Adams given his famous father it would have been better to stick with just JQA. Other that it was a great biography.

5 comments about Robert Kennedy : His Life.

1. The life and times of Robert Kennedy beg for a coherent and in depth book .... unfortunately this is not it. Living in the shadow of his presidential brother, the shadow of his oldest brother killed in WWII and the all encompassing shadow of his father, RFK was able to chisel out an identity of his own in US history before his tragic death. Hoping to gain some understanding/insight of/into this man's character and evolution from a sullen child to presidential candidate and everything in between, and a chonology of such things as his involvement in the US civil rights movement, McCarthyism, Cuba (Bay of Pigs and The Missle Crisis) and his relationship in the White House with his brother JFK... I was greatly disappointed. A glaring hole in this book is any serious treatment of RFK and Vietnam. What the book does contain are snippets, quotes and anecdotes, some mildly interesting, (i.e. RFK's role in the release of Martin Luther King from prison), without any cohesiveness and very little context. And although many of the conclusions reached in this volume are valid they are simply not borne out here. The book's attempt to cover significant parallel events is at best confusing and there is also an alarming amount of armchair psychology. I hate to be so hard nosed but the subject deserves much better than this book.



2. Evan offers much insight into an unfinished life. He meets the mark of a good biographer; as a history this is a well-balanced read.
   
   Bobby once famously said: "Progress is a nice word. But change is its motivator. And change has its enemies". Mr. Thomas has done a commendable job of tracking that change, speaking to the better known facets of Bobby's personal as well as political evolution. Evan's book captures the antecedents: his awkwardness as a young Kennedy; the shadow, and then death of, his brother Jack; the opportunities to question the rigidity of his Catholic faith; his decision to align himself with McCarthy (Joe not Gene). These alternately help set the foundation for the evolution of Bobby from FDR politician to modern-day progressive. These help explain what caused a 1950's era government attorney concerned about Comintern penetration of the State Department to become a proponent of the United Farmworkers in its most radical years. Or those changes that caused the one-time skeptic of Martin Luther King to become one of his most ardent political champions.
   
   Evans provides the rationale for the enmity shared by various mobsters, LBJ, and even Roy Cohn. His rationale is this: Bobby cared. Evans touches us when he describes Bobby as a man who strived to live lives as others did. The description of Bobby's pain witnessing the utter poverty of rural blacks in the 1960's Mississippi delta is palpable and authentic. But Bobby was also a shrewd strategist, adapting to a time when the solid south was no longer the dependable, conservative counterweight of the Democratic Party fulcrum, and the campus was no longer the only forum in America for frank discussion of problems in America. Bobby was not an opportunist, but he was a political realist, and in the days leading up to the '68 convention Bobby reflected not simply the changes occurring within the antiwar movement or the modern-day Democratic Party, but also those changes occurring all across America at that time.
   
   Would Bobby have turned around a country that was heading down a path of "secret plans" to end the Vietnam War, Watergate, "Trickle Down" economics and South American puppeteering? Evan Thomas to his credit wrote a book about an unfinished life, and a good one at that. But for those interested in what might have been, that's a different book.



3. Although I was only 7 years old when he died I have talked to many people about the passion they felt for Bobby. Boy, could we use someone like that now. Although the book does not shy away from his sometime machiavellian tactics, it shows a person who was so affected by tragedy that he really cared. I see film clips of when he visited Buffalo, and the entire Niagara Square was packed with tens of thousands of people. I cannot think of anyone, short of the Bills after a super bowl win, that would garner that much enthusiasm. Evan Thomas captures that and draws the reader in. I actually felt empty when finishing the book and sad that I could think of no one today that could fill that void. Thomas also through thorough research seems to dispel the popular myth of Bobby as a womanizer. He was actually a devoted family man haunted by his brothers death but loyal to wife and children. Not so with Jack. When Bobby was in Indianapolis about to speak before a black audience it was announced that Martin Luther King had just been killed. He discarded his planned speech and relayed his own feelings of how he felt when his brother Jack was killed. It was totally ad-libbed and from the heart. Indianapolis was one of the few major cities not to erupt in violence. I wonder how different this country might be had he the opportunity to serve us.



4. I was so looking forward to listening to this book and so frustrated with the outcome.
   
   That part that I did listen to was written well but read poorly. Attempting to mimick the voice of Kennedy (and others) grows so old so quickly one would have thought it would have captured the eye of an editor sooner rather than later. But never? Alas, apparently that was not in anyone's job description.
   
   If you must do anything buy the printed version.



5. The book is okay. It is that simple. The prose are incoherent and it is very hard to tell who or what the subject of the sentence is. He tries to be far too clever with his sentence structure which results in being forced to read a sentence several times, sometimes understanding what he's talking about the fifth time, sometimes still confused but forced to move on
   The most prominent of my complaints is that he is so repetitious. He will use the same adjectives to describe the same person over and over in almost identical sentences which begs the question: How long would this book be if he didn't repeat himself?
   My final complaint is that he will write ad nauseam about the most mundane events and details and will examine the motives and come to a verdict while repeating the evidence almost verbatim to what he just wrote the paragraph before.
   I haven't read another book on Bobby so I cannot compare it to other Bobby-books. However, since I was born in the eighties and did not live during all of this, it is new information and basically the only fact I can't give this a lower grade is because the information itself propels the book into mediocrity.

5 comments about Love in a Torn Land: Joanna of Kurdistan: The True Story of a Freedom Fighter's Escape from Iraqi Vengeance.

1. I love all of Jean Sasson's books. Like all the others, this is written to keep you interested in the story and wondering what could possibly happen next to this poor young woman, her husband and all Kurds, even though you eventually know about the general outcome. The fact that the story is true, makes it hair raising. The only unfavorable thing I could say about the book, is that in telling the story, Jean Sasson looses herself a bit by going into too many details of places, people, every day occurrances, and the constant back and forth conversations between the protagonists. Sometimes it is best to leave details to your imagination. Other than that, I enjoyed it thoroughly and can't wait for the next!



2. As usual, Jean Sasson opened my eyes to a harsh culture where survival is your minute by minute goal. She has provided women with a voice and others of us a reason to be thankful to be Americans.



3. In Jean Sasson's book, "Love in a Torn Land", you will meet an astonishing heroine of an unbelievable adventure novel as well as hear a tender romance that survives against all odds. This is Jean Sasson at her best!
   
   Before I read this book, I did not even know what a Kurd was, but you will come to admire the spirit of the Kurdish people and their struggle to survive in the current day through war, suppression, genocide and their unfathomable faith in their right to survive. This is a truly harsh environment as the people struggle day by day to survive.
   
   Follow the story of a family's struggles in war torn Iraq as our heroine, Joanna, carries us through stories of oppression of Muslim women, heart breaking tales of torture and loss, warm sharings of people reaching out to comfort when none seems to be had, harrowing narratives of a people's struggle to survive. Against all odds, this brave woman survives and lives to tell the tale of how she was determined to live the life she wanted no matter the cost.
   
   As you cower under your covers, you will read of the bombings of Baghdad and the Northern Iraq mountains where learning "that whatever one might be doing here, half the mind will not be focusing on the task at hand, but instead on the sounds and sights from the skies" is a crucial lesson. Joanna applies this lesson as her ears are tuned for the shrill whistling resonance of shells, or for the noisy roar of an airplane or helicopter engine while she is preparing a meager breakfast that may only consist of rice. Our heroine suffered through narrow escapes in treacherous places only to place herself in an area targeted for race eliminating scourges. She suffers the heartbreak of the loss of loved ones, is often on the brink of starvation, poisoned and blinded by gas - but almost never loses her spirit and will to survive. Just imagine thinking you are in heaven to have a shelter over your head that is crawling with scorpions, `despite the fact that there was no electricity, no running water, and no toilets".
   
   This eye opening book just may have you clamouring for more of Jean Sasson's books as she supports the efforts of women whose voices must be heard.



4. It is hard to believe that this story is non-fiction given the never-ending twists and turns, intense drama and the perfect love story that unfolds. It was hard to put this book down!
   
   This is Jean Sassoon's best book to date. There is far less of the distracting shifting back and forth that I found to be a problem in the construction of her earlier books. Her descriptions are richer, more vivid. I used to live in Kurdistan, and her descriptions are very true to life!
   
   I think this book does more to advance the Kurdish cause than any documentary I have seen! The harsh life under both the Baathists and the Iranian government is fairly portrayed. You will come away impressed with the strength of the Peshmergas and very grateful for your own soft bed and other creature comforts.
   
   I do wish that the author had not been in such a rush to move the characters from Iran to London. I would have loved to have read more about Joanna's trials and tribulations in the Kurdish area of Iran and in Damascus. The adjustment to living in London would also have made for interesting reading.



5. I briefly had an understanding of where Kurdistan was. That the "Kurds" were yet another minority being persecuted in our world. "Love in a Torn Land" has somewhat educated me as to their history and current situation. In a most entertaining manner. I salute both the author and the heroine. Thank you for letting me into the Kurdistan situation. Why can't we not only just not get along but need to bomb and chemically bomb a nation out of existance? The thing is, it is happening right now in Kurdistan and "most" other parts of our earth. I lie here in my comfortable bed wishing I could help. THANK YOU again.
   peter

5 comments about Basic Brown: My Life and Our Times.

1. Willie Brown, the unshakable Speaker of the House in California and then Mayor of San Francisco is one wild and crazy guy. I'm sure his off the cuff remarks and detailed recounting of political shenanigans will anger about as many as they amuse, but for the casual reader this is a very interesting glimpse into the world of politics. I'll never read coverage about the simple passage of a bill again without wondering what went on behind the scenes. Willie Brown was a gift to San Francisco who only expects everyone else to be as proud of the City as he is. PJ Corkerey has done a fine job of capturing Brown's energy and wit.



2. Basic Brown is, without question, the most entertaining and engaging political autobiography I've ever read. Willie Brown is a political animal extraordinaire, and on every page he revels in the intrigue and dealmaking, the pomp and circumatance, and the sheer fun of big time politics. The book is loaded with many memorable antecdotes that not only place Willie Brown front and center in California politics of the last 40 years, but teach pithy lessons about the nature of modern politics. Throughout the narrative, Willie Brown is always right. He's always the most skilled, best dressed, most adroit politician in the room, whether it's in the backrooms and august chambers of the Capitol in Sacramento, or in San Francisco City Hall.
   
   Willie Brown often refers to himself in the third person, and wears his massive political ego on his sleeve. But his prose never gets long winded or boring. And, through it all, the reader gets a behind the scenes glimpse into how a master of modern politics plays The Game. Willie Brown came to San Franscico as a poor, undereducated teenager from the segregated south. Through the sheer force of this personality, and his shrewd intelligence he made his way to Speaker of the California Assembly and, later, Mayor of San Francisco. Luckily for us, he has no qualms about sharing his insights, unfettered and unvarnished, so that the rest of us can learn from the Master. What a terrific book.



3. I bought this book with great anticipation: I read the chapter about Willie's political dates with women who accompany him to political functions. I read that excerpt on NPR. In that excerpt. Willie was honest, straightforward, and scintillating in how he described his working a room while a date waits for his attention.
   
   So I expected the rest of the book to deliver on the promise of that excerpt: to be scintillating, honest, and straight-forward. Except the all other parts of the book are cautious. I had the feeling the Willie is still playing to his friends and because of that, he held back. I was disappointed. It seemed like Willie's caution was tempered by his not wanting to piss-off his friends in case he needs them in the future for some political task. I think the chapter about his relationship with women was much more bold because Willie did not perceive that boldness potentially harming in at some point in the future.
   
   The rest of the book is somewhat standard political fare: master the rules, work hard, be scrupously honest, work for justice, have fun, etc. But that sort of mundane advice is obvious. What I wanted from Willie was his take on how and why and what the system really is to him. How we can make it work for us rather than for Republican lobbyists. I love ya Willie, but the second part of your book is too timid. The book should be read but only after in comes out in paper.



4. I always thought that Willie Brown was amazing, but Basic Brown shows that he is far more amazing than I could have imagined.
   I love the book!
   I originally borrowed it from the public library, but now I must have my own copy. My close friends share my views on the book. We love discussing, laughing about and learning so much from Basic Brown. May Willie Brown stay on the job for a long, long time to come!



5. I am only marginally interested in his politics, but this book is really a great read for anyone. Willie Brown has had such a fascinating life that anyone could appreciate this candid biography of one of the great "movers and shakers" of our time. Willie is so incredibly witty, classy and intelligent. He is truely a great man!! This book is so fun and amazingly difficult to put down.