5 comments about Aurelia.

1. I thought it was an excellent book, especially for a new author. I loved the characters- they were strong, fun, likable, and left you wanting more.



2. I was drawn to this book by the lovely cover. I am not a YA but have enjoyed several YA novels recently (for example the Libba Bray series).This was a pleasant read primarily geared towards young girls- probably age 12 to 15. The adventure,mystery and romance might be somewhat tame for older teens.
   
   As an adult reading this book I found the writing style and prose very simple and the plot sterotypical. But a young girl reading this might view the book as an exciting adventure between a fiesty princess and her dashing childhood friend.For Moms looking for nice clean books with adventure and a dash of romance for their young daughters to read,this book fits the bill.
   
   If you or your daughter enjoyed this book, then I would suggest Crown Duel by Sherwood Smith, The Hero and the Crown by Robin McKinley, a Posse of Princessess by Sherwood Smith and Princess Ben by Catherine Murdock. IMHO Crown Duel and The Hero and the Crown are the Classics in this genre and are very readable for both young girls and not so young gals who are young at heart.



3. Aurelia is the crown princess of Tyralt. Everyone loves her. The people of Tyralt would rather see Aurelia on the throne than the king, her father. Her father is not a cruel ruler, but he thinks of no one besides himself. If that means more taxes to finance his parties, so be it. So if everyone loves Aurelia, who is trying to kill her?
   
   Robert Vantauge's father had been the king's spy until they left the kingdom for a new life on the remote frontier. The king's current advisor wrote and begged the spy to return and help find the assassin. When Robert heard his father refusing to go, he goes in his father's place. Aurelia had been his friend as he grew up. He still cares very deeply for the princess and sets off to save her.
   
   By order of the king, no one is to tell Princess Aurelia that someone is trying to kill her. She is to remain unaware. So Robert cannot tell Aurelia what is going on. But Aurelia refuses to be held back. She always has. She knows every escape route from the palace and its grounds. She knows every nook and cranny of the kingdom (the bad areas, as well as the good). And she knows something is going on, concerning her, and no one will tell her - not even the one she trusts above all others, Robert.
   
   **** Personally, I enjoyed every page of this wonderful story until the ending. It will be up to each reader to decide whether the ending is satisfactory or not. To each her own. The plot is solid and engrossing. The characters are engaging. The clues to solve the mystery, before those in the book do, are all there. Though teens are the target audience for this book, adults will enjoy it just as much. Down right intriguing! ****
   
   Reviewed by Detra Fitch of Huntress Reviews.



4. She is Aurelia, she's the crown princess and the heir to Tyralt. Someone's been trying to kill her, but who? and why?
   
   He is Robert Vantauge, son of the king's former spy, nephew of the king's adviser and former classmate of Aurelia. His uncle sent for his father to come back to the palace and figure out who is trying to kill Aurelia. His father doesn't go but instead Robert goes.
   
   This is in the eyes of Robert and Aurelia. Yes, this is a mystery book but, it's not completly revolved around 'Who is trying to kill Aurelia?'
   I would recommend this book to those who like mystery, but also like a good story.



5. Aurelia is not the fairytale princess story it first appears to be.
   Aurelia's family problems are more complicated than that. Since she is the crown princess and heir to the thrown that means the royal court and the realm has issues to work through, which it turns out are bigger than the first book. Luckily she finds a friend and an ally that is worth trusting in the spy-master's son-Robert. Really the story is as much about Robert becoming a hero as it is about Aurelia finding her freedom. There are some nice touches of romance, but I'd say the story's greatest strength is in how Robert and Aurelia daringly put everything at risk to end the schemes of whoever is trying to kill her. There's a surprising conclusion that leads me to believe the kingdom may face greater problems than the King, Robert,or Aurelia had anticipated. It's definitely not a typical ending, even though Aurelia and Robert appear to have won what they both really needed. I'm left wondering what will happen in the next book and can't help but think that their code of honor will be needed to help save the kingdom from corruption.

5 comments about In God's Name: An Investigation Into the Murder of Pope John Paul I.

1. It seems to me that Mr Yallop has made no progress in his investigations since releasing this very same book over 20 years ago.He seems to be flogging a dead horse (no sarcasm intended).John Cornwell's Thief in the Night is a far more credible ,if not entirely complete, work.The Vatican is apparently initiated an investigation into Pope John Paul 1's untimely death.The cause for this Pope's Beatification and Canonization is well under way, so this may result in the eventual exhumation of theis Pope's body, thus facilitating a forensic or ragular autopsy. The release of this book seems to be wishful thinking regarding Pope Benedicr xvi---a little ghoulish. This book is not recommended , unless you enjoy crime fiction or the recent rash of CSI TV shows.



2. Fascinating read, although I'no not sure I buy in to all the conspiracy theories surrounging the death of Pope John Paul I. Still worth the read to stimulate thinking about the Vatican and its inner-workings. Makes you think.



3. From 1978 to 1983, the Vatican's strategy was to suppress the memory of the liberal 33 day pope and the true circumstances of his mysterious death. Then in 1984, David Yallop's `In God's Name' did a riveting job in proving this pope was murdered. In 1985, the Vatican recruited clergy in several countries to write brief biographical sketches that painted him out to be a man who ignored the issues of his day and spent his life on his knees. Nothing could be further from the truth, as for twenty years as a bishop he had been a rampaging locomotive running about the Vatican, the courts and Parliament of Italy struggling for human rights for the oppressed; the reason he had risen to the papacy.
   
   There have been several books written about this pope's unwitnessed death, of which I would give only two of them more than one star. Many of the others have been commissioned by the Vatican to spread the misconception that this man died of a heart attack. Only two of them tell the truth. This book 'In God's Name' and 'Murder in the Vatican' by Lucien Gregoire.
   
   Whereas, no one is going to walk away from either of these books without the firm conviction this man was murdered, there is a difference. Yallop claims the Pope was murdered because of his involvement in the Vatican Bank. Gregoire presents compelling proof that two Opus Dei bishops, who rose to high rank shortly after the Polish pope was elected, masterminded the murders of John Paul and his six closest friends in the fall of 1978. He answers the question, "Did John Paul's struggle for planned parenthood, the remarried, women, sexual orientation and others cost him his life?" Yet, the credit goes mostly to Yallop, for had he not written his book, all the others would have never written their books.



4. Murder in the Vatican: The Revolutionary Life of John Paul and The Vatican Murders of 1978
   
   Yallop does a riveting job in proving this pope was murdered; something that most Europeans already know, yet, Americans find hard to accept.
   
   Anyone who takes the time to read `In God's Name' will find that Yallop's investigation is not based on assumptions or conjecture, but absolute fact. Yallop presents substantial evidence pointing to Cardinal Villot, the Vatican Secretary of State, and Paul Marcinkus, the President of the Vatican Bank, as being among the culprits. I followed Albino Luciani for many years and I have read every book about his death, and I have found that all of Yallop's copycats have concluded that these two were among the conspirators.
   
   Recently I found an exception. Lucien Gregoire's `Murder in the Vatican' presents equally compelling evidence that Villot and Marcinkus had nothing to do with the murder of John Paul - he points the finger in an entirely different direction and proves his case. In addition to giving you Luciani's death, Gregoire gives you his life - something that the others ignored. He proves you will never understand the mystery of John Paul's death, unless first you first understand the mystery of his life. You can get a glimpse of Luciani's life on JohnPaul1 org.
   
   Yet, anyone interested in this subject, should begin with `In God's Name'. There is a reason why it sold over six million copies. It's the tops, you know.



5. This is an erudite accounting of BOTH the putative murder of Pope John Paul I and Vatican finances. Written by an editor of the Wall Street Journal, this book reads like an arcane mystery or true crime book. It is a good reminder that the love of money breeds evil. A must read for crime buffs and good Catholics (I am one!)

5 comments about Killer Weekend.

1. animal cruelty
   two adjoining hotel rooms occupied by the same person, one in disguise, and no one picks up on it?
   this book insults the reader
   it may not deserve the one star I gave it



2. Ridley Pearson's KILLER WEEKEND has a pace that is fast and furious, but maybe just a little two many side issues. Sheriff Walt Fleming has the dubious job of protecting a potential presidential candidate, Elizabeth Shaler from being murdered. Walt as a curious rookie cop had saved her life five years before so they had a history that makes her vulnerable to the pressures of big time wheeler and dealer money to finance her campaign.
   She is a show piece to a conference of the smartest money men in the nation, but the author never gives a clue as to why the complex effort is made to kill the woman, the reader is left wondering is it someone from her past, her politics or just plain cussedness.
   A good read and maybe if he uses these characters again we will learn more about them.
   Nash Black, author of WRITING AS A SMALL BUSINESS and SINS OF THE FATHERS.



3. Sheriff Walt Fleming has a lot going on in his life. He is going through a divorce. One of his deputies is sleeping with his wife. He is trying to keep his troublesome nephew from going to jail. There's a cougar attacking people. And a part-time resident, New York attorney general Elizabeth Shaler, has returned to Sun Valley to officially announce her candidacy for President at the prestigious C3 weekend conference, a who's who convention for the elite of the communications industry. The Sheriff is helping coordinate security for the attorney general. The Sheriff's father is in town to provide unwelcome advice.
   
   And, oh yeah, there is a murderer on the loose and Sheriff Fleming also believes an assassin may be in town to kill Ms. Shaler.
   
   There is a lot going on in "Killer Weekend"...too much I would say. There are too many plots and subplots for Mr. Pearson to tackle in a book that is padded out to just over 300 pages. There is a lot of action, but there really isn't a character that I cared for or felt like I knew. The shear number of subplots took away any chance Mr. Pearson had of developing a character that I cared to root for.
   
   I have to admit that the final 60-70 pages, though implausible at times, were a fun roller coaster ride.



4. Walt Fleming is a small-town sheriff, but Quantico-trained and unusually competent. We're given to understand this in the prologue to Killer Weekend, when Walt pieces together clues anyone else might have overlooked and saves the life of Liz Shaler, the Attorney General of New York State, who maintains a second home in Idaho's Sun Valley. Eight years later Shaler is set to announce her candidacy for the presidency at a conference at the Sun Valley Inn. The event would be a logistical nightmare for Walt and his staff under the best of conditions. But he has reason to believe that Shaler is being targeted by an assassin who will make his move when she makes her announcement.
   
   Pearson tells his story from Walt's perspective as well as the assassin's. Milav Trevalian is himself supremely competent at his job. One admires, despite the nature of the task, his painstaking preparations for the kill. Interestingly, he turns out to be a relatively likable character, both because of his professionalism and because, despite his resumé, he shows moments of humanity. Indeed, his humanity turns out to be his Achilles heel.
   
   Unfortunately, Trevalian's motivation is never explored. We never learn why Shaler is in his crosshairs or what the stakes are for him personally. There are other loose ends. Walt's brother is dead, for example, and Pearson hints at deeper issues connected with his death, but we're never told the story. Finally, the book's prologue--in which Walt saves Shaler's life for the first time--makes promises that are never fulfilled. Pearson puts the proverbial gun on the mantle in act one when he describes the means by which that night's intruder enters Shaler's home. Readers expecting that gun to go off by the book's end, however, will wait in vain.
   
   Pearson's principal characters, both good guys and bad, are interesting enough to make us want to read on. The story becomes more complex the deeper into the book we get. The writing doesn't distract from the plot. And the short chapters go by fast enough. Killer Weekend never quite becomes an edge-of-your-seat thriller. But it's a near miss.
   
   -- Debra Hamel



5. But it was given to me. I was pleasantly surprised. I thought it was fast paced and well written. I had a hard time putting it down. I hope this is the start of a great series.

5 comments about Trigger Men: Shadow Team, Spider-Man, the Magnificent Bastards, and the American Combat Sniper.

1. My name is James "Rock" McGlynn. I was a Marine Scout/Sniper and I fought in Beirut Lebanon in 1983. Hans Halberstadt was gracious enough to interview me for this book and I think this book has the ability to give it's readers a much better understanding of what it means to be a "Sniper" on the modern battlefeild.
   There are a whole handfull of books on store shelves about us.I have been written about in a few of them. Yet, "Trigger Men" will give you a view that not many of you have ever witnessed before. The art and the craft of being a Sniper has evolved into a new era. The Battles we are fighting in the Middleast and the urban settings in which those battles are taking place, have forced the modern day Sniper to adapt and overcome many obstacles that previous generations did not have to deal with.
   This book tells the actual stories from those of us that have been there. I strongly reccomend this book to you. It is written well and it's told without being filtered. You get the realism that others may have lacked. Not because other books are not truthful but, because Hans has written it without being apologetic or fearful of offending.
   Combat is the most Barbaric event that man can partake in but, killing the enemy is what it's all about. Snipers' kill with accuracy that our enemies have never seen before. "Trigger Men" will bring it home to you.
   Thanks, Hans for writting a great book and I am honored to have been included in it.
   Semper Fi
   Rock McGlynn



2. Much like Greg Mast, I must confess to being a dear friend of Hans. As one of the Commanders of a large regional SWAT Team, and the Sniper Element Commander of that team, I was delighted when Hans told me of his plans to write this superb book. Many previous works on sniping have documented the history of this deadly art, others have listed in great detail the hardware and tactics used by snipers, but none that I have read before have taken this approach of providing intimate, personal accounts of this specialized profession, straight from the mouths of the men in the field. I have also had the pleasure of meeting and sharing stories with Major Charles Greene, the inspiration for Trigger Men. This book is a fitting tribute to Greene and all the other military snipers who have proven time and time again that the most efficient, fearsome and cost-effective weapon on the battlefield is the sniper. Hans has done a magnificent job of turning these individual vignettes into an informative, insightful and thorough look into the world of combat sniping. No student of the military or the rifle should be without it.
   
   Captain Nicholas Gottuso
   SWAT/Sniper Team Commander



3. With his newest installment from an already well appreciated line of excellent books on various tactical aspects of military warfare, author Hans Halberstadt has again blessed military & police "operators" and the interested civilian readers with an outstanding text on the art of long and short range sniping. In my humble opinion, no one writing about military warfare and tactics has quite captured the essence of the psychological, physiological, technical and tactical aspects of "projecting force from afar" like Halberstadt since the late Carlos "White Feather" Hathcock, USMC wrote his military classic on snipers.
   
   Make no mistake about it, "Triggermen" is not for those with a weak stomach. Author Halberstadt, through the stories of the snipers he interviewed for this book, allow the reader into the deep recesses of the military sniper's mind. For civilian readers, this book takes one on a unique journey where you begin to appreciate the mental and physical hardships associated with becoming a sniper on today's ever changing battlefield. From training, to target acquisition, to trigger compression, to terminal velocity; Hans Halberstadt transitions the reader from arm chair to prone position with eyes on the target. It just doesn't get any better than that!
   
   "Triggermen" is MUST reading for all military and police operators; those seeking to be; and those who dream about what it would be like to defend this nation with a long gun and a scope. Five stars and a special salute to Hans Halberstadt!
   
   Dr. Ron Martinelli
   Criminologist/Law Enforcement Training Consultant
   Technical Advisor, "Military & Law Enforcement Snipers"
   The History & Discovery Channels
   Martinelli & Associates: Justice Consultants, LLC
   The Officer Safety Institute
   Temecula, California



4. This book highlight a new face of the sniper's job, and how they must deal with the new form of war. But, in the same time, the author show us how easily the sniper is able to adapt his behaviour and its tactics to the new type of war is facing every day in Irak.



5. I picked this book up after browsing the first chapter, and reading the reviews on the back, including a few from authors I know and respect. Unfortunately, I did not realize until I had bought it that the reviews were for a different book by the same author.
   
   There was quite a bit of really compelling stuff in this book - but not enough to fill the pages. The book is repetitive, and there is some really bad editing at times. The author describes the same equipment and situations over and over again. It seemed haphazardly written, and poorly organized.
   
   I would classify this as one of 'those' books on current events, where some corners were cut, and some filler put in to get it to press while most relevant.

5 comments about Sleeping with Strangers.

1. EJD must've really needed money. This book was horrible...the story line (if you would call it that)had very little dialogue, lacked substance, advanced extremely slowly, and kept putting me to sleep. Vital details that could've have been explained in the beginning were not brought out until the very end...My guess is that he EJD wanted to get more money by stretching this story into two books when both SWS and WWE could've been edited down into one book. Don't waste your money. I bought both books at the same time and don't plan on reading the second.



2. Eric has done it again he has taken writing to a whole new level. I must say I enjoyed reading both books this one and the sequil Waking with Enemies. Once I started reading I didnt want to put it down...I would love to meet Gideon. :)



3. I truly loved this series! I really didn't have much interest in this glaring deviation from EJD's usual subject matter when it first came out - but boy, was I wrong!! I did the audiobook for this one and the narrator's excellent and multi-faceted presentation of the material is what made a good book a great book, in my opinion. His narration style effectively communicates and maintains the mysterious and intriguing element of the story and perfectly conveys the complexity of the Gideon character. Even though Gideon kills people for a living, you actually find yourself rooting for the guy. He's, like, the black Golgo 13!!
   
   I liked "Waking with Enemies" too. And though I thought the erotic "scenes" drew on a little too long, EJD did a pretty decent job of bringing a satisfying closure to the story. Once again, the narrator(I did the audiobook for this one too) puts on a dazzling presentation, making the story more enjoyable than the conventional version. More Gideon!!



4. I so wanted to not like this book. As I read page after page, I kept saying to myself, "I don't like this story." Guess what I said when I got to the end? "OK, Dickey, you won me over."
   
   This is not your usual Dickey relationship drama. Central character, Gideon, is a hit-man whose latest caper takes him overseas in search of his next target. Dickey cleverly brings back a character from the past - Arizona - who I vaguely remembered from Thieve's Paradise (Dickey says she was in Drive Me Crazy, too, but I don't remember her from that one) and creates a story that is full of non-stop action and a few suspenseful moments.
   
   I have to admit, as much as I didn't want to like this story, I have to give Dickey props for this creation. It did remind me of Thieve's Paradise in that it wasn't so much about relationships as it was about action and adventure. Have no fear, there are some "adult moments" intertwined - what's a Dickey story without them? I sure hope my library has Waking With Enemies because I have to read how this plays out.



5. this book was so awesome! i couldn't wait to read the sequel. I just started reading it and it's a page turner!!!!!

5 comments about The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy.

1. I decided to take this book with me on a long 9 hour flight to Hawaii. Big mistake. I don't profess to be an expert but I have read at least 50 books on the assasination and this one ranks among those that were quite unsatisfying. My frustration stemmed from the author going page after page with good reserach and then seemingly summing up an assumed conclusion in a sentence or two, to which I'm saying to myself "that doesn't make any sense". In fact I'm not sure what exactly the point of the entire book is. He seems to imply that LH Oswald was the lone gunman but he didn't act alone.
   
   From my perspective, he never persuades me on this point. In fact from the evidence set out in this book, one more likely would come to the conclusion that Oswald was being manipulaed by others to be "the patsy". No one who sets out to prove the "conspiracy but lone shooter scenerio" ever seems to ever have an answer for the question of why you would choose as your shooter...an unstable, unreliable poor shot...and arm him with a joke of a rifle. It simply does not make any sense.



2. The Author assumes Oswald is Guilty because he carried the Murder weapon(Manlicher Carcano) into the Depository yet offers no evidence for his claim.Frazer's unswerving testimony before the WC demonstrates that the package that Oswald was carrying was no more than 26inches in length yet CE-139 Manlicher when broken down is 34.8 inches. Frazier said Oswald carried the Heavy Package with one end in the palm of his hand and the other under his arm. for the package that Frazier saw to have contained CE-139 Even broken down would have required Oswald to have an arm length of over 36 inches!!it was simply too small to have contained The Manlicher Carcano!What did the WC Had to say about Frazier's Testimony they said he was probably Mistaken.also how is it that no depository employee testify seeing Oswald with any package in his hand of some 90 employees some one had to see him!According to The WC Oswald carried the Rifle Wrapped in a Brown Paper package up the 6th floor and set up the Snipers Nest unnoticed.!yet, no scratches,tears,not a single crease,gunpowder residue or any gun oil was found on the paper bag upon examination by the FBI.No Witness saw Oswald at the so called ''Snipers Nest'' window. only Mr.Brennan claimed he saw somebody that resembled Oswald yet could not make a positive identification!he changed his testimony so many times it look suspicious. in a court of law his testimony would have been thrown out!!



3. This book is lopsided. Some highly questionable conclusions are just accepted wholesale without any discussion of contradictory evidence. Other parts about relations between the CIA and Mafia do provide fresh insight, but there attempts to put these insights into context seem arbitrary, and based on a fixed idea that the mob done it.
   Unconvincing.
   
   A much better book is James W. Douglass' JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. This one is not only a game-changer; if enough people read it it could prove a world changer. This is the best answer yet, to
   left-liberal critics at the Nation Magazine who argue that JFK was just another Cold Warrior. It ansers this critique so thoroughly because it meets it head onJFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters



4. Gonna keep this short and sweet. The book is an exhaustive document of the dirty dealings and black ops that were happening around JFK. Sometimes the overwhelming amount of information makes it a hard read, but that may be just me. I have been following the JFK assassination for many years and I think the author states his case pretty well, except for one assumption.
   
   No matter what has been documented about Lee Harvey Oswald, yes he most definitely was set up. All factions of the government underworld manipulated him to create plausible deniability. But, and this is a big but, he did not pull the trigger. Throw everything else out, remember these two facts: no one proved he fired a weapon, much less a rifle that day and there were no fingerprints on the alleged rifle until after the FBI visited the morgue after LHO was murdered.
   
   The Mob and CIA provided the ammunition and the patsy and the coverup. But LHO did not pull the trigger.



5. First of all I have not read a whole lot of books on the JFK assassination so I can not compare this book to other books which is just as well. The Road To Dallas is meticulously researched and the endless details can be confusing at times and trying to keep track of all the names is impossible but I found this book very hard to put down. It was an easier read then I thought it would be because it is so well laid out and the facts certainly buttress the author's theory. A fascinating hard look at the players and the facts many from declassified documents released over the last few years.

3 comments about Who Killed Bobby?: The Unsolved Murder of Robert F. Kennedy.

1. I strongly recommend that readers read O'Sullivans new book, Who Killed Bobby. There is a lot of new information, not only on the new Times/ Discovery channel balistics test that argues 13 shots--Sirhan's gun had eight-- but also invaluable updated interviews with nearly all of the key witnesses to the shooting.
   
   Also included are much greater detail, including extensive direct quotations from LAPD interviews with key witnesses. Reading these interviews gives new meaning to the phrase "leading the witness".... even while she is still plugged into the polygraph!
   
   Also there is perhaps the best concise and pertinant overview of the CIA's Artichoke and MK-ULTRA research. This research is summarized deftly and always remains the very live third rail, running parallel to the assassination and investigation narrative. Even those wary of being labeled "conspiracists' by those employable "'leftists"" at The Nation, will be impressed by the lineup of heavily-credentialed hitters that O'Sullivan lines up to argue that Sirhan was a manipulated patsy.
   
   This book is an invaluable service for a new generation. One cannot help wondering why this Assassination is so unfashionable, compared to others. Leads one to question the Taste Makers-- even more!



2. As an avid researcher of the Robert F. Kennedy assassination, I enjoyed Sullivan's chronology of this event and what official investigators and researchers have determined. He covers possible answers thoroughly, but I wish he would consider the idea that Sirhan fired blanks more as Sullivan acknowledges no bullet has been tied to Sirhan's gun.



3. (This is more of a review of the new documentary "RFK Must Die" by Mr. O'Sullivan than it is of the book.)
   
   I put in my order for the book just before viewing the movie version on the Documentary Channel. The only word to describe O'Sullivan's documentary is "surreal". And if it were one of those post-SCTV mockumentaries from the 1980s it would be very funny. Instead, what the documentary version of this book leaves behind is enormous outrage and suspicion as to what Shane O'Sullivan is really up to.
   
   Briefly, the body of the documentary involves the analysis of a increasing number of photos taken at the Ambassador Hotel the night of Bobby's murder. We see more and more views of three men who are presented to us as David Morales, George Joannides and Gordon Campbell -- three members of the CIA known to be enemies of John and Robert Kennedy. O'Sullivan shows these photos to many people: associates, friends and relatives of the three men. Obviously if all(or any) of these three spooks were present the night of RFK's murder -- well, that's ballgame.
   
   But then, close to the end of the documentary O'Sullivan pulls his gimp string by leaving no doubt that NONE of these three men are who we've been led to believe they were! We are finally shown photos of David Morales circa 1968, a much older-looking man than the scary Latino we've been looking at for 90 minutes. Gordon Campbell and George Joannides? -- they turn out to be two traveling watch salesmen from the Midwest, in town that night just for fun!!
   
   I'm not joking here. Also along the way, O'Sullivan trips over a witness who solves the question of why RFK's fatal headwound is described as "point-blank" when Sirhan Sirhan was standing 3 to 5 feet away from the Senator. This witness demonstrates for us that Sirhan lunged forward, arm-extended, and then pulled the trigger. The pantry witness says that when the fatal shot was fired, the gun was only a few inches away from Kennedy.
   
   So. WTF???
   
   O'Sullivan takes us on a two-hour trip that leads nowhere. He must have had the exculpatory evidence ahead of time. Yet he leads with this "Three CIA Men at the Scene" scenario, until almost the close of the film. Then shows that it's all completely bogus.
   
   In other words, don't waste your time or money on the book. (Or on watching the film version either. Except for laughs.)

5 comments about Rain Fall (John Rain Thrillers).

1. I think that I heard about this book from a reviewer on Amazon.
   
   Rain Fall, by Barry Eisler, centers on John Rain, a contract killer. But he is more than just a shot to the head, he specializes in killings that look "natural" so that no heat comes to him or his employers. Rain is very effective. His latest contract goes well - an apparent heart attack in a crowded Tokyo subway. But, strangely, someone is at the victim's side, going through his pockets. Rain, ever careful, notes this but confirms the kill to his employer. Soon, he is in the middle of some very bad people. His employer wants him dead, he has a yakuza after him, and the CIA is hot on his trail. He juggles all of these competing factions while providing protection to the dead man's daughter. Normally a solitary man, he finds that all of this interest in him, and the daughter, has blown his cover, and he has to come out from under the rocks.
   
   This was not a normal thriller. Eisler takes his time setting up the scenes, allowing the reader to visualize the dark corners of Tokyo. He sprinkles the novel with Japanese, dark whiskey bars, packed and claustrophobic subway trains. All of this enhances the action. Further, for the first novel with the John Rain character, you witness quite a bit of his background, which slowly develops throughout the novel. As I read this novel, I was drawn into the Rain character and Eisler's descriptions of Tokyo. This is a well researched thriller (check the author's biography) with quite a few twists and turns to keep your interest to the very end.
   
   I've found a new author and character.



2. This book really delivered the action and thrills.
   
   A whim purchase that sat on my shelf for quite some time, this was a surprisingly good novel. Content-rich and full of suspense, the first Rain novel exceeded the expectations I had based on the dust jacket.
   
   Not as hardcore as an early Ludlum, this was certainly more than spy fluff, and it was incredibly easy to read. Instead of just a few chapters before bed, I found myself tearing through half the book.



3. I knew this was a first novel when I started it and I was committed to read it and the rest of the series because of the reviews. I was a bit disappointed until I got midway through the novel. I noted the very descriptive manner in which Eisler tries to put the reader in Tokyo, all the scenes are very vivid and that was part of my problem with the book. Rain was very fleshed out but the other characters weren't so much at least not until much later in the book. I was glad in the end that I kept at it, through all the Japanese, that I eventually began skimming over to read the translations that came right after, through the vivid descriptions of the scenery, the subways, the hotels and the music (that part I really liked actually). If I could have given it a 3 1/2 I would, it was an admirable first effort. I am sure that the rest of the series will be better and now I know what to expect and am prepared. I look forward to seeing Rain mature as the series progresses.



4. It was an excellent read with a very intriguing premise in that the hero is a former CIA agent turned assassin who specializes in hits that look like death by natural causes and is told in first person. Mr. Eisler gave him a unique voice, which evolved and changed as the story progressed. Incorporating several different writing styles, from terse and suspenseful to flowery and sweet, the story creates a bevy of emotions I assume must be raging within the once cold heart of Junichi "John" Rain.
   
   John Rain is a Japanese American konketsu, or half-breed, born to an American and a Japanese Father. This mix gives him characteristics that make it difficult for him to be accepted by either culture. Living is life as an outsider makes it that much easier to follow the path that lead him into the jungles of Vietnam where he honed his killing skills. Twenty Five years later, he is a world weary hit man still thriving off the heightened sense of self that only a man who's been in combat will know and the only way to maintain it is to constantly be at war. It is a system that works for him. Well, it worked fine until he met a woman. Though this is a common theme throughout history, this one is different in that she is the daughter of his latest victim. Complicated? Absolutely and it is this sort of "out of the box" thinking that sets this book apart from the cookie cutter thrillers I all too often stumble across.
   
   The story provides a fascinating glimpse into Japanese culture and a horrifying glimpse into government corruption at its worst. This is the first book in the series, so you know the hero will survive. The questions is what will he do with his newfound awareness and conscious? I have a feeling he'll now use his powers to better the world, becoming a solution rather than part of the problem. I look forward to reading the next adventure of John Rain.



5. The author is an ex CIA agent assigned to Japan. His charactor is a half Japanese ex CIA agent. How could an author be more accurate? It is an action packed book. I read most books secondhand but Eisler's books I buy new. They are page turners. I read them all. I am so much of a fan that I have communicated with him via email.

5 comments about April 1865: The Month That Saved America (P.S.).

1. Winik's account of April 1864 could serve as a textbook example of how to write narrative history. He uses the events of the month as a framework within which to draw together the great historical threads that he posits were resolved that fateful month:
   
   --The conception of America as one nation, the transition to "the United States" as a singular, not plural noun.
   
   --The long history of threatened secession from all geographical and political quarters of the country in its brief history, and the locus of patriotic feeling in the states and not the country up to that time. As Winik reminds us, most states had a history, a political existence, and a citizenry who had demonstrated their loyalty well before they were part of the union of states that was seen as a federation of more (Lincoln's great thought) or less (the states rights position) binding power.
   
   --The problem of Presidential succession after the death of a President, a Constitutional gray area that Winik examines to pull out the interesting insight that Chief Justice Salmon Chase also reviewed the Constitution and the slim precedents available to him in the tense hours after Lincoln's death.
   
   --The real risk of the dissolution of the Civil War into a shadow country's guerrilla warfare carried on by the 100,000 Confederate soldiers still under arms even after Lee's surrender. Winik uses his sources and well-written arguments to remove the reader from the perfect hindsight of settled history back to the time when some Confederate politicians (Jefferson Davis among them), journalists, and (surprisingly few) military leaders counseled this very path. He shows how the actions and words of Lincoln, Lee, Grant, and Sherman were directed toward the prevention of this never-ending nightmare, and how Joseph Johnston's willingness to ignore the order of Jefferson Davis to withdraw to Texas to continue the fight as a guerrilla leader may have been the key piece palliative to this waking dream of horror.
   
   Winik writes novelistic narrative to frame the subject and drive the action to a crisis in April 1865, then freeze-frames the present and draws the camera back and away to the broader landscape and scope of his thesis. These flashbacks actually constitute the meat of the book, but Winik never forgets the framework, or the reader's emotional suspension at the point of crisis, so he zooms back into the freeze-frame and completes the action in a way that keeps the reader's mind and emotions fully engaged.
   
   Next, I will read and review Winik's newest narrative The Great Upheaval: America and the Birth of the Modern World, 1788-1800, with larger scope and more pages. Look for my review to follow there in about two weeks.



2. I'm the kind of person who likes the "story behind the story," and so, I truly enjoyed Jay Winik's April 1865: The Month That Saved America. Winik has produced a well-written, meticulously researched scholarly tome about this critical month in our nation's history.
   
   Inching toward April of 1865, Confederate General Robert E. Lee was painted into a corner without supplies, and most people assumed that they days of the Confederacy were numbered. Abraham Lincoln's great fear was that Lee would disperse his troops into the mountains, shifting the war into a guerilla war which could go on forever. Two things kept this from happening. First, Union General Grant offered to Lee very generous terms of surrender. How this develops can be seen in the amazing correspondence between Grant and Lee in the days leading up to Appomattox. The other is that at age 58, Lee felt himself too old to become a "bushwacker." After the surrender, he encouraged his soldiers to become "good citizens." "By this one momentous decision, he spared the country the divisive guerrilla warfare that surely would have followed, a vile poisonous conflict that would not only have delayed any true national reconciliation for many years to come, but in all probability would have fractured the country for decades into warring military pockets." Once Lee surrendered, the other Confederate generals did so as well (despite the protests of Jefferson Davis).
   
   Even with the surrendering of the Confederate armies, a restored Union was not a given. Terms of reconstruction were not yet fully worked out in 1865. It was unclear as to how the former Confederate states would be governed. Also, how would former slaves be incorporated into the country? What rights would they possess? And then when Lincoln was assassinated, this generous and forgiving president was replaced by the vengeful Andrew Johnson. It truly was a miracle that the United States survived this fateful month.
   
   What makes April 1865 even more fascinating is the in-depth historic background Winik provides as a backdrop for the events during the Civil War. He begins with Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers and their unsuccessful attempts to deal with the slave issue. He also writes of the creation of the Constitution--"did the Constitution create a Union from which no state, once having joined, could escape except by extra-constitutional acts of revolution?" He explains how the succession of presidential powers in the event of a presidential event was never contemplated by our Founding Fathers, and how our government stumbled through the days after the death of William Henry Harrison. And he gives us short course in the history of guerilla warfare. But where Winik really excels is the short but fascinating portraits he provides of the major players including Lincoln, Davis, Grant, Lee, Sherman, and Johnston. He provides careful analysis of their strengths, weaknesses and personalities. For Davis, he writes "His executive management was poor: he never really could decide whether he wanted to be president or secretary of war, and in often seeking to do both, it could be argued he did neither well." I was especially interested in the competition between Lincoln and Davis, Grant and Lee, and Sherman and Joe Johnston. When Lee finally surrendered to Grant, Grant suffered depression "at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause." The relationship between Sherman and Johnston was especially intriguing. "Without ever having laid eyes directly on each other, they more than knew one another, feeling the bonds of battle that ineluctably join soldiers' souls. Interestingly enough, there was also affection there--and real respect."
   
   The story of the month of April in 1865 is usually the end of the story. I'm grateful to Mr. Winik for making this not the end, but the primary story.



3. Altogether, a fine examination of the events of a single month that would forever shape the face of America, and the impeccable judgment used by leaders of the era, both Union and Confederate, in determining America's destiny. To support his argument, Winik uses the unusual - but clever - method of comparing and contrasting the American Civil War with the civil wars of other nations. In these comparisons, it's clear that America's civil war had one of the most fortunate endings.
   
   Winik goes on to examine the state of the nation during April 1865, and considers the possible outcomes that could have arisen during this most critical month. The possibilities are endless. The rebels could have taken to the hills, and reaped terror against the Union for years in an organized guerilla war. Then there was Lincoln's assassination. John Wilkes Booth sought, though he failed, to provoke a Confederate revival and continue the war. Winik lists other outcomes, but he notes the leaders on both sides that made the monumental decisions during April were adamant in unifying the country.
   
   Finally, Winik should be given credit for providing a superb background of the battles, the leaders, and the other events that occurred throughout the civil war that eventually determined the events of April 1865. The reader is given a thorough introduction to Abraham Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, U.S. Grant, Jefferson Davis, William Tecumsah Sherman, and John Wilkes Booth just to name a few. The book also provides a wonderful account of Lee's westward retreat from a smoldering Richmond. April 1865 could use better structure, but because of Winik's compelling narrative of the major events and leaders, this book is a worthwhile read. I would especially recommend this book to anyone who has not read much on the Civil War. April 1865 is a great starting point.



4. What a book! Until I read this I had no idea what that month meant to the US or the world. Lee chose to surrender so peace could prevail. He did have other choices. He could have hid in the Southern Hills for years like the Taliban has done in Afghanistan, but he cared too much about the stability of his country. I personally think it was the hardest decision he had and the best decision he made, Grant and Lee handled Appomattox with the best diplomacy as was possible. Many do not realize that Appomattox was the only the end of one part of the war a fact the Winik illustrates here well as does that it was a valiant fight to the end. Did I mention it was Palm Sunday?



5. Alot of people assume that the Civil War abruptly ended at Appomattox and that our nation simply healed itself. Nothing could be further from the truth.
   
   Jay Winik argues that April 1865 was perhaps the most crucial period of time in our history, even more so than July 1776. While the Founding Fathers may have established a set of ideals, it was the Civil War that put them to the test. As Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address, "...testing whether that nation or any nation can long endure". The Civil War never fully realized those ideals. It took over 100 years for civil rights laws to be passed and the process is still incomplete. But April 1865 was the painful start of that process of rebirth which saved our country.
   
   What is unique about the American Civil war is that the nation actually did heal itself, unlike many other civil wars which degenerated into chaos, fragmentation, and prolonged guerilla warfare. All of these things could have happened in America had it not been for a few high-minded individuals from both sides of the conflict who put their personal animosities and ambitions aside for the good of the nation as a whole. Lincoln was the foremost of these individuals, but his assassination threatened to end any reconciliation between the north and the south. It was left to others to carry out that task.
   
   Ironically, it was the warriors, the generals, who were most instrumental in making that happen. They were the ones who took the high road while many politicians succumbed to short-sighted and petty vindictiveness. Many southerners refused to accept defeat and wanted to disband their armies and carry out a guerilla war. Jefferson Davis was the foremost of these individuals. Rather than demonize Davis as a coward, as so many historians have done, Winik portrays him as a brave but tragic man who could never compromise his beliefs.
   
   If there is one hero in this book, it is Robert E. Lee who could easily have been swayed into continuing the rebellion as a guerilla war. Lee, not Davis, was the only man in the south who had the respect and moral credibility among southerners to prevent that from happening. The other Confederate generals followed Lee's example, including Joe Johnston and the hard-bitten Nathan Bedford Forrest.
   
   While many politicians in the north wanted to punish and subjugate the south as a conquered territory against Lincoln's wishes, it was the union generals like Grant and Sherman who showed generosity and magnanimity to their conquered foes. In fact, Sherman, who was so brutal to the south during the war, had to endure scathing criticism from his superiors in Washington for the lenient terms of surrender which he offered Joseph Johnston.
   
   Jay Winik takes us back to the time and events at the end of the Civil War which are taken for granted in history classes but were as important as the founding of our nation. July 1776 may have been the first birth of our nation, but April 1865 was perhaps the more crucial rebirth.

5 comments about Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

1. Bugliosi takes on every crackpot notion and especially the popular film "JFK" and knocks them over like bowling pins. One shooter...that's it, that's all. There are moments, especially in the description of the assassination, that caused me to experience a visceral reaction. Be forewarned.



2. I had read a dozen or so conspiracy books on JFK and watched the movie JFK a dozen times. I believed in a conspiracy and I persuaded others to believe in a conspiracy. I even wanted to travel to New Orleans to shake Jim Garrison's hand. I have also read most of the books written by Vincent Bugliosi and have the utmost respect for the man and his abilities.So when I found out that he was writing a book that reputed the conspiracy theory I was curious to say the least. But I read the book with an open mind and I now believe Bugliosi nailed it right on the head- case closed- Oswald did it all by himself. If you had made up your mind for conspiracy like I had then I dare you read this book and not change you whole perspective. If you have delved into this subject like I have then this will be the last book on the matter that you will read.



3. Although I doubt Bugliosi's book will change the minds of hard-core, pro-conspiracy people, it may swing some of the fence sitters (if there are any) over to the lone gunman side. I was a conspiracy person as a teenager, but after reading the Warren Commission, along with books supporting and attacking it, I became one of the few who believes Oswald acted alone. For me, this book does nothing more than reinforce that belief.
   However, for those who are not sure, Bugliosi does an excellent job of putting together all the available evidence to demonstrate that Oswald acted alone, as did Jack Ruby. Also, he takes a couple of instances (Oswald looking into buying a car and going to Sylvia Odio's house with two anti-Castro Cubans) and clearly shows how they could into Oswald being the single gunman. Many other lone assassin writers have dismissed these two instances, which I believe has hurt their credibility some.
   By the way, Bugliosi doesn't just attack pro-conspiracy writers, but single gunman authors as well, noting how the latter have gotten some of the information wrong (Gerald Posner is a particular target).
   It'll take a while to get through the whole book (a few months for me), but it's worth it, and it's a handy reference book to have on the subject as well.



4. Vincent Bugliosi is arguably one of the brightest legal minds this country has ever seen. What more can be said for twenty years of research, trying Oswald after the fact and obtaining a conviction, and an eye for the smallest detail that establishes this book as the final word on the JFK assassination. His analysis of the facts, from every conceivable angle, and laying out all the conspiracy theories so they can finally dry up in the light of day, makes Reclaiming History a must read for every American (and certainly, along with Helter Skelter) required reading for every law school student. There is only one minor criticism, I personally wish it was in two volumes with larger type and heavier paper, but I'll blame the publisher for that.



5. Does Mass Equal Conclusive Fact? Former federal prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi seems to think so. Bugliosi prosecuted Charles Manson, in the easiest murder trial of the century. Here Bugliosi has a much more difficult time and it shows.
   
   Had Bugliosi read or researched what other trained, professional snipers determined about the JFK "hit", he might not have wasted his (or our) time with this literary anchor. Unlike many of VB's fellow attorneys, I read the WCR and also Case Closed. However, I also dissected and gained a great deal more factual insight from Garrison's "On The Trail of The Assassins: and one slim book called, "Kill Zone: A Sniper Looks At Dealey Plaza." Then, having picked up a battered 30.06 rifle with scope, I attempted to hit a stationary target with three quick rounds in less than 6 seconds. Then I penned my own critical essay called "Count The Bullets: Blow Away All Arguments" (Google).
   
   Former top US Marine sniper, detective and author, Craig Roberts deduced: "The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was because I could not have done it." Credited with numerous kills while serving in Vietnam , Roberts turned an objective eye on the shot heard `round the world. After he visited Dealey Plaza, after viewing the so-called sniper's lair, on the sixth floor of the book depository, and after staring at the large oak tree overspreading much of Elm Street, Roberts said, "I walked away from the window in disgust. I had seen all I needed to know that Oswald could not have been the lone shooter."
   
   But Roberts, a retired police investigator, wanted to know what did happen. Not content to dismiss the improbable feat, he delved into the crime from every angle.
   
   "First, I analyzed the scene as a sniper...I looked at the engagement angles. It was entirely wrong...Here, from what I could see, three problems arose that would influence my shots. First, the target was moving away at a drastic angle to the right from the window, meaning that I would have to position my body to compete with the wall and a set of vertical water pipes . . . This would be extremely difficult for a right-handed shooter. Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone. Finally, I would have to deal with two factors at the same time; the curve of the street, and the high-to-low angle formula--a law of physics Oswald would not have known."
   
   From my research in "Count The Bullets: Blow Away All Arguments," I decided to examine the OBJECTS STRUCK rather than focus on the sound of gunfire witnesses claimed to have heard. Bugliosi, a competent prosecutor rather than a damn good detective failed, as did the Warren Commission, to perform this simple task. And simply by counting the objects, we realize Oswald would have needed an automatic rifle with a ten shot magazine to kill Kennedy.
   
   Case Closed.